Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Wine (alt.food.wine) Devoted to the discussion of wine and wine-related topics. A place to read and comment about wines, wine and food matching, storage systems, wine paraphernalia, etc. In general, any topic related to wine is valid fodder for the group. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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 |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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 |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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 |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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 |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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 |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
"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 |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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? |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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! |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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 |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
"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 :-) |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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 |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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 |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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 > > |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
"Terroir don't mean s___."
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. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|