AaronW. wrote:Hey Otto,
I'm curious as to why the description of your blind tasting of a Gamay wine concluded with "candied cherries" and you associated that essence with that of a Calif. Pinot. Does your palate prefer the "earth tones" of a wine or is Cal. Pinot generalized as "candy" wine? I've generally been of the understanding that, varietally speaking, Pinot's are renowned for their "earthy" notes such as- mushrooms, soil, truffles etc.. Which is why my curiosity is compounded. Not that I'm a pinot-ologist, because I'm certainly not; that's why I'm asking. Are there no good pinots from the Golden State in your opinion, because I tried a "David Bruce '03" from Sonoma and I thought it was outstanding with great balance. But then, at this point in time, my palate kind of leans toward fruit forwardness. I'm looking forward to being informed.
Aaron! You must understand that the title was a sweeping generalisation: I have had some very nice Californian Pinots that I would love to have again (some Caleras e.g.). But like in all generalisations there is a hint of truth in that the trend in Cali Pinots seems to be much sweetness, little savoury character, high alcohol and what to my Eurocentric palate seems like an utter lack
of earthy notes!
The Calera and Arcadian Pisoni had these typical Pinot scents, but e.g. Siduri and Loring didn't. You certainly will have more experience with Cali Pinot than I do, but it seems that the Calera style is in the minority. I hope I am wrong as I like that style: it is distinctly Pinot, yet distinct from Burgundy.
Also, the cherry question. I tend to see cherry as a typically Burgundian scent, yet when I add such a word as "candied" or "confected" it becomes a bad sterotype of the fruit-forward New World style IMO. Once again, I hope I am wrong in thinking this style of Pinot the dominant one there.
This probably is more a matter of me liking wines that most other people call tart, overly acidic, thin... I don't know why this could be. I heard an intriguing theory recently. Apparently people's own PHs vary and this will affect whether that person likes highly acidic wines or the softer (which I guess will usually mean sweetly fruity wines due to the lesser acids). I've no idea if this is an Erich von Däniken -like theory or not, but it's certianly an interesting question.
So in conclusion, I think this boils down to just my lack of experience in Californian wines, my wanting to make a catchy title, my love for sweeping generalisations (trolls, I guess) and our palates' differences.
I don't drink wine because of religious reasons ... only for other reasons.