Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Monday 14 November 2011 10:14 PM, ss wrote: On Monday 14 Nov 2011 4:40:51 pm Eugen Leitl wrote: DIY meaning starting completely from scratch, with the green plant. Green plant? Why use tobacco? Reminds me of the time in college where a bunch of us purportedly studying for the exam ran out of cigarettes. We ended up trying different things to smoke and one even rolled some tea leaves and lit up. Well, didn't last more than a puff. Addiction is a strange thing. -Venkat
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 03:32:37PM +0800, Chew Lin Kay wrote: Nevermind machorka, DIY from Nicotiana rustica. DIY meaning self-cured, or self-rolled? DIY meaning starting completely from scratch, with the green plant.
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 03:32:37PM +0800, Chew Lin Kay wrote: Nevermind machorka, DIY from Nicotiana rustica. DIY meaning self-cured, or self-rolled? DIY meaning starting completely from scratch, with the green plant. Gosh that is hard-core!
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Monday 14 Nov 2011 4:40:51 pm Eugen Leitl wrote: DIY meaning starting completely from scratch, with the green plant. Green plant? Why use tobacco? shiv
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:14 PM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday 14 Nov 2011 4:40:51 pm Eugen Leitl wrote: DIY meaning starting completely from scratch, with the green plant. Green plant? Why use tobacco? LOL! I've always thought of pot as fairly harmless (though I may be wrong -- facts welcome), but I'm in two minds about whether it should be legalized. On the one hand, I don't see why alcohol and tobacco are any different from pot -- they can be addictive and they have long term consequences to ones health if consumed in excess. And why should the government interfere with an individual's right to choose what he does to himself. On the other hand, why stop at weed? Why not e? crack? heroin? Or should we just ban tobacco and alcohol too? Perhaps messing with the status quo is a bad idea -- a move in either direction seems to have more pros than cons... -- b
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Nov 15, 2011 4:05 PM, Biju Chacko biju.cha...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:14 PM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday 14 Nov 2011 4:40:51 pm Eugen Leitl wrote: DIY meaning starting completely from scratch, with the green plant. Green plant? Why use tobacco? I've always thought of pot as fairly harmless (though I may be wrong -- facts welcome), It appears to be relatively harmless according to the British Government's scientific advisory body on relative harms or various drugs. but I'm in two minds about whether it should be legalized. On the one hand, I don't see why alcohol and tobacco are any different from pot -- they can be addictive and they have long term consequences to ones health if consumed in excess. According to that report alcohol and tobacco are relatively harmful. If you want to use a pure harm model either they should be illegal, or a great many other drugs should be legal (or both.) However that does not factor in the costs and dangers of prohibition which are considerable. And why should the government interfere with an individual's right to choose what he does to himself. On the other hand, why stop at weed? Why not e? crack? heroin? Or should we just ban tobacco and alcohol too? These are objective questions with objective answers. From a pure harm viewpoint cannabis and hallucinogens should be legalized immediately. From a relative harm viewpoint, e, opiates and MDMA should be legalized. From a harm reduction viewpoint all drugs should be legalized with treatment, education, and harm reduduction programs instituted. See Portugal's example. Perhaps messing with the status quo is a bad idea -- a move in either direction seems to have more pros than cons... Hardly. The arguments for legalization of cannabis are compelling. (And I am objective in this matter, being a user or alcohol, a non-user of cannabis or tobacco.) -- Charles
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Biju Chacko biju.cha...@gmail.com wrote: I've always thought of pot as fairly harmless (though I may be wrong -- facts welcome), but I'm in two minds about whether it should be legalized. On the one hand, I don't see why alcohol and tobacco are any different from pot -- they can be addictive and they have long term consequences to ones health if consumed in excess. No comment on the rest of the debate, but this page on the relative addictiveness of various substances may be of interest. Marijuana is, in fact, significantly less addictive than tobacco or alcohol. http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/addictiv.htm Udhay -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
Apart from that, surely far more entertaining as well? Sent from my iPad On Nov 15, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Udhay Shankar N ud...@pobox.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Biju Chacko biju.cha...@gmail.com wrote: I've always thought of pot as fairly harmless (though I may be wrong -- facts welcome), but I'm in two minds about whether it should be legalized. On the one hand, I don't see why alcohol and tobacco are any different from pot -- they can be addictive and they have long term consequences to ones health if consumed in excess. No comment on the rest of the debate, but this page on the relative addictiveness of various substances may be of interest. Marijuana is, in fact, significantly less addictive than tobacco or alcohol. http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/addictiv.htm Udhay -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
The aura is crap; surely that goes without saying. What is important is being able to pick out what one likes and dislikes. Point being that this is not only possible, it is done regularly on a plebeian, day-to-day basis by people as far removed from kings, artifice, and fraud, though blessedly not from laughter. It's no different from cigarettes or whiskey. As for charlatans, they wouldn't exist if their gullible audiences didn't exist. From: ss lt;cybers...@gmail.comgt; To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Sent: Friday, 11 November 2011, 6:41 Subject: Re: [silk] Query on wines and snobbery On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 11:14:46 pm Indrajit Gupta wrote: gt; Frankly, I think we are hugely overdoing the wine snobbery bit; if we can gt; distinguish between cigarette brands and their smokes, or between gt; different brands of blended whiskey, what is the big deal in being able to gt; distinguish between different types of wine? gt; :D Objection, your honour. If you sit in a dining room and say you can tell the difference between Charminar and Benson amp; Hedges, most people would give you credit for being gifted like a circus clown. But if you pronounce funny sounding French names and say you can close your eyes and say what tastes good and what does not, (a skill that is avaialble to all children after the age of 6 months) people act as if you are a king. It is completely artificial. Completely fraudulent. And a huge laugh. I would not give it teh aura it is being given. shiv
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
Of course there is. As former and present smokers may recall, there is a division between plain and mentholated filters, and between filtered and unfiltered cigarettes, and within unfiltered cigarettes, between smooth smokes and the 'strong' ones. These progressions are well-defined and well-recognised, and the way to death ends with what used to be a Charminar; there was nothing stronger, and you couldn't smoke the other stuff once you were on Charminars. Even brain-dead idiots could make out the difference betwee, say, Wills Filters and Charminars. So why not in other areas? This whole thing is quite a phony controversy, worth talking about only because of the phony experts who get undue attention. There is undoubtedly clear and visible difference and distinction between different types and varieties of wine. If people are able to distinguish between single-origin products like cigarettes (leaving aside the different leaves and their aroma) and grain whiskies, why should they not be able to distinguish multiple-grape products, produced specifically to taste different from other similar products? The mere fact that some idiots put other idiots on a pedestal has nothing to do with this basic fact of being able to make out what I like and what I don't, which, as has been rightly said, is available even in children over 6 months. From: Suresh Ramasubramanian sur...@hserus.net To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Sent: Friday, 11 November 2011, 6:47 Subject: Re: [silk] Query on wines and snobbery That does explain why people tend to only smoke wills, or gold flake kings or ... and a wills smoker wouldn't dream of smoking gold flake. There's a paanwallah I used to know in hyd who had an uncanny knack of spotting people new to his shop as wills, goldflake, charminar etc smokers. I guess wine is a more complex tasting product than tobacco (and outside cheap and mass produced brands, you have quite a lot of people grading expensive tobacco on virginian or turkish, how dark its roasted etc) --Original Message-- From: ss Sender: silklist-bounces+suresh=hserus@lists.hserus.net To: silklist@lists.hserus.net ReplyTo: silklist@lists.hserus.net Subject: Re: [silk] Query on wines and snobbery Sent: Nov 11, 2011 06:41 On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 11:14:46 pm Indrajit Gupta wrote: Frankly, I think we are hugely overdoing the wine snobbery bit; if we can distinguish between cigarette brands and their smokes, or between different brands of blended whiskey, what is the big deal in being able to distinguish between different types of wine? :D Objection, your honour. If you sit in a dining room and say you can tell the difference between Charminar and Benson Hedges, most people would give you credit for being gifted like a circus clown. But if you pronounce funny sounding French names and say you can close your eyes and say what tastes good and what does not, (a skill that is avaialble to all children after the age of 6 months) people act as if you are a king. It is completely artificial. Completely fraudulent. And a huge laugh. I would not give it teh aura it is being given. shiv -- srs (blackberry)
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Sunday 13 Nov 2011 2:59:21 pm Indrajit Gupta wrote: and the way to death ends with what used to be a Charminar; there was nothing stronger, Gauloise. The worst. Ever. shiv
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Nov 13, 2011 5:23 PM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday 13 Nov 2011 2:59:21 pm Indrajit Gupta wrote: and the way to death ends with what used to be a Charminar; there was nothing stronger, Gauloise. The worst. Ever. Obviously IG meant among the Indian-made cigarettes. Else, the strongest I've come across were the unfiltered Russian cigarettes. Much worse than Gauloise. Heck, they are worse than the beedi-on-steroids called chutta you get in Kerala. Udhay, tobacco-free for 7+ years
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
And oh, by the way, we notice that some of us most deprecatory about these seeming skills do have it in them to put it on about differences in whiskies and know all about the more lethal variants of cigarette. Hmmm. Quelle surprise! From: ss cybers...@gmail.com To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Sent: Sunday, 13 November 2011, 17:21 Subject: Re: [silk] Query on wines and snobbery On Sunday 13 Nov 2011 2:59:21 pm Indrajit Gupta wrote: and the way to death ends with what used to be a Charminar; there was nothing stronger, Gauloise. The worst. Ever. shiv
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
B. How nice never to have met a Russian cigarette. You HAVE been around quite a bit, haven't you, young-fella-me-lad? From: Udhay Shankar N lt;ud...@pobox.comgt; To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Sent: Sunday, 13 November 2011, 21:35 Subject: Re: [silk] Query on wines and snobbery On Nov 13, 2011 5:23 PM, quot;ssquot; lt;cybers...@gmail.comgt; wrote: gt; gt; On Sunday 13 Nov 2011 2:59:21 pm Indrajit Gupta wrote: gt; gt; and the way to death ends with what used to be a Charminar; there was gt; gt; nothing stronger, gt; gt; gt; gt; Gauloise. The worst. Ever. Obviously IG meant among the Indian-made cigarettes. Else, the strongest I#39;ve come across were the unfiltered Russian cigarettes. Much worse than Gauloise. Heck, they are worse than the beedi-on-steroids called quot;chuttaquot; you get in Kerala. Udhay, tobacco-free for 7+ years
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 09:46:28PM +0530, Indrajit Gupta wrote: B. How nice never to have met a Russian cigarette. Nevermind machorka, DIY from Nicotiana rustica. You HAVE been around quite a bit, haven't you, young-fella-me-lad? From: Udhay Shankar N lt;ud...@pobox.comgt; To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Sent: Sunday, 13 November 2011, 21:35 Subject: Re: [silk] Query on wines and snobbery On Nov 13, 2011 5:23 PM, quot;ssquot; lt;cybers...@gmail.comgt; wrote: gt; gt; On Sunday 13 Nov 2011 2:59:21 pm Indrajit Gupta wrote: gt; gt; and the way to death ends with what used to be a Charminar; there was gt; gt; nothing stronger, gt; gt; gt; gt; Gauloise. The worst. Ever. Obviously IG meant among the Indian-made cigarettes. Else, the strongest I#39;ve come across were the unfiltered Russian cigarettes. Much worse than Gauloise. Heck, they are worse than the beedi-on-steroids called quot;chuttaquot; you get in Kerala. Udhay, tobacco-free for 7+ years -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a http://leitl.org __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 09:46:28PM +0530, Indrajit Gupta wrote: B. How nice never to have met a Russian cigarette. Nevermind machorka, DIY from Nicotiana rustica. DIY meaning self-cured, or self-rolled? CL
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
Hear, hear! Excellent exposition. I entirely concur. J.A.P. On 10 November 2011 14:17, Deepa Mohan mohande...@gmail.com wrote: -- Forwarded message -- From: Venkat Mangudi s...@venkatmangudi.com Date: Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 1:57 PM Subject: Re: [silk] Query on Indian-made wines To: silklist@lists.hserus.net ** My previous mail does not imply Charles is a wine snob. :) sorry, Charles. Just that wines have matured in India. Well, Charles certainly qualified his statement with As of when I left a few years ago. And just because some of us don't like some (or all) Indian wines, doesn't mean that others can't like them. I don't see anything wrong with liking the cheapest and most plonky wine in the supermarket...as long as one is quite confident about it. It's only when there is a need to be right instead of standing by one's likes and dislikes, that the snobbery element creeps in. If only we could phrase XYZ is hopeless to drink/eat/watch/experience as I don't personally like XYZ...but I also think it's implied in the statement that it is one's opinion. Alas, it is easier to don the mantle of superior knowledge and experience by being dismissive of something ( anything, not just wine)..I find that often people mistake self-confident snobbery for actual knowledge. Being dismissive or damning with faint praise is also more witty. How do I feel if something I like (er, for example, rhododendron juice, which I saw advertised in the Garhwal region) and someone else dismisses it? I have several optionsignore the opinion, and stick to my choice; protest against the opinion, and stick up for my choice; or quietly change my preferences. The third option makes me a snob, as much as the person who says that what s/he doesn't like is actually not good. -- J. Alfred Prufrock Gliding wrapt in a brown mantle, hooded I do not know whether a man or a woman - But who is that on the other side of you?
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 2:17:14 pm Deepa Mohan wrote: I don't see anything wrong with liking the cheapest and most plonky wine in the supermarket. Deepa wine appreciation is pure snobbery nothing else. You might have read about the expert wine tasters who detected hint of rose etc when they were given white wine colored pink by a tasteless artificial coloring agent. (link and quote below) I am certain some wines must be better than others, just like I would say that Talisker or Laphroaig are the best whiskies in my view. But In India I drink 100 Pipers. Failing that arrack will do. For all the bullshitting about wine I belong to a social class that looks at price of wine first and then decides about taste. It is always safe to say cheap wine is lousy. Cheap is lousy is a standard wannabe cliche and the stuff that salespeople's dreams are made of. Expensive wine, which no one actually drinks - or drinks very little of, must be good. No one in his right senses will pay the equivalent of US$ 5000 for a bottle of wine and say Yuck! Vinegar! Here you go: http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2007/11/the_subjectivity_of_wine.php Makes a great read. The red dye story is there as well. The second test Brochet conducted was even more damning. He took a middling Bordeaux and served it in two different bottles. One bottle was a fancy grand-cru. The other bottle was an ordinary vin du table. Despite the fact that they were actually being served the exact same wine, the experts gave the differently labeled bottles nearly opposite ratings. The grand cru was agreeable, woody, complex, balanced and rounded, while the vin du table was weak, short, light, flat and faulty. Forty experts said the wine with the fancy label was worth drinking, while only 12 said the cheap wine was. LOL! What a bunch of frauds. As usual the addition of the word Indian to wine will make our usual bunch of snobs crinkle their nosikinses in dellicate disgust before opening the bottle and tasting. Bunch of frauds is an understatement. shiv
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 3:54 PM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: The second test Brochet conducted was even more damning. He took a middling Bordeaux and served it in two different bottles. One bottle was a fancy grand-cru. The other bottle was an ordinary vin du table. Despite the fact that they were actually being served the exact same wine, the experts gave the differently labeled bottles nearly opposite ratings. The grand cru was agreeable, woody, complex, balanced and rounded, while the vin du table was weak, short, light, flat and faulty. Forty experts said the wine with the fancy label was worth drinking, while only 12 said the cheap wine was. The origins of Pleasure - A good talk by Paul Bloom at TED on a similar topic. http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_bloom_the_origins_of_pleasure.html -- Vinayak
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
I agree that it is snobbish to say that cheap wine is bad . Case is point Sula Mosaic and Sante from Grovers. Rs 400 a bottle, eminently drinkable. There is a port from Sula called 'port 1000'. Rs 137 a bottle. Great after an hour of drinking. :) not bad relly, especially compared to one from Heritage for the same price. Been a nice wine journey in India for the last 5 years. -Venkat -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
Wine tasting is fun. But inaccurate unles ypou're spitting it out. After a flight, you can drink anything and say cool stuff like oak, plum, woody, tannins, legs etc and nobody will disagree. :) -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. Aanjhan Ranganathan aanj...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:24 AM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 2:17:14 pm Deepa Mohan wrote: I don't see anything wrong with liking the cheapest and most plonky wine in the supermarket. Deepa wine appreciation is pure snobbery nothing else. You might have read about the expert wine tasters who detected hint of rose etc when they were given white wine colored pink by a tasteless artificial coloring agent. (link and quote below) We (some 12 of us) in Zurich, had a blind wine tasting party. Each of us got a wine bottle (either expensive or cheap). The host wrapped the bottles in aluminium foil and numbered them. Everybody then tasted the wine and started classifying the wines. It was fun (of-course at the end of it ). Nobody got more than 70% right. And guess who scored 70%? ;-) The worst score was by a German girl (Can't blame her. There was no beer). So yes, some wines do taste yuck. But it is always personal preference and wine connoisseurs are a bit of snobs. This XKCD post comes to my mind http://xkcd.com/915/ My 2 cents. -- A
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:24 PM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 2:17:14 pm Deepa Mohan wrote: I don't see anything wrong with liking the cheapest and most plonky wine in the supermarket. Deepa wine appreciation is pure snobbery nothing else. Certainly there are wine drinkers who are purely snobs and nothing else, but I assure you that I learned to taste wines in a rather stricter, more structured way. A friend of mine used to conduct semi-weekly wine tastings, usually 5-6 bottles either of a single varietal from a single producer over multiple years (a vertical tasting) or 5-6 bottles of a single varietal from multiple producers in the same region in a single year (a horizontal tasting). Both vertical tastings and horizontal tastings usually had one or two ringers - wines that were either from a different producer (in the case of a vertical) or from a different grape, region, or year in the case of a horizontal. The wines were put in opaque bags by one person, and given random letter labels by a different person. We then poured a measured portion of each wine into our separate lettered glasses. The tasting itself was relatively structured, each person evaluating each wine indepenently of everyone else, writing down observations about color, aroma and taste along multiple dimensions and at different times. Each person then rated the wines by letter, and the ratings were collected. The scores were aggregated and the wines were then revealed from lowest to highest. From this, over time, we learned how to identify grape varietals, producers, styles, various kinds of defects, and how to distinguish and describe different wines. Because the tastings were double blind, we were not influenced by brand or price. It was in the course of years of these kinds of tastings that I determined my own preferences in wine style and varietals (I tend to prefer reds in a traditional burgundian style - usually pure pinot noir - and I dislike big extracted wines, or whites with a lot of oak for example.) I am a big fan of traditional champagnes, and at one point I could tell if a champagne from a producer I was unfamiliar with was from Marne, Reims, or Cote de Blancs, blind. We also did what's called a components tasting, where we would start with 5-6 identical bottles and add specific components (like tannin, oak, malic acid, lactic acid, sweetness, and ketones) would be added in small amounts to the wine to let us learn what those flavors were like in wines. Anyway, I'm just trying to say that no actually, real wine appreciation is a learned skill that can be used for snobbery or not as suits the inclination of the individual. I find that it enhances my enjoyment of wine to have a discerning palate, but it also means I do not get as much enjoyment out of boxed wine as I did when I was younger. I'm willing to make that sacrifice. -- Charles
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Aanjhan Ranganathan aanj...@gmail.com wrote: http://xkcd.com/915/ Ironically, I spent some time yesterday hunting for deals on Lapsang souchong and Pu'erh. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j25dBuXl907jffar2s64Bb_RYGhQ?docId=CNG.7d2b4a98d964b2797a1705c20a3e7c04.541 While in college my friends and I were more likely to be found in one of a dozen tea bars (I believe that term is still valid in Madras, yes?) than in class. These small nooks tucked away in the armpits of the city and unsavory elsewheres pinned their survival on unwelcome teenagers who slouched their rides lazily to drag on a cigarette and a shared glass of tea. The tea stood out from dish water only in temperature, but it bonded us in socialist camaraderie and disease for a mere two rupees. The conversation flowed freely as it only can when the worries of the world weigh heavily on young shoulders. I haven't had any beverage alcoholic or otherwise produce the same quality of conversation since. Cheeni
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
Actually the evidence is on Charles' side. Practiced wine-tasters can identify many different characteristics of wine with high statistical significance. This is not to say it isn't a major outlet for snobbery. -T On Nov 10, 2011 4:36 AM, Charles Haynes charles.hay...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:24 PM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 2:17:14 pm Deepa Mohan wrote: I don't see anything wrong with liking the cheapest and most plonky wine in the supermarket. Deepa wine appreciation is pure snobbery nothing else. Certainly there are wine drinkers who are purely snobs and nothing else, but I assure you that I learned to taste wines in a rather stricter, more structured way. A friend of mine used to conduct semi-weekly wine tastings, usually 5-6 bottles either of a single varietal from a single producer over multiple years (a vertical tasting) or 5-6 bottles of a single varietal from multiple producers in the same region in a single year (a horizontal tasting). Both vertical tastings and horizontal tastings usually had one or two ringers - wines that were either from a different producer (in the case of a vertical) or from a different grape, region, or year in the case of a horizontal. The wines were put in opaque bags by one person, and given random letter labels by a different person. We then poured a measured portion of each wine into our separate lettered glasses. The tasting itself was relatively structured, each person evaluating each wine indepenently of everyone else, writing down observations about color, aroma and taste along multiple dimensions and at different times. Each person then rated the wines by letter, and the ratings were collected. The scores were aggregated and the wines were then revealed from lowest to highest. From this, over time, we learned how to identify grape varietals, producers, styles, various kinds of defects, and how to distinguish and describe different wines. Because the tastings were double blind, we were not influenced by brand or price. It was in the course of years of these kinds of tastings that I determined my own preferences in wine style and varietals (I tend to prefer reds in a traditional burgundian style - usually pure pinot noir - and I dislike big extracted wines, or whites with a lot of oak for example.) I am a big fan of traditional champagnes, and at one point I could tell if a champagne from a producer I was unfamiliar with was from Marne, Reims, or Cote de Blancs, blind. We also did what's called a components tasting, where we would start with 5-6 identical bottles and add specific components (like tannin, oak, malic acid, lactic acid, sweetness, and ketones) would be added in small amounts to the wine to let us learn what those flavors were like in wines. Anyway, I'm just trying to say that no actually, real wine appreciation is a learned skill that can be used for snobbery or not as suits the inclination of the individual. I find that it enhances my enjoyment of wine to have a discerning palate, but it also means I do not get as much enjoyment out of boxed wine as I did when I was younger. I'm willing to make that sacrifice. -- Charles
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
I thought all whisky tasted the same till I went for a distillery tasting recently. Where I was taught, a little, by a wonderfully down to earth master distiller on tasting whiskies and generally drinking them with a little insight. He said rather than worrying about whether I got the same honey notes as he did, I should focus on figuring out notes I liked and then trying lots of different whiskies till I found what pleased me the most. Now I really do enjoy whiskies better. Oddly, maybe, the insights he gave me help me identify bad whiskies more than it does good. It turns out I like smokey malts. Cheers. On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Tim Bray tb...@textuality.com wrote: Actually the evidence is on Charles' side. Practiced wine-tasters can identify many different characteristics of wine with high statistical significance. This is not to say it isn't a major outlet for snobbery. -T On Nov 10, 2011 4:36 AM, Charles Haynes charles.hay...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:24 PM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 2:17:14 pm Deepa Mohan wrote: I don't see anything wrong with liking the cheapest and most plonky wine in the supermarket. Deepa wine appreciation is pure snobbery nothing else. Certainly there are wine drinkers who are purely snobs and nothing else, but I assure you that I learned to taste wines in a rather stricter, more structured way. A friend of mine used to conduct semi-weekly wine tastings, usually 5-6 bottles either of a single varietal from a single producer over multiple years (a vertical tasting) or 5-6 bottles of a single varietal from multiple producers in the same region in a single year (a horizontal tasting). Both vertical tastings and horizontal tastings usually had one or two ringers - wines that were either from a different producer (in the case of a vertical) or from a different grape, region, or year in the case of a horizontal. The wines were put in opaque bags by one person, and given random letter labels by a different person. We then poured a measured portion of each wine into our separate lettered glasses. The tasting itself was relatively structured, each person evaluating each wine indepenently of everyone else, writing down observations about color, aroma and taste along multiple dimensions and at different times. Each person then rated the wines by letter, and the ratings were collected. The scores were aggregated and the wines were then revealed from lowest to highest. From this, over time, we learned how to identify grape varietals, producers, styles, various kinds of defects, and how to distinguish and describe different wines. Because the tastings were double blind, we were not influenced by brand or price. It was in the course of years of these kinds of tastings that I determined my own preferences in wine style and varietals (I tend to prefer reds in a traditional burgundian style - usually pure pinot noir - and I dislike big extracted wines, or whites with a lot of oak for example.) I am a big fan of traditional champagnes, and at one point I could tell if a champagne from a producer I was unfamiliar with was from Marne, Reims, or Cote de Blancs, blind. We also did what's called a components tasting, where we would start with 5-6 identical bottles and add specific components (like tannin, oak, malic acid, lactic acid, sweetness, and ketones) would be added in small amounts to the wine to let us learn what those flavors were like in wines. Anyway, I'm just trying to say that no actually, real wine appreciation is a learned skill that can be used for snobbery or not as suits the inclination of the individual. I find that it enhances my enjoyment of wine to have a discerning palate, but it also means I do not get as much enjoyment out of boxed wine as I did when I was younger. I'm willing to make that sacrifice. -- Charles
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:46:40AM +0100, Aanjhan Ranganathan wrote: We (some 12 of us) in Zurich, had a blind wine tasting party. Each of us got a wine bottle (either expensive or cheap). The host wrapped the bottles in aluminium foil and numbered them. Everybody then tasted the wine and started classifying the wines. It was fun (of-course at the end of it ). Nobody got more than 70% right. And guess who scored 70%? ;-) You should try this with a 100% tannat grape and lesser wines. Sure, some are more organoleptically challenged than others, but I'd assume the recognition rate would nearly quantitative in this case. The worst score was by a German girl (Can't blame her. There was no beer). So yes, some wines do taste yuck. But it is always personal Beers have huge differences as well. Consider this thread: http://beeradvocate.com/forum/read/3949153 preference and wine connoisseurs are a bit of snobs. This XKCD post comes to my mind http://xkcd.com/915/ -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a http://leitl.org __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery (Charles Haynes)
In the second, the wines were exactly the same, but different music was played during the tastings, and the human tasters gave the same wines different notes. Ambiance matters; better a poor wine in good company... -Dave I agree. Lots of people hold a glass of wine for the image it conjures: romance, good food, pretty location, etc. I am doing an experiment in which I check the amount of wine glasses in a romantic scene in a Hollywood movie. So far, I have not found a single scene that even borders on love/romanticism/fun/get the girl situation in which wine glasses are not present. I enjoy wine. I find that the more expensive ones are flatter. Wine writers use the phrase, well-rounded for this.
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery (Charles Haynes)
On 10-Nov-11 9:13 PM, Shoba Narayan wrote: I enjoy wine. I find that the more expensive ones are flatter. Wine writers use the phrase, well-rounded for this. While on the topic of wine/food writers: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/silk-list/message/8375 Udhay -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 03:24:19PM +, Sidin Vadukut wrote: It turns out I like smokey malts. Cheers. Laphroaig, Lagavulin, Ardbeg?
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Charles Haynes charles.hay...@gmail.comwrote: we were not influenced by brand or price. It was in the course of years of these kinds of tastings that I determined my own preferences in wine style and varietals Time and experimentation - that's the crux of the matter, isn't it? And that means it takes a lot of money, particularly in India, merely to realize (good) wine does not have a bitter-ish taste like some other unmixed drinks, such as beer ;-) Cultivating one's own taste after 'tasting the world', I would wager, is easily beyond the means of most IT professional types and like classes.
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
It is so not true that distinctions don't exist, and that they can't be spotted. Some generalisations: 1. Most of us don't drink enough wine, and certainly not enough variety of wine on a regular basis, sufficient to allow us to develop our palates; 2. Most of us should be able to figure out the difference between No. 1 in a blind test and No. 10, even if we can't make out any real difference between #6, #7 and #8; 3. Indian wines are improving, but certainly nowhere near the quality of a standard Chardonnay or a Pinot Noir out of any standard Tesco outlet, forget about the vintage and crus and grand crus; 4. Finding a wine style - either varietal or more subtle - to suit one's tastes is not particularly difficult. Finding a fortified wine of choice is even easier. It doesn't take a hugely sophisticated palate to conclude that either a Chardonnay or a Riesling is one's tipple, rather than the other whites (I bet nobody other than Charles has had any of the big Sauternes, so why bring them in?), or choose between Pinot Noir and the mix of grapes that go into Claret. The point being that some of what is being called wine snobbery here is probably due to having developed a taste in a kind of wine, and being unable to find the equivalent among Indian wines. Frankly, I think we are hugely overdoing the wine snobbery bit; if we can distinguish between cigarette brands and their smokes, or between different brands of blended whiskey, what is the big deal in being able to distinguish between different types of wine? And Indian wine has improved tremendously but .. From: ss lt;cybers...@gmail.comgt; To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Sent: Thursday, 10 November 2011, 17:25 Subject: Re: [silk] Query on wines and snobbery On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 5:03:59 pm Charles Haynes wrote: gt; Anyway, I#39;m just trying to say that no actually, real wine gt; appreciation is a learned skill that can be used for snobbery or not gt; as suits the inclination of the individual. gt; Charles - I am sure you are right. But there are some things in life that are used by a lot of people to put on airs that they feel will show them as being among a hallowed group. Wine appreciation is one such thing. Golf is another. I know only one wine connoisseur with a golf handicap of less than 10. In fact you will know him too. His name#39;s Bond. James Bond. shiv
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:15 AM, Sriram ET. karra@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Charles Haynes charles.hay...@gmail.com wrote: we were not influenced by brand or price. It was in the course of years of these kinds of tastings that I determined my own preferences in wine style and varietals Time and experimentation - that's the crux of the matter, isn't it? And that means it takes a lot of money, particularly in India, merely to realize (good) wine does not have a bitter-ish taste like some other unmixed drinks, such as beer ;-) Cultivating one's own taste after 'tasting the world', I would wager, is easily beyond the means of most IT professional types and like classes. That is one of the beauties of these tastings, it's like a cooperative. The group of tasters splits the costs of the wines, which means that you get to taste excellent wines at a reasonable cost. However I agree that the economics of such a thing would be very different in India, where 1) imported wines are much more expensive and 2) IT salaries are relatively lower. Even so, it would be possible to arrange something similar if one were so inclined. I've appended an announcement from earlier this week for your entertainment. Remeber this is a tasting arranged as a hobby by a friend who's passionate about wine. These tastings are better than any professional tasting I've ever been to - I was very lucky to have them available to me. I've included this announcement because if I were still in the Bay Area, this is one I would have attended - I'm a fan of Cote du Rhones. The prices are in USD, but note that there are good Cote du Rhones available in the US for less than the price Sula sells for in India. Indian protectionist duties and taxes on alcohol are robbing you of the opportunity to enjoy some of the world's great wines and allowing domestic producers to sell plonk. -- Charles Cote du Rhones The designation of origin Cote du Rhone extends back to 1737 when the then king of France decreed that wines from the right bank of the Rhone River (the eastern slopes which will get the afternoon sun shining down from the west) as Cote du Rhone, with barrels branded with CDR. The Appellation d'Origine Controllee (AOC) system used across France to manage and control a high level of quality for wines of different regions was later loosely based upon this decree. The Cote du Rhone AOC is one of the largest in France, running from the northern tip of the Rhone region near Cote Rotie through the southern regions surrounding Marseilles. Although any wine in this region can be called Cote du Rhone, the appellation is primarily used areas not covered by Hermitage, Cote Rotie, Chateauneuf du Pape, Gigondas, St. Joseph and other more well known AOCs. Although there are white, rose and red Cote du Rhones, the majority of wines are red. For these, the accepted varietals mirror those grown in the region: Grenache, Syrah, Mourvedre, Cinsault, Carignane, and Counoise, with more Syrah-only Cote du Rhones from the north and more Chateauneuf-like blends from the south. The area is enormous, spanning almost 200,000 acres and producing 400-500 million bottles a year. Much of this is ordinary wine, meant to be drunk out of carafes in local restaurants. However, the minority of Cote du Rhone designated for export is of significantly higher quality. In the past decade or so, the quality of the exported Cote du Rhone has steadily increased, partially because more money and knowledge has flowed into the Rhone wineries, and perhaps partially because of global warming, which allowing the domaines to make rich, concentrated wines almost every year. Because of the volume, the price of Cote du Rhones have remained quite inexpensive, ranging from about $8 through $30, and good examples can be remarkable values. Most of these wines are meant to be drunk in their first 3-4 years, but I've found that cellaring them for up to 10 years can sometimes produce a lovely, complex wine that can have a passing resemblance to an older Chateauneuf or Hermitage. Tonight, we'll have a couple flights of Cotes du Rhone, the first a flight of 5 to 8 year old examples and the second flight including examples from 2007 and 2009, both outstanding years in the regiion. In each flight, we'll have a Chateauneuf du Pape ringer for comparison, and in the second flight, I will also sneak in a California Rhone ringer. Here are the lineups and some tasting notes: FLIGHT 1 2003 Perrin et Fils Vinsobres - Les Hauts de Julien, Cotes du Rhone Villages (14%): The 2003 Perrin Cotes du Rhone-Villages Vinsobres Vieilles Vignes Les Hauts de Julien is a real winner. A fruit bomb as wines go, this dense purple-colored wine shows wonderfully sweet black raspberry and cassis notes intermixed with crushed rock, kirsch, and spice. The wine has a fabulous attack, medium to full-bodied palate, terrific ripe fruit, and noticeable but sweet tannin. This wine should
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
Yes please! On Nov 10, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 03:24:19PM +, Sidin Vadukut wrote: It turns out I like smokey malts. Cheers. Laphroaig, Lagavulin, Ardbeg?
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 11:14:46 pm Indrajit Gupta wrote: Frankly, I think we are hugely overdoing the wine snobbery bit; if we can distinguish between cigarette brands and their smokes, or between different brands of blended whiskey, what is the big deal in being able to distinguish between different types of wine? :D Objection, your honour. If you sit in a dining room and say you can tell the difference between Charminar and Benson Hedges, most people would give you credit for being gifted like a circus clown. But if you pronounce funny sounding French names and say you can close your eyes and say what tastes good and what does not, (a skill that is avaialble to all children after the age of 6 months) people act as if you are a king. It is completely artificial. Completely fraudulent. And a huge laugh. I would not give it teh aura it is being given. shiv
Re: [silk] Query on wines.... and snobbery
That does explain why people tend to only smoke wills, or gold flake kings or ... and a wills smoker wouldn't dream of smoking gold flake. There's a paanwallah I used to know in hyd who had an uncanny knack of spotting people new to his shop as wills, goldflake, charminar etc smokers. I guess wine is a more complex tasting product than tobacco (and outside cheap and mass produced brands, you have quite a lot of people grading expensive tobacco on virginian or turkish, how dark its roasted etc) --Original Message-- From: ss Sender: silklist-bounces+suresh=hserus@lists.hserus.net To: silklist@lists.hserus.net ReplyTo: silklist@lists.hserus.net Subject: Re: [silk] Query on wines and snobbery Sent: Nov 11, 2011 06:41 On Thursday 10 Nov 2011 11:14:46 pm Indrajit Gupta wrote: Frankly, I think we are hugely overdoing the wine snobbery bit; if we can distinguish between cigarette brands and their smokes, or between different brands of blended whiskey, what is the big deal in being able to distinguish between different types of wine? :D Objection, your honour. If you sit in a dining room and say you can tell the difference between Charminar and Benson Hedges, most people would give you credit for being gifted like a circus clown. But if you pronounce funny sounding French names and say you can close your eyes and say what tastes good and what does not, (a skill that is avaialble to all children after the age of 6 months) people act as if you are a king. It is completely artificial. Completely fraudulent. And a huge laugh. I would not give it teh aura it is being given. shiv -- srs (blackberry)
