Jose > wrote:

> 6. Are those expensive Riedel glasses worth the money?
>
> Yes.
>
> (and Reidel

R_ie_del.

> isn't the only brand worth considering - Spiegleau

Spieg_el_au.

> is another). ...
>
> [...]
>
> Champaigne

Champ_a_gne.

> and other sparkling wines should be served in a flute style
> glass.

Don't know whether a discussion is wished here, but it is my deep
conviction that this assumption has been wrong for at least 150
years.

Very tall, straight, narrow flutes stem from the times where
disgorgment for sparkling wines was unknown, until well into
the 19th century. Flutes were tall and slim to get the deposit
down in the glass as fast as possible.

From the point where disgorgment became common, there was
absolutely no need to stick to flutes. A decent all-purpose
wine glass is better in just about any aspect: nose, fragrancy
and drinking is better from a decent wine glass than a flute.

> This keeps the effervescence from dissipating too soon.

This is the standard pro-flutes argument. May I ask those who
stand behind it, whether they serve sparkling water in flutes?
Shouldn't the sparkle - the *only* property of that type of
drink - be preserved even more? So why sparkling wine in flutes,
but not water?

*I* don't use flutes for sparkling wine anymore, and I am more
than happy with my decision.

Anybody having tried side by side agrees with me.

Sorry if a response is undesired here, but I find this
"dissenting opinon" worthwhile, and maybe it could be
added to the FAQ (possibly in a better wording than mine).

M.