Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
Wine (alt.food.wine) Devoted to the discussion of wine and wine-related topics. A place to read and comment about wines, wine and food matching, storage systems, wine paraphernalia, etc. In general, any topic related to wine is valid fodder for the group. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I went into Whole Foods to get a one-ounce taste of a Y'quem at $20 an
ounce. (shot) They didn't have it, so I tasted a Barolo 2000 Monprivato at $5 per shot. Then I tasted a Chateau Pavie 1982 Valette St. Emilion 1st Grand Cru at $10 per shot. I suppose to really taste, I would've had to let it decant, do a little rolling it around in the glass, sniff like a fool, gargle it, let it roll around on the front, middle and rear part of my tongue, and jump up-and-down like Gordon Ramsay, and of course, drink more than an ounce. For a novice, (you know who you are who call me a drinker of Charles Shaw), the only remarkable note I can make is that I liked the color of each wine. (Not purple.) I could not taste nor smell any of the usual buzz words descriptions: tobacco, cassis, etc. Guess I'll have to keep trying those $10-$40 bottles of wine. Surely someone will tell me I couldn't had a better taste test for $16 with something different. But I enjoyed it. Tasted another one at $1 a shot -- Chateau Haut-Piquot 2005 Lussac St Emilion. Dee Dee |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 19:07:28 -0800 (PST), Dee Dee
> wrote: >I went into Whole Foods to get a one-ounce taste of a Y'quem at $20 an >ounce. (shot) > >They didn't have it, so I tasted a Barolo 2000 Monprivato at $5 per >shot. > >Then I tasted a Chateau Pavie 1982 Valette St. Emilion 1st Grand Cru >at $10 per shot. > >I suppose to really taste, I would've had to let it decant, do a >little rolling it around in the glass, sniff like a fool, gargle it, >let it roll around on the front, middle and rear part of my tongue, >and jump up-and-down like Gordon Ramsay, and of course, drink more >than an ounce. > >For a novice, (you know who you are who call me a drinker of Charles >Shaw), the only remarkable note I can make is that I liked the color >of each wine. (Not purple.) > >I could not taste nor smell any of the usual buzz words descriptions: >tobacco, cassis, etc. > >Guess I'll have to keep trying those $10-$40 bottles of wine. Surely >someone will tell me I couldn't had a better taste test for $16 with >something different. But I enjoyed it. > >Tasted another one at $1 a shot -- >Chateau Haut-Piquot 2005 Lussac St Emilion. > >Dee Dee That sounds disappointing. Doesn't seem that you got much bang for a lot of bucks. I think I'd expect a lot more from the experience and I would expect Whole Foods, if they were expecting that such tasting opportunities would result in sales of wine, would have offered a bit of assistance. You describe the tasting as "shot"-size, but hopefully it wasn't offered in a shot glass or a paper cup. A tasting glass doesn't have to be huge, but it should be a proper tulip/balloon shape and stemmed (sorry Riedel "O" lovers). No need for the Gordon Ramsay act, but a moment or two of swirling would help. The Barolo was quite young, but even a 25 year old Bdx could benefit from some aeration. You did note color,but should also have noted viscosity or "legs"--the tendrils that climb up the side of the glass. Then a bit of time to sniff. No rush here, you paid for the ride so enjoy the nuances without being in a hurry. Anything come at you? Barolo's typically give me some "barn" or leather or briar or tar notes. Bdx might offer some pencil lead, cedar, cigar box, dark berries or similar. Didn't get it at first? Swirl and try again. Take your time. Sip. Make the shot last. Not all in one fell swoop. On the tongue, hold it, feel it, think about it....getting anything? Swallow (slowly if that's possible) and think about what's still going on in your mouth. Anything? Getting some finish or is it just gone? Dust, chalk, dryness, residual flavor? Anything? Little bigger mouthful now, maybe all the remainder of the shot. Hold in your mouth, swirl a bit, think about it. Inhale a bit of air over what's in your mouth. Getting anything? Slosh around. Take a second or two, swallow. Finish any better? Ask the merchant who is pouring what you should have seen, smelled, tasted, felt. If he doesn't have anything to offer, walk away. If he does have some description, compare it to your own experience. How does it match up? Are you noting the same things but maybe using different descriptors? (One man's blueberry is another man's cassis.) Give it time and keep exploring. Sometimes you go through a lot of ducks before you find a swan. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dee Dee, Where is the Whole Foods located?
Rick "Dee Dee" > wrote in message ... >I went into Whole Foods to get a one-ounce taste of a Y'quem at $20 an > ounce. (shot) > > They didn't have it, so I tasted a Barolo 2000 Monprivato at $5 per > shot. > > Then I tasted a Chateau Pavie 1982 Valette St. Emilion 1st Grand Cru > at $10 per shot. > > I suppose to really taste, I would've had to let it decant, do a > little rolling it around in the glass, sniff like a fool, gargle it, > let it roll around on the front, middle and rear part of my tongue, > and jump up-and-down like Gordon Ramsay, and of course, drink more > than an ounce. > > For a novice, (you know who you are who call me a drinker of Charles > Shaw), the only remarkable note I can make is that I liked the color > of each wine. (Not purple.) > > I could not taste nor smell any of the usual buzz words descriptions: > tobacco, cassis, etc. > > Guess I'll have to keep trying those $10-$40 bottles of wine. Surely > someone will tell me I couldn't had a better taste test for $16 with > something different. But I enjoyed it. > > Tasted another one at $1 a shot -- > Chateau Haut-Piquot 2005 Lussac St Emilion. > > Dee Dee > > > > > > > > > |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dee Dee, when I was first getting into wine sometime back there in the
early 60's, myself and another guy went to a wine bar in DC to sample some good wines. After an hour, we had run up a tab of $180 and remember this was in the days when La Tour was to be had for less than $18/blt. What we learned was that we could taste the same wines at home a lot cheaper. Once we formed a group of 6 guys, we also found that we could learn infinitely more because we could focus the tastings to compare similar wines. Each month one person would be totally responsible for the tasting. He had to do the research, shopping and hosting. We divided the cost at the beginning of the evening. We soon adopted a rule that all the wines tasted had to be currently available and the corollary was that no cellar wines be part of our tastings. It is easy to learn a lot this way. Dee Dee wrote: > I went into Whole Foods to get a one-ounce taste of a Y'quem at $20 an > ounce. (shot) > They didn't have it, so I tasted a Barolo 2000 Monprivato at $5 per > shot. > Then I tasted a Chateau Pavie 1982 Valette St. Emilion 1st Grand Cru > at $10 per shot. .. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 3, 11:07�pm, Dee Dee > wrote:
> I went into Whole Foods to get a one-ounce taste of a Y'quem at $20 an > ounce. (shot) > > They didn't have it, so I tasted a Barolo 2000 Monprivato at $5 per > shot. > > Then I tasted a Chateau Pavie 1982 Valette St. Emilion 1st Grand Cru > at $10 per shot. > > I suppose to really taste, I would've had to let it decant, do a > little rolling it around in the glass, sniff like a fool, gargle it, > let it roll around on the front, middle and rear part of my tongue, > and jump up-and-down like Gordon Ramsay, and of course, drink more > than an ounce. > > For a novice, (you know who you are who call me a drinker of Charles > Shaw), the only remarkable note I can make is that I liked the color > of each wine. �(Not purple.) > > I could not taste nor smell any of the usual buzz words descriptions: > tobacco, cassis, etc. > > Guess I'll have to keep trying those $10-$40 bottles of wine. Surely > someone will tell me I couldn't had a better taste test for $16 with > something different. �But I enjoyed it. > > Tasted another one at $1 a shot -- > Chateau Haut-Piquot 2005 Lussac St Emilion. > > Dee Dee Hey, you might mean first taste of an expensive wine, but if you didn't think some wines you had tried were good, you wouldn't still be trying! Good doesn't have to be expensive. I like the '82 Pavie, a nice lighter St Emilion, very different from the newer Pavies. Prices are better than restaurant pricing (figure the Mascarello is $150 in a restaurant, '82 Pavie is probably $250+). Not bad for tastes. 1 oz is hard, though. thanks for reporting. |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message
ups.com> DaleW > wrote: > On Jan 3, 11:07?pm, Dee Dee > wrote: >> I went into Whole Foods to get a one-ounce taste of a Y'quem at $20 an >> ounce. (shot) >> >> They didn't have it, so I tasted a Barolo 2000 Monprivato at $5 per >> shot. >> >> Then I tasted a Chateau Pavie 1982 Valette St. Emilion 1st Grand Cru >> at $10 per shot. >> >> I suppose to really taste, I would've had to let it decant, do a >> little rolling it around in the glass, sniff like a fool, gargle it, >> let it roll around on the front, middle and rear part of my tongue, >> and jump up-and-down like Gordon Ramsay, and of course, drink more >> than an ounce. >> >> For a novice, (you know who you are who call me a drinker of Charles >> Shaw), the only remarkable note I can make is that I liked the color >> of each wine. ?(Not purple.) >> >> I could not taste nor smell any of the usual buzz words descriptions: >> tobacco, cassis, etc. >> >> Guess I'll have to keep trying those $10-$40 bottles of wine. Surely >> someone will tell me I couldn't had a better taste test for $16 with >> something different. ?But I enjoyed it. >> >> Tasted another one at $1 a shot -- >> Chateau Haut-Piquot 2005 Lussac St Emilion. >> >> Dee Dee > Hey, you might mean first taste of an expensive wine, but if you > didn't think some wines you had tried were good, you wouldn't still be > trying! Good doesn't have to be expensive. > I like the '82 Pavie, a nice lighter St Emilion, very different from > the newer Pavies. > Prices are better than restaurant pricing (figure the Mascarello is > $150 in a restaurant, '82 Pavie is probably $250+). Not bad for > tastes. 1 oz is hard, though. > thanks for reporting. 1982 Pavie was, in my opinion, expressive of terroir and was a true Saint-Emilion and the Valettes who owned it were delightful people who understood their wine and their heritage. Timothy Hartley |
Posted to alt.food.wine
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 6, 6:28*am, Timothy Hartley >
wrote: > In message > ups.com> > * * * * * DaleW > wrote: > > > > > > > On Jan 3, 11:07?pm, Dee Dee > wrote: > >> I went into Whole Foods to get a one-ounce taste of a Y'quem at $20 an > >> ounce. (shot) > > >> They didn't have it, so I tasted a Barolo 2000 Monprivato at $5 per > >> shot. > > >> Then I tasted a Chateau Pavie 1982 Valette St. Emilion 1st Grand Cru > >> at $10 per shot. > > >> I suppose to really taste, I would've had to let it decant, do a > >> little rolling it around in the glass, sniff like a fool, gargle it, > >> let it roll around on the front, middle and rear part of my tongue, > >> and jump up-and-down like Gordon Ramsay, and of course, drink more > >> than an ounce. > > >> For a novice, (you know who you are who call me a drinker of Charles > >> Shaw), the only remarkable note I can make is that I liked the color > >> of each wine. ?(Not purple.) > > >> I could not taste nor smell any of the usual buzz words descriptions: > >> tobacco, cassis, etc. > > >> Guess I'll have to keep trying those $10-$40 bottles of wine. Surely > >> someone will tell me I couldn't had a better taste test for $16 with > >> something different. ?But I enjoyed it. > > >> Tasted another one at $1 a shot -- > >> Chateau Haut-Piquot 2005 Lussac St Emilion. > > >> Dee Dee > > Hey, you might mean first taste of an expensive wine, but if you > > didn't think some wines you had tried were good, you wouldn't still be > > trying! Good doesn't have to be expensive. > > I like the '82 Pavie, a nice lighter St Emilion, very different from > > the newer Pavies. > > Prices are better than restaurant pricing (figure the Mascarello is > > $150 in a restaurant, '82 Pavie is probably $250+). Not bad for > > tastes. 1 oz is hard, though. > > thanks for reporting. > > 1982 Pavie was, in my opinion, expressive of terroir and was a true > Saint-Emilion and the Valettes who owned it were delightful people who > understood their wine and their heritage. > > Timothy Hartley- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Thanks everyone for your interest and replies. This wine was tasted at Whole Foods, Fairfax, VA. Dee Dee |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Buying Tomatoes that have good taste? | General Cooking | |||
roselle is good for your skin and of good taste | Tea | |||
What foods taste good without salt? | General Cooking | |||
How does good rice taste? | Sushi | |||
How do I make pie crust taste good? | General Cooking |