i'm new to wine tasting

skrev i melding news: snipped-for-privacy@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...

What makes you think so? You had a watery wine and suspect that all wines from Pinot Noir are watery? Not true. Anders

Because you're not tasing good ones.

Seriously.

For many years I didn't think much of Pinot Noir, preferring Zin, Shiraz, and Cabs, which had more substance as far as I was concerned. Most of my wine tastings were in the Napa and Sonoma valley, but then I tasted some Pinots from Oregon and Mendocino, and they had much more body to them.

Of course, it may have been the year, the specific wines, and some random variation in my tastings, but Pinot requires colder climates to do well, and it may be that you aren't tasting Pinots from the right places (everyone tries to make Pinot Noir, but it's kind of hard).

Try a handful of Oregon or Mendocino Pinots and see if you get some good ones in the batch.

Jose

Try Steele Pinot Noir, Carnaros, not watery at all, more fruit forward. There are quite a few low end Pinots that lack character and taste!

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote in news:1141597756.944968.233920 @p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com:

I am having a Marsannay this evening, I certainly hope it is not watery, I am expecting a nice dark wine with hints of cherries. Light by some standards, but with a lot of character and God forbid, wateriness.

It would be very helpful if you would list the PN's that you have found " watery." PN is available from several regions around the globe, from Germany, to the US, France, Southern Hemisphere, and are done in many, many styles. Compared to a big Cal-Cab, or Zin, many may appear so. However, most are not. They are usually lighter in body, but hardly "watery."

Please provide some recent examples, so folk can comment, regarding those wines, and maybe point you to some specimen, that have much more body.

Hunt

The wine I drank comes from Northern California and is an organic wine... 2001 vintage...

I won't name it because I haven't even been drinking wine that long, so I don't feel I should. Maybe I found the taste watery because I had just had Merlot the night before.

Just a "shot-n-the-dark," but I'd venture that what you experienced was a stylistic choice by the winemaker.

Usually, the CA PNs, especially Central Coast and Carneros, are anything but watery. As a test, pick up a bottle of Acacia PN (~US$20/btl.) and give it a try. It will be lighter, than say a Milat, Duckhorn, or Sullivan Merlot, but not a watery wine. Many Fr PNs are likely to seem lighter, but no less filled with flavors, just lighter in the mouth-feel.

Hunt

For the most part I agree. For a long time I found Pinot Noirs watery, but being from Oregon with all the Pinots available I was able to find some good ones. Very generally speaking the I found the southern Oregon and southern Willamette valley Pinots much better. Alot of the northern Willamette valley Pinots are watery. Good ones to look for are Abecela, & King Estates available in the $20 range. What ever you do, don't give up. It's all part of the enjoyment of discovery is to find the wines you like the best, and the only way to find them is to taste them. I find that wine events are the best way to taste several wines from several wineries for a minimal cost at one location.

Bruce

Why are you tatsing wine? Tasting is for experts and producers. You will get nothing from wine tasting as an amateur or consumer. Leave tasting to experts. It is pointless.

wrote ........

Mr. Scarpitti,

Taste is one of the basic senses - it is impossible to eat/drink anything without tasting.

You taste your morning cornflakes; your morning coffee; your steak and salad for dinner.

Whether you drink your wine by itself, or accompanying a meal, you taste it.

It is from tasting, you get your enjoyment.

A two year old can taste an apple (no great expertise required).

Give over on this tireless campaign against "tasting" - it is pointless.

Of course, someone completely new to wine will want to taste it, and ascertain for themselves the difference between a cabernet and a Chianti.

Just as you did when you had your very first glass.

Hi Zarl,

I found this great website

and they have Discovery Tastings that are specific to region ("appellation" as it is called in wine-talk.) They had a tasting of Anderson Valley Pinot Noirs and discovered two different styles of Pinot Noir. One is more elegant and refined and the other is more fruit forward and jammy. Perhaps you would like the more fruit forward examples. You should read the article and look at the examples they picked out.

Somewhere along the line somebody came up with the idea that there is such a thing as beginning and advanced wine appreciation, which presumes that if you just drink wine with food you're some kind of inbred idiot, and that true connoisseurs have to 'taste' wines in a competitive or comparative setting. This seems to be primarily an American fixation.

It's completely wrong. True connoisseurs drink wines as they are intended to be enjoyed, with food!

Wine is made to be drunk along with a meal. It is NOT intended to be 'tasted' in isolation. Many great dinner wines taste terrible alone, but great with food.

Tasting is used by EXPERTS (not connoisseurs) to evaluate a wine. Experts buy, sell, and prduce wine: they do not consume wine.

Cite one (1) reference that makes a statement to the effect that people who drink wine with food are some kind of idiot.

PPOSTFU Mark Lipton

One little experiment, that you might want to run, is to go to your local wine shop, and express your past experience(s). Mention that you rather liked the Merlot of earlier, but did not fancy the PN. Set a budget /btl. and ask for some recommendations of PNs that have more body. Over a few nights, give each a try, and compare.

IMO, PNs are more food-friendly, than some of the other, bigger wines. In general terms, one can find PNs that go with all but the lightest fish (cream sauces are something different), to many fire grilled red meats. That said, I find little goes so well with mushrooms (soups, sauces, grilled), as a PN, though might opt for one with less "Body" from CA/USA, and lean more towards the PNs of Burgundy, or OR/WA, as they often exhibit more of the truffle, mushroom, damp earth flavors, that I find in many mushrooms. For fish, I'll lean toward a Cal/PN, and for my wife's gumbo, will go for one with some real "backbone."

Most of all, enjoy!!!! Hunt

Tasting is used by everyone to evaluate a wine. I go to vinyards, I taste wines, I buy the ones I like. The only way I know I'll like a wine is to taste it. Preferably with food (it does make a difference) but even without, tasting a wine is a better way to choose than looking at the shape of the bottle, or the color of the seal.

Jose

Quite.

I would add that I also taste to get a broader context for making these purchasing decisions. Much broader than if I only tasted with food. And this breadth of experience gives me a good idea how any given wine will taste with a range of foods.

And I taste because it is FUN!

Oh, and by the way, like many other people, I drink (not taste) without food sometimes. Depends on the wine and my mood. I believe in the UK that most wine is drunk without food.

So, Zarloth, you go ahead and do some tasting,. And drink your wine without food, if that is what you want to do. But do be aware that the wine will taste different if you do drink it with food.

"Steve Slatcher" wrote .............

That certainly is the case in NZ.

Now *that* is splendid advice.

Steve,

I agree completely. While one of my passions is the pairing of food and wine, and I have wine with every meal served after about 11:00AM, I also enjoy " drinking" wine and cannot possibly eat constantly, from 11:00AM until Midnight

- not without really good reason, anyway.

Just drinking wine, is basically "tasting" the wine. Even my "house wines" spend a great deal of time being swirled, and sniffed. Ah, that's part of the pleasure of it all. Even "event" wines, served in resort glassware (jelly-jars mostly), deserve a certain reflection. I hope to extract the most that the wine has, regardless of it cost, or prestiege.

When it comes to buying wines, I attend about 30 "tasting" events for the public, about 10 "trade-only" events, and as many barrel-room tastings as I can, per year. Many of my purchases are predicated on these "tastings." Now, in most cases, I will end up drinking these with food, but it not always possible to have it on hand, especially when the tasting is done outside of my home.

Years ago at a trade-only tasting, one importer of Chianti lamented that his wines were not showing well, because he was too far away from the food stations with any red sauce. I had to agree, and crossed the exhibit hall to retreive some plain pasta with a medium red sauce. His wines came alive and I urged him to direct any serious person to stop across the hall first, then come to him. Of this wine, I freely admit that it was less of a drinker, than a perfect accompaniment to the right foods. I bought several cases later, and it was my house Chianti for some years.

Taste all that you can, and just because a wine might leave you wanting, doesn't mean that it will not become a darling when paired with the right food.

Hunt