Bi!! wrote:

> More is better when you're Kendall Jackson, Adler Fels, Gallo, Bronco
> or any number of mass producers in California.

Kendal, Gallo, Mondavi etc. do produce a few decent wines but I agree
with your logic. However, I don't believe its organic farming by itself
that produces better fruit.

Miles wrote on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:46:00 -0700:

>> More is better when you're Kendall Jackson, Adler Fels,
>> Gallo, Bronco or any number of mass producers in California.

I can't say I spend much time in bulk wine sections of stores but I've
never seen Adler Fels or Bronco. What do they make, "Wild Irish Rose"
perhaps?

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Sep 13, 10:02�am, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> �Miles �wrote �on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:46:00 -0700:
>
> >> More is better when you're Kendall Jackson, Adler Fels,
> >> Gallo, Bronco or any number of mass producers in California.
>
> I can't say I �spend much time in bulk wine sections of stores but I've
> never seen Adler Fels or Bronco. What do they make, "Wild Irish Rose"
> perhaps?
>
> --
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Don't know Adler Fells, but Bronco is Fred Franzia, who uttered the
titular phrase. Charles Shaw and dozens of other brands.

DaleW wrote:

> Don't know Adler Fells, but Bronco is Fred Franzia, who uttered the
> titular phrase. Charles Shaw and dozens of other brands.

Haven't ever seen a decent wine by Franzia but Gallo produces some
rather decent wines. I like the Sonoma series they started producing
quite a few years ago. Decent wine for the money.

I agree...of the jug wine producers, Gallo is one of the best.

They also have some Estate Bottled Wines from Sonoma...truly outstanding and
ageworthy.


"Miles" > wrote in message
...
> DaleW wrote:
>
>> Don't know Adler Fells, but Bronco is Fred Franzia, who uttered the
>> titular phrase. Charles Shaw and dozens of other brands.
>
> Haven't ever seen a decent wine by Franzia but Gallo produces some rather
> decent wines. I like the Sonoma series they started producing quite a few
> years ago. Decent wine for the money.

On Sep 13, 10:02�am, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> �Miles �wrote �on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:46:00 -0700:
>
> >> More is better when you're Kendall Jackson, Adler Fels,
> >> Gallo, Bronco or any number of mass producers in California.
>
> I can't say I �spend much time in bulk wine sections of stores but I've
> never seen Adler Fels or Bronco. What do they make, "Wild Irish Rose"
> perhaps?
>
> --
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Sep 13, 10:24�am, DaleW > wrote:
> On Sep 13, 10:02 am, "James Silverton" >
> wrote:
>
> > Miles wrote on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:46:00 -0700:
>
> > >> More is better when you're Kendall Jackson, Adler Fels,
> > >> Gallo, Bronco or any number of mass producers in California.
>
> > I can't say I spend much time in bulk wine sections of stores but I've
> > never seen Adler Fels or Bronco. What do they make, "Wild Irish Rose"
> > perhaps?
>
> > --
>
> > James Silverton
> > Potomac, Maryland
>
> > Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
>
> Don't know Adler Fells, but Bronco is Fred Franzia, who uttered the
> titular phrase. Charles Shaw and dozens of other brands.

Bronco makes a ton of labels but most well known is "Two Buck Chuck"
aka Charles Shaw Winery. Adler Fels is a huge wine factory in Santa
Rosa California making mostly private label wines under names like
Coyote Creek, Leaping Lizard and Big Ass Wines.

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:40:47 -0700, Miles > wrote:

>IanH wrote:
>
>> Surely there's more to making decent wine than "crop per acre", isn't
>> there? The logical end result of maximum crop per acre is minimum
>> quality IMO.
>
>Sure theres some truth to that but you missed the point. I've been
>under the impression that organic farming produces less 'Good' crop per
>acre.
If I missed the point, I'm sorry, but could that be because you failed
to say what you meant?

> My current opintion is that it does not in itself increase the
>quality of the juice simply by using organic methods and nothing else
>that couldn't be done through other methods.

I don't know, any more than I know whether using biodynamic methods
increases the quality of the juice. The winemakers who have made the
switch seem to think so, though of course it's always possible they're
deluding themselves.

> I'll have to find that study, it was very recent as in the >past month or so. It was for fruits and veggies and not wine grapes so
>who knows how it would apply to the latter.

I'd be interested to know what critieria were used to assess
"quality". So often today, quality is taken to be the aspect,
regularity of size, keeping properties .... in short everything except
taste.

I am not an avid supporter of "organic at all costs". However, I am
deeply suspicious of the use of pesticides which chemically are very
similar to those used in chemical warfare. I don't trust manufacturers
of persistent chemicals to tell ALL the truth about the persistence in
the plant, nor do I trust farmers to respect the maximum permitted
doses and harvesting delays to the letter.

I've no particular axe to grind on this, but would still point out
that it might be better to prune for quality and lower yield, rather
than encourage the vine to produce every bunch it can, and then throw
half of these away in high summer. Sure these techniques _could_ be
used by vignerons who practice so called "traditional" (only
traditional in the last 50 years or so) vine management techniques,
but often they aren't. The other side of the coin is that vignerons
who move towards organic and biodynamic viticulture do tend to be more
rigorous about limiting their yield in harmony with the plant.

As for your sharpshooter story.... Look to Ch Tahbilk in Australia,
where the land suits the Syrah vine so well that they are able to be
grown on their own rootstocks despite phylloxera, so the infested
vines which merely - wait for it - limit their yield improving the
quality.


--
All the best
Fatty from Forges

Miles wrote:

> Sure theres some truth to that but you missed the point. I've been
> under the impression that organic farming produces less 'Good' crop per
> acre. My current opintion is that it does not in itself increase the
> quality of the juice simply by using organic methods and nothing else
> that couldn't be done through other methods.
>
> There was some recent studies done on quality of fruits and vegetables
> using organic methods. The study concluded the quality of crop was not
> improved. I'll have to find that study, it was very recent as in the
> past month or so. It was for fruits and veggies and not wine grapes so
> who knows how it would apply to the latter.

I'd be very intersted to see those studies. In his book "Omnivore's
Dilemma," the journalist Michael Pollan cites several studies that show
that organically raised fruits and vegatables were higher in nutrients
and tasted better.

Mark Lipton

--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.cwdjr.net

Mark Lipton wrote:
> Miles wrote:
>
>> Sure theres some truth to that but you missed the point. I've been
>> under the impression that organic farming produces less 'Good' crop per
>> acre. My current opintion is that it does not in itself increase the
>> quality of the juice simply by using organic methods and nothing else
>> that couldn't be done through other methods.
>>
>> There was some recent studies done on quality of fruits and vegetables
>> using organic methods. The study concluded the quality of crop was not
>> improved. I'll have to find that study, it was very recent as in the
>> past month or so. It was for fruits and veggies and not wine grapes so
>> who knows how it would apply to the latter.
>
> I'd be very intersted to see those studies. In his book "Omnivore's
> Dilemma," the journalist Michael Pollan cites several studies that show
> that organically raised fruits and vegatables were higher in nutrients
> and tasted better.
>
Highly recommend Pollan for anyone interested in food. I'm about
halfway through "Omnivore" but it makes me very glad to live where we
do, and eat for the very large part locally.

His book "The Botany of Desire" is also very interesting.

-E

Mark Lipton wrote:

> I'd be very intersted to see those studies. In his book "Omnivore's
> Dilemma," the journalist Michael Pollan cites several studies that show
> that organically raised fruits and vegatables were higher in nutrients
> and tasted better.


http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science...ic.cooking.pv/
It clearly talks about no higher nutrients but does say they may taste
better. I'm not sure the taste part was part of a large scale blind
tasting study or not.

This article refers to the same study.
http://oudaily.com/news/2008/sep/04/...re-nutritious/

This one says the same thing but doesn't take into account the effect of
pesticides or taste. Just that organic has no more nutrients.
http://www.greendaily.com/2008/08/24...us-says-study/

I can't find any study that did a large scale blind tasting with organic
and non organic farmed foods. They all seem to be based totally on
nutrient content only.

Emery Davis wrote:

> Highly recommend Pollan for anyone interested in food. I'm about
> halfway through "Omnivore" but it makes me very glad to live where we
> do, and eat for the very large part locally.

The recent studies I listed contradict some of Pollans writings as for
the nutritional value of organic food. But I'd sure like to see some
good studies done on taste perception. The other issue is pesticide
residue which can't be good but the current studies don't talk about
that. They just refer to the FDA's guidelines as to whats considered
harmful without talking about the effect on taste.

"Mark Lipton" > wrote in message
...
> Miles wrote:
>
> I'd be very intersted to see those studies. In his book "Omnivore's
> Dilemma," the journalist Michael Pollan cites several studies that show
> that organically raised fruits and vegatables were higher in nutrients
> and tasted better.


But is there need to go the whole hog and be fully organic with the high
overheads that imposes?

I buy at local farmers markets who are rare breed cattle/pig, with low but
not zero antibiotic use etc, similarly the veg I buy I often heritage
varieties with low pesticide use and mainly avoiding chemical fertilizers.
the quality of their produce is far better than most of the fully organic
stalls at the same market and far better than normal supermarket stock.

It I not organic per se that makes the difference, but attention to detail,
careful selection of varieties (taste not max weight being key criterion)
together with sensible use of agro chemical technology.

I'm sure the same middle road idea would apply to wine as well.

pk

On Sep 14, 10:24�am, miles > wrote:
> Mark Lipton wrote:
> > I'd be very intersted to see those studies. �In his book "Omnivore's
> > Dilemma," the journalist Michael Pollan cites several studies that show
> > that organically raised fruits and vegatables were higher in nutrients
> > and tasted better.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science...ic.cooking.pv/
> It clearly talks about no higher nutrients but does say they may taste
> better. �I'm not sure the taste part was part of a large scale blind
> tasting study or not.
>
> This article refers to the same study.http://oudaily.com/news/2008/sep/04/...rily-more-nutr...
>
> This one says the same thing but doesn't take into account the effect of
> pesticides or taste. �Just that organic has no more nutrients.http://www.greendaily.com/2008/08/24...ore-nutritious...
>
> I can't find any study that did a large scale blind tasting with organic
> and non organic farmed foods. �They all seem to be based totally on
> nutrient content only.

So, who drinks wine for it's nutritional value?

Bi!! wrote:

> So, who drinks wine for it's nutritional value?

You haven't heard about the studies regarding drinking red wine to help
the heart? I know Dr's say to drink 1 glass a day but they don't state
the size of that glass!

Local and organic has caught on more in the USA recently because for
fruits/Veg the quality might vary..but the cost of local organic can now
compete with the non organic same variety that cost $5 per gallon of Diesel
to bring cross country.

With wine, biodynamics really don't mean much to me...especially local
wine...

Why? Any one taste any local North Carolina wine.


"PK" > wrote in message
...
> "Mark Lipton" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Miles wrote:
>>
>> I'd be very intersted to see those studies. In his book "Omnivore's
>> Dilemma," the journalist Michael Pollan cites several studies that show
>> that organically raised fruits and vegatables were higher in nutrients
>> and tasted better.
>
>
> But is there need to go the whole hog and be fully organic with the high
> overheads that imposes?
>
> I buy at local farmers markets who are rare breed cattle/pig, with low but
> not zero antibiotic use etc, similarly the veg I buy I often heritage
> varieties with low pesticide use and mainly avoiding chemical fertilizers.
> the quality of their produce is far better than most of the fully organic
> stalls at the same market and far better than normal supermarket stock.
>
> It I not organic per se that makes the difference, but attention to
> detail, careful selection of varieties (taste not max weight being key
> criterion) together with sensible use of agro chemical technology.
>
> I'm sure the same middle road idea would apply to wine as well.
>
> pk

On Sep 14, 11:30�am, miles > wrote:
> Bi!! wrote:
> > So, who drinks wine for it's nutritional value?
>
> You haven't heard about the studies regarding drinking red wine to help
> the heart? �I know Dr's say to drink 1 glass a day but they don't state
> the size of that glass!

That's for the medicinal anti-oxidant effect of polyphenol compounds
not for nutrition. I often wonder about the counter effect on people
who drink bulk wines (for health benefits) that contain at least a
certain level of chemical additives. Perhaps a study needs to be done
on exactly what is in these wines and what the efffect is on the human
body.

"Bi!!" > wrote in message
...

So, who drinks wine for it's nutritional value?"

I do. I have found that First Growth Bordeau from great vintage years has
more nutrutional value than wines from New Zealand is good vintage years :-)

Richard wrote on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 12:34:05 -0400:

> So, who drinks wine for it's nutritional value?"

>I do. I have found that First Growth Bordeau from great vintage
>years has more nutrutional value than wines from New Zealand
>is good vintage years :-)

Psychologically possibly! Hard evidence, huh?




--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Richard Neidich wrote:

> Why? Any one taste any local North Carolina wine.

Years ago I had a NC Chardonnay that was decent. A bit expensive
comparatively but good.

Miles wrote on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 11:02:18 -0700:

>> Why? Any one taste any local North Carolina wine.

>Years ago I had a NC Chardonnay that was decent. A bit expensive
>comparatively but good.

I wonder if these new wines can compete financially. Virginia is a case
in point. I've had some very decent wines but they did not seem to offer
interesting flavors attributable to a "terroir" and were more costly
that comparable Californian, New Zealand or Australian wines.
..

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

In 2005, on a tasting in Montpellier, a North Carolina wine ("Kitty Hawk
Native Wine") was perpetarated on the (volontary) participants (I name no
names, but He Who Did It will know ...). This was, with the exception of the
wines my high school friend made from elderberries, without a doubt the
worst I have ever tasted.
Cheers
Nils
"Richard Neidich" > skrev i meddelandet
...
> Local and organic has caught on more in the USA recently because for
> fruits/Veg the quality might vary..but the cost of local organic can now
> compete with the non organic same variety that cost $5 per gallon of
> Diesel to bring cross country.
>
> With wine, biodynamics really don't mean much to me...especially local
> wine...
>
> Why? Any one taste any local North Carolina wine.
>
>
> "PK" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Mark Lipton" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Miles wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd be very intersted to see those studies. In his book "Omnivore's
>>> Dilemma," the journalist Michael Pollan cites several studies that show
>>> that organically raised fruits and vegatables were higher in nutrients
>>> and tasted better.
>>
>>
>> But is there need to go the whole hog and be fully organic with the high
>> overheads that imposes?
>>
>> I buy at local farmers markets who are rare breed cattle/pig, with low
>> but not zero antibiotic use etc, similarly the veg I buy I often heritage
>> varieties with low pesticide use and mainly avoiding chemical
>> fertilizers. the quality of their produce is far better than most of the
>> fully organic stalls at the same market and far better than normal
>> supermarket stock.
>>
>> It I not organic per se that makes the difference, but attention to
>> detail, careful selection of varieties (taste not max weight being key
>> criterion) together with sensible use of agro chemical technology.
>>
>> I'm sure the same middle road idea would apply to wine as well.
>>
>> pk
>
>

James Silverton wrote:

> I wonder if these new wines can compete financially. Virginia is a case
> in point. I've had some very decent wines but they did not seem to offer
> interesting flavors attributable to a "terroir" and were more costly
> that comparable Californian, New Zealand or Australian wines.

Thats true in the NC wines I've tried. Very nice but rather expensive
compared to an equal quality wine from California. However, I don't
think most NC wineries distribute very far and have their own wine club
members that tend to buy most of what they produce. Different market.
Most wineries in California are similar small production, limited
distribution with most wines going to walk ins and club members.