Is the vocal minority against alcohol burning California Cabernet Sauvignons?
As I have written before, I am not against wines with over 15 percent alcohol if they are in balance and they don’t have a hot, alcoholic finish. It’s interesting to note that the legendary 1947 Cheval Blanc had an alcohol level of about 14.7 percent in a day and age when many red Bordeaux were less than 12 percent.
I thought that this posting on my website’s forum was concise and articulate on the distaste of high octane California Cabernet Sauvignons:
“I’ve weighed in on this before. I love Napa wines and I make an effort to keep loving them but they’ve gone off the deep end style-wise and price-wise. Many wines have no balance and no price discipline — 400 case newcomers charging $100+ for berry flavored ink. I’ve been burned so many times experimenting with new producers, driven into their arms by the crazy inflation behind more established names, to say nothing of the velvet rope marketing BS of producers’ mailing lists. I’ve mostly given up on the newbies as well as the velvet ropers…I’m down to about five or six tried and true names that I buy regularly, and even those in modest quantities. Crazy to say, but If you gave me $10,000 to blow on Napa wine I’d be hard pressed to spend it both wisely and happily, but I could spend that sum in about 10 seconds on Bdx and/or Italians very happily/wisely. That either makes me nuts or says something about Napa. I’ve been at this for just over 15 years; JS has been at it for 30 years…Lou Kascandy said in his JS video that he’s trying to revitalize Napa merlot…trust me there are problems underneath the apparent health of Napa wine.”
-pdnnyc
I recall similar comments from your 07 tasting report. However, you didn't give tasting notes on wines that were problematic, thereby not informing the drinking public, honestly about the wines.
I would be surprised if I were alone in your readership in finding equal value in knowing wines you find of high quality as those you find to be problematic. It is in this way that we get to really know the tastes of critics. Presenting sweeping generalizations of a region with no formal tasting notes to back up the opinions, does little more than fuel the flames of a tired cliché.
I am not sure it is a tired cliche if it still remains a fact of everyday drinking life. I realize that some people like wines that are overly alcoholic and have burning finishes. But I don't.
I'm not disputing that there is an issue. My only point is that generalizations tend not to add very much to the discussion, even when they come from an expert in the field. When you list wines that aren't rated, all we know is that they tally to less than 90 points by your calculus. If we (the broad "we") are going to have a rational discussion, specifics can only enhance that discussion. I, for one, would love to hear/see/read a round table which is an open, frank and polite discussion/debate,between winemakers, vintners, etc, (preferable from the same region) on what exactly "ripe" means to them. to my mind, it should be rather different from that Pinot thing that Parr did, in that it should represent a diversity of mindsets.
People love to blame Robert Parker, however I have to imagine it is far more complex than that. I think that open discussions of what winemakers look for in the vineyard and why, would be very helpful in having the consumer (and critics too, I suspect) truly understand why the current landscape looks the way it does
Thouhg I have bought and tasted many Napa/Cali Cabs, few have really interested me...Insignia I find is always outsanding but it is $200.00+. Let's not even talk about the value spectrum as it barely even exist. If I am am spending $50.00-$100.00 a bottle, my money is almost always shopping elsewhere.
I would like to point out James that I also like to read the reviews of lesser rated wines for reference and I also find it is somewhat of a shortfall of your current practice.
Keep 'em coming though James, enjoying the new venture greatly!
Marc
Marc
I'm praying that the 2010 vintage will showcase that you don't need raisins to produce good wine.
Very interesting topic. I'm new to the wine world, and as my career has taken off in the last 3 years, so has my experience in the world of wine. Although I spend a lot of time in California and try to appreciate the local culture, so far, I completely agree with this blog. When I have a little money to explore, I always go for French and Italian wine. Even when I DON'T have money to spend, I still go for French and Italian wine. You can still find a $20 2005 Bordeaux or 06 - 07 Chianti or a Rhone Red that will crush most California Red for the same price. As I have the convenience of shopping at great LA wine stores like Wine House, K&L, Wally's, Moe's Fine Wine, and Fireside Cellars, I find that I rarely buy domestic wine (except for Pinot, because Burgundian Pinot scares me. Too hit and miss). Bottom line... Californian wine is too pricey and too fruity. I will keep an open mind and I love trying wine from everywhere, but French and Italian wine is still my favorite. :)