Unfiltered Wine?

[Randy Caparoso]

Hi, folks. I'm back, and can't resist a personal comment. As a longtime wine professional, I've come up with this conclusion: most wines that come unfiltered are better for being that way. It is less of a marketing than a quality decision. Why else would vintners risk such a regime? The thinking is basically that it is worth it to take a chance of instability or even inconsistency of product if the product ends up with more unemasculated flavor for having not gone through the process. I guess you can say it is like circumcision vs. noncircumcision. Personally, I much prefer my wine uncircumcised -- even if every bottle needs to be treated more gently, and every bottle opened is an adventure! What is wine for anyhow, folks? Sameness? Predictability? Not for me!

For the strongest printed word against circumcision -- whoops, I mean against filtering! -- I suggest that you pick up a Kermit Lynch's book, Adventures on the Wine Route. Some think Lynch is a little "out there," but when you consider the fact that perfectly respectable, well established wineries such as Robert Mondavi, Chalk Hill, and Saintsbury (among many, many others) have long ago concluded that unfiltered wines are best, Lynch doesn't seem so radical after all.