German Trocken?

I was just ordering some 2007 Riesling to bolster my sagging German section and it brought to mind some wines tasted not long ago.

We had tried some Kabinett and Spatlese wines against similar Trocken wines. While Trocken on its own can be a nice wine, both of us opined that a Trocken wine often seemed to lack not just RS but also a certain amount of fruit and richness in the mouth, and that by and large the Rieslings we enjoyed the most were not Trockens.

I know there are a few Riesling fans out there - what do you feel about Trockens. Can you just take them as they come? Do you ever feel the lack of RS also entails less charm? Obviously tastes will vary, but a Trocken Auslese somehow strikes me like a 'Lite' beer.

Except that they are by no means light in the alcoholic sense, as the sugars originally present in the must have to be transformed into alcohol for the wine to be classified as Trocken, so they are higher in alcohol than regular Rieslings, which sometimes seems to give an out of balance impression.

PS - I almost never see Halb-Trocken used any more. Why is that?

I love riesling in all its forms.
How many of the sweet ones in my cellar are German? All of them.
How many of the dry ones in my cellar are German? Zero.

Greetings from Sweden / Fredrik L

PS. And, as Broadbent said, there are no better German wines than the ausleses, only sweeter.

I love trocken!

I'm not sure trockens would ever show well in a comparative setting versus non-trockens. Too hard to compare. That being typed, I myself have real affection for trocken riesling. I've experienced and appreciated more at the kabinett or spätlese (or qualitätswein) level. I love how refreshing they are, how well they go with food, how much mineral punch they can pack. I've never done it, but trockens are like riding a motorcycle without a helmet. Fantastically bracing. I developed a trocken tooth while living in Germany and have hard it very challenging to encounter enough trocken rieslings for me stateside.

For the upper reaches of auslese trocken or the grosses gewächs--I haven't experienced enough to have formed an opinion. The wines can be very unique and very expressive, but so intense and powerful, the elegance and finesse can feel a bit muddled. But I haven't sampled enough there to say . . .

I've been having a serious change of heart on trockens in the last 6 months or so. For the most part I found them overly austere, light and shrill - generally boring and a waste of wine (or perfectly good grapes that could have made a nice sweeter wine).
But since I've been exposed to some of the richer dry wines - the Grosses Gewachs or the 'harmonious' dry wines from producers like Van Volxem, I've been slowly getting hooked. The best dry Rieslings I've had have been freaking amazing - and IMO far more interesting and enjoyable than the few seriously high end Burgs/other high end dry white wines i've tasted. Wines like Donnhoff's Hermannshohle GG, Keller's Abtserde or Hubacker, or Van Volxem's range of wines have a ton of richness and depth - lots of fruit, density and balance (without excessive alcohol) but without any real sweetness. Amazing wines and really fascinating expressions of Rieslings.

Although most of my 'dry wine' money may still go to Austria though...

Bill, I think the main issue is that we really don't get the high quality trocken wines in Canada. They have a better selection in the US, but even there, the best dry German wines don't always make it over the Atlantic.

I've been lucky enough to have visited Germany several times over the last few years, and have tasted many outstanding dry wines. But it's still true, I think, that you have to go through a fair number of overly acidic, austere dry wines to get a dry wine that is truly balanced. As Salil mentioned, it is the Grosses Gewachs that are often the best dry wines (i.e., as opposed to 'merely' trocken wines), and they are usually the most expensive wines as well (apart from some auslese and higher pradikats). And I agree that these balanced dry wines can be quite remarkable, a very different and valuable expression of riesling.

But I still don't understand why the majority of riesling produced in Germany is made in the dry style, when most of it seems 'forced' into that style.

But I still don't understand why the majority of riesling produced in Germany is made in the dry style, when most of it seems 'forced' into that style.

My sediments exactly!

[David M. Bueker]

Bill, I think the main issue is that we really don't get the high quality trocken wines in Canada. They have a better selection in the US, but even there, the best dry German wines don't always make it over the Atlantic.

At least in terms of the USA that is no longer true. We get Keller, Wittmann, Weil, Donnhoff, Heymann-Lowenstein, van Volxem (including both dry and "harmoniously dry" in this list), etc, even if it's in limited quantities. Producers who have long been known for very sweet wine styles (e.g. Leitz) are also exporting fabulous dry wines these days.

Trocken Riesling has evolved since the '90s and even since the early 2000s. The wines are richer in texture, a bit lower in acidity (thank global warming) and the best are truly world-class dry Riesling that can stand toe-to-toe with things like Pichler's Kellerberg, Hirtzberger's Singerriedel and even Trimbach's golden children of CFE and CSH.

But I still don't understand why the majority of riesling produced in Germany is made in the dry style, when most of it seems 'forced' into that style.

Wouldn't the off-dry style qualify more as 'forced' - to the extent that fermentations need to be stopped?

[David M. Bueker]

I think John's comment has more to do with the fact that the wines, once dry, are frequently quite nasty, especially at the lower level.

Forced can be used in multiple ways. There's getting the wine to do something, and there's force fitting a style that just tastes yucky.

Also there have been numerous wines where the fermentation just would not go to dryness & had no stopping involved. Donnhoff's 2001 Felsenberg Spatlese was like that, as was Catoir's amazing '98 Burgergarten Spatlese Halbtrocken (to name two fantastic examples out of a myriad of choices).

Trocken Riesling has evolved since the '90s and even since the early 2000s. The wines are richer in texture, a bit lower in acidity (thank global warming) and the best are truly world-class dry Riesling that can stand toe-to-toe with things like Pichler's Kellerberg, Hirtzberger's Singerriedel and even Trimbach's golden children of CFE and CSH.

I agree. And even on the lower end of the scale there are plenty of gems, especially when they are from Southern ends of things. I was just in Germany drinking lots of kabinett and QbA trocken wines at dinner parties and I was never upset with their quantity of fruit. The 2008 Mosbacher Kabinett trocken in particular was full and ripe and refreshing and worth drinking lots of..

It is another question whether you like a wine better as a Trocken or not. Once in awhile you get a winery making a Trocken and a non-Trocken from the same vineyard in the same vintage. I've only managed to taste such a pair a couple of times and in both cases preferred the non-Trocken version. Not a statistically significant sample size, of course.

I've liked quite a few QbA trockens from producers I like over last couple years. But am a wary buyer of over-$20 trockens- I think I own a few Donnhoffs, couple of Leitz, and one Pfeffingen GG. I don't get a lot of opportunity to taste trockens, and it's safer w/o pretasting to save my dry Riesling money for Trimbach, some Nigl and other Austrians, and an occasional Aussie. But I read with interest the opinions of others, certainly I see no intrinsic reason German Riesling can't be great.

It is another question whether you like a wine better as a Trocken or not. Once in awhile you get a winery making a Trocken and a non-Trocken from the same vineyard in the same vintage. I've only managed to taste such a pair a couple of times and in both cases preferred the non-Trocken version. Not a statistically significant sample size, of course.

In a sip and spit context that doesn't surprise me but "trocken" is far more food versatile. Regrettably few trocken make it outside Germany (barring David's part of USA) except for the doubtfully (harmonic) dry offerings of Heymann-Löwenstein and van Volxem. I had to profit from a trip to Cologne to get a small handful of bottles; the first tried, Breuer's Nonnenberg, was truly delicious.

Very very limited experience with riesling, but at a recent tasting I actually much preferred the etherial, light, elegant character of the Raptor Ridge (Seneca Lake, NY) DRY riesling to their richer auslese or kabinet level wine.

Trocken Riesling has evolved since the '90s and even since the early 2000s. The wines are richer in texture, a bit lower in acidity (thank global warming) and the best are truly world-class dry Riesling that can stand toe-to-toe with things like Pichler's Kellerberg, Hirtzberger's Singerriedel and even Trimbach's golden children of CFE and CSH.

No argument there!

But I still don't understand why the majority of riesling produced in Germany is made in the dry style, when most of it seems 'forced' into that style.

Wouldn't the off-dry style qualify more as 'forced' - to the extent that fermentations need to be stopped?

As David mentioned, I wasn't talking about 'forced' in a scientific or fermentation sense, but it's definitely an interesting question you pose. But aren't most fermentations (not all) stopped artificially when the desired sugar and alcohol levels are reached? That was my understanding, but I'm happy to be told otherwise!

I meant the term 'forced' in the decision seems to be a social as opposed to winemaking decision, though I admit the two can never be fully separated. That is, the domestic market mainly calls for dry wines, so that's what most producers (except the relatively few that rely on exporting their wines) provide. There's certainly nothing unusual for societal attitudes and values to affect winemaking - it happens everywhere, and with any activity. All individual and group actions are guided by social attitudes and values (including economics). I think that explains the move to increased ripeness and thus higher alcohol levels (i.e., Parkerization) of wine over the last 10-20 years.

But I agree with Terry Theise on this issue, who suggests that we need to question why many winemakers attempt to make dry wines even when they will be of lower quality than off-dry wines from certain vintages, vineyards or even regions. Just because society wants something a certain way doesn't mean it's always right. But it's a tricky issue.

I've liked quite a few QbA trockens from producers I like over last couple years. But am a wary buyer of over-$20 trockens- I think I own a few Donnhoffs, couple of Leitz, and one Pfeffingen GG. I don't get a lot of opportunity to taste trockens, and it's safer w/o pretasting to save my dry Riesling money for Trimbach, some Nigl and other Austrians, and an occasional Aussie. But I read with interest the opinions of others, certainly I see no intrinsic reason German Riesling can't be great.

I'll have to open a Van Volxem, Wittmann or Keller trocken/GG with you at some point in the fall once I get back. Those are such amazing wines - Keller's Abtserde and G-Max are up there among the very best wines (Rieslings or otherwise) I've ever tasted. And Donnhoff's 07 Hermannshohle GG is in that same league as well - just really amazing.

Re. your comment about Aussies - I haven't tried many higher end dry whites from them (aside from Grosset, which is a style I've never been thrilled by) - but some of their < $20 dry Rieslings are really amazing, when you can find them. Mount Langi and Frankland Estate make some phenomenal wine for their prices - a bottle of Frankland Estate Poison Hill Vyd 08 (about ~ US $20 if anyone does bring it in) was sensational last week.

But I agree with Terry Theise on this issue, who suggests that we need to question why many winemakers attempt to make dry wines even when they will be of lower quality than off-dry wines from certain vintages, vineyards or even regions. Just because society wants something a certain way doesn't mean it's always right. But it's a tricky issue.

Yes, but the other issue is that the trockens didn't necessarily have to be of lower quality (at least according to our metric) but were made to suit a certain bland style that the German consumer wanted. Sure the weather has been one reason, but there seems to be a momentum behind making richer and more complex trocken wines, from the same sites that produced boring ones a few years ago. So it seems that winemaker intentions are also important.

Not that I've actually spoken with any winemakers about this mind you!

[David M. Bueker]

The weather has been a big reason. Look back at some of the top vintages of the '90s. '90, '94, '96 and '98 were probably the top 4 in that decade, and they all had acidity levels that made dry wines very difficult. And that was with a lot of sugar ripeness in the grapes.

Vintages like 2005 and 2007 have been more friendly to the making of grat dry wines because the acidities are 3-4 grams per liter (or more) lower than in some of those "great" years of the '90s. Now we don't have to play the high acid, high wire act.

The winemaking is better too.

When you talk about the vast ocean of bland, screechingly acidic garbage that is the lion's share of German trockens you're moving away from the great growers who know what they are doing.

Another data point. Had 3 Germans at an al fresco event at my place on the weekend.

2001 Weegmuller Haardter Burgergarten Spatlese (Pfalz) - very nice wine, lovely varietal nose, clean and crisp with a full mouth feel.

2001 Selbach Oster Zeltinger Sclossberg Spatlese Trocken - pretty good nose, but on palate, a lean wine with an almost slightly bitter finish, that came across as being stingy and constricted compared to the non-Trocken.

May as well throw in:

2005 Markus Molitor Wehlener Sonnenuhr Spatlese - richest of all with a killer nose more RS than the 01 Spatlese and a run-on sort of finish that just kept on trying.

The Trocken woud have been alright served on its own, but the non-Trocken wines just killed it, at least for me. John S., if you are out there, I'd be interested in what you thought of them.

[David M. Bueker]

Was the trocken served after the Weegmuller spatlese? Is so that's a horribly unfair serving order.

Try having a dry sauvignon blanc after a Champagne (which generally is sweeter than you think) & you will get just a bit of the idea.

Was the trocken served after the Weegmuller spatlese?

No - I went back to them wines today and tried them with the Trocken first and it was still not very satisfactory.

Yes, the order of the rieslings we had was a little unfortunate, but there's no doubt the trocken I brought was the least 'fruited' of all the ones we tried. I was going to say the driest of all, but the Ozzie riesling won that monicker, as usual! The finish of the trocken was a little clipped compared to the others, as you say, but I thought the nose was the most interesting. A good but not great trocken wine.

Was the trocken served after the Weegmuller spatlese? Is so that's a horribly unfair serving order..

Heck, it would be tough enough for most people to drink a non-trocken Selbach Oster Spatlese after a Pfalz Spatlese. Although I might be able to manage it in my search for refreshment...