Well, yes its hard to really go wrong. Well-cooked food and decent wine always have a place together. We talk a lot about the combinations of the two, and there's many different ways they can play off of each other. Good combinations sometimes make the wine sing, sometimes make the food sing, and sometimes can amplify the flavors of both at the same time. I don't want to take a stand as to which is better, they're all good in their own way.
But, sometimes you happen on a combination that really, really works in its own individual way.
Food - Pan-seared Opah, lightly salt and peppered over mashed sweet potatoes (Yes. I mean sweet potatoes, with the golden colored flesh, considerably sweeter than normal potatoes, but very different from the orange flesh colored yams) with chopped garlic, smoked paprika, olive oil, and touch of butter to finish.
Wine - Brewer-Clifton Santa Rita Hills Chardonnay
This combination was one of the great ones. The dish amplified and celebrated all the subtleties of this wine. Almost like a gentlemen ballroom dancer twirling around and showing off his beautiful dance partner. The wine dominated the show, but afterward left you fresh and prepared for the next bite. Each bite of food was like tasting this dish for the first time.
Getting wine and food to dance together so well is tough. Usually you end of with a good combination, everybody knows the steps, but the guy is slightly plodding or the women isn't picking up on all the cues. But, every now and then you end up with a partnership that not just works well together, but seems to really understand each other.
29 November 2010
19 November 2010
30 years old...Ha, still a baby.
Sierra Nevada has been releasing a series of 30th Anniversary beers this year.
All have been very good, but I have to give it to them for the most recent release.
This is a big brewery. While they still fall into the micro-brew category, Sierra is pumping out a lot fermented grains these days. I've always enjoyed the beers. The Pale Ale is a good, clean, and piney hopped ale, which can be argued, created the American IPA style. When you get this big it gets that much harder to keep the quality level high. Sierra has. But that's not what this post is all about.
What I'm, slowly, getting at is Sierra's willingness to still take some pretty big chances. The 30th Anniversary series has been crafted, with the help of other well-known beer brewers in the industry, by taking some big chances with the final beer. For a big brewer, this can backfire pretty quick if experimental beers you create don't deliver.
Well, the last release of this series delivers. A blend of oak-aged Bigfoot barleywine, Celebration, and Pale Ale thrown all together with a few more dry hops. This could easily be a complete disaster of a beer. Fortunately, it is delicious. It needs some time to open up, and would probably benefit from 6-12 months aging, as the different parts are still noticeable. But this brewski is intriguing, constantly evolving in the glass, and obviously a style that you don't get to drink every day.
Sierra Nevada - Congratulations on having the testicular fortitude to blend a bunch of stuff together that could have been downright horrible, and the blending skill to know that this would come out as a damn fine beer.
All have been very good, but I have to give it to them for the most recent release.
This is a big brewery. While they still fall into the micro-brew category, Sierra is pumping out a lot fermented grains these days. I've always enjoyed the beers. The Pale Ale is a good, clean, and piney hopped ale, which can be argued, created the American IPA style. When you get this big it gets that much harder to keep the quality level high. Sierra has. But that's not what this post is all about.
What I'm, slowly, getting at is Sierra's willingness to still take some pretty big chances. The 30th Anniversary series has been crafted, with the help of other well-known beer brewers in the industry, by taking some big chances with the final beer. For a big brewer, this can backfire pretty quick if experimental beers you create don't deliver.
Well, the last release of this series delivers. A blend of oak-aged Bigfoot barleywine, Celebration, and Pale Ale thrown all together with a few more dry hops. This could easily be a complete disaster of a beer. Fortunately, it is delicious. It needs some time to open up, and would probably benefit from 6-12 months aging, as the different parts are still noticeable. But this brewski is intriguing, constantly evolving in the glass, and obviously a style that you don't get to drink every day.
Sierra Nevada - Congratulations on having the testicular fortitude to blend a bunch of stuff together that could have been downright horrible, and the blending skill to know that this would come out as a damn fine beer.
15 November 2010
What really makes wine great?
In the last couple weeks I have had the pleasure of having a number of very memorable experiences surrounding wine.
First, I recently spent an evening in Las Vegas at a Wine Spectator event. Almost all the famous names from Cali. where present and many from Australia and South America (theme was the New World Wine Event, if you hadn't figured this out yet). We walked around a grand ballroom and tasted many wines priced into the stratosphere. I personally relish these types of opportunities, as there is simply no other way to experience these wines other than an event like this, simply because of the prices. Many of these wine where great, many where good, and just as many where insanely over priced, but all where spare-no-expense juice. Incidentally, the wine of the night, for me, was the 1999 Catena Zapata Cabernet from Argentina. (A certain somebody would be very happy to know the winery is based in Mendoza)
Second, I spent a couple days in Sonoma wine country. We visited a couple wineries. Those in attendance can attest to the beautiful wines being made a Truet-Hurst in Dry Creek Valley. We then spent two evenings dining in Santa Rosa. With both meals we drank our fair share of wines. Never wasting time drinking the same bottle twice, we got to experience many wonderful wines in a setting these beverages where crafted to be drank in.
So what's the point you are asking?
While it is a necessary (and very enjoyable) experience to get to events like the one in LV, the most memorable are those when wine is part of the experience, not just the experience itself. Enjoying a great meal and great wine with loved ones is what makes wine the experience it should be.
A week after the these memorable dinners in Santa Rosa, I was at another event and one of the wines we drank at dinner was being poured. Corison Napa Cabernet 2002. Always a very good producer, these wines typically add a considerable amount of dimension with 5-10yrs of bottle age. My opinion of Corison 2002 at dinner in Santa Rosa was very high. Wonderfully defined, complex, and still holding on to the density that makes Napa Cab. great. At the later tasting, this wine was good. All the components where there, but not setting the world on fire...not truly memorable.
I think my conclusion is we can't separate the quality of the wine from the experience of drinking it. Nor should we. While this may certainly frustrate many producers, as they obviously can only control the quality of wine, not the quality of our loved ones, if you enjoy a wine, than it must be a good wine...regardless of what anyone says, as they didn't have the chance to experience that wine exactly the same way you did.
I tasted many wines in LV that, technically, are far superior to wines drank at the above dinners. But, at the end of day, the wines drank at dinner gave considerably more pleasure than even the greatest of the great wines being poured at the Spectator event. Think that drives the producer of a $300 Cabernet crazy?
First, I recently spent an evening in Las Vegas at a Wine Spectator event. Almost all the famous names from Cali. where present and many from Australia and South America (theme was the New World Wine Event, if you hadn't figured this out yet). We walked around a grand ballroom and tasted many wines priced into the stratosphere. I personally relish these types of opportunities, as there is simply no other way to experience these wines other than an event like this, simply because of the prices. Many of these wine where great, many where good, and just as many where insanely over priced, but all where spare-no-expense juice. Incidentally, the wine of the night, for me, was the 1999 Catena Zapata Cabernet from Argentina. (A certain somebody would be very happy to know the winery is based in Mendoza)
Second, I spent a couple days in Sonoma wine country. We visited a couple wineries. Those in attendance can attest to the beautiful wines being made a Truet-Hurst in Dry Creek Valley. We then spent two evenings dining in Santa Rosa. With both meals we drank our fair share of wines. Never wasting time drinking the same bottle twice, we got to experience many wonderful wines in a setting these beverages where crafted to be drank in.
So what's the point you are asking?
While it is a necessary (and very enjoyable) experience to get to events like the one in LV, the most memorable are those when wine is part of the experience, not just the experience itself. Enjoying a great meal and great wine with loved ones is what makes wine the experience it should be.
A week after the these memorable dinners in Santa Rosa, I was at another event and one of the wines we drank at dinner was being poured. Corison Napa Cabernet 2002. Always a very good producer, these wines typically add a considerable amount of dimension with 5-10yrs of bottle age. My opinion of Corison 2002 at dinner in Santa Rosa was very high. Wonderfully defined, complex, and still holding on to the density that makes Napa Cab. great. At the later tasting, this wine was good. All the components where there, but not setting the world on fire...not truly memorable.
I think my conclusion is we can't separate the quality of the wine from the experience of drinking it. Nor should we. While this may certainly frustrate many producers, as they obviously can only control the quality of wine, not the quality of our loved ones, if you enjoy a wine, than it must be a good wine...regardless of what anyone says, as they didn't have the chance to experience that wine exactly the same way you did.
I tasted many wines in LV that, technically, are far superior to wines drank at the above dinners. But, at the end of day, the wines drank at dinner gave considerably more pleasure than even the greatest of the great wines being poured at the Spectator event. Think that drives the producer of a $300 Cabernet crazy?
27 September 2010
Hello Beer, meet Mr. Wine...
Highly controversial, this strain of yeast adds a lot of flavor, but they are flavors that are considered by many to be unappealing. Notes of leather and barnyard funk are common. In moderation, IMHO, these aromatics add aromatic complexity and can produce a wonderfully distinctive product.
But who cares, this beer is AWESOME! It feels like a sour ale, without the prerequisite sweetness of most. The wine barrels add winey notes of ripe tree fruit. Think apricot, nectarine. Acidity is intense! and I love it. This is one of those beers that divides people. It creates so many different arguments, you almost have to like it just for the amount of tension it creates in the beer world.
At the end of the day, I know a big reason I like this so much is because, as much as I like beer, I'd rather be drinking wine. This has a lot of similar aromatics. This isn't a classic beer in any sense. There are those that debate its overall quality because of that. But I really don't care what you call it. Call it Bine, or a Weer, if that makes you happy. Just make sure you drink this if you get the chance.
20 September 2010
Achaval Ferrer, Spanish for "I wish I was French"
Recap of recent Achaval Ferrer tasting.
Achaval certainly aspires to be great. Their entry level Malbec starts out at $18-$20, and they go up from there. I'm not sure there's a lot about these wines that really make them representative of where they come from (Argentina), but there's no question this is some high quality juice. The new releases where all decanted for about an hour, but still very hard to taste at this point. The higher-end single vineyard wines felt, at times, like gnawing on a block of iron.
2009 Malbec $20 - Very tight, with a mouth coating viscosity. Fresh and yeasty right now. Fruit will become much more present after a couple months in bottle. There's a slight salinity that adds some interest, but the finish is still fairly tart at this point
2008 Quimera - Malbec/Cab/Franc/Merlot blend $30 - Intense and firm structure. Very high acid component. Aromatics fairly similar to Malbec at this point. The acid is high, but there is still a sense of balance here. Not so much of a mouth coating feeling, but this wine makes a statement.
2008 Mirador - Malbec vineyard planted in 1921 $79 - This is very good. Still takes some concentration to taste, but there are notes of dessert soil and charcoal underneath the red and black fruit notes. A little fatter than the Quimera. Intense flavor profile builds nicely from the entry through the moderately long finish.
2008 Bella Vista - Malbec vineyard planted in 1910 $79 - Still very closed, but concentration is evident. This really starts to feel like Bordeaux. If this was in a line-up of 08 left-bank Bordeaux, I would say french all the way, not that that's a bad thing. The wine is very enjoyable. Well balanced and firm, with an excellent aging potential.
2008 Altamira - Malbec vineyard planted on its own roots, averaging 80 yr old $79 - Shows more sap around the midpalate. Bright and fresh entry leads to compact aromatics of creosote, beef, and dark black fruits. Acidity reverberates nicely on finish, lending balance to the lengthy aromatics.
Back Vintages
2007 Mirador - Picks up some subtle cola notes. Just starting to gain some definition.
2006 Mirador - Surprising complexity. Some secondary notes present. This feels overly mature. Could be bad storage.
2005 Mirador - Still young and primary. Has liveliness with and inky note on the palate. Long life ahead.
2003 Mirador - Beautiful wine. Just developed enough so primary notes are dominant, but subtle secondary notes of truffle and wet tobacco become evident.
2000 Mirador - Said it before, but this is Bordeaux. A great wine and very enjoyable. Tannins are resolved, but just slightly rustic. If this was blind, I'd call this St. Estephe all the way.
So what's the point? Admittedly, I'm not sure where I stand. Great wine is great wine, who cares where it comes from right? Sure, but the other side says that part of what makes great wine great is a distinctive personality. As good as Achaval Ferrer wines are, they seem to be trying to imitate. Almost like a smoking hot Sports Illustrated swim suit cover model. It seems like the models on the cover are just trying to reincarnate Kathy Ireland (with different hair) at this point. Is that wrong? Kathy was (and I'm sure still is) hot. So is more of good thing bad? Do we always need to be different to be considered great? Freud? Where are you?
Achaval certainly aspires to be great. Their entry level Malbec starts out at $18-$20, and they go up from there. I'm not sure there's a lot about these wines that really make them representative of where they come from (Argentina), but there's no question this is some high quality juice. The new releases where all decanted for about an hour, but still very hard to taste at this point. The higher-end single vineyard wines felt, at times, like gnawing on a block of iron.
2009 Malbec $20 - Very tight, with a mouth coating viscosity. Fresh and yeasty right now. Fruit will become much more present after a couple months in bottle. There's a slight salinity that adds some interest, but the finish is still fairly tart at this point
2008 Quimera - Malbec/Cab/Franc/Merlot blend $30 - Intense and firm structure. Very high acid component. Aromatics fairly similar to Malbec at this point. The acid is high, but there is still a sense of balance here. Not so much of a mouth coating feeling, but this wine makes a statement.
2008 Mirador - Malbec vineyard planted in 1921 $79 - This is very good. Still takes some concentration to taste, but there are notes of dessert soil and charcoal underneath the red and black fruit notes. A little fatter than the Quimera. Intense flavor profile builds nicely from the entry through the moderately long finish.
2008 Bella Vista - Malbec vineyard planted in 1910 $79 - Still very closed, but concentration is evident. This really starts to feel like Bordeaux. If this was in a line-up of 08 left-bank Bordeaux, I would say french all the way, not that that's a bad thing. The wine is very enjoyable. Well balanced and firm, with an excellent aging potential.
2008 Altamira - Malbec vineyard planted on its own roots, averaging 80 yr old $79 - Shows more sap around the midpalate. Bright and fresh entry leads to compact aromatics of creosote, beef, and dark black fruits. Acidity reverberates nicely on finish, lending balance to the lengthy aromatics.
Back Vintages
2007 Mirador - Picks up some subtle cola notes. Just starting to gain some definition.
2006 Mirador - Surprising complexity. Some secondary notes present. This feels overly mature. Could be bad storage.
2005 Mirador - Still young and primary. Has liveliness with and inky note on the palate. Long life ahead.
2003 Mirador - Beautiful wine. Just developed enough so primary notes are dominant, but subtle secondary notes of truffle and wet tobacco become evident.
2000 Mirador - Said it before, but this is Bordeaux. A great wine and very enjoyable. Tannins are resolved, but just slightly rustic. If this was blind, I'd call this St. Estephe all the way.
So what's the point? Admittedly, I'm not sure where I stand. Great wine is great wine, who cares where it comes from right? Sure, but the other side says that part of what makes great wine great is a distinctive personality. As good as Achaval Ferrer wines are, they seem to be trying to imitate. Almost like a smoking hot Sports Illustrated swim suit cover model. It seems like the models on the cover are just trying to reincarnate Kathy Ireland (with different hair) at this point. Is that wrong? Kathy was (and I'm sure still is) hot. So is more of good thing bad? Do we always need to be different to be considered great? Freud? Where are you?
11 September 2010
Whole Foods your cheese selection sucks!
There I said it. So what, it's the truth. Am I being harsh? Yes. I know it and I don't care. And don't tell me you're better than all the other big grocers. My trash dumpster has a better cheese selection that the typical grocer.
There was a time when I felt the complete opposite. While there were smaller, more artisanal cheese shops in the big city, your cheese section was never cramped, much easier to shop, and I could always pick-up all kinds of other deliciousness from you as well. You made great producers like Humbolt Fog and Cowgirl Creamery readily available nationwide. But unfortunately you are resting on your laurels and that's just bad business. In the last 5+ years what have your cheese mongers discovered that are anywhere near as exciting of a product like Humbolt Fog? You did a job great with them and I'm sure they have worked hard to grow with you and make sure they had enough cheese to supply all your stores. But you bring us nothing to get excited about anymore. And don't give me some crap about some Epoisses or your Robiola brand you love. These are tried and true styles. They're great (although you could work harder at making sure your selections are always sold a bit riper, rather than putting them on display at the beginning of their ripeness curve). But where is the passion?
Before you give me all the crap about how you brought in a couple small producers you thought where great and nobody bought them, or because of your size, you only work with producers who can supply your nation-wide chain. Or in certain markets, a few small local guys, let me respond to each of your dumb arguments now.
If you brought in a producer you thought was great and nobody bought it then you failed. That's OK. When we take chances, sometimes we fail. That doesn't mean you stop taking chances, you just learn from your mistakes and try to get it right next time. Whether that means more cheese education of your staff or a continued search for new and exciting products, that is good business. And don't tell me you've tried all this stuff. The fact is you haven't succeeded. Listen and learn and figure out how to get this done. Your customers are begging.
As for supply issues, sometimes you have to work to develop brands. Help them grow. If you think you have the next Humbolt Fog, figure out how to help them become a bigger producer. If the cheesery doesn't want to grow, then you don't have the next Humbolt Fog.
I don't know if these are the solutions or not, it's your business. All I know is your cheese selection is boring and stagnant. I really don't care why. That's for you to figure out. So quit wasting your time reading this great blog and get to work.
B.F.
2004 Bordeaux
2004 Bordeaux will from here forth be called "the drinking person's vintage". As a matter of fact, from now on I will only refer to this vintage in Bordeaux as such. "The drinking man's", or "The drinking woman's vintage", however, will also be acceptable descriptors.
The pleasure this vintage has given real wine drinkers over the last 1-2yrs has been unmatched in my short time following the wine world.
Stuck in between the renowned 2005 and wild styled wines of 2003, no one paid much attention. Until recently. The great wines of the vintage can be had for a song, compared to the ridiculous prices of the 2005's. The great 2nd-5th growths are available for 1/2 to 2/3 the price of the same Chateau from 2005. While there is no question 2005 was a great vintage. The great wines will live forever. They're dense and concentrated, but well-balanced, and, and, and...you know the deal. But when you drink these wines they take mental focus and concentration to truly enjoy and appreciate. Not that I'm against that. The ability to drink a beverage so complex it requires deep thought to fully appreciate is nothing short of a grand experience.
The only problem is the wines still aren't inexpensive by any stretch. With few exceptions, the good 2nd growth properties are selling in the $30-$60 range. But, considering these same properties are selling in the $75-$300 range, in many ways the prices are great. The beautiful thing about 2004 is that you can drink top tear bordeaux that from a strictly quality perspective is just a hair or two below the same wine from 2005. 2004 certainly doesn't have the longevity of 2005, hence the title - "The drinking person's vintage".
Drink now, drink well, drink an experience, drink wines from some of the best properties in bordeaux. 2004. The only caveat, the left bank appears to be much successful in 2004 than the right bank
Recent 2004's consumed that helped considerably to shape this opinion include, Ch. Grand Puy Lacoste $39, Ch Branaire Ducru $37, Ch Leoville Barton $49, Ch Lilian Ladouys $24, Ch d'Armailhac $44, Ch. Clos du Marquis $39.
The pleasure this vintage has given real wine drinkers over the last 1-2yrs has been unmatched in my short time following the wine world.
Stuck in between the renowned 2005 and wild styled wines of 2003, no one paid much attention. Until recently. The great wines of the vintage can be had for a song, compared to the ridiculous prices of the 2005's. The great 2nd-5th growths are available for 1/2 to 2/3 the price of the same Chateau from 2005. While there is no question 2005 was a great vintage. The great wines will live forever. They're dense and concentrated, but well-balanced, and, and, and...you know the deal. But when you drink these wines they take mental focus and concentration to truly enjoy and appreciate. Not that I'm against that. The ability to drink a beverage so complex it requires deep thought to fully appreciate is nothing short of a grand experience.
The only problem is the wines still aren't inexpensive by any stretch. With few exceptions, the good 2nd growth properties are selling in the $30-$60 range. But, considering these same properties are selling in the $75-$300 range, in many ways the prices are great. The beautiful thing about 2004 is that you can drink top tear bordeaux that from a strictly quality perspective is just a hair or two below the same wine from 2005. 2004 certainly doesn't have the longevity of 2005, hence the title - "The drinking person's vintage".
Drink now, drink well, drink an experience, drink wines from some of the best properties in bordeaux. 2004. The only caveat, the left bank appears to be much successful in 2004 than the right bank
Recent 2004's consumed that helped considerably to shape this opinion include, Ch. Grand Puy Lacoste $39, Ch Branaire Ducru $37, Ch Leoville Barton $49, Ch Lilian Ladouys $24, Ch d'Armailhac $44, Ch. Clos du Marquis $39.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)