Another Noobie Question: Will Too Much Oak Mellow Out in Time?

Someone made a comment that the "oak" had settled down a bit in a bottle of wine s/he had found too oaky before.

So, my question is: I am developing a dislike (intense) for the harsh caramelly/vanilla style of some Napa cabs.

Is one problem that I have been trying them too young, and that the better-known/made with good grapes examples of this (to me noxious) style will actually, given 10-years, settle down and become more enjoyable?

Or, should I simply continue searching out the more austere, "Old World" style wines that I actually prefer even young?

I asssume that even the oak bombs will develop SOME secondary characteristics? Or, will they always be too oaky and caramelly and sweet?

I'm sure some of the other folks here will disagree with me, but I have never known an oaky wine that didn't "mellow" out. This mellowing doesn't make the oak disappear, but the notes change into something smoother, creamier, dillier, whatever (depending on the oak used).

It's important to try and taste older examples of heavier oaked wines to get an idea of what those more integrated notes will appear as (and if you'll like them). French barriques, American oak barrels, Slavonian oak, Portuguese oak, old, new, toasted, etc., all have different expressions and lifespan.

What becomes a better question than "will the oak settle?" is "when will the oak settle and will there be anything interesting left when it does?"

Oak isn't nearly as important to me as acid, balance, and fruit quality; if these things are done properly, the oak can be carried off with age (and even become an enjoyable part of the wine).

Best,
Joe

p.s. Additionally, there are some cases where I like a certain kind/amount of oak with a specific wine, but not in other wines. I'm sure you'll find the same is true with yourself.

Or, should I simply continue searching out the more austere, "Old World" style wines that I actually prefer even young?

Of course, this answered most of your question.

I'm sure some of the other folks here will disagree with me

Hand waving in the air....

I shoulda guessed

Is there a specific example of a wine that you noticed where the oak never mellowed?

"Too much oak" is a highly relative statement. Depends on your palate. But as far as I'm concerned, if its an "oak bomb", it will always be an "oak bomb". No matter how long you age it.

Richard

"What becomes a better question than "will the oak settle?" is "when will the oak settle and will there be anything interesting left when it does?"

The above comment from Joe is also reflected in Richard's comment.

It isn't just about the oak, but about the wine's balance. A heavily oaked, otherwise out of balance wine will never mellow to in-balance.

You're probably too young of a whippersnapper to remember Silver Oak, Bonny's Vineyard (I think the last bottling was 1991) -- American oak pickle barrel in, American oak pickle barrel out. That's just one glaring example of many.

So, my question is: I am developing a dislike (intense) for the harsh caramelly/vanilla style of some Napa cabs.

Sounds to me like your palate is becoming more developed. I initially didn't mind oaky Cabs, but now that I've experienced a wider range of wines, I can't stand 'em.

At a tasting last year, Matt Garretson compared wine to art. Wood is what is used to frame a great painting.

I wouldn't like a painting that was nothing but frame, nor do I like wine that is nothing but barrel.

The oak can resolve over time, but it greatly depends on the overall balance of the wine, as has been said above. If the other elements of the wine fall apart before the oak, then all you'll get is oak.

I unintentionally "overaged" a few bottles of well oaked California Chardonnay. When I did find them and open them they were a lot better than I expected. The oak had "resolved." That is, the oak taste no longer overwhelmed the taste of the wine. Now I do not recommend this approach but I do think it supports the proposition that the oak taste will become less dominant in time.

Glenn

[Robin Garr]

Someone made a comment that the "oak" had settled down a bit in a bottle of wine s/he had found too oaky before.

So, my question is: I am developing a dislike (intense) for the harsh caramelly/vanilla style of some Napa cabs.

Is one problem that I have been trying them too young, and that the better-known/made with good grapes examples of this (to me noxious) style will actually, given 10-years, settle down and become more enjoyable?

Or, should I simply continue searching out the more austere, "Old World" style wines that I actually prefer even young?

I asssume that even the oak bombs will develop SOME secondary characteristics? Or, will they always be too oaky and caramelly and sweet?

Adding another data point, there's oak and then there's oak. I'm not convinced that a badly over-oaked American or Australian trophy will ever improve to my taste buds, and I know I've had a few older Silver Oaks that I considered horrifying. But look at some of the Old World wines that see long barrel time in an established, traditional barrel program and it's a whole 'nother story. Chianti Classico Riserva, Brunello, Barolo, Barbaresco, Rioja, Vega Sicilia? I might not call that "too much oak" exactly, but certainly these are wines that (barring Parkerized or Rollandated excesses) aren't really intended to be drunk with enjoyment in their youth but that turn into real beauties after years in the cellar.

In my experience, no. Over-oaked wine is over-oaked wine. In some cases, my answer to your question would be "Hell no!"

Having said this, there are wines with a pronounced oaky character in their youth where the oak does integrate in time and becomes much less protagonistic. Of course, certain elements, such as quality of fruit and structure have to be present in order for the more obnoxious oak notes to be absorbed--or at least have the room to mutate comfortably into something more agreeable. A lot of oak has to be--an this is non-negotiable--balanced out by other attributes. "Balance" is the key word here.

Unfortunately, over the past couple of decades new-oak treatments have become more and more aggressive (my use of the word "treatment" is no accident; in many cases we're talking about some serious messing-with), to the point where I fear not even divine interventiuon could balance out the resulting "wine" (the quotes I use on purpose, of course, since I can hardly consider some of the wood teas from Spain, California, Bordeaux or the Rhône that I often have the misfortune of tasting as anything even remotely resembling what I consider wine).

Two one hundredths of a dollar.

But look at some of the Old World wines that see long barrel time in an established, traditional barrel program and it's a whole 'nother story. Chianti Classico Riserva, Brunello, Barolo, Barbaresco, Rioja, Vega Sicilia? I might not call that "too much oak" exactly, but certainly these are wines that (barring Parkerized or Rollandated excesses) aren't really intended to be drunk with enjoyment in their youth but that turn into real beauties after years in the cellar.

Ahem, Robin, I must take exception to the placement of Vega Sicilia in this category. These days, Vega Sicilia is seeing way too much new oak and being released way too early (consider the years it took that bodega to release the 1968 "Único", and then how quickly they released their '94). We can't generalize about that house anymore, since the difference between their latter-day wines and the wines that made their glory is too radical, IMO.

Also, one needs to consider that the barrel regimes of the traditional bodegas of Rioja (and many cantine in Pedmont) involve only limited amounts of new oak. And while we're at it, we should also ponder whether the origini of the oak used makes a difference in terms of eventual integration (or the lack thereof).

Some of the world's greatest wines are matured in all-new barriques, but IMO if a wine smells more than very slightly of vanilla, milk chocolate, clove, cinnamon, dill or coconut I won't buy it (or sell it). Firstly, because I don't like those flavors in my wine, and secondly because I like other flavors (those that are grown in that place) more.

There is a movement away from new wood in Piedmont, with some of the leading modernists changing their barrel regimen (Scavino, for example). Thank Heavens.

Thanks, all, for the insight. Silver Oak was the second wine I had in mind, because as I've noted before, I think they do have beautiful fruit-it's just buried in vanilla!

I don't mind a little bit of oak, actually. The Raymond 1998 Generations had a whisper of it, but it was still beautifully baloanced (after being open for two days!!!)

I doubt the harsh caramel wines will ever be to my taste, but they are popular, which is odd. The Tamber Bey that was on my list of "Worst for 2006" was snapped up with gusto by a coworker.