Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Nat Decants


jayt90
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have been getting Natalie's LCBO Vintages scores for quite awhile. Useful, as they pre-dated the Vintages release. Recently Nat. upped the ante by boosting her scores, so that the good wines in the monthly release would score bretween 90 and 95.

Not very useful, when most critics reserve this area for the very best.

Nat, supplies these ratings to LCBO consutants be e mail, and they influence Ontario buyers. Even less useful...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I wroter her when I saw that (I get her newsletter) and complained that she was, by her own admission, inflating her scores to more closely match Wine Spectator's (a common complaint from her readership, by her account). Heaven forbid you should have opinions that don't match WS's!

Derrick Schneider

My blog: http://www.obsessionwithfood.com

You have to eat. You might as well enjoy it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

e Gads! I called her Natalie MacMaster, when she is rightly Natalie McLean!

For what its worth, Natalie sends a ready to use copy of her monthly ratings to LCBO consultants; I have seen this lying around in Vintages Corners. Those 90+ ratings are worth something when the uninformed consumer arrives!

The LCBO, in its own publications, uses high ratings when they can get them, and when not so good (such as a Parker note with an 87) they print the blurb, not the rating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
e Gads!  I called her Natalie MacMaster, when she is rightly Natalie McLean!

For what its worth, Natalie sends a ready to use copy of her monthly ratings to LCBO consultants; I have seen this lying around in Vintages Corners. Those 90+ ratings are worth something when the uninformed consumer arrives!

The LCBO, in its own publications, uses high ratings when they can get them, and when not so good (such as a Parker note with an 87)  they print the blurb, not the rating.

I used to (highland) dance with Natalie MacMaster when she and I were youngsters... but I stuck to the boozy side of the business.

Cheers,

Natalie

Natalie MacLean

Wine Newsletter Writer

www.nataliemaclean.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ah, try drinking while you're sword dancing... very exciting.

A sword without a handle flask? and you call yourself a Scot... :wink:

I remember some kind words you gave 2001 Masi Algheri Red a while back - that case served me quite well and I thank you

delighted to hear that!

Natalie MacLean

Wine Newsletter Writer

www.nataliemaclean.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Personally speaking, there are quite a few wine professionals offering recommendations and ratings. The key is to follow someone who has a compatible palate. Many parker-files enjoy immense, extracted wines while others such as Jancis Robinson prefer subtle, complex wines. My personal tastes have changed over the years and are still evolving. If I concur with a particular suggestion, I will most likely follow this person’s advice in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing this from a outsider POV. Natalie, you have no direct response, to pretty heavy criticism laid against you?

-Steve

When Natalie introduced her new rating system several months ago, I noticed a few wines that raised an eyebrow, dramatically up in the 90's. Then there was the 99 rating for a Mission Hill Oculus that generated a thread in the egullet wines section.

But recently, since September, Natalies's monthly ratings have been more conservative, and I think they offer good advice prior to the Vintages monthly releases. We need all the help we can get when we have to consider joining the Saturday morning line ups at a select few Vintages stores when something special is released.

Natalie has been a good sport about all this, especially in the bantering and repartee in this thread. And I'll continue to read those monthly reviews along with Beppi and the others...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing this from a outsider POV. Natalie, you have no direct response, to pretty heavy criticism laid against you?

-Steve

When Natalie introduced her new rating system several months ago, I noticed a few wines that raised an eyebrow, dramatically up in the 90's. Then there was the 99 rating for a Mission Hill Oculus that generated a thread in the egullet wines section.

But recently, since September, Natalies's monthly ratings have been more conservative, and I think they offer good advice prior to the Vintages monthly releases. We need all the help we can get when we have to consider joining the Saturday morning line ups at a select few Vintages stores when something special is released.

Natalie has been a good sport about all this, especially in the bantering and repartee in this thread. And I'll continue to read those monthly reviews along with Beppi and the others...

I agree that you need to follow a reviewer whom you trust and then the ratings are relative to what that person has recommended in the past. I've been using scores for only about six months now and am still trying to find the right calibration, though the relative rankings have remained consistant. I appreciate your support and patience Jay... it's a labor of love, as you know, given I don't charge for newsletter.

Natalie MacLean

Wine Newsletter Writer

www.nataliemaclean.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...