In article >, ianhoare@angelfire.
com says...
>
>Salut/Hi Jeff,

[SNIP]
>
>>> to the smell or the taste we get on a wine. Buttery is one such. If you've
>>> ever had a "buttery" chardonnay, you'll say AHA!!! I SEE what they mean,
>>> even if it doesn't really taste or smell like butter.
>>
>>Well, I was at a wine tasting once and had a chardonnay (can't remember what
>>it was, but it was from California and unoaked), and it did have a buttery
>>taste.
>
>Now it's interesting that you should say that, because most people say that
>it's the oaked California Chardonnay's that show that characteristic, and if
>you ask him, Mark Lipton will probably be able to tell you what the chemical
>is that gives that flavour. However, if you found it in an unoaked
>chardonnay, then that's where you foind it. I'm certainly not about to tell
>you that you're wrong. :-)
[SNIP]
>--
>All the Best
>Ian Hoare
>http://www.souvigne.com
>mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Ian/Jeff,

The "buttery" smell is from diacetyl, (or biacetyl) formed durning malolactic
(or secondary) fermentation. It can be found in oaked, as well as, un-oaked
wines. Chardonnay exhibits it very well, if the secondary fermentation has
been allowed, or encouraged. Now Mark can give us the complete equation for
its formation, and I hope that he will. To Mark, how is diacetyl formed for
use as flavoring in "butter-like" products? Obviously via a chemical
interaction without wine.

Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

Hunt wrote:

> Ian/Jeff,
>
> The "buttery" smell is from diacetyl, (or biacetyl) formed durning malolactic
> (or secondary) fermentation. It can be found in oaked, as well as, un-oaked
> wines. Chardonnay exhibits it very well, if the secondary fermentation has
> been allowed, or encouraged. Now Mark can give us the complete equation for
> its formation, and I hope that he will. To Mark, how is diacetyl formed for
> use as flavoring in "butter-like" products? Obviously via a chemical
> interaction without wine.

Heh, check the post that hit *just* before yours, Hunt ;-) You *want*
the chemistry, you masochist? Here goes:

HO2C-CH(OH)-CH2-CO2H -> HO2C-CH(OH)-CH3 + CO2
malic acid lactic acid carbon dioxide

above is the normal respiration of the bacteria responsible for ML

diacetyl: CH3-C(O)-C(O)-CH3

How it forms is likely a side-reaction to the actual chemisty. The bugs
convert malic to lactic acid by first oxidizing malic to oxaloacetic
acid: HO2C-C(O)-CH2-CO2H, which spontaneously loses CO2 to form pyruvic
acid: HO2C-C(O)-CH3, which then gets reduced to lactic acid. These sort
of enzymes are known in the biz as oxidoreductases (go figger!). Now,
the pyruvate intermediate can react with acetaldehyde in the
fermentation to produce acetolactic acid, which is then metabolized to
diacetyl and carbon dioxide. *whew*

After all that, I'm heading home for a glass of Port :-)

Mark Lipton

In article >, says
....
>
>Hunt wrote:
>
>> Ian/Jeff,
>>
>> The "buttery" smell is from diacetyl, (or biacetyl) formed durning
malolactic
>> (or secondary) fermentation. It can be found in oaked, as well as, un-oaked
>> wines. Chardonnay exhibits it very well, if the secondary fermentation has
>> been allowed, or encouraged. Now Mark can give us the complete equation for
>> its formation, and I hope that he will. To Mark, how is diacetyl formed for
>> use as flavoring in "butter-like" products? Obviously via a chemical
>> interaction without wine.
>
>Heh, check the post that hit *just* before yours, Hunt ;-) You *want*
>the chemistry, you masochist? Here goes:
>
>HO2C-CH(OH)-CH2-CO2H -> HO2C-CH(OH)-CH3 + CO2
>malic acid lactic acid carbon dioxide
>
>above is the normal respiration of the bacteria responsible for ML
>
>diacetyl: CH3-C(O)-C(O)-CH3
>
>How it forms is likely a side-reaction to the actual chemisty. The bugs
>convert malic to lactic acid by first oxidizing malic to oxaloacetic
>acid: HO2C-C(O)-CH2-CO2H, which spontaneously loses CO2 to form pyruvic
>acid: HO2C-C(O)-CH3, which then gets reduced to lactic acid. These sort
>of enzymes are known in the biz as oxidoreductases (go figger!). Now,
>the pyruvate intermediate can react with acetaldehyde in the
>fermentation to produce acetolactic acid, which is then metabolized to
>diacetyl and carbon dioxide. *whew*
>
>After all that, I'm heading home for a glass of Port :-)
>
>Mark Lipton

I KNEW that you could do it! Now go and have your Port. It's still a bit early
in the SW, so I'll settle for another glass of the Talbott Chard, then move on
to something serious.

Thanks,
Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
...
> Salut/Hi Jeff,
>
> I'm so glad you didn't do what you might have done after the stupid
> reception you got - disappear from this NG.
>
> le/on Wed, 29 Mar 2006 22:09:10 -0500, tu disais/you said:-
>
>>Well, I'm not one to judge immediately...but, given a few times, that's a
>>different story. Maybe Mr. Committee is having a bad evening.
>
> Well, he knows a bit about Italian wines, but nevertheless his views about
> so many other aspects surrounding wine are SO extreme that one can't trust
> him on anything.

He has his opinions, just like any one else...If I decide I need to ignore
him I will. Otherwise, I'll read what he has to say...

As for his stance on Italian wines...the few I've had have probably been
commercial, mass produced junk, so I don't really know. Same with German
wines. I just really don't know. Shame I wasn't into drinking wine when I
was in my late 20s, because I spent a few months in Luxembourg, and we had
quite a few decent wines while dining, but it never occured to me to
actually look at the bottle. I did find the whites there pretty sweet,
though, which I wasn't too fond of. I was primarily a beer drinker back
then, and yes, it was good!


> If you want peace and quiet, put him in your kill file.

Peace and quite on Usenet...pretty funny. :-)

>>
>>Well, I was at a wine tasting once and had a chardonnay (can't remember
>>what
>>it was, but it was from California and unoaked), and it did have a buttery
>>taste.
>
> Now it's interesting that you should say that, because most people say
> that
> it's the oaked California Chardonnay's that show that characteristic, and
> if
> you ask him,

The guy doing the tasting said that there was a lot less oak used in this
one then most chardonnays these days. He didn't say there was no oak at all
(my mistake). But it definately had a smoother texture and less "bite" as
the chardonnays I'm used to. And there was a buttery taste. That may, of
course, just have been because it was *better* than the stuff I normally
drink.

I liked it, and since then have tried two other "unoaked" chardonnays, or
rather, one the says "unoaked" on the label Brampton (sp?) from SA, and
another one which was light on the oak from France. Can't remember that
one, but the person at the store told me it was the one they had that had
the least oak in it...Durn...can't remember. I don't mean to say that I
don't like the bitey/oaky taste, it's just nice to have something different
once in a while. Lately, though, I have been drinking reds exclusively,
since my wife likes them better, and I don't really care that much.

> Well, I find myself in some difficulty here. I don't want to contradict
> Steve here, but I find for example that the taste of a Pinot Noir based
> wine

I'm a little leary of a) getting something crappy, and b) looking like some
dolt. The popularity of Pinot Noirs now, because of that movie, makes me
not want to jump on the "bandwagon". However, at that same tasting I was
at, the guy did bring a Pinot Noir...Acacia, I believe, and it was pretty
good, but I liked the Goat-Rotie and the Zin he brought much better. Maybe
I should try some more.

In addition to those, and the chardonnay that I can't recall, he brought a
prosecca?, an Italian champagne type thing, which I'm sure you guys are
familiar with....I was leary, because I was immediatly thinking
Asti-Spumante, and I can't stand sweet stuff, but it wasn't. I was
pleasantly surprised. I like my champagne as dry as it can be. Still have
the bottle in the fridge. Do I need to drink this stuff? It's been over a
year now...

> OK, the Pinot Noir is
> notorious for showing up the effect of terroir,

OK, wine "jargon" there.....what is "terroir"...Maybe I should do what I
always yell at my kids....YOU HAVE A DICTIONARY, LOOK IT UP!

> from two parcels of
> land only 100 yeards apart, and you can immediately taste the difference
> between them.

Would growers mess with soil? Or would that be too cost prohibitive? I
mean, to make any difference in an entire vintage of thousands and thousands
of bottles would be hard. How many grapes does it take to make a
bottle...500 or so? How many grapes come off the average vine? And I dont'
mean, mess with soil as in regular fertilizer or something, but really play
around with it...

>>>>I'm just afraid of wasting money...which I don't have a lot of...even
>>>>for one bottle...
>
> I don't think many of us are so wealthy that we can afford to waste a lot
> of
> money on a bottle. Some are much better off than others, but no one wants
> to
> buy bad value for money.

Well, I just stand there, looking at the racks and racks of wine, and figure
that some of them are crappy, some are good. How do I tell? I imagine it
would be pretty hard for me to pick at random and find something that is
REALLY terrible, but also the reverse applys...I do try to stay away from
anything that is filling 3/4 of the shelf, though (like Yellow Tail, Little
Penguin, Jacobs Creek, Lindemans, etc)...maybe that is a bad strategy too.

> By the way, when I was in Walla-Walla I tried the old Pillar Box Red and
> was
> very favourably impressed with it.

After reading this yesterday afternoon, I tried to find it again and could
not. My wife bought it, I'll have to ask her where she got it.

> Excellent vfm.

"Whoop-whoop"! Wine jargon alert...What's vfm?

> Don't be put off by sediment in a wine, by the way. It happens and it
> often
> shows a wine that has been treated less harshly than most large scale
> industrial wineries do.

I wasn't...it just caught me by surprise, that's all.

> And - don't be put off by the egregious UC. Even
> the USA has a few idiots living within its borders.

A few. Yes. We have our share of idiots.

Mark Lipton wrote:
>
> Sorry, Ian, but it's a common misconception that the oak imparts the
> buttery character, whereas in fact it's a byproduct of the malolactic
> fermentation that most Chandonnays are put through.

Yes, but the two are closely related in the style the wine maker is
looking for. In general, Chardonnay that is oaked is also put through
MLF and Chardonnay that is fermented in SS has the MLF suppressed, so
butter and toast tend to go together.

Andy

Got to love this group :-).

Mark Lipton wrote:

> Hunt wrote:
>
>
>>Ian/Jeff,
>>
>>The "buttery" smell is from diacetyl, (or biacetyl) formed durning malolactic
>>(or secondary) fermentation. It can be found in oaked, as well as, un-oaked
>>wines. Chardonnay exhibits it very well, if the secondary fermentation has
>>been allowed, or encouraged. Now Mark can give us the complete equation for
>>its formation, and I hope that he will. To Mark, how is diacetyl formed for
>>use as flavoring in "butter-like" products? Obviously via a chemical
>>interaction without wine.
>
>
> Heh, check the post that hit *just* before yours, Hunt ;-) You *want*
> the chemistry, you masochist? Here goes:
>
> HO2C-CH(OH)-CH2-CO2H -> HO2C-CH(OH)-CH3 + CO2
> malic acid lactic acid carbon dioxide
>
> above is the normal respiration of the bacteria responsible for ML
>
> diacetyl: CH3-C(O)-C(O)-CH3
>
> How it forms is likely a side-reaction to the actual chemisty. The bugs
> convert malic to lactic acid by first oxidizing malic to oxaloacetic
> acid: HO2C-C(O)-CH2-CO2H, which spontaneously loses CO2 to form pyruvic
> acid: HO2C-C(O)-CH3, which then gets reduced to lactic acid. These sort
> of enzymes are known in the biz as oxidoreductases (go figger!). Now,
> the pyruvate intermediate can react with acetaldehyde in the
> fermentation to produce acetolactic acid, which is then metabolized to
> diacetyl and carbon dioxide. *whew*
>
> After all that, I'm heading home for a glass of Port :-)
>
> Mark Lipton

Mike Tommasi wrote:
> wrote:
> > Bi!! wrote:
> >
> >>When was the last time you were in a restaurant......1970? These
> >>restaurant wine mark-ups have been standard for years in most parts of
> >>the US and Europe.
> >
> >
> > I know that, but I think they are excessive.
>
> I agree with uranium here (did you try the cicuta yet?).
>
> If retail is 20, and wholesale is 12, I can accept a restaurant marking
> up x2 (24), but beyond that makes no sense. Most wines no longer
> require years of storage before being consumed, so if anything the
> cellar argument would be LESS pertinent today than 30 years ago.

If wholesale is $12, Ohio state minimum is $18. I would accept $24 at a
restaurant, but not $36.

A 'normale Chianti (Cecchi, for example) is not worth $36. It retails
for about $10.

http://www.alcoholreviews.com/WINES/...i-cecchi9.html

http://www.mountcarmelwines.com/sku9948.html


> In France there has been an interesting phenomenon. As tobacco and
> alcohol laws drastically reduce consumption of both (yes, finally, 70%
> of men in France no longer smoke!), restaurants that were used to
> selling their food cheap and basing their profit on the wine now find
> themselves in a very tight spot. This will hopefully bring back normal
> prices on both food and wine.

Si!

> A 'normale Chianti (Cecchi, for example) is not worth $36. It retails
> for about $10.

Ever look at the restaurant markup for Coke? I can get a liter bottle
of that paint remover for less than a dollar. A glass of mostly ice
with some soda costs $1.50 at most restaurants around here. That's a
markup in the thousands of percent.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
> > A 'normale Chianti (Cecchi, for example) is not worth $36. It retails
> > for about $10.
>
> Ever look at the restaurant markup for Coke? I can get a liter bottle
> of that paint remover for less than a dollar. A glass of mostly ice
> with some soda costs $1.50 at most restaurants around here. That's a
> markup in the thousands of percent.

Correct, but it's not the percentage per se that matters in the case of
wine. Paying $36 for a bottle of Cecche Chianti to go with 50 cents
worth of pasta is ridiculous..


>
> Jose
> --
> Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Mike Tommasi wrote:
> wrote:
> > Jose wrote:
> >
> >>>A 'normale Chianti (Cecchi, for example) is not worth $36. It retails
> >>>for about $10.
> >>
> >>Ever look at the restaurant markup for Coke? I can get a liter bottle
> >>of that paint remover for less than a dollar. A glass of mostly ice
> >>with some soda costs $1.50 at most restaurants around here. That's a
> >>markup in the thousands of percent.
> >
> >
> > Correct, but it's not the percentage per se that matters in the case of
> > wine. Paying $36 for a bottle of Cecche Chianti to go with 50 cents
> > worth of pasta is ridiculous..
>
>
> I am always amazd at how LOW prices for European wines can be in
> California. Recently found Pur Sang by Dagueneau cheaper at a
> restaurant in La Jolla than in stores here in France.

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

JEP62 wrote:

>> Sorry, Ian, but it's a common misconception that the oak imparts the
>> buttery character, whereas in fact it's a byproduct of the malolactic
>> fermentation that most Chandonnays are put through.
>
> Yes, but the two are closely related in the style the wine maker is
> looking for. In general, Chardonnay that is oaked is also put through
> MLF and Chardonnay that is fermented in SS has the MLF suppressed, so
> butter and toast tend to go together.

That depends on what wines you're drinking, Andy. In CA, you've got
wines like the Ch. Montelena Chardonnay that see little ML but still get
the oak treatment (which is also the norm in Chablis). And how about
those oaky CA sauvignon blancs? Sure, a few of them get full ML, but
the majority I've tried were (thankfully) spared that treatment. I've
also had a number of buttery viogniers with no appreciable oakiness
(though they were probably barrel aged in older oak). Still, your point
that the two often go together is beyond dispute.

Mark Lipton

In article >, jrich7970@hotmail.
com says...
>
>
>"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
.. .
>> Salut/Hi Jeff,

[SNIP]

>> le/on Wed, 29 Mar 2006 22:09:10 -0500, tu disais/you said:-

[SNIP]

>I'm a little leary of a) getting something crappy, and b) looking like some
>dolt. The popularity of Pinot Noirs now, because of that movie, makes me
>not want to jump on the "bandwagon". However, at that same tasting I was
>at, the guy did bring a Pinot Noir...Acacia, I believe, and it was pretty
>good, but I liked the Goat-Rotie and the Zin he brought much better. Maybe
>I should try some more.

I find the Acacia PN to be a good value, and a food-friendly wine. It also
does nicely with about a year in the cellar. The big fruit that is so "
forward" when released, calms down a bit, and all things come together nicely.
It's nice in its youth, but I find it better, all around, when it has a little
age. I doubt that it would "improve" much with even more time, but maybe I'll
find a missing bottle of an older vintage in a dark corner of the cellar and
let you know.
>
>In addition to those, and the chardonnay that I can't recall, he brought a
>prosecca?, an Italian champagne type thing, which I'm sure you guys are
>familiar with....I was leary, because I was immediatly thinking
>Asti-Spumante, and I can't stand sweet stuff, but it wasn't. I was
>pleasantly surprised. I like my champagne as dry as it can be. Still have
>the bottle in the fridge. Do I need to drink this stuff? It's been over a
>year now...
I've never kept any Prosecco for very long, usually treating it like a NV (
non-vintage) Champagne. I cannot comment on its longevity. Its style can range
from sweet to tart, though most that will be exported tend to go toward the
crisp, tart, side of things. It can also be made into a still wine, but I
haven't seen much state-side.
>
>> OK, the Pinot Noir is
>> notorious for showing up the effect of terroir,
>
>OK, wine "jargon" there.....what is "terroir"...Maybe I should do what I
>always yell at my kids....YOU HAVE A DICTIONARY, LOOK IT UP!

Ah, terroir. You'll get almost as many interpretations of terroir, as you will
get political affiliations from a crowd of 50 Italian gentlemen. Basically, it
is FR for "soil," used in the phrase, "gout de terroir" (taste of the soil).
However, used within the context of wine-making, it goes beyond the actual
soil type, and encompasses other geographic and geologic factors: altitude,
angle of vineyard to the sun, angle of incline, drainage, both topographically
and subsurface. In the US, the term "micro-climate" is, or was, more often
used. Basically, it is all factors governing where the vine is grown, starting
with the soil-type, but moving on to almost all other factors. Then, one has
vintage, which is governed by the weather patterns that year, and how the
grower dealt with them. And yes, PN shows its terroir as well as, or better
than, most varietals.
>
>> from two parcels of
>> land only 100 yeards apart, and you can immediately taste the difference
>> between them.
>
>Would growers mess with soil? Or would that be too cost prohibitive? I
>mean, to make any difference in an entire vintage of thousands and thousands
>of bottles would be hard. How many grapes does it take to make a
>bottle...500 or so? How many grapes come off the average vine? And I dont'
>mean, mess with soil as in regular fertilizer or something, but really play
>around with it...

Not usually. The soil is the soil. It usually determines which grapes will do
well there - the soil and all of the other factors listed above. Time and
experimentation has defined what grows best where in the Old World. That's not
to say that there are not some, who freely experiment with other "non-
standard" varietals, but with hundreds, if not thousands, of years experience,
the Old World growers know what grows THERE best. Most Old World wine
regulations are built around these centauries of experience. If you grow red-
wine grapes in the Bordeaux Region of France, and wish to have your wines
certified, they will only consist of Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc,
Merlot, Petite Verdot, Malbec, Carmenere, Gros Verdot, and St. Macire, in some
concentration, or the other. Some might be 100% Cab Sauvignon, or Merlot, but
they cannot have any OTHER grape, than listed above. The blend may also change
to reflect the vintage. Now what the grower will "mess with," is the pruning
of the vines, the spacing of the rows, the direction that the rows run, etc.
For the most part, these formulae have already been worked out in the Old
World. For fine-wine grapes, what would be typified as "lousy soil" works
best! The exact desired ripeness of the grape at harvest is debated the world
over. After the vineyard, more experimentation probably goes on with how to
press, vinify, age, blend, etc. As earlier stated, additions of sugar, or
acid, can be used under certain conditions to yield a wine in line with local
rules and laws.
>
>>>>>I'm just afraid of wasting money...which I don't have a lot of...even
>>>>>for one bottle...
>>
>> I don't think many of us are so wealthy that we can afford to waste a lot
>> of
>> money on a bottle. Some are much better off than others, but no one wants
>> to
>> buy bad value for money.
>
>Well, I just stand there, looking at the racks and racks of wine, and figure
>that some of them are crappy, some are good. How do I tell? I imagine it
>would be pretty hard for me to pick at random and find something that is
>REALLY terrible, but also the reverse applys...I do try to stay away from
>anything that is filling 3/4 of the shelf, though (like Yellow Tail, Little
>Penguin, Jacobs Creek, Lindemans, etc)...maybe that is a bad strategy too.

We all have this problem, regardless of what our family income might be. The
limits that one can spend might well be different, but the desire for value
for [the] money (VFM), is what it is about. One can never know ALL of the
wines available, nor have experience with them all. Here is where the wine
writers and critics can help. They get to taste many more than we, mere
mortals, can ever do. Very often, we have to "read between the lines," of "
scores" as the case so often is, to find wines that we might like and feel ARE
vfm. The good sommeliers and wine-stewards are also of great use, as are
informed retailers/distributors. Again, most have exposure to much more than
the consumer. This is where one's ability to articulate their tastes and
desires comes into play. A little correct "jargon" can go a long way to
getting a recommendation of a wine that we are likely to enjoy. Most of these
folk are proud of their knowledge and their experience and are more than
willing to share, just in doing their job. Resources, such as this NG are
excellent for getting those recommendations, too.

Just stating the name of a wine that one liked might not be much help, i.e. I
have never heard of, nor tried Old Pillar Box Red, but it you described it in
common wine "jargon," I might be able to build a profile of it in my mind, and
come up with suggestions for other similar wines. Here is also where one's
location on the globe and relative price-points come in handy. If you are
located in a small town in the rural South (US), where there might be rather
strict laws on wine distribution, for me to recommend a boutique wine from
Albania wouldn't be much help. Same goes for price-points. Are those US$'s,
CA$'s AU$'s, or ¥?
>
>> By the way, when I was in Walla-Walla I tried the old Pillar Box Red and
>> was
>> very favourably impressed with it.
>
>After reading this yesterday afternoon, I tried to find it again and could
>not. My wife bought it, I'll have to ask her where she got it.
>
>> Excellent vfm.
>
>"Whoop-whoop"! Wine jargon alert...What's vfm?

Not really "wine" jargon. See above.
>
>> Don't be put off by sediment in a wine, by the way. It happens and it
>> often
>> shows a wine that has been treated less harshly than most large scale
>> industrial wineries do.
>
>I wasn't...it just caught me by surprise, that's all.
>

[SNIP]

And most of all, welcome to our little "family!?!?!" however dysfunctional we
may be. Enjoy your wines, and don't hesitate to ask questions. Often, the
answers will be all over the board, as, one must remember, taste is a very
personal thing.

Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

"Mike Tommasi" > wrote in message
...
> JR wrote:
>
>> Would growers mess with soil? Or would that be too cost prohibitive? I
>> mean, to make any difference in an entire vintage of thousands and
>> thousands of bottles would be hard. How many grapes does it take to make
>> a bottle...500 or so? How many grapes come off the average vine? And I
>> dont' mean, mess with soil as in regular fertilizer or something, but
>> really play around with it...
>
> Not sure what you mean by "mess with soil", you cannot change the soil,
> the roots in a proper vineyard go very deep, the surface soil does not
> affect terroir, only the deep soil. When you have deep roots, the tips of
> the roots are the most effective in absorbing water and nutrients. The
> differences in deep soil are easily detected if you make wine in a certain
> way.
>
> About the math, in a good vineyard you get about one bottle per plant.

Sorry Mike, but most of the feeder roots of vines are found in the top 30cm
of soil. Deeper roots may access water, but most nutrients exist in the
top-soil and immediate sub-soil (from what I've learned) since that's where
most of the microbial activity is found. Yes, deep soils are great in a
drought-prone, infertile environment, but canopy management becomes a huge
issue in deep, fertile soils. I really don't believe that soil is that big a
deal, so long as drainage is good. Coonawarra has very thin soils overlying
more or less impenetrable limestone, yet it produces some of the best
Cabernet in the southern hemisphere. If one can adapt canopy management to
soil potential then soil depth/fertility becomes less of an issue.

But, hey, we Colonials are still learning, right?

Marcello

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

> Paying $36 for a bottle of Cecche Chianti to go with 50 cents
> worth of pasta is ridiculous..

How much did you pay for that 50 cents worth of pasta?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Hunt" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> jrich7970@hotmail.
> com says...
>>
>>
>>"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> Salut/Hi Jeff,
>
> [SNIP]
>
>>> le/on Wed, 29 Mar 2006 22:09:10 -0500, tu disais/you said:-
>
> [SNIP]
>
<Big snip of interesing topics>

> Just stating the name of a wine that one liked might not be much help,
> i.e. I
> have never heard of, nor tried Old Pillar Box Red, but it you described it
> in
> common wine "jargon," I might be able to build a profile of it in my mind,
> and
> come up with suggestions for other similar wines. Here is also where one's
> location on the globe and relative price-points come in handy. If you are
> located in a small town in the rural South (US), where there might be
> rather
> strict laws on wine distribution, for me to recommend a boutique wine from
> Albania wouldn't be much help. Same goes for price-points. Are those
> US$'s,
> CA$'s AU$'s, or ¥?

Ok Hunt --- here's the wine jargon version for Pillar Box Red 8-) Approx
USD 8.00 - 9.00.

"A fabulous value, this 20,000 case blend, assembled by renowned Barossa
winemaker Chris Ringland, is composed of 57% Cabernet Sauvignon, 32% Shiraz,
and 11% Merlot, primarily from young vines. Ringland has rarely worked with
such huge quantities, but he kept the wine in tank with a little exposure to
American and French oak, bottled it unfined and unfiltered, and finished it
with a screw cap. It boasts luscious black currant fruit intermixed with
smoke, herbs, and cedar. Richly fruity, opulent, and medium to full-bodied,
it is one of the great wine bargains of the world. Consume it over the next
2-3 years." (WA)

"A blend of 57% cabernet, 32% shiraz and 11% merlot) Ruby red. Aromas of
smoky grilled meat, dark cherry, plum and licorice candy are lifted by
alcohol and show a distinctly herbal cabernet tone. Fat and broad in the
mouth, with sweet, candied berry, plum and cherry flavors complicated by
hints of cracked pepper and violet pastille. Finishes on a tangier, red
fruit note of cranberry, with no noticeable tannins." (IWC)

Of course, I never found all of the flavors as described but really enjoyed
the wine. I was able to find the screw cap, thought. And I believe that the
OP already found the unfiltered part (sediment).

Mike P

<More snipage>

> Hunt
>
> --
> NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

Mike Tommasi wrote:
> JEP62 wrote:
> > Mark Lipton wrote:
> >
> >>Sorry, Ian, but it's a common misconception that the oak imparts the
> >>buttery character, whereas in fact it's a byproduct of the malolactic
> >>fermentation that most Chandonnays are put through.
> >
> >
> > Yes, but the two are closely related in the style the wine maker is
> > looking for. In general, Chardonnay that is oaked is also put through
> > MLF and Chardonnay that is fermented in SS has the MLF suppressed, so
> > butter and toast tend to go together
>
> Nest step: add jam.
>
Just add a sip of Concord wine!

Dan-O

Nils Gustaf Lindgren wrote:
> "Mike Tommasi" > skrev i meddelandet
> ...
> > wrote:
> >> Jose wrote:
> >>
> >>>>A 'normale Chianti (Cecchi, for example) is not worth $36. It retails
> >>>>for about $10.
> >>>
> >>>Ever look at the restaurant markup for Coke? I can get a liter bottle
> >>>of that paint remover for less than a dollar. A glass of mostly ice
> >>>with some soda costs $1.50 at most restaurants around here. That's a
> >>>markup in the thousands of percent.
> >>
> >>
> >> Correct, but it's not the percentage per se that matters in the case of
> >> wine. Paying $36 for a bottle of Cecche Chianti to go with 50 cents
> >> worth of pasta is ridiculous..
> >
> >
> > I am always amazd at how LOW prices for European wines can be in
> > California. Recently found Pur Sang by Dagueneau cheaper at a restaurant
> > in La Jolla than in stores here in France.
>
>
> Bit [OT] here ...
> In my foolish youth (today I am only foolish) I travelled extensively in
> Ireland (at times it will come over me and I start talking with an Irish
> accent, bigorrah) and came in close contact with that fluid out of hell, the
> curse of Lord Iveagh, the Liffey juice - Guiness. I found that the most
> expensive pint was at the pub just across the road from the Guiness
> breweries, while, the CHEAPEST, was found in the Aran Islands, way out in
> the west, where the barrels of stout were laborously lowered into a curragh
> (those canoe-like boats taht are, I believe, still used by suicidal Western
> irish), and rown ashore, then hauled by hand into the pub.
>
> Some conspiracy is undoubtedly to blame for it all.
>
> Cheers
>
> Nils Gustaf
>
This is probably supply-and-demand at work; I'm guessing that Guinness
consumption is somewhat higher in the areas closer to the brewery.
Also, people may be under the impression that a beer purchased across
the street from the brewery is fresher, whether that's true or not.

Dan-O (carry large barrels in small boats? BRILLIANT!)

To get back to the original RAMBLING questions, I simply feel that
limiting oneself to $10 bottles is not going to be the way to learn all
there is to learn about wine.

Barolo, Amarone, Brunello, and Taurasi wines all start around $25-30
for decent examples. I assume the equivalent wines from other lands are
comparable in price, if not more expensive.

Much of the 'jargon' is applicable primarily to the better wines.
'Interesting', as we have explained, is one term that does not. It is a
term of derision.

In article >,
says...
>
>
>"Hunt" > wrote in message
...
>> In article >,
>> jrich7970@hotmail.
>> com says...
>>>
>>>
>>>"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Salut/Hi Jeff,
>>
>> [SNIP]
>>
>>>> le/on Wed, 29 Mar 2006 22:09:10 -0500, tu disais/you said:-
>>
>> [SNIP]
>>
><Big snip of interesing topics>
>
> Ok Hunt --- here's the wine jargon version for Pillar Box Red 8-) Approx
>USD 8.00 - 9.00.
>
>"A fabulous value, this 20,000 case blend, assembled by renowned Barossa
>winemaker Chris Ringland, is composed of 57% Cabernet Sauvignon, 32% Shiraz,
>and 11% Merlot, primarily from young vines. Ringland has rarely worked with
>such huge quantities, but he kept the wine in tank with a little exposure to
>American and French oak, bottled it unfined and unfiltered, and finished it
>with a screw cap. It boasts luscious black currant fruit intermixed with
>smoke, herbs, and cedar. Richly fruity, opulent, and medium to full-bodied,
>it is one of the great wine bargains of the world. Consume it over the next
>2-3 years." (WA)
>
>"A blend of 57% cabernet, 32% shiraz and 11% merlot) Ruby red. Aromas of
>smoky grilled meat, dark cherry, plum and licorice candy are lifted by
>alcohol and show a distinctly herbal cabernet tone. Fat and broad in the
>mouth, with sweet, candied berry, plum and cherry flavors complicated by
>hints of cracked pepper and violet pastille. Finishes on a tangier, red
>fruit note of cranberry, with no noticeable tannins." (IWC)
>
>Of course, I never found all of the flavors as described but really enjoyed
>the wine. I was able to find the screw cap, thought. And I believe that the
>OP already found the unfiltered part (sediment).
>
>Mike P
>
><More snipage>
>
>> Hunt

Sounds interesting. Being under Stelvin, my assumption that it was a BnB (bag
in box) wine is obviously wrong. The Pillar BOX Red threw me. I'll keep an eye
out for it though. In really general terms, I have been less a fan of some of
the Cab Shiraz Merlot blends, than many folk. That is not to say that I don't
try them often, and do find some gems in the bunch, just not as many as I
would like to. The price seems very good also. I'll either pour carefully, or
decant/caraffe, if I get my hands on some. I wondered about the sediment, as
so many BnB wines are over-processed to keep that sort of thing from
happening.

Thanks for the notes,
Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

I'm not trying to change the subject, but I'm crious whether you've dined at
the Burgundy Room. I'm surprised Columbus has such a good tapas and wine
bar.

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> To get back to the original RAMBLING questions, I simply feel that
> limiting oneself to $10 bottles is not going to be the way to learn all
> there is to learn about wine.
>
> Barolo, Amarone, Brunello, and Taurasi wines all start around $25-30
> for decent examples. I assume the equivalent wines from other lands are
> comparable in price, if not more expensive.
>
> Much of the 'jargon' is applicable primarily to the better wines.
> 'Interesting', as we have explained, is one term that does not. It is a
> term of derision.
>

Nils Gustaf Lindgren wrote:
> --
> Respond to nils dot lindgren at drchips dot se
> "Dan The Man" > skrev i meddelandet
> oups.com...
>
> > This is probably supply-and-demand at work; I'm guessing that Guinness
> > consumption is somewhat higher in the areas closer to the brewery.
> > Also, people may be under the impression that a beer purchased across
> > the street from the brewery is fresher, whether that's true or not.
>
> The people on Aran Islands seemed particularly devoted to their Anna Liffey.
>
> > Dan-O (carry large barrels in small boats? BRILLIANT!)
>
> OK - the BARRELS were smaller than the BOATS. And the caps of the rowers
> were smaller than the barrels.
>
> Cheers
>
> Nils Gustaf

Oops, maybe I should explain - here in America, Guinness is running an
ad campaign. They use the animated likenesses of Guiness's co-founders.
One suggests a new invention, the other responds "BRILLIANT!" in a
piercing voice.

Dan-O (I must remember those emoticons!)

Salut/Hi Mike P,

le/on Fri, 31 Mar 2006 09:22:47 -0800, tu disais/you said:-


>> have never heard of, nor tried Old Pillar Box Red, but it you described it

> Ok Hunt --- here's the wine jargon version for Pillar Box Red 8-) Approx
>USD 8.00 - 9.00.

Ah, Thanks!! I was being particularly dumb, as I was thinking of Firehouse
Red from Walla walla.

Not my day, yesterday
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Salut/Hi Mark Lipton,

le/on Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:36:22 -0500, tu disais/you said:-

>> Now it's interesting that you should say that, because most people say that
>> it's the oaked California Chardonnay's that show that characteristic, and if
>> you ask him, Mark Lipton will probably be able to tell you what the chemical
>> is that gives that flavour. However, if you found it in an unoaked
>> chardonnay, then that's where you found it. I'm certainly not about to tell
>> you that you're wrong. :-)

Re-reading that, I could almost pretend that I meant _exactly_ what I said.
"Most people say". As it is, I have to admit I forgot. Thanks for the
correction.

>> All that said... there's probably more difference between wines made from
>> different grapes in the same vineyard than between the same grapes grown in
>> different vineyards. But only just - and a malicious tease could certainly
>> find exceptions that "proved the rule".
>
>I'm not so sure, Ian (or perhaps I'm just being contrary today!). Think
>of the situation in the Medoc, where from year to year the mix of grapes
>may change quite dramatically, yet the overall character of the vineyard
>is maintained well enough that experienced tasters can reliably identify
>it in a blind tasting. That same may (or may not) be true in
>Chateauneuf-du-Pape, too.

Well, I can't speak for the mix they use in CdP, which I don't think varies
THAT widely from one year to the other.

However, your point over the grapes that go into Bordeaux is well made. That
said, you don't get much co-planting there, and so the grapes aren't all
grown in the same soil. You talk about "a" Bordeaux vineyard as if it were
homogenous and all in one parcel. That's not quite true.

It would be an interesting tasting to match a 100% Malbec from Bordeaux
against a 100% Malbec from Cahors and against a 100% Cabernet Sauvignon from
the same estates in both regions. I know there are a couple of Chx in
Bordeaux who keep some 100% cepage samples, so theoretically it might be
possible. Could it be that these Bordeaux cepages were chosen for approval
because THEY do have the capacity to give similar profiles in that area. Can
I also say that Ch de La Jaubertie in Bergerac makes a Chardonnay, and that
it tastes like a Chardonnay, and nothing like the other white Ch de la
Jaubertie wines. So in that case, the cepage gives more to the character of
the wine than the terroir.

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

"Mike P" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Hunt" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article >,
>> jrich7970@hotmail.
>> com says...
>>>
>>>
>>>"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Salut/Hi Jeff,
>>
>> [SNIP]
>>
>>>> le/on Wed, 29 Mar 2006 22:09:10 -0500, tu disais/you said:-
>>
>> [SNIP]
>>
>>
> Ok Hunt --- here's the wine jargon version for Pillar Box Red 8-) Approx
> USD 8.00 - 9.00.

!!!! I just paid $11 US for it! Damn!

Still like it, though.

>
> "A blend of 57% cabernet, 32% shiraz and 11% merlot) Ruby red. Aromas of
> smoky grilled meat, dark cherry, plum and licorice candy are lifted by
> alcohol and show a distinctly herbal cabernet tone. Fat and broad in the
> mouth, with sweet, candied berry, plum and cherry flavors complicated by
> hints of cracked pepper and violet pastille. Finishes on a tangier, red
> fruit note of cranberry, with no noticeable tannins." (IWC)
>
> Of course, I never found all of the flavors as described but really
> enjoyed the wine. I was able to find the screw cap, thought. And I believe
> that the OP already found the unfiltered part (sediment).

Oh yes, I did.

OK,...Now...Here's some more wine jargon questions...I get smoky grilled
meat, dark cherry, plum, licorace candy, etc., etc., etc (ahtough I'm not
sure I tasted or smelled them, but I know what the mean....) What does
"tangier", mean. I'll get to the other things later (not necessarily in
your post). "broad"?

"Finishes", I guess means, what it tastes like after you're swallowed it, or
just before. So, a wine can taste different when you put it in your mouth
initially, then when you've finished swallowing it.

Jeff

>><More snipage>
>>
>>> Hunt
>
> Sounds interesting. Being under Stelvin, my assumption that it was a BnB
> (bag
> in box) wine is obviously wrong.

Stevlin? A person? A person who makes average questionable wines? More
reading and research for me, I guess.

Jeff

"Mike Tommasi" > wrote in message
...
> JR wrote:
>
>> Would growers mess with soil? Or would that be too cost prohibitive? I
>> mean, to make any difference in an entire vintage of thousands and
>> thousands of bottles would be hard. How many grapes does it take to make
>> a bottle...500 or so? How many grapes come off the average vine? And I
>> dont' mean, mess with soil as in regular fertilizer or something, but
>> really play around with it...
>
> Not sure what you mean by "mess with soil", you cannot change the soil,
> the roots in a proper vineyard go very deep, the surface soil does not
> affect terroir, only the deep soil. When you have deep roots, the tips

Of course I don't know, but if someone put "something" in the soil, might it
not affect the taste of the grapes? Seems goofy, though, becuase they would
have to put it on acres and acres of ground...

See how much I DON'T know?

Jeff

> I've never kept any Prosecco for very long, usually treating it like a NV
> (
> non-vintage) Champagne. I cannot comment on its longevity. Its style can
> range
> from sweet to tart, though most that will be exported tend to go toward
> the
> crisp, tart, side of things. It can also be made into a still wine, but I
> haven't seen much state-side.

Guess I had better drink it then. Just checked, Presecco Di Conegliano by
"Canella". There is no year on it...

> used. Basically, it is all factors governing where the vine is grown,
> starting
> with the soil-type, but moving on to almost all other factors. Then, one
> has
> vintage, which is governed by the weather patterns that year, and how the
> grower dealt with them. And yes, PN shows its terroir as well as, or
> better
> than, most varietals.

Got it.


> vfm. The good sommeliers and wine-stewards are also of great use, as are
> informed retailers/distributors. Again, most have exposure to much more
> than
> the consumer.
....

Resources, such as this NG are
> excellent for getting those recommendations, too.

The guy who owns the closest liquor store to me seems to really enjoy wine.
Others who are much more knowledgable than me say has a very good
collection. So, when he is there, I'll ask him for advice.

> If you are
> located in a small town in the rural South (US), where there might be
> rather
> strict laws on wine distribution,

I wonder what it's like down there. Actually I have family that lives in
the rural south, but they're not drinkers anyway, so they wouldn't know.
I'm sure the large cities (Atlanta, for instance) have good selections.

Where hail from, there are no restrictive laws regarding what is sold (just
who can sell it), so whatever the store owner wants to buy, he buys. Of
course, that usually means, he buys what his customers buy.

If I crossed the river into Pennsylvania, it might be a problem, since the
state does the buying.

>>
>>> Don't be put off by sediment in a wine, by the way. It happens and it
>>> often
>>> shows a wine that has been treated less harshly than most large scale
>>> industrial wineries do.
>>
>>I wasn't...it just caught me by surprise, that's all.

Actually, I had a wine a month or so back that had those little "crystals"
on the cork. I read up on it, and, of course, found out it was no big
deal...most lkely happened because the wine got cold. They also mentioned
that it happens more often in wines that aren't as mass produced because
they aren't filtered as much as the Sutter Home's and such.

Oddly enough, I bought a second bottle two weeks later, and it too had the
crystals. Same store, though, so nothing surprising there.

> And most of all, welcome to our little "family!?!?!" however dysfunctional
> we
> may be. Enjoy your wines, and don't hesitate to ask questions.

Oh, I will.

Jeff

In article >, jrich7970@hotmail.
com says...
>
>>><More snipage>
>>>
>>>> Hunt
>>
>> Sounds interesting. Being under Stelvin, my assumption that it was a BnB
>> (bag
>> in box) wine is obviously wrong.
>
>Stevlin? A person? A person who makes average questionable wines? More
>reading and research for me, I guess.
>
>Jeff

Stelvin is a type of screw-cap closure. While there are other brands of screw
-cap enclosures, Stelvin is probably near the Kleenex tm mode for tissues.

Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

In article >, says...
>
>
>"Mike P" > wrote in message
.. .
>>
>> "Hunt" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In article >,
>>> jrich7970@hotmail.
>>> com says...

SNIP]

>OK,...Now...Here's some more wine jargon questions...I get smoky grilled
>meat, dark cherry, plum, licorace candy, etc., etc., etc (ahtough I'm not
>sure I tasted or smelled them, but I know what the mean....) What does
>"tangier", mean. I'll get to the other things later (not necessarily in
>your post). "broad"?
>
>"Finishes", I guess means, what it tastes like after you're swallowed it, or
>just before. So, a wine can taste different when you put it in your mouth
>initially, then when you've finished swallowing it.
>
>Jeff

I have no idea what "tangier" is. Maybe someone can clear it up for all of us.

Most of the sensory impressions come from smelling the wine, either via the
nose, or after you have swallowed and exhaled, "retronasal." The finish is
actaully how long the retronasal impression lasts. Try swallowing and then
exhaling through your nose (make sure that you swallow completely!). See how
long the impressions last.

The basic drill for tasting (though some don't like to do that - just drink it
with food) is to look at the wine in good light, usually over white cloth, a
napkin, tablecloth, or at a formal tasting, maybe a white placemat with
circles for the glasses. Tilt the glass and study the rim, especially. Some
hold the glass to a point light source to see if there is any cloudiness, etc.
Next, smell the wine. Next, swirl the wine, and then smell it again.
Aromas may well be different between sniffs. Then you're ready to actually
taste the wine. Take a small amount of wine into your mouth, and breath in
some air. Move the wine around your mouth. Some folk advocate "chewing" the
wine, so that it reaches all parts of the mouth. Swallow. Exhale, and see what
aromas are picked up in the retronasal maneuver. There are variations on this
basic theme, and one will find what they are comfortable with. In a tasting of
many wines, one should have an opaque vessel to sip into. The retronasal is a
little less intense that way, but still doable.

Let me know if this makes any sense.

Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

> Stelvin is a type of screw-cap closure. While there are other brands of
> screwcap enclosures, Stelvin is probably near the Kleenex tm mode for tissues.

How do they rate against one another (and against non-wine screwcaps?)
If I open a bottle and don't finish it, I usually rebottle it in a
smaller bottle and pump it down with VacUVin. But if I can fill it to
the tippy top and screwcap it, it should also keep nicely, no?

Does the kind of screwcap matter? Can I use an old EVO (I just learned
that one) bottle with no ill effects?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

> In a tasting of
> many wines, one should have an opaque vessel to sip into.

I've never heard of that. What does the opacity do?

> The retronasal is a
> little less intense that way, but still doable.

What does opacity have to do with retronasality?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Hunt" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> jrich7970@hotmail.
> com says...
>>
>>>><More snipage>
>>>>
>>>>> Hunt
>>>
>>> Sounds interesting. Being under Stelvin, my assumption that it was a BnB
>>> (bag
>>> in box) wine is obviously wrong.
>>
>>Stevlin? A person? A person who makes average questionable wines? More
>>reading and research for me, I guess.
>>
>>Jeff
>
> Stelvin is a type of screw-cap closure. While there are other brands of
> screw
> -cap enclosures, Stelvin is probably near the Kleenex tm mode for tissues.

How did you know that this wine used a Stelvin screw cap? I thought the
review just mentioned a screw cap, but wasn't specific.

"Hunt" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> says...
>>
>>
>>"Mike P" > wrote in message
. ..
>>>
>>> "Hunt" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> In article >,
>>>> jrich7970@hotmail.
>>>> com says...
>
> aromas are picked up in the retronasal maneuver. There are variations on
> this
> basic theme, and one will find what they are comfortable with. In a
> tasting of
> many wines, one should have an opaque vessel to sip into. The retronasal
> is a
> little less intense that way, but still doable.
>
> Let me know if this makes any sense.

It does except for the last bit...The opaque vessel...Are you saying, if
tasting many wines, you don't want to get smashed, so you don't swallow them
all? The vessel is to spit into? Typo?

Just my guess....

"JR" > skrev i melding
...
>
>>
>> Stelvin is a type of screw-cap closure. While there are other brands of
>> screw
>> -cap enclosures, Stelvin is probably near the Kleenex tm mode for
>> tissues.
>
> How did you know that this wine used a Stelvin screw cap? I thought the
> review just mentioned a screw cap, but wasn't specific.
Read him again - Tissues often are called Kleenex even then they are not.
Same with Stelvin.
Anders

"JR" > skrev i melding
...
>

> The vessel is to spit into? Typo?
>
> Just my guess....
My guess too. You don't want to see a lot of spit floating around... :-)
Anders

"JR" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Mike Tommasi" > wrote in message
> ...
>> JR wrote:
>>
>>> Would growers mess with soil? Or would that be too cost prohibitive? I
>>> mean, to make any difference in an entire vintage of thousands and
>>> thousands of bottles would be hard. How many grapes does it take to
>>> make a bottle...500 or so? How many grapes come off the average vine?
>>> And I dont' mean, mess with soil as in regular fertilizer or something,
>>> but really play around with it...
>>
>> Not sure what you mean by "mess with soil", you cannot change the soil,
>> the roots in a proper vineyard go very deep, the surface soil does not
>> affect terroir, only the deep soil. When you have deep roots, the tips
>
> Of course I don't know, but if someone put "something" in the soil, might
> it not affect the taste of the grapes? Seems goofy, though, becuase they
> would have to put it on acres and acres of ground...
>
> See how much I DON'T know?
>
> Jeff

Well there was some experiment done in Germany a while back (please don't
make me find the source guys...) where they buried some containers filled
with different kinds of soils and then grew the same variety in them to
compare soil difference and its effect on wine flavour. The vines were all
the same variety and were all exposed to the same climactic conditions since
they were side by side in the same vineyard. Vine management was the same
for each container. They subsequently microvinified the fruit from each
container seperately and they found that there was not "much" difference
from one batch to the other. There were slight differences in pH, titratable
acidity, baume`, etc., but these variances could have been attributed to the
small scale of the production, shaded bunches vs. unshaded etc. Effectively,
the result was that all the wines shared many common traits. The aroma, the
length and flavour; all these were shared by all of the resulting wines.
What this illustrated for some of the participants was that soil ALONE did
not account for wine quality. And in fact the idea of "terroir" isn't wholey
dependent on soil.

Terroir incorporates a whole bunch of variables, like traditional vineyard
and winemaking techniques, climate, exposure, local varieties, management,
oak etc. and not just whether the soil is deep enough for the vine to draw
water through the dry months of the year, or whether there are the full
complement of elements for the vine to access. Irrigation does not negate
terroir, though some might like to say it does, (even New World producers
like Randall Grahm). Some producers don't believe in terroir and emphasise
vine balance (through canopy management, controlled irrigation etc.) as
being more qualitatively significant. Basically, they put it down to
photosynthesis being the first and final quality influencing factor. If you
can maximise PS per leaf, per bunch for the variety you've chosen according
to heat summations, rainfall averages etc. of your particular plot, then you
have a pretty good chance of making seriously drinkable wine, and who would
have the right or the means to say that it didn't express the true nature of
your vineyard's terroir?

Basically, you can mess with a whole lot more than soil and dramatically
change the wine you'll eventually bottle.

I love the "idea" of terroir, but you have to give you're vines every chance
to express it, and that takes lots of trial and error, and increasingly
these days -- science.

Marcello

PS. I know, almost ad infinitum nauseamque... But that's a wrap!

In article >, teacherjh@aol.
nojunk.com says...
>
>> Stelvin is a type of screw-cap closure. While there are other brands of
>> screwcap enclosures, Stelvin is probably near the Kleenex tm mode for
tissues.
>
>How do they rate against one another (and against non-wine screwcaps?)
>If I open a bottle and don't finish it, I usually rebottle it in a
>smaller bottle and pump it down with VacUVin. But if I can fill it to
>the tippy top and screwcap it, it should also keep nicely, no?
>
>Does the kind of screwcap matter? Can I use an old EVO (I just learned
>that one) bottle with no ill effects?
>
>Jose

I do not know the answers to either. Some in the group have much experience
and knowledge regarding the various producers of screw-cap enclosures for the
wine industry.

In very limited tests, I've re-sealed the bottles of white "under" Stelvin (
don't even know if they are OFFICIALLY Stelven), and stuck 'em back into the
fridge. They did not leak, so the experiment succeded. Unfortunately, the
wines never hung around long enough to really test their effectiveness. I
still Vacu-Vin my non-Stelvin bottles, and refrigerate them with little ill
effect. So far, I have not encountered any reds with Stelvin, so I cannot
comment. I still might Vacu-Vin them though - just out of habit.

Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

In article >, says...
>
>
>"Hunt" > wrote in message
...
>> In article >,
>> jrich7970@hotmail.
>> com says...
>>>
>>>>><More snipage>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hunt
>>>>
>>>> Sounds interesting. Being under Stelvin, my assumption that it was a BnB
>>>> (bag
>>>> in box) wine is obviously wrong.
>>>
>>>Stevlin? A person? A person who makes average questionable wines? More
>>>reading and research for me, I guess.
>>>
>>>Jeff
>>
>> Stelvin is a type of screw-cap closure. While there are other brands of
>> screw
>> -cap enclosures, Stelvin is probably near the Kleenex tm mode for tissues.
>
>How did you know that this wine used a Stelvin screw cap? I thought the
>review just mentioned a screw cap, but wasn't specific.

Probably an assumptive mistake on my part. As has been pointed out, there are
many different brands of screw-cap-type of enclosures, and I just applied the
"generic" (to me, at least) Stelvin to it.

Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

In article > , teacherjh@aol.
nojunk.com says...
>
>> In a tasting of
>> many wines, one should have an opaque vessel to sip into.
>
>I've never heard of that. What does the opacity do?
>
>> The retronasal is a
>> little less intense that way, but still doable.
>
>What does opacity have to do with retronasality?
>
>Jose
>--
>Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
>for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Er-r-r, just a typo. Nothing to see here folks, move along. Sorry, it should
have read "SPIT into." Dang, I hate when the mind out paces the fingers.
Opacity should have NOTHING to do with the retronasal maneuver.

It took me a moment to even understand your misunderstanding, then I saw it.
Even if this news reader had spell-check, which it doesn't, it would not have
caught it.

I suppose that I could have just said that it was an April Fool's joke, but am
not that quick of wit.

Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

In article >, jrich7970@hotmail.
com says...
>
>
>"Hunt" > wrote in message
...
>> In article >,
>> says...
>>>
>>>
>>>"Mike P" > wrote in message
.. .
>>>>
>>>> "Hunt" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> In article >,
>>>>> jrich7970@hotmail.
>>>>> com says...
>>
>> aromas are picked up in the retronasal maneuver. There are variations on
>> this
>> basic theme, and one will find what they are comfortable with. In a
>> tasting of
>> many wines, one should have an opaque vessel to sip into. The retronasal
>> is a
>> little less intense that way, but still doable.
>>
>> Let me know if this makes any sense.
>
>It does except for the last bit...The opaque vessel...Are you saying, if
>tasting many wines, you don't want to get smashed, so you don't swallow them
>all? The vessel is to spit into? Typo?
>
>Just my guess....

Your guess is a good one! Wish there was a prize, but alas...

Hunt

--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth