"Drinkable" wine

Reading the thread on wine "traits", it occurred to me that I haven't seen the attribute "drinkability" discussed here; yet this is one of the most important attributes for me. I define drinkability thusly: it is the amount of wine one would consume at a single sitting (evening), without ill effects. Obviously, it depends on the particular person's constitution and drinking habits, which have to be accounted for, but (I think) it reflects some intrinsic property of the wine too, that is independent from all its other taste traits (acidic/sweet/tannic etc.). For me, a wine is undrinkable if I would not consume more than half a bottle (for whatever reasons - bad taste or ill effects), moderately drinkable - one bottle or thereabouts, but no more than one and a half, and highly drinkable - a magnum or more. So do you think this is an objective trait (like acidity), or is it a subjective trait, such that a certain wine, drinkable for somebody, can be undrinkable for someone else? (Note - I can usually tell if the wine is drinkable or not as early as the first sip, or as late as the beginning of the second glass. In the second case, the wine gradually feels weirder and weirder, and I know I have to stop drinking, or else... How do I know, you may ask - simple, by stubbornly ignoring that feeling on some occasions ;) Some examples of some somewhat common wines you might have tasted, together with their drinkability rating (for me, of course):

- Charles Shaw "Two Buck Chuck" (California) - undrinkable

- Zarafa Pinotage (South Africa) - undrinkable

- Little Penguin Chardonnay (Australia) - undrinkable

- Yellowtail Shiraz (Australia) - moderately drinkable

- Rex Goliath 47lb rooster (California?) - moderately drinkable

- Egri Bikaver Bull's blood (Hungary) - highly drinkable

- Castellana Montepulciano D'Abruzzo (Italy) - highly drinkable

- Les Etoiles Shiraz (Vin de pays d'Oc) - highly drinkable

- Pepiere Muscadet (France) - highly drinkable

Reply to
Elko Tchernev
Loading thread data ...

Not sure exactly what you consider to be undrinkable. What 'ill effects' are you referring to? What tastes bad to one person might be very enjoyable to another. Most traits are definable across a wide spectrum of people. Acidity for instance can be defined. Drinkability can not because in actuality it encompasses all the other traits combined and is subjective to the individuals own likes and dislikes.

If you define it as ability to consume a certain amount in one sitting then a lot has to do with alcohol content and the individual. Some are under the table with 1 glass especially a high alcohol wine!!

Reply to
miles

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"---Attila the Hon 1231 AD

as an experiment I served a decent Bordeaux > > Reading the thread on wine "traits", it occurred to me that I

Reply to
Joe "Beppe"Rosenberg

Not sure what they meant by 'too dry'. Sounds like they just didn't like dry wines. I myself prefer as close to bone dry as a wine can get. Sometimes people confuse sweetness with fruity. They may say a wine that is very fruit forward is sweet and a wine that lacks fruit as being too dry.

Reply to
miles

IME people not used to wine terms say a wine is too dry when they notice the mouth-drying effects of tannin; it has nothing to do with residual sugar.

Reply to
Steve Slatcher

Hey, that was the vintage I discovered Dutertre! (Not sure about the spelling either, or where the caps go anyway). That was one of the great values of '82. And far from dry, as I recall.

Personally drinkable has more to do with how the wine flatters its setting for me, but then I'm sort of a light weight when it comes to downing a mag of anything! :)

That is to say a fruit forward aussie would be great with conversation or pizza, but I wouldn't find it very drinkable with a veal chop. (Not criticizing anyone who would enjoy the combo).

-E

Reply to
Emery Davis

Well, all wines are 'drinkable'. That's what they are made to be.

No. It's purely a function of alcohol content.

Reply to
UC

Did you serve it with a meal?

At the last class of an eight week

Reply to
UC

Oh no. Are we back to that tired out discussion that wines should only be served with a meal? Thought that was done and over with.

Reply to
miles

No, they (reds, at least) should not be JUDGED except with a meal.

Reply to
UC

Guess I shouldn't be enjoying a nice Syrah right now since I don't have a meal with it. I've never had this particular Syrah before so I guess I am judging it. It's excellent. Now, we already had this discussion before. People drink as they please. What works for you does not for others. Recognize that and deal with it.

Reply to
miles

Being "made to be" something doesn't make it so. I had a friend who made some homemade wine. He didn't have grape juice, so he used Tang.

He didn't have grape Tang, so he used orange Tang instead.

I doubt even you would consider the result to be drinkable.

Jose

Reply to
Jose

no meal--just bread & cheese

I used to teach wine appreciation @ senior centers---wines without residual sugar were not popular, so I began offering wines like Inglenook chenin blanc--which is about 3% RS----class wanted stuff like Shapiro's Concord which blends some grape juice with a lot of sugar.

I served 3 wines--a California "Chablis" or White Table wine, an inexpensive chining blanc, a chenin of quality like Dry Creek or decent Vouvray.

Drinkability

Reply to
Joe "Beppe"Rosenberg

Are you saying that a wine is "highly drinkable" if you could *imagine* drinking a magnum of it at one sitting, or if you *actually* do drink a magnum of it at one sitting?

Dana

Reply to
Dana H. Myers

I would define a drinkable wine as one that gives pleasant, smooth flavors as it crosses your tongue. A wine that socks you in the mouth with potent, highly extracted flavors could certainly be drunk, but it wouldn't go down easy with someone who is unaccustomed to such wines.

Dan-O

Reply to
Dan the Man

[SNIP]

I tend to use slightly different criteria, but also give "grading" points on "drinkability." One Chardonnay that was our house white for a while, some many years ago, was the Lindeman's Bin 65 [?]. Only problem that I found with it, was that it was good for the first glass, so-so for the second, and took on a bitter "edge," by the third glass. I've experienced the same thing, usually with less expensive wines, and grade them down on the drinkability scale.

Hunt

Reply to
Hunt

I love a huge big fruit forward Zin or Syrah. Some of the bigger Zins are potent and rather high alcohol. True that those unaccustomed to such wines wouldn't like them but for me they are very drinkable.

Reply to
miles

I don't think that anyone apart from you has any idea what kind of ill effects you're talking about. Drunkenness we understand, of course, but from the context of your remarks I don't think that's the kind of "ill effect" that you are referring to.

So, what are you talking about?

Andrew.

Reply to
Andrew Haley

Maybe I assumed incorrectly that the ill-effect was more flavor-based, than an actual malady. Perhaps I am very wrong in that one.

Hunt

Reply to
Hunt

DrinksForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.