| Vino |
On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 20:50:59 GMT, Dana Myers <dana.myers@gmail.com>
wrote:
>[T]here are some aromas which are not pleasant which escape
>as well. Certainly, as one gains experience with older wines, one finds
>that they often come out of the bottle with a little bit of funk that
>takes a few minutes to blow off.
This topic came up many threads back and, IIRC, was never settled to
my complete satisfaction. It's possible that it may never be, but I
thought I'd use this opportunity to throw it out again for discussion.
With apparently one lone exception, everyone here agrees that *in
general* SOME red wines improve following *some* exposure to air. The
reasons for such improvement (when it occurs) can be (and are) debated
endlessly. Most of the reasons I have heard relate to beneficial
changes that occur to the wine itself. I have often wondered how much,
if any, of the improvement comes from the escape of undesirable
compounds that were either bottled with the wine or formed after
bottling. I'm not necessarily talking about the usual suspects such as
SO2, mercaptans, etc. There may even be compounds that have little or
no odor themselves but somehow degrade the wine. I readily admit to
profound ignorance here, but I can't help but wonder.
Vino
To reply, add "x" between
letters and numbers of
e-mail address.
|
|
|
| Mike Tommasi |
On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 21:21:11 GMT, Vino <ifw416@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 20:50:59 GMT, Dana Myers <dana.myers@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>[T]here are some aromas which are not pleasant which escape
>>as well. Certainly, as one gains experience with older wines, one finds
>>that they often come out of the bottle with a little bit of funk that
>>takes a few minutes to blow off.
>
>This topic came up many threads back and, IIRC, was never settled to
>my complete satisfaction. It's possible that it may never be, but I
>thought I'd use this opportunity to throw it out again for discussion.
>With apparently one lone exception, everyone here agrees that *in
>general* SOME red wines improve following *some* exposure to air.
I would say that all wine benefits from exposure to air, and young
reds particularly so.
I think that old wines also benefit, I have seen this with red and
white top Bordeaux from the 20's for example. These wines not only
improve, but change radically in the space of 2-3 hours, it is worth
tasting them every half hour to see what is happening.
Anyhow, I think MS is having fun poking at us.
Mike
Mike Tommasi, Six Fours, France
email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail
|
|
|
| Ian Hoare |
Salut/Hi Vino,
le/on Tue, 07 Sep 2004 21:21:11 GMT, tu disais/you said:-
>On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 20:50:59 GMT, Dana Myers <dana.myers@gmail.com>
>This topic came up many threads back and, IIRC, was never settled to
>my complete satisfaction. It's possible that it may never be, but I
>thought I'd use this opportunity to throw it out again for discussion.
>With apparently one lone exception, everyone here agrees that *in
>general* SOME red wines improve following *some* exposure to air.
I'd go further, Vino. I don't think I've ever met a red wine which didn't
improve with some exposure to air - and I'm not talking about opening the
bottle a couple of hours before and leaving it, but by decanting/carafing. I
know of many white wines which do too. For example, many serious white
burgundy makers decant their wines before serving them, as do several of the
best Bergerac wine makers. I can't speak to what the bordelais do, as I
don't often taste white Bordeaux at the property. I have doubts about
whether German whites do, but I've had some Gruner Veltliners which
benefitted by it (right Michael P?).
>changes that occur to the wine itself. I have often wondered how much,
>if any, of the improvement comes from the escape of undesirable
>compounds that were either bottled with the wine or formed after
>bottling. I'm not necessarily talking about the usual suspects such as
>SO2, mercaptans, etc. There may even be compounds that have little or
>no odor themselves but somehow degrade the wine. I readily admit to
>profound ignorance here, but I can't help but wonder.
No, I don't think this is the case. I think that the decanting process and
exposure to oxygen allow some of the components to form/develop. They were
"waiting" for the moment, and decantation kick starts it.
This is a non experiment I've done dozens/hundreds of times. Take two
bottles of the same wine. Decant one and leave the other sealed. Then 1 hour
or 2 hours or whatever, open the second and taste them against each other.
Do it double blind if you like so one person pours in one room and the
second tastes, so you have no idea which was which. I don't do it anything
like as formally. If I don't know whether my guests (3-4 meals a week 6-8
months a year for the last 10 years, gives me a _some_ small experience) are
going to need one bottle or two of a particular wine, then I'll decant one,
and leave the other unopened. If the second is needed I'll open and decant
immediately. You can almost always tell the difference, and -in my opinion -
the first bottle shows more on the nose and (in the case of reds) is often
less tannic. However once poured into glasses and swirled around, the second
can "catch up".
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website
|
|
|
| Bill Spohn |
Decanting is one of the most important decisions one must make when opening a
bottle of wine, for it surely does change the wine, although those changes
range from trivial and often all but undetectable in very young wines to
profound and potentially destructive in very old wines.
Decanting allows some unpleasant aromas and 'bottle' stinks' to blow off. To
those insensitive to TCA, these can seem like a corked wine - I have seen
several good bottles discarded because the person that opened it smelled
something unpleasant and assumed that it was corked, not knowing the
difference. Of course if it is Burgundy, the stink may be all part of the
fun....;-)
With some young wines the oxidation reactions that begin when you aerate and
decant can soften the wine.
In wines such as Port and certain Nebbiolo based wines, these reactions need at
least several hours to bring the wine to it's best drinking point.
In some older wines, you may find that the whole process takes not hours but
minutes. I have had 1981 Bordeaux crash over a couple of hours and I have seen
80 year old Bordeaux show beautifully - but only for a 10 - 15 minute span
before deteriorating.
I haven't been following this thread, but if I am correct in stating that
someone thought that the chemical reactions promoted by aeration have no effect
on the smell and taste of a wine, they are incorrect, perhaps through
inexperience or inability to detect the differences.
And food will definitely affect how one perceives a wine as well. If the wine
is the focus then no food, initially at least, is best. You can then decide
whether the wine is best appreciated alone (as in the case of old Rieslings,
dessert wines and ancient red Burgs) or with food, which can blunt the tannins
and acids of a younger wine.
|
|
|
| Michael Scarpitti |
wspohn4@aol.comnojunk (Bill Spohn) wrote in message news:<20040908121521.01927.00000279@mb-m23.aol.com>...
Of course aeration has an effect: bad. That's why I keep the cork in
after opening. My argument was that you SHOULD NO 'breathe' wine, not
that breathing it has no effect. It has no GOOD effect, except,
perhaps, for a few seconds.
> Decanting is one of the most important decisions one must make when opening a
> bottle of wine, for it surely does change the wine, although those changes
> range from trivial and often all but undetectable in very young wines to
> profound and potentially destructive in very old wines.
>
> Decanting allows some unpleasant aromas and 'bottle' stinks' to blow off. To
> those insensitive to TCA, these can seem like a corked wine - I have seen
> several good bottles discarded because the person that opened it smelled
> something unpleasant and assumed that it was corked, not knowing the
> difference. Of course if it is Burgundy, the stink may be all part of the
> fun....;-)
>
> With some young wines the oxidation reactions that begin when you aerate and
> decant can soften the wine.
>
> In wines such as Port and certain Nebbiolo based wines, these reactions need at
> least several hours to bring the wine to it's best drinking point.
>
> In some older wines, you may find that the whole process takes not hours but
> minutes. I have had 1981 Bordeaux crash over a couple of hours and I have seen
> 80 year old Bordeaux show beautifully - but only for a 10 - 15 minute span
> before deteriorating.
>
> I haven't been following this thread, but if I am correct in stating that
> someone thought that the chemical reactions promoted by aeration have no effect
> on the smell and taste of a wine, they are incorrect, perhaps through
> inexperience or inability to detect the differences.
>
> And food will definitely affect how one perceives a wine as well. If the wine
> is the focus then no food, initially at least, is best. You can then decide
> whether the wine is best appreciated alone (as in the case of old Rieslings,
> dessert wines and ancient red Burgs) or with food, which can blunt the tannins
> and acids of a younger wine.
|
|
|
| st.helier |
"Michael Scarpitti" wrote an opinion
> Of course aeration has an effect: bad.
> That's why I keep the cork in after opening.
> My argument was that you SHOULD NO
> 'breathe' wine, not that breathing it has no effect.
> It has no GOOD effect, except, perhaps, for a few seconds.
Michael - you have gone to great lengths to state a subjective opinion.
I will be the first to defend your right, not only to have an opinion, but
to have the freedom to state/publish/broadcast that opinion.
But, consider this - What if that opinion was nonsense?
Not just a little off the mark, but absolute dribble.
Would you like to discuss matters in an open and courteous forum (which
a.f.w. is 99% of the time) or are you going to steadfastly hold on to an
erroneous argument - just for the sake of it?
Because, respectfully, that is the current situation.
Some extremely knowledgeable people from all walks of life, from many
countries around the world, with experience in wine far, far more expansive
than yours have tried to explain that the decanting and/or aeration of a
wine is a very important decision which one must make.
Almost everyone is agreement - the wine will surely change.
However, you are the only one trying to defend an argument that all change
is bad.
This is total crap - but you are unable or, probably more accurately
unwilling to accept this.
So, enough is enough; you have stated your case; you are unwilling to even
entertain the fact that your own experience is very limited and that you
have neither the experience or ability to detect these changes, and in
reality you know 2/5 of 5/8 of bugger-all about the wonderful world of wine.
Go back to making your racist comments re women tennis players or the finer
points of photography if you cannot contribute in a positive and polite
manner in this newsgroup.
--
st.helier
|
|
|
| Bill Spohn |
> My argument was that you SHOULD NO 'breathe' wine, not
>that breathing it has no effect. It has no GOOD effect, except,
>perhaps, for a few seconds.
Don't know what you have been drinking but many wines open up and improve over
a period that ranges from a half hour to a day or more.
|
|
|
| Michael Pronay |
Ian Hoare <ianhoare@angelfire.com> wrote:
> I have doubts about whether German whites do, but I've had some
> Gruner Veltliners which benefitted by it (right Michael P?).
Yep.
M.
|
|
|
| Michael Pronay |
wspohn4@aol.comnojunk (Bill Spohn) wrote:
>> My argument was that you SHOULD NO 'breathe' wine, not that
>> breathing it has no effect. It has no GOOD effect, except,
>> perhaps, for a few seconds.
> Don't know what you have been drinking but many wines open up
> and improve over a period that ranges from a half hour to a day
> or more.
Bill, do not feed the trolls.
M.
|
|
|
| Michael Scarpitti |
"st.helier" <nospam@thisaddress.4me> wrote in message news:<1094691733.218640@ftpsrv1>...
> "Michael Scarpitti" wrote an opinion
>
> > Of course aeration has an effect: bad.
> > That's why I keep the cork in after opening.
> > My argument was that you SHOULD NO
> > 'breathe' wine, not that breathing it has no effect.
> > It has no GOOD effect, except, perhaps, for a few seconds.
>
> Michael - you have gone to great lengths to state a subjective opinion.
It has been my experience that oxidation over any length of time is
bad for wine. (It's also bad for developer.)
You may find that opening a bottle lets the wine cast off a little
mustiness, but that's all. It should be recorked immediately.
It's really rather simple:
Oxygen is bad.
> I will be the first to defend your right, not only to have an opinion, but
> to have the freedom to state/publish/broadcast that opinion.
>
> But, consider this - What if that opinion was nonsense?
What if the opinions of those who advocate breating are nonsense?
>
> Not just a little off the mark, but absolute dribble.
Likewise with 'breathers'.
> Would you like to discuss matters in an open and courteous forum (which
> a.f.w. is 99% of the time) or are you going to steadfastly hold on to an
> erroneous argument - just for the sake of it?
It's not erroneous.
> Because, respectfully, that is the current situation.
Have you considered the possibility that you're mistaken?
> Some extremely knowledgeable people from all walks of life, from many
> countries around the world, with experience in wine far, far more expansive
> than yours have tried to explain that the decanting and/or aeration of a
> wine is a very important decision which one must make.
I have enjoyed many, many, many, wines from all around Italy, Sicily,
and Sardinia.
Have you ever tasted Giacomo Bologna's Barberas? Fabulous!
Grignolino from Bruno Giacosa? Chionetti's Dolcetto di Dogliani?
Valentini's Trebbiano di Abruzzo? Cosimo Taurino's Patrigliano?
etc. etc. etc.
> Almost everyone is agreement - the wine will surely change.
I agree it will change. It will go bad.
> However, you are the only one trying to defend an argument that all change
> is bad.
>
> This is total crap - but you are unable or, probably more accurately
> unwilling to accept this.
Because oxidation ruins everything.
> So, enough is enough; you have stated your case; you are unwilling to even
> entertain the fact that your own experience is very limited and that you
> have neither the experience or ability to detect these changes, and in
> reality you know 2/5 of 5/8 of bugger-all about the wonderful world of wine.
My experience is not 'limited'. See above.
> Go back to making your racist comments re women tennis players or the finer
> points of photography if you cannot contribute in a positive and polite
> manner in this newsgroup.
|
|
|
| Michael Scarpitti |
Michael Pronay <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:<Xns955F6495540E2gmxat@pronay.com>...
> wspohn4@aol.comnojunk (Bill Spohn) wrote:
>
> >> My argument was that you SHOULD NO 'breathe' wine, not that
> >> breathing it has no effect. It has no GOOD effect, except,
> >> perhaps, for a few seconds.
>
> > Don't know what you have been drinking but many wines open up
> > and improve over a period that ranges from a half hour to a day
> > or more.
>
> Bill, do not feed the trolls.
>
> M.
If you think 'breathing' the wine has a positive effect, get two or
three bottles of the same wine and open one and note its character
upon opening, then enjoy your dinner. Open the second bottle from the
same batch and see if it hasn't magically 'improved' over the first
notes of the first bottle.
The 'positive effect' that you may have attributed to breathing has
nothing to do with breathing. It has to do with eating food and
drinking the wine, which also includes smelling it.
|
|
|
| Bill Spohn |
>Bill, do not feed the trolls.
I haven't been following the thread, but from recent repetitive responses I am
coming to the conclusion that you are correct.
I wonder why anyone would bother - this group has many people that have opened
more than their share of wine, tasted without any food and monitored over time,
who know that what he is saying is drivel. Oh well.
I shan't respond any further.
|
|
|
| Bill Loftin |
Michael Pronay wrote:
>>>My argument was that you SHOULD NO 'breathe' wine, not that
>>>breathing it has no effect. It has no GOOD effect, except,
>>>perhaps, for a few seconds.
>>Don't know what you have been drinking but many wines open up
>>and improve over a period that ranges from a half hour to a day
>>or more.
>
>
> Bill, do not feed the trolls.
Actually I believe in politeness to the point that it hurts.
A lot of years ago I read an article in a wine magazine that said that
it was necessary to drink wines like Chat La Tour to educate your
tastes so you would know what good wine was supposed to taste like.
I thought at the time that the author was the biggest snob in the
world. When I drank my first La Tour, I no longer disagreed with that
position. This latest "troll" must be drinking Thunderbird to have to
strange opinions that he does but maybe he is worth educating and
saving. If he shows up in your restaurant one day, you hope like hell
that he will have learned what good wine tastes like.
I got called a troll and a newbie in alt.history this week. I have been
posting to that group for four years and the guy that said that has only
been on the internet for one year. He had a different opinion that mine.
I will try not to feed him more than the required daily amount.
Bill
|
|
|
| st.helier |
"Michael Scarpitti" wrote in message.........
> I have enjoyed many, many, many, wines from all around
> Italy, Sicily and Sardinia.
but tried to claim..........
> My experience is not 'limited'.
Huh?????????????????????????????????????
In another thread, he then wrote
> "I know absoltely nothing about wines that are not Italian."
Mr. Scarpitti, we have now arrived at the crux of the matter.
If you know NOTHING about wines which are not Italian, then in fact YOU KNOW
NOTHING!!!!!!!
You are a prejudiced racist, with an acute case of FITH disease.
Go away, troll.
--
st.helier
|
|
|
| Michael Scarpitti |
wspohn4@aol.comnojunk (Bill Spohn) wrote in message news:<20040909120321.25748.00000309@mb-m21.aol.com>...
> >Bill, do not feed the trolls.
>
> I haven't been following the thread, but from recent repetitive responses I am
> coming to the conclusion that you are correct.
>
> I wonder why anyone would bother - this group has many people that have opened
> more than their share of wine, tasted without any food and monitored over time,
> who know that what he is saying is drivel. Oh well.
>
> I shan't respond any further.
You don't taste wine, you drink it — with food. Wine without food is
an abomination. I NEVER just 'taste' wine. 'Wine tastings', so popular
in the US, are an utter waste of time.
|
|
|
| Michael Scarpitti |
"st.helier" <nospam@thisaddress.4me> wrote in message news:<1094763810.351545@ftpsrv1>...
> "Michael Scarpitti" wrote in message.........
>
> > I have enjoyed many, many, many, wines from all around
> > Italy, Sicily and Sardinia.
>
> but tried to claim..........
>
> > My experience is not 'limited'.
>
> Huh?????????????????????????????????????
>
>
> In another thread, he then wrote
>
> > "I know absoltely nothing about wines that are not Italian."
>
>
>
> Mr. Scarpitti, we have now arrived at the crux of the matter.
>
> If you know NOTHING about wines which are not Italian, then in fact YOU KNOW
> NOTHING!!!!!!!
Since Italy produces more wine and more kinds of wine than any other
nation, your response makes no sense.
>
> You are a prejudiced racist, with an acute case of FITH disease.
The F_____ are cowards and useless to boot. I'm not prejudiced. Not at
all. Can you name a single great Renaissance artist from F_____ off
the top of your head? No? Do you know why? It's a trick question.
There weren't any.
>
> Go away, troll.
|
|
|
| Michael Scarpitti |
Bill Loftin <william.loftin@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<Tt30d.1681$Vs2.1174@trnddc03>...
> Michael Pronay wrote:
>
> >>>My argument was that you SHOULD NO 'breathe' wine, not that
> >>>breathing it has no effect. It has no GOOD effect, except,
> >>>perhaps, for a few seconds.
>
> >>Don't know what you have been drinking but many wines open up
> >>and improve over a period that ranges from a half hour to a day
> >>or more.
> >
> >
> > Bill, do not feed the trolls.
>
> Actually I believe in politeness to the point that it hurts.
> A lot of years ago I read an article in a wine magazine that said that
> it was necessary to drink wines like Chat La Tour to educate your
> tastes so you would know what good wine was supposed to taste like.
> I thought at the time that the author was the biggest snob in the
> world. When I drank my first La Tour, I no longer disagreed with that
> position. This latest "troll" must be drinking Thunderbird to have to
> strange opinions that he does but maybe he is worth educating and
> saving. If he shows up in your restaurant one day, you hope like hell
> that he will have learned what good wine tastes like.
I do beg your pardon, Sir.
Perhaps you missed this point I made earlier in this thread:
I have enjoyed many, many, many, wines from all around Italy, Sicily,
and Sardinia.
Have you ever tasted Giacomo Bologna's Barberas? Fabulous!
Grignolino from Bruno Giacosa? Chionetti's Dolcetto di Dogliani?
Valentini's Trebbiano di Abruzzo? Cosimo Taurino's Patrigliano?
Amarone? Vermentino? Morellino di Scansano?
etc. etc. etc.
> I got called a troll and a newbie in alt.history this week. I have been
> posting to that group for four years and the guy that said that has only
> been on the internet for one year. He had a different opinion that mine.
>
> I will try not to feed him more than the required daily amount.
> Bill
|
|
|
| Dale Williams |
>Can you name a single great Renaissance artist from F_____ off
>the top of your head? No? Do you know why? It's a trick question.
>There weren't any.
I know I shouldn't respond to this, but it's hard to let prejudiced drivel go
by. No, I can't name a great Renaissance artist from France. But for that
matter, I couldn't name a a great Renaissance artist from Southern Italy (Italy
wasn't a country then).
It's no secret that at various times of human development bursts of creativity
have centered in small pockets - ancient Athens, 14th century Florence, Paris
in the 19th and early 20th century,Weimar Berlin, New York City in the 1950s,
etc. I can't imagine any intelligent human man would not offer these periods as
somehow proof that present-day Greeks, Italians, French, Germans, or Americans
were somehow superior ("can you name a single great 19th century painter from
Italy?").
Congratulations Mr. Scarpitti, you have become only the third resident of my
killfile.
Dale
Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply
|
|
|
| Dale Williams |
> I can't imagine any intelligent human man would not offer these periods as
oops, obviously I accidently put in the double negative- drop the not
Dale
Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply
|
|
|
| Joe Rosenberg |
Da udder night whilst I waz watching a tag team wrasslin match on Fox (da
Swify Boat guys & Holocaust Deniers voices Michael Moore n Tanya Hardup) I
waz insiped by dis thred an' tried what you mihjt call a voitical on Arber
Mist Prune Danish Grenache from 8 monts ago to last week paired wit a
horizontle of Thundaboid, Night Trane n Fels Naphta which has been unter my
sink since George Bush # 1 discovered pork rinds. Whilst da more recen
Arber Mists had profundity n a briny bouket n da old stuff had a smell
remindin me of Secaucus under attack from fart monsters from da planet Marz,
da Night Trane etc was ded on revival.
How you like dem petunas? yez wine geeks
Sir Damon Staiman as belched to
Joe "Beppe" Rosenberg
"Michael Pronay" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:Xns955F640C7501Cgmxat@pronay.com...
> Ian Hoare <ianhoare@angelfire.com> wrote:
>
> > I have doubts about whether German whites do, but I've had some
> > Gruner Veltliners which benefitted by it (right Michael P?).
>
> Yep.
>
> M.
|
|
|
|
