Paul T wrote:Guest.
Your comments on Australian Cabernet "Guest" ....
Paul, Francois signed his name. I do not think he is the 'guest' who posted the cabernet thing.
Cheers,
Sue
Mmmmm - Aussies too parochial to drink US wines
Sorry Sue and Francois
I was replying to another guest..about the cabernet thing..Francois didn't post anything i dont agree with..i never said America doesn't make great wines..just that wines as good are available cheaper from other countries.
I just hate the my country's wines are better than your's bullshit..from any party including Australia, but as i said some represent better value for money.
I simply love wine where ever it comes from as long as it's good..and decent value.
Cheers
Paul
I was replying to another guest..about the cabernet thing..Francois didn't post anything i dont agree with..i never said America doesn't make great wines..just that wines as good are available cheaper from other countries.
I just hate the my country's wines are better than your's bullshit..from any party including Australia, but as i said some represent better value for money.
I simply love wine where ever it comes from as long as it's good..and decent value.
Cheers
Paul
Paul T wrote:I just hate the my country's wines are better than your's bullshit..from any party including Australia, but as i said some represent better value for money.
I simply love wine where ever it comes from as long as it's good..and decent value.
Paul, I agree and I am sure most of us would agree. This is why I posted the link to the Decanter article. I think Mr Sands comment is completely unfounded. Parochialism doesn't even come into the equation.
Cheers,
Sue
-
Phil Shorten
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 12:19 am
US of A
Hi all
A few questions and comments guys and girls...
- Why would US producers focus on the Australian market given that it has a domestic market of 250 million +, as well as Canada to its north? Let us remember that the population of California is 30 million+ and it is the world's 5th or 6th largest economy in its own right (notwithstanding the current economic problems).
- To generalise all American wine and overoaked and overripe is just as crude generalisation as saying that the only decent Australian wine is overripe heavily US oaked Parkerised wine from the Barossa Valley. From my understanding (and correct me if I'm wrong) the state of California produces more wine than Australia, and it would be erroneous to assume that it is all the same.
- It is fair to say that in the wider scheme of things, some American wine constitutes poor value for money. Indeed, some of the so called "cult" labels represent very poor value for wine that can sometimes come over as one dimensional and excessively sweet (the same might be said about some Australian cult labels that are exported to the States). However, in my visit to California a couple of years back I did find some smaller wineries producing very good atypical wine at very fair prices (and this was at the height of the dotcom boom). I have already mentioned Navarro in Mendocino County, who produce some very attractive dry and late harvest aromatic wines, all very well priced. There is some good Syrah being produced as well.
- On the question of pricing, there are some Aussie labels we see in the UK that constitute questionable value - Giaconda Chardonnay at £45 a bottle, E&E Black Pepper at £45 per bottle, Mt Mary Quintet Cabernets at £65 per bottle - good wines, but frankly there are just as good wines to be found at half the price.
- To my knowledge, Viognier is not a variety that lends itself to ageing be it Condrieu/Chateau Grillet or from the New World. The two Rhone examples are not cheap due to the small quantities that are produced; likewise for high quality New World Viognier. I think it is a little unfair to mark a wine/variety down simply because it is not built for ageing.
- In sum, like most wine producing nations, both Australia and the US produce some good stuff, and a good amount of dross as well. The challenge, as anywhere, is to be able to seek out the good wine that is reasonably priced.
There endeth the diatribe.
Phil
A few questions and comments guys and girls...
- Why would US producers focus on the Australian market given that it has a domestic market of 250 million +, as well as Canada to its north? Let us remember that the population of California is 30 million+ and it is the world's 5th or 6th largest economy in its own right (notwithstanding the current economic problems).
- To generalise all American wine and overoaked and overripe is just as crude generalisation as saying that the only decent Australian wine is overripe heavily US oaked Parkerised wine from the Barossa Valley. From my understanding (and correct me if I'm wrong) the state of California produces more wine than Australia, and it would be erroneous to assume that it is all the same.
- It is fair to say that in the wider scheme of things, some American wine constitutes poor value for money. Indeed, some of the so called "cult" labels represent very poor value for wine that can sometimes come over as one dimensional and excessively sweet (the same might be said about some Australian cult labels that are exported to the States). However, in my visit to California a couple of years back I did find some smaller wineries producing very good atypical wine at very fair prices (and this was at the height of the dotcom boom). I have already mentioned Navarro in Mendocino County, who produce some very attractive dry and late harvest aromatic wines, all very well priced. There is some good Syrah being produced as well.
- On the question of pricing, there are some Aussie labels we see in the UK that constitute questionable value - Giaconda Chardonnay at £45 a bottle, E&E Black Pepper at £45 per bottle, Mt Mary Quintet Cabernets at £65 per bottle - good wines, but frankly there are just as good wines to be found at half the price.
- To my knowledge, Viognier is not a variety that lends itself to ageing be it Condrieu/Chateau Grillet or from the New World. The two Rhone examples are not cheap due to the small quantities that are produced; likewise for high quality New World Viognier. I think it is a little unfair to mark a wine/variety down simply because it is not built for ageing.
- In sum, like most wine producing nations, both Australia and the US produce some good stuff, and a good amount of dross as well. The challenge, as anywhere, is to be able to seek out the good wine that is reasonably priced.
There endeth the diatribe.
Phil
-
Steve
Hi all,
There is no need for Aussies to seek out American wines when you can hardly find one in your neighbourhood/friendly liquor outlet.
Aussies are not that dedicated to RPj in seeking out his recommendations. It is the Americans who want the 'status' to possess any 98+ recommended by RPj.
Lately I was silly enough to buy what was recommended to try out New Zealand's 'Grange' - 1996 Goldwater Estate Cabernet Sauvignon & Merlot. Luckily I only purchased two and tried one last Friday. Double decant - simply awful - liquorice, very dry tannins, low alcohol 13%, totally unbalanced and no finish. Tried it again the next day, same results.
Decant the 1990 Penfolds Bin 389, YUM!
Now I wonder why some winery are simply adding sugar to the must to improve their wines during fermentation.
Cheers,
Steve
There is no need for Aussies to seek out American wines when you can hardly find one in your neighbourhood/friendly liquor outlet.
Aussies are not that dedicated to RPj in seeking out his recommendations. It is the Americans who want the 'status' to possess any 98+ recommended by RPj.
Lately I was silly enough to buy what was recommended to try out New Zealand's 'Grange' - 1996 Goldwater Estate Cabernet Sauvignon & Merlot. Luckily I only purchased two and tried one last Friday. Double decant - simply awful - liquorice, very dry tannins, low alcohol 13%, totally unbalanced and no finish. Tried it again the next day, same results.
Decant the 1990 Penfolds Bin 389, YUM!
Now I wonder why some winery are simply adding sugar to the must to improve their wines during fermentation.
Cheers,
Steve
-
Guest
Adair wrote:Guest wrote:viognier - calera, mt harlan is as good a viognier as any on the planet
2002 Calera Mt.Harlan Viognier - 15.5% alcohol - 36 US Dollars per bottle!!! ... and a drink now proposition - hahahahahaha
Seriously though, even if this if a great wine of the world, it is a New World Viognier and 36 US Dollars is totally ridiculous.
to mention these 2 in the same breath is a crime. I realise you have not tried the calera, but please be careful in your pronouncements then.
The Calera is superior to any condrieu I could name, including / especially Ch. Grillet.
Virgilius is poor wine.
Guest wrote:cabernet
Your "cabernet" comment has already been addressed but you obviously have not tried many Yarra Valley(Victoria), Coonawarra(South Australia) and Margaret River (Western Australia) cabernets - furthermore, only a few cost more than your Viognier above!!! (and not much more for that matter)
Adair[/quote]
Only a few hundred.
value is one thing, quality is another. Australian Cabernet is very rarely at the standard of a Napa cabernet, it is cheaper yes, and exchange exacerbates that. I hope you're not saying Australian Cabernet is better than Bordeaux because it's cheaper?
Mosswood is the only great Australian Cabernet imo.
Parker can be good. Coldstream Hills is a structureless pudding.
-
Guest
Steve wrote:Lately I was silly enough to buy what was recommended to try out New Zealand's 'Grange' - 1996 Goldwater Estate Cabernet Sauvignon & Merlot.
Goldwater's flagship wine is the Goldwater 'Esslin' Merlot, not the blend you were recommended to buy - so someone led you up the vineyard path there, mate!. I've never seen this referred to as NZ's 'Grange' by the way.
Cheers,
Sue
SueNZ wrote:Paul T wrote:Guest.
Your comments on Australian Cabernet "Guest" ....
Paul, Francois signed his name. I do not think he is the 'guest' who posted the cabernet thing.
Cheers,
Sue
Isn't it confusing - I preferred it when everyone had to register & you knew who you were talking to! Perhaps if guests are forced to at least supply a name it would help (even a made up one).
I'd given up on the winepro's forum after getting fed up of some pretty vicious anonymous baiting, so I guess I'm biased in preferring to know who's saying what!
just my 0.02 Euros
Ian
It's threads like this and the stelvin vs cork ones that are one of the reasons I don't post here much any more, not at all on star forum. Too many people pushing personal opinions and preferences (that's not bad in itself) as being universal facts that are self-evident and persistently misinterpreting or selectively quoting others posts to push their own biased agenda.
Comprehension, logic and rational argument go out the window and civility soon follows.
I know the stuff here is tame in comparison to some of the rubbish on the US boards, but let's not go in that direction please.
To steal someone else's line "It's just a bloody drink!"
Comprehension, logic and rational argument go out the window and civility soon follows.
I know the stuff here is tame in comparison to some of the rubbish on the US boards, but let's not go in that direction please.
To steal someone else's line "It's just a bloody drink!"
Cheers
Brian
Life's too short to drink white wine and red wine is better for you too! :-)
Brian
Life's too short to drink white wine and red wine is better for you too! :-)
Brian,
I shoulda realised that this would provoke heated discussion, but I didn't. It was just that I thought the "parochial" statement of Mr Sands may be completely unwarranted if the Aussie situation was perhaps similar to NZ in respect of American wines. Hence the posting of the comment.
It's not a question of parochialism. It's a question of availability and value for money.
Here's an extract on something I wrote on American wines in NZ a while ago .... "... the wines disappeared from the retailers' shelves .... the exchange rate hindering ongoing supply. As the New Zealand dollar kept plummeting against the greenback, the prices of inward goods kept escalating out of proportion and some of the wines that remained on sale simply did not offer value, especially in 2001 when the ratio was at it widest. I tasted a rather boring, bland and short Robert Mondavi Coastal Zinfandel 1998 which, at NZ$46 a bottle, did not offer anything near like a New Zealand, Australian wine or Rhone wine of that price. "
I could buy 2.5 good bottles of Aussie shiraz for $46. So I made some queries and found this was a sub-$10 wine in the US and that was retail.
Prices are recovering and recently I had a Ravenswood Vintners Blend Zin that was selling at $19.95. Much better than the Mondavi wine and starting to get competitive at that price. The Ravenswood Mendocino Country Zinfandel 2000 at $29.95 was the better wine and if this was $10 cheaper, it would become competitive to the the Aussie wines that sell at the sub-$20 price.
After all, most of the people who buy wine are not into the top end stuff.
Cheers,
Sue
I shoulda realised that this would provoke heated discussion, but I didn't. It was just that I thought the "parochial" statement of Mr Sands may be completely unwarranted if the Aussie situation was perhaps similar to NZ in respect of American wines. Hence the posting of the comment.
It's not a question of parochialism. It's a question of availability and value for money.
Here's an extract on something I wrote on American wines in NZ a while ago .... "... the wines disappeared from the retailers' shelves .... the exchange rate hindering ongoing supply. As the New Zealand dollar kept plummeting against the greenback, the prices of inward goods kept escalating out of proportion and some of the wines that remained on sale simply did not offer value, especially in 2001 when the ratio was at it widest. I tasted a rather boring, bland and short Robert Mondavi Coastal Zinfandel 1998 which, at NZ$46 a bottle, did not offer anything near like a New Zealand, Australian wine or Rhone wine of that price. "
I could buy 2.5 good bottles of Aussie shiraz for $46. So I made some queries and found this was a sub-$10 wine in the US and that was retail.
Prices are recovering and recently I had a Ravenswood Vintners Blend Zin that was selling at $19.95. Much better than the Mondavi wine and starting to get competitive at that price. The Ravenswood Mendocino Country Zinfandel 2000 at $29.95 was the better wine and if this was $10 cheaper, it would become competitive to the the Aussie wines that sell at the sub-$20 price.
After all, most of the people who buy wine are not into the top end stuff.
Cheers,
Sue
Anonymous wrote:The Calera is superior to any condrieu I could name, including / especially Ch. Grillet.
Virgilius is poor wine.
Brian, I can understand exactly what you are saying and realise that in this case I may even be guilty of it but the above statement is enough for me as well!
Guest, the only thing that is poor, except for USA wines' value for money here in Australia and New Zealand, is your form. The above statement displays a lack of understanding and appreciation, as well as stupidity!
Adair
-
Guest
Adair wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Calera is superior to any condrieu I could name, including / especially Ch. Grillet.
Virgilius is poor wine.
Brian, I can understand exactly what you are saying and realise that in this case I may even be guilty of it but the above statement is enough for me as well!
Guest, the only thing that is poor, except for USA wines' value for money here in Australia and New Zealand, is your form. The above statement displays a lack of understanding and appreciation, as well as stupidity!
Adair
Adair,
why???
I think Virgilius is terrible wine, on the 4 occasions I have had it, it's been rubbish. Why do you think, given your professed lack of experience on Viognier, this statement is stupidity?
Ch. Grillet is widely thought of as being one of the most overrated icon wines in the world. I, again have had it many times, and have yet to see anything to sway me otherwise.
The Calera is good kit, but there is no point discussing this.
So in the long run, you are saying that me dismissing the Virgilius is 'stupidity'. It's overripe, hot, lacking in complexity, slightly bitter (acidification?) on the finish.
If poor form is commenting on wines I have tried repeatedly, then...
I think poor form is commenting on things you have not tried. If you have not tried something/'s, you can't have a lot to say about it.
reasonable no?
I intially stated that as far as 'greatest' wines go, Australia could learn something from USA on Cabernet & Viognier. the defensive posture exhibited by some, might constitute 'parochialism' in certain circles.
FYI Sue, your comments on the woodbridge Coastal range are concerning, as the woodbridge wines were developed as a supermarket range, the coastal series being a slight premium over the standard. $46 seems awfully high for a wine pitched at supermarkets intially. The byron series is the next step up in the mondavi range and usually they aren't bad, qpr. usually anyways. After that comes the AVA series, which is where qpr often heads south.
Michael
Anonymous wrote:Sue, your comments on the woodbridge Coastal range are concerning, as the woodbridge wines were developed as a supermarket range, the coastal series being a slight premium over the standard. $46 seems awfully high for a wine pitched at supermarkets intially.
Michael
Michael, thanks for signing you name. The fact that a wine like the Mondavi wine could have ever sold for as much as $46 is the big concern - this is why I posted the thread. It was never meant to be a discussion 'my wine is better than yours', etc.
The bottom line is American wines will never convince the punters to buy again and again if they are so ridiculously expensive for the quality they return.
Think about it. The consumer is the last step in the supply chain. It goes from the US producer to the US agent, then's there's shipping to the Aus agent who sells it on to the retailer - it's a 4-tier structure and everyone wants to make a profit along the way. Add to that the freight cost, the exchange rate anomalies, excise tax on arrival into our country (same as WET tax in Aus?) , then GST!!!
The only thing that is changing in the equation now is the greenback is losing value against the world's other currencies, but it is still not a $1 to $1 ratio for us and it probably never will be.
Today (according to xe.com/ucc) it costs AUD$1.41 and NZD$1.63 for US$1 - and when the exchange happens, the exchange agency also takes their cut.
When that Mondavi was imported, it cost about NZD$2 to buy USD$1. After that, until just recently, the imports of US wines virtually stopped.
I'll repeat, it's not parochialism. It is simply wanting quality representative of the money we have to pay.
Regards,
Sue
Anonymous wrote:Adair wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Calera is superior to any condrieu I could name, including / especially Ch. Grillet.
Virgilius is poor wine.
Brian, I can understand exactly what you are saying and realise that in this case I may even be guilty of it but the above statement is enough for me as well!
Guest, the only thing that is poor, except for USA wines' value for money here in Australia and New Zealand, is your form. The above statement displays a lack of understanding and appreciation, as well as stupidity!
Adair
Adair,
why???
I think Virgilius is terrible wine, on the 4 occasions I have had it, it's been rubbish. Why do you think, given your professed lack of experience on Viognier, this statement is stupidity?
Ch. Grillet is widely thought of as being one of the most overrated icon wines in the world. I, again have had it many times, and have yet to see anything to sway me otherwise.
The Calera is good kit, but there is no point discussing this.
So in the long run, you are saying that me dismissing the Virgilius is 'stupidity'. It's overripe, hot, lacking in complexity, slightly bitter (acidification?) on the finish.
If poor form is commenting on wines I have tried repeatedly, then...
I think poor form is commenting on things you have not tried. If you have not tried something/'s, you can't have a lot to say about it.
reasonable no?
I intially stated that as far as 'greatest' wines go, Australia could learn something from USA on Cabernet & Viognier. the defensive posture exhibited by some, might constitute 'parochialism' in certain circles.
FYI Sue, your comments on the woodbridge Coastal range are concerning, as the woodbridge wines were developed as a supermarket range, the coastal series being a slight premium over the standard. $46 seems awfully high for a wine pitched at supermarkets intially. The byron series is the next step up in the mondavi range and usually they aren't bad, qpr. usually anyways. After that comes the AVA series, which is where qpr often heads south.
Michael
Hello Michael,
The major reason for calling you “stupid†is your comment that the Calera is superior to any Condrieu (you could name). Saying that a 15.5% New World is superior to all wine in an Old World region that has arguably over 2000 years experience, at least over 1000 years, is an example of massive arrogance!
The fact that you use the phrase “you could name†does not excuse you as you obviously have considerable wine knowledge and, probably like most of us, know that some Condrieu Viognier is far too expensive for our wallets and thus have not tried them but can name them. I have not tried the top Guigals or Vernays.
Saying that Virgilius is “poor†and/or “terrible†wine is another example of arrogance. As I stated previously, I do not like/enjoy Australian Viognier and do not buy it. However, when I have the opportunity to taste the wine, I do in order to get a better understanding of the wine and I do appreciate what Yalumba have done with the variety but I simply don’t enjoy it. When I read a respected wine critic, who has years more experience than I, comment favourably about a wine, I think it worthwhile to try the wine and try to gain an understanding of why he/she sees the wine in that light. There is usually/always a reason that can be understood that helps increase wine appreciation. Then I make my own mind up as to whether I enjoy the wine. Easy Example: I dislike/don’t enjoy much of the Australian wine that RPjr gives mid-90/100 but I can usually appreciate why he has given it that mark and I don’t call it poor/terrible wine. In fact, in most cases I marvel at the flavour and power of such wines. I just don't enjoy drinking them.
Leading this point back to your “Calera is superior to any Condrieu†remark, I see that your arrogance has again overshadowed the fact that your palate prefers a variety in its New World style rather than its Old World style. I have friends that prefer top Australian Chardonnay to most Premier Cru White Burgundy. They do not say that the Roxborough is better than any white Burgundy!
Also, the fact that you say that the leading New World experimenter in the Viognier variety, Yalumba, makes poor/terrible wine of the grape, as well as contradicting many experienced critics, should make you think that maybe you do not understand as opposed to thinking it is poor/terrible. The fact that the winemaker of the Calera came all the way to Yalumba to understand more about this particular grape makes your comments even more amusing.
Your comment that Australia is able to learn about Cabernet & Viognier from American is, I am sure, correct. I am also sure that the other way around is correct as well!
Must go. I look forward to tasting and learning more about American Cabernet of the next 12 months. I will make a point of trying some at every opportunity. I will now also attempt to get a bottle of the Calera Viognier - I will go 3rds or 4ths with a few mates though!
Adair
-
Guest
SueNZ wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sue, your comments on the woodbridge Coastal range are concerning, as the woodbridge wines were developed as a supermarket range, the coastal series being a slight premium over the standard. $46 seems awfully high for a wine pitched at supermarkets intially.
Michael
Michael, thanks for signing you name. The fact that a wine like the Mondavi wine could have ever sold for as much as $46 is the big concern - this is why I posted the thread. It was never meant to be a discussion 'my wine is better than yours', etc.
The bottom line is American wines will never convince the punters to buy again and again if they are so ridiculously expensive for the quality they return.
Think about it. The consumer is the last step in the supply chain. It goes from the US producer to the US agent, then's there's shipping to the Aus agent who sells it on to the retailer - it's a 4-tier structure and everyone wants to make a profit along the way. Add to that the freight cost, the exchange rate anomalies, excise tax on arrival into our country (same as WET tax in Aus?) , then GST!!!
The only thing that is changing in the equation now is the greenback is losing value against the world's other currencies, but it is still not a $1 to $1 ratio for us and it probably never will be.
Today (according to xe.com/ucc) it costs AUD$1.41 and NZD$1.63 for US$1 - and when the exchange happens, the exchange agency also takes their cut.
When that Mondavi was imported, it cost about NZD$2 to buy USD$1. After that, until just recently, the imports of US wines virtually stopped.
I'll repeat, it's not parochialism. It is simply wanting quality representative of the money we have to pay.
Regards,
Sue
Sue,
I am disagreeing with you here, certainly not in this instance. I am not a fan of the coastal series, and that price is far too high. I don't think it's just exchange, but because it sells for an adjusted (fx) sum considerably less than that elsewhere. Simply put, I wouldn't buy it, and I wouldn't expect anyone else too. I never thought this was being parochial,
What is imo, and I don't think this was you, is the presumption that I am American. Because I feel that California makes better quality cabernet, that I must be American and an idiot at that.
Drawing those lines in the sand is myopic parochialism.
M
-
Guest
ok this getting silly now, I am little confused about what it is you're saying?
again lot's of points about wines you haven't had - doesn't that seem ridiculous to you? Too much heresay, and opinions derived 4th hand.
let me try to go through this:
Now, what does the alcohol have to do with anything? and you seem to be basing, whatever it is you claim, on a single vintage. Do you always sum up an estate or wine on one year? actually you seem to do that without having any knowledge at all on this wine. I am not alone in considering Viognier to not be a 'noble' grape, it is very troublesome to grow, causing massive variation in the old world. It's really only grown with any success in Condrieu and in some southern parts of the languedoc roussilion. So to even draw in the whole of the old world, doesn't make a lot of sense, just misapplying bits of information gleaned here and there. -by the way what is your definitintion of 'old world'? it's not as easy as it sounds
huh? I am not concerned by the price of condrieu, just the quality. Again you keep talking about wines you haven't tried, I have. You are presuming a nobility upon a famous region, without the backup to know that it is dangerously underperforming. I quite like the Vernays (had the L'empire 3 weeks ago), Guigal I don't rate, though his single vineyards is very rich and interesting. smaller producers: Yves Cuilleron is doing decent things, but his botytris is still his most successful creation. There is no point but I can name another half dozen or so I have had in this couple of years. I feel qualified, to pass judgements on the quality of these wines, and the Grillet monopole - and to compare them to the one manifestation of this grape that I do rate. Further I don't really think it (wines from viognier) is a food wine, the acidity is too low - at which point it should be drunk on it's own, and often seems to lack real complexity beyond ripe aromatics.
ok, a local critic, enjoys the Virgilius, and now I have to appreciate it too. You presume the local critic is right - why? It seems you're quite ok with suggesting the worlds leading wine critic doesn't know much.
I don't like the wine, and I don't agree with the direction they are going with it. Fundmentally I disagree with this wine, and what it represents.
so? If they can present reasons, why can't they say. I would expect them to have proper experience and knowledge, but if they wish to assert the roxborough (someone tell phillip shaw we have moved on from the eighties, less oak is more) is superior to white burgundy I would be interested to hear why. You also should be careful comparing, a notoriously esoteric, inconsistent and not widely appreciated region, with a classic. Also, it matters which ones? I would take a Leeuwin estate art series, over any number of premier cru's - because region is more important than designation of the climat at that distinction. Premier cru Rully or Macon Lugny isn't anything to write home about.
You're telling me how to think - interesting.
Again I'm sure local critics may have enjoyed it, but let's look at the wider picture. I have already told you what I don't like about this wine, and framed against internation competition and context I think it's appalling.
As for leading new world experimenter - that's not true, leading Australian (Parochialism) . Why don't you tell me how much I need to respect the great chilean chambourcin project. I made that up btw.
I don't know what they spoke about, or what the precise purpose was - do you? The conclusions you are drawing, what do you base that on.
Adair, in the long run, I just think you're getting carried away here, about things you don't know enough about.
Too much Beligerrant even handedness, and name calling at that rate.
I look forward to reading some of your posts on things you DO know something/anything about.
A Final thought, I think it's the height of poor form to talk about wines you've never had, and then quite ridiculous to then take a position on them. Even more ridiculous to call someone else arrogant, when the basic premise of your posts started as "wines I have never heard of - how good can they be?". Not to menton all the presumption of what I have knowledge and experience of.
Michael
again lot's of points about wines you haven't had - doesn't that seem ridiculous to you? Too much heresay, and opinions derived 4th hand.
let me try to go through this:
Adair wrote:Hello Michael,
The major reason for calling you “stupid†is your comment that the Calera is superior to any Condrieu (you could name). Saying that a 15.5% New World is superior to all wine in an Old World region that has arguably over 2000 years experience, at least over 1000 years, is an example of massive arrogance!
Now, what does the alcohol have to do with anything? and you seem to be basing, whatever it is you claim, on a single vintage. Do you always sum up an estate or wine on one year? actually you seem to do that without having any knowledge at all on this wine. I am not alone in considering Viognier to not be a 'noble' grape, it is very troublesome to grow, causing massive variation in the old world. It's really only grown with any success in Condrieu and in some southern parts of the languedoc roussilion. So to even draw in the whole of the old world, doesn't make a lot of sense, just misapplying bits of information gleaned here and there. -by the way what is your definitintion of 'old world'? it's not as easy as it sounds
The fact that you use the phrase “you could name†does not excuse you as you obviously have considerable wine knowledge and, probably like most of us, know that some Condrieu Viognier is far too expensive for our wallets and thus have not tried them but can name them. I have not tried the top Guigals or Vernays.
huh? I am not concerned by the price of condrieu, just the quality. Again you keep talking about wines you haven't tried, I have. You are presuming a nobility upon a famous region, without the backup to know that it is dangerously underperforming. I quite like the Vernays (had the L'empire 3 weeks ago), Guigal I don't rate, though his single vineyards is very rich and interesting. smaller producers: Yves Cuilleron is doing decent things, but his botytris is still his most successful creation. There is no point but I can name another half dozen or so I have had in this couple of years. I feel qualified, to pass judgements on the quality of these wines, and the Grillet monopole - and to compare them to the one manifestation of this grape that I do rate. Further I don't really think it (wines from viognier) is a food wine, the acidity is too low - at which point it should be drunk on it's own, and often seems to lack real complexity beyond ripe aromatics.
Saying that Virgilius is “poor†and/or “terrible†wine is another example of arrogance. As I stated previously, I do not like/enjoy Australian Viognier and do not buy it. However, when I have the opportunity to taste the wine, I do in order to get a better understanding of the wine and I do appreciate what Yalumba have done with the variety but I simply don’t enjoy it. When I read a respected wine critic, who has years more experience than I, comment favourably about a wine, I think it worthwhile to try the wine and try to gain an understanding of why he/she sees the wine in that light. There is usually/always a reason that can be understood that helps increase wine appreciation. Then I make my own mind up as to whether I enjoy the wine. Easy Example: I dislike/don’t enjoy much of the Australian wine that RPjr gives mid-90/100 but I can usually appreciate why he has given it that mark and I don’t call it poor/terrible wine. In fact, in most cases I marvel at the flavour and power of such wines. I just don't enjoy drinking them.
ok, a local critic, enjoys the Virgilius, and now I have to appreciate it too. You presume the local critic is right - why? It seems you're quite ok with suggesting the worlds leading wine critic doesn't know much.
I don't like the wine, and I don't agree with the direction they are going with it. Fundmentally I disagree with this wine, and what it represents.
Leading this point back to your “Calera is superior to any Condrieu†remark, I see that your arrogance has again overshadowed the fact that your palate prefers a variety in its New World style rather than its Old World style. I have friends that prefer top Australian Chardonnay to most Premier Cru White Burgundy. They do not say that the Roxborough is better than any white Burgundy!
so? If they can present reasons, why can't they say. I would expect them to have proper experience and knowledge, but if they wish to assert the roxborough (someone tell phillip shaw we have moved on from the eighties, less oak is more) is superior to white burgundy I would be interested to hear why. You also should be careful comparing, a notoriously esoteric, inconsistent and not widely appreciated region, with a classic. Also, it matters which ones? I would take a Leeuwin estate art series, over any number of premier cru's - because region is more important than designation of the climat at that distinction. Premier cru Rully or Macon Lugny isn't anything to write home about.
.Also, the fact that you say that the leading New World experimenter in the Viognier variety, Yalumba, makes poor/terrible wine of the grape, as well as contradicting many experienced critics, should make you think that maybe you do not understand as opposed to thinking it is poor/terrible
You're telling me how to think - interesting.
Again I'm sure local critics may have enjoyed it, but let's look at the wider picture. I have already told you what I don't like about this wine, and framed against internation competition and context I think it's appalling.
As for leading new world experimenter - that's not true, leading Australian (Parochialism) . Why don't you tell me how much I need to respect the great chilean chambourcin project. I made that up btw.
The fact that the winemaker of the Calera came all the way to Yalumba to understand more about this particular grape makes your comments even more amusing.
I don't know what they spoke about, or what the precise purpose was - do you? The conclusions you are drawing, what do you base that on.
Your comment that Australia is able to learn about Cabernet & Viognier from American is, I am sure, correct. I am also sure that the other way around is correct as well!
Must go. I look forward to tasting and learning more about American Cabernet of the next 12 months. I will make a point of trying some at every opportunity. I will now also attempt to get a bottle of the Calera Viognier - I will go 3rds or 4ths with a few mates though!
Adair
Adair, in the long run, I just think you're getting carried away here, about things you don't know enough about.
Too much Beligerrant even handedness, and name calling at that rate.
I look forward to reading some of your posts on things you DO know something/anything about.
A Final thought, I think it's the height of poor form to talk about wines you've never had, and then quite ridiculous to then take a position on them. Even more ridiculous to call someone else arrogant, when the basic premise of your posts started as "wines I have never heard of - how good can they be?". Not to menton all the presumption of what I have knowledge and experience of.
Michael
-
Guest
ok this getting silly now, I am little confused about what it is you're saying?
again lot's of points about wines you haven't had - doesn't that seem ridiculous to you? Too much heresay, and opinions derived 4th hand.
let me try to go through this:
Now, what does the alcohol have to do with anything? and you seem to be basing, whatever it is you claim, on a single vintage. Do you always sum up an estate or wine on one year? actually you seem to do that without having any knowledge at all on this wine. I am not alone in considering Viognier to not be a 'noble' grape, it is very troublesome to grow, causing massive variation in the old world. It's really only grown with any success in Condrieu and in some southern parts of the languedoc roussilion. So to even draw in the whole of the old world, doesn't make a lot of sense, just misapplying bits of information gleaned here and there. -by the way what is your definitintion of 'old world'? it's not as easy as it sounds
huh? I am not concerned by the price of condrieu, just the quality. Again you keep talking about wines you haven't tried, I have. You are presuming a nobility upon a famous region, without the backup to know that it is dangerously underperforming. I quite like the Vernays (had the L'empire 3 weeks ago), Guigal I don't rate, though his single vineyards is very rich and interesting. smaller producers: Yves Cuilleron is doing decent things, but his botytris is still his most successful creation. There is no point but I can name another half dozen or so I have had in this couple of years. I feel qualified, to pass judgements on the quality of these wines, and the Grillet monopole - and to compare them to the one manifestation of this grape that I do rate. Further I don't really think it (wines from viognier) is a food wine, the acidity is too low - at which point it should be drunk on it's own, and often seems to lack real complexity beyond ripe aromatics.
ok, a local critic, enjoys the Virgilius, and now I have to appreciate it too. You presume the local critic is right - why? It seems you're quite ok with suggesting the worlds leading wine critic doesn't know much.
I don't like the wine, and I don't agree with the direction they are going with it. Fundmentally I disagree with this wine, and what it represents.
so? If they can present reasons, why can't they say. I would expect them to have proper experience and knowledge, but if they wish to assert the roxborough (someone tell phillip shaw we have moved on from the eighties, less oak is more) is superior to white burgundy I would be interested to hear why. You also should be careful comparing, a notoriously esoteric, inconsistent and not widely appreciated region, with a classic. Also, it matters which ones? I would take a Leeuwin estate art series, over any number of premier cru's - because region is more important than designation of the climat at that distinction. Premier cru Rully or Macon Lugny isn't anything to write home about.
You're telling me how to think - interesting.
Again I'm sure local critics may have enjoyed it, but let's look at the wider picture. I have already told you what I don't like about this wine, and framed against internation competition and context I think it's appalling.
As for leading new world experimenter - that's not true, leading Australian (Parochialism) . Why don't you tell me how much I need to respect the great chilean chambourcin project. I made that up btw.
I don't know what they spoke about, or what the precise purpose was - do you? The conclusions you are drawing, what do you base that on.
Adair, in the long run, I just think you're getting carried away here, about things you don't know enough about.
Too much Beligerrant even handedness, and name calling as well.
I look forward to reading some of your posts on things you DO know something/anything about.
A Final thought, I think it's the height of poor form to talk about wines you've never had, and then quite ridiculous to then take a position on them. Even more ridiculous to call someone else arrogant, when the basic premise of your posts started as "wines I have never heard of - how good can they be?". Not to menton all the presumption of what I have knowledge and experience of.
Michael
again lot's of points about wines you haven't had - doesn't that seem ridiculous to you? Too much heresay, and opinions derived 4th hand.
let me try to go through this:
Adair wrote:Hello Michael,
The major reason for calling you “stupid†is your comment that the Calera is superior to any Condrieu (you could name). Saying that a 15.5% New World is superior to all wine in an Old World region that has arguably over 2000 years experience, at least over 1000 years, is an example of massive arrogance!
Now, what does the alcohol have to do with anything? and you seem to be basing, whatever it is you claim, on a single vintage. Do you always sum up an estate or wine on one year? actually you seem to do that without having any knowledge at all on this wine. I am not alone in considering Viognier to not be a 'noble' grape, it is very troublesome to grow, causing massive variation in the old world. It's really only grown with any success in Condrieu and in some southern parts of the languedoc roussilion. So to even draw in the whole of the old world, doesn't make a lot of sense, just misapplying bits of information gleaned here and there. -by the way what is your definitintion of 'old world'? it's not as easy as it sounds
The fact that you use the phrase “you could name†does not excuse you as you obviously have considerable wine knowledge and, probably like most of us, know that some Condrieu Viognier is far too expensive for our wallets and thus have not tried them but can name them. I have not tried the top Guigals or Vernays.
huh? I am not concerned by the price of condrieu, just the quality. Again you keep talking about wines you haven't tried, I have. You are presuming a nobility upon a famous region, without the backup to know that it is dangerously underperforming. I quite like the Vernays (had the L'empire 3 weeks ago), Guigal I don't rate, though his single vineyards is very rich and interesting. smaller producers: Yves Cuilleron is doing decent things, but his botytris is still his most successful creation. There is no point but I can name another half dozen or so I have had in this couple of years. I feel qualified, to pass judgements on the quality of these wines, and the Grillet monopole - and to compare them to the one manifestation of this grape that I do rate. Further I don't really think it (wines from viognier) is a food wine, the acidity is too low - at which point it should be drunk on it's own, and often seems to lack real complexity beyond ripe aromatics.
Saying that Virgilius is “poor†and/or “terrible†wine is another example of arrogance. As I stated previously, I do not like/enjoy Australian Viognier and do not buy it. However, when I have the opportunity to taste the wine, I do in order to get a better understanding of the wine and I do appreciate what Yalumba have done with the variety but I simply don’t enjoy it. When I read a respected wine critic, who has years more experience than I, comment favourably about a wine, I think it worthwhile to try the wine and try to gain an understanding of why he/she sees the wine in that light. There is usually/always a reason that can be understood that helps increase wine appreciation. Then I make my own mind up as to whether I enjoy the wine. Easy Example: I dislike/don’t enjoy much of the Australian wine that RPjr gives mid-90/100 but I can usually appreciate why he has given it that mark and I don’t call it poor/terrible wine. In fact, in most cases I marvel at the flavour and power of such wines. I just don't enjoy drinking them.
ok, a local critic, enjoys the Virgilius, and now I have to appreciate it too. You presume the local critic is right - why? It seems you're quite ok with suggesting the worlds leading wine critic doesn't know much.
I don't like the wine, and I don't agree with the direction they are going with it. Fundmentally I disagree with this wine, and what it represents.
Leading this point back to your “Calera is superior to any Condrieu†remark, I see that your arrogance has again overshadowed the fact that your palate prefers a variety in its New World style rather than its Old World style. I have friends that prefer top Australian Chardonnay to most Premier Cru White Burgundy. They do not say that the Roxborough is better than any white Burgundy!
so? If they can present reasons, why can't they say. I would expect them to have proper experience and knowledge, but if they wish to assert the roxborough (someone tell phillip shaw we have moved on from the eighties, less oak is more) is superior to white burgundy I would be interested to hear why. You also should be careful comparing, a notoriously esoteric, inconsistent and not widely appreciated region, with a classic. Also, it matters which ones? I would take a Leeuwin estate art series, over any number of premier cru's - because region is more important than designation of the climat at that distinction. Premier cru Rully or Macon Lugny isn't anything to write home about.
.Also, the fact that you say that the leading New World experimenter in the Viognier variety, Yalumba, makes poor/terrible wine of the grape, as well as contradicting many experienced critics, should make you think that maybe you do not understand as opposed to thinking it is poor/terrible
You're telling me how to think - interesting.
Again I'm sure local critics may have enjoyed it, but let's look at the wider picture. I have already told you what I don't like about this wine, and framed against internation competition and context I think it's appalling.
As for leading new world experimenter - that's not true, leading Australian (Parochialism) . Why don't you tell me how much I need to respect the great chilean chambourcin project. I made that up btw.
The fact that the winemaker of the Calera came all the way to Yalumba to understand more about this particular grape makes your comments even more amusing.
I don't know what they spoke about, or what the precise purpose was - do you? The conclusions you are drawing, what do you base that on.
Your comment that Australia is able to learn about Cabernet & Viognier from American is, I am sure, correct. I am also sure that the other way around is correct as well!
Must go. I look forward to tasting and learning more about American Cabernet of the next 12 months. I will make a point of trying some at every opportunity. I will now also attempt to get a bottle of the Calera Viognier - I will go 3rds or 4ths with a few mates though!
Adair
Adair, in the long run, I just think you're getting carried away here, about things you don't know enough about.
Too much Beligerrant even handedness, and name calling as well.
I look forward to reading some of your posts on things you DO know something/anything about.
A Final thought, I think it's the height of poor form to talk about wines you've never had, and then quite ridiculous to then take a position on them. Even more ridiculous to call someone else arrogant, when the basic premise of your posts started as "wines I have never heard of - how good can they be?". Not to menton all the presumption of what I have knowledge and experience of.
Michael
-
Guest
SueNZ wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sue, your comments on the woodbridge Coastal range are concerning, as the woodbridge wines were developed as a supermarket range, the coastal series being a slight premium over the standard. $46 seems awfully high for a wine pitched at supermarkets intially.
Michael
Michael, thanks for signing you name. The fact that a wine like the Mondavi wine could have ever sold for as much as $46 is the big concern - this is why I posted the thread. It was never meant to be a discussion 'my wine is better than yours', etc.
The bottom line is American wines will never convince the punters to buy again and again if they are so ridiculously expensive for the quality they return.
Think about it. The consumer is the last step in the supply chain. It goes from the US producer to the US agent, then's there's shipping to the Aus agent who sells it on to the retailer - it's a 4-tier structure and everyone wants to make a profit along the way. Add to that the freight cost, the exchange rate anomalies, excise tax on arrival into our country (same as WET tax in Aus?) , then GST!!!
The only thing that is changing in the equation now is the greenback is losing value against the world's other currencies, but it is still not a $1 to $1 ratio for us and it probably never will be.
Today (according to xe.com/ucc) it costs AUD$1.41 and NZD$1.63 for US$1 - and when the exchange happens, the exchange agency also takes their cut.
When that Mondavi was imported, it cost about NZD$2 to buy USD$1. After that, until just recently, the imports of US wines virtually stopped.
I'll repeat, it's not parochialism. It is simply wanting quality representative of the money we have to pay.
Regards,
Sue
Sue,
I am disagreeing with you here, certainly not in this instance. I am not a fan of the coastal series, and that price is far too high. I don't think it's just exchange, but because it sells for an adjusted (fx) sum considerably less than that elsewhere. Simply put, I wouldn't buy it, and I wouldn't expect anyone else too. I never thought this was being parochial,
What is imo, and I don't think this was you, is the presumption that I am American. Because I feel that California makes better quality cabernet, that I must be American and an idiot at that.
Drawing those lines in the sand is myopic parochialism.
M
-
Guest
Hello Michael,
Even if you were the lovechild of Robert Parker Junior and Jancis Robinson, I would still consider your statement that the Calera Viognier is superior to any Condrieu as absurd!
However, it is pretty pointless us arguing this point any further as we obviously have very different ideals as to the purpose of wine and what it offers.
Your comment about increasing one's (in this case my) wine understanding/appreciation by following up reviews/tasting notes from respected wine critics again highlights our difference in wine ideals. In my view, whether a wine critic is wrong or right about a wine is absolutely beside the point. The fact you deduce that I am saying that “the world's leading wine critic doesn't know much" shows again that we are on different wine wave lengths. Using the Virgilius as example, local critics including MWs have reviewed them favourably. I believe that I can understand why they have done so and believe that it is interesting and important (as a wine follower) to find out why they arrive at such conclusions. Whether I enjoy the wine or not is a personal thing but, either way, by investigating such wines in this way, I have increased my wine understanding.
With regard to actually providing some interest and benefit to others reading this thread, sincerely, could you please tell us in what areas Australian Cabernet producers can learn from US Cabernet producers.
Kind regards,
Adair
Even if you were the lovechild of Robert Parker Junior and Jancis Robinson, I would still consider your statement that the Calera Viognier is superior to any Condrieu as absurd!
However, it is pretty pointless us arguing this point any further as we obviously have very different ideals as to the purpose of wine and what it offers.
Anonymous wrote:ok, a local critic, enjoys the Virgilius, and now I have to appreciate it too. You presume the local critic is right - why? It seems you're quite ok with suggesting the worlds leading wine critic doesn't know much.
Your comment about increasing one's (in this case my) wine understanding/appreciation by following up reviews/tasting notes from respected wine critics again highlights our difference in wine ideals. In my view, whether a wine critic is wrong or right about a wine is absolutely beside the point. The fact you deduce that I am saying that “the world's leading wine critic doesn't know much" shows again that we are on different wine wave lengths. Using the Virgilius as example, local critics including MWs have reviewed them favourably. I believe that I can understand why they have done so and believe that it is interesting and important (as a wine follower) to find out why they arrive at such conclusions. Whether I enjoy the wine or not is a personal thing but, either way, by investigating such wines in this way, I have increased my wine understanding.
With regard to actually providing some interest and benefit to others reading this thread, sincerely, could you please tell us in what areas Australian Cabernet producers can learn from US Cabernet producers.
Kind regards,
Adair
