Ok, I have been pretty much lurking here for a year or so. Maybe I have
posted 6 times. The afw community is the friendliest most civil newsgroup
I have ever consistently read. I have learned much and enjoyed
"listening" in on your conversations. Thank you all very much.

So I am going to post about wines my wife and I are drinking and see if the
messages enhance the discussions. First a little about me:

I live outside of Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

I have maybe 150 bottles in an unconditioned basement cellar. Most of the
wines are American, but not all. I do not have any old wines that Uncle
Henry left me that I would like to know how much they are worth and where I
might sell them.

I use Cellar!software to track my collection, but I know where every bottle
is. Yes, I sometimes stroke the bottles lovingly

I decant when it seems to make sense--old or young reds mainly.

I am a pure amateur and don't hold out any expertise or knowledge.

I am in favor of screw caps and stelvin.

I buy most of my wines based on recommendations from here, Wine Spectator
and Wine Enthusiast.

As a consumer, I think selelcting wines is really difficult. How does one
know whether the 01 Chateau Bop do bop from France for $29.99 is better
than the 99 Big State Red from California for $15.00 when the consumer has
never heard of either wine (fictional here) and doesn't have a clue about
the vintages or the differences between the wines? My answer is read the
reviews and buy on the recommendations. If I like something (say the
Loosen-Michelle Eroica) then I buy more.

So here is what we have drunk this week and my thoughts on them:

Wednesday (January 5) I came home and a case of wine was on the porch from
the online order I had placed. 6 bottles of 01 Simi Landslide and 6
bottles of 04 Kim Crawford Sauvignon Blanc. My wife was starting parmesan
risotto and needed a cheap white so I chose a Estancia Pinot Grigio and
decided to drink a bottle of the Kim Crawford. Disappointing. It seemed
one dimensional--citrusy tart and nothing else. Screw top. I prefer the
03 Nobilo. I ended up making the risotto which was pretty darn good. 8-)

(Now the moment of truth. Do I give wines a rating like Dale or just use
words for my impressions?) Ok, the Kim Crawford is a B- and cost me $12.99
(all my currency will be USD).

Thursday--Dinner out to celebrate my wife's birthday and friends'
anniversary. We drank the 01 Floral Springs Napa Cabernet. Fruity, with
not much tannin. Enjoyed the wine, but not memorable. B and cost $48 at
the restaurant.

Friday--Lamb chops, roasted potatoes and asparagus. As we cooked, I opened
an Argenta Malbec that someone had brought to our Christmas party. I found
nothing to like about it. No fruit, dull taste and alcohol vapors. I gave
it to my wife, she said "yecch" so we ditched it. I am not sure I have
ever identitied a TCA contaminated bottle, and don't think this one was.
It was just mediocre wine. So, I give it a D. Wonder who foisted it off
on us?

After the disaster, I opened an 02 Terrazas de los Andes Malbec that Wine
Spectator had put in its top 100 wines of 2004. I had 4 bottles in the
cellar. Here was a chance to compare 2 Malbecs and see if it is the style
of the wine or the difference in the wineries. The Terrazas was night and
day different. It had a chewy taste with nice spices. For $13.95 this is
my favorite wine of the week--so far. B+ (still not very sure of how I am
going to grade).

So, this was long, and future posts--assuming for some reason I don't
unleash a flood of flames and go back to luking--will be shorter.

Bill Hogsett

Bill Hogsett > wrote in
. 142:


> cost $48 at the restaurant.
>
> Friday--Lamb chops, roasted potatoes and asparagus. As we cooked, I
> opened an Argenta Malbec that someone had brought to our Christmas
> party. I found nothing to like about it. No fruit, dull taste and
> alcohol vapors. I gave it to my wife, she said "yecch" so we ditched
> it. I am not sure I have ever identitied a TCA contaminated bottle,
> and don't think this one was. It was just mediocre wine. So, I give
> it a D. Wonder who foisted it off on us?
>
> After the disaster, I opened an 02 Terrazas de los Andes Malbec that
> Wine Spectator had put in its top 100 wines of 2004. I had 4 bottles
> in the cellar. Here was a chance to compare 2 Malbecs and see if it
> is the style of the wine or the difference in the wineries. The
> Terrazas was night and day different. It had a chewy taste with nice
> spices. For $13.95 this is my favorite wine of the week--so far. B+
> (still not very sure of how I am going to grade).
>

This sounds like possible TCA- did the first wine have a musty wet
cardboard taste? It doesn't always come out that way to me, the first thing
I notice is the lacking- no fruit dull taste are good signs of a bad
situation. Even poor (cheap)wine will usually show some varietal character
(think about the $6 cabs that they taste at the supermarket, one can
usually at least know that the wine is meant to be cabernet s even if it
isn't a great one), when varietal character is missing, something is wrong
and corked bottle is a likely contender.

"Bill Hogsett" > skrev i melding
. 142...
>
> Friday--Lamb chops, roasted potatoes and asparagus. As we cooked, I
> opened
> an Argenta Malbec that someone had brought to our Christmas party. I
> found
> nothing to like about it. No fruit, dull taste and alcohol vapors. I
> gave
> it to my wife, she said "yecch" so we ditched it. I am not sure I have
> ever identitied a TCA contaminated bottle, and don't think this one was.
> It was just mediocre wine. So, I give it a D. Wonder who foisted it off
> on us?
>
> After the disaster, I opened an 02 Terrazas de los Andes Malbec that Wine
> Spectator had put in its top 100 wines of 2004. I had 4 bottles in the
> cellar. Here was a chance to compare 2 Malbecs and see if it is the style
> of the wine or the difference in the wineries. The Terrazas was night and
> day different. It had a chewy taste with nice spices. For $13.95 this is
> my favorite wine of the week--so far. B+ (still not very sure of how I am
> going to grade).
>
Nice to hear about your tastings. Your low rating of the Argento Malbec
surprised me a little, so it may have been an off bottle, especially judging
from your statement "no fruit". It could have been TCA contamination you
know.
This Malbec was considered a very good buy for the very low price, around
here.
Now, there certainly are much better Malbecs around and I'll have to look
for this Terrazas de los Andes... :-)
Catena Alta 2000 seems to be the best I can get in Norway (55USD a bottle)
Anders

>So, this was long, and future posts--assuming for some reason I don't
>unleash a flood of flames and go back to luking--will be shorter.
>
>Bill Hogsett

Thanks for the post and reviews. I used to live in Chagrin Falls and now I
live outside of Columbus so we're practically neighbors! Please deep posting
you notes I enjoyed them.
Bi!!

In article > ,
says...
[SNIP]
>(Now the moment of truth. Do I give wines a rating like Dale or just use
>words for my impressions?) Ok, the Kim Crawford is a B- and cost me $12.99
>(all my currency will be USD).
[SNIP]

Thanks for the TNs - always appreciated. I'm a bit surprised at the Kim
Crawford SB. I have some of the 04, but have not opened one yet. Unfortunately
(maybe) I gave three as gifts, when I ran out of the three cases of Hafner. In
most other years the Crawford has proved to be great value, sort of a poor
man's Cloudy Bay. I'll crack an 04 this evening and put it to the test,
especially if I'm going to gift it! Crawford has, in the past, offered me
layers of flavor and a wonderful experience. It has exhibited great NZ SB
character and offered inexpensive pleasures. Maybe St H can shed light on the
04, and offer some details of the harvest and Crawford's handling of it.

Again, thank you for the contribution,
Hunt

jcoulter > wrote in
:

> Bill Hogsett > wrote in
> . 142:
>
>
>>
>> Friday--Lamb chops, roasted potatoes and asparagus. As we cooked, I
>> opened an Argenta Malbec that someone had brought to our Christmas
>> party. I found nothing to like about it. No fruit, dull taste and
>> alcohol vapors. I gave it to my wife, she said "yecch" so we ditched
>> it. I am not sure I have ever identitied a TCA contaminated bottle,
>> and don't think this one was. It was just mediocre wine. So, I give
>> it a D. Wonder who foisted it off on us?
>
> This sounds like possible TCA- did the first wine have a musty wet
> cardboard taste?

No, I didn't identify a "musty wet cardboard taste." More no taste at
all. But, since I don't think I have ever identified a TCA corked
bottle, I am not sure what to describe. But, "musty wet cardboard
taste" sure sounds unappealing.

Bill Hogsett

"Bill Hogsett" > skrev i melding
. 142...
> jcoulter > wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> This sounds like possible TCA- did the first wine have a musty wet
>> cardboard taste?
>
> No, I didn't identify a "musty wet cardboard taste." More no taste at
> all. But, since I don't think I have ever identified a TCA corked
> bottle, I am not sure what to describe. But, "musty wet cardboard
> taste" sure sounds unappealing.
>
Hi Bill
Did you ask your wife? You see, you might be like me - I think I'm quite
insensitive to TCA and so don't often, if ever, get that musty wet cardboard
sensation. But, I've certainly had wines with little or no fruit (flat,
empty, nothing there) which is a telltale sign for TCA insensitives I've
understood.
Anders.

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:36:42 -0600, Bill Hogsett >
wrote:

>Ok, I have been pretty much lurking here for a year or so. Maybe I have
>posted 6 times. The afw community is the friendliest most civil newsgroup
>I have ever consistently read. I have learned much and enjoyed
>"listening" in on your conversations. Thank you all very much.
>

Hi Bill,

I agree, this is a very enjoyable ng (unless we get involved in a
discussion with a crosspost) then a few of the "other folk" start
emerging from under their rocks ;-)

Your bravery (first official post) might get some of us other lurkers
to venture into a tasting note or two. The experienced regular
posters are usually very supportive of us who are trying to learn
more about wine.

All the best,

Larry
Southern Ontario

in article , Anders Tørneskog at
wrote on 1/8/05 8:27 AM:


> Hi Bill
> Did you ask your wife? You see, you might be like me - I think I'm quite
> insensitive to TCA and so don't often, if ever, get that musty wet cardboard
> sensation. But, I've certainly had wines with little or no fruit (flat,
> empty, nothing there) which is a telltale sign for TCA insensitives I've
> understood.
> Anders.


First, a welcome to Bill. I generally feel much like you in regard to
making wine decisions. I use the TNs on this board a lot, as well as the
two or three magazines I get, and newspaper articles too. I also go by the
recs of people in those wine shops in my area (Southern California) that
have proven their tastes to be somewhat similar to ours. That's the key, I
think. While there are certainly taste 'standards' for the various varietals
and blends, none of that really matters if a wine isn't to your personal
taste preference.

That leads me to a follow-up to the issue of possible TCA in Bill's Malbec.
On the recommendation of a friend (who is something of an Italian wine
buff), I picked up a bottle of Rosenblum Zin - Richard Sauret Vineyard -
2003 (US$12.49 at Costco..... my friend paid $18 at BevMo - h-m-m-m) and we
tried it last night with some pizza. The 2002 vintage of this wine was a 92
point WS pick, I think. The immediate sensation was very musty. I didn't
really taste anything off, though the wine seemed very flat at first. I've
had this happen several times with an Antinori Chianti I used to like.
After about 20 minutes the mustiness had gone and the fruit was very much
present. This became a really good Zin I would go back for more of, but the
initial mustiness was pretty daunting.

Now........ is that TCA?? or not? Does TCA 'air out' of a wine once it's
opened, or is it simply there or not there?

I also have an interesting side note to this. I just spoke with the friend
who recommended the wine, to ask if he has noted anything similar. He had
not noticed the mustiness, but the couple he has had both exhibited the
same need to stand for 20 or 30 minutes for the fruit to come out. IN
ADDITION, his opened bottles both had synthetic corks in them, while mine is
definitely a natural cork (Same exact vintage). I'm wondering whether this
has anything to do with how Costco got this wine and whether the 'corkiness
- mustiness' was part of the unusually large price difference.

"Anders Tørneskog" > wrote in
:

>
> "Bill Hogsett" > skrev i melding
> . 142...
>> jcoulter > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> This sounds like possible TCA- did the first wine have a musty wet
>>> cardboard taste?
>>
>> No, I didn't identify a "musty wet cardboard taste." More no taste
>> at all. But, since I don't think I have ever identified a TCA corked
>> bottle, I am not sure what to describe. But, "musty wet cardboard
>> taste" sure sounds unappealing.
>>
> Hi Bill
> Did you ask your wife? You see, you might be like me - I think I'm
> quite insensitive to TCA and so don't often, if ever, get that musty
> wet cardboard sensation.

Anders, I just asked my wife. She didn't detect musty wet cardboard
either. She said, "I knew it was a wine I didn't want to drink or use
for cooking."

Bill

(Hunt) wrote in :

> In article > ,
> says...
> [SNIP]
>>(Now the moment of truth. Do I give wines a rating like Dale or just
>>use words for my impressions?) Ok, the Kim Crawford is a B- and cost
>>me $12.99 (all my currency will be USD).
> [SNIP]
>
> Thanks for the TNs - always appreciated. I'm a bit surprised at the
> Kim Crawford SB. I have some of the 04, but have not opened one yet.

I'll be interested in your opinion of the 04. It may very well be that I
haven't had enough New Zealand sauvignon blanc to judge what is good and
what is not. But, I didn't find the Kim Crawford (Marlborough) to be
very interesting.


Bill Hogsett

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 12:48:43 -0600, Bill Hogsett >
wrote:


>I'll be interested in your opinion of the 04. It may very well be that I
>haven't had enough New Zealand sauvignon blanc to judge what is good and
>what is not. But, I didn't find the Kim Crawford (Marlborough) to be
>very interesting.
>
>
>Bill Hogsett

I've always been somewhat quizzical about the fans of NZ sauvignon
blanc. The wine is very respected and regularly gets high ratings in
tastings, yet the relatively common descriptor that the tasters use is
"cat pee". Frankly, that isn't high on my list of potential flavor
favorites--although I must confess to having little experience
first-hand. The end result is that my experience with NZ SB has been
limited and the wines I've tried weren't high on my list. I've done
the Cloudy Bay thing as well as a number of Marlboroughs and it just
didn't float my boat.

In SB, I've always found two distinct flavor profiles. One is a
bright, tart, fruit group--you'll hear of citrus, kiwi, etc. The other
is more mineral--things like flint, stoniness, etc. My usual
preference is for the flinty form. I'd rather find the tart fruit
profiles in whites of Italy, Alsace, Spain, etc.

But, that's just my opinion.
Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

"Hunt" wrote (re Kim Crawford Sauvignon Blanc) ..........

> It has exhibited great NZ SB character
> and offered inexpensive pleasures.

> Maybe St H can shed light on the 04, and offer some details
> of the harvest and Crawford's handling of it.

I have previously posted on the sheer size of the 04 vintage (in particular
respect to the Marlborough region) it was/is nearly double the previous
year.

But (and there is always a but!) I do not equate size with quality - I fear
that many wineries (particularly those with larger export markets) have
churned out one hell of a lot of wine (by NZ standards, of course) of good,
but not excellent quality.

I myself *am not* a huge Kim Crawford fan - it has wide availability in
every supermarket chain around, is frequently discounted - and to me, is
exactly what the British market demands, a quite aggressive, one dimensional
style of Marlborough SB.

I have tried the 04 on about 1/2 dozen occasions, and remain underwhelmed.

Firstly, I understand that although there are something like 150 separate
Marlborough Sauvignons made, many are made in very small quantities, and to
you USAns, I am sorry, the UK market remains far more important to NZ
winemakers than yours (your "difficult" distribution system is an impediment
to the marketing of "boutique" wines) - so, while there are quite a few
better examples of NZ Sauvignon which I have tried, I can only guess which
ones may be available.

Getting back on to the subject of Kim Crawford SB - imnsho, it would not
make my top 20.

Top 2004 Marlborough wine (to me) is Sacred Hill Marlborough SB, followed by
Nautilus, Mud Brick (I know this is available in Australia) Jackson Estate,
several of the Villa Maria Single Vineyard Reserve wines (Wairau & Clifford)
and Cloudy Bay (available under Stelvin, I note!)

I rate the 2004 Palliser Estate (Martinborough) something like 18/20 (not
quite up to the astounding 2003).

A word about Cloudy Bay, and the Villa Maria Reserve wines - they are more
expensive, but I do believe that these wineries "do more".

Both have a little oak maturation, to soften that acidic assault; some have
a little Semillon blended; both pick at various times, to ensure some very
ripe fruit introduces some real tropical flavours, while underpinning with
typical kiwi sauvignon "herbaceousness"

There ends the gospel according to His Lordship.

I agree with (the privately communicated comments of my friend, the learned
Lipton) - upon my recommendation, he tried the Nautilus, and compared same
with the Crawford.

The Crawford was OTT (his comment) and harsh (mine) - while the Nautilus
showed more complexity (his words) and structure and dimension (mine)

Sauvignon (no matter where from) would not be my choice of winter wine, but,
I urge you, to look outside the obvious - you may well be surprised)

--

st.helier

"Hunt" wrote (re Kim Crawford Sauvignon Blanc) ..........

> It has exhibited great NZ SB character
> and offered inexpensive pleasures.

> Maybe St H can shed light on the 04, and offer some details
> of the harvest and Crawford's handling of it.

I have previously posted on the sheer size of the 04 vintage (in particular
respect to the Marlborough region) it was/is nearly double the previous
year.

But (and there is always a but!) I do not equate size with quality - I fear
that many wineries (particularly those with larger export markets) have
churned out one hell of a lot of wine (by NZ standards, of course) of good,
but not excellent quality.

I myself *am not* a huge Kim Crawford fan - it has wide availability in
every supermarket chain around, is frequently discounted - and to me, is
exactly what the British market demands, a quite aggressive, one dimensional
style of Marlborough SB.

I have tried the 04 on about 1/2 dozen occasions, and remain underwhelmed.

Firstly, I understand that although there are something like 150 separate
Marlborough Sauvignons made, many are made in very small quantities, and to
you USAns, I am sorry, the UK market remains far more important to NZ
winemakers than yours (your "difficult" distribution system is an impediment
to the marketing of "boutique" wines) - so, while there are quite a few
better examples of NZ Sauvignon which I have tried, I can only guess which
ones may be available.

Getting back on to the subject of Kim Crawford SB - imnsho, it would not
make my top 20.

Top 2004 Marlborough wine (to me) is Sacred Hill Marlborough SB, followed by
Nautilus, Mud Brick (I know this is available in Australia) Jackson Estate,
several of the Villa Maria Single Vineyard Reserve wines (Wairau & Clifford)
and Cloudy Bay (available under Stelvin, I note!)

I rate the 2004 Palliser Estate (Martinborough) something like 18/20 (not
quite up to the astounding 2003).

A word about Cloudy Bay, and the Villa Maria Reserve wines - they are more
expensive, but I do believe that these wineries "do more".

Both have a little oak maturation, to soften that acidic assault; some have
a little Semillon blended; both pick at various times, to ensure some very
ripe fruit introduces some real tropical flavours, while underpinning with
typical kiwi sauvignon "herbaceousness"

There ends the gospel according to His Lordship.

I agree with (the privately communicated comments of my friend, the learned
Lipton) - upon my recommendation, he tried the Nautilus, and compared same
with the Crawford.

The Crawford was OTT (his comment) and harsh (mine) - while the Nautilus
showed more complexity (his words) and structure and dimension (mine)

Sauvignon (no matter where from) would not be my choice of winter wine, but,
I urge you, to look outside the obvious - you may well be surprised)

--

st.helier

Salut/Hi st.helier,

As usual, I agree with most of what you say about NZ Sauvignons,

le/on Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:27:01 +1300, tu disais/you said:-

>I agree with (the privately communicated comments of my friend, the learned
>Lipton) - upon my recommendation, he tried the Nautilus, and compared same
>with the Crawford.

Who is missed on the NG (is he OK?)

>Sauvignon (no matter where from) would not be my choice of winter wine, but,
>I urge you, to look outside the obvious - you may well be surprised)

Assuming you mean "winter" in weather terms, rather than a North-centric set
of months, why not, and what would YOU serve to accompany a new recipe I
shall be trying out by the ever adventurous Gordon Ramsey, "Jerusalem
artichoke risotto with pan seared scallops."

You cook the unpeeled (to preserve their flavour) sliced artichokes in
butter till tender and then simmer with cream till well reduced. That's used
as the flavouring added at the end of a classic risotto made with chicken
stock etc and the richness cut with a dribble of a sweet sherry vinegar
caramel. I had been going to use one of my remaining Babich Barrel fermented
SBs, but wondered what kind of wine you felt would go better. A classic
white Burgundy (with a flavour profile like that Alan Scott Reserve we blew
our minds over)? Something more mineral?
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Salut/Hi st.helier,

As usual, I agree with most of what you say about NZ Sauvignons,

le/on Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:27:01 +1300, tu disais/you said:-

>I agree with (the privately communicated comments of my friend, the learned
>Lipton) - upon my recommendation, he tried the Nautilus, and compared same
>with the Crawford.

Who is missed on the NG (is he OK?)

>Sauvignon (no matter where from) would not be my choice of winter wine, but,
>I urge you, to look outside the obvious - you may well be surprised)

Assuming you mean "winter" in weather terms, rather than a North-centric set
of months, why not, and what would YOU serve to accompany a new recipe I
shall be trying out by the ever adventurous Gordon Ramsey, "Jerusalem
artichoke risotto with pan seared scallops."

You cook the unpeeled (to preserve their flavour) sliced artichokes in
butter till tender and then simmer with cream till well reduced. That's used
as the flavouring added at the end of a classic risotto made with chicken
stock etc and the richness cut with a dribble of a sweet sherry vinegar
caramel. I had been going to use one of my remaining Babich Barrel fermented
SBs, but wondered what kind of wine you felt would go better. A classic
white Burgundy (with a flavour profile like that Alan Scott Reserve we blew
our minds over)? Something more mineral?
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

In article >,
says...
>
>"Hunt" wrote (re Kim Crawford Sauvignon Blanc) ..........
>
>> It has exhibited great NZ SB character
>> and offered inexpensive pleasures.
>
>> Maybe St H can shed light on the 04, and offer some details
>> of the harvest and Crawford's handling of it.
>
>I have previously posted on the sheer size of the 04 vintage (in particular
>respect to the Marlborough region) it was/is nearly double the previous
>year.
>
>But (and there is always a but!) I do not equate size with quality - I fear
>that many wineries (particularly those with larger export markets) have
>churned out one hell of a lot of wine (by NZ standards, of course) of good,
>but not excellent quality.
>
>I myself *am not* a huge Kim Crawford fan - it has wide availability in
>every supermarket chain around, is frequently discounted - and to me, is
>exactly what the British market demands, a quite aggressive, one dimensional
>style of Marlborough SB.
>
>I have tried the 04 on about 1/2 dozen occasions, and remain underwhelmed.
>
>Firstly, I understand that although there are something like 150 separate
>Marlborough Sauvignons made, many are made in very small quantities, and to
>you USAns, I am sorry, the UK market remains far more important to NZ
>winemakers than yours (your "difficult" distribution system is an impediment
>to the marketing of "boutique" wines) - so, while there are quite a few
>better examples of NZ Sauvignon which I have tried, I can only guess which
>ones may be available.
>
>Getting back on to the subject of Kim Crawford SB - imnsho, it would not
>make my top 20.
>
>Top 2004 Marlborough wine (to me) is Sacred Hill Marlborough SB, followed by
>Nautilus, Mud Brick (I know this is available in Australia) Jackson Estate,
>several of the Villa Maria Single Vineyard Reserve wines (Wairau & Clifford)
>and Cloudy Bay (available under Stelvin, I note!)
>
>I rate the 2004 Palliser Estate (Martinborough) something like 18/20 (not
>quite up to the astounding 2003).
>
>A word about Cloudy Bay, and the Villa Maria Reserve wines - they are more
>expensive, but I do believe that these wineries "do more".
>
>Both have a little oak maturation, to soften that acidic assault; some have
>a little Semillon blended; both pick at various times, to ensure some very
>ripe fruit introduces some real tropical flavours, while underpinning with
>typical kiwi sauvignon "herbaceousness"
>
>There ends the gospel according to His Lordship.
>
>I agree with (the privately communicated comments of my friend, the learned
>Lipton) - upon my recommendation, he tried the Nautilus, and compared same
>with the Crawford.
>
>The Crawford was OTT (his comment) and harsh (mine) - while the Nautilus
>showed more complexity (his words) and structure and dimension (mine)
>
>Sauvignon (no matter where from) would not be my choice of winter wine, but,
>I urge you, to look outside the obvious - you may well be surprised)
>
>--
>
>st.helier

I knew that you would come through on this one and THANK you. Over the years
(more casual tasting than is required to actually rate the NZ SBs) I've found
the Nautilus to be a wonderful wine, often on par, or even slightly above the
CB. Unfortunately, the highly rated Palliser doesn't seem to be found in the
Sonoran Desert. I have some of the '03 Nautilus, AWS the CB, but will try and
find the '04 to taste alongside the aforementioned '04 Crawford.

I, like Ed Rasimus, do not find "cat pee" to be a pleasent taste component,
however, I've never encountered it in the NZ SB's that I've had the pleasure
to try. The "damp hay, bracing citrus, and other light herb" notes are all
there, but I've never found cat pee. Maybe like some, who write that they seem
non-sensitive to TCA, I just have a tolerance for it. Having had cats for many
years, I have never taken the opportunity to "taste" it, but have cleaned MANY
a litter box, and think I know what it smells like. I think that using it as a
descriptor in the flavo(u)r profile is a subversive plot by those who love NZ
SB's to keep the supply UP :-) Regardless, I'll do a horizontal of the '04s
and see what shakes out - hopefully NOT the litter box!

Thanks,
Hunt

(Hunt) wrote in :

>
but I've never found cat pee.

> Thanks,
> Hunt
>
>

Just remeber that it (the cat's pee) is a good thing! present in the better
Sancerre as well.

(Hunt) wrote in :

>
but I've never found cat pee.

> Thanks,
> Hunt
>
>

Just remeber that it (the cat's pee) is a good thing! present in the better
Sancerre as well.

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 10:39:53 -0600, jcoulter
> wrote:

(Hunt) wrote in :
>
>>
> but I've never found cat pee.
>
>> Thanks,
>> Hunt
>>
>>
>
>Just remeber that it (the cat's pee) is a good thing! present in the better
>Sancerre as well.

I hereby nominate you for further research on that particular
attribute. You know, the usual standard verification, validation,
certification, etc. Relationships to breeds and size of cats,
consistency of flavor, aging for maximization of taste, etc. That sort
of thing. I'll stick with flinty, fruity and the occasional
fine-grained tannin sort of descriptors. ;-)


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 10:39:53 -0600, jcoulter
> wrote:

(Hunt) wrote in :
>
>>
> but I've never found cat pee.
>
>> Thanks,
>> Hunt
>>
>>
>
>Just remeber that it (the cat's pee) is a good thing! present in the better
>Sancerre as well.

I hereby nominate you for further research on that particular
attribute. You know, the usual standard verification, validation,
certification, etc. Relationships to breeds and size of cats,
consistency of flavor, aging for maximization of taste, etc. That sort
of thing. I'll stick with flinty, fruity and the occasional
fine-grained tannin sort of descriptors. ;-)


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

In article >,
says...
>
>On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 10:39:53 -0600, jcoulter
> wrote:
>
(Hunt) wrote in :
>>
>>>
>> but I've never found cat pee.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Hunt
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Just remeber that it (the cat's pee) is a good thing! present in the better
>>Sancerre as well.
>
>I hereby nominate you for further research on that particular
>attribute. You know, the usual standard verification, validation,
>certification, etc. Relationships to breeds and size of cats,
>consistency of flavor, aging for maximization of taste, etc. That sort
>of thing. I'll stick with flinty, fruity and the occasional
>fine-grained tannin sort of descriptors. ;-)
>
>
>Ed Rasimus
>Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
>"When Thunder Rolled"
> www.thunderchief.org

Ed,

Are you saying that that research project is "urine?" Sorry, couldn't resist a
bit of my "red-neck" humo(u)r. I too do not find that flavor/odor a nice one,
however, I do admit that some of the mercaptane [SP?] aromas, that would
normally be off-putting elsewhere, do seem pleasent in some wines, same for
the "barnyard" aspect in some PNs - in very small does, though.

Hunt