 |
|
 |
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 18:58:09 +0000, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:19:59 +0800, "Raymond" <...@singnet.com.sg>
wrote:
What's the latest wine law or agreement?
Certain US brands are allowed to use protected names under the
so-called grandfather clause in the agreement with the EU. More detals
are here:
http://www.practicalwinery.com/MayJune07/mayJune07p5.htm
I believe that is the latest state of agreement, but am not 100% sure.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:13:40 -0500, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
Raymond wrote:
I'd come across several of them.
Example:
1) Andre Pink Champagne California
2) Cook's Brut Champagne
3) Korbel Brut
4) Piper Sonoma Brut
What's the latest wine law or agreement?
There is no US law (yet) that prevents such labeling, but EU law forbids
it so such wine can't be imported to the EU. Recently, a shipment of
Andre "Champagne" was confiscated and destroyed in Belgium. Here's a
link to an article about it:
http://www.wein-plus.com/magazine/index.html?show=fullnews&nr=4312
and here's the footage of the destruction, for those voyeurs among us:
http://www.flow-films.com/materials/champagne.wmv
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:34:05 +0000, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:13:40 -0500, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude>
wrote:
Raymond wrote:
I'd come across several of them.
Example:
1) Andre Pink Champagne California
2) Cook's Brut Champagne
3) Korbel Brut
4) Piper Sonoma Brut
What's the latest wine law or agreement?
There is no US law (yet) that prevents such labeling,
But it's forbidden for new brands, isn't it? Or did the US never
actually get around to passing the legislation they agreed to?
but EU law forbids it so such wine can't be imported to the EU.
Hmm, apparently so. I thought that if a label was legal in the US it
could be exported to the EU, but I forgot about all that "Champagne".
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:23:29 +0100, Michael Pronay <...@privacy.net> wrote:
Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
There is no US law (yet) that prevents such labeling,
But it's forbidden for new brands, isn't it?
AFAIK: yes.
M.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:55:05 -0700 (PDT), DaleW <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 18, 12:19�pm, "Raymond" <...@singnet.com.sg> wrote:
I'd come across several of them.
Example:
1) Andre Pink Champagne California
2) Cook's Brut Champagne
3) Korbel Brut
4) Piper Sonoma Brut
What's the latest wine law or agreement?
Thanks
Ray
I believe the ATF's successor (can't remember their designation)
allows grandfathered use of "semi-generic" terms such as Champagne,
Chablis, Chianti, etc domestically. They are not supposed to be
exported, and I believe a load of Andre was dramatically destroyed in
the EU last year.
Does Piper Sonoma really say Champagne? I'd be very surprised. I
thought the only holdouts were industrial crap like Korbel, Cooks,
Andre.
Brut of course is a non-geographic designation, and I have never heard
of complaints about that usage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:38:47 +0000 (UTC), enoavidh <...@yahoo.com> wrote:
DaleW <...@aol.com> wrote in news:478a7712-b981-486f-a3a3-e67a79ebacb0
@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com:
On Mar 18, 12:19�pm, "Raymond" <...@singnet.com.sg> wrote:
I'd come across several of them.
Example:
1) Andre Pink Champagne California
2) Cook's Brut Champagne
3) Korbel Brut
4) Piper Sonoma Brut
What's the latest wine law or agreement?
Thanks
Ray
I believe the ATF's successor (can't remember their designation)
allows grandfathered use of "semi-generic" terms such as Champagne,
Chablis, Chianti, etc domestically. They are not supposed to be
exported, and I believe a load of Andre was dramatically destroyed in
the EU last year.
Does Piper Sonoma really say Champagne? I'd be very surprised. I
thought the only holdouts were industrial crap like Korbel, Cooks,
Andre.
Brut of course is a non-geographic designation, and I have never heard
of complaints about that usage.
As far as I can tell, it's still the ATF:
http://www.atf.gov/pub/alctob_pub/bevalmanual/chapter5.pdf
Regarding the term CHAMPAGNE, it is in the SPARKLING WINE class, defined as
- Wine containing more than 0.392 grams per 100 ml carbon dioxide
resulting solely from secondary fermentation in a closed container
- "Sparkling Wine" is sparkling grape wine. Sparkling citrus,
fruit and agricultural wines must be further identified, e.g., "Sparkling
Peach Wine";
the Type being CHAMPAGNE, defined thus:
- "Grape wine refermented in glass containers of one gallon or less
capacity"
(I reckon they capitalize to avoid the Champagne/champagne disagreement)
And the Class CHAMPAGNE is footnoted as
- "Sufficient as class and type designation. Also, classified as a
SEMI-GENERIC name. (For information on semi-generic names, see 27 CFR
4.24.)
- A semi-generic named wine not from the origin indicated by the name,
e.g., "Champagne" not from France, must also be labeled with an appellation
of origin. (For appellation of origin requirements see 27 CFR 4.25a)"
I note that the Class ASTI SPUMANTE must be "made in Italy" ;) so there are
some regional distinctions, and the Class IMITATION WINE gives me *the
fear*! O_o
d.
Oh, and Piper Sonoma's label says "Méthode Champenoise"; it looks like
*most* of the Champagne houses with California branches label their wines
as "California Sparkling Wine".
--
I didn't write it, but you can find the alt.food.wine FAQ here:
http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:50:52 GMT, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not> wrote:
DaleW wrote on Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:55:05 -0700 (PDT):
D> On Mar 18, 12:19�pm, "Raymond" <...@singnet.com.sg> wrote:
??>> I'd come across several of them.
??>> Example:
??>> 1) Andre Pink Champagne California
??>> 2) Cook's Brut Champagne
??>> 3) Korbel Brut
??>> 4) Piper Sonoma Brut
??>> What's the latest wine law or agreement?
??>> Thanks
??>> Ray
D> I believe the ATF's successor (can't remember their
D> designation) allows grandfathered use of "semi-generic"
D> terms such as Champagne, Chablis, Chianti, etc domestically.
D> They are not supposed to be exported, and I believe a load
D> of Andre was dramatically destroyed in the EU last year.
D> Does Piper Sonoma really say Champagne? I'd be very
D> surprised. I thought the only holdouts were industrial crap
D> like Korbel, Cooks, Andre.
Cooks and Andre are Charmat (tank) process wines and indicate
that on the label but Korbel is fermented in the bottle and is
not bad at all, IMHO. It is a pity that no-one will risk a
public blind tasting like the "Judgment of Paris." The next best
thing was Consumer Reports tasting of California products where
the wines produced by French-owned companies came out at the
top.
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:22:51 -0000, "PK" <...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"James Silverton" <...@verizon.not> wrote in message
news...@trnddc08...
Cooks and Andre are Charmat (tank) process wines and indicate that on the
label but Korbel is fermented in the bottle and is not bad at all, IMHO.
It is a pity that no-one will risk a public blind tasting like the
"Judgment of Paris." The next best thing was Consumer Reports tasting of
California products where the wines produced by French-owned companies
came out at the top.
some time ago (sorry I have not got a reference, but my source was a senior
WSET tutor) a "champagne" tasting in Paris was carried out in two stages:
1. all wines blind - a particular wine came top
2. all wines "open" - the same wine came bottom
the wine in question:
Nyetimber, produced in West Sussex, England
http://www.nyetimber.com/
more info on Nyetimber:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/28/nwine28.xml
http://www.thewinedoctor.com/tastingsformal/englishsparklingwine.shtml
pk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:18:06 -0000, "PK" <...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Mike Tommasi" <...@tommasi.org> wrote in message
news...@mid.individual.net...
PK wrote:
some time ago (sorry I have not got a reference, but my source was a
senior WSET tutor) a "champagne" tasting in Paris was carried out in two
stages:
1. all wines blind - a particular wine came top
2. all wines "open" - the same wine came bottom
the wine in question:
Nyetimber, produced in West Sussex, England
http://www.nyetimber.com/
If it's from England, it's probably terrible.
most are but Nyetimber is up there with the best champagnes -
pk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:36:50 +0000, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:18:06 -0000, "PK" <...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Nyetimber is up there with the best champagnes -
I think that is overstating the case, but certainly the better
vintages of Nyetimber compare well with Champagnes of a similar price.
And stylistically it is very similar.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:04:03 -0500, "Robb_in_Austin" <...@notin.austin.rr.com> wrote:
Does Piper Sonoma really say Champagne? I'd be very surprised.
No. It says: "Sonoma County Sparkling Wine", and "Methode Champenoise".
Helping to clear the confusion,
Robb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:22:15 +0100, Michael Pronay <...@privacy.net> wrote:
Mike Tommasi <...@tommasi.org> wrote:
Methode Champenoise is also prohibited by European law.
True.
The correct term is Methode Classique.
Don't think I've ever seen that.
What I do encounter is "Méthode Traditionelle".
M.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:32:38 -0700 (PDT), Kamakazee <...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 18, 11:19 am, "Raymond" <...@singnet.com.sg> wrote:
I'd come across several of them.
Example:
1) Andre Pink Champagne California
2) Cook's Brut Champagne
3) Korbel Brut
4) Piper Sonoma Brut
What's the latest wine law or agreement?
Thanks
Ray
No, it's my understanding that champagne comes only from France. It's
known by other names in other regions (i.e., "cava" in Spain).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 18:43:24 -0000, "PK" <...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Kamakazee" <...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news...@m34g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 18, 11:19 am, "Raymond" <...@singnet.com.sg> wrote:
I'd come across several of them.
Example:
1) Andre Pink Champagne California
2) Cook's Brut Champagne
3) Korbel Brut
4) Piper Sonoma Brut
What's the latest wine law or agreement?
Thanks
Ray
No, it's my understanding that champagne comes only from France. It's
known by other names in other regions (i.e., "cava" in Spain).
More specifically, only from the Champagne region of france, other ferench
sparkling wines include;
a.. Crnt d'Alsace
a.. Crnt de Bordeaux
a.. Crnt de Bourgogne
a.. Crnt de Die
a.. Crnt du Jura
a.. Crnt de Limoux
a.. Crnt de Loire
a..
a.. pk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:40:31 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
PK wrote:
More specifically, only from the Champagne region of france, other
ferench sparkling wines include;
It's absurd to me. French wine producers want to use the name Zinfandel
because of the huge success it's had in California and elsewhere in the
USA. Yet, they don't want the USA to use any names associated with
French wines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:16:04 -0400, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
Miles wrote:
PK wrote:
More specifically, only from the Champagne region of france, other
ferench sparkling wines include;
It's absurd to me. French wine producers want to use the name Zinfandel
because of the huge success it's had in California and elsewhere in the
USA. Yet, they don't want the USA to use any names associated with
French wines.
Untrue for several reasons, Miles. Firstly, I've yet to hear of a
French producer wanting to use the Zinfandel name: it's mostly been
Italians who work with Primitivo AFAICT. Secondly, it's a question of
apples and oranges: Chamapagne is a _place_ name, like Napa or Sonoma;
Zinfandel is a varietal name. Have the French ever complained about our
calling wine Pinot Noir or Syrah? No, they haven't. Have we ever
complained about wine from elsewhere labeled "Napa"? Just ask Fred
Franzia (then duck). It all boils down to deceptive labeling: wine
that's not from Champagne (or Napa) is deceptively labeled if it bears
that name. Zinfandel from wherever isn't deceptively labeled if what's
in the bottle is indeed Zinfandel. Get it?
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:29:31 GMT, "Vilco" <...@b.invalid> wrote:
Mike Tommasi wrote:
However, it is true that Italians using the name Zinfandel or
Californians using the name Primitivo could be accused of using
tactics that may be legal but are certainly not very "nice", let's
say it is not very sportsmanlike, I would go so far as to say it is
berlusconian...
LOL
The name Zinfandel may be a synonym of Primitivo - and officially
recognized by USA and EU - but its usage is definitely tied to a
place, to the rich history and culture of wine in America. As an
Italian I would never buy a wine from Puglia labelled Zinfandel.
Same for me.
--
Vilco
Mai guardare Trailer park Boys senza
qualcosa da bere a portata di mano
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:20:19 -0400, Bill Loftin <...@gmail.com> wrote:
Vilco wrote:
The name Zinfandel may be a synonym of Primitivo - and officially
recognized by USA and EU - but its usage is definitely tied to a
place, to the rich history and culture of wine in America. As an
Italian I would never buy a wine from Puglia labelled Zinfandel.
As far as I see, all the Italian Zinfandel is being sold in the US.
Is it time for Gallo and Bronco to market US made Primitivo (out of
Zinfandel grapes) in Italy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:55:52 -0500, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
Bill Loftin wrote:
As far as I see, all the Italian Zinfandel is being sold in the US.
Is it time for Gallo and Bronco to market US made Primitivo (out of
Zinfandel grapes) in Italy?
They may already be doing that, for all that I know. For my part, I'd
like to see some *quality* Zinfandels from Ridge or Seghesio marketed to
Puglia and Manduria so that they can see the heights that "Primitivo"
can achieve in different terroir ;-)
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:29:03 -0000, "PK" <...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Mark Lipton" <...@eudrup.ude> wrote in message
news...@mailhub227.itcs.purdue.edu...
Bill Loftin wrote:
can achieve in different terroir ;-
Semantic mode on/
Surely, given that terroir is a mix of climate, soil and topography, it
should be "with a different terroir" not "in"
pk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:32:01 -0500, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
PK wrote:
can achieve in different terroir ;-
Semantic mode on/
Surely, given that terroir is a mix of climate, soil and topography, it
should be "with a different terroir" not "in"
Good call. I'm enough of a pedant to appreciate the distinction.
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:34:23 +0000, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:23:07 +0100, Mike Tommasi <...@tommasi.org>
wrote:
The name Zinfandel may be a synonym of Primitivo - and officially
recognized by USA and EU - but its usage is definitely tied to a place,
to the rich history and culture of wine in America. As an Italian I
would never buy a wine from Puglia labelled Zinfandel.
They are now recognised as the same variety (as are Pinot Noir, Gris
and Blanc), but they are unlikely to be the same clones of that
variety, and may be totally different clonally. Irrespective of the
legalities, I'd prefer it if the Italians stuck to the name Primitivo.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:01:16 GMT, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not> wrote:
Steve wrote on Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:34:23 +0000:
??>> The name Zinfandel may be a synonym of Primitivo - and
??>> officially recognized by USA and EU - but its usage is
??>> definitely tied to a place, to the rich history and
??>> culture of wine in America. As an Italian I would never
??>> buy a wine from Puglia labelled Zinfandel.
SS> They are now recognised as the same variety (as are Pinot
SS> Noir, Gris and Blanc), but they are unlikely to be the same
SS> clones of that variety, and may be totally different
SS> clonally. Irrespective of the legalities, I'd prefer it if
SS> the Italians stuck to the name Primitivo.
Would you please expand on "totally different clonally" ? It has
no obvious meaning to me.
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:38:14 +0000, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:01:16 GMT, "James Silverton"
<...@verizon.not> wrote:
Would you please expand on "totally different clonally" ? It has
no obvious meaning to me.
I mean that the clones of Zin in California may be similar to each
other, but not closely related to the clones of Pimitivo in Italy.
Zin and Primitivo have a common ancestor, but clonal selection in
California and Italy could have effectively produced two very
different grapes for practical purposes. In the same way that Pinot
Blanc and Pinot Gris are practically different for example, despite
the fact that they technically belong to the same variety.
It's pure speculation that the clones are very different, but I bet
they are not the same clones both sides of the Atlantic. As far as I
know no one has done the research.
But it could be that the differences between California Zin and
Italian Primitivo might not be totally down to terroir.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:31:39 -0700 (PDT), "Bi!!" <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 19, 5:52�pm, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
BTW - this is a good thread on Zinfandel and Primitivohttp://www.wineloverspage.com/forum/village/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9733&.. .
--
Steve Slatcherhttp://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
This is too.
http://www.zinfandel.org/about_zin/zindev.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:32:17 GMT, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not> wrote:
Steve wrote on Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:38:14 +0000:
??>> Would you please expand on "totally different clonally" ?
??>> It has no obvious meaning to me.
SS> I mean that the clones of Zin in California may be similar
SS> to each other, but not closely related to the clones of
SS> Pimitivo in Italy.
SS> Zin and Primitivo have a common ancestor, but clonal
SS> selection in California and Italy could have effectively
SS> produced two very different grapes for practical purposes.
SS> In the same way that Pinot Blanc and Pinot Gris are
SS> practically different for example, despite the fact that
SS> they technically belong to the same variety.
SS> It's pure speculation that the clones are very different,
SS> but I bet they are not the same clones both sides of the
SS> Atlantic. As far as I know no one has done the research.
SS> But it could be that the differences between California Zin
SS> and Italian Primitivo might not be totally down to terroir.
I am still rather puzzled. A clone in genetics is an exact
replica. Cloning, in horticulture and biology, produces an
organism whose genetic information is identical to that from
which it was created.
I would suspect that it is usual to grow new vines of Pinot
Blanc and Pinot Gris etc. from cuttings. In this case, the DNA
sequence for two cuttings is identical even if growers may try
to select for a particular characteristic. I don't know how you
can achieve this asexually. Genetics seems to be taking a
beating :-) Since "clonality" is described as the ability to
form clones or the ability to be cloned, it does not seem to
describe a process of selection that might produce different
varieties.
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 07:39:48 -0700 (PDT), DaleW <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 20, 10:32�am, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not>
wrote:
�Steve �wrote �on Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:38:14 +0000:
�??>> Would you please expand on "totally different clonally" ?
�??>> It has no obvious meaning to me.
�SS> I mean that the clones of Zin in California may be similar
�SS> to each other, but not closely related to the clones of
�SS> Pimitivo in Italy.
�SS> �Zin and Primitivo have a common ancestor, but clonal
�SS> selection in California and Italy could have effectively
�SS> produced two very different grapes for practical purposes.
�SS> In the same way that Pinot Blanc and Pinot Gris are
�SS> practically different for example, despite the fact that
�SS> they technically belong to the same variety.
�SS> It's pure speculation that the clones are very different,
�SS> but I bet they are not the same clones both sides of the
�SS> Atlantic. �As far as I know no one has done the resea=rch.
�SS> But it could be that the differences between California Zin
�SS> and Italian Primitivo might not be totally down to terroir.
I am still rather puzzled. A clone in genetics is an exact
replica. Cloning, in horticulture and biology, produces an
organism whose genetic information is identical to that �from
which it was created.
I would suspect that it is usual to grow new vines of Pinot
Blanc and Pinot Gris etc. from cuttings. In this case, the DNA
sequence for two cuttings is identical even if growers may try
to select for a particular characteristic. I don't know how you
can achieve this asexually. Genetics seems to be taking a
beating :-) Since "clonality" is described as the ability to
form clones or the ability to be cloned, it does not seem to
describe a process of selection that might produce different
varieties.
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
Did you read Bill's link to the WLDG discussion with Carole Meredith's
explanation? " All clonal variation, on the other hand, arises as a
result of rare and random somatic mutations (i.e., not sexual) that
occur in all vines. Sometimes such a mutation has a visible or
otherwise detectable (e.g. aroma difference) effect and a vine
carrying it will be preferentially used for propagation wood for new
vineyards. But often it is just chance that one mutation survives to
the next generation of vineyards and another doesn't. The mutations
accumulate over time and eventually clones diverge from each other."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:58:19 GMT, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not> wrote:
"DaleW" <...@aol.com> wrote in message
news...@a23g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 20, 10:32�am, "James Silverton"
<...@verizon.not>
wrote:
�Steve �wrote �on Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:38:14 +0000:
�??>> Would you please expand on "totally different clonally"
?
�??>> It has no obvious meaning to me.
�SS> I mean that the clones of Zin in California may be
similar
�SS> to each other, but not closely related to the clones of
�SS> Pimitivo in Italy.
�SS> �Zin and Primitivo have a common ancestor, but clonal
�SS> selection in California and Italy could have effectively
�SS> produced two very different grapes for practical
purposes.
�SS> In the same way that Pinot Blanc and Pinot Gris are
�SS> practically different for example, despite the fact that
�SS> they technically belong to the same variety.
�SS> It's pure speculation that the clones are very different,
�SS> but I bet they are not the same clones both sides of the
�SS> Atlantic. �As far as I know no one has done the research.
�SS> But it could be that the differences between California
Zin
�SS> and Italian Primitivo might not be totally down to
terroir.
I am still rather puzzled. A clone in genetics is an exact
replica. Cloning, in horticulture and biology, produces an
organism whose genetic information is identical to that �from
which it was created.
I would suspect that it is usual to grow new vines of Pinot
Blanc and Pinot Gris etc. from cuttings. In this case, the DNA
sequence for two cuttings is identical even if growers may try
to select for a particular characteristic. I don't know how
you
can achieve this asexually. Genetics seems to be taking a
beating :-) Since "clonality" is described as the ability to
form clones or the ability to be cloned, it does not seem to
describe a process of selection that might produce different
varieties.
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
Did you read Bill's link to the WLDG discussion with Carole
Meredith's
explanation? " All clonal variation, on the other hand, arises
as a
result of rare and random somatic mutations (i.e., not sexual)
that
occur in all vines. Sometimes such a mutation has a visible or
otherwise detectable (e.g. aroma difference) effect and a vine
carrying it will be preferentially used for propagation wood for
new
vineyards. But often it is just chance that one mutation
survives to
the next generation of vineyards and another doesn't. The
mutations
accumulate over time and eventually clones diverge from each
other."
"Somatic" sounds rather mystical to me. Something is either a
clone (exact replica) or it is not tho' two *cuttings* might
differ. Perhaps to enlighten me, you know some references to
scientific papers or published books by authors from, say, U.
Cal, Davis, explaining these terms.
--
Jim Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 11:35:10 -0400, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
James Silverton wrote:
Did you read Bill's link to the WLDG discussion with Carole Meredith's
explanation? " All clonal variation, on the other hand, arises as a
result of rare and random somatic mutations (i.e., not sexual) that
occur in all vines. Sometimes such a mutation has a visible or
otherwise detectable (e.g. aroma difference) effect and a vine
carrying it will be preferentially used for propagation wood for new
vineyards. But often it is just chance that one mutation survives to
the next generation of vineyards and another doesn't. The mutations
accumulate over time and eventually clones diverge from each other."
"Somatic" sounds rather mystical to me. Something is either a clone
(exact replica) or it is not tho' two *cuttings* might differ. Perhaps
to enlighten me, you know some references to scientific papers or
published books by authors from, say, U. Cal, Davis, explaining these
terms.
Somatic or germline mutation refers to the random mutagenesis events
that arise from chemical modification of DNA such as alkylation, gamma
irradiation or enzymatic crossover events. The semantic difficulty here
is that, as you note, cloning refers to asexual reproduction and so
implies no change in genetic identity. What Prof. Meredith (Emeritus
from UC Davis) means by this usage is "clonal variation," the
explanation for how two clones, both of which arise from asexual
reproduction of the same germline, can differ genetically. Somewhat off
the topic, there is a growing field of epigenetics, the study of how
gene regulation can alter genetic expression without altering the DNA
itself. Most recently, epigenetic differences have been used to explain
the differences encountered between "identical" twins (as described in a
recent Science publication).
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 08:19:48 -0700 (PDT), DaleW <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 20, 10:58 am, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not>
wrote:
"DaleW" <...@aol.com> wrote in message
news...@a23g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 20, 10:32�am, "James Silverton"
<...@verizon.not>
wrote:
> �Steve �wrote �on Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:38:14 +000=0:
> �??>> Would you please expand on "totally different clonally"
> ?
> �??>> It has no obvious meaning to me.
> �SS> I mean that the clones of Zin in California may be
> similar
> �SS> to each other, but not closely related to the clones of
> �SS> Pimitivo in Italy.
> �SS> �Zin and Primitivo have a common ancestor, but clon=al
> �SS> selection in California and Italy could have effectively
> �SS> produced two very different grapes for practical
> purposes.
> �SS> In the same way that Pinot Blanc and Pinot Gris are
> �SS> practically different for example, despite the fact that
> �SS> they technically belong to the same variety.
> �SS> It's pure speculation that the clones are very different,
> �SS> but I bet they are not the same clones both sides of the
> �SS> Atlantic. �As far as I know no one has done the resh.
> �SS> But it could be that the differences between California
> Zin
> �SS> and Italian Primitivo might not be totally down to
> terroir.
> I am still rather puzzled. A clone in genetics is an exact
> replica. Cloning, in horticulture and biology, produces an
> organism whose genetic information is identical to that �from
> which it was created.
> I would suspect that it is usual to grow new vines of Pinot
> Blanc and Pinot Gris etc. from cuttings. In this case, the DNA
> sequence for two cuttings is identical even if growers may try
> to select for a particular characteristic. I don't know how
> you
> can achieve this asexually. Genetics seems to be taking a
> beating :-) Since "clonality" is described as the ability to
> form clones or the ability to be cloned, it does not seem to
> describe a process of selection that might produce different
> varieties.
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
Did you read Bill's link to the WLDG discussion with Carole
Meredith's
explanation? " All clonal variation, on the other hand, arises
as a
result of rare and random somatic mutations (i.e., not sexual)
that
occur in all vines. Sometimes such a mutation has a visible or
otherwise detectable (e.g. aroma difference) effect and a vine
carrying it will be preferentially used for propagation wood for
new
vineyards. But often it is just chance that one mutation
survives to
the next generation of vineyards and another doesn't. The
mutations
accumulate over time and eventually clones diverge from each
other."
"Somatic" sounds rather mystical to me. Something is either a
clone (exact replica) or it is not tho' two *cuttings* might
differ. Perhaps to enlighten me, you know some references to
scientific papers or published books by authors from, say, U.
Cal, Davis, explaining these terms.
--
Jim Silverton
Potomac, Maryland- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I think Carole has retired in last couple years from UC-Davis, but she
is probably considered the top expert on grape genetics in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:32:26 GMT, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not> wrote:
"DaleW" <...@aol.com> wrote in message
news...@p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 20, 10:58 am, "James Silverton"
<...@verizon.not>
wrote:
"DaleW" <...@aol.com> wrote in message
news...@a23g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 20, 10:32�am, "James Silverton"
<...@verizon.not>
wrote:
> �Steve �wrote �on Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:38:14 +0000:
> �??>> Would you please expand on "totally different
> clonally"
> ?
> �??>> It has no obvious meaning to me.
> �SS> I mean that the clones of Zin in California may be
> similar
> �SS> to each other, but not closely related to the clones of
> �SS> Pimitivo in Italy.
> �SS> �Zin and Primitivo have a common ancestor, but clonal
> �SS> selection in California and Italy could have
> effectively
> �SS> produced two very different grapes for practical
> purposes.
> �SS> In the same way that Pinot Blanc and Pinot Gris are
> �SS> practically different for example, despite the fact
> that
> �SS> they technically belong to the same variety.
> �SS> It's pure speculation that the clones are very
> different,
> �SS> but I bet they are not the same clones both sides of
> the
> �SS> Atlantic. �As far as I know no one has done the
> research.
> �SS> But it could be that the differences between California
> Zin
> �SS> and Italian Primitivo might not be totally down to
> terroir.
> I am still rather puzzled. A clone in genetics is an exact
> replica. Cloning, in horticulture and biology, produces an
> organism whose genetic information is identical to that
> �from
> which it was created.
> I would suspect that it is usual to grow new vines of Pinot
> Blanc and Pinot Gris etc. from cuttings. In this case, the
> DNA
> sequence for two cuttings is identical even if growers may
> try
> to select for a particular characteristic. I don't know how
> you
> can achieve this asexually. Genetics seems to be taking a
> beating :-) Since "clonality" is described as the ability to
> form clones or the ability to be cloned, it does not seem to
> describe a process of selection that might produce different
> varieties.
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
Did you read Bill's link to the WLDG discussion with Carole
Meredith's
explanation? " All clonal variation, on the other hand, arises
as a
result of rare and random somatic mutations (i.e., not sexual)
that
occur in all vines. Sometimes such a mutation has a visible or
otherwise detectable (e.g. aroma difference) effect and a vine
carrying it will be preferentially used for propagation wood
for
new
vineyards. But often it is just chance that one mutation
survives to
the next generation of vineyards and another doesn't. The
mutations
accumulate over time and eventually clones diverge from each
other."
"Somatic" sounds rather mystical to me. Something is either a
clone (exact replica) or it is not tho' two *cuttings* might
differ. Perhaps to enlighten me, you know some references to
scientific papers or published books by authors from, say, U.
Cal, Davis, explaining these terms.
--
Jim Silverton
Potomac, Maryland- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
DaleW> I think Carole has retired in last couple years from
UC-Davis,
DaleW> but she is probably considered the top expert on grape
genetics
DaleW> in the world.
I will have to search libraries for her books since of the two
relevant ones available on Amazon, one is out of my range at
$202 and the other is unavailable. Thanks.
--
Jim Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 08:37:44 -0700 (PDT), "Bi!!" <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 20, 11:32 am, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not>
wrote:
"DaleW" <...@aol.com> wrote in message
news...@p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 20, 10:58 am, "James Silverton"
<...@verizon.not>
wrote:
> "DaleW" <...@aol.com> wrote in message
>...@a23g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 20, 10:32�am, "James Silverton"
> <...@verizon.not>
> wrote:
> > �Steve �wrote �on Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:38:14 +00:
> > �??>> Would you please expand on "totally different
> > clonally"
> > ?
> > �??>> It has no obvious meaning to me.
> > �SS> I mean that the clones of Zin in California may be
> > similar
> > �SS> to each other, but not closely related to the clones of
> > �SS> Pimitivo in Italy.
> > �SS> �Zin and Primitivo have a common ancestor, but cl=onal
> > �SS> selection in California and Italy could have
> > effectively
> > �SS> produced two very different grapes for practical
> > purposes.
> > �SS> In the same way that Pinot Blanc and Pinot Gris are
> > �SS> practically different for example, despite the fact
> > that
> > �SS> they technically belong to the same variety.
> > �SS> It's pure speculation that the clones are very
> > different,
> > �SS> but I bet they are not the same clones both sides of
> > the
> > �SS> Atlantic. �As far as I know no one has done the
> > research.
> > �SS> But it could be that the differences between California
> > Zin
> > �SS> and Italian Primitivo might not be totally down to
> > terroir.
> > I am still rather puzzled. A clone in genetics is an exact
> > replica. Cloning, in horticulture and biology, produces an
> > organism whose genetic information is identical to that
> > �from
> > which it was created.
> > I would suspect that it is usual to grow new vines of Pinot
> > Blanc and Pinot Gris etc. from cuttings. In this case, the
> > DNA
> > sequence for two cuttings is identical even if growers may
> > try
> > to select for a particular characteristic. I don't know how
> > you
> > can achieve this asexually. Genetics seems to be taking a
> > beating :-) Since "clonality" is described as the ability to
> > form clones or the ability to be cloned, it does not seem to
> > describe a process of selection that might produce different
> > varieties.
> > James Silverton
> > Potomac, Maryland
> > E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> > not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
> Did you read Bill's link to the WLDG discussion with Carole
> Meredith's
> explanation? " All clonal variation, on the other hand, arises
> as a
> result of rare and random somatic mutations (i.e., not sexual)
> that
> occur in all vines. Sometimes such a mutation has a visible or
> otherwise detectable (e.g. aroma difference) effect and a vine
> carrying it will be preferentially used for propagation wood
> for
> new
> vineyards. But often it is just chance that one mutation
> survives to
> the next generation of vineyards and another doesn't. The
> mutations
> accumulate over time and eventually clones diverge from each
> other."
> "Somatic" sounds rather mystical to me. Something is either a
> clone (exact replica) or it is not tho' two *cuttings* might
> differ. Perhaps to enlighten me, you know some references to
> scientific papers or published books by authors from, say, U.
> Cal, Davis, explaining these terms.
> --
> Jim Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
DaleW> I think Carole has retired in last couple years from
UC-Davis,
DaleW> but she is probably considered the top expert on grape
genetics
DaleW> in the world.
I will have to search libraries for her books since of the two
relevant ones available on Amazon, one is out of my range at
$202 and the other is unavailable. Thanks.
--
Jim Silverton
Potomac, Maryland- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
This is a little more in depth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinfandel
Genetically duplicates or not.....the wines smell and taste different
to me. Why? The vines themselves? The terroir? The vineyard
techniques or cellar techniques?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:46:20 GMT, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not> wrote:
Bi!! wrote on Thu, 20 Mar 2008 08:37:44 -0700 (PDT):
??>> I will have to search libraries for her books since of the
??>> two relevant ones available on Amazon, one is out of my
??>> range at $202 and the other is unavailable. Thanks.
??>>
??>> --
??>> Jim Silverton
??>> Potomac, Maryland- Hide quoted text -
??>>
??>> - Show quoted text -
B> This is a little more in depth.
B> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinfandel
A Google Scholar search on Carole Meredith produced some
interesting summaries and I will have to see if I can look at
the full papers at a local university library when I have time.
I will have to refresh my memory as to things like allele etc.
Even my copy of Stryer's Biochemistry seems a bit sketchy there
as to mechanisms.
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:23:51 +0000, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:32:17 GMT, "James Silverton"
<...@verizon.not> wrote:
I am still rather puzzled. A clone in genetics is an exact
replica. Cloning, in horticulture and biology, produces an
organism whose genetic information is identical to that from
which it was created.
You are right. Clones are genetically identical.
But I think in everyday usage, if you take a number of cutting from
the same vine, they would be called clones - even if small mutations
caused the cuttings to have slightly different DNA. Frankly no one
would really know whether they are true clones or not - it was only
recently, wasn't it, that the complete DNA sequence of a grape (a
Pinot Noir) was published.
The different clones sold by nurseries would be more distinct, and
would have documented properties.
Presumably vines also sometimes mutate into something totally
different, at which point they would be destroyed - isn't that one of
the possible consequences of viral infection?
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 00:07:36 -0400, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
Miles wrote:
Thats true but I do not feel a place defines a wine in the way the
French perceive. Can a great Burgundy blend be produced from grapes not
grown in the Burgundy region?
Great Pinot Noir and Chardonnay can be grown in several different
places, but great Burgundy by definition comes from Burgundy. And it's
not just a French idea: Italian and Spanish wines are also frequently
labeled by place.
Can Burgundy grown grapes not blended
into a true Burgundy be a great wine? I have no trouble with labeling an
appellation as its important but naming the wine by region doesn't make
sense to me. California, Oregon, Washington all produce great wines and
do it without such policies.
That's true, but that's a straw man argument. I'm not arguing that
names like Chablis, Champagne and Burgundy should be protected because
they produce great wine (although they do) but because those names are,
in essence, brand names for regions. I can't make tissue paper and
legally call it Kleenex; why should I be able to make a red wine and
call it Burgundy?
A Napa wine doesn't tell me much at all nor does Burgundy. Too broad
for anything meaningful due to the numerous micro climates of the region.
That's why there are sub-appelation and vineyard names. Do you not
subscribe to the notion of "Rutherford Dust" or "Santa Lucia Highlands
Pinot Noir"? Likewise, Musigny has a certain flavor profile, as does
Richebourg. Those names were arrived at from many centuries of experience.
Do you really feel that particular blends common in a particular
California region should be named after that region and regulated as such?
No, and where in my statement do you get that mistaken impression? My
point is that certain place names are protected as equivalent to
trademarks. Do you think that crabs from Florida should be able to be
sold as Dungeness crabs? Should farmed salmon from Canada be sold as
Copper River? Should California be able to sell its produce as Florida
oranges?
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:04:02 -0700, miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Mark Lipton wrote:
I can't make tissue paper and
legally call it Kleenex; why should I be able to make a red wine and
call it Burgundy?
Not a good analogy. If I buy 5 boxes of Kleenex I know that all will be
the same. If I buy 5 bottles of Burgundy they will not all be the same
unless I look at who made them and what vineyard, winemaker etc.
Burgundy is not a brand name like Kleenex. It is an appellation
although in the case of Burgundy is also describes the choice of grapes
used but not the exact blending done.
That's why there are sub-appelation and vineyard names. Do you not
subscribe to the notion of "Rutherford Dust" or "Santa Lucia Highlands
Pinot Noir"? Likewise, Musigny has a certain flavor profile, as does
Richebourg. Those names were arrived at from many centuries of experience.
I agree with noting that on the bottle. I like Reds from the Stags Leap
region. But I do not feel Reds that come from that region should be
labeled Stags Leap Wine.
No, and where in my statement do you get that mistaken impression?
You feel France etc. should but the USA shouldn't? Thats my point. Why
is it ok in Europe but you don't feel it appropriate elsewhere?
point is that certain place names are protected as equivalent to
trademarks.
With regards to Wine where is this done in the USA without it being
trademarked by a particular wine producer? If it isn't, why not?
Do you think that crabs from Florida should be able to be
sold as Dungeness crabs?
Dungeness refers to a species and not a region. They are found along
the western coast from Alaska down into Mexico. The grapes used in
Burgundy are not unique to the region nor a particular producer. Label
the appellation correctly just as is done in the USA.
Should farmed salmon from Canada be sold as
Copper River? Should California be able to sell its produce as Florida
oranges?
Nope and a wine made from grapes grown in New York can't label them as
being from elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:28:34 +1300, "st.helier" <...@thisaddress.4me> wrote:
"miles" wrote ................
If I buy 5 bottles of Burgundy they will not all be the same unless I look
at who made them and what vineyard, winemaker etc.
Burgundy is not a brand name like Kleenex.
With the greatest of respect Miles, your view if far too simplistic.
If you truly want to understand this region and its wines I suggest you read
"Côte d'Or: A celebration of the great wines of Burgundy" by Clive Coates.
"Bourgogne" appellation covers all the Burgundy region, totalling approx.
7,500 acres.
The vineyards of Bourgogne AOC are located on 385 villages - many with
their own separate appellations - names like Chablis - Côte de Nuits -
Gevrey Chambertin - Clos Vougeot - Vosne Romanée - Nuits Saint Georges -Côte
de Beaune - Corton - Pommard - Volnay - Meursault - Chassagne Montrachet -
Rully - Givry - Pouilly Fuissé - Macon - Mercurey - these are all separate
appellations within Burgundy.
The grapes used in Burgundy are Pinot Noir for red wine and Chardonnay for
white wine.
Until 50 or so years ago, winemakers also used Pinot Beurot, César and
Tressot red grapes but they have now almost non-existent to the extent that
one should consider all white Burgundy (and Chablis) as Chardonnay and all
red Burgundy as Pinot Noir.
It is an appellation
Exactly - as Steve said, this means very strict controls over everything
from approved varieties, vineyards practices, yields, vinification etc.
although in the case of Burgundy is also describes the choice
of grapes used but not the exact blending done.
Nope - sorry - again, no choice - Chardonnay for white; Pinot noir for
ed - thus (unlike Bordeaux) no blending of varieties.
Nope and a wine made from grapes grown in New York can't label them as
being from elsewhere.
Exactly - so why do you think it is alright that a wine made from grapes
grown *anywhere outside of Burgundy* (this distinct geographic area in
France) could be named "Burgundy"?
Next you will be arguing that it is fine for a Sauvignon Blanc, grown and
made in New York, to be labelled "Marlborough."
--
st.helier
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:08:52 -0500, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
st.helier wrote:
Nope - sorry - again, no choice - Chardonnay for white; Pinot noir for
ed - thus (unlike Bordeaux) no blending of varieties.
err... Bourgogne Passetoutgrains? ;-)
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:57:39 -0700 (PDT), DaleW <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 26, 12:08�pm, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
st.helier wrote:
> Nope - sorry - again, no choice - Chardonnay for white; Pinot noir for
> ed �- �thus (unlike Bordeaux) no blending of varieties.
err... Bourgogne Passetoutgrains? �;-)
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: �http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com
and Bourgogne Grande Ordinaire!
But PTG and BGO together make up something like 2% of production, and
way less than 1% of exports.
Personally, even when I was brand new to wine, I didn't find European
labeling confusing. And no one has ever suggested that US wines had to
switch to European styled geographic labeling, to my knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:38:21 +0000, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:57:39 -0700 (PDT), DaleW <...@aol.com>
wrote:
and Bourgogne Grande Ordinaire!
But PTG and BGO together make up something like 2% of production, and
way less than 1% of exports.
I was surprised that it was that low, but you are right - if you
include all Burgundy's production, including Beaujolais (which is a
huge chunk of the total) and white wines. I was also surprised to see
how little BGO is produced compared to PTG.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:30:09 +1300, "st.helier" <...@thisaddress.4me> wrote:
Mark Lipton wrote:
err... Bourgogne Passetoutgrains? ;-)
And "Mike Tommasi" wrote .........
err... Sauvignon de St Bris?
err... Bourgogne Aligoté?
err... Beaujolais?
His Lordship readily concedes - outside of Beaujolais, small of amounts of
Gamay (red) and in certain defined areas, Aligot (white) are still grown,
vinified, bottled and sold - BUT ..........
All the above will be labelled according to the individual labelling
requirements: i.e. "Bourgogne Passetoutgrains" or "Appellation Bourgogne
Aligoté Controlée".
My contention is that none of the abovementioned would be *normally* termed
Burgundy - either red or white!
Either or both of you may feel free to argue otherwise ;-)
However, I am surprised that neither of you picked up on my error -
Burgundy covers closer to 25,000 ha (60,000 acres) !
--
st.helier
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 07:54:30 -0700 (PDT), "Bi!!" <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 27, 9:44�am, Mike Tommasi <...@tommasi.org> wrote:
st.helier wrote:
>>> Mark Lipton wrote:
>>> err... Bourgogne Passetoutgrains? �;-)
> And "Mike Tommasi" wrote .........
>> err... Sauvignon de St Bris?
>> err... Bourgogne Aligot�?
>> err... Beaujolais?
> His Lordship readily concedes - outside of Beaujolais, small of amounts =of
> Gamay (red) and in certain defined areas, Aligot (white) are still grown=,
> vinified, bottled and sold �- �BUT ..........
> All the above will be labelled according to the individual labelling
> requirements: i.e. "Bourgogne Passetoutgrains" or "Appellation Bourgogne
> Aligot� Control�e".
> My contention is that none of the abovementioned would be *normally* ter=med
> Burgundy - either red or white!
> Either or both of you may feel free to argue otherwise ;-)
> However, I am surprised that neither of you picked up on my error BD-
> Burgundy covers closer to 25,000 ha (60,000 acres) !
Yes Beaujolais tends to be seen as a separate wine growing area, but
surely M'Lawd the Burgundy Alley Goat is... Burgundy? And the Sauvignon
de St Bris is, no doubt about it, Bourgogne, adminstratively and in wine
terms...
--
Mike Tommasi - Six Fours, France
email linkhttp://www.tommasi.org/mymail- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Actually we're getting close to defining just how many angels can
dance on the head of a pin.
Oop......almost forgot ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:12:28 GMT, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not> wrote:
Bi!! wrote on Thu, 27 Mar 2008 07:54:30 -0700 (PDT):
On Mar 27, 9:44�am, Mike Tommasi <...@tommasi.org> wrote:
??>> st.helier wrote:
??>>>>> Mark Lipton wrote:
??>>
??>>>>> err... Bourgogne Passetoutgrains? �;-)
??>>
??>>> And "Mike Tommasi" wrote .........
??>>>> err... Sauvignon de St Bris?
??>>>> err... Bourgogne Aligot�?
??>>>> err... Beaujolais?
??>>
??>>> His Lordship readily concedes - outside of Beaujolais,
??>>> small of amounts of Gamay (red) and in certain defined
??>>> areas, Aligot (white) are still grown, vinified, bottled
??>>> and sold �- �BUT ..........
??>>
??>>> All the above will be labelled according to the
??>>> individual labelling requirements: i.e. "Bourgogne
??>>> Passetoutgrains" or "Appellation Bourgogne Aligot�
??>>> Control�e".
??>>
??>>> My contention is that none of the abovementioned would be
??>>> *normally* termed Burgundy - either red or white!
??>>
??>>> Either or both of you may feel free to argue otherwise
??>>> ;-)
??>>
??>>> However, I am surprised that neither of you picked up on
??>>> my error �- Burgundy covers closer to 25,000 ha (60,000
??>>> acres) !
??>>
??>> Yes Beaujolais tends to be seen as a separate wine growing
??>> area, but surely M'Lawd the Burgundy Alley Goat is...
??>> Burgundy? And the Sauvignon de St Bris is, no doubt about
??>> it, Bourgogne, adminstratively and in wine terms...
??>>
??>> --
??>> Mike Tommasi - Six Fours, France
??>> email linkhttp://www.tommasi.org/mymail- Hide quoted
text -
B> Actually we're getting close to defining just how many
angels
B> can dance on the head of a pin.
B> Oop......almost forgot ;-)
I thought the final answer there was that angels were
dimensionless, so as many as you want! They aren't dimensionless
but Champagne districts behave like angels :-)
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:11:33 -0700 (PDT), "Bi!!" <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 27, 11:12 am, "James Silverton" <...@verizon.not>
wrote:
Bi!! wrote on Thu, 27 Mar 2008 07:54:30 -0700 (PDT):
On Mar 27, 9:44�am, Mike Tommasi <...@tommasi.org> wrote: ??>> st.helier wrote:
??>>>>> Mark Lipton wrote:
??>>
??>>>>> err... Bourgogne Passetoutgrains? �;-)
??>>
??>>> And "Mike Tommasi" wrote .........
??>>>> err... Sauvignon de St Bris?
??>>>> err... Bourgogne Aligot�?
??>>>> err... Beaujolais?
??>>
??>>> His Lordship readily concedes - outside of Beaujolais,
??>>> small of amounts of Gamay (red) and in certain defined
??>>> areas, Aligot (white) are still grown, vinified, bottled
??>>> and sold �- �BUT ..........
??>>
??>>> All the above will be labelled according to the
??>>> individual labelling requirements: i.e. "Bourgogne
??>>> Passetoutgrains" or "Appellation Bourgogne Aligot�
??>>> Control�e".
??>>
??>>> My contention is that none of the abovementioned would be
??>>> *normally* termed Burgundy - either red or white!
??>>
??>>> Either or both of you may feel free to argue otherwise
??>>> ;-)
??>>
??>>> However, I am surprised that neither of you picked up on
??>>> my error �- Burgundy covers closer to 25,000 ha (60,00=0
??>>> acres) !
??>>
??>> Yes Beaujolais tends to be seen as a separate wine growing
??>> area, but surely M'Lawd the Burgundy Alley Goat is...
??>> Burgundy? And the Sauvignon de St Bris is, no doubt about
??>> it, Bourgogne, adminstratively and in wine terms...
??>>
??>> --
??>> Mike Tommasi - Six Fours, France
??>> email linkhttp://www.tommasi.org/mymail-Hide quoted
text -
B> Actually we're getting close to defining just how many
angels
B> can dance on the head of a pin.
B> Oop......almost forgot ;-)
I thought the final answer there was that angels were
dimensionless, so as many as you want! They aren't dimensionless
but Champagne districts behave like angels :-)
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
I'm headed to Champagne and Burgundy on May 1 for a few weeks so it
will be interesting to get their take on the expansion. My guess is
that I'll get the French shrug!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:02:01 +1300, "st.helier" <...@thisaddress.4me> wrote:
"Mike Tommasi" wrote ......
M'Lawd the Burgundy Alley Goat is... Burgundy? And the
Sauvignon de St Bris is, no doubt about it, Bourgogne,
administratively and in wine terms...
to which "Bi!!" wrote ...............
Actually we're getting close to defining just how many
angels can dance on the head of a pin.
Bill, with an ounce of planning and some stability in the world's currency
markets (lest I should convert all my holdings into Lilangeni!), it is my
intention to again arrive in the general neighbourhood of Mr. Tommasi - some
time around mid-September.
Whereupon, I shall demand that he and Cathy should invite me and my tribe to
dinner at Chez Tommasi, where he can show me a bottle or two of those
well-known and plentiful examples of *Burgundy* he quotes (Aligoté and
Sauvignon de St Bris) matched perfectly with some local cuisine.
Methinks he will need to start his search very soon - lest he be found
wanting !!!!!!!!!
Cheers
st.h
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:00:31 -0700 (PDT), "Bi!!" <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 27, 7:02�pm, "st.helier" <...@thisaddress.4me> wrote:
"Mike Tommasi" wrote ......
>> M'Lawd the Burgundy Alley Goat is... Burgundy? And the
>> Sauvignon de St Bris is, no doubt about it, Bourgogne,
>> administratively and in wine terms...
�to which "Bi!!" wrote ...............
> Actually we're getting close to defining just how many
> angels can dance on the head of a pin.
Bill, with an ounce of planning and some stability in the world's currency
markets (lest I should convert all my holdings into Lilangeni!), it is my
intention to again arrive in the general neighbourhood of Mr. Tommasi - so=me
time around mid-September.
Whereupon, I shall demand that he and Cathy should invite me and my tribe =to
dinner at Chez Tommasi, where he can show me a bottle or two of those
well-known and plentiful examples of *Burgundy* he quotes (Aligot�= and
Sauvignon de St Bris) matched perfectly with some local cuisine.
Methinks he will need to start his search very soon - lest he be found
wanting !!!!!!!!!
Cheers
st.h
To be fair M'Lawd I've had many a Kir in Burgundy made with Aligote
and Brocard distributes a pretty fair Sauvignon de St Bris here in
America. I do not think of either as being "Burgundy" however.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:34:29 GMT, Timothy Hartley <...@DELETEorpheusmail.co.uk> wrote:
In message <...@news.datemas.de>
"st.helier" <...@thisaddress.4me> wrote:
"Mike Tommasi" wrote ......
M'Lawd the Burgundy Alley Goat is... Burgundy? And the
Sauvignon de St Bris is, no doubt about it, Bourgogne,
administratively and in wine terms...
to which "Bi!!" wrote ...............
Actually we're getting close to defining just how many
angels can dance on the head of a pin.
Bill, with an ounce of planning and some stability in the world's currency
markets (lest I should convert all my holdings into Lilangeni!), it is my
intention to again arrive in the general neighbourhood of Mr. Tommasi - some
time around mid-September.
Whereupon, I shall demand that he and Cathy should invite me and my tribe to
dinner at Chez Tommasi, where he can show me a bottle or two of those
well-known and plentiful examples of *Burgundy* he quotes (Aligoté and
Sauvignon de St Bris) matched perfectly with some local cuisine.
Methinks he will need to start his search very soon - lest he be found
wanting !!!!!!!!!
Cheers
st.h
Speaking as a fan of St. Bris and the son-in-law of an inhabitant of
Six-Fours, almost next door to Bandol, I think it is your request that
M. Tomassi should match the wine to local cuisine which may cause the
problem rather than finding the wine maybe soupe de poisson minus
the rouille? As for the Aligoté I have yet to be persuade that Canon
Kir did not find the best use for it.
Tim Hartley
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:36:28 GMT, Timothy Hartley <...@DELETEorpheusmail.co.uk> wrote:
In message <...@mid.individual.net>
Mike Tommasi <...@tommasi.org> wrote:
st.helier wrote:
it is my
intention to again arrive in the general neighbourhood of Mr. Tommasi - some
time around mid-September.
Good news !
Whereupon, I shall demand that he and Cathy should invite me and my tribe to
dinner at Chez Tommasi, where he can show me a bottle or two of those
well-known and plentiful examples of *Burgundy* he quotes (Aligoté and
Sauvignon de St Bris) matched perfectly with some local cuisine.
Methinks he will need to start his search very soon - lest he be found
wanting !!!!!!!!!
Er, how about if I serve some REAL Burgundy. Who said B. Aligoté and
Sauvignon de St Bris is Burgundy? :-)
They are entitled to the Appellation does that make them real or are
we in Velveteen Rabbit territory where feeling loved was necessary
before the poor toy rabbit became real?
Tim Hartley
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:07:01 -0500, Mark Lipton <...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
miles wrote:
No, and where in my statement do you get that mistaken impression?
You feel France etc. should but the USA shouldn't? Thats my point. Why
is it ok in Europe but you don't feel it appropriate elsewhere?
No, I feel that any given region is free to label its wine as it
chooses. Many regions of Europe label their wine by region; most areas
of the New World label by varietal designation. I have no interest in
changing anyone's labeling practices.
point is that certain place names are protected as equivalent to
trademarks.
With regards to Wine where is this done in the USA without it being
trademarked by a particular wine producer? If it isn't, why not?
Did you not read about the lawsuit brought by the Napa wine producers
association against Fred Franzia's Bronco Wine Co. for the
misappropriation of the name "Napa"? Try making a wine in Idaho and
labeling it as your "Sonoma Cuvée" and see what happens when you try to
sell it...
Do you think that crabs from Florida should be able to be
sold as Dungeness crabs?
Dungeness refers to a species and not a region.
Never heard of Dungeness, WA? ;-)
The grapes used in
Burgundy are not unique to the region nor a particular producer. Label
the appellation correctly just as is done in the USA.
They _do_ label the appellation correctly, Miles. A typical bottle of
Burgundy will say "Chambolle-Musigny" (village appellation) "Les
Amoureuses" (vineyard appellation) and "Grand Vin de Bourgogne"
(regional appellation). Many Napa Cabs, BTW, fail to mention Napa on
their labels.
Should farmed salmon from Canada be sold as
Copper River? Should California be able to sell its produce as Florida
oranges?
Nope and a wine made from grapes grown in New York can't label them as
being from elsewhere.
I agree. So why should someone from California be able to label their
wine as Burgundy? That sounds like a double standard to me.
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 07:50:08 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Mark Lipton wrote:
Did you not read about the lawsuit brought by the Napa wine producers
association against Fred Franzia's Bronco Wine Co. for the
misappropriation of the name "Napa"? Try making a wine in Idaho and
labeling it as your "Sonoma Cuvée" and see what happens when you try to
sell it...
Never heard of Dungeness, WA? ;-)
Yes but Dungeness crabs in stores nationwide do not have to come from
Washington. They come from all along the west coast. It is a species.
I agree. So why should someone from California be able to label their
wine as Burgundy? That sounds like a double standard to me.
They shouldn't as it would confuse the consumer because it's too late to
change. I do not wish the USA to adopt such practices. Labeling a wine
NAPA is meaningless to me. Just put the appellation etc. on the label.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 07:44:52 +0000, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:47:30 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Mark Lipton wrote:
apples and oranges: Chamapagne is a _place_ name, like Napa or Sonoma;
Thats true but I do not feel a place defines a wine in the way the
French perceive.
French AOCs are not just defined by the place. It is also the grape
varieties used, vineyard practice, yields and vinification.
Can a great Burgundy blend be produced from grapes not
grown in the Burgundy region? Can Burgundy grown grapes not blended
into a true Burgundy be a great wine?
Putting aside the issue of greatness, I'd say that in general Burgundy
has a taste profile that is distinct from PN wines made elsewhere. I
am thinking of the better generic Burgundies, and village level and
upwards here.
I have no trouble with labeling an
appellation as its important but naming the wine by region doesn't make
sense to me. California, Oregon, Washington all produce great wines and
do it without such policies.
They may not use such large print on the label, but use of California
etc, and/or sub areas, is controlled. And respected by the EU.
A Napa wine doesn't tell me much at all nor does Burgundy. Too broad
for anything meaningful due to the numerous micro climates of the region.
Certainly to talk about the terroir of Burgundy or Bordeaux in a
generic way is meaningless twaddle - the stuff of French marketing and
little else. But the climate and winemaking practices are also
controlled, and these contribute to the taste.
Do you really feel that particular blends common in a particular
California region should be named after that region and regulated as such?
Not really sure what you are asking here. AOCs do not name blends
after regions. They say that IF you want to call a wine Burgundy you
have to follow a set of rules - including region, grapes, and many
other.
What California growers want to do is up to them as far as I am
concerned, providing they do not confuse the consumer by using names
that have already been earmarked by others. They seem to be doing OK
using variety names and AVAs and I see no problem with that.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 07:37:50 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Steve Slatcher wrote:
French AOCs are not just defined by the place. It is also the grape
varieties used, vineyard practice, yields and vinification.
Yep and I don't agree with that practice. I prefer the way its done in
the USA.
Putting aside the issue of greatness, I'd say that in general Burgundy
has a taste profile that is distinct from PN wines made elsewhere.
That could often be said of many appellations. Thats why in the USA the
appellation is labeled to give the consumer the information they need to
make their choices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:50:48 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Mike Tommasi wrote:
If the provenance does not imply anything, then why indicate it at
all?
You can buy a lousy Burgundy and a top notch one. You can also buy a
top notch PN from outside the Burgundy region. It comes down to ones
particular tastes rather than a name. Two PN's from the exact same
vineyard but different wineries, winemakers etc. can be totally different.
The other extreme is to place so many limitations on an appellation that
all the wines end up tasting the same, often modeled around some fuzzy
notion of what is "typical", a very dangerous concept indeed because it
tends to level everything and homogenize taste. Concepts of the
"typical" are so subjective that they are not even worth discussing.
I prefer to let a winemaker do what he knows best and let the consumer
decide what they like. Gives the consumer more variety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 07:07:41 +0000, Steve Slatcher <...@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:54:55 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Burgundy wines are a blend of 3 or 4 grapes.
The vast majoritiy of Burgundies are made from a single variety. Not
that it affects your arguments otherwise I suppose.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 08:06:57 -0700 (PDT), "Bi!!" <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 29, 10:32�am, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Steve Slatcher wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:54:55 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
>> Burgundy wines are a blend of 3 or 4 grapes. �
> The vast majoritiy of Burgundies are made from a single variety. BDNot
> that it affects your arguments otherwise I suppose.
I've never cared for Bufundies but was under the impression most were
blends. �At least whats on the common stock shelves here which cou=ld be
just the lower end mass produced stuff.
Actually, as stated here before. Basically, red burgundy is pinot
noir and white is chardonnay and they do not blend varietals. I'm not
sure I understand what you mean by "common stock shelves" since there
really aren't a lot of mass producers in burgundy. Perhaps Jadot and
Drouhin? http://www.thewinenews.com/aprmay02/cover.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 08:36:03 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Bi!! wrote:
I'm not
sure I understand what you mean by "common stock shelves" since there
really aren't a lot of mass producers in burgundy.
I'll have to check next time at the store. There are cheap jugs of
Burgundy I see often. While I love a good California or Oregon PN their
styles are vastly different than any Burgundy I've tried. Perhaps I've
tried the wrong ones or the availability where I am is limited.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 09:15:03 -0700 (PDT), "Bi!!" <...@aol.com> wrote:
On Mar 29, 11:36�am, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Bi!! wrote:
> I'm not
> sure I understand what you mean by "common stock shelves" since there
> really aren't a lot of mass producers in burgundy. �
I'll have to check next time at the store. �There are cheap jugs o=f
Burgundy I see often. �While I love a good California or Oregon PN= their
styles are vastly different than any Burgundy I've tried. �Perhaps= I've
tried the wrong ones or the availability where I am is limited.
Where are you? I haven't seen "jugs" of actual burgundy wines since
it's generally quite expensive. If you click on the link that I
posted in my previous post you'll get a better idea of why burgundy is
so pricey. It's almost impossible these days to find it at under $30
a bottle since the land parcels are so tiny and production is so
limited. Warning-do not search for great burgundy. Once you've
tasted a great burgundy, from a good producer, in a good vintage,
properly stored and aged, from a Grand Cru vineyard you will be moved
to tears and will then spend the rest of your life searching for the
holy grail of burgundy only to be crushed by the countless lesser
wines that you will encounter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:42:06 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Bi!! wrote:
do not search for great burgundy. Once you've
tasted a great burgundy, from a good producer, in a good vintage,
properly stored and aged, from a Grand Cru vineyard you will be moved
to tears and will then spend the rest of your life searching for the
holy grail of burgundy
Probably true! Years ago I was quite fine with my case of beer and some
$5 box wine. Then my folks moved to Napa area so I was introduced to
some 'real' wines when visiting. Theres no going back! But my wine and
beer budget sure increased substantially!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:55:38 -0400, "Richard Neidich" <...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Hi Miles,
This argument of geographical naming protection was taken by the WTO (world
trade org) and was mostly won on your arguments.
Personaly I disagree with the findings that Canada can go on producing Parma
Ham even thought Parma Ham is NOT from Parma. Or San Marasno tomatoes grown
in Canada.
Realize all of these and many more are the geographical component. If a
town in Canada decided to change their name however to "Parma" shouldn't
they be allowed to state Parma ham from Parma?
There is a Naples Italy, Naples Florida...and many more...
While I understand this ruling from WTO I do not personally apply it the
same way to wine. But the majority do in the world. And unless there are
treaties and respect given this debate cannot really change minds.
"Miles" <...@nopers.com> wrote in message
news...@newsfe13.phx...
Mark Lipton wrote:
Zinfandel from wherever isn't deceptively labeled if what's
in the bottle is indeed Zinfandel. Get it?
Thats only because of historical naming. Burgundy wines are a blend of 3
or 4 grapes which are also grown worldwide quite successfully. So the
term Burgundy only refers to the appellation and nothing more. Why not
just say that as USA wines are labeled?
My point was asking whether California should have 'trademarked' the term
Zinfandel for it's exclusive use before others started using it? For me
the answer would be no. If I want a particular blend from a particular
appellation I'll look for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 07:44:39 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Richard Neidich wrote:
While I understand this ruling from WTO I do not personally apply it the
same way to wine. But the majority do in the world. And unless there are
treaties and respect given this debate cannot really change minds.
I think most here are missing my point. The way wines are labeled in
the USA works very well to inform the consumer. I feel the way it's
done in France etc. is a limitation to the market. There may very well
be excellent 'Burgundy' style wines made outside the Burgundy region but
marketing conventions make it difficult to gain in the publics eye.
That type of limitation doesn't exist in the USA and I prefer it that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 13:00:18 -0400, "Richard Neidich" <...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Miles, I do not disagree with you but it is more than that. See, in my
opinion once we became part of a global economy you have to take other
trading partners into consideration.
While packaging laws vary from country to country some countries are very
protective of their names. But for whatever the legal reasons we do not
have to conform on geographical preferances. And that I beleived was the
result of the WTO on some of the cases I have mentioned.
In my opinion this is a clashing of cultures and I beleive cheese in France
is also geographical in naming. In my opinion we should NOT name items in
the geographical names no matter what.
Would Schramsberg taste less good if it was called Sparkling wine vs
Champaigne (they do not call it Champaigne by the way...that is an example.
How about KOBE beef, the imitation Wagyu beef does NOT taste the same but
its good at 25% the cost. Doesn't georgraphy mean something?
"Miles" <...@nopers.com> wrote in message
news...@newsfe13.phx...
Richard Neidich wrote:
While I understand this ruling from WTO I do not personally apply it the
same way to wine. But the majority do in the world. And unless there
are treaties and respect given this debate cannot really change minds.
I think most here are missing my point. The way wines are labeled in the
USA works very well to inform the consumer. I feel the way it's done in
France etc. is a limitation to the market. There may very well be
excellent 'Burgundy' style wines made outside the Burgundy region but
marketing conventions make it difficult to gain in the publics eye. That
type of limitation doesn't exist in the USA and I prefer it that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:44:54 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Richard Neidich wrote:
How about KOBE beef, the imitation Wagyu beef does NOT taste the same but
its good at 25% the cost. Doesn't georgraphy mean something?
Geography does mean something and is why USA wines state their
appellation. However, there can be rot gut wine from the same region as
a very top notch wine. I just prefer the way it's done in the USA.
Works for me as a consumer just fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 22:16:05 +0100, Munged <...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Miles,
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 07:44:39 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
I think most here are missing my point. The way wines are labeled in
the USA works very well to inform the consumer.
Not really. You are assuming that almost the only important factor in
the flavour of a wine is the grape variety from which it is made. The
place and type of soil upon which these grapes are grown isa certaily
AS important and arguably more important for some varietals.
You only have to drink the muck called "Merlot" in most parts of the
the USA (Walla walla is an honourable exception) and contrast that wth
a Pomerol, or a Merlot from Tessin in Switzerland or one from Vilyán
in Hungary.
While I've no objection to mantioning the grapes that have gone to
make up a wine, the US naming procedure leads to as great a likelyhood
of error and customer disappointment as the French, Italian, Spanish
and German model does. The truth is that ignorant buyers will very
possibly be disappointed no matter what system of naming you have.
I feel the way it's done in France etc. is a limitation to the market.
No it isn't. It does on the other hand demand a liny bit of
application in that in the French naming system, you can treat the
name "Pomerol" as a kind of mnemonic for "Merlot", the phrase "red
Burgundy" (despite the odd exceptions) is a mnemonic for Pinot Noir,
and so on. It's really not beyond the wit even of the most limited
varietally fixated drinker to get that. In any case increasingly the
variety IS being mentioned, even if it's not supposed to be.
There may very well be excellent 'Burgundy' style wines made outside the Burgundy region
I've never tasted one. I've taste Pinot Noir wines from most leading
PN growing areas in the world and none of them taste anything like a
half way decent Burgundy. You may not accept that, but anyone here
who's drunk the stuff will agree with me. Not even Domaine Drouhin,
whose family are eminent Burgundy negociants and producers in Beaune,
and who have an excellent estate in theWillamette valley, make a wine
that much resembles a good Burgundy, delicious though it is _in its
own right_. It doesn't NEED the burgundy name and cachet to sell under
its own right. Anymore that does a decent sparkler from Germany or
Spain or California need to pass itself off as Champagne. Actually
it's a silly thing for most of them to do, as most (I'd say about 70%)
true champagnes are awful muck anyway.
That type of limitation doesn't exist in the USA and I prefer it that way.
Fine. Then buy US wines, and let those of us prepared to make the
minimal effort to remember that "Hermitage" means Syrah buy that. But
please don't seek to impose the naming conventions of what is, after
all a very minor wine producing country on other countries which have
been making wine for 2000 years and in quantities that exceed that of
the USA by at least an order of ten.
All the best
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 15:05:59 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
Munged wrote:
Not really. You are assuming that almost the only important factor in
the flavour of a wine is the grape variety from which it is made.
Not true. Particular vineyard, winery, winemaker, etc. are all
important. The vineyard and varietal alone do not make a wine.
Besides, in the USA both are labeled as they should be.
You only have to drink the muck called "Merlot" in most parts of the
the USA (Walla walla is an honourable exception) and contrast that wth
a Pomerol, or a Merlot from Tessin in Switzerland or one from Vilyán
in Hungary.
Could be true. I have no desire for US Merlots. They for the most part
lack any complexity, just nothing there of interest. Yet, they are one
of the most widely purchased reds in the USA. I have no idea why.
While I've no objection to mantioning the grapes that have gone to
make up a wine, the US naming procedure leads to as great a likelyhood
of error and customer disappointment as the French, Italian, Spanish
and German model does. The truth is that ignorant buyers will very
possibly be disappointed no matter what system of naming you have.
To find a good wine one does need to be somewhat educated on the matter.
Sometimes I feel the EU's method goes the way of thinking the consumer
is too stupid to find the wine they like on their own.
I've never tasted one. I've taste Pinot Noir wines from most leading
PN growing areas in the world and none of them taste anything like a
half way decent Burgundy.
Thats personal preference. I've tasted lousy PN's and great ones from
California and Oregon. I really haven't cared at all for the Burgundies
I've tried. Just a different style overall than what I prefer.
You may not accept that, but anyone here
who's drunk the stuff will agree with me.
I maybe wrong but it seems that most in here prefer French and other
European wines to California, Oregon and Washington wines. I'm the
exception. I greatly prefer the big california reds over their French
counterparts. Generally speaking they are different styles rather than
one being better than the other. Just depends on personal tastes.
Fine. Then buy US wines, and let those of us prepared to make the
minimal effort to remember that "Hermitage" means Syrah buy that. But
please don't seek to impose the naming conventions of what is, after
all a very minor wine producing country on other countries which have
been making wine for 2000 years and in quantities that exceed that of
the USA by at least an order of ten.
The people and skills that started making wines in the USA came from
those 2000 year old wine making countries. They didn't start from
scratch with no knowledge. So that point is moot. If you prefer EU
wines then by all means buy them but please do not tell me they are
better. Thats an opinion and all are entitled to such. As to Syrahs, I
prefer Aussie Shiraz over California or Rhone styles but all are good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 23:29:22 -0000, "PK" <...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Miles" <...@nopers.com> wrote in message
news...@newsfe17.phx...
Munged wrote:
. I greatly prefer the big california reds over their French counterparts.
is not that the nub of the "problem" : they are not counterparts, they are
simply different.
Traditional wines grew into what they are to complement local foods.
Wines from new countries serve a different and wider market.
It's like trying to compare American football and rugby - certain surface
similarities but fundamentally different beasts.
pk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:44:04 -0700, Miles <...@nopers.com> wrote:
PK wrote:
is not that the nub of the "problem" : they are not counterparts, they
are simply different.
They're different styles generally. People drink both with or without a
meal depending on their own preferences. I do agree there are
differences in culture but they overlap quite a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|