|
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
Hello;
Last Saturday, the Tastevins of Helsingborg had a small tasting - small in number, limited to 30 participants, and small in number of wines, (you guessed it) only five. This was presented as an exposition of expression of terroir in Californian Cabs. It has formerly been played down, apparently, and even denied, that terroir plays a part in the quality wines of the New World. This was meant to be a tasting of wines that definitely expressed terroir. The wines were pretty near identical in terms of color - rather youthful, no tendency towards brick on the edge - I´ll leave it at that. They had all had one hour in the glass when the tasting started. 1. Napanook 1999 (Yountville) [N] Smoky, toasted, very forthcoming acidity, some intensity. AFter a while, deep down, fruitiness, oddly reminiscent of strawberries, loads of toasted oak. [P] Very coarse and dominating tannines, dark fruits, bordering on the sinister Overall impression: Apaprently Napanook comes from one of the colder parts of Napa. It was the wine least appreciated by the guests. It was also the youngest, it may be it will develop over the next years and the tannines mellow - I know it not. SEK 500, c USD 68 2. Caymus 1997 (Rutherford) [N] Nose initially dominated by burnt, toasty notes, mineral (granit), artichokes (the topinambour kind), burnt rubber, geranium, cassis [P] Rather high acidity, dominating but not unpleasant tannines, minerality, paprika (red paprika, or sweet red pepper), sweet fruit Overall impression: This was more like it. In an impromptu referendum, a third of the participants voted this the most pleasant of the wines. It developed over time in the glass - high acidity and tannines, together with this, could give the impression that this wine would develop further over time. This wine contains 10 % Merlot. SEK 500, c USD 68 3. Stag´s Leap Fay 1997 [N] Dark fruit, a bit restrained [P] Oak, a bit of dark fruit, fresh and pleasant acidity, violets, aniseed. A certain elegance. Very good persistance. Overall impression: My favorite. Both from the impression in the glass, and the road record of the producer, it would appear to be a wine worth keeping around in the cellar. SEK 750, c USD 102 (Ouch!) 4. Red Rock Terrace 1995 (Diamond Creek) [N] Initially something unclean about the nose, my first thought was, it´s damaged, corked, whatever, too much sulphur. It cleared, somewhat, and presented stony minerals, a certain animal meatiness. [P] Dominating sweetishness, smoke, toast, a lasting impression of something unclean. OVerall impression: A wine I didn´t appreciate. This feeling was shared with my neighbours, who were much more experienced than I am in matters vineous. 'Mouldy' (or the colloquial equivalent) a lady of a certain age, one of the founding mothers of the society called it. SEK 1400, c USD 192 (Ouch!Ouch!!) 5. Monte Bello Ridge 1993 (Sta Cruz Mts) [N] Yoghurt? Sour cream? Burnt sugar, jammy blackberries, toasted oak, hint of mineral. [P] Sweet, alcoholic, good acidity, soft tannines. Overall impression: Not bad but a bit wimpy. SEK 925, c USD 126 At this point in the proceedings, the MC, who had hitherto discussed the merits of the various wines, especially pointing out the seminal Paris, 1976 tasting, where a Stag´s Leap Cab was considered better than any of the French entrants (including various first growths), said: Well, I thought it would be interesting to bring in one of the wines from the Old World that these are at times compared to. Fortunately, I have had a bottle lying about for some time, and decided to open it. 6. Mouton-Rothschild 1989. [N] Complexity. What´s in it? Grass? Newly toasted coffe? What intensity. [P] Chocolate, or bitter cocoa, soft, pleasant tannines, intensity. Overall impression: Grace and elegance. What a wine. My first experience of a Haut-Medoc first growth, except a bottle of La Tour back in 1981 - we were both to young ... We were then urged to taste the Californian wines again, and experience the presence of the sweet, almost overripe, fruit, lacking in number 6. The MC then said, (and I took, though politely, exception to it) that it would be very difficult, bordering on the impossible, to pair these wines with food, and, that, really, they were more often presented in formal tastings. I was gently reminded of the words of Mr Delmas, the legendary regisseur of Ch Haut-Brion, who said (I quote from memory) 'My wines were not made to be compared to Lafitte Rothschild - they were made to be drunk with food'. Exactly. Tastings are fun, and you may learn something new (as I did this Saturday), but I prefer (most of the time) a good wine integrated in a meal. Cheers Nils Gustaf -- Respond to nils dot lindgren at drchips dot se |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
In article >, "Nils Gustaf Lindgren"
> writes: >This was presented as an exposition of expression of terroir in Californian >Cabs. It has formerly been played down, apparently, and even denied, that >terroir plays a part in the quality wines of the New World. This was meant >to be a tasting of wines that definitely expressed terroir. Not to be picky, but if trying to show terroir, wouldn't it have been more informative to limit to a vintage? >1. Napanook 1999 (Yountville) >[N] Smoky, toasted, very forthcoming acidity, some intensity. AFter a while, >deep down, fruitiness, oddly reminiscent of strawberries, loads of toasted >oak. >[P] Very coarse and dominating tannines, dark fruits, bordering on the >sinister >Overall impression: Apaprently Napanook comes from one of the colder parts >of Napa. It was the wine least appreciated by the guests. It was also the >youngest, it may be it will develop over the next years and the tannines >mellow - I know it not. >SEK 500, c USD 68 Whoa, at least double US price. If you didn't know, this is the second wine of Dominus (the Moueix family effort in California)] >2. Caymus 1997 (Rutherford) >SEK 500, c USD 68 This , on the other hand, would be a fair price in US. >3. Stag´s Leap Fay 1997 >SEK 750, c USD 102 (Ouch!) Always a good wine, good vintage. Again for clarification, this is from Stag's Leap Wine Cellars (there is another winery confusingly known as Stags' Leap Winery) >4. Red Rock Terrace 1995 (Diamond Creek) Diamond Creek is the winery name. I usually have liked the Gravelly Meadow more (though extensive tastings are beyond my budget) >5. Monte Bello Ridge 1993 (Sta Cruz Mts) >[N] Yoghurt? Sour cream? Burnt sugar, jammy blackberries, toasted oak, hint >of mineral. >[P] Sweet, alcoholic, good acidity, soft tannines. >Overall impression: Not bad but a bit wimpy. Surprised, I think the '93 was one of my faves, after the '91. > >At this point in the proceedings, the MC, who had hitherto discussed the >merits of the various wines, especially pointing out the seminal Paris, 1976 >tasting, where a Stag´s Leap Cab was considered better than any of the >French entrants (including various first growths), said: Well, I thought it >would be interesting to bring in one of the wines from the Old World that >these are at times compared to. Fortunately, I have had a bottle lying about >for some time, and decided to open it. >6. Mouton-Rothschild 1989. While I'm no apologist for Cal Cabs, I wouldn't call that a fair fight! :) That Mouton must retail for more than $200US, and is just beginning to come into its own. > >The MC then said, (and I took, though politely, exception to it) that it >would be very difficult, bordering on the impossible, to pair these wines >with food, and, that, really, they were more often presented in formal >tastings. I was gently reminded of the words of Mr Delmas, the legendary >regisseur of Ch Haut-Brion, who said (I quote from memory) 'My wines were >not made to be compared to Lafitte Rothschild - they were made to be drunk >with food'. >Exactly. Tastings are fun, and you may learn something new (as I did this >Saturday), but I prefer (most of the time) a good wine integrated in a meal. > While I do enjoy tastings, nothing compares to great wine with great food. I'd definitely take exception to the idea that any of these wines is even particularly difficult to match with food. Thanks for the interesting notes and the commentary! Dale Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply |
Shifts in Bordeaux retailing ( [TN] Five Cal Cabs ...)
Interesting and eloquent notes, thanks for posting.
"Nils Gustaf Lindgren" in ... > > At this point in the proceedings, the MC, who had hitherto discussed the > merits of the various wines, especially pointing out the seminal Paris, 1976 > tasting, where a Stag´s Leap Cab was considered better than any of the > French entrants (including various first growths) It might be still, if you re-tried today those 1973 Bordeaux against that Stag's Leap, if it had any durability. I am sure people here remember the 1973 Bordeaux and how weak they were. Cos d'Estournel for example dribbled out of wholesalers for years in the US at something like $6 retail. (To be fair, in general Bordeuax usually stayed on the market much longer in those days, into the early 1980s I believe-- it was usual to see good 1970 Bordeaux on retail shelves in 1980 for example). Might have been interesting, though, to compare in 1976 stronger years Bord. vs Ca. -- 1970 Bordeaux and 1970 California Cab ? A vast difference between, say, 1976 and today, separate from winemaking changes, and relatively unexamined in the US at least publicly, is the absence in those days of widely accepted ultrasimplified rating systems and large bodies of wine enthusiasts buying Bordeaux exactly as thereby ordered -- "zu befehl" I believe is the German idiom ("bevel" in Dutch possibly?) -- and applauding this situation even as they protest the high prices that result. I know that readers of this newsgroup are savvy and diverse but below, in case any have not seen it, is one of the few US wine articles I've found that researches this situation and puts it into perspective (Haeger 1998; I found this more penetrating, for example, than the longer article in the _Atlantic Monthly_ circa 2000). It is online and concise. (I would welcome suggestions of other relevant articles, by email if you prefer.) http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m13...96/print.jhtml |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dale Williams" > Newsgroups: alt.food.wine Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 10:35 PM Subject: [TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie > In article >, "Nils Gustaf Lindgren" > > writes: > > >This was presented as an exposition of expression of terroir in Californian > >Cabs. It has formerly been played down, apparently, and even denied, that > >terroir plays a part in the quality wines of the New World. This was meant > >to be a tasting of wines that definitely expressed terroir. > > Not to be picky, but if trying to show terroir, wouldn't it have been more > informative to limit to a vintage? You are quite right. There were other nits worth picking - such as, what here is terroir, and what is the influence of the maker? After all, a lot of a wine´s style is made in the cellar, right? > >2. Caymus 1997 (Rutherford) > >SEK 500, c USD 68 > > This , on the other hand, would be a fair price in US. I´d rather pay that for the Caymus than the Napanook! > While I'm no apologist for Cal Cabs, I wouldn't call that a fair fight! :) > That Mouton must retail for more than $200US, and is just beginning to come > into its own. I checked the Systembolaget - 1989 is not avaliable, but 1988 sells at a whooping SEK 2526, c USD 346 (Triple-Ouch with a long sigh after it) Perhaps a more modest Bordeaux would have been better (how about Ch Palmer? SEK 672, c USD 92). Here, in the discussion, was also raised the question of the earlier maturation of the Californian wines - at what age would the comparison be a fair one? In this flight, age varied between 4 and 10 years - I would hazard that the Monte Bello Ridge might not evolve considerably, while I´d certainly expect the Stag´s Leap FAy to go on to glory. But I have put my foot in it concerning age-worthiness before, and should perhaps keep my big mouth shut ;) > I'd > definitely take exception to the idea that any of these wines is even > particularly difficult to match with food. I´d love cooking with either nos 2, 3 .... or 6 :((( Cheers Nils Gustaf |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 07:20:50 GMT, "Nils Gustaf Lindgren"
> wrote: >You are quite right. There were other nits worth picking - such as, what >here is terroir, and what is the influence of the maker? After all, a lot of >a wine´s style is made in the cellar, right? Yes, unfortunately a lot of wines have their styles determined in the cellar, through intrusive oenological techniques. Terroir expression is impossible for these high-tech wines, as a matter of fact the objective is precisely the opposite, remove any character that may be imparted by terroir, including any vintage effects, in order to obtain the same easy reliable wine every year. The only expression remaining may be varietal, but even that may be masked by excessive use of artificial flavouring, such as the use of special yeasts during fermentation, or through "dumb" oak aging. If we were to concentrate only on those few wines that are made to bring out terroir, then you are again right, viticulture and winemaking are indeed part of terroir. The "hand" of the winemaker must be subtle in order to let terroir come out. And of course Nils you know very well that real wine is made in the vineyard, and the grower' choices (not just yields, but every aspect of vine growing) are an integral part of terroir. So have you packed your bags for the next trip down here? Mike Mike Tommasi, Six Fours, France email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
"Mike Tommasi" > wrote in message ... > On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 07:20:50 GMT, "Nils Gustaf Lindgren" > > wrote: > > > >You are quite right. There were other nits worth picking - such as, what > >here is terroir, and what is the influence of the maker? After all, a lot of > >a wine´s style is made in the cellar, right? That depends a lot on the fruit itself. Think of it in terms of woodcarving. Some grapes are like balsa wood: easily shaped and molded into different styles. Others - particularly big reds - are more like walnut: they force the winemaker to follow the "grain", as it were. These are the ones that are more truly "made in the vineyard". With the latter type of fruit the winemaker's contribution is more along the lines of maintenance (prevention of spoilage). > Yes, unfortunately a lot of wines have their styles determined in the > cellar, through intrusive oenological techniques. Terroir expression > is impossible for these high-tech wines, as a matter of fact the > objective is precisely the opposite, remove any character that may be > imparted by terroir, including any vintage effects, in order to obtain > the same easy reliable wine every year. The only expression remaining > may be varietal, but even that may be masked by excessive use of > artificial flavouring, such as the use of special yeasts during > fermentation, or through "dumb" oak aging. That's a rather harsh criticism, Mike, and one that is very tenuously founded in fact. While it's true that technology has played more of a part over the years, its effect has been more to improve general overall quality and consistency, as opposed to the sinister sounding intrusions you alluded to. For example, consider the use of cultured yeast. The differences in flavor and aroma imparted are an early, transitory phase in the wine. By the time the wine is bottled it would be nearly impossible to tell the difference between a Pasteur Red fermented wine and the same fruit fermented using Prise de Mousse, e.g. It's _not_ the same as in beers; yeast strain influence is much more apparent in the finished product because the time between production and consumption is very much shorter. While by no means universal, the use of cultivated strains has long become popular among winemakers for good reason. Selected strains that have known, good properties make a lot more sense to use than whatever wild strains blow on the wind, for two reasons: quality and consistency. To carry the analogy a little further, do you suppose that grapes that are allowed to grow wild would produce intrinsically better wines than cultivated grapes? Of course not! > If we were to concentrate only on those few wines that are made to > bring out terroir, then you are again right, viticulture and > winemaking are indeed part of terroir. The "hand" of the winemaker > must be subtle in order to let terroir come out. I don't know where the idea arises that terroir is so delicate that it is easily destroyed. I find it nearly impossible to conceal because it is as integral a part of a wine as varietal flavor. It also occurs to me that what one might _think_ represents terroir is merely the presence of spoilage organisms: e.g., Bretannomyces in Bordeaux. > you know very well that real wine is made in the vineyard, and the > grower' choices (not just yields, but every aspect of vine growing) > are an integral part of terroir. Oops - aren't you verging on including climate with terroir? Thinning the crop and canopy management are both important for vine health and the production of quality fruit, but I'd say the latter is arguably in the "climate" category. Tom S |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
>
>You are quite right. There were other nits worth picking - such as, what >here is terroir, and what is the influence of the maker? After all, a lot of >a wine´s style is made in the cellar, right? > Good point. A Chevillon NSG will taste quite different from a Dominique Laurent (to use an extreme example) >> That Mouton must retail for more than $200US, and is just beginning to >come >> into its own. > >I checked the Systembolaget - 1989 is not avaliable, but 1988 sells at a >whooping SEK 2526, c USD 346 (Triple-Ouch with a long sigh after it) And the '89 would typically retail for quite a bit more than the '88. >wines - at what age would the >comparison be a fair one? In this flight, age varied between 4 and 10 >years - I would hazard that the Monte Bello Ridge might not evolve >considerably, while I´d certainly expect the Stag´s Leap FAy to go on to >glory. > Hmm, I wouldn't be too sure re the Ridge not aging (and comparing your notes to my experience re the '93 makes me wonder re storage). Certainly the Monte Bello vineyard is capable of making wines to age- I think Mr. Spohn or someone has commented on some ones from the '80s, and a teeny pour of a '84 at an offline showed a vigorous wine. > >I´d love cooking with either nos 2, 3 .... or 6 :((( > I'm sure you mean cooking to match with, not cooking with the wine :) thanks again for the notes! Dale Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
Dale Williams wrote: > >wines - at what age would the > >comparison be a fair one? In this flight, age varied between 4 and 10 > >years - I would hazard that the Monte Bello Ridge might not evolve > >considerably, while I´d certainly expect the Stag´s Leap FAy to go on to > >glory. > > > Hmm, I wouldn't be too sure re the Ridge not aging (and comparing your notes to > my experience re the '93 makes me wonder re storage). Certainly the Monte Bello > vineyard is capable of making wines to age- I think Mr. Spohn or someone has > commented on some ones from the '80s, and a teeny pour of a '84 at an offline > showed a vigorous wine. Dale, Perhaps we need a clarification here. Did Nils mean that he didn't expect the Monte Bello to be capable of evolution, or rather to evolve at a slow pace? In the latter instance, I'd agree full tilt. To me, Monte Bello (especially older vintages) ages at a glacial pace, second only to Randy Dunn's monsters and Ch. Montelena in terms of CalCabs. Funny... Those are almost the only ones that I still buy! ;-) Phelps Insignia puts the lie to that correlation, though. Mark Lipton |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
Nils,
Congratulations! What a fascinating lineup of wines. You can now claim to have tasted some of the best (if not the most prestigious) Califonia Cabernets. I was a bit surprised by your notes re the Caymus 1997. Though I used to be a regular customer of theirs (back when this wine sold for less than $20), I stopped because their style had shifted to softer, fruit-forward wines with little aging potential. I would have expected you to find a much softer, oakier wine than what you report. Perhaps I need to try them again? Regarding the Ridge Monte Bello, it should be noted that 1993 was arguably the weakest vintage of the '90s for CalCabs (though '98 gives it a run for the money). However, Ridge typically manages to make good wines year in an year out, and their location in the Santa Cruz mountains (directly above Silicon Valley, for the record) has very different weather than Napa, so I am a bit surprised that it didn't show better than it did. I wonder if travel shock could be the explanation? I also agree with Dale that tasting them alongside the '89 Mouton is even more unfair a comparison than Steven Spurrier's '76 event. Still, it makes for a good overview of what California is producing these days in the "still vaugely affordable" range of CalCabs. Mark Lipton |
Shifts in Bordeaux retailing ( [TN] Five Cal Cabs ...)
Max Hauser wrote: > Interesting and eloquent notes, thanks for posting. > > "Nils Gustaf Lindgren" in ... > > > > At this point in the proceedings, the MC, who had hitherto discussed the > > merits of the various wines, especially pointing out the seminal Paris, > 1976 > > tasting, where a Stag´s Leap Cab was considered better than any of the > > French entrants (including various first growths) > > It might be still, if you re-tried today those 1973 Bordeaux against that > Stag's Leap, if it had any durability. I am sure people here remember the > 1973 Bordeaux and how weak they were. Cos d'Estournel for example dribbled > out of wholesalers for years in the US at something like $6 retail. (To be > fair, in general Bordeuax usually stayed on the market much longer in those > days, into the early 1980s I believe-- it was usual to see good 1970 > Bordeaux on retail shelves in 1980 for example). Might have been > interesting, though, to compare in 1976 stronger years Bord. vs Ca. -- 1970 > Bordeaux and 1970 California Cab ? > Max, In fact, most of the Bordeaux at the tasting were from the 1970 vintage. What is often lost in the hoopla concerning the first place for SLV was that places 2-4 went to '70 Montrose, '70 Mouton and '70 Haut-Brion -- no slouches there! Alas, the '70 Latour was not among them, or the result might have been a bit different. It's also worth noting that, apart from the SLV, no other 1973 CalCab was present. The rest were drawn from the much weaker years of 1970-1972, except for the 1969 Freemark Abbey. Another fact often lost in the hype is that the '70 Montrose and the '73 SLV effectively finished in a dead heat: their aggregate scores (41.0 and 41.5) are statistically indistinguishable, and that the top five wines ('73 SLV, the '70 B'dx and the '71 Ridge Monte Bello) were qualtitatively far superior to the other wines in the tasting. Here's a good statistical breakdown of the results: http://www.quandt.com/tasting.html I agree with you that the wine press of that era was markedly different from that of today. As I was just discovering wine at that time, I recall quite well much of the knee-jerk reaction that passed for wine journalism of the era, especially the blanket statements being made regarding the new vintage of '75 in Bordeaux. While I am not a blind follower of Parker, or any other reviewer, I appreciate what those publications have brought to the world of wine criticism. Mark Lipton |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
I would agree with Marks comments regarding the wines he buys since I purchase
the same wines he mentions. I recently opened a '78 and a '91 Ridge Monte Bello. The '78 was young, rich and complex and was at it's plateau and the '91 was still a bit backward. I recently opened a 1985 Dunn's Howell Mountain that was still 10 years away from it's peak. >Perhaps we need a clarification here. Did Nils mean that he didn't expect >the Monte Bello to be capable of evolution, or rather to evolve at a slow >pace? >In the latter instance, I'd agree full tilt. To me, Monte Bello (especially >older vintages) ages at a glacial pace, second only to Randy Dunn's monsters >and >Ch. Montelena in terms of CalCabs. Funny... Those are almost the only ones >that >I still buy! ;-) Phelps Insignia puts the lie to that correlation, though. > >Mark Lipton Bi!! |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 14:19:32 GMT, "Tom S" >
wrote: >> Yes, unfortunately a lot of wines have their styles determined in the >> cellar, through intrusive oenological techniques. Terroir expression >> is impossible for these high-tech wines, as a matter of fact the >> objective is precisely the opposite, remove any character that may be >> imparted by terroir, including any vintage effects, in order to obtain >> the same easy reliable wine every year. The only expression remaining >> may be varietal, but even that may be masked by excessive use of >> artificial flavouring, such as the use of special yeasts during >> fermentation, or through "dumb" oak aging. > >That's a rather harsh criticism, Mike, and one that is very tenuously >founded in fact. > >While it's true that technology has played more of a part over the years, >its effect has been more to improve general overall quality and consistency, >as opposed to the sinister sounding intrusions you alluded to. But as you know most wines that you buy are taylored to fit a certain type of buyer, and while average quality has no doubt gone up through better techniques and better hygiene, most high tech wines are just not interesting to me. Overoaked international style wine is bought and sold much like Coke, and it is boring in the sense that you learn nothing from it. >While by no means universal, the use of cultivated strains has long become >popular among winemakers for good reason. Selected strains that have known, >good properties make a lot more sense to use than whatever wild strains blow >on the wind, for two reasons: quality and consistency. I drink mostly wines made with the natural yeasts that the wind carries, and I have no quality problem, it remains consistently high quality wine. >To carry the analogy a little further, do you suppose that grapes that are >allowed to grow wild would produce intrinsically better wines than >cultivated grapes? Of course not! Of course not, they would be twenty meter long lianas with poor grapes. I am not saying that wine is made by nature alone, but some things are not worth interfering with, I drink wines from all kinds of climates and none suffer from the lack of selection of the yeasts... > >> If we were to concentrate only on those few wines that are made to >> bring out terroir, then you are again right, viticulture and >> winemaking are indeed part of terroir. The "hand" of the winemaker >> must be subtle in order to let terroir come out. > >I don't know where the idea arises that terroir is so delicate that it is >easily destroyed. I find it nearly impossible to conceal because it is as >integral a part of a wine as varietal flavor. Most oenology aims at removing inconsistency from one year to another, because the average consumer would not understand. It is a personal choice of mine, and of many of the most progressive young winemakers in this country, to take a new approach to winemaking. On the producer's side, to limit the human intervention to "accompanying" nature, just to make sure someone is there because nature goes haywire when left unsupervised. On the consumer side, to accept that such wines require a certain commitment, but once that link is made if you follow a wine throughout several vintages, you make endless discoveries about what in nature influences wine. Take the same grape variety and a given vintage, and try wine from 2 vineyards from a slightly different exposure and you will notice the differences are huge. Why hide them? Hand that wine over to your average oenologist, and he will endeavour to cancel all those differences, whether they be from one parcel to another or from one vintage to another. >It also occurs to me that >what one might _think_ represents terroir is merely the presence of spoilage >organisms: e.g., Bretannomyces in Bordeaux. I think you are confusing terroir with what we call "typicite", the ?typicity?typiclaness? of a wine. Yes, many people think that Bandol should smell like a horse's behind, but I agree that there is nothing typical about brett, except in very small doses. Really, brett typical of Bordeaux? Hmmm. >> you know very well that real wine is made in the vineyard, and the >> grower' choices (not just yields, but every aspect of vine growing) >> are an integral part of terroir. > >Oops - aren't you verging on including climate with terroir? Thinning the >crop and canopy management are both important for vine health and the >production of quality fruit, but I'd say the latter is arguably in the >"climate" category. By definition terroir includes climate. A good definition is given by the Hachette guide : "In the widest sense, the notion of viticultural terroir brings together many factors of a biological (choice of grape variety), geographical, climatic, geological and pedological nature." I think a more strict definition would have to mention soil characteristics, exposure, choice of grapes, yields and type of vine geometry, climate. Cheers Mike Mike Tommasi, Six Fours, France email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
"Mark Lipton" > wrote in message ... > To me, Monte Bello (especially > older vintages) ages at a glacial pace, second only to Randy Dunn's monsters and > Ch. Montelena in terms of CalCabs. Speaking of "glacial pace" aging, don't forget Mayacamas and Mount Eden. Funny... Those are almost the only ones that > I still buy! ;-) Phelps Insignia puts the lie to that correlation, though. How so, Mark? Do you find those more approachable in their youth or does Insignia simply age more rapidly? Tom S |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
> Perhaps we need a clarification here. Did Nils mean that he didn't expect
>the Monte Bello to be capable of evolution, or rather to evolve at a slow >pace? > Hi Mark: Rereading, I guess it is possible he meant the latter. I assumed the former (because soft tannins and wimpy are seldom descriptors I would apply to wines I expect to age at a slow pace). Hopefully Nils can clarify. And you are quite correct in another reply when you mention that CA vintage generalizations (mostly based on Napa and to a lesser degree Sonoma) quite often don't apply very well to Santa Cruz. Best, Dale Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
"Mike Tommasi" > wrote in message ... > But as you know most wines that you buy are tailored to fit a certain > type of buyer, and while average quality has no doubt gone up through > better techniques and better hygiene, most high tech wines are just > not interesting to me. Overoaked international style wine is bought > and sold much like Coke, and it is boring in the sense that you learn > nothing from it. I'm having a hard time figuring out which wines you're describing, Mike. What, exactly, is a "high tech" wine? Can you cite some examples? You see, I'd think "high tech" would be a _positive_ attribute (as opposed to crudely made), but you make it sound pejorative. Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes. > I drink mostly wines made with the natural yeasts that the wind > carries, and I have no quality problem, it remains consistently high > quality wine. Maybe so, but that doesn't imply that those wines are inherently _superior_ because they are not made using cultivated strains. > I am not saying that wine is made by nature alone, but some > things are not worth interfering with, I drink wines from all kinds of > climates and none suffer from the lack of selection of the yeasts... How can you know that without the experience of tasting the same grapes vinified by both methods? The logic behind using a cultivated strain is twofold: (1) Using a strain with oenological properties that are well known allows the winemaker to choose the fermentation properties that are best for the specific fruit he's working with. (2) Adding a very large population of a "friendly" yeast culture as soon as possible after picking the fruit gives the "good guys" a big headstart over the spoilage organisms that are always present on the fruit. In a wild fermentation there's no assurance of such a competitive advantage over the "bad bugs", so high volatile acidity tends to be more of a problem in them. Of course you don't ever _taste_ any of the wines that go bad via the "natural" process - except perhaps in your _salad_! :^) > Most oenology aims at removing inconsistency from one year to another, > because the average consumer would not understand. It is a personal > choice of mine, and of many of the most progressive young winemakers > in this country, to take a new approach to winemaking. On the > producer's side, to limit the human intervention to "accompanying" > nature, just to make sure someone is there because nature goes haywire > when left unsupervised. On the consumer side, to accept that such > wines require a certain commitment, but once that link is made if you > follow a wine throughout several vintages, you make endless > discoveries about what in nature influences wine. IOW you consciously _choose_ to also drink wines from poor vintages as part of your continuing education process? I've already done my share of that, thanks very much. ;^) Take the same grape > variety and a given vintage, and try wine from 2 vineyards from a > slightly different exposure and you will notice the differences are > huge. Why hide them? Hand that wine over to your average oenologist, > and he will endeavour to cancel all those differences, whether they be > from one parcel to another or from one vintage to another. It sounds to me like you are comparing European wines (which may have huge vintage to vintage differences) against California (e.g.) wines, where vintage to vintage climate tends to run much more uniform. Actually, if you give the _same_ grapes to two winemakers you'll end up with two different wines. There will be similarities, but differences too. > Really, brett typical > of Bordeaux? Hmmm. Robert Parker is said to prefer his Bordeaux with a touch of Brett. Although I know that he is aware of that rumor, I don't actually know for sure whether that is actually his position. > By definition terroir includes climate. > > A good definition is given by the Hachette guide : > > "In the widest sense, the notion of viticultural terroir brings > together many factors of a biological (choice of grape variety), > geographical, climatic, geological and pedological nature." That definition starts out by _conceding_ that it is too "wide" a brush for defining terroir. To me, terroir means the soil only. It doesn't even include water unless a subterranean aquifer is involved (which typically would _not_ be the case in a vineyard). Water, wind and sunlight are all under the heading "climate". The third major variable is "clone". Of those three, it seems rather obvious that vintage variation is about 99% dependent on climate. After all, the soil and clone don't change much from year to year. Don't misunderstand me; clone and soil _are_ both important too, but not with respect to vintage variation because they remain very nearly constant from year to year. > I think a more strict definition would have to mention soil > characteristics, exposure, choice of grapes, yields and type of vine > geometry, climate. Those can be approximately classified as terroir, climate, clone, climate and climate - in that order. See? Even the arithmetic average of those puts climate in the majority! ;^D Tom S |
Shifts in Bordeaux retailing ( [TN] Five Cal Cabs ...)
"Mark Lipton" > wrote in message ... > It's also worth noting that, apart from the SLV, no > other 1973 CalCab was present. The rest were drawn from the much weaker > years of 1970-1972, except for the 1969 Freemark Abbey. Where did you ever get the idea that 1970 was a _weak_ year in California, Mark? Even Louis Martini made exceptional Cabernets that year, and the top wineries produced wines that were absolutely *stunning*! IIRC, there was an April frost in Napa after bud break that annihilated a third or so of the crop. The fruit that survived, however, was textbook perfect, and ripened magnificently in a warm Autumn. Having tasted all the 1970 first growth Bordeaux, I am quite confident that the 6th place Heitz "Martha's Vineyard" (which I've tasted recently) would stomp all _over_ them today. It really isn't a fair fight; 1970 was a very good year in Bordeaux, but it was an _outstanding+_ year in California. Tom S |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
"Mark Lipton" > skrev i meddelandet
... > > > Dale Williams wrote: > > > >wines - at what age would the > > >comparison be a fair one? In this flight, age varied between 4 and 10 > > >years - I would hazard that the Monte Bello Ridge might not evolve > > >considerably, while I´d certainly expect the Stag´s Leap FAy to go on to > > >glory. > > > > > Hmm, I wouldn't be too sure re the Ridge not aging (and comparing your notes to > > my experience re the '93 makes me wonder re storage). Certainly the Monte Bello > > vineyard is capable of making wines to age- I think Mr. Spohn or someone has > > commented on some ones from the '80s, and a teeny pour of a '84 at an offline > > showed a vigorous wine. > > Dale, > Perhaps we need a clarification here. Did Nils mean that he didn't expect > the Monte Bello to be capable of evolution, or rather to evolve at a slow pace? > In the latter instance, I'd agree full tilt. To me, Monte Bello (especially > older vintages) ages at a glacial pace, second only to Randy Dunn's monsters and > Ch. Montelena in terms of CalCabs. Funny... Those are almost the only ones that > I still buy! ;-) Phelps Insignia puts the lie to that correlation, though. > > Mark Lipton Hello Mark; Dale understood me correctly. I honestly, if erroneously, did not expect the Monte Bello Ridge to evolve much more. Not that it was over the top - no signs of drying out or oxidization - but I was as Dale understood it, under the impression that it would stay much the same. And Dale was of course quite right about the cooking too. I´ve heard somebody say that to make Bouef Bourgignonne, you need one bottle of Echezeaux in the pot and two on the table, but ... no, the day will be long in coming when I pour SEK 750 worth of wine into a beef stew ... Returning to the concept of terroir, I realise that my concept of the term is less than perfct, e g, I´d have tot aste more wines from the same plot of land made by different producers. OTOH, having tasted Rieslings from GC vineyards only a few houndred meters distant from each other, and finding a world of difference between them, well, obviously it exists, even if I don´t understand it. Of course, Riesling is one of the varietals most sensitive to difference in soil, right? Cheers Nils Gustaf -- Respond to nils dot lindgren at drchips dot se |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
"Mike Tommasi" > skrev i meddelandet ... > On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 07:20:50 GMT, "Nils Gustaf Lindgren" > > wrote: > > > So have you packed your bags for the next trip down here? Hello Mike; We´ll be coming down April 17th for a week of rollerskating, conferencing, and generally loafing. We won´t be bringing the little car, so we´re staying in our friend´s apartment in Nice (if you and Cathy feels like coming over ...?). We will hit Mougins, little car and all, June 6th or 7th. Cheers Nils Gustaf -- Respond to nils dot lindgren at drchips dot se |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
"Mark Lipton" > skrev i meddelandet ... > Nils, > ... I was a bit surprised by your notes re the Caymus > 1997. Though I used to be a regular customer of theirs (back when this > wine sold for less than $20), I stopped because their style had shifted > to softer, fruit-forward wines with little aging potential. I would > have expected you to find a much softer, oakier wine than what you > report. At least one of my neioghbours had a slightly different opinion concerning the Caymus. Unfortunately, the word he used is quite colloquial (and so, I´d guess, unprintable) but "warmly embrassing and corpulent" would come close. Heck, don´t take my word for it. > ... in the "still vaugely affordable" range of CalCabs. "Vaguely affordable"? <hollow laughter> Mark, I seriously doubt that I´ll ever invest in any of these wines unless another elderly realtive kicks the bucket and leaves me a pot of filthy lucre, and, unfortunately, the way things are, _I´m_ starting to be the elderly relative as the old generation has all passed to the great vineyards up above. No, these wines are too expensive to contemplate buying. Cheers Nils Gustaf -- Respond to nils dot lindgren at drchips dot se |
Shifts in Bordeaux retailing ( [TN] Five Cal Cabs ...)
"Mark Lipton" in ...
> > Max, > In fact, most of the Bordeaux at the tasting were from the 1970 vintage. > What is often lost in the hoopla concerning the first place for SLV ... My remarks reflected my memory, wrong it seems, that the 1976 Spurrier tasting in Paris compared 1973 Bordeaux against 1973 Stag's Leap from California, so please keep that in mind. I could not research the details of the Spurrier tasting before posting (I was too busy, you see, lecturing cherie on the sins of "armchair expertise" on newsgroups :-). Mea MAXima culpa! Note anyway the following comment by Bob Thompson, writing from the US in the 1984 UC/Sotheby book (ISBN 0520050851 US, 0856671851 British). "The Paris tasting staged by Stephen Spurrier in 1976 offers a different measure of novelty as a virtue, real or perceived. It was not so much that somebody staged an international tasting, or that expert tasters placed some California [Cabernets] and Chardonnays on an equal footing with some of their French counterparts. That had been happening for several years. The Spurrier tasting became important because _Time_ reported it. When Gault-Millau staged their much more informative Wine Olympiad a few years later [remember that? --M], the news magazines had already spent their interest in the comparative tasting story. The Gault-Millau results went ignored by all but special interest wine publications [Finigan's newsletter for one -- MH] and a few newspapers." > I agree with you that the wine press of that era was markedly different from > that of today. ... I must stress if it was not clear earlier that my posting on this thread referred only to the now-popular _numerical_ element in wine criticism, and its effects. Parker, though he decisively popularized it, is one of those who comments thoughtfully on its effects in the Haeger 1998 article I linked to. I did not refer (though people have in the past often confused these points) to the general issue of wine critics with newsletters. That industry long predated Parker in the US (though you might not know it, to hear from some people who've read no one else and therefore have a perfect perspective). In fact the Thompson chapter I quoted above was comparing US wine newsletters as of 1984 (Parker is not mentioned, partly because the emphasis in the chapter is on California wines but also because he was only becoming known then, amid a crowded field of predecessors, none of whom, however, emphasized two-digit numbers as Parker did.) |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
"Nils Gustaf Lindgren" in ...
> Here, in the discussion, was also raised the question of > the earlier maturation of the Californian wines - at what age would the > comparison be a fair one? In this flight, age varied between 4 and 10 > years - I would hazard that the Monte Bello Ridge might not evolve > considerably, while I´d certainly expect the Stag´s Leap FAy to go on to > glory. If I understand this remark (quoted by others later), it concerns the effect of age so far on the wines tasted. I don't have my own Ridge 1993 notes at hand (and I have recently been reminded, 1000th time, of the dangers of relying on memory) but I do not recall it being an extremely eccentric example of that wine. The thing about Ridge Monte Bello -- if anyone is at all interested and doesn't know this already -- is that it is made in what I consider an "old" high-end California style (ŕ la 1950s), very natural, meant to age slowly for 20 years or whatever, and then you begin tasting and considering it. One group of enthusiasts I taste with contains various members over 60 yrs old, many have bought Ridge MB for a LONG time (I've only bought it since the 1980, I'm new) -- Paul Draper joins this group occasionally to conduct vertical tastings of his wines from the faithful collections of the members -- and some members now speak of buying no more, just from "actuarial" expectations -- they want to live to taste it! So that issue is of slow aging rather than of ability to age at all. (I'm still young enough, I still buy it. 2001 arrived today, ordered two years ago.) Actually this newsgroup (modulo its latest name change) was used together with a local newsgroup to arrange local picnic visits to Ridge, circa 1992. |
Wines of character vs high tech wines (was Five Cal Cabs)
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 12:44:06 -0800, "Tom S"
> wrote: >I'm having a hard time figuring out which wines you're describing, Mike. >What, exactly, is a "high tech" wine? Can you cite some examples? You see, >I'd think "high tech" would be a _positive_ attribute (as opposed to crudely >made), but you make it sound pejorative. Perhaps we're talking at cross >purposes. Hi Tom You are assuming that high-tech is the opposite of crudely made. Let's leave out of the discussion any crudely made wines, they are uninteresting to this forum. By high-tech wines I mean wines that are made in usually large wineries that do everything that is considered right in modern winemaking, but end up producing high quality wine that is uninteresting, simple. Lacking soul might be a good way to express it, but you might object to such language. Let's say "lacking character". Undistinguished. In many ways, the word "typical" could apply, but I don't want to push it too far. There is a small but growing movement of consumers and producers that are tired of wines that are becoming increasingly uniform in taste. The AOC/AVA/DOC systems aim precisely at such uniformity, in order to simplify wine, to make it more easy to recognize by the average consumer and more easy to produce by the average winery. The whole appellation system, wherever it is applied, is taylor made for a) producers that can use technology to constantly correct the output of the vine and mold the product into fitting the model, by whatever oenological intervention that technology can provide, however harsh ; b) consumers that have less and less time to spend on learning about wine, and who just want to see wine reduced to a few simple categories (in some places, varietals, in orthers, appellations). Wines of character in my exprience are wines where, once tha basic rules are known (ex.: in Cote Rotie you must use syrah and maybe a little viognier, yields are to be kept below x, etc.), the winemaker will try to obtain the healthiest grapes possible given that season's particular conditions, and steer the production through its various steps, doing the best he can and making sure that all goes according to sound winemaking practice, refraining from using a heavy hand to correct the wine, knowing that his customers are knowledgeable enough to accept that every vintage is different and that every vineyard and every winemaker is different, even in the same appellation area. You might object that customers are not willing to buy bad vintages. But as a matter of fact, the kind of wines that I am describing do not really have bad vintages, or very seldom, "lesser" vintages may be less rich or complex, or they may be more drinkable when young, but it is extraordinary to be able to taste in your glass the results of the particular conditions of year X. I don't buy this business of people constantly asking "is 19XX a good vintage in area YY?". You would have to be crazy to start making wine, knowing that people will only buy your wine in those years that some guru defines as "good" or "excellent". Again a simplification that is incongruous with the very nature of making wine, the idea of vintages being either good or bad, and the idea that as a winemaker your job is to make it taste the same every year or you won't sell it. >> By definition terroir includes climate. >> >> A good definition is given by the Hachette guide : >> >> "In the widest sense, the notion of viticultural terroir brings >> together many factors of a biological (choice of grape variety), >> geographical, climatic, geological and pedological nature." > >That definition starts out by _conceding_ that it is too "wide" a brush for >defining terroir. To me, terroir means the soil only. Then your definition disagrees with the most widely accepted meaning of terroir. So why not just call it "soil" then, or "terre". There are in fact two usages of the word terroir. "terroir" on its own, without an article, is described above. Whereas "a terroir", a particular terroir, is an area where several vineyards and wineries share a particular set of characteristics of soil, climate, grape varieties and winemaking techniques. Such areas are sometimes called "climat" (in Burgundy for example). But it is not just "climate". Nor is it just soil. Mike Mike Tommasi, Six Fours, France email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 07:04:35 GMT, "Nils Gustaf Lindgren"
> wrote: >We´ll be coming down April 17th for a week of rollerskating, conferencing, >and generally loafing. We won´t be bringing the little car, so we´re staying >in our friend´s apartment in Nice Cathy has a vernissage on the 20th, you are welcome, then we can go drink some wine at the Part des Anges near the gallery. >(if you and Cathy feels like coming over ...?). We will hit Mougins, little >car and all, June 6th or 7th. Look forward to seeing you both again. Mike Mike Tommasi, Six Fours, France email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail |
Wines of character vs high tech wines (was Five Cal Cabs)
"Mike Tommasi" > wrote in message ... > By high-tech wines I mean wines that are made in usually large > wineries that do everything that is considered right in modern > winemaking, but end up producing high quality wine that is > uninteresting, simple. Sounds like most of the mass produced wines from the big wineries. I work side by side in a big winery with the guys who produce stuff like that, as well as with others who produce what's commonly referred to as "boutique" wine. Although the processing may be similar in some ways, the fruit typically isn't. The big boys don't buy the same quality of fruit as the artisan winemakers. They also tend to age in huge tanks on oak chips rather than in barrels. The finished product isn't as bad as you might think, but I don't buy it - despite the low price. Lacking soul might be a good way to express it, > but you might object to such language. Let's say "lacking character". > Undistinguished. In many ways, the word "typical" could apply, but I > don't want to push it too far. That about sums it up. It's wine for the masses, which isn't a bad thing for the rest of us. Imagine what good wines would cost if the masses insisted on drinking _them_! > Wines of character in my exprience are wines where, once tha basic > rules are known (ex.: in Cote Rotie you must use syrah and maybe a > little viognier, yields are to be kept below x, etc.), the winemaker > will try to obtain the healthiest grapes possible given that season's > particular conditions, and steer the production through its various > steps, doing the best he can and making sure that all goes according > to sound winemaking practice, refraining from using a heavy hand to > correct the wine That's how it's done in the boutique wineries, except there are no draconian laws requiring that wines be composed from _exactly_ such and such a composition. The actual blending is up to the winemaker, although that blend is usually described on the label - a practice that is unfortunately missing in Europe. > You might object that customers are not willing to buy bad vintages. > But as a matter of fact, the kind of wines that I am describing do not > really have bad vintages, or very seldom, "lesser" vintages may be > less rich or complex, or they may be more drinkable when young, but it > is extraordinary to be able to taste in your glass the results of the > particular conditions of year X. Sounds like you're in denial about the relative merits of, say 1961 vs 1972 in Bordeaux e.g. ;^) FWIW, you might be surprised to learn that it _is_ possible to find common threads among fine wines based on vintage variations. It's more subtle than regional variations, but observable by a discriminating palate. > I don't buy this business of people constantly asking "is 19XX a good > vintage in area YY?". You would have to be crazy to start making wine, > knowing that people will only buy your wine in those years that some > guru defines as "good" or "excellent". The fact is, knowledgeable consumers _are_ vintage driven. I know. I'm one of them. You won't find _any_ 1998 California Cabernet in my cellar, but I do have 1994, 1995, 1997 and 1999s. I'm passing over 2000 and starting to buy the 2001s. I only have so much $$ to spend and I'm putting it where I get the best quality. Again a simplification that is > incongruous with the very nature of making wine, the idea of vintages > being either good or bad, and the idea that as a winemaker your job is > to make it taste the same every year or you won't sell it. It doesn't have to taste the same every year; it just has to be _cheaper_ in poorer vintages! > >To me, terroir means the soil only. > > Then your definition disagrees with the most widely accepted meaning > of terroir. So why not just call it "soil" then, or "terre". OK, I can live with that. It seems to be a misunderstanding about the language. I assumed that terroir = soil (in French). I suppose it's "terre". That's too subtle a difference for me, I guess. Languages are not my strong suit. :^/ Tom S |
Wines of character vs high tech wines (was Five Cal Cabs)
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:14:29 GMT, "Tom S" >
wrote: >Sounds like you're in denial about the relative merits of, say 1961 vs 1972 >in Bordeaux e.g. ;^) Only for these techie wines... >The fact is, knowledgeable consumers _are_ vintage driven. I know. I'm one >of them. It is unfair to winemakers that need to sell their wine every year. Yes, they might adjust price, specially if they have a hefty price tag. Mike Mike Tommasi, Six Fours, France email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
Tom S wrote: > "Mark Lipton" > wrote in message > ... > > To me, Monte Bello (especially > > older vintages) ages at a glacial pace, second only to Randy Dunn's > monsters and > > Ch. Montelena in terms of CalCabs. > > Speaking of "glacial pace" aging, don't forget Mayacamas and Mount Eden. Very true, though it's been so long since I've had a Mayacamus Cab that I have no idea if that's still true. > > > Funny... Those are almost the only ones that > > I still buy! ;-) Phelps Insignia puts the lie to that correlation, > though. > > How so, Mark? Do you find those more approachable in their youth or does > Insignia simply age more rapidly? Insgnia is (to me) much more approachable in its youth, much more attuned to the "elegance" side of the Cab/claret side of the spectrum, but still capable of many years of improvement in the bottle. However, in comparison to the painfully slow development of those other wines, the Insignia does indeed age more rapidly (i.e., it takes only a decade to reach maturity). Mark Lipton |
Shifts in Bordeaux retailing ( [TN] Five Cal Cabs ...)
Tom S wrote: > "Mark Lipton" > wrote in message > ... > > It's also worth noting that, apart from the SLV, no > > other 1973 CalCab was present. The rest were drawn from the much weaker > > years of 1970-1972, except for the 1969 Freemark Abbey. > > Where did you ever get the idea that 1970 was a _weak_ year in California, > Mark? Even Louis Martini made exceptional Cabernets that year, and the top > wineries produced wines that were absolutely *stunning*! Well, Tom, I readily confess to little firsthand knowledge of the vintage, but I'd offer that in comparison to the years '68-'69 and '73-'74, '70 was indeed weaker (please note that this is a relative comparison only). To me, those other years define the most successful vintages of the 1965-1980 period. Do you think that '70 is on a par with those other years, Tom? > > > IIRC, there was an April frost in Napa after bud break that annihilated a > third or so of the crop. The fruit that survived, however, was textbook > perfect, and ripened magnificently in a warm Autumn. > > Having tasted all the 1970 first growth Bordeaux, I am quite confident that > the 6th place Heitz "Martha's Vineyard" (which I've tasted recently) would > stomp all _over_ them today. Even the '70 Latour? It's quite an outstanding wine. > > > It really isn't a fair fight; 1970 was a very good year in Bordeaux, but it > was an _outstanding+_ year in California. OK. I'll bow to your superior knowledge here, Tom. Mark Lipton |
Wines of character vs high tech wines (was Five Cal Cabs)
Mike Tommasi wrote: > On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:14:29 GMT, "Tom S" > > wrote: > > >Sounds like you're in denial about the relative merits of, say 1961 vs 1972 > >in Bordeaux e.g. ;^) > > Only for these techie wines... Mike, To me, the idea of comparing vintages is a matter of the collective success in that region. As you recently said, 2001 is perhaps the best year on record in Bandol. What most savvy consumers will understand is that that statement says NOTHING at all about a particular wine made in that year. It's the same as, e.g., a stock market index: even in the best of times, a poor stock can do poorly and vice versa. So it is too with wines. A talented winemaker can produce good wine even in a "weak" year, and a poor winemaker can make dull wine even in a great year. But, my odds of randomly choosing a good '82 Bordeaux are far higher than my odds would be in '87. That's just statistics. > > > >The fact is, knowledgeable consumers _are_ vintage driven. I know. I'm one > >of them. > > It is unfair to winemakers that need to sell their wine every year. > Yes, they might adjust price, specially if they have a hefty price > tag. And herein lies the big difference between wineries in Europe and the US. Here it is almost unknown for a winery to drop its prices, even in the worst of vintages. In those rare cases when they do, they do it sub rosa, out of fear that their rational pricing decision will be recognized and denounced by their peers. Hence the advent of "Two Buck Chuck" and its ilk, where the grapes can be sold off in near-complete anonymity. And let's see how long those overpriced '98 CalCabs remain languishing on the shelves before they get remaindered by the retailers... Mark Lipton |
Vintages (was Wines of character vs high tech wines)
Mike & Tom,
Boy, I'm not sure I want to get between you two. But I do feel I'm somewhere in the middle (opinion-wise) here. I think it's unrealistic to think that people should just buy wines even in "difficult" vintages to either support the producer or experience the vintage. I think better producers tend to do (comparatively) well even in "poor" vintages. I buy the Lafarges, Chevillons, etc every year- but I buy more in '99 than '94. I tend to spend more for wines I can cellar, so vintages like '93 & '97 in Bordeaux have less appeal for me (my last '93, a Lynch-Bages, dies a ritual death in a vertical tomorrow). I don't think the use of technology in and of itself is an indicator of quality, poor or high. There are plenty of traditionalists who make crappy wines, along with the Bartolo Mascarellos of the world. And there are high tech wineries that use those technologies to produce high quality wines that speak of place. But far more who use them to produce featurless plonk, indistingushable as to whether it's from Tuscany, Napa, Oz, or Chile. Dale Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
"Mike Tommasi" > skrev i meddelandet
... > On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 07:04:35 GMT, "Nils Gustaf Lindgren" > > wrote: > > >We´ll be coming down April 17th for a week of rollerskating, conferencing, > >and generally loafing. We won´t be bringing the little car, so we´re staying > >in our friend´s apartment in Nice > > Cathy has a vernissage on the 20th, you are welcome, then we can go > drink some wine at the Part des Anges near the gallery. > > >(if you and Cathy feels like coming over ...?). We will hit Mougins, little > >car and all, June 6th or 7th. > > Look forward to seeing you both again. As do we, good Mike, as do we. We will be very happy to meet with you for the vernissage - I don´t think we´ve seen any of C:s exhibitions. And Part des Anges is a good place for a glass of wine. Comes recommended by Mlle Duthiel (Marie, that is, the giggly one). Cheers! Nils Gustaf -- Respond to nils dot lindgren at drchips dot se |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:51:23 GMT, "Nils Gustaf Lindgren"
> wrote: >As do we, good Mike, as do we. We will be very happy to meet with you for >the vernissage - I don´t think we´ve seen any of C:s exhibitions. And Part >des Anges is a good place for a glass of wine. Comes recommended by Mlle >Duthiel (Marie, that is, the giggly one). The giggly one has flown away from the nest, hasn't been around for months... I spoke to Mme Dutheil, we are holding a Loire terroir testing there on march 21, overlooking the vineyards of .. Bandol ! Anjou - Le Cornillard - Domaine Patrick Baudouin Jasničres - Les Rosiers - Domaine de Bellivičre - E. Nicolas Montlouis-sur-Loire - Les Choisilles - F. Chidaine Vouvray - Sec - Clos Naudin - P. Foreau Saumur (Chteau Tour Grise, bubbly, non-dosed) Orantium 1997 Eric Morgat (sticky) The stickies will be accompanied by a pear crumble made with crushed toasted pain d'epices and speculoos cookies. If you are around may 15, we are doing a recital-tasting, matching wine to renaissance and baroque songs, in an old olive oil mill near Brignoles. The singing trio features a winemaker as its leader, it is Emanuelle Dupere, remember? Mike Mike Tommasi, Six Fours, France email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail |
[TN] Five Cal Cabs and a freebie
In article >, Mike Tommasi
> writes: >njou - Le Cornillard - Domaine Patrick Baudouin >Jasničres - Les Rosiers - Domaine de Bellivičre - E. Nicolas >Montlouis-sur-Loire - Les Choisilles - F. Chidaine >Vouvray - Sec - Clos Naudin - P. Foreau >Saumur (Chteau Tour Grise, bubbly, non-dosed) >Orantium 1997 Eric Morgat (sticky) Pretty nice list of Chenin - look forward to the notes! What's the Orantium- is that a proprietary name? Dale Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply |
Shifts in Bordeaux retailing ( [TN] Five Cal Cabs ...)
"Mark Lipton" > wrote in message ... > Well, Tom, I readily confess to little firsthand knowledge of the vintage, but > I'd offer that in comparison to the years '68-'69 and '73-'74, '70 was indeed > weaker (please note that this is a relative comparison only). To me, those > other years define the most successful vintages of the 1965-1980 period. Do > you think that '70 is on a par with those other years, Tom? In my experience, 1968 was the best of those - closely followed by 1970. We won't discuss 1971 or 1972 (they mostly sucked!), but the remainder should probably be ranked 1969, 1974 and 1973 - or possibly 1974, 1969 and 1973 - in that order. At the time, there was a lot of fanfare re the 1974s, but IMO they didn't come close to measuring up to the 1970s. As an addendum, I'd like to mention that some of the drought year wines (1976 and 1977) were both exceptional and reasonably priced. The 1976 BV GdL was one of the best Cabs of the decade for them - only overshadowed by their 1970. 1978 and 1979 were decent vintages, but not on par with 1974. 1975 was nearly as poor as 1972. > > Having tasted all the 1970 first growth Bordeaux, I am quite confident that > > the 6th place Heitz "Martha's Vineyard" (which I've tasted recently) would > > stomp all _over_ them today. > > Even the '70 Latour? It's quite an outstanding wine. Yep, even the Latour. Have you ever tasted the Heitz? The 1970 was stunning. As good as it was, however, the 1968 Martha's Vineyard remains the best red wine I've _ever_ tasted. It nearly _killed_ me to spend $40/btl for it in ~1976, but in retrospect I wish I'd bought _cases_! Tom S |
Vintages (was Wines of character vs high tech wines)
"Dale Williams" > wrote in message ... > Mike & Tom, > Boy, I'm not sure I want to get between you two. But I do feel I'm somewhere in > the middle (opinion-wise) here. > > I think it's unrealistic to think that people should just buy wines even in > "difficult" vintages to either support the producer or experience the vintage. > I think better producers tend to do (comparatively) well even in "poor" > vintages. I buy the Lafarges, Chevillons, etc every year- but I buy more in '99 > than '94. I tend to spend more for wines I can cellar, so vintages like '93 & > '97 in Bordeaux have less appeal for me That's pretty much what I was saying, but you put it a bit more delicately. :^) > I don't think the use of technology in and of itself is an indicator of > quality, poor or high. There are plenty of traditionalists who make crappy > wines, along with the Bartolo Mascarellos of the world. And there are high tech > wineries that use those technologies to produce high quality wines that speak > of place. But far more who use them to produce featurless plonk, > indistingushable as to whether it's from Tuscany, Napa, Oz, or Chile. Dale, you did a better job of stating a point I was (clumsily) trying to make: The use of technology is not necessarily a warning that the resulting wine will be uninteresting; neither is a rustic approach any guarantee of quality. I want _my_ rustics to be well schooled in technology. Then they can make intelligent decisions about what is safe to ignore and what's important to pay attention to. Tom S |
Wines of character vs high tech wines (was Five Cal Cabs)
try Gabrielli Sangiovese Reserve or Gabrielli Pinot Noir for having both
charachter and built on high-tech principles of hygiene and uniformity of vat. go to http://www.gabrielli-winery.com for more info and they make excellent Syrahs as well. and of course Zinfandels to die for. (-->>BeTTeR LiVinG Thru BetteR LiVING !!<<----) GABRIELLI WINERY & VINEYARDS OF MENDOCINO For The BIGGEST BOLDEST & SASSIEST REDS: Zany & ZaFTiG ZINFANDELS +++ Sassy SYRIAHs +++ SEXY Sangiovese +++ Piquant PINOT NOIRs: http://www.gabrielli-winery.com http://community.webtv.net/rosaphilia/h2Rosaphilias ----------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter