Mike Conner wrote:Jenise,
Hey, that is good!
Honestly never occurred to me that I ought to do that for the whole box . . .
(who will now have a couple of pillows dedicated to my wine traveling escapades)
Robin Garr wrote:I'm just sure that horrific Kentucky Norton I took to NYC last year would have been as good as Ch. Pavie if only I hadn't shaken it up
Covert wrote:As others have commented, travel shock is not a matter of sediment. Something else happens to take subtleties and flair out of some wines.
Ian Sutton wrote:Here's another theory - that it is sediment, but that it's the early stage of sediment, not apparent to the naked eye.
I hope that Jenise is right in blaming vibration more than sloshing.
Jenise wrote:...my own experience has been that fined/filtered wines escape shock better than un-f'd wines.
Covert wrote:Ian Sutton wrote:Here's another theory - that it is sediment, but that it's the early stage of sediment, not apparent to the naked eye.
Maybe so, but I have never worried about sediment (almost never decant) and the wine tastes as bright to me when I take that last glass with sometimes plenty of sediment in it.
Perhaps other forum members can vouch for wine tasting worse with sediment. To me it obviously loses some mouth feel with gritty sediment and sometimes the sediment imparts a bitter taste. But I think we are talking about wine shutting down with travel, not just tasting a little bitter.
Or are you saying that only very fine sediment shuts a wine down?
Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], TomHill and 8 guests