This winemaker

originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:



Art is a rush of inspiration only when the rush flows out onto a foundation of craft, honed over years of experience and thoughtful pursuit. Ymmv.
Click to expand...

That would be my position, too.
But then, VLM believes there is some objective analysis in assessing good wine and bad wine, whereas I'm on the subjective side of such definitions.
Curiously, we like a lot of the same wines.
Go figure . . .
Best, Jim
 
originally posted by Florida Jim:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:



Art is a rush of inspiration only when the rush flows out onto a foundation of craft, honed over years of experience and thoughtful pursuit. Ymmv.
Click to expand...

That would be my position, too.
But then, VLM believes there is some objective analysis in assessing good wine and bad wine, whereas I'm on the subjective side of such definitions.
Curiously, we like a lot of the same wines.
Go figure . . .
Best, Jim
Click to expand...
I like Cathy Corison's assessment of her own wines: intended to grace the table.
 
originally posted by VLM:


Reviewer 2 must be stopped!!!

reviewer2.jpg
Click to expand...

Love it! I'm appropriating that image, thankyouverymuch.

Mark Lipton
(usually, alas, it's reviewer 3 that must be stopped)
 
From Environmental Microbiology's annual digest of favorite reviewers' comments (2011 edition, the 2012 isn't out yet):

"The biggest problem with this manuscript, which has nearly sucked the will to live out of me, is the terrible writing style."

"This paper is desperate. Please reject it completely and then block the author’s email ID so they can’t use the online system in future."

"Ken, I would suggest that EM is setting up a fund that pays for the red wine reviewers may need to digest manuscripts like this one."

"I agreed to review this Ms whilst answering e-mails in the golden glow of a balmy evening on the terrace of our holiday hotel on Lake Como. Back in the harsh light of reality in Belfast I realize that it’s just on the limit of my comfort zone and that it would probably have been better not to have volunteered."

"Reject More holes than my grandad’s string vest!"

"The writing and data presentation are so bad that I had to leave work and go home early and then spend time to wonder what life is about."
 
Phil,
WTF are you doing reading EM reviewers' comments? I thought that you were in Urban Planning, dood. Those are pretty funny in a vicious sort of way and I have occasionally engaged in similar banter when addressing comments to the editor only. My personal peeve is when I get a review that spends an entire paragraph dissing my work for a reason completely debunked in Ref. 7 and discussed at length in my manuscript. Did you actually read my MS before writing your review or do you completely lack reading comprehension? Or is the answer C) I am an utter asshat? The mind boggles...

Mark Lipton
 
Oh, these periodically make the rounds of one or another geography listserv - everybody likes to gawk at a train wreck, especially when it involves those dicks over in the bio department. The full list is here (Wiley promises it's not paywalled but I can't tell from here.)
 
originally posted by MLipton:
My personal peeve is when I get a review that spends an entire paragraph dissing my work for a reason completely debunked in Ref. 7 and discussed at length in my manuscript. Did you actually read my MS before writing your review or do you completely lack reading comprehension? Or is the answer C) I am an utter asshat? The mind boggles...

Mark Lipton
Click to expand...

Honestly, I am stunned by how frequent that is. It's not really an issue in statistis or psychometrics, but in medical/biological it seems like every paper has a review like this. If I were a bench scientist, I'd send everything to PLos One.
 
originally posted by MLipton:

Those are pretty funny in a vicious sort of way and I have occasionally engaged in similar banter when addressing comments to the editor only.
Click to expand...

my understanding was that the "comments for the editor" box was for flirting if she is cute (inside joke), or else reminding the fucker that he shorted the table on a cheque at the last conference i attended, and the choice is pay up in blood or booze.

why would anyone with a vague sense of principle say anything at all in there that was evaluative?

or to put it another way, if you have something to say, say it to the fucking authors -- that box is to science what teh megapurplez (tm) is to wine. and you know it.

fb.
 
originally posted by richard slicker:

my understanding was that the "comments for the editor" box was for flirting if she is cute (inside joke), or else reminding the fucker that he shorted the table on a cheque at the last conference i attended, and the choice is pay up in blood or booze.
Click to expand...

You have female editors??? Lucky sod! Mine are generally white, male, balding and well north of 60. Cute doesn't even enter into it.

why would anyone with a vague sense of principle say anything at all in there that was evaluative?
Click to expand...

Good question. I can't speak for the EM reviewers, obviously, but for my own part I restrict my comments to the editor to those subjects that fall outside the purview of my review. For instance, since a fair number of articles come from non-English-speaking authors, I am from time to time driven to advise the editor that editing for English usage will be required beyond the needed scientific changes. I have also had the unfortunate task of informing the editor in private of suspected improprieties in the authorship of a manuscript. Any criticism of the substance of the work, however, goes into the review, as you say.

Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by MLipton:
I have also had the unfortunate task of informing the editor in private of suspected improprieties in the authorship of a manuscript.
Click to expand...

ouch.

fb.
 
It took this thread for me to realize that that guy's site wasn't like the Hosemaster.
How did you even find that guy's site, GG?
 
I wish Mr. Stolpman the best as he continues his studies.

Hopefully, he's learned a bit more than just his opinion and guesses might tell him. As a wise teacher once told me, the first rule of tasting is "Evaluate yourself."

I've been lucky to have some good teachers whose lessons, while humbling, were delivered softly. Like David Lillie, and his arched eyebrow after I brought back an '02 Cazin Cuvee Renaissance that an entire table of geeks studying for the WSET Diploma had roundly dismissed as corked the night before. Twelve hours of air had transformed it from what I thought as flawed, to one of the most beguiling bouquets ever.

Or Levi. Who, when I raised an eyebrow myself, questioning the soundness of some pour at one of Convivio's fabled dinners, quietly said "Ahh, Seth. You always think there's one..." And he was right. I was isolating difference, and not coming to the wine on its own terms. Of course he had checked it. Better to say, "I don't understand this wine." I learned, a bit. (And later, after more wine, got to defend another wine and its odd bones. Though perhaps my "You're wrong" to the editor of a wine mag was a bit impolitic.)

Or Joe Dressner. Who, when I was a rube finishing up a BA at NYU and interviewing whoever would take my calls as I tried to prepare for turning a hobby into a profession, suffered this fool enough to point out some of my blind spots. And when I made the leap and joined CSW, he could have needled me for what I was but instead was generous in offering what he could in support of my evolution.

Or countless friends, many on this board, who've shared bottles, laughs, knowledge, and stories. And who might have seen me at moments where that first rule has been difficult- whether I have had a glass or bottle too many, or I'm geared up and ready to tilt at the nearest windmill. Not sure which is in evidence here...
 
originally posted by Seth Hill:
windmill.
Click to expand...

True, true.

As a VLM-statistical matter, I would say that IME the false negatives far outnumber the false positives in TCA detection, though the numbers may skew with chenin, menu pineau, and romorantin.
 
originally posted by SFJoe:

though the numbers may skew with chenin, menu pineau, and romorantin.
Click to expand...

Those are my bugbears. Occasionally older Muscadet, too. And the cabbage-y thing w/ Cab Franc can cause trouble, when it's that particular vegetal mineral sharpness. Cement tanks.
 
From Jamie Goode:

Mark Haisma is a winemaker with broad experience across different hemispheres. In his previous employ he was at Yarra Yering, in Australia’s Yarra Valley, but he’s now a micronegociant in Burgundy, also making a wine in Cornas in the northern Rhône. At Yarra Yering he developed an innovative approach to stem use, which he calls a ‘macerating basket’. ‘The fruit would be completely destemmed, and I had some stainless steel mesh cylinders made,’ he explains. ‘These would be stuffed with the stems. I could take them out when I felt I had what I wanted.’ And the results of using stems this way? ‘I find it adds a great spicy complexity to the wine and also builds your tannin profile. And this way I have absolute control.’ Haisma is working on this in Burgundy, with some interesting results, but he doesn’t know anyone else doing it this way.

‘Whole bunch for me is about controlling the ferment, slowing it down, with a slow release of sugar.’ Says Haisma. ‘It is a great way to build loads of complexity and savoury characters, and still keep a lush creamy feel to the palate. I think of velvet. This is especially noticeable with my Cornas. As for burgundy, it’s all about the complexity and finesse. In the big appellations I feel it adds a structure to the fruit, without adding coarseness or bitterness, characters I hate in Pinot Noir.’

See, Eric, you aren't taking enough control. Your (hypothetical) Cornas could also have a "lush creamy feel to the palate" if you were doing it right.
 
Interesting. My experience with adding back stems to destemmed fruit is not positive. Much more of a green, stemmy note than if you just use whole, non-destemmed fruit.
 
originally posted by Hank Beckmeyer:
Interesting. My experience with adding back stems to destemmed fruit is not positive. Much more of a green, stemmy note than if you just use whole, non-destemmed fruit.
Click to expand...
Gideon at Clos Saron adds back stems to quite good effect. I'm wondering why the difference, given that you work with similar varieties in a (fairly) similar part of the world at (fairly) similar levels of ripeness... Or if the difference is about judgment of the finished wine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top