Wine Thread

[pozz]

I know nothing about wine. The knowlegeable @MediumRare can likely change this (see this post and his others in that thread). I mostly go for Italian (any kind of chianti) or Californian reds (Rodney Strong is always nice).

Starting with a few questions:

• Is there any measurable basis for "good" wine?
• Why do men seem to prefer red over white?
• Is there any basis for pairing with food?
• How can old bottles (20+ years aged) be safe to drink?
• Is there anything to look out for with packaging? Are there industry-specific badges, labels or marking that indicate important information?
• Why does every bottle have a "contain sulfites" warning? Aren't sulfites naturally-occuring in wine?
• What is interesting or different about grape varieties? Can any sort of grape be used to make wine?
• What are some interesting industry stats?

And finally: how can I determine my own flavour preferences and correlate them to wines? (See this post.)

 

[scott wurcer]

I know nothing about wine. The knowlegeable @MediumRare can likely change this (see this post and his others in that thread). I mostly go for Italian (any kind of chianti) or Californian reds (Rodney Strong is always nice).

• How can old bottles (20+ years aged) be safe to drink?
• Why does every bottle have a "contain sulfites" warning? Aren't sulfites naturally-occuring in wine?

You should try to find a beginners seminar series somewhere near you, some local public art centers do food and wine also. You'll probably get confused in this format.

The sulfite warning is like the warning on a package of smoked salmon, "Warning: Contains fish".
Old bottles are rarer these days, but I've had 100+ year old wine in perfect condition and plenty of very bad ones but don't know of any truly harmful spoilage mechanism (maybe SY does).

 

[LF78]

I mostly go for Italian (any kind of chianti)

I suggest you to try also some other wines from the same region (Tuscany):

• Brunello di Montalcino
• Morellino di Scansano
• Any wine from the Bolgheri area

I'm not an expert in any way, but this is my "objective" check list when I want to try a new bottle:

• Presence of standard classification badges (for italian wines: DOC, DOCG and IGT)
• Vintage (i.e. year). If not present it may be a mix of different (cheap) wines.
• Grapes used that I already know and I like (i.e. Cabernet, Merlot, Sangiovese, Vermentino, etc...)
• Areas of production that I already know and I like (Tuscany, Veneto, Piemonte, etc...)
• If red, alcohol percentage between 12.5% and 13.5%
• If white, alcohol percentage between 11.5% and 12.5%

 

[Soniclife]

I'm trying to avoid learning anything about wine, ignorance is cheaper.

 

[pozz]

The sulfite warning is like the warning on a package of smoked salmon, "Warning: Contains fish".

LOL

 

[MediumRare]

I know nothing about wine. The knowlegeable @MediumRare can likely change this (see this post and his others in that thread).

• How can old bottles (20+ years aged) be safe to drink?

So many great questions! I'll try to answer one at a time when I have the opportunity. First question is about aging:

Wine is (should be) sterile-filtered when bottled. The integrity of the closure (old-days was cork, but that's a whole other set of questions) generally keeps it sterile. (Champagne is a notable exception.)

When the cork/closure fails, the risk of infection by bacteria (such as acetobacter, which turns the wine to vinegar) exists, but it's very rare these days.

Otherwise, the aging of the wine will depend on:

1. The chemical components of the wine and the way they degrade over time. Chemical "degrading" is actually what causes a possible improvement in the wine as new flavor compounds become perceivable.
2. The closure permitting (or not) oxygen to participate in the chemical evolution of the wine. (Aerobic v. anaerobic)
3. The heat, light, humidity, and air-pressure variation over time which could damage the wine or accelerate the evolution of it.

 

[KozmoNaut]

I'm trying to avoid learning anything about wine, ignorance is cheaper.

I do try to maintain a base-level working knowledge of wine. Just the basics, certainly not wine buff/snob level. A lot of the most pleasing wines I've had have been <$10.

For instance a nice Barbera d'Asti for just $7/bottle at our local supermarket turned out to be a real favorite. It's very low in tannins, which the missus prefers. I do enjoy fancier wine on occasion and the occasional wine tasting, but it's not like I log every bottle or maintain a collection or anything.

Now, whisky on the other hand is a wholly different matter...

 

[Soniclife]

Now, whisky on the other hand is a wholly different matter...

Oh yes.

I've largely come out the other side of whisky (no e) geekiness now, and appreciate a wide range of types, and expense. I even like some blends now. But fear wine will be a black hole I'll never escape if I get dragged in.

 

[Ron Texas]

Go to the store, buy some wine, get sloshed. Repeat with a different wine.

 

[ElNino]

And finally: how can I determine my own flavour preferences and correlate them to wines? (See this post.)

One of the best ways to learn about wines, if you live somewhat close to a wine-producing area, is to just take a long weekend and drive around to as many local wineries as you can, do tastings, and chat with the staff. It's far easier to get a sense of what you like and don't, and what correlates to what flavors, by doing a lot of sampling rather than going through whole bottles.

Food pairings are definitely a thing. An oakey red with strong tannins really clashes with chicken breasts or a light seafood risotto, to the point where I find it tough to even get through the glass during the meal. On the other hand, there are some explosively good pairings. One of my go-to pairings when hosting parties is a nice very sweet white (an ice wine or a late harvest vidal) paired with either corn dogs or the Cook's Illustrated grown-up grilled cheese recipe. It sounds ridiculous, but both pairings are explosively good. I never would have stumbled on that kind of pairing if a chef at a winery hadn't prepared it for me.

 

[AudioTodd]

WAY too complicated a subject to address in even a horribly cursory way in this forum!

BUT I would say you are asking many of the right questions! Some have objective answers, but much of wine is VERY subjective and personal.

The other responders have given good ideas for starters. I would reiterate that there is no substitute for drinking LOTS of wine - responsibly of course.

I would suggest The Sotheby's Wine Encyclopedia by Tom Stevenson as a great place to find answers (and spark and answer many more questions) and anything by Oz Clark - look up his shows on wine with James May (formerly of the real Top Gear) too for some fun.
Cheers!

 

[KozmoNaut]

Oh yes.

I've largely come out the other side of whisky (no e) geekiness now, and appreciate a wide range of types, and expense. I even like some blends now. But fear wine will be a black hole I'll never escape if I get dragged in.

I'm no snob at all, I'll happily drink blends, bourbons, whisk(e)y from any origin as long as it's reasonably good. I just don't get the "18+ year single malt scotch only" types, they're missing out on so much.

"Good" in whisky terms is a very broad definition, since a lot of the most interesting taste notes would be considered "off" or "disgusting" in most other foods and drinks. I think I've only ever had to spit out one dram, which was an absolutely horrendously bad German sherry-matured abomination.

 

[pozz]

WAY too complicated a subject to address in even a horribly cursory way in this forum!

Well, I'll take what I can get. I'm more interested in reading good advice and explanations than developing expertise myself.

To everyone who suggested it, I'll take that wine tour eventually, though I'll have to fly somewhere for that.

I'm no snob at all, I'll happily drink blends, bourbons, whisk(e)y from any origin as long as it's reasonably good. I just don't get the "18+ year single malt scotch only" types, they're missing out on so much.

"Good" in whisky terms is a very broad definition, since a lot of the most interesting taste notes would be considered "off" or "disgusting" in most other foods and drinks. I think I've only ever had to spit out one dram, which was an absolutely horrendously bad German sherry-matured abomination.

I was always pretty hit & miss with whiskey. I really prefer strong, hoppy beer, but I'll have a glass (dram=fancy glass?) sometimes for the hell of it.

Go to the store, buy some wine, get sloshed. Repeat with a different wine.

There's that, though I get as much fun talking to people who are into the subject.

 

[Kuba]

Appetizer

 

[Soniclife]

I'm no snob at all, I'll happily drink blends, bourbons, whisk(e)y from any origin as long as it's reasonably good. I just don't get the "18+ year single malt scotch only" types, they're missing out on so much.

I've given up on bourbon and Irish pot still, they just don't work for me, but single malts I'll try from anywhere. I quite agree on the 18+ snobbery, I think a lot of distilleries often produce there best output closer to 10 years old, and often in their main product. When I have a blend I want to be able to taste the grain as well as the malt, and I generally prefer the cheap slightly uncouth blends, the expensive ones are often boring.

 

[KozmoNaut]

I was always pretty hit & miss with whiskey. I really prefer strong, hoppy beer, but I'll have a glass (dram=fancy glass?) sometimes for the hell of it.

Craft beer is a wonderful world to explore, as well.

A dram is just an old-fashioned informal word for a small amount of liquor, about the same amount as a shot, but it sounds classier ;-)

 

[Soniclife]

"Good" in whisky terms is a very broad definition, since a lot of the most interesting taste notes would be considered "off" or "disgusting" in most other foods and drinks.

That's a very good point. My introduction to whisky was from an uncle giving me some Laphroaig at about 13, a lot of people would never have touched the stuff again after that.

 

[KozmoNaut]

I've given up on bourbon and Irish pot still, they just don't work for me, but single malts I'll try from anywhere. I quite agree on the 18+ snobbery, I think a lot of distilleries often produce there best output closer to 10 years old, and often in their main product. When I have a blend I want to be able to taste the grain as well as the malt, and I generally prefer the cheap slightly uncouth blends, the expensive ones are often boring.

My the best whiskies I've tasted range from 8 years to 25 years, so I prefer to look at the age as more of a guideline to the overall taste profile, rather than an outright quality statement. There is definitely whisky out there that has been kept for too long in the casks, and the quality of the spirit simply isn't up to such a long maturation. Younger whiskies tend to be more forward and driven by the spirit, this is also where you get the real fiery peat/smoke varieties. Older whiskies tend to be more driven by the cask maturation, so you get more wood notes and influence from the different types of casks.

My all-time favorite is a 20 year old cask strength Laphroaig. It still has that peaty and phenolic character, but the maturation rounds it off a little bit and adds so much depth to it.

 

[Soniclife]

There's that, though I get as much fun talking to people who are into the subject.

That's what bars are for, find a good one and talk to someone who knows some stuff, whilst drinking.

 

[Soniclife]

My all-time favorite is a 20 year old cask strength Laphroaig. It still has that peaty and phenolic character, but the maturation rounds it off a little bit and adds so much depth to it.

That sounds right up my street.

I agree that young and old both have things the other doesn't, but just like hifi because one is rarer and more expensive the assumption from too many people is it's better than the common cheap one. And just like hi-fi it's just as likely to be wrong.