Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker
Jeff B
Champagne Lover
2160
Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
David M. Bueker
Riesling Guru
34386
Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:52 am
Connecticut
Daniel Rogov
Resident Curmudgeon
0
Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:10 am
Tel Aviv, Israel
Hoke
Achieving Wine Immortality
11420
Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am
Portland, OR
Bill Spohn
He put the 'bar' in 'barrister'
9539
Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:31 pm
Vancouver BC
Daniel Rogov wrote:I'll comfortably join in the appreciation of the 375 ml bottle.... perfect for the person drinking on his/her own
Dale Williams
Compassionate Connoisseur
11163
Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:32 pm
Dobbs Ferry, NY (NYC metro)
Dale Williams
Compassionate Connoisseur
11163
Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:32 pm
Dobbs Ferry, NY (NYC metro)
Dale Williams wrote: I have to say that I seldom buy Champagne in halves, having had some mixed luck years ago. At that point I was told (and have no evidence of this) that it's riskier buying bubbly in halves,as the bottles are actually filled from larger bottles at disgorgement. Is that true or not?
Jeff B
Champagne Lover
2160
Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
David M. Bueker wrote:There are actually quite a number of grower Champagnes (e.g. Gaston-Chiquet, Chartogne-Taillet) available in 375s. You will just have to prod your friendly merchants to get them for you & pony up for them in quantity.
Jeff B
Champagne Lover
2160
Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
Daniel Rogov wrote:I will, however, disagree (but merely a personal disagreement) on Champagne, for a whole bottle never, never shows any leftovers at my meals or with snacks.
Best
Rogov
Jeff B
Champagne Lover
2160
Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
Hoke wrote:The "Balance Really IS Everything" point is a great thing to learn.
I've found it's one of the easiest things to talk about for newcomers to wine...but one of the hardest things to truly comprehend, oddly enough.
When one is starting out on their (hopefully) lifelong journey with wine, one is of necessity looking at specific characteristics and attributes, from "This is Chardonnay" and "This is high acid" and This is Piedmont", and engaged in so many comparative elements (of variety, of place, of style) that balance is the last thing they are looking for, really.
These people, at this stage, are looking for things that leap out, that actually defeat or counter the idea of balance. They tend to concentrate on singular aspects---okay, sometimes multiples of singular, but you know what I mean---to help them clarify what they like or don't like in a wine. So we have people looking for the imbalance in wines, as in "I love tannic wines". This is not to disparage you and your love for big bruisers, mind you, it's just capturing one of the stages where one is focused on a largely singular attribute.
So when you're in that stage, when you're focused on particular attributes, you seek out those wines, and perpetuate those attributes in your value scale. Then, often enough, the palate leads you down other pathways. Some of those pathways lead somewhere; some don't. But you are incorporating other aspects, other values, other elements.
I have seen people begin with a fascination for the (to me) overfruited and jammy style, the blockbusters, the cult wines, the bombs, simply because it was easy to see the clearly delineated features of the wines.
To use a somewhat clumsy analogy (which I actually do use in some of my classes), think of a bodybuilder as opposed to a marathon long-distance runner or swimmer. In the bodybuilder you can perceive the absolute mass (even though it's pumped up, literally, with a lot of oxygen); you can clearly see the three dimensional protuberance of muscles, as distinct from the rest of the body. It then becomes all about the musculature. Marathoners/swimmers, however, do not show as clear a visual impression, and are not nearly as dramatic in their impression, but they do have musculature and muscular strength; it is simply that that is not their only focus or only attribute: they must bundle together attributes to achieve their goals.
You could also use the analogy of muscle cars versus touring cars, or dragsters versus grand prix racers.
The point of all this rambling is that a true appreciation of balance in wine is not a capability easily achieved, I think. I had a very perceptive and intelligent wine apprentice some years ago who said to me, "This balance thing is fine, but balance means bland; it means nothing sticks out, nothing asserts itself more than any other thing. And to me that's essentially an uninteresting wine." It took him several years before he could get beyond that point of view (but he did).
Some of us are very fortunate, in a way, if we can find a certain style that forever after is the singular definitive style for us. Some of us----I think most of us---have to go through a progress to learn what we most appreciate, and that what we appreciate might be constantly changing, so that what we liked at one time, and fervently so, is not so much what we are drinking now. Some of us---like me---love the journey so much that we don't want the trip to ever end, so we stay on the train as long as we can; now it's the journey that's important, and not the destination.
Jeff B
Champagne Lover
2160
Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
Bill Spohn wrote:Daniel Rogov wrote:I'll comfortably join in the appreciation of the 375 ml bottle.... perfect for the person drinking on his/her own
Dr. Johnson would disagree....but I quite agree, especially if one is to start with a half of white and proceed to a full bottle of red.
Jeff, what you said about balance makes perfect sense with your example of Champagne, but surely a lot less sense when indulging your proclivity for drinking red wines that are so tannic that the subtleties are masked by the roughness of the tannins. How do you reconcile those two? I'd define such a wine as inherently unbalanced...
Jeff B
Champagne Lover
2160
Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
Dale Williams wrote:I really enjoy half bottles. The problem of course is that selection is limited, and sometimes price is 75% of a 750.
But I buy 375s when I can. I have to say that I seldom buy Champagne in halves, having had some mixed luck years ago. At that point I was told (and have no evidence of this) that it's riskier buying bubbly in halves,as the bottles are actually filled from larger bottles at disgorgement. Is that true or not?
Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot, ClaudeBot, Google [Bot], Google IPMatch and 1 guest