Thanks, Eric

Proportion is not nearly as interesting to me as absolute number.

Ephemeral Yellow Tail dwarfs everything we discuss here, but so what?
 
originally posted by David M. Bueker:
originally posted by Anders Gautschi:
originally posted by David M. Bueker:
No doubt Jay, but that's still a tiny slice of the world of wine. It also doesn't change the fact that the lengthy required aging curve for those select wines is more of a pain in the ass than a virtue.

To follow a wine through its different stages isn't a pain in the ass in my view, rather the contrary. Therefore, the lengthy aging curve for certain wines are indeed a virtue.

I agree that many wines do not win from beeing aged, but imho there are many considered to be drunk young that do win from being aged. Chasselas, for instance from good sites. Good storage is mandatory, of course.

A 10-15 year life span is potentially a virtue. A wine that needs 20 to just be ready to drink is a pain. I love following wines through their life span, but a bottle every two years is just a series of isolated data points IMO.

The question being of course whether the wines that require the silly amount of aging end up being much better than other wines that require less. In some cases the answer is yes (50-60 year old Huet comes to mind). Though I'll agree that this is in some ways unfortunate. I would love for the '89s or '71s to be drinking as well the '53s...
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
Proportion is not nearly as interesting to me as absolute number.

Ephemeral Yellow Tail dwarfs everything we discuss here, but so what?

I was at a Losar party last week that was BYO and one (very nice) lady disliked the Pinon, the Mayacamas the Texier and a bunch of other more middling but perfectly nice wines but loved the Yellowtail Shiraz. In her words it was "smooth".
 
originally posted by Jay Miller:
originally posted by SFJoe:
Proportion is not nearly as interesting to me as absolute number.

Ephemeral Yellow Tail dwarfs everything we discuss here, but so what?

I was at a Losar party last week that was BYO and one (very nice) lady disliked the Pinon, the Mayacamas the Texier and a bunch of other more middling but perfectly nice wines but loved the Yellowtail Shiraz. In her words it was "smooth".
Hence the relative volumes, without a doubt.
 
originally posted by Jay Miller:
The question being of course whether the wines that require the silly amount of aging end up being much better than other wines that require less. In some cases the answer is yes (50-60 year old Huet comes to mind). Though I'll agree that this is in some ways unfortunate. I would love for the '89s or '71s to be drinking as well the '53s...

No doubt. I wish I had started buying Huet from the womb, but I couldn't get a WiFi signal.
 
originally posted by Jay Miller:
The question being of course whether the wines that require the silly amount of aging end up being much better than other wines that require less. In some cases the answer is yes (50-60 year old Huet comes to mind). Though I'll agree that this is in some ways unfortunate. I would love for the '89s or '71s to be drinking as well the '53s...

Haven't had any [Huet] 53s if that's what you meant but the 89 Constance is already a lovely wine.
 
Three CRs last night:

2011 Stéphane Otheguy Côte-Rôtie Les Massales 12.5%
Smells like carbô spirit. Excellent acidity, EQ & weight. Reminiscent of that Othe guy, JM Stéphan.

2005 Eric Téxier Côte-Rôtie Vieilles Vignes 12.5%
First of four bottles, held impatiently since release. No way around it, needs to fuflfil the rule of 15. Even with a good decant, remained utterly closed. But a beautiful mouthful, with excellent weight and texture. Try again in five.

1999 Patrick Jasmin Côte-Rôtie 12.5%
Rule fulfilled, ready to go. Olives, dark fruits, rubber, and a glimmer of tertiaries. Restrained. Not a "great" CR, but whispers demurely in the ancient style.
 
Back
Top