Quote:
Originally Posted by Baddad
Articles such as the one Geoff W has produced interest me. 
I say again the point I made earlier. That is that unless you have a "clean palate" and have some experience it is difficult to judge a wine.
Having experience I take that article to be somewhat insulting. Interesting but not good. Nothing untoward you Geoff.
Wine makers no longer produce bad wines. They are all quite drinkable.
To further prove that most people can taste the difference between a bad and good wine. Here is a small exercise you can do. It will show you what a bad wine tastes like. Don't get me wrong. The wine is still drinkable but....
Buy any two bottles of wine. Both bottles need to be the same. 
Open only one bottle. Drink half. Recap the bottle and leave it for a week.
If you prefer chilled wine place both the unopened and opened bottles to chill a while.
Taste both and compare. Now you know what oxidation does to wine.
That is what was hard to avoid in the early days. From there you can progress further. Some early wines were so badly oxidized it made them almost undrinkable. 
Cheers  Oh! Pat, Well said... er written. |
further marty and other members I was going to mention this in my ramblings to, but the first and the last glasses out of the same opened wine will never taste the same either!
I think the original article is just sour grapes and pun intended!
im afraid on the whole Australian winemakers are not interested too much on "subtleties" in their wine, with their 15% alcohol fatarses a punch in the face is more what they are like, but this is exactly what they say the consumers demand...... very obvious, high alcohol, unsubtle and to me undrinkable anyhow
looking back at some old penfolds wines from the 80's and early 90's and some wynnes red vintages virtually none of them were near 13%, now some of them are approaching 16%! they will have to change the style on the label to "port" with another 0.5% more ha ha!
not attributable to global warming as just bad winemaking!
pat
So true Baz.
