To Oak or Not to Oak?
(by Raymond R. Wells, Ed.D., CSW)
To oak, or not to oak: that is the question: Whether ‘tis tastier in the mouth to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous wood, or to take arms against a sea of simple fruit? (with apologies to Shakespeare)
Though there are advantages and disadvantages to both, oaked versus unoaked mainly comes down to winemaking traditions, the vintner’s goals, and to the consumer’s personal preferences. Rieslings, Gewurztraminers, and Beaujolais are rarely oaked; while Chardonnays, Cabernets, and Pinot Noirs are usually oaked to some extent. So, rather than take sides, I’ll present some characteristics of both:
More expensive to produce Less expensive to produce
Adds complexity Preserves fresh fruit character
Adds tannins Does not add tannins
Allows polymerization of tannins Tannins present are changed little
Affects color Does not affect color
Could be over-oaked Can’t be over-oaked
May be less food-friendly May be more food-friendly
More reactions with oxygen Fewer reactions with oxygen
Introduces additional aromas Presents the varietal’s aromas
Different oaks = different characteristics Fewer options for the vintner
More brettanomyces problems possible Brettanomyces less likely
If you are looking for complex wines of great character, you would usually want at least some oak influence. If you want a simpler wine with more fresh-fruit character, go with unoaked. Fortunately, more vintners are producing unoaked options, giving the consumer more choices.
In wine, truth and health!