US Passes France In Wine Consumption

Originally Posted by Nil

Click to expand...

I picked up three different kinds of Crus Beaujolais after reading this thread. I figured it's finally time I step up my wine knowledge and expand my horizons.

To become a genius at wine, we can definitely give you some great book recs. Or you could come and be my protege. Those are your two main options.

Book recommendations would be fine, I fear sexual assault if I were to put you into a position of power over me.

Originally Posted by Nil

Click to expand...

Book recommendations would be fine, I fear sexual assault if I were to put you into a position of power over me.
You and everyone else I know. My two favorites are The World Atlas of Wine and the Sotheby's Wine Encyclopedia. If you want to learn about winemaking practices and the differences in laws between regions, and a lot of talk about different producers in each region, go for the second. If you want a really in depth look at each region with incredibly awesome maps, go for the former.

interesting discussion.

Originally Posted by Manton

Click to expand...

Long story.

Short version: California by and large did not use oak until the late 60s. Then the new wave of vintners started using it to emulate the French and up the quality. It became popular and notable. Then they started to find ways oak the cheaper wines to capitalize on that prestige and popularity. It was short step from there to mass produced chard with wood chips. (Kendall-Jackson).

Originally Posted by Manton

Click to expand...

I didn't mean that they innovated oak chips, just that they were the biggest user. Sort of like Henry Ford didn't invent the car.

Stonestreet makes great Chard, I was stunned when I learned it was not only owned but founded by Jess Jackson.

Potelle is another great Chard, which they acquired.

Actually, Kendall-Jackson and it's family doesn't use oak chips. In essence, they don't "teabag" any of their wines. Everything made is done in oak. Now whether or not that fits your palate is a different story altogether.

It's also worth noting that just because something is mass produced doesn't mean it's made in bulk, if you follow my distinction. KJ uses small lots, and artisan techniques.

there are so many wine books out there. kwilky cited two very good references for looking things up. but trying to learn about wine through a reference is like trying to learn about history through an encyclopedia ... it can be done, but you're going to miss a lot of context. if you really want to learn about wine ... not just be able to rattle off place names and obscure production techniques ... i think the best writer around is my old friend Matt Kramer. His "Making Sense of Wine" is absolutely terrific. he followed that up with "Making Sense of Burgundy", which is more specific but even better (history of why burgundy is the way it is). He's also done books on italy and california. the vital difference with matt's books is a) he's a REALLY graceful writer, a pleasure to read, not just a collector of facts; and b) you really get the context in which these wines exist. they're not just free-floating brand names.

Originally Posted by foodguy

Click to expand...

there are so many wine books out there. kwilky cited two very good references for looking things up. but trying to learn about wine through a reference is like trying to learn about history through an encyclopedia ... it can be done, but you're going to miss a lot of context. if you really want to learn about wine ... not just be able to rattle off place names and obscure production techniques ... i think the best writer around is my old friend Matt Kramer. His "Making Sense of Wine" is absolutely terrific. he followed that up with "Making Sense of Burgundy", which is more specific but even better (history of why burgundy is the way it is). He's also done books on italy and california. the vital difference with matt's books is a) he's a REALLY graceful writer, a pleasure to read, not just a collector of facts; and b) you really get the context in which these wines exist. they're not just free-floating brand names.

This is my favorite wine book. It sets you up to enjoy, not be an expert, which is exactly what I want. Good to hear he is a nice guy as well. Certainly comes off as one.

I'm shocked that it's possible to age a million case production in oak, not using chips, and still be able to charge what they charge.

Great discussion after I signed out. FG and K-dub got what I was saying in all it's variations. As I said early, from canopy managment (including trellis systems) to terrior choices (this clone on this hillside, that clone on the lee side as micro-terrior choices to deciding to grow in Sonoma or Australia as macro ones) it's all a form of manipulation.

FG, like that term and I think it's an apt term.

Originally Posted by Piobaire

Click to expand...

Great discussion after I signed out. FG and K-dub got what I was saying in all it's variations. As I said early, from canopy managment (including trellis systems) to terrior choices (this clone on this hillside, that clone on the lee side as micro-terrior choices to deciding to grow in Sonoma or Australia as macro ones) it's all a form of manipulation.

FG, like that term and I think it's an apt term.
Eh, I'm not sure manipulation is the right word for that. I mean, you know a lot more about how wine is made than I do, but I would think that separating basic growing choices from the manipulation of the picked grapes would be more useful if your aim was to create useful categories and not to try to make an argument that everything is the same, so there can be no real differentiation. Anyway, if this goes back to your argument that Chardonnay is a blank slate, I can see it necessary to blur these lines, because only by doing so can you support that claim. Chardonnay is probably the most terroir-centric grape I can imagine, so if choosing terroir is considered manipulation, then chardonnay is a blank slate. On the other hand, if you are talking about vineyards that are because they were, then you end up with a very different answer. I just don't think that your grouping is useful, though it is logically supportable.

Maybe we need two classifications? One to indicate outright changes in the flavour of the finished product and one to indicate gentle nudges or things that cannot help but to give a certain outcome, i.e. warm climate vineyard = lower acid than cold climate vineyards? So call the crass category "manipulation" and the other "winemaking choices?" Something like that.

I agree, letting oak chips soak so you get an oak bomb is of a different...something...that decided to risk fall storms and letting the grapes hang longer to lose acidity.

yeah, my point was kind of the silliness of including things like that under the category of manipulation. but whatever.

Originally Posted by Piobaire

Click to expand...

So call the crass category "manipulation" and the other "winemaking choices?" Something like that.

viticulture and viniculture

Originally Posted by gomestar

Click to expand...

viticulture and viniculture

Are those two not basically the same thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viticulture

I learned slightly different, not that i have my notes available