The "skin contact" crowd reminds me of people who insist on calling sparkling wine "méthode traditionnelle" at dinner parties. Technically correct. Socially exhausting. "Orange wine" tells you what you're getting. "Skin contact white" sounds like a dermatology seminar. Language should help people find what they want, not gatekeep them from trying it.
Totally agree with you Simon! Since I love orange /amber wines, I always search for those on the winelist and it's not helpfull at all if they don't have their own section- unless you know the wines already and you have to scroll the white wine part. If not you have to ask the staff if there is any 'white' wine with longer skin contact -if they know about the length of maceration...
I agree with you 100% - I live in Brooklyn and I have been going around asking wine bars (that I love) why they call it skin contact ??? as you would expect no reasonable answers.....just to name a few: With Others, Plus de Vin. At Rude Mouth they call it Skin Contact/Orange - ?
At Cavallini they finally call it Orange. On the other hand in Lisbon they seem to call orange at some of the wine bars I went ( Pif, Jasmin da Mouraria). Thanks for your usual insight!
While not "grind my gears" territory for me I found myself going "yes", "yes", "yes" as I read and the restaurant examples perfectly illustrate the argument.
It grates on me because it feels like some people are just contrary. And you might say everyone is entitled to be so - but if that affects perception from wine drinkers, or confuses people about a topic that is already confusing enough, then it makes my blood boil a little.
Thank you for writing this, yes!!! I'm also so frustrated by this. I work at a wine bar and if someone asks for a skin contact wine, I clarify with "an orange wine?" (though what I want to ask "what color skin-contact wine" but that feels a little too snarky for me, maybe only if the guest is acting very arrogant.) Occasionally someone asks about the distinction and I'm glad to explain. I also hate when places include oranges with whites or with rosés, it seems gatekeeping to make someone know every grape on the list to know what color the wine is. But, I *do* wish we'd all decided to go with the term amber, instead of orange—such a beautiful word that is so much more evocative and appealing!
I agree that amber is a lovely word, however to me it's more obtuse than 'orange' - which has a number of advantages including being the same in three languages - English, German and French. Thanks to David A Harvey for this realisation.
Hi Simon, ever since I was first exposed to the concept of white skinned grapes left on their skins one Christmas season where Georgian wine and "Quevri" first entered my orbit, followed by reading a book called "Amber Revolution" (you may have heard of it), it seemed completely logical that this classification (method of creation) slotted naturally into the other three classifications described in your rant, er, essay. I fully commiserate with your angst regarding the display of amber wines in restaurant lists. At the very least, they should be separating the ambers into their own section. This way, it should be clear to the prospective buyer that they are looking at wines not red, white or rose, but of their own distinctive classification. I prefer the term amber to orange. Either way, as a leading authority on this still nascent but expanding classification, I believe you may have the ability to influence how it becomes labelled. I think you already have. Cheers.
Thanks Bill! I wish, but actually reading through the comments both here and offsite, many still steadfastly believe that a technical description is the right way to go.
I wish I could convince them, but hey, people will believe what they want to believe. In these straitened times, that is more evident than ever.
Point taken. "Bianco macerato" is current in Italy, but "skin fermented white" is more precise. Point taken too, that we don't need to "explain" conventional wine styles with reference to their winemaking, but I think there is justification in this case because skin fermented wines are markedly different. There may come a time when the style is incorporated into the mainstream, and it won't be necessary to refer to the vinification any more. When small French oak barrels started to be used on a wide scale in Italy "vino barricato" entered the lexicon. Now completely superfluous. Could be the same with "skin fermented" - and I have to concede that the term "orange" will probably out-live any semi-technical gloss.
Yes, of course, not all orange wines are colour orange just as white wines are not white, but I beg to disagree that colour is not a defining criterion. The only certainty in the debate is that white wines come from white grapes and red wines come from dark grapes. Stanko Radikon, Benjamin Zidarich Josko Gravner made white wines before the term "orange" was coined. I can see the need to distinguish wines with evolved phenolic aromas and high extract from other white wine styles, but the term "orange" needs to be decoded. It doesn't say anything literally about the character of the wine or the vinification process that determines it. It has undeniable currency as a brand name (not least thanks to your impassioned championing of the cause) but my problem with the term is that it doesn't have logical coherence. "Skin contact" attempts to explain the style in a semi-technical way, but for all the reasons you quite rightly list, it is simply wrong. I can understand why the term gets under your skin, (no pun intended) but I still think that, although it requires a minimum understand of winemaking processes, the most logical way to put over the style is with a term that refers to how it is made. Which is why I prefer to call it macerated white wine, which is what it is.
Your argument breaks down to me, because it's not consistent with how we talk about red, white and rosé. These terms equally need to be broken down if a drinker wants to have any understanding of what they mean in technical terms. But 99% of the time that is just not necessary.
Maceration as a term is vague, because it doesn't specify if the wine was skin fermented or not - and that's what makes the biggest difference, stylistically, I would argue.
In explaining the term "orange wine" I like to point out that:
• No white wine is white.
• No red wine are red.
• But most orange wine is orange.
And not just to ask rhetorically - as you implicitly did - "When have you ever drunk a 'red wine' that was red?" but to add: "You want genuinely red wine? I'll show you some red-- occasionally even stop sign-red - wines ... but they'll be ORANGE ;- )"
Violent agreement here David! Are my rhetorical questions extra-annoying for turning the sarcasm up even higher? Is that a question for my readers to answer?
Nice article Simon. "skin-contact" terminology is also being used in some fine-dining restaurants' wine lists here in US, probably more than an " Orange wine" categorization. That said, there are some legal boundaries too. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) 27 CFR § 4.21(a)(4) explicitly allows grape wine to be designated as "Amber Wine" based on its color. On the other hand, TTB defines Citrus Wine as wine produced from the juice of citrus fruit. It says: Fruit wine derived wholly (except for sugar, water, or added alcohol) from one kind of fruit shall be designated by the word “wine” qualified by the name of such fruit, e.g., “peach wine,” “blackberry wine,” “orange wine.”
Yes, another commenter pointed this out - but I think this is very specifically about wine labelling law, it doesn't restrict how a restaurant or retailer can categorise their wines does it?
It is illegal to use the term 'orange wine' on a wine label in the US. The TTB in their all mighty wisdom have reserved that term exclusively for wines made from oranges (and there is, apparently, one producer of wine made from oranges in Florida).
I work for a US importer doing all the label agreements and we have tried the rosé isn't made from roses line. The TTB was unmoved.
So that is probably the main reason why US based businesses are cautious about using the term orange wine.
I have no idea why European or other non-US businesses don't use the term. That said I've come across orange wines where the skins were in contact for 6 months (it was a very cold winery) and others when the fermentating wine was pressed off at a density of around 1020° (about 4-6 days into the fermentation at 16-20°C) to minimise tannin extraction. While the market place can cope with the concept of light and fresh reds AND big tannic reds, is orange still too novel for people to accept that range of styles under one name? (That's a genuine question. I have no idea).
And to answer your second point, I think in an age of super popular wines like Gulp Hablo, the market surely understands that orange wines can be light and fruity? As well as many other things.
True that the TTB's rules only apply to wine labels themselves. But even so they might contribute towards framing the "debate" about what to call orange wine within the context of a US based wine business. If in doubt, what do the Feds say?
I had a wine made from oranges at Millésime Bio a few years back. It wasn't great but it did leave me with a reluctance to use the term orange wine. But, if you're reclaiming it, then I shall shrug off my hesitations :)
Excellent rant, even as I have to ‘fess up that I am guilty as charged – but you have deftly unpicked all my arguments in defence. I will never be able to write ‘skin contact’ again without feeling the Woolf breathing disapproval down my neck!
The "skin contact" crowd reminds me of people who insist on calling sparkling wine "méthode traditionnelle" at dinner parties. Technically correct. Socially exhausting. "Orange wine" tells you what you're getting. "Skin contact white" sounds like a dermatology seminar. Language should help people find what they want, not gatekeep them from trying it.
Preaching to the choir here 😂💚
Totally agree with you Simon! Since I love orange /amber wines, I always search for those on the winelist and it's not helpfull at all if they don't have their own section- unless you know the wines already and you have to scroll the white wine part. If not you have to ask the staff if there is any 'white' wine with longer skin contact -if they know about the length of maceration...
indeed, they could just make it simpler.
I agree with you 100% - I live in Brooklyn and I have been going around asking wine bars (that I love) why they call it skin contact ??? as you would expect no reasonable answers.....just to name a few: With Others, Plus de Vin. At Rude Mouth they call it Skin Contact/Orange - ?
At Cavallini they finally call it Orange. On the other hand in Lisbon they seem to call orange at some of the wine bars I went ( Pif, Jasmin da Mouraria). Thanks for your usual insight!
Thanks for all these examples! Lisbon moves so fast, I used to be a regular visitor 2-3 years ago but I haven't heard of Pif or Jasmin da Mouraria.
Interesting views. And so true!
While not "grind my gears" territory for me I found myself going "yes", "yes", "yes" as I read and the restaurant examples perfectly illustrate the argument.
It grates on me because it feels like some people are just contrary. And you might say everyone is entitled to be so - but if that affects perception from wine drinkers, or confuses people about a topic that is already confusing enough, then it makes my blood boil a little.
Obviously I should get out more....
Thank you for writing this, yes!!! I'm also so frustrated by this. I work at a wine bar and if someone asks for a skin contact wine, I clarify with "an orange wine?" (though what I want to ask "what color skin-contact wine" but that feels a little too snarky for me, maybe only if the guest is acting very arrogant.) Occasionally someone asks about the distinction and I'm glad to explain. I also hate when places include oranges with whites or with rosés, it seems gatekeeping to make someone know every grape on the list to know what color the wine is. But, I *do* wish we'd all decided to go with the term amber, instead of orange—such a beautiful word that is so much more evocative and appealing!
I agree that amber is a lovely word, however to me it's more obtuse than 'orange' - which has a number of advantages including being the same in three languages - English, German and French. Thanks to David A Harvey for this realisation.
Hi Simon, ever since I was first exposed to the concept of white skinned grapes left on their skins one Christmas season where Georgian wine and "Quevri" first entered my orbit, followed by reading a book called "Amber Revolution" (you may have heard of it), it seemed completely logical that this classification (method of creation) slotted naturally into the other three classifications described in your rant, er, essay. I fully commiserate with your angst regarding the display of amber wines in restaurant lists. At the very least, they should be separating the ambers into their own section. This way, it should be clear to the prospective buyer that they are looking at wines not red, white or rose, but of their own distinctive classification. I prefer the term amber to orange. Either way, as a leading authority on this still nascent but expanding classification, I believe you may have the ability to influence how it becomes labelled. I think you already have. Cheers.
Thanks Bill! I wish, but actually reading through the comments both here and offsite, many still steadfastly believe that a technical description is the right way to go.
I wish I could convince them, but hey, people will believe what they want to believe. In these straitened times, that is more evident than ever.
The last line of this article should have been, “and that, Morning Claret readers, is what grinds my gears.”
You know what really grinds my gears? Other people telling me how I should write my articles.
Hi Simon,
Point taken. "Bianco macerato" is current in Italy, but "skin fermented white" is more precise. Point taken too, that we don't need to "explain" conventional wine styles with reference to their winemaking, but I think there is justification in this case because skin fermented wines are markedly different. There may come a time when the style is incorporated into the mainstream, and it won't be necessary to refer to the vinification any more. When small French oak barrels started to be used on a wide scale in Italy "vino barricato" entered the lexicon. Now completely superfluous. Could be the same with "skin fermented" - and I have to concede that the term "orange" will probably out-live any semi-technical gloss.
Dear Simon,
It's a beautiful subject to debate.
Yes, of course, not all orange wines are colour orange just as white wines are not white, but I beg to disagree that colour is not a defining criterion. The only certainty in the debate is that white wines come from white grapes and red wines come from dark grapes. Stanko Radikon, Benjamin Zidarich Josko Gravner made white wines before the term "orange" was coined. I can see the need to distinguish wines with evolved phenolic aromas and high extract from other white wine styles, but the term "orange" needs to be decoded. It doesn't say anything literally about the character of the wine or the vinification process that determines it. It has undeniable currency as a brand name (not least thanks to your impassioned championing of the cause) but my problem with the term is that it doesn't have logical coherence. "Skin contact" attempts to explain the style in a semi-technical way, but for all the reasons you quite rightly list, it is simply wrong. I can understand why the term gets under your skin, (no pun intended) but I still think that, although it requires a minimum understand of winemaking processes, the most logical way to put over the style is with a term that refers to how it is made. Which is why I prefer to call it macerated white wine, which is what it is.
Hi Richard,
Your argument breaks down to me, because it's not consistent with how we talk about red, white and rosé. These terms equally need to be broken down if a drinker wants to have any understanding of what they mean in technical terms. But 99% of the time that is just not necessary.
Maceration as a term is vague, because it doesn't specify if the wine was skin fermented or not - and that's what makes the biggest difference, stylistically, I would argue.
Great article! Thanks Simon!
In explaining the term "orange wine" I like to point out that:
• No white wine is white.
• No red wine are red.
• But most orange wine is orange.
And not just to ask rhetorically - as you implicitly did - "When have you ever drunk a 'red wine' that was red?" but to add: "You want genuinely red wine? I'll show you some red-- occasionally even stop sign-red - wines ... but they'll be ORANGE ;- )"
e.g.:
https://weinsprech.de/grauburgunder-wird-rot/
Violent agreement here David! Are my rhetorical questions extra-annoying for turning the sarcasm up even higher? Is that a question for my readers to answer?
Nice article Simon. "skin-contact" terminology is also being used in some fine-dining restaurants' wine lists here in US, probably more than an " Orange wine" categorization. That said, there are some legal boundaries too. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) 27 CFR § 4.21(a)(4) explicitly allows grape wine to be designated as "Amber Wine" based on its color. On the other hand, TTB defines Citrus Wine as wine produced from the juice of citrus fruit. It says: Fruit wine derived wholly (except for sugar, water, or added alcohol) from one kind of fruit shall be designated by the word “wine” qualified by the name of such fruit, e.g., “peach wine,” “blackberry wine,” “orange wine.”
Yes, another commenter pointed this out - but I think this is very specifically about wine labelling law, it doesn't restrict how a restaurant or retailer can categorise their wines does it?
Yes- this is true.
It is illegal to use the term 'orange wine' on a wine label in the US. The TTB in their all mighty wisdom have reserved that term exclusively for wines made from oranges (and there is, apparently, one producer of wine made from oranges in Florida).
I work for a US importer doing all the label agreements and we have tried the rosé isn't made from roses line. The TTB was unmoved.
So that is probably the main reason why US based businesses are cautious about using the term orange wine.
I have no idea why European or other non-US businesses don't use the term. That said I've come across orange wines where the skins were in contact for 6 months (it was a very cold winery) and others when the fermentating wine was pressed off at a density of around 1020° (about 4-6 days into the fermentation at 16-20°C) to minimise tannin extraction. While the market place can cope with the concept of light and fresh reds AND big tannic reds, is orange still too novel for people to accept that range of styles under one name? (That's a genuine question. I have no idea).
And to answer your second point, I think in an age of super popular wines like Gulp Hablo, the market surely understands that orange wines can be light and fruity? As well as many other things.
A very fair point and thank you for reminding me Robert. But AFAIK the label ruling is just about what's on the bottle?
I've never heard that it's illegal to call them orange wines on a restaurant list etc.
And there are plenty of examples where people do, for example Primal wine https://primalwine.com/collections/orange-wine-skin-contact-natural-wine
(OK they cover all bases but they lead with the term 'orange wine')
True that the TTB's rules only apply to wine labels themselves. But even so they might contribute towards framing the "debate" about what to call orange wine within the context of a US based wine business. If in doubt, what do the Feds say?
Yes this does make sense.
“People will think they’re made from oranges.”
I had a wine made from oranges at Millésime Bio a few years back. It wasn't great but it did leave me with a reluctance to use the term orange wine. But, if you're reclaiming it, then I shall shrug off my hesitations :)
Sure, they exist in Southern Spain and are - I think? - called vina naranja? I've had one too.
I am not trying to reclaim it alone. My point is the ship has sailed. Why do you insist on swimming right into its path?
Excellent rant, even as I have to ‘fess up that I am guilty as charged – but you have deftly unpicked all my arguments in defence. I will never be able to write ‘skin contact’ again without feeling the Woolf breathing disapproval down my neck!
No-one: The wine world is rational
The Wine world: