Hmmmm ... I noticed with my wine stix experiment that the wines became smoother after the oak was depleted from the cubes/stix. I originally assumed it was a result of natural aging of the wine, but wondered if it had to do with a less obvious effect of the oak in the wine. Your findings reinforce my thoughts in that direction. Assuming that neither of us is crazy (well, at least on this point), it makes a case for leaving the wine exposed to oak adjuncts longer, to get more than obvious flavoring.They seem to impart the oak to the wine at a rate closer to how barrels do and they produce a silkier, smoother wine than cubes or spirals
This is why winemaking is an art, not a science. We apply all the tests and science and whatnot to winemaking, but in the end it comes down to individual senses and (hopefully) experienced intuition. If the numbers were what mattered, we'd all be making 100 point wines.Everyone please remember, your mileage may vary, you might think I am Bat crap crazy about it and I might well be, but this is my experience.
It makes sense to me that some of the flavors in the oak might be imparted to the wine more slowly than others. If the flavors that are slower to be imparted are desirable, this might be a reason to use a smaller quantity of oak cubes/sticks/spirals/chips, and to leave them in until they are depleted. If you pull them too quickly, you are getting only certain aspects of the flavor from the oak.I noticed with my wine stix experiment that the wines became smoother after the oak was depleted from the cubes/stix. I originally assumed it was a result of natural aging of the wine, but wondered if it had to do with a less obvious effect of the oak in the wine. Your findings reinforce my thoughts in that direction. Assuming that neither of us is crazy (well, at least on this point), it makes a case for leaving the wine exposed to oak adjuncts longer, to get more than obvious flavoring.
Enter your email address to join: