Is This For Real? Or has April Fool’s Day Come Late For Wine Spectator?
I saw a headline in my RSS reader today and clicked on over to the Wine Spectator to read about an “amazing” $8 Pinot Noir that James Laube apparently tasted blind. The ensuing blog entry started out well enough, but then I read a few lines that made me wonder if it could be a joke. Read it for yourself by clicking here (membership to the Wine Spectator site required to read the full article).
For your general enjoyment, and for those of you lacking access to WS, I’m taking the liberty of including a few paragraphs here (at least until cease and desist orders come my way) that stand out to me as…well, as Onion-like in their tone:
The wine was aged with oak chips instead of in oak barrels, which give it a very subtle spicy wood edge. “I really focus on the taste and complexity that I’m getting.” To achieve the right flavor profile he adds what he described as simply “red blending wine.”
When I asked him what grapes were in the “red blending wine,” Broman insisted he didn’t know, but that it’s common to buy bulk wine samples that have already been assembled, and the percentage of blending wine added is small enough that the wine can legally be labeled as Pinot Noir.
“We don’t know [what grapes] they are,” he said. “It sounds like I’m being evasive, but I don’t know what it is. We’re simply focusing on the flavor.”–excerpted from James Laube Unfined, 4/22/09
I’m actually certain this isn’t some sort of late-April Fool’s joke, and that Laube indeed loved this “yummy” 2008 RedTree California Pinot Noir (with a dash of some other grape varieties in it that the winemaker can’t even identify).
And while there’s a strange kind of honor in Laube’s admittal that he was wowed by a blindly-tasted-wine of unlikely (or less-than-elite) origins, there’s something kind of (really!) disturbing about his subsequent statement that it doesn’t really matter what’s in the wine, as long as it tastes good (can oak chips ever be a good thing? Really? And could he not tell the wine was artificially oaked?).
More so than just endorsing iffy modes of production, Laube is commending what amounts to a simulacrum of wine in general, and Pinot Noir in specific, rather than an authentic product.
9 Responses to “Is This For Real? Or has April Fool’s Day Come Late For Wine Spectator?”
Leave a Reply
get your wine on
2008 “Bebame” Red, El Dorado County, California
Cabernet Franc (65%) and Gamay (35%) from - gasp - California! And only 13% ABV, pretty modest by California standards. If I tasted this blind I would probably have said it’s from the Loire Valley. It has pretty much nothing in common with the full bodied iterations of Cab Franc coming out of Napa. Juicy, light, delicious quaffing wine.$18 a bottle
2006 Telegramme Chateauneuf-du-Pape Rouge
Really balanced and smooth, this is a bargain of a Chateauneuf. Yeah, the 07s are lauded but what would I prefer to drink? This! It’s the second label of Vieux Telegraphe, from the same property but from younger vines. And it’s a deal at $33 a bottle.2006 or bust!
NV Barcino Cava: LA Times Wine of the Week!
Delicious and just in time for New Year’s Eve…this is the LA Times Wine of the Week, and we have plenty in stock. Order online, pick-up in-store!$14 a bottle!
Search
freshly pressed
The Business of Saying No:
No, I am not a natural wine merchant.
And no, I am also not not a natural wine merchant.
So what exactly is my store, Domaine LA? This is a tricky question that I try to answer here.
________
A couple of months back, I participated in the first annual Los Angeles Natural Wine Week, spearheaded by Lou Amdur of Lou Wine Bar. At that time, I took some heat from a few folks around the Internet who felt I might have been merely capitalizing on a trend and didn’t see me as a true natural wine merchant.
The thing is, I’ve never claimed to be a natural wine merchant. When I started my business online a few years ago, I stated plainly that I wanted to sell wines I loved. I was an enthusiast with a fairly receptive, wide-ranging palate, and I considered learning about wine a journey I would be going on alongside my customers. While I’ve since expanded my business to include a brick and mortar space, my self-conception and mission statement haven’t really changed. But my palate has.
To be absolutely blunt about it, I used to love wines that I simply can’t stomach anymore. There are blog posts archived on my website that in retrospect make me cringe, paragraphs singing the praises of some of the most blatantly manipulated wines in the world. I once criticized a wine bar for not having any Southern Hemisphere selections; it’s now my favorite spot in Los Angeles. And today I carry barely a dozen Southern Hemisphere SKUs myself.
By and large, my palate-shift is reflected in what I bring into the store. Chris Ringland and Mollydooker have been replaced by Eric Texier and Thierry Puzelat; the California fruit- and alcohol-bombs, for the most part, have given way to wines from La Clarine Farm, Donkey and Goat and LIOCO.
As a result of my largely obscure inventory, almost every day I’m faced with customers asking for items that I don’t stock. On a regular basis, I hear:
“Do you have Rombauer Chardonnay?”
No, I answer.
“Do you have Caymus?”
Afraid not, I reply.
“What about Blackstone Merlot?”
So sorry, but no.
“Where’s the Veuve Clicquot? This is a gift. I need the recipient to know it’s nice!”
Sigh.
Saying no to people sets up a potentially risky relationship that may start and end with that one exchange—many customers want what they want and aren’t open to alternative suggestions. In other cases, however, that simple “no” can be the beginning of something beautiful, a dialogue that winds up with a customer who came in looking for the Prisoner instead going home with something like Morgan Twain-Peterson’s Bedrock Heirloom Red, a wine which, while perhaps not 100% natural, is a more honest “made in the vineyard” (yes, I know this is also a cliché) version of what the Prisoner purports to be.
Of course, sometimes that customer really just wants the Prisoner. Which leads me to my major confession here: despite more than a bit of ambivalence, I continue to sell the Prisoner, along with other wines that are by no means natural, wines that are quite frankly manufactured. The Prisoner sits on the shelf right next to the Bedrock Heirloom Red, and for the time being, it will stay there. At least twice a week people come in asking specifically for this wine, and, for several reasons, it’s a request I’m not—yet—willing to deny.
Even though I no longer drink the Prisoner, there was a time–not too long ago–when I did so happily. When I first started getting interested in wine, it was a bottle that captured my imagination and helped launch me on the journey I remain committed to today. So maybe I keep the Prisoner around out of a sense of nostalgia. Or maybe I keep it around to remind me how far I’ve come. Maybe I keep it around hoping that for those who ask for it, it will simply be their starting place just as it was mine.
Or, more cynically, maybe I keep it around because people buy it. Maybe it’s a crutch to lean on when I’m too tired to hand-sell the less familiar items on my shelves. Seeing something recognizable is comforting to consumers, and that comfort somehow lends me credibility; credibility is a precedent to trust. Trust is what enables me to recommend something different to a customer who normally drinks the Prisoner.
In this sense, the Prisoner is of great value to me, not just as an easy sell, but even more so as a gateway to all the other wines I have available. I don’t know that I’d be able to move as much of the Bedrock, an unknown wine with a tiny case production, without the Prisoner right next to it.
______
Saying no is extremely hard. Right now, I’m willing to do so 90% of the time, maybe even 95%. Call me a coward or a fake if you want. But I know where I started out, and it’s been a logical evolution. And while I’m headed in a particular direction, guided by my palate, it’s safe to assume I won’t ever be a 100% “natural wine merchant.”
I like to think there’s room for somebody like me—somebody with confidence in her tastes, who also takes into account modes of production in buying decisions; someone who has a particular point of view, yet retains an inclusive attitude. I am strong in my opinions, and enthusiastic in my passions. I never judge my customers, and hope that they’ll be as open-minded and respectful of my offerings as I am of their preferences.
So far, it seems to be working out. In recent months, I’ve brought in only one case of the Prisoner (less than a thousandth of a percent of its total production) for every three cases of the Bedrock (1.3% of its total production).
So, what am I?
I’m not a natural wine merchant. And I’m not not a natural wine merchant.
I’m a work in progress. And I’m okay with that.
The Business of Saying No
Los Angeles Natural Wine Week: Taste California Terroir on 5/15/2010 at Heath Ceramics
Meet the Reps: Amy Atwood
wine jargon
Frizzante
From Wikipedia: Frizzante is an Italian wine term term for semi-sparkling wine (as opposed to Spumante, which is generally used for fully sparkling wines). Frizzante wines generally owe their bubbles to a partial secondary fermentation in tank. You might notice a light fizz or tingly sensation on the tongue with a Frizzante wine, compared to the more carbonated sensation that more fully sparkling wines yield.
Scorekage
Okay, so we made up this word yesterday after a great restaurant experience. We brought a bottle of wine with us, expecting to pay a corkage fee. But the restaurant either forgot to charge us the $15, or decided to be nice to us. We scored! Hence, “scorekage” has entered our lexicon. This can also refer to BYO friendly restaurants that don’t charge for corkage under any circumstances.
grapewise
DomaineLA Store Contact Info
If you’re looking for our brick and mortar shop, here’s where it can be found:
(323) 932-0280
Hours are 11AM to 8PM, Monday through Saturday and noon to 5PM on Sundays.
Read more…Fabulous & Frugal!
Our friends launched a new site and domaine547 is a featured wine columnist in their premiere edition! Go check out Fabulous & Frugal for some fantastic lifestyle tips for living the good life during what, for most of us, is an economically challenging time. There’s much more than wine there, and we’re thrilled to be a small part of the start of what will surely be a successful venture. Congrats to Brandi & Steph for their achievement!
DomaineLA Store Contact Info
Fabulous & Frugal!
domaine547 In the Blogosphere! Imbibe Magazine Unfiltered
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:16 am
This is really interesting! I am sort of torn. My instinct is to scoff at the impersonal connection between winemaker and an unidentified, chipped blending wine. But then I think well wait maybe he’s just gotten past all the pretense and this could be a winemaker who cares more about the authenticity of the experience than the authenticity of his wine’s pedigree.
You know? We put a lot of focus on varietal composition, but 99% of the wine drinkers I meet can easily be stumped trying to identify varietals. And maybe this is some wacky context where the chips really were a good thing. After all, it’s all about the experience of the wine.
Very interesting indeed!
April 23rd, 2009 at 5:27 am
I think James Laube intended to submit that review to the Dregs Report and accidentally emailed it to Spectator instead.
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:28 am
Hi guys, thanks for the comments!
Dale, I agree…
MasterGrape, I have in general the same attitude of wanting to get past the pretense. I’m just kind of in disbelief that this is the for which wine he chose to stake the stance of an anti-snob!
I mean, tea-bagging oak, and mixing in product of unknown origins — these are super-industrial techniques. It seems more like this “winemaker” is concocting a soft drink or flavored Iced Tea than wine.
Yes, I agree with Laube that really good (or interesting) wine doesn’t have to come at a high price. Nor does it have to come from pedigreed origins (place or winemaker included). This whole site was meant as a way to explore wine in an unpretentious manner, after all.
Maybe I’m turning into the kind of snob I used to scoff at, but I’m just sort of shocked at the casual way Laube accepts these techniques of manufacture.
What’s next? Wine that has added nutritional components (Vitamin Wine!)? Would he be offended by additives of that sort?
April 24th, 2009 at 7:51 am
It’s really freaky to read a blog post that has your last name in it, when you’re not really expecting it and don’t have a terribly common last name. I don’t have access to the full WS article - is the winemaker Bob Broman, of Broman Cellars?
Like, MasterGrape, I’m torn. I like to scoff at oak chips, and was put-off by him not knowing what grapes were going into his wine. But then again, if it’s a tasty wine, who really cares?
Sadly, “red blending grapes” just sounds way too much like “cheese food product”.
April 24th, 2009 at 7:54 am
It is Bob Broman:
http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Blogs/Blog_Main/0,4210,1,00.html
You can’t read the comments or full text w/o logging, but that link gave me enough of of Laube’s TN.
April 24th, 2009 at 7:56 am
Ron, was just about to post to you that indeed the winemaker is Bob Broman!
Jill
April 24th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
“Iffy” method of production? Do you have any idea how many wines, globally, are made using chips or staves? What, exactly, is the qualitative difference to you in chipped and micro-oxed wines vs. barrel aged and do you think you can tell the difference? Unlikely. You’ve probably had many, many chipped wines and never known. Last, what makes barrel aging “authentic”, and shouldn’t one use amphora, for legititmate “authenticity”?
C’mon, all manipulation to juice is artificial (including adding yeast or S02, fining, etc), let’s get rid of this silly notion of “authentic” wines. It’s a silly distinction without any real meaning or merit.
Somebody found a way to make good-tasting California Pinot Noir for under $10. We should congratulate them rather than stampeding to the high-horse of snobbery….
V
April 24th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
St. Vini
Ooooh harsh!
First, let me say that I think that there is a difference when “artificial” substances and techniques are used in winemaking vs. more “natural” and — yes, “authentic” modes of production. I don’t actually consider myself a terroirist with tolerance only for un-sulfured, biodynamic or natural wines.
But after a few years in the business and many more of tasting, I do believe I can tell the difference between wine that has seen mass-industrialized techniques in its making and wines that have been made more carefully.
Whether I can tell the difference is beside the point though. I would hope James Laube could tell the difference, or care about these things. That he can’t or doesn’t is disturbing to me. It’s not a snob thing on my part. But it is a question of values.
As for micro-oxidization, that’s a whole ‘nother beast. I don’t know that I could tell the difference between a barrel-aged or micro-ox’d wine. My sense of the oak chips in the RedTree is that they were used to impart flavor characteristics to the wine, not to soften it or affect its texture. I don’t really know what a “woody edge” is that they refer to. But it doesn’t sound appealing to me.
Further, I personally don’t really care about barrels and cooperage nor do I think that expensive, new French (or Slovenian or American) oak barrels are the be all end all. I love plenty of stainless tank fermented and aged wines, and really that has nothing to do with the term “authenticity” as I use it. So I think you’ve misunderstood what I mean by authentic. I mean real…
Which brings me to my final point. Regarding huge mass production wine efforts where the makers don’t even know what’s in the stuff they’re creating — well, I agree, if it tastes good, nothing’s wrong with it. Just don’t call it wine. Call it soda. Still, hard soda but soda nonetheless.
Thanks for commenting.
Jill
April 25th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Very interesting piece- thanks for picking up on this! For me, there are a couple of additional angles that come to mind…
The first is that it’s been really hard to find a good $20 Pinot Noir the past few years. Perhaps its the Sideways effect, perhaps it’s been an expensive grape for longer than that. But maybe production levels and therefore the cost to produce Pinot Noir might be catching up with demand to the point where we’ll see more outstanding Pinot Noir south of $20. And as consumers that’s something we can all cheer for.
The second speaks to Spectator being the only publication that I’m aware of that takes blind tasting so seriously. They actually taste blind whereas others taste blind “when possible” (meaning: hardly ever). When you taste blind crazy things can happen, and I think this is proof that Spectator doesn’t sort blind flights of wines by price. As a consumer of their ratings, this is *exactly* how I’d like to see tastings conducted because you’ll never know what jumps out.
I just picked up a bottle of this wine this afternoon. I’ll let you know how it goes!
Cheers!