|
AriTheDog posted:There was an article in Serious Eats called "The Case for Bad Coffee"... That article is a well-written, emotionally compelling piece of sophistry. What complete bullshit. He really pulls out all the stops here, like repeatedly making appeals to old-school masculinity to support his love of bad coffee. It's a lot of emotionally manipulative window dressing surrounding an idea that is rather self-evidently wrong: that the pursuit of quality, whether it be in coffee, food, wine, etc., is a barrier to forming connections with people while enjoying cheap crap somehow leads to emotional bonding with friends and family. He's presenting a false dichotomy. I sincerely hope that every one of you in this thread has bonded with people over excellent wine. I know I certainly have. His failure to have memorable moments with friends and family over a good cup of coffee is a personal failing and not a result of his choice of beverage. pork never goes bad posted:I suppose in contrast to the author, for wine at least I won't drink what I consider "bad wine", but it's definitely cheap natty juice (idiotsavan'ts brought up Raisins Gaulois's a few times, that poo poo is perfect - or something like Tami Frappato) that does for me in the wine world what AA coffee does for the author. You're right, that's not bad wine you're drinking at all. Folgers is the coffee equivalent of drinking Gallo Family Hearty Burgundy. I'm sure we all have our go-to inexpensive wines that are simple but delicious and great for a party.
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 10:52 |
|
|
I kinda thought aerating wine was bullshit, but the Cab Franc I drank last night actually was better with some time sitting out and being swirled around a bit in the glass. "Looser" tannins I guess. Not sure if it was just a placebo effect.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
AriTheDog posted:So for wine, yeah, I completely agree. At a big get together or any kind of special occasion cheap wine is great, because nobody cares, and nobody really wants to talk about the wine even if they are enjoying it. Could not possibly disagree with you more. It's a given that the industry people I drink with will sit and discuss the wine, but the novices amongst my friends and family do it too. Whether you care about the quality of the wine is very subjective. The vast majority of people probably don't, but there are plenty that do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Comb Your Beard posted:I kinda thought aerating wine was bullshit, but the Cab Franc I drank last night actually was better with some time sitting out and being swirled around a bit in the glass. "Looser" tannins I guess. Not sure if it was just a placebo effect. Aerating wine is definitely not bullshit! Try decanting half a bottle of wine into a sealable 375ml bottle, and the other half into a wide vessel, and compare at 1hr. The difference in taste and aroma will be immediately obvious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Comb Your Beard posted:I kinda thought aerating wine was bullshit, but the Cab Franc I drank last night actually was better with some time sitting out and being swirled around a bit in the glass. "Looser" tannins I guess. Not sure if it was just a placebo effect. Yeah it definitely is in no way bullshit and the "test" described above will make things pretty clear. Find someone to help you and do it blind just for fun to clear up that whole placebo thing. That said though, some wines definitely benefit more than others
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
goferchan posted:Yeah it definitely is in no way bullshit and the "test" described above will make things pretty clear. Find someone to help you and do it blind just for fun to clear up that whole placebo thing. That said though, some wines definitely benefit more than others It can make a huge difference in young wine for sure. What's the consensus on decanting Pinot noir? I advise against it, but I'm not sure if there are any exceptions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
Secret Spoon posted:It can make a huge difference in young wine for sure. What's the consensus on decanting Pinot noir? I advise against it, but I'm not sure if there are any exceptions. Absolutely. There's plenty of Pinot Noir meant to age, and if opened too young will definitely benefit from a decant. DRC obviously should be decanted if opened young. Reductive Pinots like Cobb's Coastlands: Old Firs Block can take even a vigorous shake in the decanter and some time to rest. In general, I would decant high quality, expensive Pinot Noir when opened young, especially Burgundy, and especially villages with rougher edges, like Nuits St Georges or Pommard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 06:26
|
|
|
95% of "premium" (~$10+) wines, whites and Pinot Noir included, are released before they're in their ideal drinking window. Ideally you should just taste and judge for yourself. But if you're not confident, unless you have reason to believe the wine is past its prime, go ahead and decant. The only common premium wines which are exceptions are Rioja Gran Reserva, sparkling wines, and aromatic whites like NZ Sauvignon Blanc and Gewurz.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 07:55
|
|
|
It's funny that Jancis says that vastly more wine is drunk too old than too young, but she is talking about budget wine. I'd say that at the $10-30 price point, a great deal of the wine you buy could do with a year or 2 of bottle age, but also that in many stores near me a lot of the wine has that bottle age at time of sale. That said, there are plenty of "premium" wines that are also meant to be drunk young - if you go tasting in Napa and buy at the $10-30 price point you'll find very little that will improve with bottle age, and the same is true spending $15 at most supermarkets. All in all, I'd be much less uncomfortable with your comment if you set the price point for "premium" at (eg) over $30. On decanting, the most common reason I decant something is that I opened it too young, and proactively decide to decant. The second most common reason is that I open something that's a better age, but I find to be a bit closed (teenaged?) when I try it. I have very few harder/faster rules about wine that's still before it's drinking window but close to it, or that's early in the drinking window - often in the past my popped and poured glass was better/more interesting than after a quick decant, and often the reverse is true.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
pork never goes bad posted:All in all, I'd be much less uncomfortable with your comment if you set the price point for "premium" at (eg) over $30. Agreed. Obviously highly depends on the region/wine. $30 is like a baseline low for aging Napa Valley reds, for example, but a $30 Riesling from Alsace will probably improve with age. Some grapes are better values for quality because they don't need expensive new oak barrels to make great wine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
Yeah I should have made that clearer: decanting is basically a rough-but-quick way of aging wine. As for prices, it definitely does depend on your market. Here it's closer to $20 that I expect wines to benefit from age, but I think in most of the US it's definitely lower than that, although maybe $10 is a bit optimistic. And as you say, the origin of the wine matters too: $10 is entering premium territory for Chile, but it's bulk for California. So there's no easy rule, but I when I think of what you can get for $10 in the US, I think of Ch Ste Michelle, Gerard Betrand, Cono Sur Bicicleta, etc. Those are all exceptional QPR though, so I suppose it's unfair of me to say they're typical of what you get for $10. I think Jancis may be right in the UK market, where they drink wines older than anywhere else in the world (including the countries of origin of said wines). But not for the US, where it's estimated that 80% of wine is consumed within 24 hours of purchase. Edit: And personal taste is definitely a thing too. I'm a little biased towards maturity. Kasumeat fucked around with this message at 01:21 on Feb 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
I think the root of Jancis' comment is that date of purchase itself is too late for much wine sold, when being able to drink it immediately upon release is optimal, and each day thereafter you're losing quality.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Kasumeat posted:Yeah I should have made that clearer: decanting is basically a rough-but-quick way of aging wine. As for prices, it definitely does depend on your market. Here it's closer to $20 that I expect wines to benefit from age, but I think in most of the US it's definitely lower than that, although maybe $10 is a bit optimistic. And as you say, the origin of the wine matters too: $10 is entering premium territory for Chile, but it's bulk for California. So there's no easy rule, but I when I think of what you can get for $10 in the US, I think of Ch Ste Michelle, Gerard Betrand, Cono Sur Bicicleta, etc. Those are all exceptional QPR though, so I suppose it's unfair of me to say they're typical of what you get for $10. I think I've mentioned it before, but since you touched on it: I love Chilean wine at pretty much every price point for its QPR. From Cono Sur Bicicleta to Marques de Casa Concha to Don Melchor, I haven't found a Chilean wine that wasn't worth more than what I paid for it. I also like the fact that they tend to be less fruit-forward than other new world regions, since that's more to my personal taste.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I think I've mentioned it before, but since you touched on it: I love Chilean wine at pretty much every price point for its QPR. From Cono Sur Bicicleta to Marques de Casa Concha to Don Melchor, I haven't found a Chilean wine that wasn't worth more than what I paid for it. I also like the fact that they tend to be less fruit-forward than other new world regions, since that's more to my personal taste. Yes. I love Chilean wine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
I also love Chilean wine. I feel like the Chileans haven't sold out their heritage like the Argentinians did. Most Chilean wineries are still Chilean owned and operated. Plus, the array of terroirs and climates available in Chile is staggering. They have a progressive attitude towards viticulture and have been actively correcting their mistakes (like the Big Carmenere Mixup) and honing the winemaking techniques that are most suited to their grapes. They have come a long long way since the old Concha Y Toro days. EDIT: As an aside because I am thinking about the bastardization of Argentina, I'd like to say I've never enjoyed a single Paul Hobbs wine I have ever tasted. None were ever bad, but likewise none were ever great. EDIT2: Chile makes some of the best razor-sharp Chardonnay found in either of the Americas, generally from their Coast Range. Overwined fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
Shamefully, Chile is almost completely unexplored. I like underextracted underripe horrible green red wines primarily, but anything glouglou will do. Can anyone recommend me a few decent wines here http://www.klwines.com/Products/r?r=0+4294966829&d=37&t=&o=8&z=False They do have Don Melchor, but a hundo to drink "serious density" likely won't have me screaming back to Chile for more (though reading into some of the other comments, if this really does have that kind of aromatic complexity, and acid backbone, then I might be interested in another 5-10 years!). We have a Chilean wine at work, but it's very new world, very inky, basically no acidity, artificial vanilla notes presumably from clumsy-rear end oaking, clocks in at 14.5% but feels hotter, has a ton of primary fruit, but it's ultimately jammy and flabby past the point I can handle. Mostly I put ice in Pinot Gris if I'm drinking the wine we have at work, though - I'd rather a Trumer most days.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
I've heard great things about Chilean wine from respectable wine people, but I've never had a Chilean wine better than mediocre. I think of Chile as a) tremendous value for ultra-modern Cab and Syrah, b) ultra-green Sauvignon Blanc without the passion-fruit or grapefruit charm of NZ, and c) a source for oaky and sweet Pinot Noir which is priced much better than its Californian equivalent so is actually possible to list for less than $18 a glass. I often recommend it to people who normally drink California and would like to pay one-third the price for equal quality, but if they actually make elegant wine I'm yet to see it. Oh and Carmenere is objectively the worst grape in the world. Edit: I don't mean to be so hard on Chile. They are legitimately making the best wines priced at $10 or less in the world. And I'm sure there's potential for elegance as they push higher into the mountains and winemaking catches up, but they're behind the Argentians in doing so. Kasumeat fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
This is my first venture outside of Games. So...don't crucify me. I had no idea there were wine goons. This is a great day. I'm really getting into wine, I spent the last couple years making wine and want to improve my understanding of the beverage. If anyone in the Seattle area would like to pop corks for learning purposes please send me a PM. (Also if anyone here makes wine in Washington, let me know, I'd love to buy a case and try out your stuff.) Now, I have a question: What is it that gives some wines a sort of grape dimetapp flavor? Medicinal background note? I've got a few bottles of a particular wine from a local producer that are usually good, but these are showing this funk.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
Sounds like a microbial fault. But I'll let someone who knows more than me answer that definitively. So when should a CDR be opened? What's the life of these wines?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
Perfectly Cromulent posted:That article is a well-written, emotionally compelling piece of sophistry. I don't disagree and that's why I didn't link it. It's a lengthy piece of pontification. I'm not suggesting anyone here drink bad wine, nor would I suggest anyone drink bad coffee, but I think that there's an interesting point there that in most cases (at least in my circles) connoisseurship isn't terribly important.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
Kasumeat posted:I've heard great things about Chilean wine from respectable wine people, but I've never had a Chilean wine better than mediocre. I think of Chile as a) tremendous value for ultra-modern Cab and Syrah, b) ultra-green Sauvignon Blanc without the passion-fruit or grapefruit charm of NZ, and c) a source for oaky and sweet Pinot Noir which is priced much better than its Californian equivalent so is actually possible to list for less than $18 a glass. I often recommend it to people who normally drink California and would like to pay one-third the price for equal quality, but if they actually make elegant wine I'm yet to see it. As a big fan of Chilean wines, let me say you're not wrong. My theory with "value wines" in general is that they aren't necessarily bad, so much as they need to be tailored toward one's individual taste. I haven't tried any of the Sauv Blanc, so I can't speak to that, my experiences with the Pinot Noir have been limited but poor, and I'd absolutely agree that Carmenere is terrible 99% of the time. The few Chardonnays I've tried have impressed me for the price, mainly because they aren't oaked all to gently caress like everything from the US, but aren't completely unoaked, and in a limited market I'll take what I can get. I've had great experiences with red blends and Cab Sauvs, though -- Cousino-Macul Finis Terrae stands out as a particularly great QPR. Also, if you don't think Don Melchor is both a great wine and a decent value... then tell me what I should be drinking instead, because I think it destroys most everything I've had at a similar price-point (which is admittedly not a price range I'm very familiar with...) I haven't explored as much Argentine wine as I probably should because I find the idea of supporting the Argentine government on any level to be a disgusting proposition. I may be missing out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Kasumeat posted:
Yeah I'm not sure I entirely agree with your statement on Carmenere but I feel your sentiment. Where I work we have a Carmenere that we pay <$8 a bottle for and it's tasty and works great with our food but I've never been really impressed with anything Chilean a rep's brought in outside of that by-the-glass price range. I'm sure there's some great poo poo out there I haven't been exposed to but I taste a lot of wines and with stuff from Chile my positive impressions have been limited to "wow, that's a great deal" rather than "wow, that's a great wine"
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
PT6A posted:As a big fan of Chilean wines, let me say you're not wrong. My theory with "value wines" in general is that they aren't necessarily bad, so much as they need to be tailored toward one's individual taste. I haven't tried any of the Sauv Blanc, so I can't speak to that, my experiences with the Pinot Noir have been limited but poor, and I'd absolutely agree that Carmenere is terrible 99% of the time. The few Chardonnays I've tried have impressed me for the price, mainly because they aren't oaked all to gently caress like everything from the US, but aren't completely unoaked, and in a limited market I'll take what I can get. I've had great experiences with red blends and Cab Sauvs, though -- Cousino-Macul Finis Terrae stands out as a particularly great QPR. Also, if you don't think Don Melchor is both a great wine and a decent value... then tell me what I should be drinking instead, because I think it destroys most everything I've had at a similar price-point (which is admittedly not a price range I'm very familiar with...) Like I said, Chile is excellent value for Modern red wines, from Cono Sur to Don Melchor. I'm not trying to deny that at all, but the former is cheap and cheerful, and the latter is definitely not my style. I'm not sure where you're finding you're Chilean Chardonnay, but oaked all to gently caress is definitely the typical style. 99% of producers are trying to emulate the Californian Chardonnay of the late 90s/early 00s, and for the most part succeeding. Which producers that are going for more elegance can you recommend? If you want to boycott wines for political reasons I totally understand. I have mixed feelings about buying South African wines from wineries that abused apartheid (pretty much all of them operating during it).
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
Kasumeat posted:I'm not sure where you're finding you're Chilean Chardonnay, but oaked all to gently caress is definitely the typical style. 99% of producers are trying to emulate the Californian Chardonnay of the late 90s/early 00s, and for the most part succeeding. Which producers that are going for more elegance can you recommend? The only one I can think of offhand is Marques de Casa Concha, and while it's still noticeably oaky, it's much less oaky than the worst offenders from California, or even Catena Alta. I'm not sure whether that's a one-of or if that's reflective of the country's style in general, because I don't have that much experience. I don't see it coming even close to Burgundy, well, ever, but I'm more willing to continue to explore it as compared with Washington State or California because I've got the "holy gently caress, did someone put maple syrup in this?" versions way too many times from those regions (at every price-point, too). If you could steer me toward some North American chardonnays that are more elegant, I'd be down for that too, because my current strategy of basically picking at random has not proved successful. I usually pick a producer that I've had good wines from in the past, but this has not worked out for me very well with North American wines the same way it has with other regions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
Jarvis chard is one of my favorites.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
pork never goes bad posted:Shamefully, Chile is almost completely unexplored. I like underextracted underripe horrible green red wines primarily, but anything glouglou will do. Can anyone recommend me a few decent wines here http://www.klwines.com/Products/r?r=0+4294966829&d=37&t=&o=8&z=False That Meli Carignan is wild and good. You'll love it at $13. The Apaltagua "Envero" is mostly Carmenere and a "good" example of it, though I agree that 90% of Carmeneres out of Chile are garbage. I guess every country needs its Pinotage. EDIT: One of the most misunderstood things about Chile is that it's all about the mountains. In the center of the country where they tend to make all the wines, it's only 2 hours drive from its east border to the coast. It's possible to have both oceanic and mountain influences in Chile and pretty much all of it can be classified as "cool climate". Overwined fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
PT6A posted:
I picked at random today, and it worked out. Got the cheapest new world Chardonnay that didn't look like cougar juice. (I live in Norway so our choice on this specific category is a bit limited) http://thefermentedfruit.com/wente-morning-fog-chardonnay-ring-in-chardonnay-day/ Very nice, ok oak, fresh fruit with green apple and peach. A bit of butter and plenty of acidity. Elegant? For the price, definitely.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
Ola posted:I picked at random today, and it worked out. Got the cheapest new world Chardonnay that didn't look like cougar juice. (I live in Norway so our choice on this specific category is a bit limited) Wente is an iconic California producer. Their specific clone of Chardonnay is propagated all up and down the state. I haven't actually tasted the wines in years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Crimson posted:Wente is an iconic California producer. Their specific clone of Chardonnay is propagated all up and down the state. I haven't actually tasted the wines in years. I hadn't seen it before. I wonder if it's being aggressively priced to capture market share. It does cost a bit to ship the bottles after all. It's half price of village Burgundy (which is starting to get really stupid) and just over 1.5 times regular new world chard, so I think it's good value. Ola fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
I tried a bottle of the Montes Alpha Chardonnay, and it's definitely oakier than I would prefer, but it's not as over-oaked as some chards can be. Decent QPR but I think I'd rather just spend a bit more and grab a village white burgundy most of the time. Marques de Casa Concha is both cheaper and more to my taste, if we want to compare Chilean to Chilean. It has been growing on me even so... The Wente seems to be available up here, very near me even, so I'll give it a go just to compare.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
PT6A posted:If you could steer me toward some North American chardonnays that are more elegant, I'd be down for that too, because my current strategy of basically picking at random has not proved successful. I usually pick a producer that I've had good wines from in the past, but this has not worked out for me very well with North American wines the same way it has with other regions. Do Ontario wines make it to your market? They're making the best cool-climate Chardonnay in North America, although in the US I imagine they're somewhat less of a bargain than here. The state of the Dollar might change that soon though. I can't recommend much from California because the big names are outrageously overpriced compared to the rest of the New World (though certainly less so within the US market) and I'm unfamiliar with smaller producers than don't export. For "inexpensive" options, I guess Rodney Strong Sonoma Chard and Ramey would be my picks. For premium, there are lots of options, but I wouldn't call any of them decent value: Au Bon Climat, Kistler, and Sandhi. Ridge was pretty reliable too up until their 2013 vintage which was terrible. But if I were you I'd look to New Zealand, Australia, or South Africa (Elgin and Hemel-en-Aarde).
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 05:46
|
|
|
Kasumeat posted:Do Ontario wines make it to your market? They're making the best cool-climate Chardonnay in North America, although in the US I imagine they're somewhat less of a bargain than here. The state of the Dollar might change that soon though. I can't recommend much from California because the big names are outrageously overpriced compared to the rest of the New World (though certainly less so within the US market) and I'm unfamiliar with smaller producers than don't export. For "inexpensive" options, I guess Rodney Strong Sonoma Chard and Ramey would be my picks. For premium, there are lots of options, but I wouldn't call any of them decent value: Au Bon Climat, Kistler, and Sandhi. Ridge was pretty reliable too up until their 2013 vintage which was terrible. But if I were you I'd look to New Zealand, Australia, or South Africa (Elgin and Hemel-en-Aarde). I'm in Alberta. Oddly enough, I don't think we get many Ontario wines -- the Canadian wine section is heavily dominated by BC wines out here. I had the Ramey Chardonnay during my WSET level 1 class a year or two back and I actually found it very oaky for my taste, but I'd be willing to revisit it, since back then I hardly drank any white wine at all so I didn't have the reference points I do now. I'll definitely try to find some Ontario chardonnays, though -- I have to assume there are some good ones that make it out here, it's not even a different country after all!
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I'm in Alberta. Oddly enough, I don't think we get many Ontario wines -- the Canadian wine section is heavily dominated by BC wines out here. I had the Ramey Chardonnay during my WSET level 1 class a year or two back and I actually found it very oaky for my taste, but I'd be willing to revisit it, since back then I hardly drank any white wine at all so I didn't have the reference points I do now. Yeah, Ramey is fairly oaky, although their entry-level bottlings and more recent vintages are less so. There are a lot more places making wine with Californian climates than Chablis climates, so there are a lot more Chardonnays going for richness rather than finesse. You're just not going to find much unoaked Chardonnay that's exported that isn't Chablis. We don't get much BC wine either, and it certainly isn't priced competitively with Ontario. As for Ontario Chards you'll see in Alberta, again, I doubt you'll find that the unoaked ones make it there, but good producers are Norman Hardie, Bachelder, Tawse, and Hidden Bench. Pearl-Morissette is one producer making excellent Jurassic-style (naturalish and oxidative) Chardonnay with 0% new oak, so that's your best bet if you're OK with a little eccentricity. I will say I'm not a fan of many of their dirty wines but I love their Chard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 07:09
|
|
|
My girlfriend bought a bottle of port, Niepoort 10 year old white, and we wanted to have some after dinner. But it turns out it doesn't have a reusable cork, just a regular wine cork. Does that mean that it'll oxidize if we just have a little bit and recork it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Ola posted:My girlfriend bought a bottle of port, Niepoort 10 year old white, and we wanted to have some after dinner. But it turns out it doesn't have a reusable cork, just a regular wine cork. Does that mean that it'll oxidize if we just have a little bit and recork it? It will be solid for a week in the fridge. Go grab one of those plastic corks and an air pump.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Secret Spoon posted:It will be solid for a week in the fridge. Go grab one of those plastic corks and an air pump. Good to know. We decided to save it for next weekend anyway, going to a mountain cabin so some port will be nice. But I just eBayed a vacuum thing with two corks. It might suck, but it cost $4.49 including shipping from Hong Kong. Come to think of it, it's supposed to suck.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Secret Spoon posted:Sounds like a microbial fault. But I'll let someone who knows more than me answer that definitively. Cotes du Rhone are all over the drat place in regards to quality but most aren't set up for any kind of aging so buy then drink is probably a safe bet, but I don't think they'd be ruined if you forgot about a bottle in your cellar for a year or three.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
himajinga posted:Cotes du Rhone are all over the drat place in regards to quality but most aren't set up for any kind of aging so buy then drink is probably a safe bet, but I don't think they'd be ruined if you forgot about a bottle in your cellar for a year or three. Haha, I meant drc. My phone auto corrected. I have several high end burgundies on my list, guess I need to study these bottles a little more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
I went with my wife to Napa Valley in 2010 and we stopped in at Castello di Amorosa and brought home a few bottles of Il Barone 2007 and stuck them in the basement under the stairs with my other special occasion wines and forgot about them. There is a note on them that says "Try one in 2016". Looking at cellar tracker and magazine comments it looks like it should be a good time. e: VVV Barolo is my favorite. That caramel-nut-berry thing you get in the good stuff is just amazing. Murgos fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Feb 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 10:52 |
|
|
Speaking of aged wines, went to a great Barolo tasting the other day - from '89 back to '52. The oldest wine I had tasted before that was an '82 Barbera. Some of the wines:   This one was great, my 3rd favorite:  But these two topped the podium:  The two oldest:  Color of '61 Damilano, 52s were very similar:  The Borgogno '52 was corked, but there was still fruit there. If cork kills fruit, it seems to be working awfully slow not to have finished it off since Eisenhower held office. There were other flawed bottles as well, the Damilano '67 had a crumbled cork and was oxidized - but didn't taste very bad. We called it "the evening's best sherry". The 64s were fantastic, even the corks smelled absolutely incredible. I didn't write down much sense (I didn't spit much either) - but what sticks out between the best ones is the very translucent orange color, caramel, sour cherry, dried yellow fruit, dried red berries, nuts and something dark which I think is the tar or asphalt often spoken of. I'm sure rose petals and rosehip was there as well in some, but I didn't write it down. Not much tannins to speak of but quite fresh acidity, which I really liked. It was also great how much they changed in the glass. I wish I could've enjoyed that '64 Mascarello alone like some dandy Gollum over a few hours. All in all it was a great experience to taste something older than my parents, human spaceflight and color television. Thinking about all the stuff that has happened outside the bottle while it was quietly aging was great and something I will have to do more of. My takeaway is that it seems that lesser names in good vintages hold up better than famous names in mediocre ones. Obviously good names in good years, like Mascarello and Conterno '64, will be the best, but 50s-60s wines from Damilano can be had for €30-€50 in Italy - which you might well pay for a current release Barolo anyway. This has definitely piqued my interest and sent my internet fingers a-googlin'. Some time this spring I'll order some '58s and '64s and see how they turn out. It'll be a total crapshoot, but people go to Vegas and shoot craps all the time, don't they?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:24
|
|