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 and mailed]
It is often suggested that French wine would sell better and be much more easily understood if the labels of AoC wines bore a reference to their constituent varietals. The French say that this ignores the over-riding importance of terroir. I have always thought the latter view to be right. To say that a St. Emilion is merlot, bouchet and cabernet sauvignon is only a tiny, tiny, part of the story — take the Corbin and Figeac groups, close as they are geographically, without even considering the differnce between those wines and those of the low lying vineyards around St. Sulpice & St. Pey. That could be said to be explained by the relative importance of the proportions of each and of the wine maker‘s influence although I would still argue when you look at those who have different chateaux in different places that terroir is vitally important. Look at the difference between the Nieppberg chateaux or Ch.Chante Alouette Cormeille and Ch. Gueyrosse for example. The reality of the argument has perhaps to be tested with unblended wines and this was brought home to me last week in a tasting of over 30 different Burgundies. It might be thought that more useful information, and greater consistency, would be derived from a wine label which showed only one cépage to have been used so that it was possible to have the attachment of a single, pure, unblended, varietal label, in Burgundy, of either Chardonnay or Pinot Noir. However tasting three different climats of Dom. Coste-Caumartin‘s wonderful Premier Cru Pommards, both vertically and horizontally, though several vintages, was a clear demonstration, yet again, of the immense difference that a few hundred yards can and does make, even when the same winemaker is responsible for each of the wines under consideration. Why do apparently knowledgeable people continue to press for varietal labelling which may be appropriate for nations or areas producing one or two dimensional wines or those blended from many hundreds of acres but which would deny the subtlety and interst of the great wines of France? Can somebody please enlighten me? Tim Hartley |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article >,
Timothy Hartley > wrote: > >It is often suggested that French wine would sell better and be much >more easily understood if the labels of AoC wines bore a reference to >their constituent varietals. The French say that this ignores the >over-riding importance of terroir. I have always thought the latter >view to be right. To say that a St. Emilion is merlot, bouchet and >cabernet sauvignon is only a tiny, tiny, part of the story — take the >Corbin and Figeac groups, close as they are geographically, without >even considering the differnce between those wines and those of the >low lying vineyards around St. Sulpice & St. Pey. That could be said >to be explained by the relative importance of the proportions of each >and of the wine maker‘s influence although I would still argue when >you look at those who have different chateaux in different places that >terroir is vitally important. Look at the difference between the >Nieppberg chateaux or Ch.Chante Alouette Cormeille and Ch. Gueyrosse >for example. > >The reality of the argument has perhaps to be tested with unblended >wines and this was brought home to me last week in a tasting of over >30 different Burgundies. It might be thought that more useful >information, and greater consistency, would be derived from a wine >label which showed only one cépage to have been used so that it was >possible to have the attachment of a single, pure, unblended, varietal >label, in Burgundy, of either Chardonnay or Pinot Noir. However >tasting three different climats of Dom. Coste-Caumartin‘s wonderful >Premier Cru Pommards, both vertically and horizontally, though several >vintages, was a clear demonstration, yet again, of the immense >difference that a few hundred yards can and does make, even when the >same winemaker is responsible for each of the wines under >consideration. Why do apparently knowledgeable people continue to >press for varietal labelling which may be appropriate for nations or >areas producing one or two dimensional wines or those blended from >many hundreds of acres but which would deny the subtlety and interst >of the great wines of France? Can somebody please enlighten me? More information is better. How would it possibly hurt to list the cepage? Dimitri |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() > More information is better. How would it possibly hurt to list the cepage? > > > Dimitri > My question was not whether it would ”hurt• but what practical beenfit it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the cépage was the same. Tim Hartley |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Perhaps you might consider that Cabernet labeled as such from some of the
cheapy places in south of france would now be Cabernet for $6.99 USA per bottle compared to Bordeauxs Chateau Margaux for $299.00 per bottle. Reality I think is the cheapo everyday wines mostly already do the grape variety. Anyone buying a Margaux is going to know what it is and if not they are not going to buy because its says: Mostly Cab, some Merlot, blah blah blah. The issue hurting French wines is primaritly competition from Austrialia, Chili, Argentina, NZ and the fact there is some anti french sentiment in USA towards french wine. Mostly the cheap stuff. I did my fair share of bashing but DRC and Margaux did not come down :-(. Today there are more producers and the guy with the largest worldwide share is always the one that has the most to lose. I would not change labels on any classified growth. Only the cheap stuff. I would suggest getting more value into the French wines at the top level. Sorry. "Timothy Hartley" > wrote in message ... > >> More information is better. How would it possibly hurt to list the >> cepage? >> >> >> Dimitri >> > My question was not whether it would "hurt. but what practical beenfit > it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker > and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter > that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the > cépage was the same. > > Tim Hartley |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Richard Neidich" > wrote in
nk.net: > Perhaps you might consider that Cabernet labeled as such from some of > the cheapy places in south of france would now be Cabernet for $6.99 > USA per bottle compared to Bordeauxs Chateau Margaux for $299.00 per > bottle. > > Reality I think is the cheapo everyday wines mostly already do the > grape variety. Anyone buying a Margaux is going to know what it is > and if not they are not going to buy because its says: Mostly Cab, > some Merlot, blah blah blah. > > The issue hurting French wines is primaritly competition from > Austrialia, Chili, Argentina, NZ and the fact there is some anti > french sentiment in USA towards french wine. Mostly the cheap stuff. > I did my fair share of bashing but DRC and Margaux did not come down > :-(. > > Today there are more producers and the guy with the largest worldwide > share is always the one that has the most to lose. > > I would not change labels on any classified growth. Only the cheap > stuff. I would suggest getting more value into the French wines at the > top level. > > Sorry. > > > "Timothy Hartley" > wrote in message > ... >> >>> More information is better. How would it possibly hurt to list the >>> cepage? >>> >>> >>> Dimitri >>> >> My question was not whether it would "hurt. but what practical >> beenfit it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine >> drinker and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to >> the latter that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply >> because the cépage was the same. >> >> Tim Hartley > > > Indeed the REd Bicyclette and the like Fat *******'s do mention varietal's but they are competing at the bottom level. I agree, one does not need to know the varietal if one is buying one of the Biggies. -- Joseph Coulter Cruises and Vacations http://www.josephcoulter.com/ |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message et>
"Richard Neidich" > wrote: > > I would not change labels on any classified growth. Only the cheap stuff. > I would suggest getting more value into the French wines at the top level. > > Sorry. > > I don't think there is anything to be sorry about! I would not disagree with you about the really basic stuff if it helps the basic buyer. However French law does not prevent a varietal name on Vin de Pays or VDQS so there is no need for change. At the AoC level terroir becomes improtnt and I stand by my original points. Tim Hartley |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article >,
Timothy Hartley > wrote: > >My question was not whether it would hurt but what practical beenfit >it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker >and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter >that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the >cepage was the same. If it won't hurt then why not list it? Trying to save ink? Dimitri |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article >,
jcoulter > wrote: > >Indeed the REd Bicyclette and the like Fat *******'s do mention >varietal's but they are competing at the bottom level. I agree, one does >not need to know the varietal if one is buying one of the Biggies. So the main argument against listing it is, it seems, snob appeal? Dimitri |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Not at all. Is a Napa Cabernet from Rutherford the same as a California
Cabernet from California. Lets face some reality that geography matters and if you don't know Margaux characteristics your not likely to spend the money anyway. Why change a label of tradition simply due to ignorance? sorry "D. Gerasimatos" > wrote in message ... > In article >, > jcoulter > wrote: >> >>Indeed the REd Bicyclette and the like Fat *******'s do mention >>varietal's but they are competing at the bottom level. I agree, one does >>not need to know the varietal if one is buying one of the Biggies. > > > So the main argument against listing it is, it seems, snob appeal? > > > Dimitri > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I do not disagree that terrior is important and that is why all Cabernet is
not created equal. I think the designate Haut Medoc, St. Emillion, Pomeral is an important part that needs better marketing. In fact, All Cab is not created equal and explain what terrior is to the future generations of wine lovers. I think its a marketing issue not a labeling issue. If it said Cabernet on the label of a Chat. Margaux but the bottle sold for $299 the average consumer is not going to understand the difference without understanding Terroir and its value. "Timothy Hartley" > wrote in message ... > In message et> > "Richard Neidich" > wrote: > > >> >> I would not change labels on any classified growth. Only the cheap >> stuff. >> I would suggest getting more value into the French wines at the top >> level. >> >> Sorry. >> >> > I don't think there is anything to be sorry about! I would not > disagree with you about the really basic stuff if it helps the basic > buyer. However French law does not prevent a varietal name on Vin de > Pays or VDQS so there is no need for change. At the AoC level terroir > becomes improtnt and I stand by my original points. > > > Tim Hartley |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article >,
jcoulter > wrote: > >well it would seem a reverse is the reason "to" list it. It isn't necessary >for the more expensive labels, but it couldn't hurt the cheap ones. Why isn't it necessary for the expensive labels? I think it's interesting to know, say, how much petit verdot made it into the cepage (or that none did in a particular year). I know that the French think we Americans have an unnatural preoccupation with varietals and that we should "Just Drink It" but c'est la vie. Is it a trade secret to know or something? Dimitri |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article et>,
Richard Neidich > wrote: > >Not at all. Is a Napa Cabernet from Rutherford the same as a California >Cabernet from California. > >Lets face some reality that geography matters and if you don't know Margaux >characteristics your not likely to spend the money anyway. Why change a >label of tradition simply due to ignorance? > >sorry This sure sounds like snobbery to me. Dimitri |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You make an interesting point but the key point on a French wine is the AOC
designation not the variety. The new world wines from Napa are great but even Napa does not want to be confused with Central coast Cabernets, or generic cab from AOC California. They want to be a Cal. Cab from Napa, Rutherford, Calistoga, Stags Leap District.---why...because terroir matters even here. If California wine production were 300 years old perhaps you would know if its red from Stags leap its Cabernet. I think 100+ years of history means that a Bordeaux left bank/right bank has different terroir and everyone that enjoys wine understands that if its bordeaux the grapes are the same but the mix might be different % year to year. How about instead of changing the front label there is a label on rear that simply says: 1995 Lafite Rothchild contains 70% Cabernet, 25% Merlot, 3% Cab Franc, 2% Petit Verdot. Small label all white no graphics ingredient type on rear that could be applied. No change to front of label. "D. Gerasimatos" > wrote in message ... > In article >, > Timothy Hartley > wrote: >> >>My question was not whether it would hurt but what practical beenfit >>it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker >>and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter >>that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the >>cepage was the same. > > > If it won't hurt then why not list it? Trying to save ink? > > > Dimitri > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Are all Cabernets the same? Are you selling Cabernet or Napa wine,
Cabernet then should be the same from anywhere? If you beleive terroir is the issue then AOC Margaux Controllee matters more than 80% Cab or 80% Merlot. Get it...I guess I am a snob!!! "D. Gerasimatos" > wrote in message ... > In article et>, > Richard Neidich > wrote: >> >>Not at all. Is a Napa Cabernet from Rutherford the same as a California >>Cabernet from California. >> >>Lets face some reality that geography matters and if you don't know >>Margaux >>characteristics your not likely to spend the money anyway. Why change a >>label of tradition simply due to ignorance? >> >>sorry > > > This sure sounds like snobbery to me. > > > Dimitri > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
(snip)
> How about instead of changing the front label there is a label on rear that > simply says: 1995 Lafite Rothchild contains 70% Cabernet, 25% Merlot, 3% > Cab Franc, 2% Petit Verdot. Small label all white no graphics ingredient > type on rear that could be applied. > > No change to front of label. I'm definitely in favour of defining varietal contents on bottles and the above suggestion sounds very practical and in fact is being practised by many vintners today. I agree that terroire is very important, as are the skills of the viticulturalist and the winemaker. I understand that these factors make one Chardonnay taste very different from another and experience and my particular taste (or lack thereof) will lead me prefer one over the other. The hints provided by the area of origin of the wine, the winemaker, and the declared bottle contents will provide me with hints as to what I can expect from the product. The buyers of plonk really don't give a shit what you put on the label, they only want price... and perhaps alcohol content. Those who are interested in the product will appreciate hints as to what they can expect in the glass. -- Regards Chuck So much wine; So little time! To reply, delete NOSPAM from return address |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Timothy Hartley > wrote:
> [Naming grape varieties on labels] The direction this discussion runs is absolutely moot. The problem does not arise with high-end appellations. The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a "Côtes du Rhône" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why should a "Côtes de Provences" not be able to mention "Grenache"? I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape variety onj these type of wines. M. |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 11:18:39 +0200, Michael Pronay >
wrote: >Timothy Hartley > wrote: > >> [Naming grape varieties on labels] > >The direction this discussion runs is absolutely moot. > >The problem does not arise with high-end appellations. > >The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be >able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a "Côtes >du Rhône" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why should a >"Côtes de Provences" not be able to mention "Grenache"? > >I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape >variety onj these type of wines. Absolutely. I was just in the process of formulating a post with an identical point of view. I have noticed that some low-end Bx and Burg *is* varietally labelled in the UK. Someone told me this was illegal, but tolerated for bottles exported from France. But I have a feeling that it might be toitally legal now. Anyone with more up to date information? Until is is accepted practice, Bx producers have a particular problem in that they have no Vin de Pays alternatives to A0C. Or has that changed now as well? -- Steve Slatcher http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steve Slatcher > wrote:
> I have noticed that some low-end Bx and Burg *is* varietally > labelled in the UK. Someone told me this was illegal, but > tolerated for bottles exported from France. But I have a > feeling that it might be toitally legal now. Anyone with more > up to date information? Afaik, all this is intensely discussed within INAO, but without definitve outcome yet. M. |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Salut/Hi D. Gerasimatos,
le/on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:26:39 +0000 (UTC), tu disais/you said:- >In article >, >Timothy Hartley > wrote: >> >>My question was not whether it would hurt but what practical beenfit >>it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker >>and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter >>that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the >>cepage was the same. > > >If it won't hurt then why not list it? Trying to save ink? Could it be because European legislators don't like being told what to do by the USA? Just like the USA doesn't like being told by France that they shouldn't have invaded Iraq. I may think they're wrong, (and you can read that any way you like) but you have to admit that sometimes "advice" may well be taken in the spirit it is offered, and again - you can take that any way you like. -- All the Best Ian Hoare http://www.souvigne.com mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Salut/Hi Timothy Hartley,
le/on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 23:37:06 +0100, tu disais/you said:- >It is often suggested that French wine would sell better and be much >more easily understood if the labels of AoC wines bore a reference to >their constituent varietals. The French say that this ignores the >over-riding importance of terroir. [snip] >possible to have the attachment of a single, pure, unblended, varietal >label, in Burgundy, of either Chardonnay or Pinot Noir. However >tasting three different climats of Dom. Coste-Caumartin"s wonderful >Premier Cru Pommards, both vertically and horizontally, though several >vintages, was a clear demonstration, yet again, of the immense >difference that a few hundred yards can and does make, even when the >same winemaker is responsible for each of the wines under >consideration. This is a subject that has come up here before and with the possible exception of DG's replies which have more to do with provocation than anything else, most of the valid points have been covered again. As it happens - serendipity, if you like - we've got a "Courtier" from Burgundy staying here for a few days, and the subject came up - before I read your article and the replies to it. I agree absolutely with what you say about the sometimes amazing differences that a few hundred yards can make in the difference between two wines made by the same grower, from the same clones of the same grape variety in the same year - especially in Burgundy, though I could perhaps more accurately say "with the Pinot Noir grape" as I think this is the cepage which seems to be most affected by terroir. Perhaps that's why some Oregon growers are now giving almost more weight to vineyard than to cepage!! (Shades of Burgundy). However, as I said to Jean-François, take some P-N grapevines from Nuits to Pomerol and take some Merlots from Pomerol to Nuits, and you won't get a bizarre pomerol and an atypical Nuits. So the taste and overall character of a wine ARE indubitably much more dependant upon the cepage than upon the terroir, even if _when tasted against eachother_ the same cepage can show amazing differences from different parcels. You point out that it's only at AOC level really that these differences show up, but that may be as much to do with the blending and general messing around that is often carried out at "lower" levels as anything, but which is illegal at AOC level. There's some truth in that - as winemaking is at present carried out. But I don't think that's necessarily true in all circumstances nor in all countries. However, my main problem with the classing of wines by cepage is that it can mislead almost more than it informs. For example, one of the best white wines I've ever drunk was Marcel Deiss' Altenberg de Bergheim. Despite recent (post 50s) legislation in Alsace which seeks to limit Grand Cru vineyards there to monocepage, (thereby disallowing the use of the name of the cepage, because it's implicit) he goes back to ancient tradition there and co-plants several cepages. His wine is sold as "Altenberg de Bergheim" and the amount of the grape varieties present will vary from year to year. "Varietal minded" types may very well dismiss the wine saying "It's a blend." I don't give a XXXX for the fact that it's a blend, I care about the fact that it's a great wine, from a great area and a great grower. That's what matters, not the information which anally retentive varietal freaks seek, that it's 57.32% riesling, 21.03% sylvaner and 12.43% gewurztraminer and 9.22% Pinot Gris. Their obsession with varietal purity has completely blinded them to the fact that there's more to wine than the grape variety from which it's made. The two classic mixed cepage areas in France are Bordeaux and Chateauneuf-du-Pape, and their wines aren't going to be better or worse because you know what's in it. And in the case of Merlot based wines, I suspect that as far as the great American unwashed is concerned, their experiences of flabby merlots from the USA would prejudice them against brilliant Merlots from the "other side" of the Gironde if the cepage were given. So although I would agree with those who insist that the overall character of a wine is more determined by the grapes that make it than anything else, in the case of wines from some of the most ancient and largest wine producing areas in the world, there's not a lot of point in insisting on it being shown. What I _do_ think is ludicrous is that European legislators seem to need to be so blessed directive all the time. What isn't obligatory is forbidden, it seems to me, and I don't think that kind of thinking is good at all. -- All the Best Ian Hoare http://www.souvigne.com mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 11:50:59 +0200, Mike T > wrote:
>Steve Slatcher wrote: > >> >> I have noticed that some low-end Bx and Burg *is* varietally labelled >> in the UK. Someone told me this was illegal, but tolerated for >> bottles exported from France. But I have a feeling that it might be >> toitally legal now. Anyone with more up to date information? > >It is definitely illegal on the main label. You can put this kind of >information on the "contre-etiquette", the back label... I meant the variety is being declared on the main label BTW. -- Steve Slatcher http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Michael Pronay wrote: > Timothy Hartley > wrote: > > > [Naming grape varieties on labels] > > The direction this discussion runs is absolutely moot. > > The problem does not arise with high-end appellations. > > The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be > able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a "C=F4tes > du Rh=F4ne" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why should a > "C=F4tes de Provences" not be able to mention "Grenache"? > > I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape > variety onj these type of wines. > > M. I agree with you Michael, the more info, the better. It may be true that experienced wine sippers (like the people in AFW) don't need to know more than the appellation. But newcomers need all the help they can get, particularly here in America, where wine is not really an ingrained part of the culture. The average American won't know what the heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means. Dan-O (just my two cents) |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Agreed but does the info have to be on the front label. Why not a small tag
on back of label that says the % of Grapes? Dick "Dan The Man" > wrote in message oups.com... Michael Pronay wrote: > Timothy Hartley > wrote: > > > [Naming grape varieties on labels] > > The direction this discussion runs is absolutely moot. > > The problem does not arise with high-end appellations. > > The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be > able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a "Côtes > du Rhône" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why should a > "Côtes de Provences" not be able to mention "Grenache"? > > I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape > variety onj these type of wines. > > M. I agree with you Michael, the more info, the better. It may be true that experienced wine sippers (like the people in AFW) don't need to know more than the appellation. But newcomers need all the help they can get, particularly here in America, where wine is not really an ingrained part of the culture. The average American won't know what the heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means. Dan-O (just my two cents) |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article . net>,
Richard Neidich > wrote: > >Are all Cabernets the same? No. >Are you selling Cabernet or Napa wine, Both. >Cabernet then should be the same from anywhere? No. >If you beleive terroir is the issue then AOC Margaux Controllee matters more >than 80% Cab or 80% Merlot. It does, but it's still nice to know the cepage. I don't see the problem with listing the cepage on the back of the label. >Get it...I guess I am a snob!!! I guess so. Dimitri |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article . net>,
Richard Neidich > wrote: > [snip!] > >How about instead of changing the front label there is a label on rear that >simply says: 1995 Lafite Rothchild contains 70% Cabernet, 25% Merlot, 3% >Cab Franc, 2% Petit Verdot. Small label all white no graphics ingredient >type on rear that could be applied. > >No change to front of label. This is exactly what I am suggesting. Why would anyone change the front? Dimitri |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cause I am a snob?
"D. Gerasimatos" > wrote in message ... > In article . net>, > Richard Neidich > wrote: >> > [snip!] >> >>How about instead of changing the front label there is a label on rear >>that >>simply says: 1995 Lafite Rothchild contains 70% Cabernet, 25% Merlot, 3% >>Cab Franc, 2% Petit Verdot. Small label all white no graphics ingredient >>type on rear that could be applied. >> >>No change to front of label. > > > This is exactly what I am suggesting. Why would anyone change the front? > > > Dimitri > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard Neidich > wrote:
[snip] > Lets face some reality that geography matters and if you don't know Margaux > characteristics your not likely to spend the money anyway. Why change a > label of tradition simply due to ignorance? > sorry Considering that the worldwide market for French wine is declining, and the average age of consumers of high end French wines are going up, I'm sure French viniters are taking note, probably with alarm. If they feel like alienating younger drinkers, eventually, they will have no market. The smarter ones will realize that marketing is more important than snobbery (and tradition). I guarantee this attitude will not be forever. -- Kevin Do you really need to email to reply? Just post it! Otherwise: 'ah' underscore 'chang' at sign hotmail period com |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Agreed that its declining but isn't that what happens when there is
competition on price side primarily. I don't think France has the issues with Top Classified wines have decline of share. Its with the lower end stuff and much of that does show the grape variety. It marketing and price that is the key issue not the front label. I am not opposed to rear label that is informative as to cepage just not the front label. Yes tradition means a lot. > wrote in message nk.net... > Richard Neidich > wrote: > > [snip] > >> Lets face some reality that geography matters and if you don't know >> Margaux >> characteristics your not likely to spend the money anyway. Why change a >> label of tradition simply due to ignorance? > >> sorry > > Considering that the worldwide market for French wine is declining, and > the average age of consumers of high end French wines are going up, I'm > sure French viniters are taking note, probably with alarm. If they > feel like alienating younger drinkers, eventually, they will have no > market. The smarter ones will realize that marketing is more important > than snobbery (and tradition). I guarantee this attitude will not be > forever. > > -- > Kevin > > Do you really need to email to reply? Just post it! > Otherwise: 'ah' underscore 'chang' at sign hotmail period com |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Richard Neidich" > skrev i melding ink.net... > I think 100+ years of history means that a Bordeaux left bank/right bank > has different terroir and everyone that enjoys wine understands that if > its bordeaux the grapes are the same but the mix might be different % year > to year. > 100+ years in Bordeaux? I believe they started in 50 A.D. so that would make it 1950 years... Anders |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
> The average American won't know what the
> heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means. > > Dan-O (just my two cents) > In which case how is the cépage information going to help him? My point is simply that, even with a single varietal, its identity only sets very broad boundaries of taste: terroir, winemaker and his method, including use of oak, temperature of fermentation and degree of extraction, maceration, use of triage, defeuillage, green harvesting, all have such a massively marked effect so that the less experienced are more likely to be misled into thinking that, for example, the French Pinot Noir labelled wine they liked last week will be the same as the one they are offered this week from a different grower and/or place. That is why I have such grave doubts about the benefits of varietal labelling — it is not informative to the less experienced — it is in fact a likely snare and a potential delusion. (You will note I have asssumed that the unwary inexperienced buyer is looking for another French Pinot Noir — a fortiori, the argument if he strays outside national boundaries.) Once you get into blended wines the arguments are stronger still that mere percentage blend information is even less helpful. Tim Hartley |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Greetings Tim;
In terms of the continental wine scene I would certainly count myself as REALLY less experienced (perhaps a little less so when it come to my native Niagara wines) and I must say I have never considered myself terribly anal retentive... certainly not to 2 decimal points at any rate.... Never the less, I am interested in information on the contents of the bottle as a useful tool to give me an INDICATION of what I can expect in the bottle. I don't think one need drink much wine to quickly realise that not all wines, blended or "pure" varietal, from all winemakers are created equal. I rather tend to believe that to most wine drinkers (even in Europe?) Chateau Flim Flam on the label tells them less than nothing about what the hell is in the bottle. Hey, you want the worlds money? Figure out what will attract the worlds wine drinkers...... Sorry, for me, Flim Flam aint it! Just the facts ma'am. -- Regards Chuck So much wine; So little time! To reply, delete NOSPAM from return address > My point is simply that, even with a single varietal, its identity > only sets very broad boundaries of taste: terroir, winemaker and his > method, including use of oak, temperature of fermentation and degree > of extraction, maceration, use of triage, defeuillage, green > harvesting, all have such a massively marked effect so that the less > experienced are more likely to be misled into thinking that, for > example, the French Pinot Noir labelled wine they liked last week will > be the same as the one they are offered this week from a different > grower and/or place. That is why I have such grave doubts about the > benefits of varietal labelling - it is not informative to the less > experienced - it is in fact a likely snare and a potential delusion. > (You will note I have asssumed that the unwary inexperienced buyer is > looking for another French Pinot Noir - a fortiori, the argument if he > strays outside national boundaries.) Once you get into blended wines > the arguments are stronger still that mere percentage blend > information is even less helpful. > > Tim Hartley > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Timothy Hartley > wrote in
: >> The average American won't know what the >> heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means. >> >> Dan-O (just my two cents) >> > > In which case how is the cépage information going to help > him? > In 1969 I had a friend who was examining my likes and dislikes in wine, he said, "you will like beaujolais." He was right, He might have said "You will like gamay" but he didn't. I also knew at the time that I liked chianti classico, though I did not know that I liked wines made from Sangiovese. It is largely what you learn. Had I learned varietals I might be on that bandwagon, but I learned AOC's and blends and to this day it is how I think of wine. For those of us who have learned this way the varietal litany seems silly since even in my favorites there huge difference from year to year based upon the growing conditions etc. You could try to convince me to drink brand X shirazGrenanche blend but it would be easier to blend something and call it Goats do Roam in Villages, I would know instantly what it would be (or should be) like. -- Joseph Coulter Cruises and Vacations http://www.josephcoulter.com/ |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I haven't read yet the whole vast flurry of responses to this query, so I
apologize if the following was covered already. Here is a little history. The "varietal" labeling now taken for granted by some US wine consumers was a new idea proposed after the repeal of Prohibition in the US. Schoonmaker and Marvel in their seminal 1941 book _American Wines_ (Duell, Sloan and Pearce, New York) advocated varietal labeling as a pragmatic alternative in the absence of the established and understood place-based naming common in other, older wine-producing regions. (Elin McCoy in her recent book mentions Schoonmaker and Lichine's coinage of the term "varietal" .) If honestly used, this could also build respectable US wine identities, unlike the very loose "generic" marketing names then routine on US table wines. (Note also that when Schoonmaker and Marvel wrote, only one quarter of US wine consumption was tables wines; three-quarters was sweet fortified wines at 18-21 percent alcohol, a residue of tastes during Prohibition.) Even varietal labeling had its limitations at the time, as those authors pointed out: "A label is submitted and approved for a California wine made from Riesling grapes: the Federal Government does not know and is apparently in no position to find out, whether this wine was made from Riesling grapes or from Thompson's Seedless. If not made from Rieslings, the wine may have been made and the labels ordered by a grower who is convinced that his grapes are Rieslings ("Father always said that the grapes in the north forty acres were Rieslings") or by a grower who is committing a deliberate and conscious fraud. The Treasury Department apparently believes, and far too many lay citizens also believe, that it is possible to make people honest and intelligent and well-informed by publishing a book of regulations or passing a law." -- Max |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
All of these arguments for and against varietal labeling are
fascinating. But I do want to make one more point - a beginning wine drinker's tastes (and income) will tend to change over time. In other words, today's $4 per bottle plonk drinker might (someday) see a substantial increase in his/her paycheck. But the habit of shopping by varietal will likely be set in concrete by then. In that case, the name Chateau Margaux (one of France's most famous) will mean diddly - the drinker in question will want to know what is inside. And this person, who might now have $104 to spend, will be inclined to look for something else. Dan-O |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dan The Man" in oups.com:
| | ... the more info, the better. It may be true that experienced | wine sippers (like the people in AFW) don't need to know | more than the appellation. But newcomers need all the help they | can get ... The average American won't know what the heck | "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means. What ??? The "average American" doesn't know either what the heck Cabernet Sauvignon means, until learning the phrase. The line of argument here seems to presume, without saying it or examining it, that US newcomers learn only about varietal naming when learning about wine, and that this is OK. Yet it has always been in the newcomer's *own interest* to learn some cross-section of wine names, not just one sub-set of them. Probably most of the separate wine labels available in the US are from outside the US and use their own, much longer-established nomenclature. If there is no interest in learning some range of wine names, then is this effectively an argument about catering to ignorance, or laziness? (I don't think that's the whole story in international varietal naming, but I am referring to the remarks above. "Dan The Man" in oups.com: | | ... today's $4 per bottle plonk drinker might (someday) see a | substantial increase in his/her paycheck. But the habit of | shopping by varietal will likely be set in concrete by then. Why? | | In that case, the name Chateau Margaux (one of France's | most famous) will mean diddly - the drinker in question will | want to know what is inside. Chteau Margaux is inside. Precisely. (Next question?) | And this person, who might now have $104 to spend, | will be inclined to look for something else. Has this become an argument now for catering to nouveaux-riches? If so let us address it in those terms, and in depth. I think that could be interesting, and more meaty than some of these discussions.. -- Max |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article >,
Max Hauser > wrote: > >The "average American" doesn't know either what the heck Cabernet Sauvignon >means, until learning the phrase. The line of argument here seems to >presume, without saying it or examining it, that US newcomers learn only >about varietal naming when learning about wine, and that this is OK. Yet it >has always been in the newcomer's *own interest* to learn some cross-section >of wine names, not just one sub-set of them. Probably most of the separate >wine labels available in the US are from outside the US and use their own, >much longer-established nomenclature. If there is no interest in learning >some range of wine names, then is this effectively an argument about >catering to ignorance, or laziness? (I don't think that's the whole story >in international varietal naming, but I am referring to the remarks above. I think what opponents are missing is that even serious wine drinkers sometimes have trouble identifying what varietals are in many French wines. As someone else stated, the blend (in blends) can even vary from year to year. It's not catering to ignorance or laziness to put the varietals on the label. Some very knowledgeable people are sometimes wrong about the varietals in even Bordeaux (there are some left bank merlots and right bank cabs), let alone 'complicated' wines like Chateauneuf Du Pape. The real question is whether it is relevant and informative to list the cepage on the (back of) the label. Many (most?) California wines (that are blends) do just this. Those that are not usually list the varietal on the front. I, personally, find this interesting. As I said earlier in this thread, some wine drinkers do not care at all what's in the bottle as long as they like it. Given that some people care and others do not, it seems to make sense to me to list the cepage somewhere on the bottle. In Robert Parker's review of the esteemed 2000 Chateau Margaux, he relates that the wine is 90% cab and 10% merlot and most profiles of Margaux's vineyards do relate the number of acres under vine of each varietal. Therefore, it is not just neophyte wine drinkers who are interested in this information. It would be much nicer to have the information printed on the bottle than to have to research the composition, which is sometimes difficult for more obscure wines. Those who don't care don't have to read the back label and those who do can have the information at their fingertips. Dimitri |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ian Hoare > wrote:
[Stating grape varieties on the label] >> If it won't hurt then why not list it? Trying to save ink? > Could it be because European legislators don't like being told > what to do by the USA? No it could definitely be not. Cool down, Ian, but this discussion has arosen in France, it's discussed at the INAO and other circles. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the cause you mention. M. |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Richard Neidich" > wrote:
>>> The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not >>> be able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a >>> "Côtes du Rhône" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why >>> should a "Côtes de Provences" not be able to mention >>> "Grenache"? >>> >>> I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape >>> variety onj these type of wines. >> I agree with you Michael, the more info, the better. [...] > Agreed but does the info have to be on the front label? Yes! > Why not a small tag on back of label that says the % of Grapes? Because Dourthe, Barton & Guestier, Caves Baron Philippe de Rothschild might want to market a wine called "Le Sauvignon du Baron Rothschild, AOC Bordeaux". Because French supermarket buyers see - and buy! - Sauvignon Blanc from Italy, Australia or New Zealand. This is a totally diffenrent question - and the one that burns under the fingernails! - from the discussion of listing the percentage of cabernet, merlot etc. on the back label of Chateau Lynch-Bages or Flim Flam. M. |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Richard Neidich" > wrote:
> It marketing and price that is the key issue not the front > label. I don't quite get this sentence, but anyhow: The front label (together with the price tag) is *THE* *SINGLE* *MARKETING* *TOOL* when you compete in a supermarket shelf. M. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Wine labelling | Wine | |||
New wine varietal just for seniors | General Cooking | |||
Yunnan black tea varietal = Darjeeling varietal? | Tea | |||
Purpose of a Wine Cellar | Wine | |||
Capitalization of Wine Varietal Names | Wine |