Francesco Spadafora's blog

''Natural'' wine is not necessarily ''good'' wine
''Natural'' wine is not necessarily ''good'' wine

Nowadays very often saying "natural wine" is considered synonymous of quality. It happens instead to taste wines that belong to this category, but when you pour it in the glass you immediately understand that you are taking the risk to get a wrong idea of wine in general. Because they are objectively bad.

Recently I tasted some wines that were absolutely unpleasant for the nose. I had to try many of those for duty or good manners, despite my nose was shouting ‘’no!’’, and the final idea did not change, because the taste in mouth was even worse. I looked at my wife’s eyes, we lowered the glass and smiling we both thought that the wine was good only to be offered to the ones who hated us, if ever there was someone.

Making a wine with own yeasts, after preparing a pied de cuve, not adding sulphur dioxide, preserved in stainless steel tanks and decanted when needed, with all the subsequent operations in the cellar, can still result in producing a wine that cannot be defined wine anymore. Unpleasant but since natural automatically considered of good quality.

In Virzi we produce a wine whose grapes ferment spontaneously without using the so called ‘selected yeasts’, and we add no sulphur dioxide as well. We produce both white and red, but if the result was that one described before, unpleasant both in taste and smell, we would for sure toss it.

The next wine wine will be called "Siriki". And I assure full reconciliation to the idea of a properly-made natural wine.



Feedback (0)