I just wanted to wish any and all that read this, a very Happy Thanksgiving.
Please be safe this weekend and give a friend you haven't spoken to in a long time a call. It will be worth your time.
15 hours ago
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Monday, November 24, 2008
The Art of a Virtual Tasting
Last Friday night at 8 pm I joined a group of other wine geeks to taste wines and compare our notes. We all went through the proper motions: swirl, sniff, sip, swish and swallow (I don’t think anyone spits in this crowd). We were all meticulous in noting the different flavors and aromas that our senses perceived. I might be the only one to admit it, but some of us got a little tipsy. And we did it while we were all hundreds of miles from each other.
We were all participants of a tasting on Twitter Taste Live. On November 19th Lenn Thompson of LENNDEVOURS announced that he was hosting the tasting and that his choice was four wines from Humanitas Winery, a winery owned by Judd Wallenbrock who is also the winemaker. I read Lenn’s blog all the time so I decided to check it out. Judd blogs at Drink Charitably and the concept of his winery is a beautiful one, to make good wine and to give back to charities in local communities where the wines are sold. The profits from the winery go to three primary causes: hunger, affordable housing and illiteracy. They have chosen Feeding America (formerly America’s Second Harvest), Habitat for Humanity, and Reading is Fundamental as their targeting charities, but do not limit the donations to only those. Judd and company are just as likely to donate to local charities that best address these issues in individual communities. One of the best winery missions I have heard to date.
If you’ve never seen or heard of Twitter before, you are not the only one. It might be the latest online craze, but then again it might not. The format of using Twitter Taste Live (TTL) was an interesting one. The notion is that everyone buys the wines and meets at the same time and tweet about them. Yes, that’s the new verb, and no I did not coin it (thank goodness). TTL was created by Craig Drollett, John Hafferty, and Chris Gillis and was originally connected to their retail store Bin Ends. Today TTL has distanced itself from the store and is completely open to the world of the wine industry, especially the consumers. The userbase is currently nearing 500 with participation in 8 countries. Not bad for a site based on tweets.
“The real vision is that this platform is a direct line of communication between consumers and wine makers,” explains Craig. “So far it’s working out very well.”
The tasting itself was very interesting, but turned into a case of the hiccups that won’t go away. I loved being in an online space where there are so many people who love to talk about wine all expressing their opinions of the same wines. The way it works is that as long as your tweet has #ttl included then it will pop up on the live feed. The only problem was that every ten to fifteen minutes or so the live twitter feed (I almost said tweet feed, but that seemed wrong somehow) would cut out. The only thing that really kept everything together was Matt doing a live video feed from his house.
All said and done, it was a good experience. The wines we tasted were:
We were all participants of a tasting on Twitter Taste Live. On November 19th Lenn Thompson of LENNDEVOURS announced that he was hosting the tasting and that his choice was four wines from Humanitas Winery, a winery owned by Judd Wallenbrock who is also the winemaker. I read Lenn’s blog all the time so I decided to check it out. Judd blogs at Drink Charitably and the concept of his winery is a beautiful one, to make good wine and to give back to charities in local communities where the wines are sold. The profits from the winery go to three primary causes: hunger, affordable housing and illiteracy. They have chosen Feeding America (formerly America’s Second Harvest), Habitat for Humanity, and Reading is Fundamental as their targeting charities, but do not limit the donations to only those. Judd and company are just as likely to donate to local charities that best address these issues in individual communities. One of the best winery missions I have heard to date.
If you’ve never seen or heard of Twitter before, you are not the only one. It might be the latest online craze, but then again it might not. The format of using Twitter Taste Live (TTL) was an interesting one. The notion is that everyone buys the wines and meets at the same time and tweet about them. Yes, that’s the new verb, and no I did not coin it (thank goodness). TTL was created by Craig Drollett, John Hafferty, and Chris Gillis and was originally connected to their retail store Bin Ends. Today TTL has distanced itself from the store and is completely open to the world of the wine industry, especially the consumers. The userbase is currently nearing 500 with participation in 8 countries. Not bad for a site based on tweets.
“The real vision is that this platform is a direct line of communication between consumers and wine makers,” explains Craig. “So far it’s working out very well.”
The tasting itself was very interesting, but turned into a case of the hiccups that won’t go away. I loved being in an online space where there are so many people who love to talk about wine all expressing their opinions of the same wines. The way it works is that as long as your tweet has #ttl included then it will pop up on the live feed. The only problem was that every ten to fifteen minutes or so the live twitter feed (I almost said tweet feed, but that seemed wrong somehow) would cut out. The only thing that really kept everything together was Matt doing a live video feed from his house.
All said and done, it was a good experience. The wines we tasted were:
- Humanitas Sauvignon Blanc 2006, 13.8% ALC, Monterey County, California, USA
- Humanitas Oak Free Chardonnay 2007, 13.8% ALC, Monterey County, California, USA
- Humanitas Gap’s Crown Pinot Noir 2006, 14.6% ALC, Sonoma Coast, California, USA
- Humanitas Cabernet Sauvignon 2006, 14.2% ALC, Paso Robles, California, USA
My clear favorite and that of the two others I tasted with (ok, so it is also nice to taste wine with live people too) was the Chardonnay. It was that classic pear and apple that Chardonnay should produce and had a great balance on the taste. The Cabernet started coming through for me after it sat out a while; I had not expected to need to decant it. When I first tasted the Cab it had huge tannins and was extremely rough. It started to smooth out and find some fruit after about an hour or so. I’ll know better for next time.
You can buy the wines here, and be sure to check out Twitter if you have not done so yet and Twitter Taste Live.
Friday, November 21, 2008
What is a wine rating?
Oh boy, did I jump the gun with my last post. I got a few notes on Facebook and by e-mail asking some questions. Sorry about that, let me start at the beginning.
There was once a bunch of grapes. Someone left these grapes outside in a bowl in the sun for too long and the sugars in the grapes fermented and became alcohol. Since by that time humans had already found an enjoyment of alcohol (A History of the World in Six Glasses), they drank it and found it delicious or at least that it took the edge off. And so, wine was brought into the world (well, close enough anyway). Eventually, people learned how to make wine better by crushing the grapes and letting the juice ferment, leading to wonderful moments of Greek mythology and I love Lucy.
And since there has been wine there have been people who want their wine to be known as better than anyone else’s wine. There was a classification in 1855 that solidified in history the prestige of the wines in Bordeaux, all of which was simply based on the price that each Chateau charged for their product. For the time being, a wine’s quality was fixed by the prestige of the winery and had very little to do with what was in the bottle.
Then came the Judgment of Paris in 1976, where some of the top Californian wines and the top French wines were compared in a blind wine tasting by some of the most prominent wine journalists and sommeliers in France. The results staggered the wine world, as the Californian wines not only held their own but were also considered better than the French wines by some of the judges.
After that more wine critics started doing more blind tastings and considering the wines based on taste and no longer on the prestige of the winery. One of the motivators of this trend was Robert Parker, who brought the 100-point rating system into the mainstream. The point ratings are based on the educational grading system in the US (90-100 = A, 80 – 89 = B, etc.). Now Parker’s publication The Wine Advocate as well as competitors such as Wine Spectator, Wine Enthusiast, Wine & Spirits and the International Wine Cellar use this system.
So why do people get so uptight about ratings? Mostly because the financial health of any single winery can break even, go under, or have amazing success based on these ratings. I think I explained my thoughts on ratings and their impact in my last post. A wineries entire future can change depending on if it received a mediocre 89 or an impressive 90. Today’s most prestigious rating publications are The Wine Advocate and Wine Spectator, but the others are fast evening out the playing field and bloggers (hurray!) are adding a whole new twist on wine recommendations.
When it comes down to it, ratings are just one person’s opinion about a wine and I don’t think anyone has the same tastes as anyone else. There are just too many factors that can change your experience of a wine: who you are drinking with, how you are feeling (Happy? Good wine! Sad? Bad wine!), etc. So drink what you feel like drinking. If you need advice, ask someone. If they steer you to a wine you like, ask them for another recommendation. If you did not like what they sent your way, then ask someone else.
Questions? Comments? Post them below! I’d love to hear them.
I am also going to be involved in an online tasting tonight (who decides to do tastings on a Friday night??). I will let you know how it goes when I post this weekend.
There was once a bunch of grapes. Someone left these grapes outside in a bowl in the sun for too long and the sugars in the grapes fermented and became alcohol. Since by that time humans had already found an enjoyment of alcohol (A History of the World in Six Glasses), they drank it and found it delicious or at least that it took the edge off. And so, wine was brought into the world (well, close enough anyway). Eventually, people learned how to make wine better by crushing the grapes and letting the juice ferment, leading to wonderful moments of Greek mythology and I love Lucy.
And since there has been wine there have been people who want their wine to be known as better than anyone else’s wine. There was a classification in 1855 that solidified in history the prestige of the wines in Bordeaux, all of which was simply based on the price that each Chateau charged for their product. For the time being, a wine’s quality was fixed by the prestige of the winery and had very little to do with what was in the bottle.
Then came the Judgment of Paris in 1976, where some of the top Californian wines and the top French wines were compared in a blind wine tasting by some of the most prominent wine journalists and sommeliers in France. The results staggered the wine world, as the Californian wines not only held their own but were also considered better than the French wines by some of the judges.
After that more wine critics started doing more blind tastings and considering the wines based on taste and no longer on the prestige of the winery. One of the motivators of this trend was Robert Parker, who brought the 100-point rating system into the mainstream. The point ratings are based on the educational grading system in the US (90-100 = A, 80 – 89 = B, etc.). Now Parker’s publication The Wine Advocate as well as competitors such as Wine Spectator, Wine Enthusiast, Wine & Spirits and the International Wine Cellar use this system.
So why do people get so uptight about ratings? Mostly because the financial health of any single winery can break even, go under, or have amazing success based on these ratings. I think I explained my thoughts on ratings and their impact in my last post. A wineries entire future can change depending on if it received a mediocre 89 or an impressive 90. Today’s most prestigious rating publications are The Wine Advocate and Wine Spectator, but the others are fast evening out the playing field and bloggers (hurray!) are adding a whole new twist on wine recommendations.
When it comes down to it, ratings are just one person’s opinion about a wine and I don’t think anyone has the same tastes as anyone else. There are just too many factors that can change your experience of a wine: who you are drinking with, how you are feeling (Happy? Good wine! Sad? Bad wine!), etc. So drink what you feel like drinking. If you need advice, ask someone. If they steer you to a wine you like, ask them for another recommendation. If you did not like what they sent your way, then ask someone else.
Questions? Comments? Post them below! I’d love to hear them.
I am also going to be involved in an online tasting tonight (who decides to do tastings on a Friday night??). I will let you know how it goes when I post this weekend.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Wines Tasted on November 19th, 2008
1) Chateau de Seuil Graves Blanc 2006, 12.5% ALC, AOC Graves, Bordeaux, France
2) Chateau Les Hauts-Conseillants 2005, 14% ALC, AOC Lalande de Pomerol, Bordeaux, France
3) Chateau de Lescours 2005, 13% ALC, (80% Merlot, 10% Cabernet Sauvignon, 10% Cabernet Franc), AOC Saint-Emilion Grand Cru, Bordeaux, France
4) Chateau Merville 2001, 12.5% ALC, AOC Saint-Estephe, Bordeaux, France
5) Chateau Lacoste-Borie 2005, 13% ALC, AOC Pauillac, Bordeaux, France
6) Charmes de Kirwan 2005, 13% ALC, AOC Margaux, Bordeaux, France
Recommendations:
I liked many of these wines. Each had a certain character and was definitely closer to the earth and mineral side of taste rather than the bigger fruit explosions.
1) For those that did not know that good white wines could come from Bordeaux, you should try this one. This wine had such soft vanilla aromas. In the group that tasted with me someone said, "butter cream frosting". I think that is right on the mark. The taste was very pleasant, an easy expression of softer pear with a little lemon zest. It had some nice honeycomb overtones as well. Relaxingly good to drink.
2) Lots of mineral/earthy smells came out of this wine for me. There was a bit of leathery, cedar boxish things going on here. The taste was something to get used to, not in a bad way, but in a way I did not expect. It was smooth up front with most of the taste coming well after the wine had past my lips. The texture was of fine grain sands washing over your tongue, or as one of our group said, "velvet".
4) To me, this is the best wine of the bunch. The nose was so funky that it almost put many of our group out from tasting it. However, when we tasted the wine it showed itself to be complex and elegant. There were some great black cherry and strawberry flavors with length and structure. A really solid and balanced wine.
5) When I tasted this wine I just wanted food. Perhaps that was because it was roughly 7 pm and I had not eaten dinner yet, but this wine made me crave a rosemary lamb stew. This wine was rich, with some dark chocolate and blackberry flavors. The scent was a little hot, reminding me of fresh leather and cassis.
2) Chateau Les Hauts-Conseillants 2005, 14% ALC, AOC Lalande de Pomerol, Bordeaux, France
3) Chateau de Lescours 2005, 13% ALC, (80% Merlot, 10% Cabernet Sauvignon, 10% Cabernet Franc), AOC Saint-Emilion Grand Cru, Bordeaux, France
4) Chateau Merville 2001, 12.5% ALC, AOC Saint-Estephe, Bordeaux, France
5) Chateau Lacoste-Borie 2005, 13% ALC, AOC Pauillac, Bordeaux, France
6) Charmes de Kirwan 2005, 13% ALC, AOC Margaux, Bordeaux, France
Recommendations:
I liked many of these wines. Each had a certain character and was definitely closer to the earth and mineral side of taste rather than the bigger fruit explosions.
1) For those that did not know that good white wines could come from Bordeaux, you should try this one. This wine had such soft vanilla aromas. In the group that tasted with me someone said, "butter cream frosting". I think that is right on the mark. The taste was very pleasant, an easy expression of softer pear with a little lemon zest. It had some nice honeycomb overtones as well. Relaxingly good to drink.
2) Lots of mineral/earthy smells came out of this wine for me. There was a bit of leathery, cedar boxish things going on here. The taste was something to get used to, not in a bad way, but in a way I did not expect. It was smooth up front with most of the taste coming well after the wine had past my lips. The texture was of fine grain sands washing over your tongue, or as one of our group said, "velvet".
4) To me, this is the best wine of the bunch. The nose was so funky that it almost put many of our group out from tasting it. However, when we tasted the wine it showed itself to be complex and elegant. There were some great black cherry and strawberry flavors with length and structure. A really solid and balanced wine.
5) When I tasted this wine I just wanted food. Perhaps that was because it was roughly 7 pm and I had not eaten dinner yet, but this wine made me crave a rosemary lamb stew. This wine was rich, with some dark chocolate and blackberry flavors. The scent was a little hot, reminding me of fresh leather and cassis.
The good of wine ratings
There are a lot of people that complain about wine ratings. Most of the people I know from college have only the slightest grasp of what a rating is and what it means for the wine. For me, it is important if a wine is rated, but a rating is not everything.
How many products have over 7,000 brands to choose from? I think I can name five brands of cereal, six brands of mustard, and perhaps (if I stretch really far) eight or nine brands of salad dressing. However, when you walk into a wine store and look around there are easily hundreds of different wine brands sitting on the shelf, waiting for you to make a decision on which one to purchase.
How are you supposed to make a decision as to which one to buy?? There are large bottles, small bottles, green bottles, brown bottles. There are bottles with cute cartoons on the label (be wary) and bottles with funny names (be even more wary). There are bottles that look like you need a jackhammer to open and bottles that look like you could sneeze and they might break. Bottles, bottles, more bottles, and then even more bottles...
It's daunting! You almost prostrate yourself in relief when a helpful employee comes over and asks you what you are looking for and then points you in a direction. However, the only way to have a suggestion coming into the wine store is by checking out the ratings.
Some writers talk about how ratings are like training wheels. I think this is pretty accurate (although those that know me might find this funny since I do not know how to ride a bike). Wine ratings are, when all is said and done, a report of what one person thought about the wine. The higher or lower the rating the more or less they would recommend the wine over another. I think the only way to know if you agree with the individual rating the wines is if you taste the ones they rated and see if your tastes match theirs. If not, perhaps it is time to find a new writer to follow (there are plenty out there).
As a final note, a writer who I read often on his blog is Steve Heimoff, the West Coast Editor of Wine Enthusiast. He posted about reviews and the people who malign them on his blog. It is an interesting read, mostly because you get to see the cat fighting in the comments.
How many products have over 7,000 brands to choose from? I think I can name five brands of cereal, six brands of mustard, and perhaps (if I stretch really far) eight or nine brands of salad dressing. However, when you walk into a wine store and look around there are easily hundreds of different wine brands sitting on the shelf, waiting for you to make a decision on which one to purchase.
How are you supposed to make a decision as to which one to buy?? There are large bottles, small bottles, green bottles, brown bottles. There are bottles with cute cartoons on the label (be wary) and bottles with funny names (be even more wary). There are bottles that look like you need a jackhammer to open and bottles that look like you could sneeze and they might break. Bottles, bottles, more bottles, and then even more bottles...
It's daunting! You almost prostrate yourself in relief when a helpful employee comes over and asks you what you are looking for and then points you in a direction. However, the only way to have a suggestion coming into the wine store is by checking out the ratings.
Some writers talk about how ratings are like training wheels. I think this is pretty accurate (although those that know me might find this funny since I do not know how to ride a bike). Wine ratings are, when all is said and done, a report of what one person thought about the wine. The higher or lower the rating the more or less they would recommend the wine over another. I think the only way to know if you agree with the individual rating the wines is if you taste the ones they rated and see if your tastes match theirs. If not, perhaps it is time to find a new writer to follow (there are plenty out there).
As a final note, a writer who I read often on his blog is Steve Heimoff, the West Coast Editor of Wine Enthusiast. He posted about reviews and the people who malign them on his blog. It is an interesting read, mostly because you get to see the cat fighting in the comments.
