CtznCane

There is no doubt that Germany, all in all, does perhaps the most stellar job across the board with sweet wines. Wines that are wonderful for desert and stand up to food as well. French Sauternes too can be exquisite though you can find many French Sauternes that aren't worth the time of day. Unfortunately to this point I've not had any Austrailian desert wines so I can't speak of those. When it comes to Ports how can one not like ones from Oporto? As to domestic sweet wines? They'll stack up with the best of them, though with being able to find so many there certainly will be some, or even a fair number that don't measure up. To imply that "most' domestics don't measure up I think is a rather shallow statement at best. Without getting into Ports, I've found plenty of top notch California sweet wines. On a higher end Grgich Hills Violeta which is 60% Chard-40% Reisling is excellent. While I think this is a good example of a fine LH wine I think there are some good values to be found. Personally I also enjoy pairing sweet wines with savory dishes and incorporating the wines in the dishes. While I thinkit is out of stock at this time, Rosenblum had a Muscat de Glacier (not a late harvest) that was absolutely unctuous. I've used this wine when cooking thin slices of chicken scaloppini with slices of orange and fishing the sauce off with heavy cream. Price and quality wise, for the combo, Concannon's 98 Late Harvest Johannisberg Riesling ($18 per half bottle) is excellent. For an appetizer I like to parboil Lobster tails. Then halve them lengthwise. Melt butter with a touch of almond oil (or no almond oil if not handy) and saute the tails lightly, add the L.H. Riesling and continue until the desired doneness is reached (it won't take long). Remove and set aside the Lobster, add heavy cream and reduce the sauce to a desired consitency. Sauce the plates, add the lobster, drizzle a little more sauce on them and garnish with slivered almonds. I serve this as a first course along with glasses of the L.H. Riesling. Both Rosenblum and Concannon also have L.H. Viogniers as well that are nice and moderately priced. It's too bad Rieussec isn't made over here or we could probably get it at Trader Joes for under $10 a bottle.

There certainly does seem to be a phobia about sweet wines. While Red's are my main choice, I'll sell them down the river any time for a fine desert wine. Even when it comes to whites I prefer the sweet ones. I'll take a nice Muscat Canelli (I very much enjoy Concannon's ) over a Chardonnay on most occasions. It just does seem so odd that people don't give them a chance. As to the term Dry? I've always hated that term myself. Anyhow, off topic what exactly is its definition?

Andrea, thanks for sharing your time. As one who is not familiar with Itialian wines but who likes hearty Red wines, what would your recommendations be? What are the dominant grape types used in Piedmont's wines and their characteristics?

I'm wondering what everyone thinks about wine clubs. What's in it for the consumer and what's in it for the winery? What should the criteria be for joining one? I especially hope we'll hear from Winery people how they view the consumer and wine club. We belong to several wine clubs. Probably too many. Since we have lived in the wine country and now live close to it we also like to support wineries we like as well. Most of the wine clubs are shipments of 2-3 bottles (lowest membership level at some most wineries) 3 to 4 times a year. I think this works out pretty well. The main problem or gripe that I have is that most of the wineries (perhaps luck of the draw) seem to come in the same months. Usually the committment is for a minimum of 1 year and then you get different perks in the form of discounts on wine, merchandise and on events. Aside from $ savings I also like the ability to get more wines which may not be available elsewhere or outside of the wine club. For those of us lucky enough to live near or within a few hours of the wineries the events are really nice. I know next week Concannon is having their food and wine pairing for club members which we enjoy. Since there is typically no choice about what wines you will receive a major guideline for us is pretty much liking a wineries wines across the board. Now for a small winery, like say Raymond Burr who only makes 3 wines, it is pretty easy to iknow if you like or don't like all the wines. For one like Concannon Vineyards or Chateau St.Jean on the other hand, who produce many different wines it is a little harder to make the blanket statement of 'all.' Another of our strategies, with some clubs is to join for a year and then switch to another winery. This way we keep our costs to what we feel is reasonable and get to try other wineries. Our last criteria for a wine club is not being in one where the wines we receive can be bought for less in the stores. While there is no avoiding some of the wines being able to be found it is getting wines that are only available at the winery to some extent that also makes a difference to us. That being said I'll give a few of the ones we like and why. Concannon Vineyards - In terms of shipments theirs are 6 bottles twice a year. This year both shipments have been $99 but the retail value has been$135-140 so the savings have been quite good. With 15% discounts, or 20% on cases and wines we like which we cannot find retail this club is a real value. They currently have an extremely nice Muscat Canelli that retails at 12 dollars and their Late Harves J. Reisling is one of my favorites. They've also held some special sales that members get first crack at that are first rate. Schramsberg - Shipments are 4 times a year and 2 bottles each. Whle not cheap, they do keep their shipments at a flat $85 + tax and include the shipping. Based on the wines we've received the value usually equates to about 20% off and free shipping. We're lucky enough to be able to drive there and the free tastings (they normally charge $20 and (it is worth it) that adds up over time. Gloria Ferrer - Shipments are 2 bottles 4 times a year and they keep the cost in the low to mid 50 range. Their combo is typically one sparkling and one still wine. Their Pinot Noirs are top notch and we thinkg their sparkling wines all represent good values. At the winery (tasting salon) we have found them to be among the friendliest people and they go out of their way. They also have put on some top notch events for wine club members.

A couple of things. First is where can I find Cellar Tracker? I think your notes of when the Concannon wines were on sale is old. With new ownership, both this year and last they had some sales that were unreal. 24-60 a case depending on the wine. In '03, there first day they had a 3 hour line of cars outside the winery. I too enjoyed their petite sirah and wish I'd gotten more. The Sauvignon Blanc I stocked up on both for a pleasant summer wine and also to have on hand for poaching Salmon. I haven't tried Tedeschi's red wine, but BevMo carries their pineapple sparkling wine which is really quite pleasant. I forget the name of the large wine shop in Calistoga but they carry all of the Tedeschi wines and I believe I may have seen the white at Cost Plus also.

I think Parker is pretty dead on with his observations. Of course living in CoCo (Contra Costa) County which is the northern edge of the Central Coast region I am most interested in that remark. The Central Coast boom is not limited to the Paso and Santa Barbara areas. The Livermore Valley is booming as well. Regardless of which part of the Central Coast there are certainly some nice wines to be found. Are the Central Coast wines superior in quality to the Napa and Sonoma county wines? I don't think so. Certainly they are reaching at least somewhat of a par with Napa & Sonoma but certainly not greater. The separation they have is that for the most part the Central Coast wines are more approachable price wise which gets towards the value issue. Too many (imho) Napa Valley wines are overpriced. Hoisted on their own pitard they've jacked their prices to an elite level. While I wouldn't go so far as to say some of them are not worth the price, in general I'd say may of the higher end (for here let's call that the $40+ wines) have at least 20%+ blue sky tacked on. Even taking into consideration the higher land costs (but heck, they knew that going in) it doesn't add up. The part about the upper echelon wines still increasing is also true. This is not unusual with many products. The top ones will always be able to command more, go up in price, and still easily obtain it. I'd guess that the two types of wine which will be hit hardest in terms of sales are the inexpensive wines that are just a tad too high to really be inexpensive and the premium wines that try to price themselves as an ultra premium.

Guess you can't get it by the glass, only by the cup.

This is an interesting note I'd not been aware of. I guess I'm lucky (or perhaps not) in that I can tolerate some sulfites. The wines that I've particularly noticed them in and experienced the headache from are some of the Chilean wines. I'm sure this is sometihing different and one more thing to be aware of and perhaps ask about if visiting a winery.

Oh yeah, now that is a great idea! (the potluck that is)

What a good topic. Spaghetti and Meatballs has to be right up near the top of comfort foods. I like my meatballs primarily beef with maybe a beef pork combo. From there the onions partsley bread crumbs and whichever herbs strike my fancy. I do lightly fry mine first to get rid of some of the grease. As to the pasta? Dried spaghetti. For the sauce either just a pure tomato sauce or, to go over the top using my normal spaghetti sauce which I always keep frozen on hand that has lots of ground chuck and italian sausage. Man, I'm getting hungry now.

I am a bit confused by this issue. I understand it, yet not being a chemist and having read the Wine Spectator article there seem to be some things that don't jive. To begin with the implication is that there are trace levels of TCA in wine. IT sounds like traces of it are 'normal'. Also that it is not harmful, and at low levels is undetectable to all but a few. If this is so, there must be some acceptable (perhaps not ideal but acceptable)level for TCA. In the Case of Chateau Montelena there is a comment that the goal of the winery is to have the TCA level be under 1.4 ppt (parts per trillion). Of the 7 bottles WS tested 2 were below 1.0ppt and the others fell within the 1.1 to 1.7 ppt range which seems to be right about where Montelena wants them to be. If this is an acceptable level (I don't know, I'm just going from what I"ve read) where's the gripe from the WS side? Sounds like a witch-hunt. An issue I do think is important though would be how Montelena or others responded to complaints about corky wines. If they replace them or refund, then it is somewhat a no harm - no foul situation other than the inconvenience. Personally, I'm not spending a buck-fifty for one of their wines so it has no affect on me. Still, it sounds to me like a bad rap of sorts.

Robert Mondavi has meant a lot to the U.S., California, and Napa Valley wine community. When it comes to the heavy hitters he's up at the top, so from my viewpoint I do find it to be somewhat sad and sort of marks the beginning of the end of a very important and dynamic era in California wines. Certainly he is well beyond his prime but I remember (and I'm not that old) when, having broken away from Charles Krug, his winery was young, progressive and on the cutting edge of the fine wine market. Even though I don't think I've bought a bottle of the Robert Mondavi label wine in close to 15 years, just seeing that label in the store evokes memories and thoughts of the past and sort of keeps that era going in a way. Be it a winery, a restaurant, or whatever it might be, when they close or change hands a part of us (however little) sort of goes and changes as well. While their quality for some time now may have been diminished, when the ownership changes hands there is just a finality that we don't like to see some times. It's not that there aren't other interesting or new wineries to keep us enthralled, it is just a reminder of our own mortality as well.

I picked up some of the yellow beans myself at the local farmers market Saturday though I don't know if they are Romano. I'm in the same boat hoping to see a few different recipes for yellow beans.

I haven't tried a sparkling Shiraz yet though it sounds interesting and I hope to seek some out after seeing this thread. It sounds (from here and checking out the Seppelts link) that this wine has a bit more to it than just being a novelty. I guess I just take offense in general to bashing a product without giving it a fair chance but hell, my wife likes to have a white zin now and then out in the back yard so I even have to keep a couple of those around the house. Of course in NorCal Korbel makes a Merlot sparkler and Frank Family Vineyards makes a deep red Pinot Noir one.

Gallo's wines run the gamut from cheap to expensive. They do however make a good number of wines that will hold their own against any competition. Yes, they do have low end wines but even there, for their price point they are usually decent compared to the competition at the different price levels. Gallo has been fighting for years to outgrow that 'screw top' - 'jug wine' image that people have of them. Even then though, for their price range, they didn't succeed by being bad.

My Mom being from the South we had hominy a lot as a kid, just plain, loved it. One dish I like is a Hominy with Tomatoes au Gratin (from a cook book "The Lewis & Clark Cookbook" by Leslie Mansfield. 3 cups hominy, drained, 2 cups chopped tomatoes 2 Tablespoons fine dry bread crumbs 1 teaspoon minced fresh sage 1 teaspoon salt 1/2 teasopon freshly ground black pepper 1 cup shredded Cheddar cheese preat to 350 dgr and in a ligyhtly oiled 9X9 baking dish: spread the hominy, then spread the tomatoes over the hominy. Sprinkle with the bread crumbs, sage, salt, & pepper, then top with the cheese and bake for 30 minutes The mexican dish Pasole is another delicious hominy dish as well.

Boy does that statement light a fire. Having worked for many years where people would ask such questions but be too -------- ignorant to either believe or understand the answer if one did bother to explain it. That aside, you are right in that it is none of the publics business what your costs or margins are. What IS important though is the publics perception. Why? Because that is what will influence their decision on whether or not to spend the money. As a restaurant, as with any other business, the idiots are going to be idiots regardless of whether your pricing is fair or not. For the people though who are potentiallly regular customers who will frequent your restaurant time and again the perception that they are getting value is important. Even though the drop in diner is important I'd think that the regular customer is the key to success for most restaurants. Most regulars, or anyone who apprecitates having that restaurant and wish to see it exist will not begrudge them a reasonable profit. It is when that profit is deemed unreasonable that both the patron and restaurant suffer. Consider the following scenario. If the wine is reasonably priced, the consumer might not only make the jump to a better wine but a wine that will better show off the food. If this is the case, that jump in price will offset or be greater (perhaps) mark-up wise to the lesser wine. If both the food and wine show better, the profit will be compenstated for and it is a win-win proposition. I know for myself, that if I feel I'm getting ripped on the wine, I'll do without. Sometimes I'll either have none or perhaps just have a cocktail before and/or after instead. Bottom line: Yes there are costs and the consumer should realize this and accept a higher price on wine and a resulting mark-up. It is simply to keep it reasonable and it is there that I think many restaurants can and do jack the wines up to an unreasonable level.

Yesterday, in a moment of political weakness, due to something mentioned in another thread here I looked to see if BevMo had any Condrieu. Unfortunately they didn't, but they did have a French wine labeled "Viognier". I found that to be both humorous and a sales ploy playing on the varietal name immitating the Americans. It did prompt me to think more about how our wines over here (in California and the states in general)are labeled primarily with Varietal names along with the region they are from as opposed to French wines that we recognize by the producer/Chateau along with their point of origin. The biggest problem as to name recognition I think is that over here wineries produce such a vast number of different wines. Taking a look at a moderate sized winery and a smaller one over here, I looked at Rosenblum for what I'd consider to be a moderate sized one and in Zinfandels alone from different locales and vineyards there were no less than 14 different Zins! That isn't taking into consideration any of their other reds or whites or dessert wines. For a small winery I looked at Dover Canyon and they list 8 different wines. On the high end French side I looked at Chateau Lafite Rothschild and Chateau Cheval Blanc. Both of these wineries are known for a single wine, yet both produce one lower tiered wine as well, Carruades de Lafite & Petit Cheval. Lafite also produces a generic Pauiillac as well. While California wines are becoming more precisely defined through the growing number of recognized appelations and the policy of many high end producers to use vineyard designates as well there are not many wineries who have a known or recognized signature wine. The most easily recognized one over here would be Opus One. They are the only one I can think of that clearly stands out. When one thinks about Ridge Vineyards the thought is typically about Zinfandels yet their signature wine Monte Bello is primarily a Cabernet Sauvignon Bordeaux styled blend. Those who are more wine savvy will recognize this signature wine but those not knowledgable would not know the difference between this Ridge wine and other Ridge wines. The general public that drinks very little wine probably recognizes BV (Beaulieu Vineyards) wines. Yet what is the perception of BV wine nowadays? Top end producer or more of a mass producer? I think of them as a mass producer now, yet mention Georges de Latour and quality along with recognition comes to mind. In this regard BV has kept their signature wine. I'd go so far as to say I think each winery should have a signature wine that goes by a name as opposed to a varietal even if the percentage is high enough to label it by its varietal name. While California has risen to at least a parity at the top of the wine world, in terms of individual recognition and a signature or making a strong statment they seem to be light years behind.

For the food, view and ambience Auberge du Soleil is close and a wonderful place to go.

Any recomendations on reasonably priced Condrieu's one might find over here? I'd be interested in picking up a bottle or 2 and then comparing them to some California Viognier's I find appealing. Other than Rieslings (especially late harvest) I've mainly been a red wine drinker. In recent years, as my SO prefers whites, I've expanded my interest and taste in the whites. While I like and can easily enjoy Chardonnay and Sauv Blancs they have never been what has floated my boat. Rousanne and Marsanne however, which I've only had over the past couple of years, is quite a different story. I find both of these wines far more attractive to my tastes than Chardonnay or Sauv Blanc. I also prefer Viognier as well over the more traditional California whites.

While political boycotting may have some effect on France's lower end bordeaux market sagging, perhaps it is not the quality of the Australian imports or California wines so much as the perceived value and quality per dollar spent. The upper tiered Bordeaux's are insanely over-priced. Yes people will buy it if money is no object and probably a good deal of those will not really be wine lovers. The overly inflated prices on the top-end probably has a great deal to do with the perception that an affordable generic Bordeaux is just trash. That part of it is a shame as just because it is a generic Bordeaux does not mean it can't be good. Raising its price to imply it is better will simply put it beyond where those looking for a good value will find it to be one. Certainly a catch-22 situation for sure. I don't know of any statistics but how much, if any, of a drop in sales in the US have they had over the past years/decades? Also, what have they done to cultivate this market? What have they done to heighten the consumers awareness or to fuel their desire to purchase French wine? With more and more domestic wine to choose from, not to mention the Austrailan wine, and now (for those of us in Calfiornia) wines from other states it becomes more confusing has a clear idea of what they are looking for. I can only view this issue from a Carlifonia/East Bay perspecitve when asking myself where I"d go if I did want to find some better low end Bordeaux purchases. The only places I know of off the top where I would trust there judgement are Kermit Lynch Wine Merchants and Paul Marcus Wines. Now 20 years ago there were actually more people whom I could go to and trust to point me in the right direction. While I'm sure there are probably more wine shops I"m not aware of, this is my perception and in an area that has a lot of good resources. I can't imagine how much more limited it would be in other areas of the country. You can't go to the local Safeway or other large markets to talk to a real butcher and find a good steak anymore(Damn, California and we don't even have a Byerly's) so why should there be someone to give good guidance for lower end French Bordeaux's? I think the French's big mistake though has been in taking a holier than thou attitude about being superior to California and Australian wines rather than trying to cultivate the market based on their own merit.

Rosenblum has a very nice Rousanne which is from a Fess Parke Vineyard in Santa Barbara County. They also have a nice Marsanne from Dry Creek. Both of these are reasonably priced at $18. Turley has a fine Rousanne/Marsanne blend called "White Coat" though I think at $35 a bottle it is a bit pricey. I'm curious as to why Brad is so biased against California white wines? Did you know Murhpy-Goode's label is purple because they are Viking fans.

I too believe that if you contact someone in customer relations or corporate that you will be able to resolve the issue. Regardless of whose fault it was, the last thing an upscale (or any good) company wants is an unhappy customer. They have far more to gain by being helpful to you and correcting the problem than by alienating you. It is also true that you never know how good a company is until you see how they resolve a problem. In the long run, iff they handle the problem well. they'll probably make you happier and more of a loyal customer than had there been no problem at all.

I'm curious who knows what is currently going on with loosening up some of the shipping laws. I know people in Texas were lobbying hard to try to be able to ship their wines. What is the current status and how much and quickly are things opening up for interstate shimpments.

Guess that leads to a bit of bar hopping, eh? I know at the local BevMo here (Calir) that for their Saturday 'tastings' they charge a quarter (though don't care if you fail to pay it). Apparently they can't have free tastings and hence the nominal charge.