Wine without food

[Michael M]

More and more lately I've found that during the week I'll often go for the bottle of wine that I can drink by itself (not the whole bottle!). As I've crept past my 20's, I find that in I eat less in the evenings during the week, and want something light - a simple soup, an easy, vegetable-oriented dish of some sort, etc. So I've found myself also purchasing wines that I drink by themselves.

So, here's what my partner and I end up doing: starting with a wine, snacking on some olives, cheese, salami maybe. Then I'll stop drinking, have dinner (especially if the wine doesn't match the small dinner dish), then go back to the wine.

It's almost like I have a two-tiered system - wines to match with food, and what's now become the larger portion - wines that I don't even want food with at all. I don't care about what they'll match.

Recent examples (that I'd also recommend, all around $15, more info if requested):

Koura Bay Sauvignon Blanc 2002

Spadina Nero d'Avola 2001

Barco Reale di Carmignano 2002

Apollonia Salice Salentino 2000

Cortello Vinho Tinto 2001

Fuedo Monai Salice Salentino 2000

La Vis Chardonnay 2001 (unoaked, from Trentino)

I've exerienced wines or foods that are better with the other, but since 5/7 days of my life are like this, I'm starting to care less about matching. I understand that's part of the new world style, but do you see what I mean? Am I a lazy drinker? Any others like this?

[Carolyn Tillie]

Kinda like you... except that I'll start with one wine that will work with the olives, cheese, and etc... Sometimes open another wine with dinner, but then finish off with a sweet wine for dessert.

That DOES leave for a lot of open bottles!

[NeroW]

More and more lately I've found that during the week I'll often go for the bottle of wine that I can drink by itself (not the whole bottle!).

Yeah, right!

We do the same thing, but we usually drink the whole bottle. In fact, I would venture to say that 80% of the time when I am buying a bottle of wine, it is meant to stand alone. This is because I don't often cook at home. Lately I've been splurging a bit on my wine purchases, i.e., spending more than $5.99, sometimes up to $20 which is a lot for me.

We've had a few really good bottles lately--one was a Gewurtz and one was a Chateauneuf-du-Pape, both drank without food, both really enjoyed. I will try and track down more info about these bottles (i.e. go back to that store) and post them because I'm not yet in the habit of keeping close track.

This pattern of purchasing--buying bottles not meant to "go" with foods and spending a little more money on them--has coincided with a shift in my wine-drinking preferences in general as far as which varietals I prefer and also as far as the level of "sweetness" or "dryness." I think my tastes are changing. I thank eG for showing me some light.

I don't think you're a lazy drinker. That's a funny phrase! With me, I have to be honest and account for the half-bottle of wine or so I put away *while* I'm cooking at home.

I'm interested in that La Vis Chardonnay--did you enjoy it?

[LindaJ]

I think there's a lot to be said for appreciating wine as wine and not simply as an accompaniment to food. We're tired when we come home from work and sometimes a full meal just isn't in the cards. Sometimes I crave a wine the way someone else might crave a food, so matching the food to the wine is more important to me than vice versa.

I think wine in itself is a complete food - maybe not nutritionally, but certainly spiritually. Enjoying it alone as an expression of the earth's bounty and the winemaker's art - well, I'm all about that.

[LOS]

Not me. The trend has gone the other way. I am now cooking almost every night at home, and rarely drinking anything at all outside of dinner -- wine, scotch, whatever.

Back in my 20's, I cooked more Thai/Indian, and would drink New World wines that drank better on their own anyway -- and certainly did not match the spicy food. Now when I cook really hot food, I'll drink beer or cider if anything.

[nessa]

I very rarely have anything alcoholic with my food. For that matter I don't drink much of anything with my food.

I like to sip wine just all by its lonesome. If I eat out, and someone else is paying, I might have one glass. I have such a low tolerance for alcohol though, so any more and I'd not feel very comfortable driving home. I'm also thrifty as hell and I'm not willing to pay the markup for the alcohol. The food, yes. Time and effort went into its preparation and I'm more than willing to pay a pretty penny for it. But not the booze, babe.

I look forward to just enjoying the taste of the wine, watching its color dancing, smelling it, and just doing a zen thing with it.

Wine for me is quasi special occasion. I think about opening a bottle a couple times a week, but rarely do. Maybe once a month. MY SO does not appreciate anything other than the sweetest of dessert wines, so the bottle is all mine. So I talk myself out of it usually.

In my 20's I could drink a couple of glasses, get a nice buzz and just enjoy the evening. Now, a couple of glasses and sure, I feel its effects, but the stronger buzz will be the one heard as I snore on the couch. Alcohol now has this nasty tendency to put me to sleep instead of just mellow me out. It's embarassin'. We went to a Christmas party and I had one drink. One. I was nodding off on their couch.

If I'm exceedlingly well rested (a rarity) then I might be able to enjoy a couple glasses of wine and not fall face first into the pate'.

So for me, since I can't have much of it, I want its beauty to stand alone, not blend with anything else.

[Craig Camp]

I'm also thrifty as hell and I'm not willing to pay the markup for the alcohol.  The food, yes.  Time and effort went into its preparation and I'm more than willing to pay a pretty penny for it.

I take it you have not visited a winery and seen the time and effort that goes into making wine. It only takes a whole growing season to make a wine and if you blow it you have to wait another whole year for your next try. Not many restaurants would survive if they made a meal tonight and could not sell it for 3 years or more.

This also goes for many spirits - take 12 year old Scotch for example. I'd say 12 years counts for time and effort.

It most of the wine drinking world, wine is not thought of as something to go with food, but a food itself. For myself I cannot separate wine and food. As much as I obviously love wine I do not drink still table wine as a cocktail on its own - although I do enjoy sparkling wine or dry Sherry as a cocktail or apertif.

[nessa]

I'm also thrifty as hell and I'm not willing to pay the markup for the alcohol.  The food, yes.  Time and effort went into its preparation and I'm more than willing to pay a pretty penny for it.

I take it you have not visited a winery and seen the time and effort that goes into making wine. It only takes a whole growing season to make a wine and if you blow it you have to wait another whole year for your next try. Not many restaurants would survive if they made a meal tonight and could not sell it for 3 years or more.

This also goes for many spirits - take 12 year old Scotch for example. I'd say 12 years counts for time and effort.

It most of the wine drinking world, wine is not thought of as something to go with food, but a food itself. For myself I cannot separate wine and food. As much as I obviously love wine I do not drink still table wine as a cocktail on its own - although I do enjoy sparkling wine or dry Sherry as a cocktail or apertif.

I'm afraid you misunderstand.

I said:

"If I eat out, and someone else is paying, I might have one glass. I have such a low tolerance for alcohol though, so any more and I'd not feel very comfortable driving home. I'm also thrifty as hell and I'm not willing to pay the markup for the alcohol. The food, yes. Time and effort went into its preparation and I'm more than willing to pay a pretty penny for it. But not the booze, babe. "

As you can see, I'm speaking of ordering alcohol while dining out.

I'm not speaking of buying alcohol in general.

Yes, I've been to several wineries, alehouses and distilleries. I'm quite aware of the time and effort that goes into making alcohol, but that is effort on the part of the brewers, not the restaurant. The restaurant puts time and effort into serving delicious, well prepared food, and I'm perfectly happy to pay them well for the pleasure of eating there.

I quite enjoy purchasing wine, much to my SO's chagrin.

But I'm too thrifty (cheap) to pay $100 dollars for a bottle of Nickel and Nickel at a restaurant when I can go to my darling wine supplier and pay him $65 for it. I understand that he marks it up, and thats fine with me.

Yes, that means tht I don't get to enjoy a fine cabernet with my meal, but I'm OK with that. I'd far prefer to get home and sip a glass on the couch and enjoy. Then wake up when the cat starts licking my nose and my dog starts whining to go out.

[Craig Camp]

By that argument you should never eat in a restaurant either. You can certainly prepare the same dish at home for far less than you would pay in a restaurant.

While restaurants shouldn't gouge, they are entitled to their mark-up. To have a good wine list means an investment in inventory and time. If it is a good restaurant that also means a large investment in glassware and possibly a sommelier. Many restaurants invest significant time and effort in choosing the "alcohol" as you refer to it. Yes they prepare the food and don't make the wine, but a thoughtful selection is an essential part of creating a fine dining restaurant and the costs of making that selection, buying it, maintaining and serving it justifies their mark-up.

It is also true that many restaurants use their wine and spirit profits to keep their menu prices down. So it is very likely that the profit they make on your glass of wine is keeping the menu price on your main course down a dollar or two. If nobody ordered wine they would have to increase their prices.

[tommy]

By that argument you should never eat in a restaurant either. You can certainly prepare the same dish at home for far less than you would pay in a restaurant.

i think that's kind of harsh craig. the issues of markups have been discussed by countless people with incomes and interests all over the spectrum here on egullet and elsewhere.

[Craig Camp]

By that argument you should never eat in a restaurant either. You can certainly prepare the same dish at home for far less than you would pay in a restaurant.

i think that's kind of harsh craig. the issues of markups have been discussed by countless people with incomes and interests all over the spectrum here on egullet and elsewhere.

It is not an issue of mark-ups. The mark-ups on food as related to quality vary just as much as they do wine. The issue is that a restaurant has unique needs that a retailer does not have when setting the price. If it is only an issue of price then you would always eat at home and buy wine at retail.

[Susan in FL]

All my wine drinking centers around the food and wine that is the meal, but that includes some wine just by itself sometimes. Mostly that's sipping while cooking dinner... I love that. Or drinking a glass of Port after dinner, by itself.

Once in a while I drink wine on its own or as a cocktail, but for the most part I'm among those who do not separate food and wine. We rarely eat dinner without wine, unless we're matching up food and beer.

[NeroW]

It may just be a question of exposure. You're always hearing about how "much wine is marked up, blah blah blah, they mark up 400% at a restaurant," etc. But you don't really hear that much about how food is marked up. And hardly anyone ever thinks about the fact that the markup on the booze helps keep the menu prices reasonable.

There are a few places in my hometown that have ridiculously-priced wine lists, and like nessa, I won't order wine from them . . . but, maybe unlike nessa, that pretty much brings my dining there to a screeching halt!

Craig I would be interested to hear what you think about drinking wine without food, and also, what you drink.

[Craig Camp]

Actually the only time I drink wine without food is when I am tasting for my newsletter or other articles. Even when I am having a glass of prosecco as an aperitivo there are always some olives, chips or salami around to munch on. I will sip on a beer without food, but wine - especially still wine seems strange to me without any food at all.

[Scott]

It may just be a question of exposure. You're always hearing about how "much wine is marked up, blah blah blah, they mark up 400% at a restaurant," etc. But you don't really hear that much about how food is marked up. And hardly anyone ever thinks about the fact that the markup on the booze helps keep the menu prices reasonable.

I hear what you're saying, but I think the difference between wine markups and food markups, for want of a better term, is the value added component is added in the kitchen.

the same cannot be said for the wine markups, which are a poor excuse for not pricing your food properly. i.e. I need to make up the GP or average spend on the beverage because I am not getting it on the food.

as for my views on the subject at large, see my moto below

also I think there is a difference between whether a wine is drunk with food and whether it can't be drunk with food. choose what you will, a wine that cannot match food in general is a very poor example.

And... I grew up in one of the most guilty wine producing areas in the world for making wines that cannot accompany food!

[blil]

I hardly ever drink wine on its own. To me, wine and food are practically inseparable.

If I'm going to drink something just to drink, I'll have a splash of rum or Scotch.

If I am drinking wine on its own, it's usually a glass of white wine while I'm cooking dinner.

[tommy]

By that argument you should never eat in a restaurant either. You can certainly prepare the same dish at home for far less than you would pay in a restaurant.

i think that's kind of harsh craig. the issues of markups have been discussed by countless people with incomes and interests all over the spectrum here on egullet and elsewhere.

It is not an issue of mark-ups. The mark-ups on food as related to quality vary just as much as they do wine. The issue is that a restaurant has unique needs that a retailer does not have when setting the price. If it is only an issue of price then you would always eat at home and buy wine at retail.

But I'm too thrifty (cheap) to pay $100 dollars for a bottle of Nickel and Nickel at a restaurant when I can go to my darling wine supplier and pay him $65 for it. I understand that he marks it up, and thats fine with me.

i guess we're reading two different posts.

[docsconz]

To me a good wine needs the right food and good food needs the right wine. This doesn't mean that I never drink wine without food, although this is usually the case if I am attending a wine tasting. By having food with my wine, I can drink that much more wine

[mongo_jones]

By that argument you should never eat in a restaurant either. You can certainly prepare the same dish at home for far less than you would pay in a restaurant.

the analogy fails:

a home cook may not be able to cook the same dishes she gets at a restaurant.

however, she can buy the exact same bottle from a store that she could at a restaurant.

[tommy]

the analogy fails:

a home cook may not be able to cook the same dishes she gets at a restaurant.

however, she can buy the exact same bottle from a store that she could at a restaurant.

but then there's the argument about how restaurants spend gobs money and time making sure the wines they select will compliment the food.

those restaurants, of course, are the minority, but that won't stop people from trying to use the argument.

[LindaJ]

This discussion is going totally off topic from the original question, but when has that stopped us before It's more economical to buy a wine by the glass in a restaurant than spending retail on a bottle that is an unknown. I'll gladly pay the markup which is why restaurants should expand wine-by-the-glass programs. I very much appreciate their selecting and storing wines that I probably otherwise wouldn't try. Plus I can do my own little wine pairing instead of being stuck drinking a whole bottle.

These restaurants with non-sucky wine programs may be in the minority, but I'm a vocal consumer about going to them, just as I'm vocal in the wine shops when I think price or selection is out of whack with reality.

It sort of makes me sad that a lot of people need to adulterate the fine taste of wine with horrible food (SARCASM), but then again, this is primarily a food website.

[Craig Camp]

These restaurants with non-sucky wine programs may be in the minority, but I'm a vocal consumer about going to them, just as I'm vocal in the wine shops when I think price or selection is out of whack with reality.

Restaurants with non-sucky food programs are also in the minority.

All in all I find wine prices and food prices go hand in hand at restaurants. Those that gouge on bad food also gouge on cheap wines they buy on close-out. Places that have great deals on good wines also tend to have good food at a fair price.

I agree with LindaJ about going out of your way to support the good ones and also her point about good wines-by-the-glass programs, which are one of the best ways to introduce yourself to new wines.

The original premise here was wine without food, but perhaps we should look at in the other way around - if you enjoy wine what is good food without good wine? I find it hard to imagine going to a restaurant that is serving excellent food and not having a nice wine with it. If price is a problem you don't have to drink big names with big prices to enjoy good wine. Drinking Muscadet instead of Chablis is not a punishment. I have never been to one restaurant that I really enjoyed that did not have several good wines at reasonable prices - in this case meaning "reasonable" in relation to the restaurant.

[Craig Camp]

the analogy fails:

a home cook may not be able to cook the same dishes she gets at a restaurant.

however, she can buy the exact same bottle from a store that she could at a restaurant.

but then there's the argument about how restaurants spend gobs money and time making sure the wines they select will compliment the food.

those restaurants, of course, are the minority, but that won't stop people from trying to use the argument.

It is true they are in the minority. Just as are restaurants that are really dedicated to excellent food. However, those that do make the effort are entitled to a reasonable mark-up. Those that don't make the effort are not - just as in every other enterprise.

[Felonius]

I love food, but usually choose food to go with my favorite wines instead of the other way around. I also enjoy opening a good bottle to be enjoyed by itself. However, there are many wines that I think taste much better when accompanied by the right food. For example, I don't particularly enjoy tannic or heavier wines such as Bordeaux or Cabernet Sauvignon without food. They seem to need something to balance them out, and can taste a overbearing if consumed alone. If I'm not in the mood for cooking or eating a whole meal, I find that a few good cheeses can be a good accompaniament for these wines.

As for drinking wines solo, I prefer lighter wines such as Red Burgundy/Pinot Noir and Sauvignon Blanc. I also think some of the sweeter Rieslings and white dessert wines such as Sauternes can be quite pleasant just to sip by themselves.

Food and wine paring can be tricky, and despite years of experience with this, I still have much to learn. I am always thrilled when a knowledgeable chef or sommelier guides me to one of those elusive perfect food and wine matches. It's amazing how much more a wine can offer if balanced by the right food. This has been particularly evident at some wine tasting dinners I've attended, where a chef has put a great deal of thought into exact pairings. Even wines that I am very familiar with can show a whole new side or depth in such circumstances.

A bit off topic, but one more thought on this. I have also found that ensuring wines are served at the optimum temperature, decanted or allowed to breath for a suitable time, and served in good stemware can give a lot more pleasure than if they are just opened and poured without care. I'd encourage anyone interested in wine for its own sake to experiment with these other variables and see if it makes a difference for them.

[Brad Ballinger]

Getting back on topic. In my home, I rarely drink wine without food. I may do so on the odd occasion, but then I'm doing it to evaluate the bottle where I likely have more of them and the exercise is in the interest of science.

If I'm going to drink alcohol without food, I'll pour a scotch or open a bottle of beer.