I am a little confused about the word "Troken" as it pertains to the various
levels of German wine. I understand that it means "dry" in its simplest of
forms but can there be a "Wine X" and a different "Wine X"- that is troken?

More specifically, I recently picked up some Donnnhoff Riesling Spatlese
Schlossbockelheimer Felsenberg "Troken." Is this the same 95 point Donnnhoff
Riesling Spatlese Schlossbockelheimer reviewed by Pierre Rovani in TWA #151?

If it is a different wine, I assume it to be of lesser quality but am not sure
why it may be so; and if it is the same wine, is it common for some retailers
to use the word "troken" and others to just omit it all together? ...Very
confusing.

Any help would be apprecieted.

Thanks,
Jason

The only certain way to know if two German wines are identical is if
they have the same A.P. number which is required by German law(at least
for any grade of wine worth importing). Many top German growers make
several batches of Auslese, for example, and each has a different A.P.
number. The label design or caplsule design may or may not be different
for the different batches. However it is illegal to use quality words
such as the German words for "fine" or "finest" to distinguish the
quality of the different batches, since this was abused in the past. One
can add "halb-trocken" if the sugar content is below a certain amount,
and "trocken" if the sugar content is extremely low. A halb-trocken wine
from many regions will taste quite dry, and a trocken wine usually will
be extremely dry - often too dry for many tastes unless you are dealing
with a late harvest wine - Sp=E4tlese or above - from a top grower in a
very good year. I always give the A.P. number on my tasting notes of
better German wines. because the same wine from another batch with a
different A.P. number may taste different. Also Austria has quite strict
laws for labeling that are much like the German ones in many respects,
and perhaps even more strict than the German laws in a few respects.

My mailbox is always full to avoid spam. To contact me, erase
from my email address. Then add . I do not
check this box every day, so post if you need a quick response.

The only certain way to know if two German wines are identical is if
they have the same A.P. number which is required by German law(at least
for any grade of wine worth importing). Many top German growers make
several batches of Auslese, for example, and each has a different A.P.
number. The label design or caplsule design may or may not be different
for the different batches. However it is illegal to use quality words
such as the German words for "fine" or "finest" to distinguish the
quality of the different batches, since this was abused in the past. One
can add "halb-trocken" if the sugar content is below a certain amount,
and "trocken" if the sugar content is extremely low. A halb-trocken wine
from many regions will taste quite dry, and a trocken wine usually will
be extremely dry - often too dry for many tastes unless you are dealing
with a late harvest wine - Sp=E4tlese or above - from a top grower in a
very good year. I always give the A.P. number on my tasting notes of
better German wines. because the same wine from another batch with a
different A.P. number may taste different. Also Austria has quite strict
laws for labeling that are much like the German ones in many respects,
and perhaps even more strict than the German laws in a few respects.

My mailbox is always full to avoid spam. To contact me, erase
from my email address. Then add . I do not
check this box every day, so post if you need a quick response.

On 31 Oct 2004 00:53:12 GMT, (Jaybert41) wrote:

In addition to what Cwdjrx said, all good advice, I would add...

>I am a little confused about the word "Troken" as it pertains to the various
>levels of German wine. I understand that it means "dry" in its simplest of
>forms but can there be a "Wine X" and a different "Wine X"- that is troken?

In general, yes. Don't know about this specific wine.

>More specifically, I recently picked up some Donnnhoff Riesling Spatlese
>Schlossbockelheimer Felsenberg "Troken." Is this the same 95 point Donnnhoff
>Riesling Spatlese Schlossbockelheimer reviewed by Pierre Rovani in TWA #151?

I would guess not, but you never know. Maybe the "trocken" got
forgotten. As the non-trocken one would be quite sweet, you should be
able to tell from the tasting note.

>If it is a different wine, I assume it to be of lesser quality but am not sure
>why it may be so;

I would assume the quality is pretty much the quality - it is made to
the standards of the same producer, and comes frmo the same vineyard.
Whether it is actually the case, and whether it is to your taste is
another matter.

You didn't mention the vintage BTW. That is also important in
defining whether it is the same wine or not. Some vintages vary a
lot, and an old wine will taste very different from a young one.

>and if it is the same wine, is it common for some retailers
>to use the word "troken" and others to just omit it all together? ...Very
>confusing.

Typically they will state "trocken" if is it. They certainly should,
as it has a huge impact on what you are buying. If you order one from
a list without "trocken" and you get a trocken wine, you have a good
case for getting your money back.

Incidently, similar problems occur with many other wines. For example
some producers in France (Beaujolais certainly) offer an "ordinary"
cuvee and a "veilles vignes" version, and I suspect the "veilles
vignes" bit often gets lost from tasting notes and wine lists. A
restaurant local to me offers a very reasonable Ch Margaux,
"forgetting" to state that it is their 2nd label.




--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

On 31 Oct 2004 00:53:12 GMT, (Jaybert41) wrote:

In addition to what Cwdjrx said, all good advice, I would add...

>I am a little confused about the word "Troken" as it pertains to the various
>levels of German wine. I understand that it means "dry" in its simplest of
>forms but can there be a "Wine X" and a different "Wine X"- that is troken?

In general, yes. Don't know about this specific wine.

>More specifically, I recently picked up some Donnnhoff Riesling Spatlese
>Schlossbockelheimer Felsenberg "Troken." Is this the same 95 point Donnnhoff
>Riesling Spatlese Schlossbockelheimer reviewed by Pierre Rovani in TWA #151?

I would guess not, but you never know. Maybe the "trocken" got
forgotten. As the non-trocken one would be quite sweet, you should be
able to tell from the tasting note.

>If it is a different wine, I assume it to be of lesser quality but am not sure
>why it may be so;

I would assume the quality is pretty much the quality - it is made to
the standards of the same producer, and comes frmo the same vineyard.
Whether it is actually the case, and whether it is to your taste is
another matter.

You didn't mention the vintage BTW. That is also important in
defining whether it is the same wine or not. Some vintages vary a
lot, and an old wine will taste very different from a young one.

>and if it is the same wine, is it common for some retailers
>to use the word "troken" and others to just omit it all together? ...Very
>confusing.

Typically they will state "trocken" if is it. They certainly should,
as it has a huge impact on what you are buying. If you order one from
a list without "trocken" and you get a trocken wine, you have a good
case for getting your money back.

Incidently, similar problems occur with many other wines. For example
some producers in France (Beaujolais certainly) offer an "ordinary"
cuvee and a "veilles vignes" version, and I suspect the "veilles
vignes" bit often gets lost from tasting notes and wine lists. A
restaurant local to me offers a very reasonable Ch Margaux,
"forgetting" to state that it is their 2nd label.




--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

(Cwdjrx _) wrote:

> One can add "halb-trocken" if the sugar content is below a
> certain amount, and "trocken" if the sugar content is extremely
> low. A halb-trocken wine from many regions will taste quite dry,
> and a trocken wine usually will be extremely dry - often too dry
> for many tastes unless you are dealing with a late harvest wine
> - Spätlese or above - from a top grower in a very good year. I
> always give the A.P. number on my tasting notes of better German
> wines. because the same wine from another batch with a different
> A.P. number may taste different.

There are exact figures by EU wine law. In principle, "trocken" is
0 to 4 grams per litre (= 0.4%) of residual sugar, "halbtrocken"
is 4 to 12 (0.4 to 1.2% RS). But there are exceptions that apply
almost inevitably. "Trocken" can stretch up to 9 g/l, provided the
acidity is not more than 0.2 g/l lower than RS - which is
absolutely no problem with riesling in Germany (and Austria).

"Halbtrocken", otoh, does have an exception only in Germany, as it
can stretch up to 18 g/l of RS (which definitely makes it rather
sweetish - at least to my palate), again with an acidity content
rule I am not aware of (since this exception does not apply to
Austrian wines).

> Also Austria has quite strict laws for labeling that are much
> like the German ones in many respects, and perhaps even more
> strict than the German laws in a few respects.

The main difference is that Austrian wine by law has to carry an
indication of sweetness on the label: trocken, halbtrocken,
lieblich, or süß/süss.

With German wines in theory it's more difficult, but easy in
practice: If the wines match the "trocken" or "halbtrocken"
bandwidth, they invariably carry this designation on the label. If
one does not find anything, they are sweet(ish).

M.

(Cwdjrx _) wrote:

> One can add "halb-trocken" if the sugar content is below a
> certain amount, and "trocken" if the sugar content is extremely
> low. A halb-trocken wine from many regions will taste quite dry,
> and a trocken wine usually will be extremely dry - often too dry
> for many tastes unless you are dealing with a late harvest wine
> - Spätlese or above - from a top grower in a very good year. I
> always give the A.P. number on my tasting notes of better German
> wines. because the same wine from another batch with a different
> A.P. number may taste different.

There are exact figures by EU wine law. In principle, "trocken" is
0 to 4 grams per litre (= 0.4%) of residual sugar, "halbtrocken"
is 4 to 12 (0.4 to 1.2% RS). But there are exceptions that apply
almost inevitably. "Trocken" can stretch up to 9 g/l, provided the
acidity is not more than 0.2 g/l lower than RS - which is
absolutely no problem with riesling in Germany (and Austria).

"Halbtrocken", otoh, does have an exception only in Germany, as it
can stretch up to 18 g/l of RS (which definitely makes it rather
sweetish - at least to my palate), again with an acidity content
rule I am not aware of (since this exception does not apply to
Austrian wines).

> Also Austria has quite strict laws for labeling that are much
> like the German ones in many respects, and perhaps even more
> strict than the German laws in a few respects.

The main difference is that Austrian wine by law has to carry an
indication of sweetness on the label: trocken, halbtrocken,
lieblich, or süß/süss.

With German wines in theory it's more difficult, but easy in
practice: If the wines match the "trocken" or "halbtrocken"
bandwidth, they invariably carry this designation on the label. If
one does not find anything, they are sweet(ish).

M.

Michael Pronay states: ' "Trocken" can stretch up to 9 g/l, provided the
acidity is not more than 0.2 g/l lower than RS - which is absolutely no
problem with riesling in Germany (and Austria).'

It is quite true that there seldom is a problem with acidity for
Riesling grown in Germany and most other cooler regions where Riesling
grows well. The one possible exception I suspect might have been 1976 in
a few of the warmer areas of Germany. In this very hot year, many of the
non-Riesling wines did lack acid. Even some Rieslings, mostly from
lesser southern regions, lacked acid to the taste, although I have not
seen a chemical analysis for these. Trocken wines were seldom seen in
the US in the 70s, and I have never seen a 76 German Trocken. Many of
the best estates in Germany made nearly nothing other than Sp=E4tlese
and above in 1976, and even some of the Sp=E4tlesen could pass for
Auslesen on taste. In fact some of these probably could have met the
technical requirements for Auslese. But one can not depend on taste
alone. A high sugar content along with very intense tropical fruit
tastes in many 76 Rieslings could make them taste as if they have less
acid than is actually the case.

My mailbox is always full to avoid spam. To contact me, erase
from my email address. Then add . I do not
check this box every day, so post if you need a quick response.

Michael Pronay states: ' "Trocken" can stretch up to 9 g/l, provided the
acidity is not more than 0.2 g/l lower than RS - which is absolutely no
problem with riesling in Germany (and Austria).'

It is quite true that there seldom is a problem with acidity for
Riesling grown in Germany and most other cooler regions where Riesling
grows well. The one possible exception I suspect might have been 1976 in
a few of the warmer areas of Germany. In this very hot year, many of the
non-Riesling wines did lack acid. Even some Rieslings, mostly from
lesser southern regions, lacked acid to the taste, although I have not
seen a chemical analysis for these. Trocken wines were seldom seen in
the US in the 70s, and I have never seen a 76 German Trocken. Many of
the best estates in Germany made nearly nothing other than Sp=E4tlese
and above in 1976, and even some of the Sp=E4tlesen could pass for
Auslesen on taste. In fact some of these probably could have met the
technical requirements for Auslese. But one can not depend on taste
alone. A high sugar content along with very intense tropical fruit
tastes in many 76 Rieslings could make them taste as if they have less
acid than is actually the case.

My mailbox is always full to avoid spam. To contact me, erase
from my email address. Then add . I do not
check this box every day, so post if you need a quick response.

A while back I found a Weingut Ernst Clusserath Trittenheimer Altarchen
Kabinett '98 at a local shop, at $5 US it was a deal so I went to find
more- I found an opened but unstocked case and checked the label, same
producer vintage vineyard and pradikat level so I bought it. As I was
putting it up I happened to notice the word "halbtrocken" at the labels
bottom. The alcohol level was 1% higher, but that was all it took to
make it too tart for me. I gave the case away to others. I went back to
the shop a few months ago and they had more of the reg kab marked down
to $2 so I got two cases this time.

A while back I found a Weingut Ernst Clusserath Trittenheimer Altarchen
Kabinett '98 at a local shop, at $5 US it was a deal so I went to find
more- I found an opened but unstocked case and checked the label, same
producer vintage vineyard and pradikat level so I bought it. As I was
putting it up I happened to notice the word "halbtrocken" at the labels
bottom. The alcohol level was 1% higher, but that was all it took to
make it too tart for me. I gave the case away to others. I went back to
the shop a few months ago and they had more of the reg kab marked down
to $2 so I got two cases this time.

"kenneth mccoy" > skrev i melding
...
>A while back I found a Weingut Ernst Clusserath Trittenheimer Altarchen
> Kabinett '98 at a local shop, at $5 US it was a deal so I went to find
> more- I found an opened but unstocked case and checked the label, same
> producer vintage vineyard and pradikat level so I bought it. As I was
> putting it up I happened to notice the word "halbtrocken" at the labels
> bottom. The alcohol level was 1% higher, but that was all it took to
> make it too tart for me. I gave the case away to others. I went back to
> the shop a few months ago and they had more of the reg kab marked down
> to $2 so I got two cases this time.
>
An amazing price, considering that this is a ranking winery in Trittenheim.
The '99 Halbtrocken Kabinett at 10.5% was 5Euro at the winery... (the sweet
one at 9%abv was 5Euro too but better reviewed, a very good buy, I'd say).
Your '98 may have been much the same.
Anders

Jason,

I agree with the others. But one thing that I wnted to point out was the
(unwarranted) fear in your initial post that a trocken is neccessarily of lower
quality than a non-designated wine. If anything, in the particular case of the
Dönhoff, it's my vague sense that the trocken versions tend to sell for a
dollar or two more. Now, what floats your boat is a different matter.
Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

Jason,

I agree with the others. But one thing that I wnted to point out was the
(unwarranted) fear in your initial post that a trocken is neccessarily of lower
quality than a non-designated wine. If anything, in the particular case of the
Dönhoff, it's my vague sense that the trocken versions tend to sell for a
dollar or two more. Now, what floats your boat is a different matter.
Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

It makes a little bit more sense now with the help found here, but I cannot
help but be a little apprehensive about whether or not the Donnhoff
Schlossbockelheimer Felsenberg Riesling Spatlese Trocken is the same (minus the
Troken) as the 2002 of the same name mentioned in TWA with such high praise.
I picked some 2001 up for $18 a bottle and seems to be remarkably cheap for a
Donnhoff wine from the 2001 vintage, which is what sparked this whole
curiosity.

Thanks for the input everyone.

>I agree with the others. But one thing that I wnted to point out was the
>(unwarranted) fear in your initial post that a trocken is neccessarily of
>lower
>quality than a non-designated wine. If anything, in the particular case of
>the
>Dönhoff, it's my vague sense that the trocken versions tend to sell for a
>dollar or two more. Now, what floats your boat is a different matter.
>Dale

It makes a little bit more sense now with the help found here, but I cannot
help but be a little apprehensive about whether or not the Donnhoff
Schlossbockelheimer Felsenberg Riesling Spatlese Trocken is the same (minus the
Troken) as the 2002 of the same name mentioned in TWA with such high praise.
I picked some 2001 up for $18 a bottle and seems to be remarkably cheap for a
Donnhoff wine from the 2001 vintage, which is what sparked this whole
curiosity.

Thanks for the input everyone.

>I agree with the others. But one thing that I wnted to point out was the
>(unwarranted) fear in your initial post that a trocken is neccessarily of
>lower
>quality than a non-designated wine. If anything, in the particular case of
>the
>Dönhoff, it's my vague sense that the trocken versions tend to sell for a
>dollar or two more. Now, what floats your boat is a different matter.
>Dale

> little apprehensive about whether or not the Donnhoff
>Schlossbockelheimer Felsenberg Riesling Spatlese Trocken is the same (minus
>the
>Troken) as the 2002 of the same name mentioned in TWA with such high praise.
>

Jason,

Donnhoff DEFINITELY makes both trocken and regular bottlings from the same
vineyard (I have the 2002 Oberhäuser Leistenberg Kabinett in both trocken and
sweeter version), and I doubt Rovani is careless enough to not note if he was
speaking of the trocken. So if TWA doesn't say trocken, I'm pretty damn sure
it's a different wine.
Now, as to whether that's something to get disappointed about, it's a matter of
taste. Donnhoff makes pretty serious wines, at all levels and in both trocken
and non-trocken versions. The quality should be at the same level, just a
different style.







Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

PS Actually, if it's 2002 you have, Zachy's has both the trocken and regular
versions at same price, $37.99.
Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

PS Actually, if it's 2002 you have, Zachy's has both the trocken and regular
versions at same price, $37.99.
Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

PS Actually, if it's 2002 you have, Zachy's has both the trocken and regular
versions at same price, $37.99.
Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

"Dale Williams" > skrev i melding
...
>> little apprehensive about whether or not the Donnhoff
>>Schlossbockelheimer Felsenberg Riesling Spatlese Trocken is the same
>>(minus
>>the
>>Troken) as the 2002 of the same name mentioned in TWA with such high
>>praise.
>>
>
Hi
Of course it is not. Trocken means dry. If the label doesn't say anything,
then the wine is sweet.
Now, here is the tasting note for the dry one from wein-plus:
Cool, intensively mineral bouquet with hints of peaches and some wax. Dense
and juicy in the mouth, still somewhat closed, very ripe, perfectly
integrated acid, on palate, complex and deepfounded minerality, austere,
great reticence (hey, Michael P - is that correct for 'Nachhaltigkeit'?) and
length. Knocks you down without having to use excessive force (whew -
attempted to translate this 'Schlägt einen ganz in seinen Bann, ohne dabei
auch nur im geringsten laut werden zu müssen' - help, Michael!)
90 points - 'outstanding'.
drink till 2007.

hth
Anders

"Dale Williams" > skrev i melding
...
>> little apprehensive about whether or not the Donnhoff
>>Schlossbockelheimer Felsenberg Riesling Spatlese Trocken is the same
>>(minus
>>the
>>Troken) as the 2002 of the same name mentioned in TWA with such high
>>praise.
>>
>
Hi
Of course it is not. Trocken means dry. If the label doesn't say anything,
then the wine is sweet.
Now, here is the tasting note for the dry one from wein-plus:
Cool, intensively mineral bouquet with hints of peaches and some wax. Dense
and juicy in the mouth, still somewhat closed, very ripe, perfectly
integrated acid, on palate, complex and deepfounded minerality, austere,
great reticence (hey, Michael P - is that correct for 'Nachhaltigkeit'?) and
length. Knocks you down without having to use excessive force (whew -
attempted to translate this 'Schlägt einen ganz in seinen Bann, ohne dabei
auch nur im geringsten laut werden zu müssen' - help, Michael!)
90 points - 'outstanding'.
drink till 2007.

hth
Anders

So within the ripeness levels of Kabinett, Spatlese, Auslese, etc, there can be
distinctions such as Troken and Halbtroken? Is it a futher specification of
how sweet the finished wine is regardless of where it falls on the ripeness
scale that gives it its pradkit name?

"Anders Tørneskog" > wrote:

> great reticence (hey, Michael P - is that correct for
> 'Nachhaltigkeit'?)

Probably yes.

> and length. Knocks you down without having to use excessive
> force (whew - attempted to translate this 'Schlägt einen ganz in
> seinen Bann, ohne dabei auch nur im geringsten laut werden zu
> müssen' - help, Michael!)

Excellent translation. Literally it would be something like
"fascinates without needing to be loud".

M.

"Anders Tørneskog" > wrote:

> great reticence (hey, Michael P - is that correct for
> 'Nachhaltigkeit'?)

Probably yes.

> and length. Knocks you down without having to use excessive
> force (whew - attempted to translate this 'Schlägt einen ganz in
> seinen Bann, ohne dabei auch nur im geringsten laut werden zu
> müssen' - help, Michael!)

Excellent translation. Literally it would be something like
"fascinates without needing to be loud".

M.

(Jaybert41) wrote:

> So within the ripeness levels of Kabinett, Spatlese, Auslese,
> etc, there can be distinctions such as Troken and Halbtroken?
> Is it a futher specification of how sweet the finished wine is
> regardless of where it falls on the ripeness scale that gives it
> its pradkit name?

Not a "further" but "the" specification. In Germany, "trocken"
means 0 to 9 g/l of residual sugar, "halbtrocken" 9 to 18 g/l in
the finished wine. This logically has nothing to do with the
pre-fermentation sugar content of the must.

M.

In Germany the grapes the quality level is based on the amount of sugar at
the time of harvest. QMP wines the highest level ,can have various degrees
of sugar. The winemaker can determine if he or she wants to make them
Trocken or Halb - Trocken by reducing the amount of residual sugar in the
wine. Reducing sugar levels raises the alcohol content of the wine.

"Michael Pronay" > wrote in message
...
> (Jaybert41) wrote:
>
>> So within the ripeness levels of Kabinett, Spatlese, Auslese,
>> etc, there can be distinctions such as Troken and Halbtroken?
>> Is it a futher specification of how sweet the finished wine is
>> regardless of where it falls on the ripeness scale that gives it
>> its pradkit name?
>
> Not a "further" but "the" specification. In Germany, "trocken"
> means 0 to 9 g/l of residual sugar, "halbtrocken" 9 to 18 g/l in
> the finished wine. This logically has nothing to do with the
> pre-fermentation sugar content of the must.
>
> M.

In Germany the grapes the quality level is based on the amount of sugar at
the time of harvest. QMP wines the highest level ,can have various degrees
of sugar. The winemaker can determine if he or she wants to make them
Trocken or Halb - Trocken by reducing the amount of residual sugar in the
wine. Reducing sugar levels raises the alcohol content of the wine.

"Michael Pronay" > wrote in message
...
> (Jaybert41) wrote:
>
>> So within the ripeness levels of Kabinett, Spatlese, Auslese,
>> etc, there can be distinctions such as Troken and Halbtroken?
>> Is it a futher specification of how sweet the finished wine is
>> regardless of where it falls on the ripeness scale that gives it
>> its pradkit name?
>
> Not a "further" but "the" specification. In Germany, "trocken"
> means 0 to 9 g/l of residual sugar, "halbtrocken" 9 to 18 g/l in
> the finished wine. This logically has nothing to do with the
> pre-fermentation sugar content of the must.
>
> M.

"sibeer" > wrote:

> In Germany the grapes the quality level is based on the amount
> of sugar at the time of harvest. QMP wines the highest level can
> have various degrees of sugar.

And, to complicate things further more, the Prädikat levels do not
have brackets of sugar content, but only minimum levels.

So yesterday evening (quite a memorable dinner here in Vienna
featuring Alois Kracher, Egon Müller, Istvan Szepsy und Alexandre
de Lur Saluces) we started with a 2003 Scharzhofberger Kabinett
with 10% alcohol and 30 g/l sugar - legally that would entitle the
wine to Auslese.

M.

Michael Pronay wrote:

> So yesterday evening (quite a memorable dinner here in Vienna
> featuring Alois Kracher, Egon Müller, Istvan Szepsy und Alexandre
> de Lur Saluces) we started with a 2003 Scharzhofberger Kabinett
> with 10% alcohol and 30 g/l sugar - legally that would entitle the
> wine to Auslese.

That is quite the "all-star" lineup of sweet wine producers. Did the
dinner attempt to match the entire menu with these wines a la the Sapros
dinner from a year or two ago?

Mark Lipton

Mark Lipton > wrote:

>> So yesterday evening (quite a memorable dinner here in Vienna
>> featuring Alois Kracher, Egon Müller, Istvan Szepsy und
>> Alexandre de Lur Saluces) we started with a 2003
>> Scharzhofberger Kabinett with 10% alcohol and 30 g/l sugar -
>> legally that would entitle the wine to Auslese.

> That is quite the "all-star" lineup of sweet wine producers.
> Did the dinner attempt to match the entire menu with these wines
> a la the Sapros dinner from a year or two ago?

Yeah.

With a gelee from crayfish on salsifis we had the Kabinett (very
fine, but at least 10 years too young) and the 1999 Auslese (8%bv,
exceptional, a memorable wine).

Next came roasted porc jowls in curry-fennel stock with almonds
(heaven, especially the stock!) with Szepsy's 2000 Tokaji Királyudvar
Cuvée Ilona (11.5%bv, from furmint and hárslevelü, somewhat
nondescript on nose, but better on palate) and 1999 Tokaji Aszú 6
puttonyos (9.5%bv, perfect, fine caramell, controlled oxodation,
Tokaj at its best).

Suprème of partrige with foie gras raviolo on a ragoût of apples,
grappes and sweet chestnut (not bad, but the fois was rather on the
salty side): Yquem 1998 (in mags; light in colour, but really elegant
albeit youthful onpalat) and 1989 (quite develpped, fine caramel).

Quince pancakes with an icecream of wine zabaione saw two Kracher
Zwischen den Seen wines (fermented in stainless steel, no wood): 2002
Scheurebe No 5 (absolutely phantastic) and 1999 Welschriesling No 8
(very good, but quite evolved). I asked Alois at what temperature he
keeps the wines: 15C – well I guess I am a fan of cooler storage (and
I'm happy to have a passive cellar at 10C year round.

After most guest had left, the hard core remainders finished off with
a magnum of Pol Roger white foil. Yumm!

My WOTN: 1999 Scharzhofberger Auslese, followed by Kracher's 2002
Scheurebe No 5.

M.

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 16:36:40 -0500, Mark Lipton >
wrote:

>Michael Pronay wrote:
>
>> So yesterday evening (quite a memorable dinner here in Vienna
>> featuring Alois Kracher, Egon Müller, Istvan Szepsy und Alexandre
>> de Lur Saluces) we started with a 2003 Scharzhofberger Kabinett
>> with 10% alcohol and 30 g/l sugar - legally that would entitle the
>> wine to Auslese.
>
>That is quite the "all-star" lineup of sweet wine producers. Did the
>dinner attempt to match the entire menu with these wines a la the Sapros
>dinner from a year or two ago?

We had the same lineup last week, except we chose the head of the
Ruster Ausbruch Circle for Austria.... and we added Switzerland. See
article below, try to guess which one is me in the pix ;-)

http://www.slowfood.fr/france/00001929fr.html

Same chef as Sapros from two years ago...

I came up with this combination a year ago, and after advertising it
very widely starting in march (through Slow Food) I am glad to see the
concept has been "adopted" first by a Hungarian importer in London a
few weeks ago, and now in Vienna. ;-))))

We had en 89 Auslese from Scharzhofberg that was stunning, did not
taste sweet despite 150 g/l of sugar. A marvel of balance. Tokaji from
Szepsy was also stupendous. Yquem 88 was well matched, Wenzel too, the
Valais wine from Chappaz had the misfortune of being picked for
dessert, but despite such a hard match it went very well. There was
not enough Petite Arvice left in the cellar, so we had to make do with
an excellent Marsanne.

Mike

Mike Tommasi, Six Fours, France
email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail