First of all, congrats to Konstantin on the success of this channel. It’s so well-deserved, and I always enjoy how you’re striking a balance of geeking out with your mad wine skills while not taking it all too seriously. As for this topic, I know that there is fashion in the descriptors people use for wines, but I don’t at all get why it’s equally fashionable for some experts to be hating on the term “minerality” The whole point to the argument seems to be that it’s invalid (or at least frowned upon) to use that particular term because there is not enough mineral contents in a wine to actually taste it. By that logic, if I said that there is wet wool in my Chenin Blanc, I’m sure a scientist would be able to tell me that the amount of sheep in the wine is too small for me to actually taste that either. And that’s because most of the descriptors are metaphors anyway. I think it’s bang on that the term is being used a lot in relation to high acid, less opulent wines, where the flavours are subtle but still lingering. So might a reason for the increased popularity of the descriptor be that preferences are moving in that direction? Think PYCM compared to an old school, buttery Meursault. Also, for a wine maker to advertise his or her wines coming from stony fields, that doesn’t necessarily imply that those stones must be beneficial in terms of their taste (or lack thereof) directly rubbing off on the wine. Heat retention and drainage very much does affect taste. Anyway, just a few humble thoughts from somebody who loves terms like minerality and salinity :-) Keep those videos coming!
I would actually argue that those metaphors have scientific bases. Most aroma descriptions can be directly linked to the presence of common compounds between the “metaphorical” objects and the wine being tasted itself. At least that is my opinion from my experience with “Le Nez du vin” wherein most descriptions and aroma vials content important compounds found in wine
@@feabterminator6326 yes, that's why you can smell certain fruits and certain natural things in wine, leather doesn't just come to be, you have to tan it to make it into what it is and the tanning process often uses vegetable tannins to achieve that. those are chemicals that can show up in a wine.
I think it’s a helpful buzz word for Sommeliers to use to excite and entice everyday consumers. “When I eat oysters, I love to drink Chablis with them because of the ancient oyster shell fossils found throughout the regions soil showcasing a beautiful minerality that pairs perfectly. Enjoy!” Reminds me of another famous saying “is there any other profession with more bullshit than wine?”
Great video! Very intriguing subject. I don’t believe that the vines can transport the minerals from the soil/bedrock into the wine so you can smell and identify them. However I do believe there are aromas in wine that people can acosiate to “minerality”. I have many memories of scents that I would put in the “minerality category”. No, a clean stone might not taste of anything but smack two stones together and the dust/smoke will smell, go into an old cave and it will smell, damp clay smells, crushed seashells smell etc. These things are obviously not in your wine but the aromas in a wine can remind you of them. An association is not the same thing as identifying and confirming stuff with your nose. You’re not smelling a fruit bowl with pear, apple and lemon, you’re smelling a wine, let it evoke your memories. (Just my opinion, cheers!)
This summarise my thoughts on this matter and how he seemed completely dumb, specially when trying to prove hes point by licking a stone. No wonder why he decided to become a TH-camr.
Hallelujah! Although I intuitively suspected that connection between soil composition and "minerality" in wine is extremely weak, this video nailed it. On the other hand, I found the term "minerality" very useful to describe that weak battery-licking quartz-crushing sensation of saltines, bitterness, and acidity.
I think metaphors as sensory descriptors are what a consumer and professionals expect and absolutely needed for us non-scientific types. There is no “rose petals” in a boti of Barolo, but saying the concentration of cis-rose oxide B damascenone geraniol nerol is lovely and adds to the nose of this wine just doesn’t flow off the tongue 😉😁😁😉. Really very much enjoy your videos. 👍👍👍
Of course minerality is a conventional terming. Which means in my opinion the freshness of creek or even mountain creek when you are near it. In palate it's even more complex but understandable for consumers. There are plenty of such termings in tasting. There is no more conventional terming as "forest floor" as you used in clip about pinot noir. But it did not disturb you. Thank you for understanding.
I think his point is that ‘minerality’ will be used by people in relation to the origin of the wine and the geology of the vineyard, when the ‘flavor’ of ‘minerality’ (likely) does not correlate to that at all. As he said, you can use it as a descriptor for those flavor notes of acidity, free sulphate and succinic acid (or whatever else tastes of ‘mineral’ to you), but to do it on the basis of the rocks it grew on is just posturing rather than based on the flavors the wine might actually be giving you (unless it coincidently happens to have those flavors, independent of the geology).
Wow that was very educational ... I must say I do use the term minerality (perhaps as a catch all) for savory/salty drying components with a wet rock after a rainfall type nose ... but loved hearing the science and geology. As always thank you
Has anyone ever considered that the descriptive term minerality is borrowed from the wide range of commercially available mineral water? There is a huge variety out there, and the concentration of dissolved elements contributes to the softness, hardness and ultimately the ‘flavor’ of the water. Even though chemically it is still two hydrogens and one oxygen. I’ve dined at michelin starred restaurants that propose water pairings to accompany a gastronomic menu, and each water was noticeably different than the next due to its mineral composition which derives from the rock type in and around the source. Why then is this not applicable to wine?
I think different waters definitely taste different. Only distilled water is (almost) pure h2o, otherwise there are many more chemical compounds, one only has to taste chlorinated tap water and compare it to even cheap spring water to know there is a difference.
Minerals are dissolved in water as it comes up from the earth. Wine does not come up from the earth it comes from grapes so the earth can not leach minerals directly onto the wine as it can into water.
NIce summary, Konstantin. Thank you . I used to use it until I realised that it wasn't very helpful, because, as you have so succinctly described, what does it actually mean? I think it is used as a shorthand to help describe terroir. For instance, I remember going to a WSET Chablis tasting in London a few years ago and, of course, the very distinctive, fossil-strewn, limestone soil is often given prominence when describing a wine which has very high acidity. When I asked about it, the explanation given was to do with the strange relationship whereby soils with higher alkalinity seem to help give wines with high acidity. Isn't that a function of the amount of sunshine in an area north of Paris, I asked? The answer came back that it was a "complex relationship"...
I always found that term, 'minerality', very vague. I usually think of lead or tea, rather than something that cannot be put into words. Thanks for making this video.
I am a wine beginner, so I use the terms I get „thaught“. Minerality is one of the most terms you can read and hear in the world of wine 😂 Good to learn about that topic, thx!
Pretty simple for me. I use the "minerality" term to describe the smell/aroma of wet rock after rain shower. Can be compared to gun flint also. I don't really attach importance to the scientific origin of this aroma, I rather note its presence quite simply.
I agree, I also find it as a way to describe some texture of the wine. But in the end, as you say, is a term "to describe", just as we use the term "tomato leaf", or "black peppercorn", when there's obviously none of these on the wine.
@@134679rap my point being, it's easier to understand "tomato leaf" or "wet rocks" instead of "minerality". Especially since there's no agreed definition of meaning.
Working in a wine store, I encounter "minerality" quite often, both when testing new wines in the store as well as helping customers. For me, minerality is the smell you get when standing in a still summer rain on a bare cliff. Sounds very specific I know, but there is a very specific scent produced when the rain hits the bare rock. And summer rain (at least the one romantized in our heads) typically involve very little wind, so the scent isn't blown away by the wind and gets more prominent. So whenever a customers asks what on earth minerality means, I just say your typical summer rain on a cliff, and they all go a-ha! If it's a certain chemical compounds responsible for this - produced by other factors such as grape variety, soil drainage, climate etc - then "minerality" still makes sense once you make that link to the summer rain on a bare cliff and is easy to remember. It's a similar case with the petrolium smell. The wines do not contain any petrolium (at least I really hope not lol), but there is a petrol-like scent to it. Or someone might say a wine taste a little "green", which is simply an umbrella term for things like mixed herbs, grassy notes, etc.
As the term minerality continually shows up when people are talking about wine, I keep coming back to this video. Really interesting what The Oxford Companion to Wine said about minerality, as it wasn't even mentioned in the third edition from 2006. It discussed the methods of detecting the mineral contents in wine down to parts per billion, but it didn't even bother to dismiss the notion that you can detect the mineral contents using the human senses. To me, using the term "minerality" when describing a wine is a copout. It's such a vague term, and very few seem to know what they're actually describing, as they can't clarify what they mean by it. Yes, some wines can have aromas reminiscent of a sea breeze or a warm pavement after a rain shower, but those aroma compounds are not minerals! Also, are wines from warmer climates or made from later picked grapes never minerally? The galets roulés of CdP are a defining characteristic in many vineyards, but those wines (reds in particular) are not as often described as being minerally. The term's usage is too inconsistent and vague to be of any use in my opinion. There are so many other precise words that can be used to accurately describe a wine, so I get frustrated that so many people who communicate about wine keep using a word that can lead to so much confusion.
Whenever I’ve described wines as having ‘high minerality’ it has always been about the flavour rather than tasting a ‘higher concentration of minerals’. I find myself using this expression with low intervention wines and the ‘mineral taste’ reminds me of water from a waterfall. Again, incredibly hard to describe the taste into words
I don’t use the term mineral very often unless I can’t find the word to describe what i am tasting that is not sweet, acidic, tannic. It it is salty, then salty or savory. If it is iron or copper then I would use those words. For all other metallic tastes, I just use metallic because I don’t know what potassium, zinc, selenium taste like.
I really enjoyed this video! My sister has been doing some research on the California terroir and this has been an interesting and helpful aid! I love the piece of art that you have displayed, do you know who the artist was or where I can find it?
Minerality.... Do not hesitate and let these people keep talking about mineral wines. Could you make a glass of wine from Toro? You feel the "terracotta" flavour. Toro is a Spanish "Denominación de Origen Protegida" for wines in the province of Zamora. Regarding names of tasting notes, have a look at whisky tasting... for example..."Old bandage". Great tutorial by the way !!!!!. Happy New Year!!!!
I use the term "Mineral" as a description of smell and taste, i.e. "wet rock" and similar, in lack of a better descrption. As a chemist and plant Biologist, I know that plants only absorb nutrients from the soil, not part of the soil itself... (thank god) :-)
Really great video, great analysis, lovin' it! Was assuming the term is en vouge at the moment, and that it describes some factors (like saltiness, acidity) which link to a picture on how people think minerals may taste (even if in real life they don't taste at all). Didn't know though that this term was absolutely not used in earlier times. So that gives still a chance that the sunny flavours of a wine become en vouge and are used heavily in some 20 or 30 years ;) sunny - hm, that sounds a bilt like warm and sweet, maybe honey, melon, exotic fruits, sugar... ah all the sudden so clear - wine has sunny flavours! and obviously, when the sun shines, part of sunbeams are stored in the grapes, no doubt about that! And then pretty clear that we taste those in the wine! ;)
Yes, only that (a bit like with mineral) sunbeams are not stored in grapes but they are needed to proudce sugar, ripen the grapes and change the flavors.
Hi Konstantin, thanks for the video, I've just discovered your channel and found it extremely interesting. My thoughts on minerality. I work in coffee as a roaster. We do a lot of quality control which involve a lot of brewing it as well. Couple of years ago the whole coffee industry was shocked how much of the difference can water quality make in coffee preparation. Especially Calcium, Magnesium and Bicarbonate (Buffor) where found to hugely affect sweetness , acidity and body. The thing is I cant taste the difference in water which has a (for example) 10ppm(!) more bicarbonate , but I can easily pick it up in brewed coffee when preparing a tasting session. The factors like coffee extraction, strength and pH seems not being a case here. Can it be possible that we see something similar in wine. We not tasting minerals but because of them our perception of different compounds change and results in something that we commonly relate to as minerality. Thanks Jakub
Minerality is a concept, an idea of a taste, it's like describing the crispy sharpness of air in sub zero temperatures, or the warmth of the sun on your skin, it is a metaphore as you say.
Very informative 👏 Coming from a world of specialty coffee, I can add that a soil makeup can translate into extraordinary variations in coffee flavour profile. Good example is Papua New Guinea. High amounts of glutamic acid find their way into coffee seeds and create this incredible umami flavour. Pairing with caramelised sugars from the roasting process the coffee has a beautiful savoury/sweet character. Really unique and singular expression of “terroir” if you will
I think it generally is used to describe something with a rich complex flavor. I’ve heard some people use “minerality” to describe fresh fruit, like how you can eat one apple that is kind of plain, then you can eat another apple of same variety and the taste can be so much better, apart from just more sugar, more defined flavors that are rich and complex. The best Example I can think of in America would be comparing non-organic del monte bananas to their organic bananas, the organic bananas just taste soo much better. Of course, none of that necessarily means that the better tasting fruit has more minerals in it or anything. I think people might think of minerality as way to explain why better cared for produce often tastes better. They think that the organic farming practices have a more rich and healthy soil transfers to the fruit itself. Once again, not sure if any of that would directly explain the better tasting fruit. My guess is that “minerality” mostly came up in the wine world as a way for the classic and well-established vineyards to give a reason for why their wine is so superior and why it can’t be “imitated”. Kind of adds to the whole “terroir” thing.
In fact, most descriptors in wine are immeasurable, which means that they are subject to a kind of interpretation, which if carried out by a single person can be very different depending on the time of day, humor, food eaten, etc. Therefore, certain mental shortcuts are used, and for unspecified phenomena more general terms that can lead to characteristics. There are many terms in the language of wine that we cannot measure and are ultimately a kind of free description. Examples: flint in Sancerre, or earthiness in Syrah. For me, minerality is a certain aroma that I feel when I am on a mountain river, but I am not a fan of this term, as well as the word terroir, and especially the context in which it is used. I like the term "feel terroir" the most 😉
Still, in Chablis you can feel metal taste, in white Burgundy iodine, in Bordeaux graphite, in vale de Loire gunpowder...same tastes in the wines from same region.
I use it. I also read that there is none to few influence which minerals really have, before but this does not change the fact, that this taste is definetely there even to extreme extent. I remember a tasting in 2018 when they poured out von Othegraven, Ockfener Bockstein Riesling GG (I think the vintage was 2017 but I am not sure) and the girl who was my girlfriend at this time said, that this wine tastes like sucking on a pebble. She is no wine freak but in my opionion her description was totally right and even if this taste has nothing to do with the stone oder soil on which the grapes grow I do not know how to describe this kind of impression better.
Yes, I also struggle with finding a good descriptor for this sensation. I also know what you mean when you use the term and I think it is fine to use it. But it is important to understand it too!
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine You are right but maybe there is no reason to worry. Sometimes wine smells like horse sweat or even blood but we also know that there is no horse sweat or blood in the wine, so maybe the problem ist not to call a certain taste "mineral" but to tell that this taste comes from the soil the grapes grow on.
@@spiritalex9397 yes, that's an argument. But the thing is minerals normally do not have a smell or taste, horse sweat and blood (to a lesser extent) do. In many cases you can also find the same substance in the wine as in the product we associate it with. Rotundone is the substance that gives pepper its smell and it can also be found in Syrah.
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine Yes, I remember we talked about rotundone in the comments of your syrah video and I have to admit that I did not know that this stuff is also responsible for this horse sweat smell so: Thank you! And you are right minerals don't taste themselves like you impressively shew to us when you liked that stone ;-) but anyway this taste people call "mineral" is there and I think we have to cope with this term until we found a better expression but I really think that the main problem is that people tell this taste comes from the minerals in the soil. However, we are both rather young and therefore I am sure there will be many years to drink wine for both of us so maybe we talk again in a few decades and can say that we (or someone else) found a really good other term to describe it :-)
Look at all the steep slopes with slate along the Mosel - the slate mostly functions as heat retainer and influences water management in the soil but tasting slate in the wines? No.
Hi Konstantin, I've often described the wines from El Valle de Guadalupe in Ensenada, Mexico as having lots of minerality. Maybe incorrectly, after having watched this video....... but they have a mineral, salinity to them. Does that sound odd? I do enjoy them but that is what I get from many of the wines from that region. Have you tried any wine from that region? I'm interested in your opinion.
I've never heard technical or literal accuracy to be the main point behind flavor descriptions before. Why are we applying that to this one specifically now?
Many people think there are actual minerals in wine and the slates in vineyards are used for marketing, while no one thinks there are actual peaches or petrol in wine. So I think it makes sense to dispel that myth.
If we smell petrol in Riesling we know that there is no actual petrol in wine. But there is a substance called TDN that is in wine and that smells of petrol. It is different with minerality as I explain in the video.
I think a lot of the people commenting understand that descriptors of wine are not the contents of wine. With countless inherently unique wines in the world, what we’re doing is applying scents, flavors and other characteristics to help people (and ourselves) know or remember what’s inside the bottle. I’ll occasionally use the term minerality. If someone said “mineral or dusty rocks,” I can start to hone in on the style of wine, while eliminating many others; and that’s just one descriptor. Today though, I feel like a big, hot fruit bomb-which won’t burn or blow up in my mouth.
I’m curios. Because I love a good Riesling ( Alsace ). IE Trimbach. I’ve always used that term. “ minerality “ for it. Or more so. “ slaty”. ( has wet slate after a rainfall aroma. Would minerality fit in that term?
mineralality is tied to ion content aka mineral salts , Italian waters have high ion content such as calcium which you can taste an ionic mineral is salt you can taste it and feel it on the palete at ppm levels
I use the term “minerality” (if I do at all, I prefer other terms usually like rocks) to describe flavors akin to dirt, the smell of petrichor, dust, wet soil, etc. I’m not discussing the literal minerals in the wine itself.
I'd be curious to know what you think of the concept terroir? It seems to me to be somewhat like minerality - poetic and slightly vague, and that the claim of, for example, winemakers in beaujolais and burgundy is that their uniqueness stems from their ability to express "terroir", morgon vs fleurie, gevrey vs. chambolle etc. what's your take?
This should really be another video Albert! Terroir makes a lot of sense if you include all factors into the equation on whether the origin influences the wine style. Being an avid blind taster I can confirm that it is possible to taste origin. But if sb only wants to look at the soil when talking about terroir it makes less sense as a concept.
Would be great with a video! I find it quite confusing because i find that many, for example in chablis, brand their wine with a particular “kimmeridgian limestone minerality” as their terroir, so if not soil, then what terroir distinguishes chablis from other regions of burgundy or champagne? microclimate? sun exposure? age of wines? And more interestingly, how do you distinguish these in a blind tasting?
@@albertk2455 I will do a video on Terroir than. To your question : all of those factors influence the wine style and many more. Think about it this way: only a few meters can make the difference in quality between different sites. The soils, altitude, exposition, microclimate, grape variety, viticulture, humidity might change, even between neighbouring sites. More in the Terroir video!
As a beginner I don’t keep so attached to the scientific explanation of minerality. The same way I don’t think we have in mind the pH level when we use the word acidity. The last one is more related to increased salivation on the mouth than pH, no? I think that we try to describe sensations, and they are linked to taste/aroma memories in most cases. For example, in some more fruity wines I feel guava aromas, but people who haven’t tasted guava won’t make the link. Maybe the problem is that, if it’s taken too far, this approach can wipe out the objectivity of the description, and it’s sure that there is some… In this way, do you know if the erosion of the minerals on the soil can make them to get absorbed by vineyards?
I thought I was the weird one cause I never understood "minerality" and what it was supposed to smell or taste or feel like. I'm still searching for it, but maube I'm just not drinking the right wines yet lol
I couldn't stop laughing. Can we taste ever present radium? A well researched exposition nevertheless! Upate: Just watched again, still laughing. Texted to my boss who will also get a chuckle. Great sense of humor and blasphemy. I think people just mean tart and acidic.
It’s about conveying what you experience when you taste the wine. Not what’s actually going on in the glass. We all know there are no wet leaves or green bell peppers in a glass of Cab Franc either. Using minerality as a descriptor is simply a way to communicate what we smell and taste. It’s what we as humans do, we use language to find common ground. I don’t see what all the fuss is about. Don’t judge me for using a term, I feel like I’m being judged 😂
Can you even describe an Assyrtiko without salinity/minerality? Language like wine is an alive, evolving thing so if people understand what is meant by minerality it's fine with me.
Strangely no one has focussed on the waxy bloom of the grape as a possible carrier of soil minerality into the wine making process. Randall Grahm probably pushed this whole story to its illogical end when he co-fermented rocks with wine. Not a happy experience apparently.
But of course, there aren't actually cherries or chocolate or roses in the wine, and yet we still reach for those descriptors to try and describe them...
As a rock licker myself I'm highly offended! Lol anyway, you should try Springfield Life from Stone (South Africa). Many describe it as very mineral rich like having liquid granite in your mouth.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Minerality tastes and smells like hyperbole... Brettanomyces smells like bullshit... If I hear "sarbright" or "medium plus" ever again, I will smell like my own vomit. BEST VIDEO EVER!! THANK YOU
Of course "minerality" in some wines is a real thing--an identifiable, reproducible quality, consistent vintage after vintage, producer upon producer, particularly evident in certain non-fruity white wines (though in some reds too) in particular geographical/geological "terriors." Think how trained palates can usually easily distinguish between Chassagne Montrachets and Meursaults, for example, even though they are less than 4 miles apart. Or how easy it is to spot the Chablis in a blind tasting of chardonnays from all over the world. Or how Pouilly- Fumés (& Sancerres) are different than most other Loire sauvignon blancs. Or how Etna carricantes actually do smell & taste, well, "igneous," similar to the "igneous" twang of Etna red nerello mascaleses. Or what makes Stag's Leap District cabernets identifiably different from Rutherford cabs, that are just down the road. Or Spring Mountain cabs different from Howell Mountain cabs. With some grapes, in some areas, with some winemaking practices, the "minerality" of a wine--the soils & geological conditions of the vineyard--can, indeed, stand out distinctively. Sure, I've seen these "debunker" claims that the quantities of ions that dissolve from rocks and soils are too low to conceivably make a sensory difference, but they are simply empirically wrong. And you aren't talking about "minerals" here. (Or that horribly ambiguous "nutrients.") We are talking about ions dissolved by water from the rocks and minerals and soils and biologically concentrated in the grapes and finished wine. As a degreed materials scientist and mining engineer, I've had geology classes where we actually had to lick rocks to try to identify them. Some don't dissolve well and are not distinctive, but some, in fact, do and are. A porous limestone does "taste" different than a flint, than a marlstone, than a sandstone, than a mafic rock. Some commenters here have correctly noted the very different tastes of various mineral waters. And they don't have the acidity of wines, which raises mineral solubilities dramatically, nor the bio-concentration processes of old, water-stressed vines. Distinctive "minerality" in some wines is clearly a real thing. The proof, as they say, is in the tasting!
I think this concept may also come from one of two other sources, namely an aftertaste from food eat with a wine that has been salted and spiced or from a mixture of wine made into a punch or spritzer, whereby a mineral water is added to the beverage mix along with the wine. See Andong's YT video about the consumption of Mineral Waters in Germany: th-cam.com/video/OHvj0MJw7z4/w-d-xo.html. Then also some people may be sensitive to the Sulfites naturally found in wine or added as a preservative and this has taste or smell, a slightly sulphurous odor. To rid a wine of these Sulfites, we have available in several wine shops a small packet of 3 percent USP Grade Hydrogen Peroxide. Add the packet to the wine, wait a few minutes and the Peroxide will oxidize the Sulfite to Sulfate or so say the directions on the packet. For the hefty price of $4.95 for 10 ml of Hydrogen Peroxide, some one is making a huge profit. Consider that a 946 ml bottle of USP Grade Hydrogen Peroxide from the local Drugstore costs 0.99 cents. Personally I just let the wine be decanted and wait an hour or two and then sip the wine for that "full blooming" of the bouquet to develop. Otherwise I have never detected a mineral flavor of a wine. Many other flavours though, including having a dry broken cork which has spoiled the wine, because the bottle was not laid on its side to keep the cork moist.
Minerality, to me is easiest to see in the contrast between Rhine and Mosel Riesling, with the Rhine being more mineral tasting. I never really thought it had much to do with actual minerals, it's more psychologically mineral like than anything else.
So you convinced yourself to avoid the term. But you actually quote a study, that hints that the term is used to differenciate the acidic impression of a wine. If you compare mineral water with (german) tap water, you notice no difference in taste? I find it surprising that soil composition should play no role regarding the end product. I believe there are differences between for example Riesling from slate or limestone. Is this actually not the case and only watersupply and heat are maybe modified by the soil composition?
I use the term myself to describe an Impression appart from sour, but also fresh. For example chalky or salty notes in otherwise more neutral but not watery wines. Minerality to me is a good word for that.
Its a funny distinction to make over others considering how terminology is used in wine tasting, minerality is one of the more direct adjectives of taste aspects that one can refer to - minerality makes more sense than others like tobacco, leather, smoke or chocolate yet those terms are widely accepted without the kind of distinction you make here (technical vs subjective) - for example on a tour of Chateauneuf du papes a key term was minerality and considering the sand dominant soils, iron clay and limestone - all from which the vines were directly planted in - it would present more of issue to avoid it and make the kind of distinction you attempt here than to actually use the term as a descriptor - again relative to all the other jargon that passes as normal in the wine industry its an odd term to focus a super technical, almost pedantic, distinction on - there are so many other terms that are so vague and often nonsensical - i'd love to see content tackling those instead.
The main difference is that the flavor compounds that smell like blackberries, butter and pepper can be found in wine. Using them as descriptors in a blind tasting therefore makes sense in my opinion. Minerals generally do not smell and there is no way that the actual mineral gets into the berry. I therefore do not think it is useful if we talk about the nonexistent flavor of limestone or granite in the wine. I am not trying to stop you from doing it though ... just trying to educate the audience.
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine Well even terroir, soil and earth can have elements of what we might term 'minerality', and loosely following your logic above we can approach flavor compounds or at the very least certain taste or smell characteristics from terrior, soil and earth that infer or link to minerality. The biological composition of wine has to have elements of actual minerality and so again I find your distinctions overworked. At the very least minerality is used to denote flavor characteristics that are not fruit or herb based, sometimes expressed directly in wine. Take 'chalkiness' for example - with that particular mouth feel, minerality makes sense as a descriptor, does it not?. However I've never heard anyone say that they feel or taste either limestone or granite during a tasting, especially as a direct taste characteristic and I never experienced any wish to do so personally either - you may have misread my initial comment. So on this particular topic I'm not really convinced that you are in fact educating the audience at all - I think you may have some further work to do on the subject first.
I find this debate completely pointless. The term is used to define a sensation, not the science of whether minerals are absorbed or not. If one followed this same logic one would stop also saying “leather” , “black olive”, “cut grass”, “cowpat” and pretty much any other descriptive term since, needless to say, a vine does not absorb these components either! If a lot of people use it it is because it captures well a sensory experience many people relate to - which can only be a good thing. Why limit vocabulary and expression? I definitely will keep using the term.
That's what I am saying - keep using the term but know what it means. If people would try to explain to me that Syrah smells of black olives because there are black olives hidden in the berries then I would like to clearify that too...
Great explanation of a term I think it is best to avoid. "Wine types" will argue with you about this until the cows come home, but the fact is you cannot taste minerals. Thanks for the video.
A lot of weird comments on here from people defending the term by saying it applies to a bunch of random, vaguely earthy notes. I've read at least a dozen different descriptors folks in the comments say fall under minerality and I heavily doubt most folks are tasting anything close to them. This is a useless term applied to almost every bottle by proverbial wine morons and people who want to sell you a bottle.
Excellent exposition on "minerality" and related physical/geologic interactions between vineyard soils and wine. I grew up drinking well water that was very high in minerals, mostly iron and calcium, so I've been wondering if that has obscured my ability to taste "minerals" in wine. You've settled that for me--thanks--I'm not handicapped in that regard, I guess. And, yes, I too felt that most wine reviews that use the term "minerality" were really describing the interaction of acidity and wine flavor compounds. The one thing notably missing from your video was microbiome considerations. A year or two ago, I read a viticulture/oenology science paper that seemed to suggest that wine critic reviews tying wine taste to vineyard soils was the result of the influence of a particular soil's microbiome (including yeasts, of course) that make their way onto grapes (and then affect the wine produced). That is, the microbiome of a limestone soil affects a wine in a particular way that is different from that same wine made from vines grown on a slate soil, with it's particular microbiome. Have you also come across this idea and what's your take?
Thank you! I think the microbiome is relevant when it comes to Terroir rather than minerality. I made a whole video on Terroir but did not go into much detail on microbes.
It was obvious to me all along vines do not suck up minerals and transfer them into the berries. However once it dawned on me there are no petals, strawberries, leather, pepper, cat pee (you name it) in wine either, I gave up on my resistance against using the term.
I found that I ended up talking about minerality in some wine when I also found some "savouriness" in it, so maybe associated to salt rather than a rock itself. Still, "minerality" feels the best word to describe it (thanks to the fact that is vague) as I wouldnt say salty.
I do not understand this recent battle against the term "minerality" that seems to be quite popular in the wine world. For me it is a shortcut to refer to a quite varied taste in wine, mixing sapididy and different types of undertoned spiciness. It is a mix that can remind the taste that we associate to minerals. Clearly, it does not have to be taken literally, most terms we use to describe wines are metaphors: bright, vertical, elegant, etc. On the other hand, I have tasted wines from volcanic regions (the Vulture area in Italy is a classical example), where the sulfur taste (and other minerals) are clearly transferred to the wine, but I agree these are quite extreme cases.
Hi Konstantin, I just recently came across your channel and have really appreciated your efforts to go behind wine buzz words and explain in more detail the history, economics and science behind wine. Interesting to learn the minerals in the soil have little if any impact on the wine’s flavor. I just ordered the book you suggested to learn more. For me personally, the term minerality just worked to describe the savory earthy flavors I love in Loire Valley Sauvignon Blancs from Sancerre and Pouilly Fumé. If you avoid the term minerality, how do you prefer to describe that type of flavor? Can minerality not be used the way “leather” is in describing that flavor in wines? I’m a long time enthusiast who has been thinking about joining a wine program like WSET. If you have any suggestions on which program is best for beginners or have already made a video on this I’d love to know. Thanks for a great channel.
I very much enjoy your channel, and have learned a great deal. Thank you! I must disagree on one point, though. I am Piemontese, but love the southern Italian and Sicilian whites. The eggplant in Sicily tastes like no other, and it resembles the ‘volcanic’ whites of the area. There is no point in eating Pasta alla Norma anywhere else I the world, it just doesn’t taste as good. I understand the science of mineral uptake in vines, I did my Masters in biochemistry, so I am being subjective. But to me it is real and reproducible. It is just that the taste of many fruits and vegetables there are very similar to the wines, and I’m going with minerality/volcanic. There you can truly appreciate the phrase ‘if it grows together, it goes together’…
Yes that is true - what grows together goes together. But how do you separate soil, climate, agriculture etc from each other. It could also be due to the climate
Tasting minerals in wine is okay, but you shouldn't think it comes from the fact those deposits were in the ground. I have a Feteasca Neagra I like to drink, that has a crushed rock/stones note to it, but I don't believe for one second it is because there were some loose stones in the ground. I've tasted cabernet with an iron like taste before, but I didn't for one second think it was because there was an iron deposit nearby. We just try to make sense of what we smell and taste and maybe use a catchall "minerals", but that doesn't mean we infer that it comes from the soil composition. If i feel blackberries in a wine, it isn't because blackberries were used to fertilise the soil the vines grew in.
Regardless of its lack of objective connection to minerals, 'minerality' just seems to be a good descriptor from a phenomenological perspective. I.e. people have a strong intuition of how minerality smells and tastes like. Tasting is a completely phenomenological event, you're describing the tastes and aromas how you perceive them, with the words that you see best fit. I don't think there's any cheesecake in the soil where the grapes of the wine I had yesterday was grown on, but that seemed like a great way to describe it because that was what I smelled. Conversely, you might smell citric acid in the wine and say "this wine is citrusy!", but are you actually smelling citrus? No, you're smelling an acid that has a connection to the word (and concept) 'citrus' in your mind. In like manner, you can smell things that are not exactly minerals, but that happen to occur in places, foods or the like that you associate with the word "mineral". Many people in the comments have expressed examples such as a wet cave, smell of a rock after rain and wet clay. Whatever the connecting molecule or a collection of molecules that are objectively speaking present in the wine, that people associate with the word 'minerality', it really won't be any different from what a citric acid is to the word 'citrus'. It's a description, not a lab test that has to come up with a presence of a molecule that happens to have a taxonomical connection to how science describes the concept of a 'mineral'.
That is true. There are some flavor molecules though that can be linked to certain fruits (citrus), porducts (milk), spices (Vanilla) etc that can be identified in wine. This is not the case for minerals.
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine But it is the case for minerals if you expand your list of concepts from "fruits, products and spices" to include "places" (wet caves) as well! I just find it trivial to exclude it from the list. Minerals are present in caves (and more importantly people associate them with caves). Specific "wet cave" flavour compounds are present in caves. People perceive "wet cave" flavour compounds as "mineraly".
Unfortunately the point of the conversation is missing.. Minerality is widely used by lot many winemakers along the world in order to make a phenomenological connection of their "terroir" with the wines that are produced there. It is very common simplification when it comes to speak about white wines from vineyards that are cultivated in volcanic soils. I know that as a wine lover all this "nerdy" information can be from boring to frustrating. But as an enologist, i would rather leave scientific research to deliver some handy objective facts about the wine i love rather to leave marketing experts do their magic 🙂
This misses the point. It's the direct claims of a link with taste and soil structures. It's one thing to have suggestions of minerality, but another to directly associate it with those soils.
Interesting video! I had a couple questions that came from this though: 1. Do you think the influence of mineral water impacts our sense of the word 'minerality'? It's effervescence/acidity as well as the Calcium and Magnesium increase could affect our sense of the word minerality? 2. For the rock minerals that do dissolve readily into soil solution (e.g. limestone), they should be important to note? I am not super familiar with geology but even less soluble rocks should contribute to the soil solution over longer periods of time? The rock licking came across a little misleading, as for example, you would not taste Mg in a rock however, is the centre of the chlorophyll molecule; could the same be true for more flavourful compounds? It would be dependent of how the plant uses these nutrients as well to affect taste. Overall i agree though, it plays a smaller part to the wine taste than is mostly led to believe and it was fun to listen to :)
Thanks. On 1. Yes maybe ... No one really knows how this word came to be. On 2. Plants take up nutrients from the soil and the bedrock will change the composition of the available nutrients. The point I was trying to make is that you cannot taste slate in wine for many reasons but the vine is definately not picking up slate through its roots. Instead it takes up nutrients like for example Mg.
Great video, as a Wine Educator I am constantly wrestling with many overused, vague descriptive terms when tasting and talking about wine. (Not very helpful when trying to "demystify" wine for my customers!) I do think that a more acidic wine can kind of be described as having a certain "minerality", but it's not really helpful as a flavor descriptive. One of my favorite words as an aroma descriptive term, though, is "petrichor", which is from the Greek for simply "wet rock". More specifically, this refers to the smell of warm rock (or even asphalt!) after a sudden summer rain. We've all experienced it, and occasionally I will encounter it in certain reds and red blends. I've almost come to expect it in some of the great red wines of Priorat in Spain. Please keep making these vids, I will recommend them to my wine classes going forward!
Petrichor is kinda deceptive term since it is caused by bacteria and algae releasing odors in the air after mist or rain, so it doesn't mean inorganic earth but rather organic lifeforms..
KB thanks for your scientific informed scepticism about so many things which does not detract from the fun and romanticism of wine. A bit of imagination and eloquent
I think that the purpose of tasting notes has a communication goal. It should be reflecting on a specific smell that is generally known about. When we start using terms like minerality, which lack an actual consensus and it is scientifically misleading, it affects how we communicate with others about wine. I have collected minerals and been to mines since I was 6 years old and I haven’t experienced a single wine that takes me to a “mineral” character. In fact, ever since I heard the term I’ve been trying to find sources to help me understand what people mean by minerally. I have had wines that have forest floor, wet soil, and pine forest aromas and palate but I would not say that is minerally… Maybe it would be a good idea to see who coined the term and what that person was describing when the person coined “minerality”. I think words stick because big and famous producers start using it and now everyone believes it’s an actual thing. The fact that the term is so ambiguous means that the term is not reliable… I’d rather tell a my mom that the wine has a wet carpet or Forrest floor aroma (which is more specific) than to use a term no one but me will understand.
Have never used the word minerality in smell or taste of wine but have heard the term used many times from a master of wine.I have used the term earthy or even cement when tasting a wine so if this is minerality then there it is.Minerals may not be in the wine but it is the perception of that element in the wine. As we all taste different elements in the same wine.
Thank you for your video, I think there're many tasting notes that we perceive in wine that they're not what we think they are. However, for me, minerality would be the expression of a wine from a certain region, and that is the unique taste you feel when you taste a wine from South Africa, Argentina or Spain for example. I do believe a region can have influence in the taste of wine. Sometimes the freshness, earthiness, herbs, somehow could be perceived whether in smell or taste, not saying they put it inside the wine, neither I'm saying the grape carries all these aspects inside, but I think each region can definitely influence in the taste of wine, IN A MINERAL WAY. For example, I've tasted some Argentinian wines (specially not aged in too much wood) that has a particular taste that give us the sensation of the region, the forest floor, grass, under bushes, that is mineral for me, the UNIQUE particular taste of a wine that shifts you towards the landscape. And that unique sensation cannot be felt in other wines, therefore, these tasting notes shouldn't be a trick of fermentation or aging.
I agree that there are huge differences in taste depending on where the same kind of grape ripens. However, the fact that your definition of minerality differs completely from what other people express here kind of proves his point. When a wine taste like green apple, cranberry or black pepper the taste is quite distinct and everybody knows exactly what you are are talking about. But by saying my wine tastes mineral, somebody thinks it tastes like licking a wet rock, the second person might think about soil and you think about Argentina. I use the term as well and at home we know what the other person is referring to. So I was wondering why Konstantin is having so many problems with this term. But seeing the comments below this video explains that very well - maybe even better than the video :)
I have no doubt that different soil types impart different flavour expressions in the wine and that you can correlate them. You are not tasting the minerals themselves, but you are among other things tasting what the minerals do to the fruits flavour expression (when fermented and aged). It is well known that different soil types change pH in the wine for example - so it also changes the structure. I think of it like epigenetics. You are not experiencing the genes of a person, but the expression of the genes as a product of environment and complex formation process. I can find specific flavours that remind me of specific minerals that I experience having tasted such as e.g. clay dust or iron or copper which for me clearly has a distinguishable tastes and smells that I know. Petrichor is another clear example of a smell I would characterize as mineral. So you can taste minerality - something with a flavour characterisric of something mineral - though it may not be the same as the mineral that is traceable in the wine. E.g. - I always find a specific tobacco smokiness and when aged powdery rose chin blush note from PN grown on slate - even if it is unoaked.
I associate minerality to the smell of a creek with round pebbles in the bottom and the bank. Others use it differently depending on their experiences. There is a lot of subjectivity on this, as well as a strong link to our own experiences. Certainly alkaline and alkaline earth elements do not smell or taste, other than saltiness, but I think we have to think more on using images or synonymous to represent what we feel.
Wow! I have my WSET-3, and you just taught me something I never new. Thank you. I use the term for the description of the smell of fresh on rocks. But it's very cool to know that it's not actual minerality. I guess it's just like most other descriptions. There isn't blackberries, cassis, leather and spices in the wine, just the aromas of them.
I think communication is choosing certain words that bring out what you hope to describe. If and when the word "sunny" started to be used in describing wine, then, sure, I'll use it. Maybe it's the next step in the evolution of saying a wine tastes "warm" or "hot." BTW, I also have a rock from the Romani Conti vineyard. Maybe soon, they will put surveillance cameras all around. LOL.
I enjoyed a glass of wine at a wine bar recently but the lovely American waitress described the red wine as "its a fun wine" which left me feeling empty within and I left and never returned.
I've probably been misusing this term for some time now, but for me, , minerality is the term i tend to lean on when trying to describe a certain mouth feel i get somewhere in the middle/finish of a sip. It tends to be something I look for when picking a better wine; white wine in particular for me. My example would be the difference in a cheap Sauvignon blanc which is acidic and "sharp" in my mouth and maybe a more expensive Sancerre (also Sauv Blc) which, in between the flavor notes, has a smoother mouth feel and a brine-like support to the flavors from start to finish. This also could be nonsense, it just helps me visualize certain flavors my palette is attracted to.... Now i'm craving a glass of Terlan Pinot Bianco!
Thank you Konstantin for a very interesting episode, as usual. I fully agree with you but have troubles describing wines without using "minerality" as a term. How would you, for exemple, describe the characteristics of a etna rosso?
Minerality has always sounded more like a descriptor of structural/textural elements rather than flavour or aroma. Now I'm intrigued as to whether that's always been succinic acid content Great video
I use the term quite a lot, mostly for non fruity white wine. I think of it as you say as a metaphor, or rather a convention in describing wine: many people broadly agree on or at least understand what is meant by it.
I never use the term "minerality" and living in France I feel sun, rain, wine making technique, bottling, temperature control especially during transport to the consumer; and serving temperature, and reaction with air (oxyben and other gases) at the time of consumption are all more important to the taste of a wine than minerals! However, I did study chemistry and worked in food chemistry (Coca-Cola) and indiustiral chemisty (Exxon) and did some study in nuclear chemistry and salt and calcium are minerals that definitely have taste! It could be that some people have the ability to detect very low levels of minerals! Salt is a flavor accentuator (it enhanses the taste of foods and beverages!) So it is possible that some people may be able to detect either the minerals themselves or the chemical compounds that are formed by these minerals (even at very low levels) It also could be similar to the effect of iron (which is a mineral) We clearly know what blood tastes like because of the reaction the iron has with taste receptors in our mouth, so one could imagine that certain people may be able to either detect the minerals themselves or the chemical compounds formed which contain minerals or a reaction similar to iron! Potasium has a taste like in KCL Potassium Cloride! it is used in many beverages for athletes to give them much needed K+! It definitely has a taste, very different from Sodium Chloride (regular salt) however if you tried to taste or eat pure potassium or sodium it would be a horrible mistake as these minerals react with water liberating hydrogen atoms violently! In other words they explode when in contact with water :) Fun videos of Sodium and Potassium: th-cam.com/video/dmcfsEEogxs/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/oqMN3y8k9So/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/CEC64Bqeajs/w-d-xo.html After theses videos you see minerals are nothing to play with :)
You said it perfectly in the end of the video. Minerality is a very abstract description as many other terms in wine tasting are. A wine beign leathery does not imply the use of leather in the wine making process
Consider this. You talk about the (not) flavor of the stone, and I think you are right that these mysterious minerals absorbed by the roots of the vine, hardly arrive inside the grapes, then managing to stand out in the juice squeezed. But what you can instead perceive is contained not in the hard rock, but in its layer of disaggregation, ie in the dust on the surface of the ground (this "organic" layer, colonized by a microbial flora, a "microbiota", which varies from land to land, from place to place), these microorganisms are transported by the wind on the grape skin itself. Have you ever heard those quaint smells of earth wet after the rain? (as well as those of undergrowth can be familiar). In certain vinifications, especially in the old world, it is still used to make spontaneous fermentation, with indigenous yeasts, those present naturally on the peel of the grape. It is mainly in these types of wines that you can feel like aromatic hints that belong neither to the fruit, nor to the wood of the barrel, but that are precisely yeasts, and that they can remember just the smell of the land, wet, from which they come. Try any Vernaccia of Oristano (this is just an example) and re-evaluates the myth. Considera questo. Tu parli del (non) sapore della pietra, e penso tu abbia ragione che, questi misteriosi minerali assorbiti dalle radici della vite, difficilmente arrivano fin dentro gli acini d'uva, riuscendo poi a distinguersi nel succo spremuto. Ma quello che puoi invece percepire è contenuto non nella dura roccia, ma nel suo strato di disfacimento, cioè nella polvere sulla superficie del terreno (quello strato "organico", colonizzato da una flora microbica, un "microbiota", che varia da terreno a terreno, da luogo a luogo), questi microrganismi vengono trasportati dal vento sulla buccia dell'uva stessa. Hai mai sentito quei caratteristici odori di terra bagnata dopo la pioggia? (così come possono essere familiari quelli di sottobosco). In certe vinificazioni, soprattutto nel vecchio mondo, si usa fare ancora la fermentazione spontanea, con i lieviti indigeni, quelli presenti spontaneamente sulle bucce dell'uva. E' soprattutto in questi tipi di vini che puoi avvertire dei sentori che non appartengono né al frutto, né al legno della botte, ma che sono proprio dei lieviti, e che possono ricordarti proprio l'odore della terra bagnata da cui provengono. Prova una qualunque Vernaccia di Oristano (questo è solo un esempio) e rivaluta il mito.
Thank you for your comment. The smell after a rain is called petrichor and it is mainly Geosmin which is produced by various algae living on the ground. That this smell makes its way into the wine is fairly unlikely as many things would then smell like Geosmin. The effect that you are describing does happen though with flavors like Eukalyptus that can make its way into wine.
Exactly! That is why pedology is much more constructive and relevant than straight geology to explain some flavors present in wine that might come from the soil.
I love ur point about sunny flavors -) When I just started my wine journey, I was confused and curious what minerality is, and then I decided to buy a wine with this "minerality" in it. In my neighborhood wine store, it appeared to be Portuguese Vino Verde. From that point on it became my standard for minerality. But when my friends ask me what is it, I can not explain, it s a combination of aromas that u perceive.
First of all, congrats to Konstantin on the success of this channel. It’s so well-deserved, and I always enjoy how you’re striking a balance of geeking out with your mad wine skills while not taking it all too seriously.
As for this topic, I know that there is fashion in the descriptors people use for wines, but I don’t at all get why it’s equally fashionable for some experts to be hating on the term “minerality”
The whole point to the argument seems to be that it’s invalid (or at least frowned upon) to use that particular term because there is not enough mineral contents in a wine to actually taste it.
By that logic, if I said that there is wet wool in my Chenin Blanc, I’m sure a scientist would be able to tell me that the amount of sheep in the wine is too small for me to actually taste that either. And that’s because most of the descriptors are metaphors anyway.
I think it’s bang on that the term is being used a lot in relation to high acid, less opulent wines, where the flavours are subtle but still lingering. So might a reason for the increased popularity of the descriptor be that preferences are moving in that direction? Think PYCM compared to an old school, buttery Meursault.
Also, for a wine maker to advertise his or her wines coming from stony fields, that doesn’t necessarily imply that those stones must be beneficial in terms of their taste (or lack thereof) directly rubbing off on the wine. Heat retention and drainage very much does affect taste.
Anyway, just a few humble thoughts from somebody who loves terms like minerality and salinity :-) Keep those videos coming!
I would actually argue that those metaphors have scientific bases. Most aroma descriptions can be directly linked to the presence of common compounds between the “metaphorical” objects and the wine being tasted itself. At least that is my opinion from my experience with “Le Nez du vin” wherein most descriptions and aroma vials content important compounds found in wine
@@feabterminator6326 yes, that's why you can smell certain fruits and certain natural things in wine, leather doesn't just come to be, you have to tan it to make it into what it is and the tanning process often uses vegetable tannins to achieve that. those are chemicals that can show up in a wine.
I think it’s a helpful buzz word for Sommeliers to use to excite and entice everyday consumers. “When I eat oysters, I love to drink Chablis with them because of the ancient oyster shell fossils found throughout the regions soil showcasing a beautiful minerality that pairs perfectly. Enjoy!” Reminds me of another famous saying “is there any other profession with more bullshit than wine?”
Great video! Very intriguing subject.
I don’t believe that the vines can transport the minerals from the soil/bedrock into the wine so you can smell and identify them. However I do believe there are aromas in wine that people can acosiate to “minerality”. I have many memories of scents that I would put in the “minerality category”. No, a clean stone might not taste of anything but smack two stones together and the dust/smoke will smell, go into an old cave and it will smell, damp clay smells, crushed seashells smell etc. These things are obviously not in your wine but the aromas in a wine can remind you of them. An association is not the same thing as identifying and confirming stuff with your nose. You’re not smelling a fruit bowl with pear, apple and lemon, you’re smelling a wine, let it evoke your memories.
(Just my opinion, cheers!)
This summarise my thoughts on this matter and how he seemed completely dumb, specially when trying to prove hes point by licking a stone. No wonder why he decided to become a TH-camr.
Beautiful
Hallelujah! Although I intuitively suspected that connection between soil composition and "minerality" in wine is extremely weak, this video nailed it. On the other hand, I found the term "minerality" very useful to describe that weak battery-licking quartz-crushing sensation of saltines, bitterness, and acidity.
I often describe some of my favorite wines as "slate" and "stoney" and "flinty" and "Earthy." This video was excellent.
I think metaphors as sensory descriptors are what a consumer and professionals expect and absolutely needed for us non-scientific types. There is no “rose petals” in a boti of Barolo, but saying the concentration of cis-rose oxide B damascenone geraniol nerol is lovely and adds to the nose of this wine just doesn’t flow off the tongue 😉😁😁😉. Really very much enjoy your videos. 👍👍👍
Thank you! Like I say: Everyone should use their preferred terms but they should undestand what they mean.
Of course minerality is a conventional terming. Which means in my opinion the freshness of creek or even mountain creek when you are near it. In palate it's even more complex but understandable for consumers. There are plenty of such termings in tasting. There is no more conventional terming as "forest floor" as you used in clip about pinot noir. But it did not disturb you. Thank you for understanding.
I think his point is that ‘minerality’ will be used by people in relation to the origin of the wine and the geology of the vineyard, when the ‘flavor’ of ‘minerality’ (likely) does not correlate to that at all. As he said, you can use it as a descriptor for those flavor notes of acidity, free sulphate and succinic acid (or whatever else tastes of ‘mineral’ to you), but to do it on the basis of the rocks it grew on is just posturing rather than based on the flavors the wine might actually be giving you (unless it coincidently happens to have those flavors, independent of the geology).
But, the difference is that forest floor is an actual recognisable smell. Minerals don’t smell.
Wow that was very educational ... I must say I do use the term minerality (perhaps as a catch all) for savory/salty drying components with a wet rock after a rainfall type nose ... but loved hearing the science and geology. As always thank you
Glad it was helpful!
Has anyone ever considered that the descriptive term minerality is borrowed from the wide range of commercially available mineral water?
There is a huge variety out there, and the concentration of dissolved elements contributes to the softness, hardness and ultimately the ‘flavor’ of the water. Even though chemically it is still two hydrogens and one oxygen. I’ve dined at michelin starred restaurants that propose water pairings to accompany a gastronomic menu, and each water was noticeably different than the next due to its mineral composition which derives from the rock type in and around the source. Why then is this not applicable to wine?
I think different waters definitely taste different. Only distilled water is (almost) pure h2o, otherwise there are many more chemical compounds, one only has to taste chlorinated tap water and compare it to even cheap spring water to know there is a difference.
Minerals are dissolved in water as it comes up from the earth. Wine does not come up from the earth it comes from grapes so the earth can not leach minerals directly onto the wine as it can into water.
NIce summary, Konstantin. Thank you .
I used to use it until I realised that it wasn't very helpful, because, as you have so succinctly described, what does it actually mean?
I think it is used as a shorthand to help describe terroir. For instance, I remember going to a WSET Chablis tasting in London a few years ago and, of course, the very distinctive, fossil-strewn, limestone soil is often given prominence when describing a wine which has very high acidity. When I asked about it, the explanation given was to do with the strange relationship whereby soils with higher alkalinity seem to help give wines with high acidity. Isn't that a function of the amount of sunshine in an area north of Paris, I asked? The answer came back that it was a "complex relationship"...
I always found that term, 'minerality', very vague. I usually think of lead or tea, rather than something that cannot be put into words. Thanks for making this video.
Thanks
I am a wine beginner, so I use the terms I get „thaught“. Minerality is one of the most terms you can read and hear in the world of wine 😂 Good to learn about that topic, thx!
Now you know :)
Pretty simple for me. I use the "minerality" term to describe the smell/aroma of wet rock after rain shower. Can be compared to gun flint also. I don't really attach importance to the scientific origin of this aroma, I rather note its presence quite simply.
Makes sense
So why not say "smells like wet rocks" or "gun flint"? Would be less confusing
I agree, I also find it as a way to describe some texture of the wine. But in the end, as you say, is a term "to describe", just as we use the term "tomato leaf", or "black peppercorn", when there's obviously none of these on the wine.
@@134679rap my point being, it's easier to understand "tomato leaf" or "wet rocks" instead of "minerality". Especially since there's no agreed definition of meaning.
@@MK-fj8xf It's not easier to understand.
Working in a wine store, I encounter "minerality" quite often, both when testing new wines in the store as well as helping customers. For me, minerality is the smell you get when standing in a still summer rain on a bare cliff. Sounds very specific I know, but there is a very specific scent produced when the rain hits the bare rock. And summer rain (at least the one romantized in our heads) typically involve very little wind, so the scent isn't blown away by the wind and gets more prominent. So whenever a customers asks what on earth minerality means, I just say your typical summer rain on a cliff, and they all go a-ha!
If it's a certain chemical compounds responsible for this - produced by other factors such as grape variety, soil drainage, climate etc - then "minerality" still makes sense once you make that link to the summer rain on a bare cliff and is easy to remember.
It's a similar case with the petrolium smell. The wines do not contain any petrolium (at least I really hope not lol), but there is a petrol-like scent to it. Or someone might say a wine taste a little "green", which is simply an umbrella term for things like mixed herbs, grassy notes, etc.
As the term minerality continually shows up when people are talking about wine, I keep coming back to this video.
Really interesting what The Oxford Companion to Wine said about minerality, as it wasn't even mentioned in the third edition from 2006. It discussed the methods of detecting the mineral contents in wine down to parts per billion, but it didn't even bother to dismiss the notion that you can detect the mineral contents using the human senses.
To me, using the term "minerality" when describing a wine is a copout. It's such a vague term, and very few seem to know what they're actually describing, as they can't clarify what they mean by it. Yes, some wines can have aromas reminiscent of a sea breeze or a warm pavement after a rain shower, but those aroma compounds are not minerals! Also, are wines from warmer climates or made from later picked grapes never minerally? The galets roulés of CdP are a defining characteristic in many vineyards, but those wines (reds in particular) are not as often described as being minerally.
The term's usage is too inconsistent and vague to be of any use in my opinion. There are so many other precise words that can be used to accurately describe a wine, so I get frustrated that so many people who communicate about wine keep using a word that can lead to so much confusion.
Whenever I’ve described wines as having ‘high minerality’ it has always been about the flavour rather than tasting a ‘higher concentration of minerals’. I find myself using this expression with low intervention wines and the ‘mineral taste’ reminds me of water from a waterfall. Again, incredibly hard to describe the taste into words
Man your videos keep on showing up on my TH-cam feed. But I like it. Good job 👏🏼
Awesome! Thank you!
Very lucid and informative. Thanks!
Glad you enjoyed it!
I don’t use the term mineral very often unless I can’t find the word to describe what i am tasting that is not sweet, acidic, tannic. It it is salty, then salty or savory. If it is iron or copper then I would use those words. For all other metallic tastes, I just use metallic because I don’t know what potassium, zinc, selenium taste like.
I really enjoyed this video! My sister has been doing some research on the California terroir and this has been an interesting and helpful aid! I love the piece of art that you have displayed, do you know who the artist was or where I can find it?
Glad you enjoyed it! This is a table set from a trattoria in Tuscany.
Minerality.... Do not hesitate and let these people keep talking about mineral wines. Could you make a glass of wine from Toro? You feel the "terracotta" flavour. Toro is a Spanish "Denominación de Origen Protegida" for wines in the province of Zamora. Regarding names of tasting notes, have a look at whisky tasting... for example..."Old bandage". Great tutorial by the way !!!!!. Happy New Year!!!!
I use the term "Mineral" as a description of smell and taste, i.e. "wet rock" and similar, in lack of a better descrption.
As a chemist and plant Biologist, I know that plants only absorb nutrients from the soil, not part of the soil itself... (thank god) :-)
Really great video, great analysis, lovin' it! Was assuming the term is en vouge at the moment, and that it describes some factors (like saltiness, acidity) which link to a picture on how people think minerals may taste (even if in real life they don't taste at all). Didn't know though that this term was absolutely not used in earlier times.
So that gives still a chance that the sunny flavours of a wine become en vouge and are used heavily in some 20 or 30 years ;) sunny - hm, that sounds a bilt like warm and sweet, maybe honey, melon, exotic fruits, sugar... ah all the sudden so clear - wine has sunny flavours! and obviously, when the sun shines, part of sunbeams are stored in the grapes, no doubt about that! And then pretty clear that we taste those in the wine! ;)
Yes, only that (a bit like with mineral) sunbeams are not stored in grapes but they are needed to proudce sugar, ripen the grapes and change the flavors.
Very helpful lecture!
From a grateful student in Seoul. :)
Thank you!
Hi Konstantin, thanks for the video, I've just discovered your channel and found it extremely interesting. My thoughts on minerality. I work in coffee as a roaster. We do a lot of quality control which involve a lot of brewing it as well. Couple of years ago the whole coffee industry was shocked how much of the difference can water quality make in coffee preparation. Especially Calcium, Magnesium and Bicarbonate (Buffor) where found to hugely affect sweetness , acidity and body. The thing is I cant taste the difference in water which has a (for example) 10ppm(!) more bicarbonate , but I can easily pick it up in brewed coffee when preparing a tasting session. The factors like coffee extraction, strength and pH seems not being a case here. Can it be possible that we see something similar in wine. We not tasting minerals but because of them our perception of different compounds change and results in something that we commonly relate to as minerality. Thanks Jakub
Minerality is a concept, an idea of a taste, it's like describing the crispy sharpness of air in sub zero temperatures, or the warmth of the sun on your skin, it is a metaphore as you say.
is like placing your tong on a wet rock over the sea being bathed by the sun =minerality
or like the clorine of the swimming pool
Very informative 👏
Coming from a world of specialty coffee, I can add that a soil makeup can translate into extraordinary variations in coffee flavour profile. Good example is Papua New Guinea. High amounts of glutamic acid find their way into coffee seeds and create this incredible umami flavour. Pairing with caramelised sugars from the roasting process the coffee has a beautiful savoury/sweet character. Really unique and singular expression of “terroir” if you will
I think it generally is used to describe something with a rich complex flavor. I’ve heard some people use “minerality” to describe fresh fruit, like how you can eat one apple that is kind of plain, then you can eat another apple of same variety and the taste can be so much better, apart from just more sugar, more defined flavors that are rich and complex. The best Example I can think of in America would be comparing non-organic del monte bananas to their organic bananas, the organic bananas just taste soo much better. Of course, none of that necessarily means that the better tasting fruit has more minerals in it or anything.
I think people might think of minerality as way to explain why better cared for produce often tastes better. They think that the organic farming practices have a more rich and healthy soil transfers to the fruit itself.
Once again, not sure if any of that would directly explain the better tasting fruit.
My guess is that “minerality” mostly came up in the wine world as a way for the classic and well-established vineyards to give a reason for why their wine is so superior and why it can’t be “imitated”. Kind of adds to the whole “terroir” thing.
Yes, some great points!
In fact, most descriptors in wine are immeasurable, which means that they are subject to a kind of interpretation, which if carried out by a single person can be very different depending on the time of day, humor, food eaten, etc. Therefore, certain mental shortcuts are used, and for unspecified phenomena more general terms that can lead to characteristics. There are many terms in the language of wine that we cannot measure and are ultimately a kind of free description. Examples: flint in Sancerre, or earthiness in Syrah. For me, minerality is a certain aroma that I feel when I am on a mountain river, but I am not a fan of this term, as well as the word terroir, and especially the context in which it is used. I like the term "feel terroir" the most 😉
Great great video
Still, in Chablis you can feel metal taste, in white Burgundy iodine, in Bordeaux graphite, in vale de Loire gunpowder...same tastes in the wines from same region.
If these descriptors work for you that is great. It is however not an actual aroma that is extracted from the minerals.
I use it. I also read that there is none to few influence which minerals really have, before but this does not change the fact, that this taste is definetely there even to extreme extent. I remember a tasting in 2018 when they poured out von Othegraven, Ockfener Bockstein Riesling GG (I think the vintage was 2017 but I am not sure) and the girl who was my girlfriend at this time said, that this wine tastes like sucking on a pebble. She is no wine freak but in my opionion her description was totally right and even if this taste has nothing to do with the stone oder soil on which the grapes grow I do not know how to describe this kind of impression better.
Yes, I also struggle with finding a good descriptor for this sensation. I also know what you mean when you use the term and I think it is fine to use it. But it is important to understand it too!
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine You are right but maybe there is no reason to worry. Sometimes wine smells like horse sweat or even blood but we also know that there is no horse sweat or blood in the wine, so maybe the problem ist not to call a certain taste "mineral" but to tell that this taste comes from the soil the grapes grow on.
@@spiritalex9397 yes, that's an argument. But the thing is minerals normally do not have a smell or taste, horse sweat and blood (to a lesser extent) do. In many cases you can also find the same substance in the wine as in the product we associate it with. Rotundone is the substance that gives pepper its smell and it can also be found in Syrah.
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine Yes, I remember we talked about rotundone in the comments of your syrah video and I have to admit that I did not know that this stuff is also responsible for this horse sweat smell so: Thank you! And you are right minerals don't taste themselves like you impressively shew to us when you liked that stone ;-) but anyway this taste people call "mineral" is there and I think we have to cope with this term until we found a better expression but I really think that the main problem is that people tell this taste comes from the minerals in the soil. However, we are both rather young and therefore I am sure there will be many years to drink wine for both of us so maybe we talk again in a few decades and can say that we (or someone else) found a really good other term to describe it :-)
Look at all the steep slopes with slate along the Mosel - the slate mostly functions as heat retainer and influences water management in the soil but tasting slate in the wines? No.
Mineral water (the one that contains a significant amount of mineral residue) undoubtedly has a distinct taste.
Hi Konstantin, I've often described the wines from El Valle de Guadalupe in Ensenada, Mexico as having lots of minerality. Maybe incorrectly, after having watched this video....... but they have a mineral, salinity to them. Does that sound odd? I do enjoy them but that is what I get from many of the wines from that region. Have you tried any wine from that region? I'm interested in your opinion.
Try tasting deionised or distilled water compared to a filtered tap water, there is a very noticeable difference in taste
I've never heard technical or literal accuracy to be the main point behind flavor descriptions before. Why are we applying that to this one specifically now?
Many people think there are actual minerals in wine and the slates in vineyards are used for marketing, while no one thinks there are actual peaches or petrol in wine. So I think it makes sense to dispel that myth.
If we smell petrol in Riesling we know that there is no actual petrol in wine. But there is a substance called TDN that is in wine and that smells of petrol. It is different with minerality as I explain in the video.
I think a lot of the people commenting understand that descriptors of wine are not the contents of wine. With countless inherently unique wines in the world, what we’re doing is applying scents, flavors and other characteristics to help people (and ourselves) know or remember what’s inside the bottle. I’ll occasionally use the term minerality. If someone said “mineral or dusty rocks,” I can start to hone in on the style of wine, while eliminating many others; and that’s just one descriptor. Today though, I feel like a big, hot fruit bomb-which won’t burn or blow up in my mouth.
I’m curios. Because I love a good Riesling ( Alsace ). IE Trimbach. I’ve always used that term. “ minerality “ for it. Or more so. “ slaty”. ( has wet slate after a rainfall aroma. Would minerality fit in that term?
mineralality is tied to ion content aka mineral salts , Italian waters have high ion content such as calcium which you can taste an ionic mineral is salt you can taste it and feel it on the palete at ppm levels
Taste of sunshine hahahah it's actually very pretty description
Yes, it is so !
Agree 100%
I use the term “minerality” (if I do at all, I prefer other terms usually like rocks) to describe flavors akin to dirt, the smell of petrichor, dust, wet soil, etc. I’m not discussing the literal minerals in the wine itself.
I'd be curious to know what you think of the concept terroir? It seems to me to be somewhat like minerality - poetic and slightly vague, and that the claim of, for example, winemakers in beaujolais and burgundy is that their uniqueness stems from their ability to express "terroir", morgon vs fleurie, gevrey vs. chambolle etc. what's your take?
This should really be another video Albert! Terroir makes a lot of sense if you include all factors into the equation on whether the origin influences the wine style. Being an avid blind taster I can confirm that it is possible to taste origin. But if sb only wants to look at the soil when talking about terroir it makes less sense as a concept.
Would be great with a video! I find it quite confusing because i find that many, for example in chablis, brand their wine with a particular “kimmeridgian limestone minerality” as their terroir, so if not soil, then what terroir distinguishes chablis from other regions of burgundy or champagne? microclimate? sun exposure? age of wines? And more interestingly, how do you distinguish these in a blind tasting?
@@albertk2455 I will do a video on Terroir than. To your question : all of those factors influence the wine style and many more. Think about it this way: only a few meters can make the difference in quality between different sites. The soils, altitude, exposition, microclimate, grape variety, viticulture, humidity might change, even between neighbouring sites. More in the Terroir video!
As a beginner I don’t keep so attached to the scientific explanation of minerality. The same way I don’t think we have in mind the pH level when we use the word acidity. The last one is more related to increased salivation on the mouth than pH, no? I think that we try to describe sensations, and they are linked to taste/aroma memories in most cases. For example, in some more fruity wines I feel guava aromas, but people who haven’t tasted guava won’t make the link. Maybe the problem is that, if it’s taken too far, this approach can wipe out the objectivity of the description, and it’s sure that there is some… In this way, do you know if the erosion of the minerals on the soil can make them to get absorbed by vineyards?
Thanks - Minerals are part of the soil but they cannot be directly absorbed by the vines.
I thought I was the weird one cause I never understood "minerality" and what it was supposed to smell or taste or feel like. I'm still searching for it, but maube I'm just not drinking the right wines yet lol
I couldn't stop laughing. Can we taste ever present radium? A well researched exposition nevertheless! Upate: Just watched again, still laughing. Texted to my boss who will also get a chuckle. Great sense of humor and blasphemy. I think people just mean tart and acidic.
Thanks!
It’s about conveying what you experience when you taste the wine. Not what’s actually going on in the glass. We all know there are no wet leaves or green bell peppers in a glass of Cab Franc either. Using minerality as a descriptor is simply a way to communicate what we smell and taste. It’s what we as humans do, we use language to find common ground. I don’t see what all the fuss is about. Don’t judge me for using a term, I feel like I’m being judged 😂
No judgement - I am pretty clear about that in the end - use it, but know what you are talking about.
Can you even describe an Assyrtiko without salinity/minerality? Language like wine is an alive, evolving thing so if people understand what is meant by minerality it's fine with me.
Strangely no one has focussed on the waxy bloom of the grape as a possible carrier of soil minerality into the wine making process. Randall Grahm probably pushed this whole story to its illogical end when he co-fermented rocks with wine. Not a happy experience apparently.
But of course, there aren't actually cherries or chocolate or roses in the wine, and yet we still reach for those descriptors to try and describe them...
2:59 😂😂😂😂❤
I'm sorry do you think that nutrient poor soil is important to wine?
If you want high quality wine you generally want to limit the availability of nutrients to the vine. Not too much but also not too little nutrients.
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine Got ya just wanted to check I've been really careful trying to make sure conditions are perfect for my first vines.
As a rock licker myself I'm highly offended!
Lol anyway, you should try Springfield Life from Stone (South Africa). Many describe it as very mineral rich like having liquid granite in your mouth.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Minerality tastes and smells like hyperbole...
Brettanomyces smells like bullshit...
If I hear "sarbright" or "medium plus" ever again, I will smell like my own vomit.
BEST VIDEO EVER!!
THANK YOU
But what about the sodium ion uptake and its effect on the final pH of the bottled wine? 😉
Of course "minerality" in some wines is a real thing--an identifiable, reproducible quality, consistent vintage after vintage, producer upon producer, particularly evident in certain non-fruity white wines (though in some reds too) in particular geographical/geological "terriors." Think how trained palates can usually easily distinguish between Chassagne Montrachets and Meursaults, for example, even though they are less than 4 miles apart. Or how easy it is to spot the Chablis in a blind tasting of chardonnays from all over the world. Or how Pouilly- Fumés (& Sancerres) are different than most other Loire sauvignon blancs. Or how Etna carricantes actually do smell & taste, well, "igneous," similar to the "igneous" twang of Etna red nerello mascaleses. Or what makes Stag's Leap District cabernets identifiably different from Rutherford cabs, that are just down the road. Or Spring Mountain cabs different from Howell Mountain cabs. With some grapes, in some areas, with some winemaking practices, the "minerality" of a wine--the soils & geological conditions of the vineyard--can, indeed, stand out distinctively.
Sure, I've seen these "debunker" claims that the quantities of ions that dissolve from rocks and soils are too low to conceivably make a sensory difference, but they are simply empirically wrong. And you aren't talking about "minerals" here. (Or that horribly ambiguous "nutrients.") We are talking about ions dissolved by water from the rocks and minerals and soils and biologically concentrated in the grapes and finished wine. As a degreed materials scientist and mining engineer, I've had geology classes where we actually had to lick rocks to try to identify them. Some don't dissolve well and are not distinctive, but some, in fact, do and are. A porous limestone does "taste" different than a flint, than a marlstone, than a sandstone, than a mafic rock. Some commenters here have correctly noted the very different tastes of various mineral waters. And they don't have the acidity of wines, which raises mineral solubilities dramatically, nor the bio-concentration processes of old, water-stressed vines. Distinctive "minerality" in some wines is clearly a real thing. The proof, as they say, is in the tasting!
Sorry about the cross-out. don't know how that happened. Just ignore it.
Hi Sid. I don't agree with your comment but I would have loved to see that geology class when you were all liking rocks 😉
I think this concept may also come from one of two other sources, namely an aftertaste from food eat with a wine that has been salted and spiced or from a mixture of wine made into a punch or spritzer, whereby a mineral water is added to the beverage mix along with the wine. See Andong's YT video about the consumption of Mineral Waters in Germany: th-cam.com/video/OHvj0MJw7z4/w-d-xo.html.
Then also some people may be sensitive to the Sulfites naturally found in wine or added as a preservative and this has taste or smell, a slightly sulphurous odor. To rid a wine of these Sulfites, we have available in several wine shops a small packet of 3 percent USP Grade Hydrogen Peroxide. Add the packet to the wine, wait a few minutes and the Peroxide will oxidize the Sulfite to Sulfate or so say the directions on the packet. For the hefty price of $4.95 for 10 ml of Hydrogen Peroxide, some one is making a huge profit. Consider that a 946 ml bottle of USP Grade Hydrogen Peroxide from the local Drugstore costs 0.99 cents.
Personally I just let the wine be decanted and wait an hour or two and then sip the wine for that "full blooming" of the bouquet to develop. Otherwise I have never detected a mineral flavor of a wine. Many other flavours though, including having a dry broken cork which has spoiled the wine, because the bottle was not laid on its side to keep the cork moist.
Why don't wines taste like grapes they come from instead of every other fruit in existence?
Minerality, to me is easiest to see in the contrast between Rhine and Mosel Riesling, with the Rhine being more mineral tasting. I never really thought it had much to do with actual minerals, it's more psychologically mineral like than anything else.
So you convinced yourself to avoid the term. But you actually quote a study, that hints that the term is used to differenciate the acidic impression of a wine. If you compare mineral water with (german) tap water, you notice no difference in taste? I find it surprising that soil composition should play no role regarding the end product. I believe there are differences between for example Riesling from slate or limestone. Is this actually not the case and only watersupply and heat are maybe modified by the soil composition?
I use the term myself to describe an Impression appart from sour, but also fresh. For example chalky or salty notes in otherwise more neutral but not watery wines. Minerality to me is a good word for that.
Its a funny distinction to make over others considering how terminology is used in wine tasting, minerality is one of the more direct adjectives of taste aspects that one can refer to - minerality makes more sense than others like tobacco, leather, smoke or chocolate yet those terms are widely accepted without the kind of distinction you make here (technical vs subjective) - for example on a tour of Chateauneuf du papes a key term was minerality and considering the sand dominant soils, iron clay and limestone - all from which the vines were directly planted in - it would present more of issue to avoid it and make the kind of distinction you attempt here than to actually use the term as a descriptor - again relative to all the other jargon that passes as normal in the wine industry its an odd term to focus a super technical, almost pedantic, distinction on - there are so many other terms that are so vague and often nonsensical - i'd love to see content tackling those instead.
The main difference is that the flavor compounds that smell like blackberries, butter and pepper can be found in wine. Using them as descriptors in a blind tasting therefore makes sense in my opinion. Minerals generally do not smell and there is no way that the actual mineral gets into the berry. I therefore do not think it is useful if we talk about the nonexistent flavor of limestone or granite in the wine. I am not trying to stop you from doing it though ... just trying to educate the audience.
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine Well even terroir, soil and earth can have elements of what we might term 'minerality', and loosely following your logic above we can approach flavor compounds or at the very least certain taste or smell characteristics from terrior, soil and earth that infer or link to minerality. The biological composition of wine has to have elements of actual minerality and so again I find your distinctions overworked. At the very least minerality is used to denote flavor characteristics that are not fruit or herb based, sometimes expressed directly in wine. Take 'chalkiness' for example - with that particular mouth feel, minerality makes sense as a descriptor, does it not?. However I've never heard anyone say that they feel or taste either limestone or granite during a tasting, especially as a direct taste characteristic and I never experienced any wish to do so personally either - you may have misread my initial comment. So on this particular topic I'm not really convinced that you are in fact educating the audience at all - I think you may have some further work to do on the subject first.
I find this debate completely pointless. The term is used to define a sensation, not the science of whether minerals are absorbed or not. If one followed this same logic one would stop also saying “leather” , “black olive”, “cut grass”, “cowpat” and pretty much any other descriptive term since, needless to say, a vine does not absorb these components either! If a lot of people use it it is because it captures well a sensory experience many people relate to - which can only be a good thing. Why limit vocabulary and expression? I definitely will keep using the term.
That's what I am saying - keep using the term but know what it means. If people would try to explain to me that Syrah smells of black olives because there are black olives hidden in the berries then I would like to clearify that too...
Great explanation of a term I think it is best to avoid. "Wine types" will argue with you about this until the cows come home, but the fact is you cannot taste minerals. Thanks for the video.
Well said!
A lot of weird comments on here from people defending the term by saying it applies to a bunch of random, vaguely earthy notes. I've read at least a dozen different descriptors folks in the comments say fall under minerality and I heavily doubt most folks are tasting anything close to them. This is a useless term applied to almost every bottle by proverbial wine morons and people who want to sell you a bottle.
bunch of BS of this term in wine industry. What a crap. Just to show off. Specially of all sommeliers when they are meantioning about it.
Bad explanation - you absolutely can taste the grass (or whatever else) a cow was eating when you eat beef.
Wow, that's interesting
Bullshit. Sancerre and flint.
Terroir is real.
Minerality is used by me, a wine buyer, as a term to mean a stony, rocky element.
Excellent exposition on "minerality" and related physical/geologic interactions between vineyard soils and wine. I grew up drinking well water that was very high in minerals, mostly iron and calcium, so I've been wondering if that has obscured my ability to taste "minerals" in wine. You've settled that for me--thanks--I'm not handicapped in that regard, I guess. And, yes, I too felt that most wine reviews that use the term "minerality" were really describing the interaction of acidity and wine flavor compounds.
The one thing notably missing from your video was microbiome considerations. A year or two ago, I read a viticulture/oenology science paper that seemed to suggest that wine critic reviews tying wine taste to vineyard soils was the result of the influence of a particular soil's microbiome (including yeasts, of course) that make their way onto grapes (and then affect the wine produced). That is, the microbiome of a limestone soil affects a wine in a particular way that is different from that same wine made from vines grown on a slate soil, with it's particular microbiome. Have you also come across this idea and what's your take?
Thank you! I think the microbiome is relevant when it comes to Terroir rather than minerality. I made a whole video on Terroir but did not go into much detail on microbes.
It was obvious to me all along vines do not suck up minerals and transfer them into the berries. However once it dawned on me there are no petals, strawberries, leather, pepper, cat pee (you name it) in wine either, I gave up on my resistance against using the term.
The big difference ist that these things actually smell.
I found that I ended up talking about minerality in some wine when I also found some "savouriness" in it, so maybe associated to salt rather than a rock itself. Still, "minerality" feels the best word to describe it (thanks to the fact that is vague) as I wouldnt say salty.
I do not understand this recent battle against the term "minerality" that seems to be quite popular in the wine world. For me it is a shortcut to refer to a quite varied taste in wine, mixing sapididy and different types of undertoned spiciness. It is a mix that can remind the taste that we associate to minerals. Clearly, it does not have to be taken literally, most terms we use to describe wines are metaphors: bright, vertical, elegant, etc. On the other hand, I have tasted wines from volcanic regions (the Vulture area in Italy is a classical example), where the sulfur taste (and other minerals) are clearly transferred to the wine, but I agree these are quite extreme cases.
Like I say in the video: Continue to use it but know what it means.
Hi Konstantin,
I just recently came across your channel and have really appreciated your efforts to go behind wine buzz words and explain in more detail the history, economics and science behind wine. Interesting to learn the minerals in the soil have little if any impact on the wine’s flavor. I just ordered the book you suggested to learn more. For me personally, the term minerality just worked to describe the savory earthy flavors I love in Loire Valley Sauvignon Blancs from Sancerre and Pouilly Fumé. If you avoid the term minerality, how do you prefer to describe that type of flavor? Can minerality not be used the way “leather” is in describing that flavor in wines? I’m a long time enthusiast who has been thinking about joining a wine program like WSET. If you have any suggestions on which program is best for beginners or have already made a video on this I’d love to know. Thanks for a great channel.
Nice try at demystifying the term minerality. As you pointed out it is still very useful as a metaphor.
Absolutely
I very much enjoy your channel, and have learned a great deal. Thank you! I must disagree on one point, though. I am Piemontese, but love the southern Italian and Sicilian whites. The eggplant in Sicily tastes like no other, and it resembles the ‘volcanic’ whites of the area. There is no point in eating Pasta alla Norma anywhere else I the world, it just doesn’t taste as good. I understand the science of mineral uptake in vines, I did my Masters in biochemistry, so I am being subjective. But to me it is real and reproducible. It is just that the taste of many fruits and vegetables there are very similar to the wines, and I’m going with minerality/volcanic. There you can truly appreciate the phrase ‘if it grows together, it goes together’…
Yes that is true - what grows together goes together. But how do you separate soil, climate, agriculture etc from each other. It could also be due to the climate
Tasting minerals in wine is okay, but you shouldn't think it comes from the fact those deposits were in the ground. I have a Feteasca Neagra I like to drink, that has a crushed rock/stones note to it, but I don't believe for one second it is because there were some loose stones in the ground. I've tasted cabernet with an iron like taste before, but I didn't for one second think it was because there was an iron deposit nearby. We just try to make sense of what we smell and taste and maybe use a catchall "minerals", but that doesn't mean we infer that it comes from the soil composition. If i feel blackberries in a wine, it isn't because blackberries were used to fertilise the soil the vines grew in.
Regardless of its lack of objective connection to minerals, 'minerality' just seems to be a good descriptor from a phenomenological perspective. I.e. people have a strong intuition of how minerality smells and tastes like. Tasting is a completely phenomenological event, you're describing the tastes and aromas how you perceive them, with the words that you see best fit.
I don't think there's any cheesecake in the soil where the grapes of the wine I had yesterday was grown on, but that seemed like a great way to describe it because that was what I smelled. Conversely, you might smell citric acid in the wine and say "this wine is citrusy!", but are you actually smelling citrus? No, you're smelling an acid that has a connection to the word (and concept) 'citrus' in your mind. In like manner, you can smell things that are not exactly minerals, but that happen to occur in places, foods or the like that you associate with the word "mineral". Many people in the comments have expressed examples such as a wet cave, smell of a rock after rain and wet clay. Whatever the connecting molecule or a collection of molecules that are objectively speaking present in the wine, that people associate with the word 'minerality', it really won't be any different from what a citric acid is to the word 'citrus'. It's a description, not a lab test that has to come up with a presence of a molecule that happens to have a taxonomical connection to how science describes the concept of a 'mineral'.
That is true. There are some flavor molecules though that can be linked to certain fruits (citrus), porducts (milk), spices (Vanilla) etc that can be identified in wine. This is not the case for minerals.
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine But it is the case for minerals if you expand your list of concepts from "fruits, products and spices" to include "places" (wet caves) as well! I just find it trivial to exclude it from the list.
Minerals are present in caves (and more importantly people associate them with caves). Specific "wet cave" flavour compounds are present in caves. People perceive "wet cave" flavour compounds as "mineraly".
Unfortunately the point of the conversation is missing..
Minerality is widely used by lot many winemakers along the world in order to make a phenomenological connection of their "terroir" with the wines that are produced there. It is very common simplification when it comes to speak about white wines from vineyards that are cultivated in volcanic soils.
I know that as a wine lover all this "nerdy" information can be from boring to frustrating. But as an enologist, i would rather leave scientific research to deliver some handy objective facts about the wine i love rather to leave marketing experts do their magic 🙂
This misses the point. It's the direct claims of a link with taste and soil structures. It's one thing to have suggestions of minerality, but another to directly associate it with those soils.
Interesting video! I had a couple questions that came from this though:
1. Do you think the influence of mineral water impacts our sense of the word 'minerality'? It's effervescence/acidity as well as the Calcium and Magnesium increase could affect our sense of the word minerality?
2. For the rock minerals that do dissolve readily into soil solution (e.g. limestone), they should be important to note? I am not super familiar with geology but even less soluble rocks should contribute to the soil solution over longer periods of time? The rock licking came across a little misleading, as for example, you would not taste Mg in a rock however, is the centre of the chlorophyll molecule; could the same be true for more flavourful compounds? It would be dependent of how the plant uses these nutrients as well to affect taste.
Overall i agree though, it plays a smaller part to the wine taste than is mostly led to believe and it was fun to listen to :)
Thanks. On 1. Yes maybe ... No one really knows how this word came to be. On 2. Plants take up nutrients from the soil and the bedrock will change the composition of the available nutrients. The point I was trying to make is that you cannot taste slate in wine for many reasons but the vine is definately not picking up slate through its roots. Instead it takes up nutrients like for example Mg.
Great video, as a Wine Educator I am constantly wrestling with many overused, vague descriptive terms when tasting and talking about wine. (Not very helpful when trying to "demystify" wine for my customers!) I do think that a more acidic wine can kind of be described as having a certain "minerality", but it's not really helpful as a flavor descriptive. One of my favorite words as an aroma descriptive term, though, is "petrichor", which is from the Greek for simply "wet rock". More specifically, this refers to the smell of warm rock (or even asphalt!) after a sudden summer rain. We've all experienced it, and occasionally I will encounter it in certain reds and red blends. I've almost come to expect it in some of the great red wines of Priorat in Spain. Please keep making these vids, I will recommend them to my wine classes going forward!
Thank you for sharing. I will add Petrichor to my vocabulary.
Petrichor is kinda deceptive term since it is caused by bacteria and algae releasing odors in the air after mist or rain, so it doesn't mean inorganic earth but rather organic lifeforms..
KB thanks for your scientific informed scepticism about so many things which does not detract from the fun and romanticism of wine. A bit of imagination and eloquent
I think that the purpose of tasting notes has a communication goal. It should be reflecting on a specific smell that is generally known about. When we start using terms like minerality, which lack an actual consensus and it is scientifically misleading, it affects how we communicate with others about wine. I have collected minerals and been to mines since I was 6 years old and I haven’t experienced a single wine that takes me to a “mineral” character. In fact, ever since I heard the term I’ve been trying to find sources to help me understand what people mean by minerally. I have had wines that have forest floor, wet soil, and pine forest aromas and palate but I would not say that is minerally… Maybe it would be a good idea to see who coined the term and what that person was describing when the person coined “minerality”. I think words stick because big and famous producers start using it and now everyone believes it’s an actual thing. The fact that the term is so ambiguous means that the term is not reliable… I’d rather tell a my mom that the wine has a wet carpet or Forrest floor aroma (which is more specific) than to use a term no one but me will understand.
I vote for introducing sunny to the wine tasting vocabulary! 🌞
Have never used the word minerality in smell or taste of wine but have heard the term used many times from a master of wine.I have used the term earthy or even cement when tasting a wine so if this is minerality then there it is.Minerals may not be in the wine but it is the perception of that element in the wine. As we all taste different elements in the same wine.
Yes, the term is still widerly used but I try to avoid it.
Thank you for your video, I think there're many tasting notes that we perceive in wine that they're not what we think they are.
However, for me, minerality would be the expression of a wine from a certain region, and that is the unique taste you feel when you taste a wine from South Africa, Argentina or Spain for example.
I do believe a region can have influence in the taste of wine. Sometimes the freshness, earthiness, herbs, somehow could be perceived whether in smell or taste, not saying they put it inside the wine, neither I'm saying the grape carries all these aspects inside, but I think each region can definitely influence in the taste of wine, IN A MINERAL WAY.
For example, I've tasted some Argentinian wines (specially not aged in too much wood) that has a particular taste that give us the sensation of the region, the forest floor, grass, under bushes, that is mineral for me, the UNIQUE particular taste of a wine that shifts you towards the landscape. And that unique sensation cannot be felt in other wines, therefore, these tasting notes shouldn't be a trick of fermentation or aging.
I agree that there are huge differences in taste depending on where the same kind of grape ripens.
However, the fact that your definition of minerality differs completely from what other people express here kind of proves his point.
When a wine taste like green apple, cranberry or black pepper the taste is quite distinct and everybody knows exactly what you are are talking about. But by saying my wine tastes mineral, somebody thinks it tastes like licking a wet rock, the second person might think about soil and you think about Argentina.
I use the term as well and at home we know what the other person is referring to. So I was wondering why Konstantin is having so many problems with this term. But seeing the comments below this video explains that very well - maybe even better than the video :)
I have no doubt that different soil types impart different flavour expressions in the wine and that you can correlate them. You are not tasting the minerals themselves, but you are among other things tasting what the minerals do to the fruits flavour expression (when fermented and aged). It is well known that different soil types change pH in the wine for example - so it also changes the structure. I think of it like epigenetics. You are not experiencing the genes of a person, but the expression of the genes as a product of environment and complex formation process. I can find specific flavours that remind me of specific minerals that I experience having tasted such as e.g. clay dust or iron or copper which for me clearly has a distinguishable tastes and smells that I know. Petrichor is another clear example of a smell I would characterize as mineral. So you can taste minerality - something with a flavour characterisric of something mineral - though it may not be the same as the mineral that is traceable in the wine. E.g. - I always find a specific tobacco smokiness and when aged powdery rose chin blush note from PN grown on slate - even if it is unoaked.
I associate minerality to the smell of a creek with round pebbles in the bottom and the bank. Others use it differently depending on their experiences. There is a lot of subjectivity on this, as well as a strong link to our own experiences. Certainly alkaline and alkaline earth elements do not smell or taste, other than saltiness, but I think we have to think more on using images or synonymous to represent what we feel.
Wow! I have my WSET-3, and you just taught me something I never new. Thank you.
I use the term for the description of the smell of fresh on rocks. But it's very cool to know that it's not actual minerality. I guess it's just like most other descriptions. There isn't blackberries, cassis, leather and spices in the wine, just the aromas of them.
Oops, … eloquence is good, as long as we stay grounded in reality and science
I think communication is choosing certain words that bring out what you hope to describe. If and when the word "sunny" started to be used in describing wine, then, sure, I'll use it. Maybe it's the next step in the evolution of saying a wine tastes "warm" or "hot."
BTW, I also have a rock from the Romani Conti vineyard. Maybe soon, they will put surveillance cameras all around. LOL.
They should put up some cameras!
I enjoyed a glass of wine at a wine bar recently but the lovely American waitress described the red wine as "its a fun wine" which left me feeling empty within and I left and never returned.
Me, just realising I've never used that word in tasting notes
I've probably been misusing this term for some time now, but for me, , minerality is the term i tend to lean on when trying to describe a certain mouth feel i get somewhere in the middle/finish of a sip. It tends to be something I look for when picking a better wine; white wine in particular for me. My example would be the difference in a cheap Sauvignon blanc which is acidic and "sharp" in my mouth and maybe a more expensive Sancerre (also Sauv Blc) which, in between the flavor notes, has a smoother mouth feel and a brine-like support to the flavors from start to finish. This also could be nonsense, it just helps me visualize certain flavors my palette is attracted to.... Now i'm craving a glass of Terlan Pinot Bianco!
Thank you Konstantin for a very interesting episode, as usual. I fully agree with you but have troubles describing wines without using "minerality" as a term. How would you, for exemple, describe the characteristics of a etna rosso?
Minerality has always sounded more like a descriptor of structural/textural elements rather than flavour or aroma. Now I'm intrigued as to whether that's always been succinic acid content
Great video
I use the term quite a lot, mostly for non fruity white wine. I think of it as you say as a metaphor, or rather a convention in describing wine: many people broadly agree on or at least understand what is meant by it.
Yes, I understand what people mean by the term!
I never use the term "minerality" and living in France I feel sun, rain, wine making technique, bottling, temperature control especially during transport to the consumer; and serving temperature, and reaction with air (oxyben and other gases) at the time of consumption are all more important to the taste of a wine than minerals! However, I did study chemistry and worked in food chemistry (Coca-Cola) and indiustiral chemisty (Exxon) and did some study in nuclear chemistry and salt and calcium are minerals that definitely have taste! It could be that some people have the ability to detect very low levels of minerals! Salt is a flavor accentuator (it enhanses the taste of foods and beverages!) So it is possible that some people may be able to detect either the minerals themselves or the chemical compounds that are formed by these minerals (even at very low levels) It also could be similar to the effect of iron (which is a mineral) We clearly know what blood tastes like because of the reaction the iron has with taste receptors in our mouth, so one could imagine that certain people may be able to either detect the minerals themselves or the chemical compounds formed which contain minerals or a reaction similar to iron! Potasium has a taste like in KCL Potassium Cloride! it is used in many beverages for athletes to give them much needed K+! It definitely has a taste, very different from Sodium Chloride (regular salt) however if you tried to taste or eat pure potassium or sodium it would be a horrible mistake as these minerals react with water liberating hydrogen atoms violently! In other words they explode when in contact with water :) Fun videos of Sodium and Potassium: th-cam.com/video/dmcfsEEogxs/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/oqMN3y8k9So/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/CEC64Bqeajs/w-d-xo.html
After theses videos you see minerals are nothing to play with :)
You said it perfectly in the end of the video. Minerality is a very abstract description as many other terms in wine tasting are. A wine beign leathery does not imply the use of leather in the wine making process
Consider this. You talk about the (not) flavor of the stone, and I think you are right that these mysterious minerals absorbed by the roots of the vine, hardly arrive inside the grapes, then managing to stand out in the juice squeezed.
But what you can instead perceive is contained not in the hard rock, but in its layer of disaggregation, ie in the dust on the surface of the ground (this "organic" layer, colonized by a microbial flora, a "microbiota", which varies from land to land, from place to place), these microorganisms are transported by the wind on the grape skin itself.
Have you ever heard those quaint smells of earth wet after the rain? (as well as those of undergrowth can be familiar).
In certain vinifications, especially in the old world, it is still used to make spontaneous fermentation, with indigenous yeasts, those present naturally on the peel of the grape. It is mainly in these types of wines that you can feel like aromatic hints that belong neither to the fruit, nor to the wood of the barrel, but that are precisely yeasts, and that they can remember just the smell of the land, wet, from which they come.
Try any Vernaccia of Oristano (this is just an example) and re-evaluates the myth.
Considera questo. Tu parli del (non) sapore della pietra, e penso tu abbia ragione che, questi misteriosi minerali assorbiti dalle radici della vite, difficilmente arrivano fin dentro gli acini d'uva, riuscendo poi a distinguersi nel succo spremuto.
Ma quello che puoi invece percepire è contenuto non nella dura roccia, ma nel suo strato di disfacimento, cioè nella polvere sulla superficie del terreno (quello strato "organico", colonizzato da una flora microbica, un "microbiota", che varia da terreno a terreno, da luogo a luogo), questi microrganismi vengono trasportati dal vento sulla buccia dell'uva stessa.
Hai mai sentito quei caratteristici odori di terra bagnata dopo la pioggia? (così come possono essere familiari quelli di sottobosco).
In certe vinificazioni, soprattutto nel vecchio mondo, si usa fare ancora la fermentazione spontanea, con i lieviti indigeni, quelli presenti spontaneamente sulle bucce dell'uva. E' soprattutto in questi tipi di vini che puoi avvertire dei sentori che non appartengono né al frutto, né al legno della botte, ma che sono proprio dei lieviti, e che possono ricordarti proprio l'odore della terra bagnata da cui provengono.
Prova una qualunque Vernaccia di Oristano (questo è solo un esempio) e rivaluta il mito.
Thank you for your comment. The smell after a rain is called petrichor and it is mainly Geosmin which is produced by various algae living on the ground. That this smell makes its way into the wine is fairly unlikely as many things would then smell like Geosmin. The effect that you are describing does happen though with flavors like Eukalyptus that can make its way into wine.
Exactly! That is why pedology is much more constructive and relevant than straight geology to explain some flavors present in wine that might come from the soil.
I love ur point about sunny flavors -) When I just started my wine journey, I was confused and curious what minerality is, and then I decided to buy a wine with this "minerality" in it. In my neighborhood wine store, it appeared to be Portuguese Vino Verde. From that point on it became my standard for minerality. But when my friends ask me what is it, I can not explain, it s a combination of aromas that u perceive.
Thanks. It is a tricky topic!