Carl Steefel
Carl Steefel
Ask Krankl...
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
In Search of Decent, Traditional Claret
- Thread starter Claude Kolm
- Start date
Oliver McCrum
Oliver McCrum
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
I'm pretty sure the answer is yes. There's been a lot of work done in Bordeaux for many years on smoothing/rounding of tannins, and certainly that can contribute.originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
It expresses itself in the texture and in the quality of the fruit. You get a thick, glossy, smooth texture and the fruit is jammy in a certain way.originally posted by MarkS:
Claude, how can you look for signs of RO in wine? I'm never sure, but then, I don't always know what I need to suss out.
I get this impression in CdPs I am not fond of. I don't know that RO has found its way there, though I might not know if it had. Can other elevage treatments cause this impression of thick glossiness?
Any thoughts on what creates a consistency of 10/40 motor oil other than RO?
Enological tannins and enzymes used to change extraction?
originally posted by Oliver McCrum:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
Any thoughts on what creates a consistency of 10/40 motor oil other than RO?
Enological tannins and enzymes used to change extraction?
Addition of triethylene glycol? [insert emoticon here]
Mark Lipton
Ian Fitzsimmons
Ian Fitzsimmons
One day you'll go too far with this chemistry humor. Decency has its limits, you know.
Jonathan Loesberg
Jonathan Loesberg
My problem with chemistry humor is that I don't know it's humor. He didn't say what kind of emoticon to insert. And for all I know whatever dilithium crystal thing he said really does get put in wine. When he and SF Joe get going, it all sounds like a scene from Star Trek to me.
Kevin Roberts
Kevin Roberts
Jonathan Loesberg
Jonathan Loesberg
originally posted by Kevin Roberts:
Now you know how we chemists feel when we Kant understand what you're talking about!
Loading…
en.wikipedia.org
Cheers,
Kevin
Philosophy, literature and art are manifestations of being human. Chemistry happens without regard to being human (even if human beings sometimes need to pay attention). Besides, people are always telling me how boring they find my posts, so I decided to answer back, resentment also being a manifestation of being human, alas.
Kevin Roberts
Kevin Roberts
I certainly was not, in any way trying to discourage you at all from having tangential philosphical discussions. (Or even relevant ones...) It's one of the things that I truly enjoy about this place. I'm certainly a big enough boy to read what I want and not read what I don't want to.
This bored is an interesting place full of interesting people, with widely ranging passions. Not all of which are interesting to all people. There's enough commonality that nearly all things are at least somewhat relevant and interesting to some subset of the population.
Besides, it's either more chemistry humor or more puns. Or both.
Cheers,
Kevin
This bored is an interesting place full of interesting people, with widely ranging passions. Not all of which are interesting to all people. There's enough commonality that nearly all things are at least somewhat relevant and interesting to some subset of the population.
Besides, it's either more chemistry humor or more puns. Or both.
Cheers,
Kevin
Levi Dalton
Levi Dalton
originally posted by Kevin Roberts:
This bored is an interesting place full of interesting people, with widely ranging passions. Not all of which are interesting to all people.
I'll have you know that Brad Kane secretly loves hearing me talk about French films from the 1960's.
Loves.
Kevin Roberts
Kevin Roberts
originally posted by Levi Dalton:
originally posted by Kevin Roberts:
This bored is an interesting place full of interesting people, with widely ranging passions. Not all of which are interesting to all people.
I'll have you know that Brad Kane secretly loves hearing me talk about French films from the 1960's.
Loves.
I just spent the last 15 minutes on this google tangent:
Puzelat --> Le Rouge et Mis (wine) --> Le Rouge et Mis (movie) --> l' orient est rouge (related searches) and now I'm listening to Kocani Orkestar. It's balkan dance music time. Next I'm going to listen to the Electric Gypsyland compilation.
It's tangent time,
Kevin
Sharon Bowman
Sharon Bowman
Are you sure it's a tangent and not a chord?
U
Unknown
Guest
Claude,
thanks again.
Unless I've misunderstood your post, you've just employed two different criteria, for Bordeaux and for Burgundy. It looks like you've compared the likes of 04 Coufran to the general pool of classified growths of 30 years ago, while, for Burgundy, you are looking at the relative quality of recent bourgogne vs village/1er cru from the 70s for each individual producer. Please correct me if this is not the case.
In reading your original post, I assumed it was the former. ( Not that the latter doesn't apply to Bordeaux, but I think we will not go down that path, as it will lead to nothing but violence, and I certainly don't mean between you and me ). That line of thinking is very interesting to me, because I have certainly consumed enough classified growths from the 60s and 70s which unquestionably could have been so much better if people actually paid attention to what they were doing, but which nevertheless did some fairly remarkable things in the glass once the wines got over their ugly intermediate stages and achieved full maturity. To me, this is down to dirt, which many claim does not exist in brdx. Ironically, in Burgundy, where the book on dirt was written, I would be less likely to have such a satisfying experience with a 30-year old 1er cru which was poorly made. Maybe it's the timing - perhaps things would be very different at the 15-year mark.
This is probably down to personal taste; the choice between a clean and balanced wine and a wine with known imprefections but rich in soil complexity is a toss-up. You know what I prefer, and this is exactly why I bypass Lanessan, Coufran, etc. these days in favour of wines from other regions, in the same price range - which brings us back in full circle.
thanks again.
Unless I've misunderstood your post, you've just employed two different criteria, for Bordeaux and for Burgundy. It looks like you've compared the likes of 04 Coufran to the general pool of classified growths of 30 years ago, while, for Burgundy, you are looking at the relative quality of recent bourgogne vs village/1er cru from the 70s for each individual producer. Please correct me if this is not the case.
In reading your original post, I assumed it was the former. ( Not that the latter doesn't apply to Bordeaux, but I think we will not go down that path, as it will lead to nothing but violence, and I certainly don't mean between you and me ). That line of thinking is very interesting to me, because I have certainly consumed enough classified growths from the 60s and 70s which unquestionably could have been so much better if people actually paid attention to what they were doing, but which nevertheless did some fairly remarkable things in the glass once the wines got over their ugly intermediate stages and achieved full maturity. To me, this is down to dirt, which many claim does not exist in brdx. Ironically, in Burgundy, where the book on dirt was written, I would be less likely to have such a satisfying experience with a 30-year old 1er cru which was poorly made. Maybe it's the timing - perhaps things would be very different at the 15-year mark.
This is probably down to personal taste; the choice between a clean and balanced wine and a wine with known imprefections but rich in soil complexity is a toss-up. You know what I prefer, and this is exactly why I bypass Lanessan, Coufran, etc. these days in favour of wines from other regions, in the same price range - which brings us back in full circle.
nigel groundwater
nigel groundwater
originally posted by MLipton:
originally posted by MarkS:
Claude, how can you look for signs of RO in wine? I'm never sure, but then, I don't always know what I need to suss out.
I'm obviously not Claude, but my answer is to look for wines that taste of surmaturit (raisined, pruney) but have an ABV below 15%.
Mark Lipton
Can I assume you are describing how the wine might present after RO had been used in its alcohol reduction mode rather than in its concentration mode?
RO in Bordeaux [to the extent that anyone admits to having the equipment never mind using it] was usually to achieve increased concentration and higher alcohol in years when the grapes didnt ripen sufficiently and/or inopportune rains caused dilution.
Since neither situation applied in 2005 the idea of RO being required to fatten thing up still further is unlikely particularly in an [apparent] Rolland consultation where hang-time together with the natural attributes of the vintage would surely have provided all the oomph necessary and more for some tastes. It is quite possible for a 2005 Bordeaux given extended hang-time to "taste of surmaturit (raisined, pruney) but have an ABV below 15%" without any need of RO - but probably unlikely that they needed to use RO to get the %ABV "below 15%".
However Rolland is certainly known to use micro-oxygenation and new oak to produce a rounded, glossy texture.
Claude Kolm
Claude Kolm
If I have not approached Burgundy and Bordeaux in the same way, it's because I really don't think it can be done. We're talking different wines and different cultures, and as a result, different ways of looking at the wines. The better I have come to know each, the more I believe the gap cannot be bridged.originally posted by .sasha:
Claude,
thanks again.
Unless I've misunderstood your post, you've just employed two different criteria, for Bordeaux and for Burgundy. It looks like you've compared the likes of 04 Coufran to the general pool of classified growths of 30 years ago, while, for Burgundy, you are looking at the relative quality of recent bourgogne vs village/1er cru from the 70s for each individual producer. Please correct me if this is not the case.
In reading your original post, I assumed it was the former. ( Not that the latter doesn't apply to Bordeaux, but I think we will not go down that path, as it will lead to nothing but violence, and I certainly don't mean between you and me ). That line of thinking is very interesting to me, because I have certainly consumed enough classified growths from the 60s and 70s which unquestionably could have been so much better if people actually paid attention to what they were doing, but which nevertheless did some fairly remarkable things in the glass once the wines got over their ugly intermediate stages and achieved full maturity. To me, this is down to dirt, which many claim does not exist in brdx. Ironically, in Burgundy, where the book on dirt was written, I would be less likely to have such a satisfying experience with a 30-year old 1er cru which was poorly made. Maybe it's the timing - perhaps things would be very different at the 15-year mark.
This is probably down to personal taste; the choice between a clean and balanced wine and a wine with known imprefections but rich in soil complexity is a toss-up. You know what I prefer, and this is exactly why I bypass Lanessan, Coufran, etc. these days in favour of wines from other regions, in the same price range - which brings us back in full circle.
As for the supposedly poor Bordeaux of the 1960s and 1970s, certainly some Bordeaux from that era, notably Ausone, developed excellently -- but that's because Ausone was being criticized for having vines so old that many were pre-phylloxera and not using the latest techniques. But I think Ausone was probably an exception. I don't think that the problem was the same for a lot of the other fairly mediocre properties. OTOH, I must admit to having tasted only a very few 1970s Bordeaux in the last 10 years or so and almost entirely from properties that I cellared at the time, e.g., Las Cases, Palmer, Pichon-Lalande. And given constraints of time and interest, that situation is unlikely to change.
originally posted by Levi Dalton:
originally posted by Kevin Roberts:
This bored is an interesting place full of interesting people, with widely ranging passions. Not all of which are interesting to all people.
I'll have you know that Brad Kane secretly loves hearing me talk about French films from the 1960's.
Loves.
Really? Maybe a reason to hang out with Kane. emoticon
Christian Miller (CMM)
Christian Miller
There may be other things at work, but very late harvesting, hand sorting the "green" grapes, and early press-off with malo in barrels is a good start.originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
I'm pretty sure the answer is yes. There's been a lot of work done in Bordeaux for many years on smoothing/rounding of tannins, and certainly that can contribute.originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
It expresses itself in the texture and in the quality of the fruit. You get a thick, glossy, smooth texture and the fruit is jammy in a certain way.originally posted by MarkS:
Claude, how can you look for signs of RO in wine? I'm never sure, but then, I don't always know what I need to suss out.
... Can other elevage treatments cause this impression of thick glossiness?
Any thoughts on what creates a consistency of 10/40 motor oil other than RO?
Christian Miller (CMM)
Christian Miller
...
This is probably down to personal taste; the choice between a clean and balanced wine and a wine with known imprefections but rich in soil complexity is a toss-up.
I don't quite understand this dichotomy. If by "soil complexity" you mean flavors and complexity that are due to the vineyard soil, then clean and balanced wines can certainly reflect them; Chablis and Mosel offer plenty of examples. If "known imperfections" means what squeaky-clean enologists would call flaws (brett, VA, mercaptans, etc.), then it could be argued that these (in sufficient concentration) actually cover up the flavor of the terroir.
Christian Miller (CMM)
Christian Miller
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
In Search of Decent, Traditional ClaretSo, down at K&L a few weeks ago, I picked up three cru bourgeois that I recall from the old days as being very good examples of Mdoc and Haut-Mdoc in hopes that they would have retained some link to the clarets of the past...
I think what these three wines showed is that even if one is looking for tradition in claret, much of the rest of the world has caught up and surpassed Bordeaux in overall quality, notwithstanding the fact that these wines are better than many classified growths of 30 years ago...
I certainly agree that the rest of the world has caught up with Bordeaux in quality, there's very good wine being made all over the world these days. And the quality of many Bordeaux at the basic level has really lagged. But what about style; when you want that classic Bordeaux profile of cedary currents with a tinge of green, medium body with some tannic structure and a nice equilibrium of density, acidity and fruit, capable of developing a mellow complexity with age. Old-fashioned Chilean and Californian Cabs and riper Loire Cab Francs can substitute, you can rummage around in the Cotes de Gascogne or Bearn, but there's really nothing quite like it.
So I'm always on the hunt for "good old claret" at a reasonable price. Ch. Mirambeau Papin Bordeaux Superieur 2005 and Ch. Jouanin Cotes de Castillon 2005 did the trick recently. Anybody else have a suggestion?
U
Unknown
Guest
originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):
...
This is probably down to personal taste; the choice between a clean and balanced wine and a wine with known imprefections but rich in soil complexity is a toss-up.
I don't quite understand this dichotomy. If by "soil complexity" you mean flavors and complexity that are due to the vineyard soil, then clean and balanced wines can certainly reflect them; Chablis and Mosel offer plenty of examples. If "known imperfections" means what squeaky-clean enologists would call flaws (brett, VA, mercaptans, etc.), then it could be argued that these (in sufficient concentration) actually cover up the flavor of the terroir.
not if there isn't enough dirt in the first place, you can't make something out of nothing