"Wine in American culture has long been a synonym for snobbery."
And this is so sad. There is such rich culture to be enjoyed through wine, if only people would look beyond the label and learn more about the stories of wine families. Wine is an experience, not merely a drink so that at every price point there is something to enjoy by all. A beautiful $20 bottle of Barbera from Paolo Scavino, for example, can be as enjoyable to someone who can't afford a Barolo Bric del Fiasc from this fabulous wine family, if only the stories are learned and explored along with drinking. Through this, the enjoyment of wine becomes the preservation of culture and history.
The best advice I ever got from a wine critic was to be adventurous. Just try new things within your budget and it will be okay (in the sense that the world won't stop turning). I have imbibed many lovely wines in the $15 - $20 range without knowing a thing about wine. Many are great and some are not. It got me past the wine selection paralysis I typically experienced. Sometimes my wine savvy friends will even think I know something about wine.
Forgive me if this is already being done, but I wonder whether the wine writers could learn something from the foodie writers who, at their best, manage to celebrate the multifold pleasures of eating while offering some kind of evaluation of the cuisine, itself? I don't mean to imply that there's no difference between eating and drinking etc. but that the foodies seem to embrace the joy that's there. Plenty of joy in drinking good wine.
Wine appreciation is a learning curve. I know this because plonk was my introduction to loving fine wine. Some people will never go beyond oaky California Chardonnay, or New Zealand Sauvignon blanc. That’s okay. I don’t run a hedge fund, so I don’t have a big wine budget, but I do have a well-educated palate. I agree that there are many under $30 wines that are very good, and some under $20s that are lovely for everyday drinking. But I know the difference between those and exceptional wines. I learned about exceptional wines through the wine experts/critics, and by showing up at tastings... and occasionally wealthier friends’ homes.
As one who had an appreciation for 'fine' wine, with a salary/expense account that once allowed it — I've since learned a 'good' wine is simply one you enjoy. It can be found at all price points. Humbling and true.
3
Eric Asimov, please do not be defensive, or maybe I am reading you wrong with a hangover caused by imbibing way too many glasses of affordable North Canterbury Sauvignon Blanc, Sicilian Nero D' Avola (awesome!) and some other closer, maybe a Shiraz from Margaret River(?) things got happy and hazy...
In any case, I agree with you, a lot of good to great wine can be had for $20 and under and have had some Cabs from Napa at a nosebleed $80 to $100 and above that were pedestrian.
I am turned off by my own region and now almost exclusively drink old world, Australian, and Argentinian wines.
My friends down in the Valley think reds should be drunk at room temperature until I tell them not their room temp of 80 degrees F plus. Eyes rolled and I was called a snob. Until I cooled it down to 60ish and then they changed their minds.
I just ignore any accusations of snobbery and let my wines fo the talking. All of them are now under $20...way under $20 while they buy name brand wines.
3
As always, a thoughtful and well-written article from Eric. That said, this particular column touches on so many different issues pertaining to the wine industry it's almost impossible to know where to begin a response. Better that it had been three or even four different columns.
One point I do take issue with is about blind tasting being “essentially a useless skill, a parlor game in the wine trade.” As a Master Sommelier and someone who’s been in the industry for over thirty years, nothing could be further from the truth. Blind tasting, at least in the context of deductive tasting used in the M.S. curriculum, is a highly disciplined exercise that requires a great deal of experience and skill.
Preparation for M.S. tasting exams requires that the student first memorize a tasting grid with over 40 criteria and then master multiple concepts including the following: cause and effect in regards to the appearance, nose, and palate of a given wine; recognition of impact compounds as they relate to varietal, environmental, and winemaking influences; calibrating structural elements consistently and precisely (levels of acidity, alcohol, and tannin); knowing markers for classic grapes and wines on an international scale; and considerable theory study.
A parlor game? Hardly. It’s monumentally difficult. The pass rate for the Master’s tasting exam historically ranges between 8-15%. There’s a reason why.
1
@Tim ~ Yeh... but you miss the point. Eric needs to make wine seem transparent for the readership....
he's actually siding with the populists...
@Joey, thanks for your response. It's actually Asimov who, as a professional, should "get it." As a critic/writer with as much visibility as anyone, it's his job to help bridge the gap between consumers and professionals. I think he brought up practically every major issue confronting the industry in the industry and yet failed offer enough thoughtful solutions.
In my 30s, I began working a second job as a bar tender at a local wine bar. The experience exposed me to wines (15 to 30 dollars a bottle - gasp!) that I would never have thought to try on my own, as they were at the edge of what I could afford. Slowly, my tastes changed as I became more aware of what wine could be. Most of my service industry friends who work in wine speak of a similar experience - as you are exposed to a greater variety of wines, your tastes - and here I mean the physical experience of the wines in the nose and the mouth - literally change. I imagine something similar happens at the level of mind when a person devotes themselves to an new academic field or when a person develops a hobby or an interest in sports. A football fan with an intense knowledge of the sport does not experience the game the same way as a person who is a casual fan or a novice. There is nothing inherently snobbish in this transformation - but as Asimov concludes, wine populists tend to project their insecurities onto those for whom wine is a hobby, a passion, or a profession. It is a form of age-old American anti-intellectualism. I find Asimov's columns perfectly positioned for beginner or intermediate wine hobbyists looking to expand their experience of wine. If you're not in that group, I hate to say it, but you probably don't understand. And here's the thing: you don't have to.
1
The wine director with whom I apprenticed—a brilliant Swiss man trained in his homeland's vaunted hotels, always emphasized, “…the point of wine is simply pleasure! Your job (as a wine professional) is to enhance pleasure not to impose your tastes.”
To me this means helping my customer select a wine that will enhance their meal, at a price with which they are comfortable and to serve it at the correct temperature at the correct time.
The difference between wine enthusiasm and that for other ‘finer’ things is the openness with which people express their opinions among those who are not similarly enthusiastic. Sit down for any dinner outing and as soon as people rattle off their drink orders, the conversation naturally moves to people speaking openly about the wines they love and hate, and then what they love and hate about what everyone else loves and hates. At that same outing, you’re not likely to hear BMW drivers talk about how much they don’t care for other guests’ Toyotas. You won’t hear someone wearing a Patek Philippe saying, “oh, I tried a Timex once, and it didn’t agree with me.”
It's great if you have a developed sense of what you like, but if you then turn to others and tell them what they should or shouldn’t like, you’re not an enthusiast, you’re a snob. Don’t be shocked when someone calls you out on it.
1
I appreciate Asimov's article, but I must say that I'm often frustrated by his assumption that $20 bottles of wines are bargains. For most wine drinkers, they aren't! I often check out Wine Spectator or Wine Advocate, and it's not difficult to find highly rated wines (90 and above) for under $12. Most of the time I agree with their assessments. Not only are Asimov's wines out of range in price for most people, they are often hard to find outside of major metropolitan areas. I'm sure it's great fun seeking out unusual, rare, and/or costly wines for review, but please, write about genuine bargains once in while. Perhaps do pieces on wines from Costco, Trader Joes, Aldi, etc.
While I did get burned relying on price ($34) and my own research to select a supposedly good value Bordeaux, a similarly priced Etna Bianco is probably the best wine I've had. It was so good that as the bottle emptied, thoughts of no longer sharing gripped both of our heads. (We split it right to the end.) Another time we found a $50 zero dosage blanc de noir French champagne that was everything I could want, but without the label I doubt I could distinguish it from California's Gloria Ferrer blanc de noir NV at half the price — something I could drink every weekend. Two years ago I bought a lot of Robert Mondavi Pinot Noir for $8 a bottle, but then the taste dropped. Maybe consistency is the most noticeable thing in price.
The native hybrid grapes I grow, which must withstand -40°F and are allowed to lie flat in winter beneath the snow drifts, are considered by even the non-snobs to be only suitable for jam or the table — not wine. But I suspect that is mainly because they are low in sugar, so the alcohol level will be low unless sugar is added. But I'm not against low alcohol wine and want to try it with what survived the hail shredding — at least to practice on before getting more suitable hybrids.
The cost of a bottle is determined by many factors, the cost of production (cost of land, cost of labour, yield etc.) being just one factor. Rarity, reputation, perceived quality and yes, critic's scores all play a part. As the Judgement of Paris clearly showed, even for experts, established "reference" wines are not necessarily superior to those with less rarified reputations. I have bought great old bottles of classic Riojas and Napa Valley carbernets that are so much more delicious and interesting than first growth Bordeaux, at a fraction of the cost of the latter. And I am still mystified by the market price of Chateau Lafite, which is higher than its fellow first growths in most vintages. It is not an exaggeration to say that I have almost never found a Lafite to be the best wine of the vintage (1953 being an exception ), and while the wine might be "intellectual", it is rarely pleasurable. And Burgundy wine prices have escalated to unimaginable heights in the recent decade. While it is true that Burgundy has had more successful vintages since 1999 than in the 30 years before then, and that the current generation of vignerons are generally better than their forefathers, it still does not account for the enormity of the price increase.
Instead of disparaging expensive wine, we should strive to discover wines that reach the same height without the commensurate expense. These are more common than most people realise and is what makes this hobby fun.
I can't get past the idea that Mr. Asimov finds blind tasting as just a "parlor trick." What is the point of being an expert in your field if you can not tell what is what without being told before hand?
1
I have a deep dislike for snobbery in this industry. I thought this article was dead on! Nice work!
Small-medium producers will often purchase fruit from multiple (small) vineyards. So in essence their wines are blended, and the winemaker has a personal preference for what turns out, and on a year to year basis that may be more consistent than the highly prized and expense "single vineyard bottlings".
Because "mouth chemistry" is different from individual to individual, the person that selects your wine should be you. My wife and I have very different chemistries so what we drink is a compromise: not too fruity, not too tannic, not too acidic.
It's easier to like a wine that's not extreme in any of those three characteristics, and that's where modest bottles of wine live.That's why, I think $20 bottles can match or outdo $50 alternatives.
"Left unsaid is the fact that many $20 bottles are better than a lot of $50 bottles."
Exactly. (Even though, ipso facto, the author isn't leaving it unsaid.) And isn't that pretty much what the reviled "populists" are saying? They are not necessarily "pandering to inchoate feelings of fear and resentment" but conveying a useful note of caution to would-be wine drinkers who might otherwise be swept away by the experts.
The advice is to try wines at different price levels without prior expectations and, through experience, decide for yourself what you like.
1
I don't need a food critic to tell me whether I like a particular dish. My palate tells me that. Likewise I don't need a wine critic to tell me which wine I like. They do provide interesting background and information which I enjoy from time to time.
In the early 1980's I was the maitre d'hotel at the Four Seasons Hotel in San Francisco. I have a big nose, but it wasn't curved up to the empyrean heights, I like to aver. Every Saturday noon, Ernesto and Julio Gallo and their wives [whose names I don't recall, if ever they were made known to us], came in for lunch. The most elegant dress, coiffure, manners, and bearing, all. The loveliest quartet. We did not carry Gallo wines. We were part of the snobby ethos that said Gallo wines were for the bums in the Tenderloin, not on your life in our five-star hotel. Thus, the Gallo Brothers brought their own wine for their lunches, a case of Chardonnay and a case of Cabernet.
One of the brothers always requested their Gallo Chardonnay. With ice! All of us tuxedo bedecked know it alls held our stomachs, guffawed just out of earshot. White wine with ice! The height of crass. Oh my. Please. White wine with ice, forfend!
Alas, the Gallo Brothers went on to make outstanding California Chardonnays and Cabernets, while we punk mockers just went on.
Nearly forty years later, I sit in a little cafe in Paleochora, on the island of Crete, in Greece, reminiscing about those times. I ask the waitress for a half carafe of the local white wine. And please, with lots of ice. I think of the Gallo brothers: how they taught me the difference between crass and class. Thank you, Ernesto and Julio.
7
@John Gabriel Lovely!
Agree that many $20 bottles taste better than $50 bottles, because the $20 is less likely than a $10 wine to be tarted up with oak chips and less likely than a $50 wine to go over the top with alcohol, oak aging, and other forms of overcooking. And at twenty bucks we are no longer paying mainly for shipping and handling as is the case with an $8 or even $12 bottle. That said, what about Roger Cohen’s point in his column just a few days ago: the word “populism” is equivocal, vague, and overused?
2
Great article. Completely agree. In my experience price is usually a reliable an indicator of quality, especially in the $15 to $30 range. Even better is finding an importer whose taste I can trust, such as Kermit Lynch.
1
I just had a delicious bottle of Mt. Veeder zinfandel from 1988 which I had bought for $2.99 many years ago. Goes to show that patience and good "stock" are essential for wine enjoyment.
This whole article is about a wine critic trying to protect his livelihood and relevance from reality-based criticism. Hardly an unbiased opinion. If it was purely up to scientific evidence and method, Eric Asimov wouldn't even have a job. But alas, there will always be a market for this kind of brainwashing among the aspirational lot. So let all flowers bloom, That's their money after all.
4
Fun article to read, but it seems a little off. Wine critics are obviously effusive about expensive wine and review less expensive wines with a different lens. Your discussion of value, and whether you are a sucker for expensive wine really hits the mark. Starbucks vs Duncan Donuts ? If you enjoy wine, and have a limited budget wine critics provide a guide to making smart purchases, much like Consumer Reports. Wine is fun and should be a joy to share with others not some museum piece. Best wine I ever drank was a Frascati in front of the Coliseum in Rome on my Honey moon. The wine was cheap, but the moment was priceless.
Beer is just as complicated. Real beer, that is, not the beer-flavoured water that politicians wield to prove they Real People.
@Wolf Kirchmeir Wow. A beer snob...not much different than a wine snob. Same side of a different coin,
1
Good Afternoon: A simple thought experiment for everyone. You have a five-hour flight and you cannot get up from your seat. Would you rather have a wine snob or Satan sit next to you? Every person of whom I've asked that question has selected the devil. Better conversation, they all say.
I have worked in wine retail, and if wine snobs drive me up the wall, it makes sense that they impede other people from enjoying one of the greatest beverages in the world.
1
But it’s true Eric. I find you are a huge offender. First you hardly do stories on American wines but I guess when the NY Times is footing the bill it’s better to go to southern France then, say, southern Rhode Island. But besides that, you often do stories on “inexpensive wines.” My circle of friends include many wine lovers and n one considers $25 an “inexpensive wine.” And we drink good wine. I seldom have a bad bottle and I almost never pay more than $15. So yes, the Vox article is correct. Wine critics ARE snobs.
3
@Jax, it may surprise you to know that American wines are rarely a better deal than their French counterparts. American wines can be great but for whatever reason (real estate costs, the costs of new oak barrels), you have to pay quite a bit more for the good ones than wines of comparable quality from France. If price is your measure of snobbery, the evidence that Asimov reviews more wines from France than from the U.S. means he is actually less elitist.
All good until this sentence “I don’t mean to suggest that many people will not enjoy the mass-produced bottles, nor do I fault anybody who is satisfied with those wines.” The use of the word “satisfied” connotes to this reader the supercilious snobbery and elitism you claim to decry. You could have written that you don’t fault folks who like those wines or who prefer such wines. Instead, your language suggests that you believe those poor sots are only “satisfied” due to their ignorance and bad breeding. Try as you might you couldn’t help taking a swipe at the hoi palloi. No wonder people dislike wine critics!
3
Make Rotgut Great Again! Witch Hunt!
1
"But does that lead to the conclusion that Nobel-winning authors like Mr. Bellow are for suckers?"
Have you ever actually read a novel by a Nobel winner? Give me J.K. Rowling and a bottle of Yellow Tail any day.
1
@Civres J.K. Rowling much better value than Yellowtail, come on.
1
@Civres Bob Dylan, Ernest Hemingway, Pearl S. Buck, and John Steinbeck are all Nobel winners. I'm sure you've read/heard their works at some time or another. But I get your point about "airy-fairy" arty types.
What the writer never discusses in any of his columns is that a lot of people buy the $10 bottle of wine because they can't afford the one that is $15.
Until Mr. Asimov begins to understand this his column will never be a success and will remain for the few instead of the many.
6
Thus the magic of wine clubs. I'm speaking of gatherings similar to book clubs where new wines are enjoyed, paired, discussed and even debated in a loving environment. An eye for bargains doesn't have to be a search for cheap wine. They are not the same. Many have never read "War and Peace," but might enjoy "Red Sparrow."
Wine is thrilling, often delicious and snobbery is foolishness.
In general, I have stopped reading about wine, because I feel like tasting wine is the most important way to discover what you like best. I did read this article, because I am interested in how others consider this issue. I learned about wine mainly by tasting it at wineries in the Finger Lakes region when I was in college, and then by trying new wines while traveling, at restaurant and bars, at parties, etc. At 53, I know what I like and don't really need to read about it. I tend to spend about $10 on wines at Total Wine and Beverage, which has excellent selection, knowledgeable staff, and the lowest prices. For special occasions, I might spend as much as $25. I can certainly taste the difference in quality for these more expensive wines, but it is not so great that I am motivated to spend more very often. It's the same with fancy and expensive foods. I save them for special occasions and try to stay within my budget.
1
@levinth
...When you have a few tons of grapes in a tank and need to make decisions about stems, temperature, time on skins one relies on flavors, aromas, color and chemical analyses. So the ability to identify some of these is an aide...
--------- as a winemaker, i taste wines looking for flaws, especially flaws that i have some control over - so i can remediate them. as a consumer, i don't need to, nor can i, remediate wine that is already in the bottle . so... blind tastings (even by critics ) are interesting. but i do wish every tasting would have at least one two-buck chuck or a gallo hearty burgundy .
1
Wine IS a con game, Mr. Azimov, because of the nature of the product itself and how it is sold. It's very hard to comparison shop. Big Mac vs. a steak at a great steakhouse? You usually know what you are paying for and why. On the contrary, the rip-off wine store in my midtown Manhattan neighborhood, staffed by know-nothings, tries to sell me an ordinary but passable bottle of prosecco (for an Aperol Spritz) for $20 that I can get for $10 at the great Astor Wines downtown, which is staffed by knowledgeable, enthusiastic people who will gladly steer you to the best product for your budget and purpose. Wine is a con game because we usually have no choice but to overpay. It is usually in glass, and heavy to carry in bulk, so we in NYC are usually at the mercy of the nearest wine store (it is still ILLEGAL to sell wine in grocery stores here - another huge problem), and we can't just go on Amazon. In Europe, the availability of appropriately priced food, wine, and coffee is considered a human right. Americans (NYers especially), are either suckers, lazy, or captive consumers.
About clothing: expensive yet well-made clothing can last a lifetime, while wine disappears. And everyone knows that the $500 new suit might be found for $200 at the outlet mall in a few months. But buyers are aware of the markups, and can also SEE, FEEL, and WEAR the product BEFORE they buy.
Wine is a con game to be lost unless you make it yourself or live next door to Astor Wines.
3
@R. Finney, Your point-of-view, which is really all that you are offering here, is fataly undermined by your demonstrated inability to correctly spell the name of the writer at whom you are directing your vitrol.
1
@Trevorbh, Your response to my post is fatally undermined by your demonstrated inability to correctly spell "fatally" and "vitriol".
Ontario, Canada is the center of alcohol socialism, with the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, selling most wine to the general public and businesses. Surprisingly enough, this isn't such a bad thing, as they also happen to be the world's largest procurers of alcohol. Employees aren't always pleasant, but they are usually knowledgeable and even in the middle of the backwoods, a decent, moderately-priced, bottle of wine is available. While I can't speak for everyone, apart from the selection, I have never found wine to be much more intimidating than navigating the numerous horrible brands of beer out there.
1
First they came for our single vineyard organically farmed Pinot Noir and we said nothing...
4
I am 71 and I love good wine. I no longer can afford the stuff I enjoyed in my "salad days". Wine simply is fermented grape juice. Who, and how, the processing is done makes a difference. So do the grapes. The price of a bottle of wine is called business. The taste is called pleasure. People make a business of many pleasures. Only drinking wine gives the pleasure. Critics fill our empty hours with many words and a few ideas. Separate things, entirely. Quest!
4
I can walk down any street in Paris and buy a bottle of French wine for a few euros. Always delicious. Here it is so expensive, even California wines, and they just are not as good.
I also went to a dinner party and was served red wine in a glass. When I asked later, I found out it was from a box! And it was very good. You just never know.
6
@Janice Badger Nelson I wish we had the culture and governmental support in the US as they do in Europe. I’ve worked in winemaking in both places and the reality is the costs of production here are 2-3x what they are in Europe. There’s a lot of reasons for that, which is a discussion for another day.
2
Why is it that wine experts are unable to distinguish the ostensibly wonderful wine from plonk when presented with the said wine in a tinted glass and without access to the label? Blind tasting have, right?, demonstrated the inherent pretensions of so-called wine experts.
5
I think a lot of people think they are supposed to like wine probably for a variety of psychological reasons that would challenge "experts" in human behavior.
Although people outwardly scorn elites, inwardly they would like to be included in this "high class" group knowing this status is probably out of reach.
I've spent many years of my life not getting wine, as in, "I don't get it." Through some help, primarily from my son, a restauranteur, I got started on an enjoyable journey through or to wine.
I've grown skeptical of most experts, not because they don't know what they are talking about but because I believe their judgment has probably been compromised by collateral interests. This is perversive in our modern world. It's not whether the "expert" is correct or has valid things to say, it's more about the status of the expert, the position of being an expert and all the trappings that go with it, not to mention the material gain in the form of special "gifts" and monetary rewards. I don't see why this shouldn't be true of wine experts. And there are so many of them.
Maybe a rating from some agency is better than none at all, but it seems if you can't get a 90 point rating from someone, you're not in the game. This is nonsense.
So what's a wine lover without the resources to blow a lot of wine choices to do? Go to Costco, that den of elitism.
3
How about an article about what is IN wine? Does the wine contain Roundup or other pesticides? What harmful chemicals are introduced to grow and process it? I love wine and I appreciate articles like this. But some wines are contain questionable added ingredients beside the grape itself, and yet there is little information about it. A Big Mac might taste good, but I don't want it in my body.
Along with beer and spirit makers. How come Lays has the list every ingredient in its potato chips but these guys list nothing? You’d be amazed at what is actually in wine and the industry doesn’t want you to know.
2
A really beautiful piece about populism, resentment of the elites, and the meaning of expertise. Thank you.
5
Pretty interesting read. Some of the criticism against critics is deserved, some not. Here's my experience: on many occasions I have brought Asimov's list of best fill-in-the-blank wines to a wine store. I have rarely found those wines in a store out here in the hinterlands of NJ. I wish that I would more frequently find the wines that Asimov writes about. Then I wouldn't feel like only the elite can find the right wines.
4
@Sandra Talarico
... I wish that I would more frequently find the wines that Asimov writes about. ..
-------- when i was growing up in napa valley, there were two hundred wineries in all of california. now there are more than two hundred in napa valley alone . . .
it's an embarrassment of riches: everybody has a different wine. perhaps your store clerks in Little silver nj should have suggested other wines that were very similar - and there always are wines that are very similar. they're all fermented grape juice .
asmo should include a two-buck chuck or a gallo hearty burgundy in EVERY tasting. they may "finish" at the bottom of the score pad but they'll all taste like wine . . .
2
Wine is such a personal affair that it is difficult to generalize this wine is good and this one is bad. That is the problem with wine tests and recommendations.
If you have grown up in a wine producing region (the Rheingau in Germany for my part) you get accustomed to these "home grown" wines first, which is quite natural. Later, after intensive travelling, Alsatian wines were my favorites.
After buying a house in Spain I drank Spanish wines only, the Cooperativa Agricola of Garriguella was close by. I even imported the Rioja wines of Bodegas Montecillo and Bodegas Bilbainas to Germany.
When age bent me down, and I moved from the Rheingau to the Rheinhessen region, I became fond of Sylvaner and Portugieser wines I formerly had only sniffed at. You see, landscape and personal affection play a great part how you estimate and enjoy wines.
4
For those of us who actually need to budget our expenses, these articles are always interesting and Asimov can be illuminating. I think I still have his piece on how to drink wine.
The mysteries of wine are a delight. My own process is to visit a price conscious wine and spirit shop that has a respectable selection and an owner with good advice. I slowly work my favorite ailses of zinfandel, malbec and cabernet loading my cart with a mix of favorites and a few experiments. I resist the temptations of label art - but some are indeed stunning. The goal is to carefully achieve the 12 count for a case discount.
Absent of Eric's piece (perhaps a future article) is an appreciation of the "red blend". Those can be a daily favorite at a friendly price. Sometimes I commit the heresy of creating my own blend. Cabernet and shiraz anyone? Afterall, what is a Bordeaux but a carefully crafted blend. California's Ghost Pines is a favorite of mine.
As to the snobbery of wine enthusiasts (professional or just rich) I think they could regain some respect from us "budget shoppers" by abandoning some of the silly terminology. Some of the descriptions sound more like a nightmare of a fruit salad rescued from a burning house. But I guess marketing to the extreme is human nature. Just look at the dog food industry.
3
I always enjoy Eric Asimoth's articles. My own experience is that, on first tasting, a reasonably good American wine ($10+) tastes great at first, but ultimately is cloying. In contrast, a French wine at about the same cost does not make the same good impression at first, but becomes more enjoyable after the first glass. I wonder if other readers have the same impression.
4
@Mike in New Mexico
Ditto, with one addition. A similarly priced Italian wine tastes better the next day.
2
It´s a matter of wine-making.
@Mike in New Mexico
New style of winemaking, pre-aged in winery. The benefit is a "ready-to-drink-best-when opened" product. For such wines aging is detrimental. It seems this had happened to you.
For the differing French one see:
@TMunj
The Italian wine was made in classic style, not pre-aged. Aging makes these wines better so it´s required to obtain better results. Disadvantage: You have to know something about aging of the specific wine and you surely have to wait some years after purchase.
Simple contemporary wines are normally pre-aged, particularly most Non-European standard wines. Supermarkets always prefer pre-aged wines to avoid disappointments of their customers deemed as non-experts.
How do you figure out whether it´s pre-aged or not? When nobody wants to disclose the way of making - some vintners do - trial and error. Sorry.
@Mike in New Mexico I agree totally.
1
I asked myself once more why I could not get this article.
Referring to the price argument I already gave my 2 Cents. Nothing to correct, nothing to add.
But referring to the other crucial point - wine critics - I´m still not sure what this article is all about. Maybe it´s because I´m European. We are those strange folks who
- have lost faith in wine critics for almost more than 10 years,
- don´t go for their estimations anymore - BTW: How they get payed?
- let high gloss wine magazines and blogs die in droves,
- prefer our own tastings (even when a few Euro ALDI wine is winning the price - value - contest),
- have decoupled us from so-called international wine business for a long time,
- love local wine fests where everyday people, wearing T-Shirts "Red wine is the solution of everything", are ordering their xth 0,1 l glass of red white or rose everyday wine for 2,50 € by local high class co-ops or family estates,
- love also to purchase decent world class wines for 10 - 20 € per bottle by proven decent producers, and
- have not the best faith when names like "Parker" are mentioned (he´s definitely not the only one.)
The rule is "Big labels for business partners - good wine at home." (How many bottles are needed for business partners?)
I met many Italians, Dutc,h French, Poles et. al. who see it the same way also. All are buying their bottles from local co-ops, producers, supermarkets et.al. offering decent qualities of all ranges. So it´s still hard to understand.
3
A good article. But I think the industry-promotional wine hobbyist publications and their tasting scores also lead to a certain cynicism. A syndrome that seems almost the opposite of wine for sensual pleasure.
In the mid-'90s. I stumbled across magnums of Gabbiano's super Tuscan, Ania at BevMo selling for $15. Essentially the same price as their entry level Chianti. I tried one and really loved the wine. When I asked the BevMo manager why it was being closed out, he suggested I email the distributor. No surprise they didn't answer, but some time later I found that James Suckling had scored the wine in the low 70s.
My only regret is not buying more than the several cases I did. It only got better over the years. A Sangiovese in a style and richness reminiscent of premium Napa Cab from the '80s. As I write this. I'm eyeing my last bottle and wondering what I'm saving it for. By now, it probably is over the hill. A likely testament to "don't postpone joy".
Anyway, I don't know whether Suckling's score was honest or a fit of pique. But I thank him for the bargain. I won't deny I enjoyed it more at the closeout price than I would have at the $50+ release price. But I also know I wasn't drinking plonk.
2
Note to all wine critics and 'experts':
Periodically redeem yourselves and your effete reputations with $8-10 finds that are better than $20 bottles. And be unafraid (of vintners and your colleagues) by citing those $50 bottles that just aren't that good.
1
Perfectly said. I often find great bottles of Portuguese wine for as low as $4. Yes wine snobs, $4. Keep drinking the $20-plus bottle though and save the rest for me
Wine is a consumable product. You don't hang it on a wall or go to a symphony hall to enjoy it. So let's get the "art and culture decline" out of the way. And let's leave Saul Bellow and George III out of it, too. If people think cheap wine is as good or better than expensive wine, let them drink the cheap stuff if it makes them happy. The pricing rule of thumb is that a $20 wine may be a lot better than a $10 wine (never mind for the moment what constitutes "better"), and a $50 wine may be better than a $20 wine, but as the price goes up, the incremental improvements become smaller. This is not a difficult concept, right? If there is a problem with wine value, it's with paying $200+ for a halfway decent Chambertin. A problem created by people who have unimaginable amounts to spend on getting "the best," whatever that might be. Is it possible, shocking though it may seem, that the "cheap wine is good" attitude is in part pushback against jillionaires buying up cases of Domaine Romanee Conti, just because they can?
5
@Bunk McNulty Your comments about price illustrate the rule that people with too much money buy expensive stuff not because it's better but because it's more expensive. Being able to pay too much proves something or other.
1
Thanks Eric, I enjoyed this insightful article.
1
It's a little like people who seldom listen to music compared to those who listen a lot, tastes evolve.
One point not mentioned is that the more expensive wines tend to be those that get better with age. Open up a newly released Chateau Margaux and you are likely to be disappointed, wait to drink it in 15 years and there will be no doubt about how special great wines can be.
2
@Brian O'Leary
And that at least is part of the point that was not made - few people these days can afford to pay for a Margaux now and lay it down for 15 years.
3
@Susan M. Smith people seem to be able to afford new cars with an average purchase price over 30k. They could choose to spend a couple grand per year on cellarable wine (and do spend more than that at bars). Choices are made. Perhaps not Margaux, but Brian's point still stands true. Not all wine is sold to be consumed 3 hours later, and it does get a lot better with time.
1
It's pretty hilarious when the pull quote "Many $20 bottles are better than a lot of $50 bottles." is a parenthetical and literally preceded by "left unsaid" in the actual article.
5
As I live and breath can Asimov get over himself? He is Saul Bellow as opposed to Rowling? The latter who I have been unable to read without being overcome by Tom Broen’s schooldays.
I have no use for Freakonomics which is but the same schtick as the South Park Nyah nyahhh nyahhh.
And wines do vary from awful to sublime.
Now grow up.
And Bellow is not all that by the way. There are better values for your reading dollar at the public library.
1
Haha. Poor Eric. Sorry though, he’s probably not reading this. He in southern France right now sampling $60 bottles that he wiklnltrr declare a bargain.
Bellow does not cost more to read than Rowling. I can’t afford two glasses of the best, but I can drink a half bottle of vin ordinare for less than 5 bucks. I am a seeker who finds tasty, but rarely exceptional, choices. Well paid columnists have more choice than pensioners.
8
I am 80 living in Mallorca.... I remember every great bottle of wine I drank...Also every beauty whose favors I enjoyed... they are both very rare.
In the 198o's I occasionally drank Lafte and Mouton Rothschild...most were ordinary...except a 71 Lafite whose taste and bouquet lasted three deep breaths.... Most of the 2nd growth and other Bordeaux were okay.... Cal Cabs were better.
Spanish wines are all the same... pay 2eu or 20eu not much difference..... One of the best wines in Spain is a Temporillo, comes by tank truck from the mainland and is deposited in barrels at local grocers. It costs 2 eu a liter including the plastic bottle and I buy 10 liters and decant into old bottles.
It is smooth, complex, easy drinking, no tannin, nice finish...
worth 50 bucks in America
(The Chardonay is the same price.. and is okay...it is impossible to find a reasonable good white in Spain)
I still buy a great (15eu) gran reserva aged ten years.... Okay, it's a little better... not much.
Mac's wine test...
1... 1-10... Taste. How does it taste?
2.... 1-10 Finish. Take a deep breath...
3... 1-10 Do you wanna drink the whole bottle?
If it tastes good and the aroma pleasantly lingers and you drink the whole bottle.... then it's a good wine
6
Nowhere in this article is a definition of "better" other than more expensive. Moreover, his assumption that "better" equals more expensive is totally false.
So why should the average Joe not be disgusted by such pretense? Why should NYT readers be obliged to read such snobbish claptrap?
His only stab at reality is to suggest that smaller estates are somehow "better" because they're...smaller. Yet the reality is that small plots carry higher prices because of factors of production issues common to all agricultural products. Said issues, strictly speaking, refer only to quantity--not quality.
Truth #1: grapes producing wines with Varietal Character must be grown on plots with the right climate. Otherwise, they become over-ripe grapy or stay under-ripe bitter.
Such plots, are are rare--therefore, expensive. Napa Cab, for example, has varietal Character while California-Cab does not. This is what the "experts" are picking out.
Truth#2: People like grapiness which, again, comes cheeper than Varietal Character. Therefore, they must somehow be "trained" to like Varietal Character in order to pass as savvy consumers pleasing to the "experts".
So of course there's a severe reaction against this --as well there should be.
Truth#3: $10 will buy a grapy Cab and $8 a grapy blend. They'll taste the same because all grapes eventually achieve their biologicaldestiny
Oth, $20 will buy you real Varietal Character. Yet this is only a choice based upon personal preference.
3
Parker's ratings should top out at 80 given the inherent promotion, mis-judgement and palate-to-palate vicissitudes (prissy wine term)
I think the most I have ever spent for a bottle of wine is about $25, and that is because almost no one stocked it (ribolla gialla) and my choice at Eataly was $25 or $150. I have found that a $20 pino grigio is better than the $12 kind. My regular zin is $14 to $18.
Living in the far distant 'burbs of Massachusetts near stores that regularly stock swill, I will ask again why you don't provide a link to a printable list in your POUR articles.
1
Wine IS a huge mystery, and a complex, changing beverage. That's its frustration (to some), and its allure (to some). A Bud is a Bud is a Bud. A bottle of wine, at different temperatures, is different. With different foods, is different. Heck, even with different moods and occasions is different. No wonder wine is so hard to understand. Let people feel morally superior or detestful of wine snobbery (and no doubt, reading a wine review can be painful). Find wine you like and enjoy it. As you drink and taste more, your tastes will undoubtedly change. Rejoice in the discovery, don't get caught up in snobbery, and wine will serve you just fine.
3
@Jim R. Thanks JIm, that it right there. Wine is a difficult mysterious thing and really that's the fun of it.
The author could have substituted “classical music” for “wine” and hardly changed the article. It’s unfortunate that there’s such an anti-intellectual bias in the US against cultural phenomena that were never meant to be the exclusive domain of the elite. I guess it’s their loss...
9
When buying wine, I follow my own philosophy...
“If I like it, it’s good”
8
I am an expert in French wine, that is why I am so open to tasting wines from other countries and of course from the USA. It takes a while to learn the ropes it also takes dedication, curiosity and having the opportunity (business, friends, tasting dinners etc). If you have the knowledge share it and open bottles to do so. But don’t let slipshod articles snd surveys dumb things down.
That I believe is the undercurrent in Mr. Asimov’s article. Knowledge is power and in almost all cases worth the effort to acquire except if it is to become a pompous wine snob or label lover.
11
I love Eric Asimov!
6
This is my recent experience. I’ve had a glass of Chardonnay with lunch for years. It comes in a five-liter box for about twelve dollars. I was given a bottle of wine as a gift. I learned that it sells for about eighty dollars. I drank half a glass & dumped the rest. Please, please don’t tell me that I’m a tasteless person. Even if I am, I refuse to be a sucker.
3
@JGSD
...I drank half a glass & dumped the rest. ..
-------- you mean you don't have a vinegar culture going in yer kitchen ? what a shame . . .
1
Offer any group of randomly assembled people a double-blind tasting of a 1er Cru Burgundy, a mass-produced Zinfandel, and a chocolate milkshake . . . and the majority will always choose the milkshake as best tasting.
Your example of Bellow vs. Rowling is a good one. Likewise the Beatles vs. Stravinsky or Raffaello vs. Picasso would likely be no contest.
Wine is about more than superficial pleasure. The mass-produced products that fill most of the wine aisle are not.
4
@Green Tea
No. The ultimate in wine snobbery is to claim that it's a legitimate art form. Woodbridge vs Jordan Cab is "like" Stravinsky vs beetles only for those who obviously know nothing about Classical music.
First of all, playing classical is something only the very few can do. It's hard--lots of notes to be played with precision in a short time, etc.
Oth, expensive and inexpensive wine are made basically the same way. Theredfore, a choice.
That certain readers don't know this is understandable. That Asimov seems clueless should be a matter of great editorial credibility with his current employer.
@Green Tea matcha latte...or puerh? Everything else you write holds true except this. Green tea is pedestrian and better puerh really does cost more.
I've often organized informal tastings where everyone brings a specific grape variety or wine type. All bottles are opened and then tasted side by side. Here is where all the fluff of pretension evaporates. I suspect something like a Bell Curve would be the statistical result of documenting such an event. But one thing is fairly consistent, there are usually clear winners and losers. And the prices of the winners are all over the place. The threshold seems to be $20, plus or minus. The are some $10 greats and some $50 disappointments.
It's that so much wine today is so much better than say 20 years ago. And who can forget all the stuff from the '60s and '70s that seem like a parody of the past. Wine critics, like wine itself, are varietal, many stripes of taste and predilection.
What's an oenophile to do? There are too many wines and not enough time.
5
This time I can´t get the points of the column. I think there is too much poured in one glass.
Certainly there is a dependance of price from quality levels simply because some qualities require higher, costly efforts - think about volume reduction, cutting leaves away, grape selection, working on steep slopes instead of full mechanisation. This is never for free. But this is a loose dependance.
On the other side there is absolutely no dependance when a wine label is nothing but a business card saying: "Look Dude, I can can afford 1000 $ for one bottle - and you? No Petrus? Oh-oh" or when a wine is regarded as store of value to put in a safe. These wines are never bad - but always out of touch.
And there are a lot of "sometimes":
- Sometimes price can be an (internal) measure of value of producers or expert trader. Then their gradation of quality is mirrored exactly by the price. But this is a limited effect on a small scope linked to persons you have to know.
- Sometimes the same wine is marketed under no-name labels when nobody is willing to pay the high rated price for the whole crop.
- Sometimes new production methods can raise quality and bring down production costs tremendously so even a simple cheap QbA/AOC/IGT can be a perfect bargain.
- Sometimes every day wines of reliable producers are defeating high price celebrities in blind tastings unanimously. Sometimes 2 € more make the difference between "hm, nice.." and "outstanding!"
- Sometimes...
Too complex.
Same old issue. How many of the populists (or those used in the research) have actually tasted a large number of wines (including the expensive ones)? If you never had the experience, how do you know? What wine you personally like is subjective and most people's tastes vary but making either assumption (more expensive wine is better or less expensive wine is as good as the expensive wine) are both wrong if you haven't had both over a longer period of time. Further, your taste and ability to taste changes as you age. We have had $2 plonk and $1000 vintages and it comes down to what you like but don't be a reverse wine snob and assume a more expensive wine doesn't taste better than your 2 buck chuck.
2
The world of wine is too large to put into any one container describing "what it is." It is also expanding with more vineyards in more places and the technology and techniques to make good wine in many more places. At the same time, wine is subjective, both in terms of what one likes and dislikes as to taste, and as to where on the many possible layers of wine experience one places oneself.
You can drink to get drunk cheaply or you can become schooled in and drink only First Growth Bordeaux wines - or anyplace in between. Likewise, wine critics, bloggers, etc., choose their niche - for the most part toward the more educated and experienced palate, as one is likely to do when wine is more than an occasional beverage.
We all experience wine writing and criticism from where we sit in terms of our own likes and experience. There are no universal ways to approach wine, so some will always be discontented with every piece of wine writing.
In my blog, I try to encourage people to get our and explore a bit and to refuse to be intimidated by the snobbery out there. That said, there are lots and lots of people simply enjoying wine on their own terms who find writers like Mr. Asimov helpful as they traverse the world of wine. I know I have appreciated his input over the past years.
https://jimlockardonwine.com/
2
My dad enjoyed food, and truly savored refined dishes he encountered at fine restaurants. But one evening when I served him a cheese course, he asked me about the stellar blue cheese I'd found. "It's really good, as good as any I've ever tasted," I told him. "No thanks," he said. "Really good blue cheese I don't like."
3
It all sounds good, but I don't see what Mr. Asimov is bringing to the party. In France, 'wine experts' are paid fairly good money to steer unknowing snobs towards the more expensive wine. Seems the same in the USA.
8
Wine is like any other commodity subject to the forces of supply and demand. The boutique "hobby vineyards" in Northern California charge more for their bottles than they are worth to simply recoup the costs of limited production. This would be justified if quality correlated with price (and it sometimes does). but it frequently does not.
Some of the best wine I ever tasted was made by my neighborhood Portuguese grocer in plastic bags. No sulfites, no fancy bottles or labels, just great wine made by a guy who had mastered the process.
7
Wine snobbery, or any for that matter, is the attempt by one person to assert their sense of "greater intellect" over others to feed their ego. Wine drinkers are often found succumbing to these critics or groups and now those of us with a sense of adventure in wine are being accused by populists that we are wasting our time and, even worse, in danger of becoming the snobs ourselves. Rather ridiculous I think and not helpful at all. I think of the cult of ignorance quoted often these days by another Asimov (Issac that is) plays well with our cultural downfall these days. This piece does a good job at breaking down a range of issues in the wine industry for us to consider, challenges us to think for ourselves when making wine choices, suggests we allow ourselves to validate our own experiences over those of others and is simply suggesting a growth mindset when it comes to experiencing wine in all of its many expressions. On the night of World Cup final, my wife and I were in a wine bar in Biarritz celebrating and I commented to her that the wine by the glass list, 7 deep each for red, white and rose’, had not much I recognized. All IGP wines (a basic level designation here in France) I asked for a suggestion and was served two incredible whites and a lovely red and went home with bottles of each. Voila! I do still enjoy blind tastings however, again for the fun of testing myself and to help me focus on the wines characteristics in the glass vs. my notions from the label.
2
Better wines are subtler, and therefore generally require more patience to appreciate. Tasting the terroir, the minerals, the vine, and a fruit with more history can provide a richer experience than a fruity, sugary mixture, but guess which one most will glom onto.
Relatedly, a general audience today will probably be able to recognize that an Ingmar Bergman's Smiles Of A Summer Night is higher art than Mall Cop, but most would probably rate Mall Cop as more enjoyable.
Once their palates have been trained to look for subtler qualities and joys, people can discover the beauty of a wine or a film, but it takes time, like taking a film or wine appreciation class.
8
It's fairly easy to tell a cheap (</= $10 or so) wine - they almost all have a certain aftertaste. I don't know what it is, but it's nearly always there. It's unpleasant.
Next up, there's sweet and simple. It's usually sweet, and there's pretty much one flavor. Those are very popular, and can be mass-produced for $10-$20/per bottle.
Beyond those, you start to get a balance between sweet and tart, and more than one flavor - complexity. The flavors change over time as it's exposed to air. That's very enjoyable for me, and usually those wines are $40 and up. Sometimes they can be found for less than $25, and that's always a happy day!
4
"The studies concede that the more people knew about wine, the more their tastes aligned with the critics’."
That is a seriously circular, and flawed, argument, because people know more about wine from the critics themselves (i.e., the same culture of taste, the same community of self-designated expertise, from which critics come), thus in effect, people are learning from the critics themselves, so of course people will align their tastes with those of the critics. But that simply begs the question, what makes the critics special to begin with. That is what is being challenged by blind tasting tests of critics. If the critics are flawed, it matters little that those they school align their tastes with their teachers.
If it weren't for blind tasting tests that shattered the myths of an expert class, Americans would have no California and still be slaves to French diktat about the superiority of French wines.
Oops, I guess we are still suffering that inferiority complex to a great extent. Nothing intimates an American more than someone making a statement about wine with a French accent. Other than perhaps someone making a statement about etiquette with an English accent.
12
@LdV
You speak as if "wine critics" are all of a same mind, coming from the same school, and engaging in some kind of wine Group Think. But this is ridiculous.
If one cares enough to take the time, there are as many myriad opinions and tastes espoused about wine as there are wines to be consumed. Pick the ones that make you happy. Try a few that challenge your own tastes and thinking, should you be so brave. Or not.
2
It seems to me that real wine experts - and people who care enough about wine to spent a lot of time drinking and thinking about it - do not often disparge other drinks or other tastes. What I have noticed in practice is that, no matter how modest the budget or tastes of my drinking companions may be, they wish to be considered knowledgeable and to have their tastes and opinions validated by the person present who appears to care most. They have a real need for confirmation that whatever Two Buck Chuck they prefer is as good or better a beverage and more rational a choice than anything anyone else might choose.
2
You're missing the point.
Blind tasting by wine experts has been shown to be little better than chance, with ratings uncorrelated with price (except for the very cheapest wines):
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-s...
So by all means feel free to buy artisanal wines. But I doubt that you will be able to identify them in a blind tasting.
10
As a wine populist & retiree of limited budget, I can tell you what I'm drinking this summer. It's a blend, nearly half & half of Pinot Noir & Carmenere & is imported from Chile by a very large Calif. winery & marketer. It is my opinion that cheap Chilean wines are better than our domestics in the same price range.
Drink your wine before, after or with your lunch in an outdoor summer setting. Sip the first half glass & down the remainder quickly. You'll seldom require a second glass unless in occasional convivial company.
Of course youth & the middle aged have an entirely different criterion. Salute.
7
Are there any data about whether or not some people really are so-called "super-tasters"? The well-known diagram about regions of the tongue being associated with primal taste sensations was debunked, so what else can we say with confidence?
Most people don't appreciate the subtle differences between the absolute best and the also-rans. We can't be experts on everything.
4
@John Yes, there is plenty of evidence that some people are "supertasters". You can even buy a set of test papers that will help you find out if you are one of them. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2016/05/31/super-tasters-no...
2
@ian stuart
Thanks for the citation!
1
Yet, no one seems to complain when the same language of wine is now applied to beer. In the end, both beer and wine are beverages, any particular one enjoyed because, in the end, it tastes good.
4
To paraphrase Twain, we're being told by experts that some wines are better than they taste.
14
I know, and drink with, quite a few good wine collectors. I say "good" in the sense that they tend to have collected quite enjoyable wines and cellared them patiently.
Those same people would seldom dare admit enjoying wines lacking pedigree in one another's company. Nor are they comfortable voicing an opinion on wines tasted blind.
So wine consumers do this thing to themselves... they create a standard (the label) by which it's OK to admit liking a wine. And in doing that they have recreated the essence of snobbery.
Expensive wines are -often- better... lots better. But if you don't take the time to understand how and why they are better you won't ever appreciate them. And... ironically... no matter how comfortable you are spending the big bucks on wine... if you don't take the time to understand what makes a wine better you'll never understand how, when, and why a cheaper wine from an unknown label actually IS better.
Blind tastings are the great equalizer.
6
I suspect that politicians in the major wine-growing regions of California would prefer not to be seen with a beer in hand (and if it happens are ready to document that it comes from a local brewery).
I'm certain that my preferences in wine have changed over the years, inching closer to those of the wine critics.
Also, though much of the wines I drink are in that $15-20 price range, there have been a few occasions in which I have had the opportunity to drink $100 wines. I can tell the difference. I liked them quite a lot, though not enough to justify their cost.
4
There are enjoyable and cheap table wines meant for everyday drinking with everyday dinners. A nice BV cab is lovely at a completely accessible price point when I’m throwing a $10 steak on the grill or making meatloaf with mac and cheese.
And then there are wines that are complex, or challenging, that are master works that one drinks with a gourmet dinner or exclusively to focus on the tasting experience.
People who drink everyday wines prefer everyday wines. When they taste an expensive reserve, they report it is a better wine, but they prefer the cheap wine. We prefer the familiar. That’s not news. If 1000 people recognize that Tchaikovsky’s 4th symphony is a more artistically elevated piece of music than the Ramones’ I Want to be Sedated, but prefer the latter, that doesn’t doesn’t make the latter a better piece of music nor shed any light on the artistry of the former.
So go out and drink and enjoy whatever wine you enjoy. But if you want to become an expert and really appreciate a fine wine, then put in the 10,000 hours to develop your pallet, and learn the vocabulary. Taking courses on music theory and music history might also increase your appreciation of Tchaikovsky without making you a snob.
23
Vox is not a scientific source. The wikipedia entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_wine_tasting points to a number of well designed studies, as opposed to dumps from web sites with unknown levels of influence or plagiarism, that make Mr Asimov sound like a silly nostalgic. Select quotes: "When given wine that they are falsely told is expensive they virtually always report it as tasting better than the very same wine when they are told that it is inexpensive." " general members of the public were unable to distinguish expensive wines from inexpensive ones" "a roster of experienced tasters showed about as much consistency as a table of random numbers". Deference to authority is not the same as deference to evidence and reason.
11
Hear, hear, but Asimov like everyone else expert and experience somehow never is able to report that with a bit of work, and even if you don't go to Costco, you can get those good $15 wines (reds anyway) for $7 - $14.
All manner of refreshing lesser bordeaux, chiantis, and riojas, and some others similar, from Italy, Spain, France (somewhat), Portugal, and LA (less luck there, I find) can be had at any broad winestore. Just dig, ask, get on their specials list, buy sale items, and by the case after you find something you really like. I can think of a half-dozen right now, at many state stores, Total, local merchant special, that sort of thing.
3
If we eliminated the wine distributors and the state laws that their lobbyists manage to get for them, and the huge profits that they make, the price of good wine at our local wine store would soon go down.
25
Wine boors are just as bad as wine snobs. I've never had time to get sophisticated, but on the few occasions when I want a merlot or chewy zin with a little character I gladly fork out $60. For a gift, $80. For a port, $150 max once in a blue moon. And sure there's decent stuff for less. I'll bet the $200 stuff is awesome but I can't rationalize $50 a glass. $20 yes. $50 no.
3
@Craig Who but a wine snob would even use the words "chewy zin"?
You are what we called a sucker in the northeast. Price point means nothing. I know someone at a California winery that suddenly found a 12 bottle becoming super popular, so much so they worried about supply, so they decided to jump the price. All the workers gave a price. They settled on $30. No reason.
Happy coincidence.....a week night supper of grilled cheese sandwich with leftover Swiss chard much improved by a glass of Teutonic Wine Co. Willamette Valley riesling ($16 bottle). We talked about how much more pleasure we got from wine since we had "enrolled" in wine school. After dinner I found this article. I also appreciated the mention of Springsteen on Broadway. It reminded me to enter the lottery for the next round of $75 tickets. We each have our comfort level for discretionary spending.
3
Winemaking is not some inscrutable art. It's science, and a fairly basic one at that. Winemakers have more or less figured out how to make a good bottle of wine for under $10 per bottle. Therefore, there's no longer a reason for a $15 bottle of wine to be materially worse than a $50 or $150 bottle of wine.
5
@Todd The goal of wine-making is not a list of chemical compounds in strict ratios but rather a collection of olfactory and gustatory sensations. If it's a science, it's an aesthetic science, also known as "art".
Meanwhile, there are many factors besides viticulture that influence the final drinking experience: bottling, transportation, storage, exposure to light and temperature, serving temperature, drinking conditions etc. In many instances, paying more for a wine might mean paying for a delivery chain that hasn't already killed the aroma or half cooked the product.
12
@Todd.... It's called real estate. Fruit from great vineyards in Piedmont, Burgundy, Bordeaux, Napa, Brunello, Chateauneuf.... COSTS more. How are you going to make a cheap wine when the fruit is $3K+/ton ? When the barrels are $1200+/ea ? When you have to let the wine develop 2+ years in properly cooled warehouses? You're not. You're notion that winemakers can work magic from Concord grapes is completely unfounded.
5
I very much enjoyed this article. I do agree, that the more you know about wine, the more you start to appreciate the more expensive bottles. For most people there is a limit to the ability of the palette to recognize excellence. This typically gets better with experience. For me, the maximum level of a bottle of good wine is around $50-$75. Anything more expensive than that, and I typically can’t taste the difference, so why buy the more expensive bottle?
It’s a little bit like coffee, when I started drinking coffee as a teenager, I liked a lot cream and sugar. As I got older I dropped the sugar first, and kept going with the cream. For a long time I enjoyed the coffee with cream. As my palette matured, I realized I enjoyed coffee more when drank black. Now I only put cream and sugar in the coffee when it’s really bad coffee. If anyone gives me a great cup of coffee, however, I would never dare pollute it with cream or sugar. Same goes for chocolate. As a kid, you love milk chocolate, but as you eat more of it and better quality, many adults move away from milk to darker chocolates. Of course there are those who will always love milk chocolate - I’m looking at you, mom, just like there are those who will always like the cheap wines better. I think that’s how your taste development occurs with wines as well. I do fully admit that there is a lot of snobbery in wine, but then again, there’s a lot of snobbery everywhere.
31
Bravo Hans! Hope you get to visit some of those distinctive, family-owned and conscientiously-farmed vineyards in your area!
I’m not a wine expert but I happen to appreciate good wine. I realize I’m often taken for a snob in US when I comment on wine, simply based on my own taste (and in lay words, not being familiar with technical terminology), or when I detect the slightest hint of cork (I’m a natural there).
Once, at a restaurant, I insisted to send a bottle back, the wine was simply disgusting. People at the table were tasting it and seemed OK with it, much to my surprise. I had to stop that, like a moral obligation. The waiter had initially resisted. I showed him that even the cork was moldy and very stinky - still resisting for a while (he was likely a new hire).
The fact is that my friends were taken aback by my request and actually seemed kind of embarrassed, even after the manager stepped in and apologized for the wine and for the stubborn waiter.
I explained to them what the issue was, yet I’m sure they thought I was being pretentious. I really meant to protect them and act in their interest, I also refused the idea of everybody paying for such product (I don’t remember the price).
They never invited me out to dinner again.
I will never do anything like that again, at least not in the US. I will let my fellow diners simply enjoy their moldy liquid or mediocre mass-product and, making some sort of excuse, I will order a different wine by the glass for myself.
25
@Gió I enjoyed reading your comment but I’m not sure if I’m enjoying it for the right reason. Are you being serious or is this a joke? Sorry for the confusion but I’d love to know
The argument here would be stronger if some of the parallels to other high-culture pursuits (e.g., literature) held better. No literary critic mistakes Bellow for Rowling, even with the book covers removed.
I love wine, and I do think there’s a general correlation between a wine’s cost, the care that went into producing it, and the likelihood that I’ll enjoy it.
But professional wine criticism has lost the plot. Most critics no longer taste blind, and the flavors they claim to discern in expensive bottles are ridiculous - made more so by clear research showing that they will find those flavors (and correspondingly high scores) where they believe high cost and pedigree exist.
We need evolution on that front: critics willing to give higher scores where those family winemakers in the $15-20 range deserve them; critics willing to deduct serious points when and where an expensive wine doesn’t warrant its price point; critics willing to abandon obscure tasting notes in favor of references that will resonate for those of us who aren’t super-tasters; etc. You’re trying to help us discover more Saul Bellows and get more out of them. Stop writing in Greek!
42
@Observer Maybe a useful analogy is in music. Why pay $30-$150 to attend a concert when the CD at $12 sounds better.
1
Outstanding; far from the first to raise these concerns, but rare in giving credit to suspicion and concretely portraying a genuine escape from it. This is our best attitude toward what we love: not merely to defend desiring to share it, but to create the respectful path for doing so.
1
Wine is far from the only product which people purchase by price. It is not always the most expensive which is the best in food, clothing, and cars. When I read about wine experts extolling the virtues of a wine with a hint of mushroom and an earthy after-note, I wonder what their sense of taste is really like. A waiter who worked in an upscale restaurant told me that some people like to show off by sending back a bottle after a sip because it is spoiled. He said, usually the person opening the bottle would notice first. Most customers don't know what they are doing. Wine is just another place where people can out-snob each other while spending a lot but not a fortune. It's harder to do it with an expensive address or car.
8
@S.L.It's pretty clear if a bottle is corked if you are familiar with that problem. You wouldn't want to drink much of that bottle.
7
I'm not a wine expert per se (I have a decent working knowledge of the wine industry, and work for a beer/wine/spirits distributor), but I like a heavily peated scotch. People look at me funny when I admit to paying $50+ for a bottle of whiskey, but there's no way to get that heavy smoky flavor without paying at least $50. And to be clear, it's not a subtle difference in flavor. Regardless of how much you know about whiskey, it's about as subtle as a sumo wrestler playing the bagpipe while riding a T-Rex. It's a love it or hate it sort of thing, but the point is that it's difficult and costly to produce (and restricted to places near peat bogs) and you can't get the same smoky flavor elsewhere. Is it objectively better than bourbon? No. But if you like it, can you get it without paying at least $50? Nope. I'm guessing it goes the same way with wine. Specific extreme flavors, if you find you like them, will be more expensive because of supply and demand. It's not that they are better, it's just that you can't get them elsewhere. Why is HBO more expensive? Because it caters to a specific taste, and you can't get nudity and Hollywood budgets on basic cable.
19
@E Guillemette I totally agree. I will pay 50-150 for a bottle of good scotch because there's a clear difference in taste.
I will not pay more than $20-30 for a bottle of wine because I don't taste the difference. Simple as that.
5
"Summer in a Glass", an engaging book about the vicissitudes and and pleasures of winemaking in the Finger Lakes region of NY, provides a lovely narrative regarding the connection among wine, the land and community. The antithesis of wine snobbery and a terrific summer read. The main point: winemaking is a labor of love and the appreciation of wine exists against the backdrop of family and friendship, where it is best savored.
8
Thoughts:
Former House Speaker John Boehner is a devoted merlot drinker; the lack of a can of Bud does not seem to have affected his re-elections. I doubt, however, that it is Wednesday plonk. Just as a curiosity, why not ask him about his preferences?
For "terroir" use "environment" to soothe the savages ;-). Adjectives and nouns often used to describe wines are often mysterious; if applied to any other ingestible, people would be put off.
Yes, I took some wine classes. In the first, run by two guys, there were different definitions of what made a wine "good." The first guy said if a wine was made to taste like it should, it is good. The second guy said if a wine appealed to you, it is good. I hold an aversion to extreme grassiness in a sauvignon blanc (apparently beloved by Kiwis), so I go with the second guy in that instance.
The wine industry boils down to agriculture and storage. Some of the nicest wines I have encountered have been in extremely rustic settings with owners who have been involved in the process from A to Z. They are necessarily small operators, and supports Mr. Asimov's point about wine made with care.
7
Deep-seated in a large segment of the American populace is a resentment of authority. This strain of anti-intellectualism has grown with the diminution of industry.
It is ironic that digital devices and social media, which facilitate information transfer, have enhanced disrespect for true authority.
The disregard of wine authority is one minor thing. Ignoring advice of immunologists and climatologists is another. It seems that digital devices and the internet have inculcated this notion that every individual is their own sovereign, and that nothing but absolute sovereignty will not be tolerated.
It's good to consult wine experts like Eric Asimov, and scientists like Isaac Asimov. I have three degrees, and am happy to listen to and defer to experts. Some people call them elites. I believe that these individuals are afraid of not only their own ignorance, but their interaction with authority inspires the cognitive dissonance born of their very real lack of standing and power.
55
@Wordsworth from Wadsworth
What's the phrase, "A person who represents himself in Court has an idiot for a client"?
I am not too proud to admit that my car is fixed by a mechanic, my dripping sink by a plumber and my more adventurous choices in wine, by Eric Asimov.
5
@Wordsworth from Wadsworth this is a good comment.
1
To my knowledge no other beverage has the sheer variety of styles, places or price points as wine. There are thousands of different wine grapes in the world today. It is a vast thing indeed.
It's also mysterious. And intimidating. But this is what makes it so much fun to delve into! Like music, there's the simple, likable pop song, there are masterpieces and everything in between. Drink what you like. Try a new grape once in a while. Tell the sommelier you have X to spend and let them impress YOU!
17
I don't think it will help the reputation of wine or wine critic for the author to claim that most drinkers are motivated by fear when they criticize expensive wine. It also doesn't help that he doesn't really refute the Vox article and video's claim. The video shows that there's often little correlation between a wine's quality and price. The author even admits it himself when he says that $20 wines are better than $50 dollar wines.
11
@Sam but I think he is asserting that while headlines indicate there is little relationship between price and quality, this is simply not true once people learn a little more and open themselves up to being able to make finer distinctions. I don’t think it is a bad argument, and one we all would likely agree is intuitively true when we consider the things we are particular about. I think he is merely making a gentle case for the wine critic and the wine drinker to maybe meet halfway and we will all be happier. And drunker!
5
@Sam No, the author said that some $20 bottles are better than some $50 ones. And that is true - there are some great $20 or $25 options out there. And more than a few overpriced 40-50 offerings. Personally I'm finding the value sweet spot to be in the range between 25 and 40. Higher for Cabs and Sparkling.
There are not a lot of good $10 bottles. So rare that I mark them in my notes under "great value." Usually it entails going to less prominent regions or varietals that Americans don't look for. Sometimes from a producer who owns their vines and has little debt. But in general, producing at that price usually translates to use of wood chips or mega purple for flavor and color.
BTW, the Vox article compared cellartracker users with wine reviewers. That's not a population of lay drinkers, but rather people who buy, drink, and store enough wine that they need data management. "There is also a tendency for scores to converge as wines improve in quality." This article confirms that quality exists. It didn't discuss the idea of value at all. I for one don't bother to enter the table wine bottles into it. I just drink them.
3
The simple truth is that buying wine to drink is a crapshoot. Tastes are different and even "experts" disagree. And you can't rely on quality to reflect price because, for some buyers, a higher price is valued more than taste. At some point you are no longer paying for better wine, just prestige.
What makes wine interesting is its unpredictable variety of flavors. Sometimes those flavors really don't taste all that good. Cheap wine made in bulk is designed to avoid that. It produces the same predictable good flavor each time. For a lot of people it going to taste better and it is certainly a lot safer.
Most people don't "taste" wine, they drink it. It isn't an adventure, its a beverage that accompanies food and conversation. Spending $20 for wine you don't like is better than spending $50. And better yet is spending $10 or less and you and your guests being completely satisfied. That makes spending $50 on a bottle of wine a gamble for those who can afford wine as a hobby. And for those who want to impress the other people at the table.
14
@ Ross Williams Grand Rapids MN
"And for those who want to impress the other people at the table". -- Yes, but provided the hosts keep the price tags on. Or, like in old plays and stories, serve bad wines in bottles of good ones later in the evening, when the guests would no longer tell the difference.
I wonder if there is a placebo or psychosomatic effect of the label and price on the perceived taste of the wine?
2
@Ross Williams ideally you would have a chance to taste before purchase. Even this isn't a guarantee (tasting order can impact perception), but you greatly reduce the odds of getting something completely wrong for your personal preferences. You might miss on some wines that just needed aging, but that's one of the most difficult to judge.
2
@Tuvw Xyz
Google -- Rudy Kurniawan
1
Beer "aficianados" are on the verge of doing the same thing, with their insistence that IPAs are everything and the new embrace of sours. Beer, like wine, is a matter of personal taste as much as the actual quality of the product.
Instead of telling me that I must like something or be outed as a mere plebe, critics should be educating people on how to identify the qualities that appeal to them and how to read different critiques accordingly.
Best event I ever attended was a beer tasting where they talked about the overall beer-making process and then how different types of beer varied in how they were made.
7
@SDH Correct. The craft beer industry has opened up whole new vistas for the same populist critics who stick to Budweiser.
Concur...whoever thought there would be such thing as a "beer bore"!
I've participated in a lot of blind wine tastings and they pretty much confirm my taste in wine. Wines I didn't like when I knew what they were I still didn't like when tasted blind, and vice versa.
It's also shown that I like more expensive red zins over less expensive ones, in general, and don't like any very inexpensive ones. Same for Champagne and other sparkling wines, and pinot noir (with the exception that there are a lot of expensive red Burgundies that aren't that good, in my opinion).
I've read all sorts of bash-those-who-like-wine studies but when I read about what they did, it's either not scientific or not having regular wine drinkers drink wine.
Shaun Breidbart
www.BrainChampagne.com
1
The same issue occurs with food. Simply look at the yelp reviews of Mcdonalds. Concerning the blind identifying of wines. This is not actually just a parlor trick. For winemakers it is a training device for identifying flavors, aromas and colors. It is the only way to get tested where there is a known correct answer and thereby hone ones memory. When you have a few tons of grapes in a tank and need to make decisions about stem content, temperature control, time on skins (till the cap sinks) one relies of flavors, aromas, color and some chemical analysis of course. So the ability to identify similarities with previously encountered vintages is an enormous aide.
2
Evidently there is no study that the dirt, soil, and terroir of a vineyard adds, subtracts or in any way contributes to the flavor of the the final bottled wine. But, that said, there is a difference when a grape is carefully harvested, crushed, blended and aged in small crafted batches versus the industrial production of most wine making. And then there is the marketing...
8
Put any human in a Rolls Royce and a Yugo, and they will be able to tell the identify which is more expensive without ever having set foot in a car before. Same with a suit or furniture.
Serve five wines priced from $20-300, and most, if not all, would not be able to identify the price points. Even wine "experts" probably wouldn't fare much better.
What I would like to see is critics guessing how much they think wines cost, or should cost. If they taste a wine and think it's $40 and actually costs $15, that's a wine I want to try. And vice versa.
44
@GCT
My taste buds no longer work very well. So, if I can not taste the difference between a $9 bottle and a $30 bottle of wine, why would I want to buy the $30 bottle. We all do not have super sensitive sniffers, nor taste buds. So...I am not buying the all the criticism of cheap wines. What suits us is good enough for now.
2
Only partially true. It’s more nearly an “S” curve. All wines under $15 probably taste relatively similar. From $15 to about $75 the increasing price is fairly highly correlated with better wine. Over $75 it’s a bit more of a crapshoot as to which wine is the $90 bottle and which is the $300 bottle. For most white wines the range is probably even narrower—maybe $15-$50.
2
@Karen
------- it's hard to believe that any wine purveyor would stock swill. maybe some wines that you don't especially care for, but not swill . . .