Tom N. wrote: I agree that tempranillo is a grape that is sensitive to terroir. I would argue for the purist, this is perhaps the best arguement for tempranillo being a noble grape.
Tom N. wrote:I agree that tempranillo is a grape that is sensitive to terroir. I would argue for the purist, this is perhaps the best arguement for tempranillo being a noble grape..
Tom N. wrote:I love tempranillos. However, I have a hard time picking them out in a blind tasting. Have any of you detected any characteristic smell/taste profile to identify tempranillo?
JoePerry wrote:We had a conversation about this not too long ago in a Numathia thread. He's what I said then...
"While a grape like Pinot Gris usually shows radish, Tempranillo doesn't have a set flavor profile... even within Rioja itself there's a lot of variation. I identify Tempranillo based on the structure, nose, acidity, body, mouthfeel, etc. It's a grape that is easily influenced by terroir, climate, oak, ripeness, blending and "other" techniques.
As much as I love Tempranillo based wines, I cant recall ever tasting Temp-based wine from anywhere and saying “this is a pure expression of Tempranillo.” For me, Allemand’s Cornas Sans Soufe tastes like pure Syrah, or Trimbach CSH as Riesling. When I drink Tempranillo based wines I say things like “this is a great Tondonia” or “classic Vina Real” or “horrendous abomination from the Toro”. I’ve actually read the words of critics who have considered Tempranillo a workhorse, or less noble, grape simply because it lacks a typical nuance. I don’t find Tempranillo so anonymous, but again, it must be identified by other (IMO, more important) characteristics rather than simply strawberries, currents, plums, raspberries, prunes, etc.
It's more important to define what you want. "
Rahsaan wrote:Tom N. wrote:I agree that tempranillo is a grape that is sensitive to terroir. I would argue for the purist, this is perhaps the best arguement for tempranillo being a noble grape..
I do not wish to weigh in on the argument of whether tempranillo should or should not be considered noble, but the above logic seems flawed.
Because, if there is no distinctive taste/character of tempranillo then how do you know what you are drinking. According to your definition all you are drinking is a terroir/elevage wine, but the noble character of the grape is by definition nonexistant and less relevant than in classic Bordeaux, Burgundy, Barolo, etc where the noble character of the grape is expressed through a particular terroir and elevage.
JoePerry wrote:Rahsaan, the character of the grape is expressed in the structure, mouthfeel, and aromatic presence.
Just because it doesn't have constant cherry fruit or green pepper doesn't mean there aren't ways of discerning Tempranillo.
Tom N. wrote:Your arguements for noble grape status are:
1. A grape variety has to have a distinctive taste not amenable to modification by terroir.
2. Expression of terroir in a grape variety is not, by itself, enough for it to be considered a noble variety.
Well, if that is the case I don't think any grape variety would qualify as noble in all cases. Why? Because I have tasted Cabs, syrahs, and pinots in certain wines that had little if any of their usual signature tastes of cassis, pepper, or cherries, respectively..
JoePerry wrote:but I don't believe that there is some inherent quality that makes Cabernet Sauvignon better than Tempranillo.
some weird variety like Muscat
Hoke wrote:some weird variety like Muscat
Rahsaan wrote:Hoke wrote:some weird variety like Muscat
For apparently not thinking that Muscat is a quirky grape.
Hoke wrote:put one of the oldest of the old world wine grapes into nothing more than the 'weird and quirky' category, dismissing it from consideration?
It might interest you to know that many wine writers/catalogers include in their lineup of "noble" varieties, the grape Semillon.
FYI, before you continue this discussion any further, you probably ought to drop the misnomer "noble" and come up with a better word, else you will never be able to define your terms and come to any sort of agreement (or stalemate).
Hoke wrote:Is a Madiran more "rustic" than a St. Joseph?
Rahsaan wrote:Hoke wrote:Is a Madiran more "rustic" than a St. Joseph?
Impossible to say. I think we both agree that you would have to bring out specific examples to really make any point (and to fill any discussion board).
Of course generally speaking we can say that Madiran tends to be more rustic than St Joseph because of the rough tannins while St Joseph tends to be more rustic than Cote Rotie because of the lack of finesse.
But, obviously you can find individual wines from all three appellations on all sides of the rustic/elegant divide.
Still, syrah seems to have a higher potential for elegance than tannat, which would qualify it for a more "noble" status in my view. Although the land is a huge issue and one could perhaps argue that tannat isn't planted on the best/most noble sites (if we need more classification based on endless imprecise variables).
Yes, whenever I find the time I'll get around to that Semillon (as well as renewed appreciation for Muscat)
Sue Courtney wrote:Anyway, what happened to the discussion on the signature tastes of Tempranillo?
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Jeff Grossman/NYC, Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests