Mega Purple and Mega Red are not in my wine

I read this article about Mega Purple and I thought I would share it with you. Many of us have experienced less then the desired color when making Central Valley and Lodi grapes. And many of us have gone to some length to correct it using cold soaks, enzymes,and higher fermenting temps to secure better color. We have also relied on Allicante Bouschet, Petite Syrah and Petite Verdot to help us out. Sometimes we have had to use more of these blenders than we really wanted to in order to achieve color. In extraordinary circumstances we have resorted to XBerry from Presque Isle.

The issue with all this is, are we as winemakers too concerned with having a darker wine thinking that it equates to a better wine? Since White Zinfandel outsells Red Zinfandel 6 to 1 it would seem consumers don’t think like we do. Here is a product that from all accounts is used extensively in California commercial wines.

The smell of Mega Purple

by W. Blake Gray The Grey Market Report
Is Mega Purple “wine”? You can add it to wine without listing it on the label, and it’s not a filtering agent that’s later removed. So technically, I suppose it could be.

I can say with confidence that you have drunk Mega Purple. You can’t be a regular US wine drinker without having had some. This is the stuff that has eliminated forever the idea that a $9 wine will be light in color.

Mega Purple is a grape-based compound that is supposed to darken the color of a wine without adding any flavors or aromas. I found out that’s not true.

While it is almost flavorless, it definitely has an aroma. I compared it yesterday* to a gymnasium floor — something I have smelled in many cheap wines over the last few years.

Wineries adore Mega Purple because American consumers are caught up in the idea that for wine, darker is better. Black fruit is better than red fruit. Roses should be red, not light pink. And heaven forbid if a bottle of Zinfandel doesn’t look inky.

When your cheap wine does look inky, there’s your reason.

But is it only cheap wine? Not likely — but not easy to prove.

I want to thank Charlie Kidd, winemaker at Flat Creek Estate in Texas, for mixing me up the pictured sample of Mega Purple in water. Texas wineries have an annual problem with grapes not getting enough color because of their short growing season; Mega Purple is a good solution for them. But it wasn’t developed in Texas — it’s a California innovation.

However, I have never been offered the chance to taste it here. Whenever I ask, the winery representative responds with something like, “Let me show you our new $6.3 million tasting room.”

Mega Purple is like steroids in baseball in the ’90s: plenty of people are doing it, and it might be increasing their average, but overall it’s bad for everyone because it changes the expectations of what’s possible.

If a vineyard manager can’t get enough color in California, he’s doing something wrong. But wineries aren’t satisfied with enough color — they want The Dark Knight. And they want it every year in every wine. Nobody wants to have the one maroon-colored Cabernet on the shelf.

I wish I could say categorically in every review, “Includes Mega Purple.” I’ll never be able to do so with authority. You can’t say for sure when you see dark purple if you’re seeing this additive.

But now I know what it smells like. Many winemakers have better noses than me, so you know what I’m saying — this stuff is not odorless. And its odor isn’t great.

Is there any chance we can ever bring the “red” back to red wine?

You can read the article here and all the comments:
http://wblakegray.blogspot.com/2010/06/smell-of-mega-purple.html