Wine Spectator

Because of the broad geographical distribution of this newsgroup, there likely aren't many takers within an easy commute of Brooklyn. You might have better luck finding a taker by advertising on the Brooklyn section of Craig's List

Just a thought, Mark Lipton

This is the best fate for any WIne Spectator, new or old.

I did not see the original post, but I ask myself who in their right mind would want to read past issues of a wine magazine? In fact, who would want to read a PRESENT issue of Wine Spectator? ;-0

One of the more brilliant things you have said, Mike....

IYO, Which of the readily available wine mags are worth reading? Graham

I am not Mike (duh!) but here's my response. I think that the Wine Advocate, especially with the recent inclusion of David Schildknecht's reviews of non-Parker-type wines, is good for its coverage and (once you learn to parse his language and understand his biases) the consistency of its reviewing; Claude Kolm's Fine Wine Review is good for geek-type wines (Riesling, N. Rhone, Burgundy) if you share Claude's tastes; Decanter is good for an English perspective.

Just my $0.02, Mark Lipton

The question is do you include newsletters as magazines? I think of the following as primarily review-driven newletters: The Wine Advocate (aka Parker), International Wine Cellar (Tanzer), and Fine Wine Review (Kolm). I'd also include Burghound (Meadows) and View from the Cellar (Gilman), although both are more likely to have more extensive articles than the previous three. The only ones I subscribe to are FWR and VftC, as Claude Kolm and John Gilman seem closer to my tastes in the areas where it is the hardest for me to sample before buying.

Among "real" magazines, at a newstand about to catch the train I am more likely to buy Decanter than Wine Spectator, Wine & Spirits, Wine Enthusiast, etc (cover stories being equal). I thought the one issue I saw of World of Fine Wine looked great, but an annual subscription costs more than a good Grand Cru Burgundy.

There of course can be good wine writing in other magazines like Saveur or Art of Eating. Occasionally stuff in Food and Wine, Cucina Italia, etc.

As to the question of the value of older WS, actually I could see it as a learning guide for a newbie. WS articles tend to be written at a fairly basic level. If you read the article on Loire, it will tell you that Savennierres and Vouvray are Chenin Blanc, and Sancerre and Quincy SB. Articles on Piedmont will explain what terroirs are considered more favored, and the differences between Nebbiolo, Barbera, and Dolcetto (I'm betting WS doesn't get into Freisa). And so on. If you are a real newbie, it might well provide a good start on a region. Sure, the reviews might be out of date, but probably least valuable part to start with. Most of the info I'm talking about doesn't change that much.

...and therefore would be available in books...

Thanks to both you and Mark for your replies. I have been a subscriber to Decanter for some time. I'm a Brit living in W.Canada so the perspective it offers suits me except that burgundies don't get reviewed much. Whenever I have looked at a WS on the news-stand I haven't been impressed. I have been looking for other journals/newsletters but the range available locally is limited and the mags themselves not very interesting. I'll look into your recommendations - I have printed off both posts. Thanks again Graham

I prefer reading everything on the computer anymore. Those magazines stink to high heaven. I know it doesn't bother some, but I could fall down dizzy from the odors. I 'peek' into them occasionally at Borders while sipping my coffee, but never lift them off the shelf. A total novice myself, I wouldn't buy the magazine for the content. There is one large wine encyclopedia that I had settled on but the color photographs sent me reeling.

Good thing wine doesn't bother me 'as badly.' Dee Dee

Those magazines are for people with more money than sense (you know, young urban professionals who want to make an impression in society). Makes me want to puke.

Pardon my saying so, but this kind of attitude is every bit as pretentious as that which some of you seem to be deploring. To suggest that those who read a magazine are being pretentious, is in and of itself pretentious.

Personally, I don't buy WS, but do read it on occassion if it's lying around somewhere. I don't pay for it because I disapprove of it, or it's readership, but simply because it provides too little value for a rather hefty price. Pretty simple consumer economics.

But I'm surprised at the negativity towards the magazine here. It may not represent everyone's feeling towards wine or the wine industry, but it obvioulsy has appeal to a wide audience - ergo it's circulation numbers - and from the little of it I have seen, it has some good content (despite the reliance on reviews). Wasn't it WS that ran some pointed articles calling out specific wineries for practices in the winery that created increased incidence of TCA contamination? And I seem to recall more than one instance of WS being quoted in calling out CA wineries for pricing practices - and touting lesser knwon regions for providing better value - a recurring theme amongst many of us wine geeks.

I'm not advocating for WS - but I think that the "anti WS' attitude, when taken to such levels of attitude, is in and of itself trendy and insubstantial.

I agree with Axis. I get a comp to WS so I don't pay for it so take my opinions with a grain a salt on the matter. Nice pictures, some interesting travel and restaurant info at times. I find the wine articles to be fairly thin on content but make nice light reading. The ratings (like them or not) are an important part of the retail and secondary market in this country. Much like Parker ratings, a good rating from WS can make a market for a wine and vice versa a bad one can spell doom and as a distributor it can have an impact.

WS is a joke. What value it has is mostly to wine shops who can use it to sell lesser-known wines that may have some merit. The ads, though, of course, are all from the big distributors. What good information WS may contain is available in many books. Ratings are utterly worthless. I have no reason to trust them whatsoever. Insofar as WS presents itself as a source of ratings, therein I despise it. I despise the very concept of ratings.

He says, rating Italian wines superior...

"AxisOfBeagles" in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.sf.sbcglobal.net :

You should have seen the more specific testimonials about it posted here in late 1980s. (And about other wine publications as well.) From one thread (one poster quoting another):

Of course that was two decades ago, presumably things have changed somewhat.

[Note: Income figure adjusted to equivalent 2007 dollars by US government Consumer Price Index. -- MH]

I wish I had not listened to Wine Advocate, Antonio Galloni gave 92 pts. to DEI Vino Nobile de Montepulciano 2003, which I just opened for lunch. Wine Spectator gave it 84. The grapes were: Prugnolo, Canaiolo, Mammolo Should've carried a magazine in. Dee Dee

Wine Spectator mails sheets of shelf-talkers in advance of the next issue so retailers can stock up on high score wines and be ready as soon as the issue hits the stands. Their meaningless restaurant winelist "awards" were exposed by Amanda Hesser in the New York Times last year. Out of 3800 entries who paid $200, 3600 got some sort of "award".

Okay, I think we get it. You think the magazine sucks.

The fact is, lame as it may be, the WS promotes wine both as an industry and as a consumable. There's nothing wrong with that. I didn't know squat about wine when I started reading it ten years ago, so I bought it. I stopped doing that several years ago, just like I stopped watching Fox News Channel. But that still doesn't mean the mag (or Fox, for that matter) is entirely useless, even if it's useless to you.

Further, if you're the type of person who only gets information from one source, your knowledge isn't going to be very well-rounded. Anyone who relies exclusively on the Spectator is going to be the wine equivalent of a functional illiterate. Ditto for anyone who relies exclusively on Parker or Rovani. You might come away with some good basic information, but you won't be able to place it in a broader context.

And btw, I guarantee you I'm about as far away from Yuppiedom as they come, and my income level is nowhere close to your assertion. So, you know...while it's generally a good thing to be passionate about one's preferences, there are as many wine publications out there as there are TV channels. Feel free to use the remote.

JJ