Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker
Ian Sutton
Spanna in the works
2558
Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:10 pm
Norwich, UK
Steve Slatcher
Wine guru
1047
Sat Aug 19, 2006 11:51 am
Manchester, England
James Roscoe
Chat Prince
11017
Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:43 pm
D.C. Metro Area - Maryland
Mike Filigenzi
Known for his fashionable hair
8187
Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:43 pm
Sacramento, CA
Bill Hooper wrote:Ah, but check out THIS nonsense:
http://www.chateaudesclans.com/index.html
72 Euros for a bottle of Provencal Rose? Right!
-Bill
David Creighton
Wine guru
1217
Wed May 24, 2006 10:07 am
ann arbor, michigan
David Creighton wrote:well, how about a slightly contrarian position? my idea is that 'serious rose' is almost a contradiction. rose should be delicious and fun. AND i don't mind spending good money - up to about $20 for delicious and fun. additionally i think there are actually too many roses out there that do take themselves too seriously - are too dark and too heavy. i found a good fresh bordeaux clairet when i was in paris. i liked it; but it just isn't a good chinon or sancerre rose. there is one pretty serious rose no one has mentioned - rose des ricys. i've only had a couple and found them interesting; but can't tell if i would want to drink them regularly - probably not in preference to loire or provence.
another aside. there seem to be two schools of thought about tavel rose: either it is the best in the world, or the most overrated(my view) - way too alcoholic to be fun.
IMO one big problem is that rose is produced not as an original intent but as a by-product of something else; and that it is this that lowers the quality. i know people who produce rose from the grapes they cut off in mid-late season to improve the quality of the remaining red grapes. and many people release a rose from juice they pull off of tanks of fully ripe red wine grapes. this latter method can work well enough in loire and other cool climate areas if the juice is pulled off early enough; but rarely in warmer regions.
so, as i say, a slightly contrarian view.
David Creighton
Wine guru
1217
Wed May 24, 2006 10:07 am
ann arbor, michigan
Ryan Maderak wrote:Perhaps it is because, or it can at least be argued, that everything that would make a rose truly serious is already done better by reds? This isn't a statement against rose - I love good rose in fact, but as some other folks have noted, rose has a different purpose. If nothing else, a rose should be at least somewhat lighter than a red, and more refreshing. In my mind, rose that isn't refreshing, or that sits too heavily on the palate, fails, because they don't usually have enough stuffing to back them up. And that is a restraint imposed by definition - if they don't have as much skin contact, they simply do not have the same level of extract. I'll go so far as to say that, if you tried to desribed what you would do to a rose to make it a more serious wine, you'd probably say more tannic stucture and more fruit extract, in which case you'd be describing a light-bodied red. Perhaps because of the very constraint of how they are made, they simply do not have the potential for greatness, and so winemakers don't feel like the extra attention is necesary?
Also, could it be (this is just blind speculation) that its not so much that the market prefers semi-sweet blush, but rather that some winemakers are trying to distance themselves from the vulgarity unfairly attached to rose because of blush?
Bill Spohn
He put the 'bar' in 'barrister'
9556
Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:31 pm
Vancouver BC
Daniel Rogov
Resident Curmudgeon
0
Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:10 am
Tel Aviv, Israel
Thomas wrote:
Ryan,
A reasonable response--until you forgot to define, "greatness." That's a word applied to wine that I'm willing to bet has more definitions than there are methods to produce rose.
Mike Filigenzi wrote:Wonder if that Edmunds guy would have an opinion on this?
Daniel Rogov wrote:A truly great wine is one that twenty-five years after drinkng it, you will remember the aromas and flavors of the wine, the sensations it imparted as you tasted it, where you drank it, the person with whom you shared it, the dishes you ate with it, and, if it was at a restaurant, probably the name and face of the waiter who served it. That, my friends, is "great".
Best
Rogov
Steve Edmunds wrote:Mike Filigenzi wrote:Wonder if that Edmunds guy would have an opinion on this?
I have some thoughts, and the first one is that, like so many things related to wine (or so many other things), it's not a simple matter. For example, there is an AOC that is dedicated to rose: Tavel, in which only a rose can use the name, and the permitted varieties include both reds and whites. And the best of them can age stunningly well, and become breathtakingly lovely wines. Yet, as has been pointed out, rose is so often about being delicious and fun. Also cold and plentiful, in a Southern venue.
I'd venture to say that the roses that give the most pleasure ("serious" or otherwise) are made with the same care that goes into the most "serious" red and white wines; if you're gonna do it and make it work, doing it right is the best approach.
Bill Spohn
He put the 'bar' in 'barrister'
9556
Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:31 pm
Vancouver BC
Bill Spohn wrote:Some people seem to be proceeding on the theory that all wines can be rated up to 100 points.
Some varietals can simply attain heights that are not possible for others - such is life. It may not be FAIR that you can't flap your arms and fly or that there will never be a 100 point wine of a specific varietal, but so what - there is no law thst says there should be.
Bill Spohn wrote:Some people seem to be proceeding on the theory that all wines can be rated up to 100 points.
I'm not a pointy head, but I'd disagree with that. I think that there has to be an absolute scale if one must use points.
For instance, there is no such thing as a 100 point Muscadet. Similarly (I would argue) there is no such thing as a 100 point Beaujolais, or Rosé, or Chianti, or Ruby Cabernet, or Carmenere, or (name your nominee).
Some varietals can simply attain heights that are not possible for others - such is life. It may not be FAIR that you can't flap your arms and fly or that there will never be a 100 point wine of a specific varietal, but so what - there is no law thst says there should be.
Users browsing this forum: LACNIC bot and 2 guests