Robin Meredith

Mogsob, Great post. My approach to wine was influenced heavily by Rosengarten & Wesson's "Red Wine With Fish" (which I believe is out of print and kind of hard to find these days). The authors advocated a structural approach to wine evaluation, emphasizing four universally relevant components (fruit, acid, tannin, and sugar/alcohol). To me, this is the only truly rational way to approach wine evaluation and description. I can describe a wine using this framework, and any other reasonably serious taster will understand exactly what I'm talking about. Or, I can talk about flavors of lychee nuts, and my colleagues will end up doing what I did recently and buying a few from the market just to see what M. Parker is going on about when he attributes lychee nut flavors to Gewurtztraminer (he's right, but that's beside the point). Once you get beyond these basic components, our taste impressions are just too personal to have much meaning to anyone but ourselves. Of course, we have now officially hijacked this thread away from Gigondas, and I'm not sure how to get it back on track, except to say that in my experience Gigondas can be somewhat aggressively tannic in its youth, sometimes with dry, dusty tannins, but I have tasted some examples that displayed immense purity of fruit after about 10 years of bottle age (the 1988 Domaine du Cayron comes to mind). The wines are generally low in acid , with moderate to high alcohol and no residual sugar . How's that?

A different but utterly delicious idea - braise them with some aromatics, white wine, herbs, and tomatoes to create a ragu - utterly delicious with fresh pasta. Cook until falling off the bone, shred the meat, and combine it with the sauce. Marcella Hazan has a recipe for a quail ragu in one of her books ("Marcella's Italian Kitchen", I think) that makes a good blueprint for this sort of thing, and I think there's a rabbit ragu recipe in the second Union Square Cafe book that is also a good model. I've done this with guinea hen and duck in addition to quail and rabbit, and they've all been delicious.

This is an interesting question. I attended a tasting moderated by M. Parker last year, and at some point during the discussion he suggested that many of the truly legendary wines from the first half of the 20th century (e.g. 1947 Cheval Blanc) "could never be made today" because they contained volatile acidity, residual sugar, and other "flaws" that are unacceptable to modern winemakers. This is all kind of abstract to me, since I haven't been fortunate enough to taste any of those wines, but it raises all kinds of interesting questions - do these "flaws" contribute to the greatness of these wines (which is what Parker seemed to be implying, although he didn't say so directly), or would they have been even better if they were somewhat "cleaner"? I have no doubt that someone out here will be able to address this based on first-hand experience .

Wasn't someone publicly busting Madame Leroy's chops a while back for quoting outrageously low yield statistics from vineyards that contained an extraordinary number of dead plants? This sounds like unfriendly rivalry and/or urban (if that word can be applied to Burgundy) myth to me, but it does indicate yet another way in which yield statistics can be manipulated.

I am definitely in the "big fan" camp. I've tasted Musar across a number of vintages and come away with a great deal of respect for its consistency and longevity. Unfortunately, it's not the bargain it once was, and it very rarely appears on restaurant wine lists (a real shame, since it is an ideal restaurant wine in many respects). Wasn't even aware that there was a second label, so thanks for the tip - I will certainly be on the lookout for that .

OMG on those white burg prices also - Colin-Deleger Premier Cru fo $14.99!!!!!! Please do report back - fire sale burgundy really makes me nervous (I've been burned by a few that were obviously cooked in transit), but that could be worth a road trip to Paterson!

Jackal is right on target - this is almost certainly nothing to worry about. Unless you purchased all of your wines directly from the winery and carted them home yourself under carefully monitored conditions, they probably were exposed to worse conditions before you acquired them. The bigger question might be why the unit failed. As I've said before, these things are notoriously unreliable, but there are specific circumstances surrounding the installation that can lead to failure. I've been having some problems in my cellar, and I'm starting to wonder if my vapor barrier might be inadequate, and if that might be accelerating the failure of the cooling units (my room might also be a bit too big for the cooling unit, or the layout/airflow might be suboptimal). Good luck! I continue to dream of a passive cellar where I don't have to mess with these things...

I haven't had many opportunities to explore Vin Santo in the last several years, so my knowledge is largely outdated. It does seem like a handful of producers are following Avignonesi's lead and trying to elevate the category a bit (or maybe they're just milking things by slapping higher price tags on the same old wine they've always been making). If I were to start exploring the category, I would probably focus on some of the better Chianti producers - it stands to reason that someone who's doing a good job with their core products might also be making a decent Vin Santo. Now that I've got myself thinking about this, I may have to try some out for myself!

When I tasted this wine I just had one thought - "now I know what wine writers mean when they call a wine immortal". Probably the only wine I've ever tasted that I have absolutely no chance of outliving. Kind of a funny thing, given the relatively modest level of ambition/achievement generally associated with Vin Santo - but these are truly monumental wines.

I think evaluating vintage port is kind of tricky, even for some tasters with a great deal of experience in other categories. I attended a tasting a few years ago that surveyed the 1983 vintage, and more than one person present commented on how "close" the wines were - meaning that they were surprisingly consistent in quality and difficult to differentiate. I was just thinking about this earlier this morning as I reviewed Tanzer's recent coverage of the 2000 vintage - the range of scores was quite small compared to what you might expect to see in other areas. One thing that did differentiate some of the wines in that tasting was the relative forcefulness of the fortified spirits - some wines demonstrated a noticeable alcoholic burn, while others integrated the spirits into the overall structure of the wine more effectively. This is something I've come to look for over time - I tend to prefer "winey" ports where the presence of the fortified spirits is largely submerged. While I have sampled a few disappointing ports, and a few that I was quite enthusiastic about (see the comments on Graham above), the vast majority of the bottles I've tried were just very good - no more, no less, and for some reason they don't seem to leave the kind of indelible taste memories I sometimes take away from other wines. However, most of my tasting experience has been focused on the old standard port houses, and there do seem to be some newer names emerging that I am completely unaware of. Bottom line - if you stick with some of the more established houses (include some second and third tier producers such as Niepport, Gould Campbell, and Churchill), your probability of success is pretty high.

I enthusiastically second David's endorsement of Graham. The first Port I ever really loved was a 1966 Graham, and I've had virtually no disappointments with either their standard vintage bottling or their single quinta Malvedos. There is a rich, exotic aspect to Graham's house style that I just find tremendously appealing. I was sorely tempted by the 2000 vintage, but I just couldn't get past the fact that wines from some very good vintages in the '80's are still relatively available and priced below the current vintage. Of course, I didn't buy any of those wines, since I already have a fair amount of Port from that era in the cellar, so my logic is kind of faulty, but it's just one of those things. Point being, you can find some decent older vintages at prices that look quite attractive relative to current levels - and Port is pretty sturdy stuff, so you don't have to be quite so concerned about storage conditions.

I'm probably guilty of attaching mythic significance to certain bottles of wine - you know, the "this is such a wonderful treasure I can't imagine ever drinking it" syndrome. So I have some permanent entries on my "special occasion" list - wines that I think about every holiday but, ultimately, am afraid to drink . Some of the entries on this list include: *1985 Avignonesi Vin Santo - this appeared on at least half a dozen special occasion menus before we actually got up the nerve to open it. Unfortunately, that bottle was absolutely mind-boggling, so opening another one is pretty much out of the question at this point; *1971 Chateau Gillette - this one has sentimental value - my wife and I had a substantial disagreement the day it was purchased. After getting cheap with her at Chateau Guiraud and only buying a few bottles of their 1990 (a stellar wine at a dirt cheap cellar door price), I proceeded to unilaterally spend a ton of money at Gillette on some old vintages, including this bottle. Can the wine outlive the memories? *1982 Chateau Chalon - the most intimidating thing I own. Fuhgettaboutit. My wife thinks I'm silly.

Craig may have a point about the 1997 vintage, but the Ceretto Barolo Zonchera can improve with age in some vintages - I was very pleasantly surprised by a bottle of the 1989 I pulled out of the cellar not too long ago. Since this tends to be one of the least expensive bottlings by any of the better-known producers in the area, my expectations weren't that high, but the wine was absolutely lovely, and seemed to have the potential for even more positive development with some additional bottle age. One side note on Mt. Carmel - I know it's a favorite around here, but I find their pricing absolutely unsupportable. I'm a major wine junkie and I take frequent field trips to Arthur Avenue, but I will never set foot inside the place again (that sounds harsher than it should, since I haven't had any actively negative experiences there, but I just don't see the point in shopping in a store with blatantly non-competitive pricing). If you decide to pick up some more of the Zonchera, shop around - you're bound to find a much better price somewhere else (it's a widely distributed bottling by Barolo standards).

A few years ago we unwittingly visited a new restaurant in the area on or in very close proximity to their opening night. It was an amusing night in general (at one point a waitress turned a party away because "the chef is really busy" - that earned her a sharp rebuke from the hostess - and, because the location formerly housed a popular farmer's bar, all these dirty guys straight from the fields kept walking in hoping to get a beer and looking really confused when they were presented with a menu full of $30 entrees). The capper took place when my first course (grilled head-on shrimp on a bed of arugula) came to the table - it was a lovely pile of greens, but after digging through it for a while it became apparent that THEY FORGOT THE SHRIMP!!! The server returned the plate to the kitchen, and the chef brought it out a few minutes later and said "crack f**king waitstaff I've got here, isn't it?". By adopting a properly bemused attitude we actually had a pleasant evening...but I've never had another one like it! (not even the time we were having lunch at Picholine and overheard - along with everyone else in the room - someone in the kitchen shouting "I've never had a f**king waiter speak to me like that in my entire life").

I am completely, perhaps irrrationally loyal to my risotto pot, a small Scanpan dutch oven very close to the 10x6 dimensions of one of your pans - so I would go with that one. Materials matter too - something that heats slowly and holds heat well is preferable. Lightweight pans don't work all that well.

My experience is similar to marcus - a bottle sampled three years ago was wonderfully concentrated, opulent, and delicious. Eminently drinkable, but with a very long and promising future ahead. Keep in mind that this particular vintage of Beaucastel is quite notorious for cork-related problems - not necessarily cork taint, but seepage and other "seal-related" problems. I purchased mine from multiple sources, and I've experienced this problem with bottles from more than one source - Parker has commented on this as well. So you may want to keep an eye on your inventory and make sure everything looks healthy.

A related question (either that or an attempted hijack ): I purchased a small cotechino on Arthur Avenue a while back, and promptly forgot about it in the fridge (guess I should get a bigger one next time). When I stumbled across it a few days ago it had acquired the look, smell, and texture of dry-cured sausage. Quite a surprise, since I was expecting a moldy, rotten mess. It was wrapped in butcher paper, and I would guess it had been stored for six to eight weeks. Safe to eat? What do you think?

I want to know what's going on on the label of that bottle that appears in the article .

I'm working from memory here, so I may not get all the details right, but I believe Brander makes as many as four SB cuvees, only one of which (Cuvee Nicolas, I believe) is primarily barrel fermented. Their basic cuvee, another odd bottling whose name escapes me (Cuvee Natalie??) that may include a bit of Riesling, and their super-premium Au Naturel all lean toward the tank-fermented style (although I wouldn't be surprised if a portion of the Au Naturel juice is barrel fermented). IMHO, this is a really cool winery - staking out turf as a SB specialist is an unusual choice (especially in the heart of Santa Barbara County), but they do a nice job with it. I've also had some decent reds, including Bordeaux varietals and blends under the Brander label and Pinot Noir under their Domaine Santa Barbara label.

Here's a fun one I tried few weeks ago: Rao's Famous Lemon Chicken Saw the legendary Frank Pellegrino (aka Frankie No) from Rao's prepare this with Martha one night. Amazingly enough, he really seems to know his way around a kitchen. The recipe itself is great - one of those pure Italian-American classics that makes you realize that this really is a viable cuisine in it's own right. The recipe calls for a whole cut-up chicken - I made it that way the first time and quickly concluded that thighs were the way to go (the breasts just weren't all that attractive). I've got a package of thighs thawing out in the fridge as we speak, just waiting to make this again!

I sense an inherent conflict between the "engineers" (gritty, determined, perhaps even heroic individuals willing to make the ultimate sacrifice and drink mediocre wine in the interest of consistent and reliable results) and the "aestheticists" (soft, self-indulgent, probably even pasty-faced vermin who want to remain safely ensconced in their ivory towers even if it means we spend days arguing about whose Syrah was oakier or higher in alcohol ). It's time to take sides !

How about a structural approach to the wine: *Big, fruit bomb red, with some oak (Rosemount Diamond Label Shiraz or Rancho Zabaco Zin); *Lighter, fruit-driven red, no oak (Dubouef Beaujolais-Villages); *Light bodied red with some tannin (having trouble here - thinking a low-end Bordeaux - maybe Greysac - or a young Rioja - maybe Montecillo Crianza - Craig might have some Italian suggestions (Monte Antico?); *Dry, oak-free white (something from Alsace might work here - one of the generic Trimbach wines - Riesling or Pinot Blanc - or maybe Hugel Gentil?); *White with some residual sugar (having trouble here also - is there a widely available New World Riesling? Germany presents availability problems.). More suggestions please.

Had a very enjoyable meal at Taste, the restaurant at Eli's market at 80th and 3rd, on Saturday night. The food wasn't perfect, but a number of small touches made it a very nice solo dining experience. High Points *The dining room was lightly populated (between 7:00 and 8:00 pm on a Saturday) - as a solo diner I'm not crazy about packed rooms; *There is plenty of very comfortable seating around the bar, with menus already on display and bowls of nicely marinated olives and somewhat soggy but still very tasty house-made potato chips. Take my advice - plop yourself down right between a bowl of olives and a basket of chips - you'll thank me; *The woman behind the bar seemed to be genuinely interested in taking care of her bar customers (all 4 to 5 of us) and presiding over her own little domain (in a good way); *There are plenty of wines available by the glass, and the pours are fairly generous (although a Chateauneuf du Pape I sampled seemed like it might have been open a while). Potential Issues *The kitchen was a bit erratic (but I ordered some things that may have been ill advised); *There doesn't appear to be a pastry chef, so there aren't many compelling options for dessert. Here's the rundown: First course - salad with mixed greens and warm veal tongue - this was a real winner. The temperature contrast was perfect, a rich homemade mayonnaise enriched the veal tongue nicely, and the salad component was very well composed. Accompanied by a 1996 (?) Savenierres from Baumard (? - sorry), this was an ideal course. (Munching on olives and potato chips between courses - nice.) Second course - risotto with morels and green garlic - I never order risotto in restaurants, but I was looking for a lighter second course so I broke my own rule. Rules are good. This wasn't bad from a technical standpoint, but the morels just didn't have the depth of flavor you would expect and the green garlic wasn't really apparent and the whole thing was a bit monolithic. Accompanied by the aforementioned CDP (1999 Fortia) - nice but so soft and forward you couldn't help but think it might have been open too long. Dessert really wasn't attractive (it sounded like an array of items from the pastry counter in the market with various garnishes), so I opted for cheese (an unusual choice for me). The cart was decent - I can't necessarily differentiate between cheeses that have been well cared for and others that haven't, but the aged gouda, stilton, and cheddar seemed very nice to me (the taleggio maybe a bit too youthful). Portions were huge - I actually left some on the plate. Will definitely return - ordering a more conventional second course and maybe just opting for some cookies or biscotti for dessert. Taste has pretty much eliminated my desire to trek downtown to Gramercy Tavern when I'm in the mood for a nice solo meal at the bar, and that's saying something.

I don't know if this would fit within the guidelines of your competition, but some of the artisanal ciders coming out of the Northeast U.S. (Hudson Valley Cider is one, and I had a great one from New Hampshire at CraftBar the other night but the name escapes me) make a tremendous match with serious cheddar (something from New England if you want to add a regional element to the pairing, or something from Neal's Yard if you don't). Sounds like fun!

There's a school of thought that says that the whole idea of corks "breathing" has no scientific foundation, and that all of the oxygen needed to move a bottle of wine down the evolutionary path resides in the neck of the bottle. Not sure what's right or wrong, but if that could be verified I would think it could be a major shot in the arm for synthetic closures. Has anyone read anything about potential corrosion issues with screw caps? As the former owner of a very damp cellar, this has always been a sticking point for me.