|
Bad wine, good?
Eddie > wrote:
> "One thing that can make a wine go bad is exposure to air and > growth of bacteria. If you don't mind steaming your food with > bacteria laden wine...go for it." Prejudice from the "Sanitized®" fanatics. > A reply from the food group said steaming kills any bacteria, so > there is no danger, which makes sense. Any opinions from this > group? If a bottle leaks the wine oxidizes. That a natural reaction that can easily be reproduced: Just kepp half a glass of wine untouched near the window for a fortnight and taste: It turns brown, and smells and tastes of browning apple peels. That's all - no danger at all. Wine turned bad by bacteria infection is extremely rare. Of some 50.000 wines tasted in my life I can't remember having come across more than once or twice. Bacteria infection tends to happen at the winery and measures against are taken there. M. |
Salut/Hi Eddie,
Michael Pronay has got it spot on, but I'll add my 2ps worth anyway. le/on Thu, 06 Jan 2005 04:17:02 GMT, tu disais/you said:- >Hi folks. I'm a newbie, just joined after posting a wine related >thread in a binary food group. Never though about looking for a wine >group. Welcome. >Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a >bottle that had leaked. Yup, that happens, though the fact of leaking doesn't _necessarily_ mean the wine is bad. If I can - sort of - explain... If the cork made a perfect seal, no wine would leak out, and more importantly, no air would ever come in either. However, I remember a publication from Christie's wine auctions, which shows that wine levels more or less signficantly below the bottom of the cork is _normal_ for old wines. So, taking the logical conclusion, some amount of leakage past the cork has to be considered as normal, since these bottles would originally have been filled correctly. The only circumstances when it won't happen, is when the wine is stored in a completely unchanging temperature, as it is temperature variations that drive the leaking. In the normal way of things, therefore, a small leakage is normal and could be argued to be desirable (this touches on a "hot potato" relative to aging wines under screwcaps) as it could help to power the maturation of the wine. So, resuming, it is more or less normal for a very small amount of wine to leak out past or through the cork, during long aging. What isn't normal is for there to be enough leakage to mark the bottle. However, the fact that wine has leaked out doesn't _necessarily_ mean that air has got in yet, nor by any manner of means does it imply that the wine will be spoiled, though it might be. > I knew it was bad when I pulled out the cork (it came out way too easy) and took a small sip. Again, the fact that the cork came out too easily is confirmation that the cork was (to use a technical term) buggered. However, I've had quite a number of such bottles in my misspent youth and middle age, which have not shown any sign of fault. A really badly buggered cork can be very hard to remove, as it slips into the bottle when you try to drive a corkscrew into it! By the way, don't make the mistake of equating a buggered cork with a corked wine. The two have only one thing in common, the wine bottle was closed with a cork!! (grin). >OK, I said, no good. As long as you weren't persuading yourself that the wine wasn't good simply because the cork was buggered! That happens too. >I told her, why not use the wine instead of water? Mussels came out >great. Then I began to think, should I have used bad wine to steam? Hey.... "bad" in this context means what? As Michael said, a loose cork may mean the wine is oxidised, but that doesn't necessarily make it undrinkable. Aging a wine has long been held to be the result of slow controlled oxidation (though this is now contested, and in fact may not be true). Certainly tiny traces of oxygen don't do significant harm to wine. I'd also want to add that I've never heard of a wine with a leaky cork turning to vinegar - although many an old wive's tale claim the contrary. It's simply not possible. The amount of air that would need to get in is simply huge, I did the calculation once, and iirc it would need several _gallons_ of air to convert all the alcohol from a bottle of wine into acetic acid. And in any case, this wouldn't happen unless a bacterium called "acetobacter" were present. >I posed this question to my sister in Houston who is, along with her >husband, a wine expert. > She replied: >"One thing that can make a wine go bad is exposure to air and growth >of bacteria. If you don't mind steaming your food with bacteria laden >wine...go for it." I'm afraid she's not quite right. Firstly almost all bacteria are killed by contact with alcohol (acetobacter isn't, of course, in the concentrations usually found in wine, or you couldn't get vinegar). While exposure to air and the presence of acetobacter will turn a wine to vinegar, I strongly suspect it would be impossible for this to happen in a bottle, and in any case the wine hasn't "gone bad", it has turned to vinegar - which is quite a different thing. In absence of acetobacter, and after VERY long exposure to moderate amounts of oxygen, wine does turn bad - loosely speaking. It tastes nasty and smells revolting. I have had a couple of wines like that in my life. Many wine lovers have had a wine which has "died". It smells of ditches, or sewage. But I very much doubt if the wine would do you harm. As for your sisters emotive statement - I quote - "If you don't mind steaming your food with bacteria laden wine...go for it" Speaking kindly, that's inaccurate (And I am afraid that your opinion of your sister's expertise may also be slightly inaccurate). Firstly, the fact that the wine tasted slightly less good than normal - if it had tasted truly horrid, you wouldn't have thought of steaming with it - shows that the wine WASN'T laden with bacteria - I repeat that nearly all bacteria are killed by wine! Any that survive would be killed by being brought to the boil. So I agree with Michael on this. She has fallen into the trap of hysterical fear of bacteria. (I hope she has never had children, for her sake. All those nasty bugs about. Bleurgh - kissing, touching someone - what a horrible thought). >Any opinions from this group? Hope that helped a bit, Eddie. -- All the Best Ian Hoare http://www.souvigne.com mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website |
In article >, hawaii-50@sbcglobal.
net says... > >Hi folks. I'm a newbie, just joined after posting a wine related >thread in a binary food group. Never though about looking for a wine >group. >Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a >bottle that had leaked. I knew it was bad when I pulled out the cork >(it came out way too easy) and took a small sip. >OK, I said, no good. My wife was preparing to steam some mussels and >I told her, why not use the wine instead of water? Mussels came out >great. Then I began to think, should I have used bad wine to steam? >I posed this question to my sister in Houston who is, along with her >husband, a wine expert. > She replied: >"One thing that can make a wine go bad is exposure to air and growth >of bacteria. If you don't mind steaming your food with bacteria laden >wine...go for it." > >A reply from the food group said steaming kills any bacteria, so there >is no danger, which makes sense. >Any opinions from this group? >Thanks much >Eddie in San Jose Welcome. As Michael and Ian have already addressed the salient points in your post, I will not persue that, as I agree with both. However, I would like to ask about your statement, "While turning my bottles .... " Many red wines throw sediment as they age. It is generally best to let sleeping bottles lie. That sediment falls to one side of the bottle as a deposit. When you serve the wine, you want to separate that sediment from the wine as well as is possible, with either your cautious pouring, or decanting. Turning the bottles stirs up the deposit(s) and, at best, forces it to filter back through the wine to attain the lowest level in the bottle. I like to leave the bottles in position in the cellar, and even when I move them about (as little as is possible to accommodate new wines, and help with my cataloging) keep the lable at the top, rather like the whitewash mark on Port bottles. I will then stand the bottle in the cellar for many hours (days?), before I pour it, to allow much of this sediment to slide down the bottle to the bottom. Now, inspecting the capsules is a good thing, for, as you found out, corks can and do leak. Hope this concept of keeping the bottles in one orientation for their cellar experience doesn't lead to a flame-war, but so be it. In a similar thread, "Wine Gone Bad?" or similar, I recounted my encounter with a 1955 Taylor Port with a bad cork, and the surprising results. I STILL have not actually tasted a '55 Taylor Vintage! :-{ Hunt |
In article >, hawaii-50@sbcglobal.
net says... > >Hi folks. I'm a newbie, just joined after posting a wine related >thread in a binary food group. Never though about looking for a wine >group. >Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a >bottle that had leaked. I knew it was bad when I pulled out the cork >(it came out way too easy) and took a small sip. >OK, I said, no good. My wife was preparing to steam some mussels and >I told her, why not use the wine instead of water? Mussels came out >great. Then I began to think, should I have used bad wine to steam? >I posed this question to my sister in Houston who is, along with her >husband, a wine expert. > She replied: >"One thing that can make a wine go bad is exposure to air and growth >of bacteria. If you don't mind steaming your food with bacteria laden >wine...go for it." > >A reply from the food group said steaming kills any bacteria, so there >is no danger, which makes sense. >Any opinions from this group? >Thanks much >Eddie in San Jose Welcome. As Michael and Ian have already addressed the salient points in your post, I will not persue that, as I agree with both. However, I would like to ask about your statement, "While turning my bottles .... " Many red wines throw sediment as they age. It is generally best to let sleeping bottles lie. That sediment falls to one side of the bottle as a deposit. When you serve the wine, you want to separate that sediment from the wine as well as is possible, with either your cautious pouring, or decanting. Turning the bottles stirs up the deposit(s) and, at best, forces it to filter back through the wine to attain the lowest level in the bottle. I like to leave the bottles in position in the cellar, and even when I move them about (as little as is possible to accommodate new wines, and help with my cataloging) keep the lable at the top, rather like the whitewash mark on Port bottles. I will then stand the bottle in the cellar for many hours (days?), before I pour it, to allow much of this sediment to slide down the bottle to the bottom. Now, inspecting the capsules is a good thing, for, as you found out, corks can and do leak. Hope this concept of keeping the bottles in one orientation for their cellar experience doesn't lead to a flame-war, but so be it. In a similar thread, "Wine Gone Bad?" or similar, I recounted my encounter with a 1955 Taylor Port with a bad cork, and the surprising results. I STILL have not actually tasted a '55 Taylor Vintage! :-{ Hunt |
One last thing: Julia Child said that one shouldn't cook with a wine
they wouldn't drink. I mean, let's say you have a really corked bottle of wine...would you want your food to taste corked? I've never actually tried it, so I don't know if the wet cardboard flavor passes along- anyone? I know it can be heartbreaking to just toss an entire bottle of wine away, but sometimes it's for the best. And I am in no way guarding against bacteria here. Just a taste thing. e. |
One last thing: Julia Child said that one shouldn't cook with a wine
they wouldn't drink. I mean, let's say you have a really corked bottle of wine...would you want your food to taste corked? I've never actually tried it, so I don't know if the wet cardboard flavor passes along- anyone? I know it can be heartbreaking to just toss an entire bottle of wine away, but sometimes it's for the best. And I am in no way guarding against bacteria here. Just a taste thing. e. |
"Eddie" > skrev i melding ... > Hi folks. I'm a newbie, just joined after posting a wine related > thread in a binary food group. Never though about looking for a wine > group. > Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a > bottle that had leaked. I knew it was bad when I pulled out the cork > (it came out way too easy) and took a small sip. Turning bottles? What for? Well, if that is important to you, then go on - but that certainly is not important for the bottles... They are better off undisturbed. Anders |
"Eddie" > skrev i melding ... > Hi folks. I'm a newbie, just joined after posting a wine related > thread in a binary food group. Never though about looking for a wine > group. > Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a > bottle that had leaked. I knew it was bad when I pulled out the cork > (it came out way too easy) and took a small sip. Turning bottles? What for? Well, if that is important to you, then go on - but that certainly is not important for the bottles... They are better off undisturbed. Anders |
Emily,
As to not cooking with a corked wine, see this link: http://makeashorterlink.com/?X51A25D2A I don't always do it, I throw away my share of corked wine, but I do occasionally use; I find that to date I haven't run across corked odors. Now, I don't use corked wines say in a stew where it's added partway thru a simmer. But in reduced sauces at high temps (or Sue's recipe I reference in that thread) I haven't detected TCA yet. |
Any time we happen to have any wine left (usually not on purpose) we
set it aside for cooking. We will also cook with a wine that's not quite right when the bottle is opened. We feel that our food has been given the sort of flavor we intended and have never felt the taste of the food spoiled by day old or even weeks old wine. |
"Eddie" > wrote in message ... snipped > Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a > bottle that had leaked. snipped > Eddie in San Jose Eddie, why are you turning your bottles? This is the second time in a week I have read of someone doing this. All you are doing is stirring up sediment in the bottle. Bottles do not need turning. Ron Lel |
"Ron Lel" > wrote in
: > > "Eddie" > wrote in message > ... > > snipped > >> Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed >> a bottle that had leaked. > snipped >> Eddie in San Jose > > Eddie, why are you turning your bottles? This is the second time in a > week I have read of someone doing this. All you are doing is stirring > up sediment in the bottle. Bottles do not need turning. > > Ron Lel > > > Another thing that this thread has brought to mind, I have had bottles with obvious leakage through the cork which were unscathed (or at least not appearantly) and delicious. Other storage factors and degree of leakage, age of wine etc. FWIW the ones that I have had that worked were relatively young and probably lost wine due to some heat problems leading to premature maturity (if that is even possible!) |
Ian Hoare > wrote:
> In the normal way of things, therefore, a small leakage is > normal and could be argued to be desirable (this touches on a > "hot potato" relative to aging wines under screwcaps) as it > could help to power the maturation of the wine. For those with a strong need to read about this issue, there is a recent, long and controversial thread on the Parker forum: <http://fora.erobertparker.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/1/46710.html> or <http://snipurl.com/btw5> I'd highly recommend reading, of course, since I am an irrelevant contributor. M. |
"Eddie" > wrote in message ... > Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a > bottle that had leaked. I'm surprised that Michael didn't comment on the issue of "turning" bottles. There is absolutely _no_ reason to turn bottles during aging. Simply leave them on their sides with the label up and resist the compulsion to fondle them needlessly. When you plan to serve the wine you should probably decant it or serve it from a bottle cradle if it has thrown any sediment. Tom S |
Now, cooking with good wine that is a few days old is another thing
entirely. I do that quite often (ok, not really often. we don't often not finish a bottle!) I had heard about someone who poured all the great last bits of wine into a big vinegar jug, creating the finest red wine vinegar in town. Don't know if that's urban legend, though. |
Salut/Hi Tom S,
le/on Fri, 07 Jan 2005 03:06:08 GMT, tu disais/you said:- > >"Eddie" > wrote in message .. . >> Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a >> bottle that had leaked. > >I'm surprised that Michael didn't comment on the issue of "turning" bottles. >There is absolutely _no_ reason to turn bottles during aging. Simply leave >them on their sides with the label up and resist the compulsion to fondle >them needlessly. When you plan to serve the wine you should probably decant >it or serve it from a bottle cradle if it has thrown any sediment. Don't be such a spoil sport, Tom, half the pleasure in having them is to give them a good fondle from time to time. All the true wine lovers I've known have this need to go down into the cellar, and stroke the current favourite lovingly from time to time - without turning it of course. -- All the Best Ian Hoare http://www.souvigne.com mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website |
Salut/Hi Michael Pronay,
Thanks very much for the headsup le/on 7 Jan 2005 01:03:16 GMT, tu disais/you said:- >> In the normal way of things, therefore, a small leakage is >> normal and could be argued to be desirable (this touches on a >> "hot potato" relative to aging wines under screwcaps) as it >> could help to power the maturation of the wine. > >For those with a strong need to read about this issue, there is a >recent, long and controversial thread on the Parker forum: > ><http://fora.erobertparker.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/1/46710.html> > >or > ><http://snipurl.com/btw5> > >I'd highly recommend reading, of course, since I am an irrelevant >contributor. I'm not sure what this last sentence is about, as I didn't see a contribution from you in that thread, relevant or otherwise. It was a very interesting thread, and there are two things I took from it. 1. That even under screwcaps there is a small but measurable oxygen ingress. and 2. That more people than I expected were in favour of screwcaps. What the study lacked, IMO was any information about the temperature stability or otherwise of the stored bottles whose performance was being measured. I am quite certain that this is of crucial importance, especially in the case of corks. I'm tempted to join, if only to make that point! -- All the Best Ian Hoare http://www.souvigne.com mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website |
On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 03:29:10 +0100, Ian Hoare > said:
] Salut/Hi Tom S, ] ] le/on Fri, 07 Jan 2005 03:06:08 GMT, tu disais/you said:- ] ] > ] >"Eddie" > wrote in message ] .. . ] >> Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a ] >> bottle that had leaked. ] > ] >I'm surprised that Michael didn't comment on the issue of "turning" bottles. ] >There is absolutely _no_ reason to turn bottles during aging. Simply leave ] >them on their sides with the label up and resist the compulsion to fondle ] >them needlessly. When you plan to serve the wine you should probably decant ] >it or serve it from a bottle cradle if it has thrown any sediment. ] ] Don't be such a spoil sport, Tom, half the pleasure in having them is to ] give them a good fondle from time to time. All the true wine lovers I've ] known have this need to go down into the cellar, and stroke the current ] favourite lovingly from time to time - without turning it of course. ] Hi Ian, Tom - You guys are waaay too sure of yourselves. Fondling aside -- and I think it would be more appropriate if you kept these habits to yourself in future, Ian; no one needs to know about yer fondling yer favorite! -- there _may_ be a reason to turn the bottles... :) Here's the thing. The cellar here in Normandy has a cieling of wooden lattes and mud, which supports some tonnes of grain, before a porous -- well, rotten -- wood layer and old hay above. All this provides dreamy insulation, but at the cost of a slow but constant rain of mud, mouse droppings and grain bits finely milled into a sticky red powder. So much for keeping the labels up. Within a few months you'd never know what you were drinking. But labels down is a problem too. In all but the highest summer the cave has a humidity that -- well, I never measured it so I don't know exactly how high it is, but say 90% -- causes streams of water to run off the bottles. And the red gunk, as it happens, is a powerful glue solvent. (I've often thought of bottling it for those folks endlessly trying to soak labels off). The net result: within a few months you'd never know what you were drinking. And the solution is... you guessed it! :) [Before the samaritans chime in here, I don't really turn bottles. Once in a while I fondle them, in the process rubbing off most of the gunk, but mostly they just get grubbier and grubbier. Which actually impresses some people! :)] -E -- Emery Davis You can reply to by removing the well known companies |
In article >, ianhoare@angelfire.
com says... > >Salut/Hi Tom S, > > le/on Fri, 07 Jan 2005 03:06:08 GMT, tu disais/you said:- > >> >>"Eddie" > wrote in message . .. >>> Here's my story. While turning my bottles the other night I noticed a >>> bottle that had leaked. >> >>I'm surprised that Michael didn't comment on the issue of "turning" bottles. >>There is absolutely _no_ reason to turn bottles during aging. Simply leave >>them on their sides with the label up and resist the compulsion to fondle >>them needlessly. When you plan to serve the wine you should probably decant >>it or serve it from a bottle cradle if it has thrown any sediment. > >Don't be such a spoil sport, Tom, half the pleasure in having them is to >give them a good fondle from time to time. All the true wine lovers I've >known have this need to go down into the cellar, and stroke the current >favourite lovingly from time to time - without turning it of course. > > > >-- >All the Best >Ian Hoare Right you are, Ian. When the temp hits 115 F on my lower patio, I retreat to the cellar and check my bottle taqs for penmanship, spelling errors, etc. I limit myself to just fondling the capsules and the neck tags though. After a few hours at 55 F, I find the heat almost refreshing... well, I did say ALMOST, didn't I? :-) Hunt |
In article >, notareal@address.
com says... [SNIP] > >Hi Ian, Tom - > >You guys are waaay too sure of yourselves. Fondling aside -- and I think it >would be more appropriate if you kept these habits to yourself in future, >Ian; no one needs to know about yer fondling yer favorite! -- there >_may_ be a reason to turn the bottles... :) > >Here's the thing. The cellar here in Normandy has a cieling of wooden lattes >and mud, which supports some tonnes of grain, before a porous -- well, rotten -- >wood layer and old hay above. All this provides dreamy insulation, but at >the cost of a slow but constant rain of mud, mouse droppings and grain bits >finely milled into a sticky red powder. So much for keeping the labels up. >Within a few months you'd never know what you were drinking. > >But labels down is a problem too. In all but the highest summer the cave has >a humidity that -- well, I never measured it so I don't know exactly how high it > is, >but say 90% -- causes streams of water to run off the bottles. And the red gunk >, >as it happens, is a powerful glue solvent. (I've often thought of bottling it f >or >those folks endlessly trying to soak labels off). The net result: within a few > >months you'd never know what you were drinking. > >And the solution is... you guessed it! :) > >[Before the samaritans chime in here, I don't really turn bottles. Once in a wh >ile >I fondle them, in the process rubbing off most of the gunk, but mostly they >just get grubbier and grubbier. Which actually impresses some people! :)] > >-E >-- >Emery Davis This might be a wonderful time to use cellar-tracking software and carefully log the exact location by bin/row/column. "Hey, hon, if this is bin AA-24, we must be drinking the '65 Ch Latour!" <G> Hunt |
Ian Hoare > wrote:
>> For those with a strong need to read about this issue, there is >> a recent, long and controversial thread on the Parker forum: >> >> <http://snipurl.com/btw5> >> >> I'd highly recommend reading, of course, since I am an >> irrelevant contributor. > I'm not sure what this last sentence is about, as I didn't see a > contribution from you in that thread, relevant or otherwise. In this thread that has grown to 14 pages in the meanwhile (if your setting of page length is equivalent to mine), my posts are numbers 163, 192, 195, 202, 208, 210, and 381. I guess yopu overlooked them. Here are direct links: The first: <http://snipurl.com/bwrj> The second: <http://snipurl.com/bwro> (the following four easily to be found, coming quite close) The last: <http://snipurl.com/bwrw> > It was a very interesting thread, and there are two things I > took from it. > > 1. That even under screwcaps there is a small but measurable > oxygen ingress. and 2. That more people than I expected were in > favour of screwcaps. > > What the study lacked, IMO was any information about the > temperature stability or otherwise of the stored bottles whose > performance was being measured. I am quite certain that this is > of crucial importance, especially in the case of corks. All I can say is that bottles with normal (= rather high) original fill under corks start to leak in the 30 to 35°C band, while screw caps remain tight until well over 40°C. (I don't know, however, if that was your question). Btw, we had an extensive Bordeaux 1995 tasting today: 6 whites, 81 reds. The cork failure rate was ab absolute disaster. I have not done the exact calculus yet, but it seems that well over 30 percent of the bottles were affected, in most cases confirmed by a backup bottle (we had second bottles for some 60 of the wines). > I'm tempted to join, if only to make that point! Good idea! M. |
Ian Hoare > wrote:
>> For those with a strong need to read about this issue, there is >> a recent, long and controversial thread on the Parker forum: >> >> <http://snipurl.com/btw5> >> >> I'd highly recommend reading, of course, since I am an >> irrelevant contributor. > I'm not sure what this last sentence is about, as I didn't see a > contribution from you in that thread, relevant or otherwise. In this thread that has grown to 14 pages in the meanwhile (if your setting of page length is equivalent to mine), my posts are numbers 163, 192, 195, 202, 208, 210, and 381. I guess yopu overlooked them. Here are direct links: The first: <http://snipurl.com/bwrj> The second: <http://snipurl.com/bwro> (the following four easily to be found, coming quite close) The last: <http://snipurl.com/bwrw> > It was a very interesting thread, and there are two things I > took from it. > > 1. That even under screwcaps there is a small but measurable > oxygen ingress. and 2. That more people than I expected were in > favour of screwcaps. > > What the study lacked, IMO was any information about the > temperature stability or otherwise of the stored bottles whose > performance was being measured. I am quite certain that this is > of crucial importance, especially in the case of corks. All I can say is that bottles with normal (= rather high) original fill under corks start to leak in the 30 to 35°C band, while screw caps remain tight until well over 40°C. (I don't know, however, if that was your question). Btw, we had an extensive Bordeaux 1995 tasting today: 6 whites, 81 reds. The cork failure rate was ab absolute disaster. I have not done the exact calculus yet, but it seems that well over 30 percent of the bottles were affected, in most cases confirmed by a backup bottle (we had second bottles for some 60 of the wines). > I'm tempted to join, if only to make that point! Good idea! M. |
Michael Pronay > wrote:
> Btw, we had an extensive Bordeaux 1995 tasting today: 6 whites, > 81 reds. The cork failure rate was ab absolute disaster. I have > not done the exact calculus yet, but it seems that well over 30 > percent of the bottles were affected, in most cases confirmed by > a backup bottle (we had second bottles for some 60 of the > wines). Once again: About half of the wines with problems had definitely signs of TCA, while the other half simply were "off", where we opened the second bottle just to be sure. In three cases the second bottle tasted discernibly different without one being able to say one bottle being better than the other: The cases of fruit scalping (first bottle) vs. random oxidation (the second bottle) - both being cork taints. M. |
Michael Pronay > wrote:
> Btw, we had an extensive Bordeaux 1995 tasting today: 6 whites, > 81 reds. The cork failure rate was ab absolute disaster. I have > not done the exact calculus yet, but it seems that well over 30 > percent of the bottles were affected, in most cases confirmed by > a backup bottle (we had second bottles for some 60 of the > wines). Once again: About half of the wines with problems had definitely signs of TCA, while the other half simply were "off", where we opened the second bottle just to be sure. In three cases the second bottle tasted discernibly different without one being able to say one bottle being better than the other: The cases of fruit scalping (first bottle) vs. random oxidation (the second bottle) - both being cork taints. M. |
On 8 Jan 2005 16:25:37 GMT, (Hunt) said:
[] ] This might be a wonderful time to use cellar-tracking software and carefully ] log the exact location by bin/row/column. "Hey, hon, if this is bin AA-24, we ] must be drinking the '65 Ch Latour!" <G> I guess that's one way to beat palate fatigue... ;) Seriously Hunt, I am not nearly organized enough to do that. I only even keep track of inventory every few years. And even that's just to keep things from getting too out of hand. I just saw a news story on a new flat screen (touch I assume) cellar "manager" machine and SW, for about $6K US, IIRC. Bar code reader included. I'd love to see what my red gunk would do to that baby! (I hate spending money on gadgets that could go after good juice. :)) -E -- Emery Davis You can reply to by removing the well known companies |
On 8 Jan 2005 16:25:37 GMT, (Hunt) said:
[] ] This might be a wonderful time to use cellar-tracking software and carefully ] log the exact location by bin/row/column. "Hey, hon, if this is bin AA-24, we ] must be drinking the '65 Ch Latour!" <G> I guess that's one way to beat palate fatigue... ;) Seriously Hunt, I am not nearly organized enough to do that. I only even keep track of inventory every few years. And even that's just to keep things from getting too out of hand. I just saw a news story on a new flat screen (touch I assume) cellar "manager" machine and SW, for about $6K US, IIRC. Bar code reader included. I'd love to see what my red gunk would do to that baby! (I hate spending money on gadgets that could go after good juice. :)) -E -- Emery Davis You can reply to by removing the well known companies |
On 10 Jan 2005 19:37:55 GMT, Michael Pronay > wrote:
>Btw, we had an extensive Bordeaux 1995 tasting today: 6 whites, >81 reds. The cork failure rate was ab absolute disaster. I have >not done the exact calculus yet, but it seems that well over 30 >percent of the bottles were affected, in most cases confirmed by >a backup bottle (we had second bottles for some 60 of the wines). Clearly that paragraph describes the magnitude of the problem. No industry can tolerate a failure rate of 30% for what is deemed a "premium" product. If the consumer applies those odds to the purchase, the probable expenditure of $xxx-hundred dollars on fine Bordeaux becomes an unacceptable risk. But, broadening the discussion a bit, in your opinion is this related to wine industry failure, cork industry failure, increased awareness/reporting or what?/ Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org |
On 10 Jan 2005 19:37:55 GMT, Michael Pronay > wrote:
>Btw, we had an extensive Bordeaux 1995 tasting today: 6 whites, >81 reds. The cork failure rate was ab absolute disaster. I have >not done the exact calculus yet, but it seems that well over 30 >percent of the bottles were affected, in most cases confirmed by >a backup bottle (we had second bottles for some 60 of the wines). Clearly that paragraph describes the magnitude of the problem. No industry can tolerate a failure rate of 30% for what is deemed a "premium" product. If the consumer applies those odds to the purchase, the probable expenditure of $xxx-hundred dollars on fine Bordeaux becomes an unacceptable risk. But, broadening the discussion a bit, in your opinion is this related to wine industry failure, cork industry failure, increased awareness/reporting or what?/ Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter