fine wine vs. cheap wine
October 29th, 2011 at 11:49:31 AM
permalink
I'm a beer lover, and I prefer microbrewed ales over mass-market lagers, (although in a pinch I'll still happily drink a Budweiser.) I like wine, too, but I can't appreciate the difference between a decent $9 bottle and a spectacular $50 bottle, so for me a $50 bottle is a waste of $40.
The big question is whether the price of a bottle actually affects its taste. Some say it does:
In 2001, Frederic Brochet conducted two experiments at the University of Bordeaux.
In one experiment, he got 54 oenology (the study of wine tasting and wine making) undergraduates together and had them taste one glass of red wine and one glass of white wine. He had them describe each wine in as much detail as their expertise would allow. What he didn't tell them was both were the same wine. He just dyed the white one red. In the other experiment, he asked the experts to rate two different bottles of red wine. One was very expensive, the other was cheap. Again, he tricked them. This time he had put the cheap wine in both bottles. So what were the results?
The tasters in the first experiment, the one with the dyed wine, described the sorts of berries and grapes and tannins they could detect in the red wine just as if it really was red. Every single one, all 54, could not tell it was white. In the second experiment, the one with the switched labels, the subjects went on and on about the cheap wine in the expensive bottle. They called it complex and rounded. They called the same wine in the cheap bottle weak and flat.
Another experiment at Cal-Tech pitted five bottles of wine against each other. They ranged in price from $5 to $90. Similarly, the experimenters put cheap wine in the expensive bottles -- but this time they put the tasters in a brain scanner. While tasting the wine, the same parts of the brain would light up in the machine every time, but with the wine the tasters thought was expensive, one particular region of the brain became more active. Another study had tasters rate cheese eaten with two different wines. One they were told was from California, the other from North Dakota. The same wine was in both bottles. The tasters rated the cheese they ate with the California wine as being better quality, and they ate more of it.
The big question is whether the price of a bottle actually affects its taste. Some say it does:
In 2001, Frederic Brochet conducted two experiments at the University of Bordeaux.
In one experiment, he got 54 oenology (the study of wine tasting and wine making) undergraduates together and had them taste one glass of red wine and one glass of white wine. He had them describe each wine in as much detail as their expertise would allow. What he didn't tell them was both were the same wine. He just dyed the white one red. In the other experiment, he asked the experts to rate two different bottles of red wine. One was very expensive, the other was cheap. Again, he tricked them. This time he had put the cheap wine in both bottles. So what were the results?
The tasters in the first experiment, the one with the dyed wine, described the sorts of berries and grapes and tannins they could detect in the red wine just as if it really was red. Every single one, all 54, could not tell it was white. In the second experiment, the one with the switched labels, the subjects went on and on about the cheap wine in the expensive bottle. They called it complex and rounded. They called the same wine in the cheap bottle weak and flat.
Another experiment at Cal-Tech pitted five bottles of wine against each other. They ranged in price from $5 to $90. Similarly, the experimenters put cheap wine in the expensive bottles -- but this time they put the tasters in a brain scanner. While tasting the wine, the same parts of the brain would light up in the machine every time, but with the wine the tasters thought was expensive, one particular region of the brain became more active. Another study had tasters rate cheese eaten with two different wines. One they were told was from California, the other from North Dakota. The same wine was in both bottles. The tasters rated the cheese they ate with the California wine as being better quality, and they ate more of it.
October 29th, 2011 at 12:05:02 PM
permalink
I'm not a wine drinker but my wife is and she has tasted many wines priced well over $50 and even $100. She is most happy with a $9 bottle of Lindeman's from Australia or Concha y Toro from Chile.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
October 29th, 2011 at 12:59:07 PM
permalink
Not surprised. Experiments like this always interest me, and many of them all confirm a sort of inherent bias in people equating price with superiority.
I always found things like this curious, this top shelf vs bottom shelf marketing. Sure, I could sense a difference between Old Grandad and Crown Royal, but I don't know how one would declare one "better", "more refined", "of higher quality". They both burn good and make your head funny, one just does it on the cheap.
Fortunately the wife feels the same way and will pass up the $50 bottle all day in favor of the kind in a box.
I always found things like this curious, this top shelf vs bottom shelf marketing. Sure, I could sense a difference between Old Grandad and Crown Royal, but I don't know how one would declare one "better", "more refined", "of higher quality". They both burn good and make your head funny, one just does it on the cheap.
Fortunately the wife feels the same way and will pass up the $50 bottle all day in favor of the kind in a box.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
October 29th, 2011 at 1:10:26 PM
permalink
Quote: renoThe big question is whether the price of a bottle actually affects its taste.
I am totally shocked. People have their sense of taste decided for them by arbitrary things like price and advertising. I would never have guessed it.
A very popular, and reasonably priced export from Spain is the Sangre de Toro. They have been using the plastic bull as a marketing device since marketing devices were invented. Now I have never done a blind test to see what the wine tastes like without the plastic bull in a straight carafe.
October 29th, 2011 at 1:18:05 PM
permalink
Shouldn't they get their diplomas revoked?
Wine's wasted on me. I can either like or not like a particular wine, but I seriously can't tell you what's different between them.
Wine's wasted on me. I can either like or not like a particular wine, but I seriously can't tell you what's different between them.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
October 29th, 2011 at 1:43:23 PM
permalink
Super thread. The emporer has no clothes! They've done the same thing with vodka. The entire concept of a $100 bottle of wine is a joke...
October 29th, 2011 at 2:12:41 PM
permalink
In my opinion, i have had many good wines which were very cheap and many good wines which were expensive. I recently had a 1981 Kopke Colheita Port which is approximately a $100 bottle of wine and to me it didnt taste any different than a $12 bottle of Red Cat.
"Stupid people are Stupid and that is Stupid."
October 29th, 2011 at 2:51:56 PM
permalink
This is a very tricky topic to be sure. There will be as many opinions as there are wines in the marketplace.
There seems to be a price point where quality changes dramatically, which seems to be around $20, retail. Sure, there are excellent values under that price but who has the time to be trying 100's of wines looking for those few bottles. Also on price, let's also be clear that the price markup in restaurants seems to be around 3X the retail price( a wine merchant once told me that figure, it seems to be very close). Sometimes even 3.5X.
I guess the real reason I try to stay around that price is that I've found that the price of the wine, for the most part, is inversely proportional to the amount of headache I have the next morning.
Also along that line of thinking, as SOOPOO mentions, the same goes for the price of Vodka. When the price of a 750ml bottle of Vodka is more than $20, my probability of having a headache in the morning goes way down. I don't need to pay >$30 for Grey Goose, in the mid $20's for a bottle of Tito's or Crater Lake is perfectly fine.
Just my own observations.
There seems to be a price point where quality changes dramatically, which seems to be around $20, retail. Sure, there are excellent values under that price but who has the time to be trying 100's of wines looking for those few bottles. Also on price, let's also be clear that the price markup in restaurants seems to be around 3X the retail price( a wine merchant once told me that figure, it seems to be very close). Sometimes even 3.5X.
I guess the real reason I try to stay around that price is that I've found that the price of the wine, for the most part, is inversely proportional to the amount of headache I have the next morning.
Also along that line of thinking, as SOOPOO mentions, the same goes for the price of Vodka. When the price of a 750ml bottle of Vodka is more than $20, my probability of having a headache in the morning goes way down. I don't need to pay >$30 for Grey Goose, in the mid $20's for a bottle of Tito's or Crater Lake is perfectly fine.
Just my own observations.
I don't know everything but I know a lot.
October 29th, 2011 at 3:14:38 PM
permalink
I have preferences between red and white, dry or sweet, and can sometimes tasts oak vs steel aging. But price alone? Nope.
Chales Shaw is always good for dinner.
Chales Shaw is always good for dinner.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
October 29th, 2011 at 3:17:31 PM
permalink
Quality is defined by ingredients. A very rough red produced in the old fashioned manner in a small region near the Pyrannees filled with octo and nonogenarians is probably the most healthful wine based on its antioxidant content. I don't care about the label or the packaging.
I already posted in someone's blog about Fortified wines from Portugal being high in spermidine, cadaverine and putrescine.
Cosmetics are mainly packaging.
Gallo's wine cooler was nothing special until they named it something unique and put it in a bottle with some foil wrap on it and marketed it as Bartells and James.
Some people have an educated palate, some don't. Expensive wine is lost on me. Free wine is all I care about anyway.
I already posted in someone's blog about Fortified wines from Portugal being high in spermidine, cadaverine and putrescine.
Cosmetics are mainly packaging.
Gallo's wine cooler was nothing special until they named it something unique and put it in a bottle with some foil wrap on it and marketed it as Bartells and James.
Some people have an educated palate, some don't. Expensive wine is lost on me. Free wine is all I care about anyway.
October 29th, 2011 at 3:19:22 PM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinI am totally shocked. People have their sense of taste decided for them by arbitrary things like price and advertising. I would never have guessed it.
I've always considered Charles Shaw ("Two Buck Chuck" at Trader Joe's) to be nasty stuff. And yet, their Chardonnay won a Double Gold award, beating 350 other California wines in a blind taste test at the 2005 California State Fair.
Dr. Richard Peterson, veteran winemaker and a State Fair judge for 20 years, said, “We have the most open judging I know. There is nothing to bias judging. We get numbered glasses. We don’t know the region, brand or price. We evaluate the judges frequently to make sure they’re tops in the field."
October 29th, 2011 at 4:03:54 PM
permalink
Quote: renoI've always considered Charles Shaw ("Two Buck Chuck" at Trader Joe's) to be nasty stuff.
Hear hear! Nice to see somebody besides me say that. I have to bring my own wine when I visit my parents house because my father always happily buys the cheapest stuff -- Charles Shaw, anything in a box, and who knows what else as long as it sells for well under $5 a bottle. I'm not saying the market is efficient and money always translates perfectly to quality when it comes to win. However, there is a positive correlation. Here are roughly the odds that I will like a wine, according to the warehouse price:
$5: 1%
$10: 25%
$15: 40%
$20: 50%
$50: 95%
I wrote a story before about getting bamboozeled in buying a $800 bottle at the Wynn, and I didn't think it was any better than some $20 wines I've had. The returns diminish fast after about $50.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 29th, 2011 at 4:12:23 PM
permalink
Well here in Las Vegas two buck chuck is 3 buck chuck because of some import fee they have!
October 29th, 2011 at 4:21:58 PM
permalink
I used to drink a lot of champagne. Dom Perignon was definitiely smoother than any other champagne back then. What's this Crystal stuff the young hoods talk about like?
Gambling is a metaphor for life. Hang around long enough and it's all gone.
October 29th, 2011 at 8:34:21 PM
permalink
Well price and quality are not necesarily related wines definately do not taste the same. I am very sceptical of the not being able to taste the difference between the red and white. I would take that blind test on any wager up to a $1000.
I watched the former sommelier from Caesars (I can't remember his name) on TV 15 years ago naming wines in blind taste tests. He was amazing and was getting some of the wines down not only to the specific vinyardr but which side of valley they came from.
I watched the former sommelier from Caesars (I can't remember his name) on TV 15 years ago naming wines in blind taste tests. He was amazing and was getting some of the wines down not only to the specific vinyardr but which side of valley they came from.
Be careful when you follow the masses, the M is sometimes silent.
October 30th, 2011 at 12:45:02 AM
permalink
The tests are bogus. The only valid tests are blind tests, and they've been
done for hundreds of years. 'Switching' tests prove people are influenced by an
already formed prejudice, they have nothing to do with whats being tested.
Blind tests done by professionals are always the only valid method. On a side
note, I found a bottle of brandy I bought in 1985 a couple years ago, unopened.
It was 24 years old, when I took a sip I thought I was in heaven. It was so
smooth and flavorful, I made it last a month. I'm also a vodka drinker, I take it
straight, as I do all liquor. You can put 3 glasses in front of me, Kamchatka,
Smirnoff, and Stoli Elit. I'll tell you which is which every time. Stoli Elit is to die
for, I only buy it at Christmas. $60 a bottle. So smooth it makes me weep. Kettle
One is close. The secret to vodka is filtration, and water. You can make a cheap
vodka better by charcoal filtering it yourself, but its not worth the effort.
done for hundreds of years. 'Switching' tests prove people are influenced by an
already formed prejudice, they have nothing to do with whats being tested.
Blind tests done by professionals are always the only valid method. On a side
note, I found a bottle of brandy I bought in 1985 a couple years ago, unopened.
It was 24 years old, when I took a sip I thought I was in heaven. It was so
smooth and flavorful, I made it last a month. I'm also a vodka drinker, I take it
straight, as I do all liquor. You can put 3 glasses in front of me, Kamchatka,
Smirnoff, and Stoli Elit. I'll tell you which is which every time. Stoli Elit is to die
for, I only buy it at Christmas. $60 a bottle. So smooth it makes me weep. Kettle
One is close. The secret to vodka is filtration, and water. You can make a cheap
vodka better by charcoal filtering it yourself, but its not worth the effort.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 30th, 2011 at 12:58:23 AM
permalink
I remember on Mythbusters they talked about using a bunch of Brita water filters to turn plastic jug vodka into an almost grey goose tasting one. Some vodka expert was able to taste and differentiate each one. Right now I have been enjoying Sobieski (something like that) Smiths has a big liquor sale here 2 for 1 on a bunch of stuff. It is not bad for being cheap vodka, it does come in a glass bottle. They advertise a rating that is higher than svedka and stoli. It does the job and does not make me feel sick the next day, but then again I don't drink that much...
October 30th, 2011 at 1:31:12 AM
permalink
Quote: NicksGamingStuffIt does the job and does not make me feel sick the next day, but then again I don't drink that much...
Good vodka has an almost fruity and nutty flavor
to it, taken straight. To the inexperienced palate,
it tastes like lighter fluid, however. I learned when
I had the bar that true alchies drink vodka not
because its cheap, but because it gives fewer
hangovers. Its the impurities in booze that cause
hangovers. Beer is the worst, its nothing but
impurities. The more expensive the vodka, the
more filtered it is, and the less hangover you
get. Whiskey is just vodka thats been aged in
oak barrels to give it color and flavor. And impurities.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 30th, 2011 at 4:28:11 AM
permalink
It is certainly true that the more expensive distilled spirits get more of the impurities out. Or at least if you pay more you *should* be getting that benefit. When it comes to wine, the real cheap stuff is one thing, once you get into better qualities it can be possible to get bamboozled for paying more when something else cheaper is just as good.
I think for most drinkers (not all drinkers) the more you drink of something the drier you want it. This can influence how someone might like a particular wine. If you havent drunk it much it may seem too dry; if you have been drinking it regularly IMO you will start to want a dry version.
Cocktails too: witness the march to drier and drier martinis for most of us who like those. I recently experimented with a bourbon cocktail that I tweaked the formula on, and got so enthusiastic about it that I felt it should be entered in a contest! As the weeks went by, though, I decided I couldnt drink something that sweet anymore. When I tried to make it drier, it was too similar to a normal version of that cocktail. Dream busted!
I think for most drinkers (not all drinkers) the more you drink of something the drier you want it. This can influence how someone might like a particular wine. If you havent drunk it much it may seem too dry; if you have been drinking it regularly IMO you will start to want a dry version.
Cocktails too: witness the march to drier and drier martinis for most of us who like those. I recently experimented with a bourbon cocktail that I tweaked the formula on, and got so enthusiastic about it that I felt it should be entered in a contest! As the weeks went by, though, I decided I couldnt drink something that sweet anymore. When I tried to make it drier, it was too similar to a normal version of that cocktail. Dream busted!
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
October 30th, 2011 at 8:48:32 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardHear hear! Nice to see somebody besides me say that. I have to bring my own wine when I visit my parents house because my father always happily buys the cheapest stuff -- Charles Shaw, anything in a box, and who knows what else as long as it sells for well under $5 a bottle. I'm not saying the market is efficient and money always translates perfectly to quality when it comes to win. However, there is a positive correlation. Here are roughly the odds that I will like a wine, according to the warehouse price:
$5: 1%
$10: 25%
$15: 40%
$20: 50%
$50: 95%
I wrote a story before about getting bamboozeled in buying a $800 bottle at the Wynn, and I didn't think it was any better than some $20 wines I've had. The returns diminish fast after about $50.
You may have also written a story about bamboozeling yourself............JUST NOW! Didn't you expect the higher price wine to be more likeable? Let an observer be the one who knows the prices, and then see how discriminating you REALLY are. And if you did it that way, than I look silly. If not, then guess who.............
October 30th, 2011 at 9:00:28 AM
permalink
Back when Coca Cola was in the midst of the "New Coke" fiasco, some "news" shows did blind taste tests with devotees of Coke. A great many couldn't tell New Coke from Classic Coke or Pepsi.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
October 30th, 2011 at 9:15:38 AM
permalink
I don't understand wine prices! I have been buying a lot of wine this year -- too much, probably more than I can afford. No product that is basically the same (fermented juice from grapes) varies in price as much as wine does. I can get box wine for pennies up to $1,000s of dollars for First-growth Bordeaux. I just don't understand why it is so expensive. Price is only a reflection of what people are willing to pay, so I have to conclude it is just snobbery. There is no way producers should be able to charge the prices they charge for wine.
For what it's worth, I think the fair price for a bottle of wine is $3-$5. Premium wines could range up to $10, with really great stuff in the $15 range. $20 is way too much to pay for a bottle of old grape juice, in my opinion.
For what it's worth, I think the fair price for a bottle of wine is $3-$5. Premium wines could range up to $10, with really great stuff in the $15 range. $20 is way too much to pay for a bottle of old grape juice, in my opinion.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
October 30th, 2011 at 9:36:40 AM
permalink
Quote: teddysPrice is only a reflection of what people are willing to pay, so I have to conclude it is just snobbery.
Not just snobbery.
From what I recall of a winery tour years ago, cheaper wines are grape juice with added sugar and yeast to speed up alcohol production. There are a lot of different grape varieties, too, and that has a lot to do with flavor. Finally the more expensive wines are aged in casks of different types of wood. All these things affect price.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
October 30th, 2011 at 9:41:22 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardHere are roughly the odds that I will like a wine, according to the warehouse price:
$5: 1%
$10: 25%
$15: 40%
$20: 50%
$50: 95%
Wiz- Are you saying that your own brain's medial orbitofrontal cortex is immune to such bias? The study at Stanford confirmed the results of the CalTech brain study: it's all in your head. And the Stanford study even used volunteers who were wine connoisseurs.
October 30th, 2011 at 9:43:06 AM
permalink
Quote: NareedNot just snobbery.
From what I recall of a winery tour years ago, cheaper wines are grape juice with added sugar and yeast to speed up alcohol production. There are a lot of different grape varieties, too, and that has a lot to do with flavor. Finally the more expensive wines are aged in casks of different types of wood. All these things affect price.
All wine is grape juice and all wine uses yeast to cause fermentation. There are good wines ages in stainless steel as well as oak. Some wine is aged in food-grade plastic. Some "aging" is only a few months.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
October 30th, 2011 at 11:33:07 AM
permalink
Wine-making's an art. Art has no value in some people's worlds. I can tell good wine from bad wine, sometimes. Varietals are easy to distinguish. I can tell the difference between a Cab, Pinot, Zin and a Merlot. And certainly I can tell the difference between red and white. Those who can't don't understand the basics of wine. Different grapes produce different flavors.
That said, a GOOD wine is subject to taste. One person's $100 bleek is another person's $100 paradise.
That said, a GOOD wine is subject to taste. One person's $100 bleek is another person's $100 paradise.
-----
You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
October 30th, 2011 at 1:04:26 PM
permalink
I accept and agree with everything that has been said. I still don't understand wine prices. Take a similar beverage that is mass-consumed and commoditized to a certain extent: Beer. You start out with the super-cheap stuff at $4.29 a six-pack for Busch, Pabst, etc. Then you move up to the so-called "premiums" like Budweiser, Miller, etc. for $5 or $6. Fine so far, although you could argue that those two brands taste the same (I would agree) and you are paying for the marketing. Then you get the premium domestics (Rolling Rock?) and Imports (Heineken, Dos Equis) for $7-$8. Same beer, same ingredients, maybe slightly better quality and cachet. Finally, you get quality domestic microbrews for $8-$10 a pack (Dogfish Head, Rogue) where you can actually taste the beer -- better quality, better ingredients, etc. And that's it. You can go higher for rare Belgians, etc., but those are one-time things and nobody buys those as an everyday beer.
Now, we've stayed with a range of $10, and experienced all the ranges of quality for beer. Why doesn't the same model work for wine? It's a bizarre puzzle.
A very good line of quality low-priced wines I have found is Gato Negro wines from Chile. $4.50 a bottle in my area. SUPER Sauvingon Blanc, and while the reds are less super, they are decent. I also find Spanish reds to be some of the most surprising values.
Now, we've stayed with a range of $10, and experienced all the ranges of quality for beer. Why doesn't the same model work for wine? It's a bizarre puzzle.
A very good line of quality low-priced wines I have found is Gato Negro wines from Chile. $4.50 a bottle in my area. SUPER Sauvingon Blanc, and while the reds are less super, they are decent. I also find Spanish reds to be some of the most surprising values.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
October 30th, 2011 at 8:43:29 PM
permalink
I think I can tell the difference between beers and the amount of care put into them. That said, there's several large mass market beers I like, and some of the "craft" brews that are (to me) nothing better than the swill pushed out by the Big Boys, but marketed as being all craft, hand crafted and some how better.
I have spent over $30 on a beer before (some of the aged beers and top end barleywines go for more than that in the bars), and it's been a very pleasurable experience. How much of that is due to the expectation, would be an interesting test. I brew my own and have done some study with the BJCP guidelines. But I'm not quite as keen a beer ticker as I was.
I am skeptical of the inability to tell the difference between red and white wine, when white wine is dyed. I'll probably try and set up a blind test. I really dislike red wine (but will drink white occasionally) so would love to see if it's really a question of colour. I can believe I can fool myself.
I have spent over $30 on a beer before (some of the aged beers and top end barleywines go for more than that in the bars), and it's been a very pleasurable experience. How much of that is due to the expectation, would be an interesting test. I brew my own and have done some study with the BJCP guidelines. But I'm not quite as keen a beer ticker as I was.
I am skeptical of the inability to tell the difference between red and white wine, when white wine is dyed. I'll probably try and set up a blind test. I really dislike red wine (but will drink white occasionally) so would love to see if it's really a question of colour. I can believe I can fool myself.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
October 30th, 2011 at 9:26:28 PM
permalink
I believe that far more people could tell the difference if they would actually take the time to drink and taste the wine over the course of an evening. A simple and brief taste test is not adequate.
I've had bottles that I really liked at first, but later grew to dislike because of the after taste.
I've had bottles that I really liked at first, but later grew to dislike because of the after taste.
October 30th, 2011 at 9:43:34 PM
permalink
Here is my recipe for a good evening: Start with the good stuff for the first drink or two, then bring out the cheap stuff because by then you will be tipsy enough where you will not notice the difference!
October 30th, 2011 at 10:51:57 PM
permalink
Quote: teddysNo product that is basically the same (fermented juice from grapes) varies in price as much as wine does.
Wow, you're right. The best exceptions I can think of are wristwatches and cars. An $8 Hello Kitty wristwatch and an $86,000 Zenith Tourbillon Titanium wristwatch both tell time, but they aren't "basically the same" the way a $10 bottle of wine and $1,000 bottle wine are. And a $15,000 Kia doesn't have much in common with a $300,000 Lamborghini, besides the fact that both of them will get you from point A to point B.
Quote: NicksGamingStuffHere is my recipe for a good evening: Start with the good stuff for the first drink or two, then bring out the cheap stuff because by then you will be tipsy enough where you will not notice the difference!
Jesus said the same thing in John 2:10.
October 31st, 2011 at 8:42:44 AM
permalink
Quote: teddysFinally, you get quality domestic microbrews for $8-$10 a pack (Dogfish Head, Rogue) where you can actually taste the beer -- better quality, better ingredients, etc. And that's it. You can go higher for rare Belgians, etc., but those are one-time things and nobody buys those as an everyday beer.
Why not?
October 31st, 2011 at 8:47:50 AM
permalink
Quote: NicksGamingStuffHere is my recipe for a good evening: Start with the good stuff for the first drink or two, then bring out the cheap stuff because by then you will be tipsy enough where you will not notice the difference!
That trick is as old as the bible. You won't fool Jesus with it though.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 31st, 2011 at 9:15:03 AM
permalink
Quote: renoWow, you're right. The best exceptions I can think of are wristwatches and cars. An $8 Hello Kitty wristwatch and an $86,000 Zenith Tourbillon Titanium wristwatch both tell time, but they aren't "basically the same" the way a $10 bottle of wine and $1,000 bottle wine are. And a $15,000 Kia doesn't have much in common with a $300,000 Lamborghini, besides the fact that both of them will get you from point A to point B.
Jesus said the same thing in John 2:10.
Don't you mean someone said Jesus said it? You didn't actually hear Jesus say it, I don't think. In legal terms, that makes it hearsay, which makes it inadmissible to LOTS OF INTELLIGENT PEOPLE!
October 31st, 2011 at 9:31:22 AM
permalink
Quote: dmDon't you mean someone said Jesus said it? You didn't actually hear Jesus say it, I don't think. In legal terms, that makes it hearsay, which makes it inadmissible to LOTS OF INTELLIGENT PEOPLE!
Is that why police confessions keep getting thrown out of court unless the accused also confesses to the judge and jury?
October 31st, 2011 at 9:39:04 AM
permalink
I believe police confessions are recorded. At any rate, Sarge is not allowed to squeeze your balls in front of the jury. Well, not in most
places. Nevada may be an exception.
places. Nevada may be an exception.
October 31st, 2011 at 9:46:28 AM
permalink
Also, let's be clear. Even if someone can distinguish the value of wine by its taste, that doesn't mean higher price equates to increased likeability. If the most expensive wine in the world is judged by tasters as tasting like horse piss, I ain't walking 100 miles across the deserts of Nevada in August for a FREE bottle if I am not allowed to sell it. I still wouldn't know what to expect it would taste like to me, but common sense would prevail.
October 31st, 2011 at 10:00:17 AM
permalink
To some extent fine wines are collectibles, too. People keep bottles for years, selling and trading them, and they may never open but a fraction of them. In that sense, you'd expect all sorts of special editions, rare vintages, and inflated prices.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
October 31st, 2011 at 10:21:46 AM
permalink
Quote: dmAlso, let's be clear. Even if someone can distinguish the value of wine by its taste, that doesn't mean higher price equates to increased likeability. If the most expensive wine in the world is judged by tasters as tasting like horse piss, I ain't walking 100 miles across the deserts of Nevada in August for a FREE bottle if I am not allowed to sell it. I still wouldn't know what to expect it would taste like to me, but common sense would prevail.
The value of something is the price someone is willing to pay, and if they'll pay $120 for a bottle of horse piss, that was it's worth to the buyer and seller at that time.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
October 31st, 2011 at 10:42:17 AM
permalink
Quote: renoJesus said the same thing in John 2:10
Quote: dmDon't you mean someone said Jesus said it? You didn't actually hear Jesus say it, I don't think. In legal terms, that makes it hearsay, which makes it inadmissible to LOTS OF INTELLIGENT PEOPLE!
Regardless of whether the Bible is fiction or nonfiction, it would be grammatically correct to write "Jesus said the same thing in John 2:10." If I had written "The Mad Hatter said the same thing in Alice in Wonderland" hopefully you wouldn't question whether I personally heard the Mad Hatter say it.
October 31st, 2011 at 11:19:33 AM
permalink
Quote: NareedTo some extent fine wines are collectibles, too. People keep bottles for years, selling and trading them, and they may never open but a fraction of them. In that sense, you'd expect all sorts of special editions, rare vintages, and inflated prices.
The same could be said for beer.
October 31st, 2011 at 11:29:00 AM
permalink
Quote: kpThe same could be said for beer.
Are there fine beers?
But it's different. Beer production is far more standardized and industrialized than wine production. And as far as I know, beer doesn't appreciate with age.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
October 31st, 2011 at 11:41:09 AM
permalink
With the microbrew revolution in full swing by the 21st century, there are indeed some beers produced with aging in mind. The most notable that I recall is the Stone Brewery Vertical Epic series, released once a year starting on 1/1/01, 2/2/02, etc. with the intent all will be at there peak on 12/12/12.
And yes, there are fine beers. The finest I've had was 30 bucks for a 750 mL bottle. DeuS, or Brut Des Flandres, which is brewed in Belgium and then finished like a champagne in France.
And yes, there are fine beers. The finest I've had was 30 bucks for a 750 mL bottle. DeuS, or Brut Des Flandres, which is brewed in Belgium and then finished like a champagne in France.
Solo venimos, solo nos vamos. Y aqui nos juntamos, juntos que estamos.
October 31st, 2011 at 11:46:59 AM
permalink
Driftwood, in Victoria BC, makes a great Barleywine (cellar dweller) that certainly improves with age. As do most of the high strength beers. I've seen some of the micro's do interesting things with oak aging... something I want to play with once I can get the white oak staves from my red-wine brewing friend.
Besides, Belgian Lambic's have for years been all about aging from 1-3 years (or longer). The best lambic I ever drank was a 12 year old blackcurrant lambic-style made by a Storm Brewing in Vancouver. Deliciously soured. Most of my home brews taste better after 2-3 months in the bottle.
Budweiser is "Beechwood Aged". This has little to do with wood aging, but does condition, help the yeast and improve the beer (removing more of the off-flavours that are killers for a good, clean lager).
Besides, Belgian Lambic's have for years been all about aging from 1-3 years (or longer). The best lambic I ever drank was a 12 year old blackcurrant lambic-style made by a Storm Brewing in Vancouver. Deliciously soured. Most of my home brews taste better after 2-3 months in the bottle.
Budweiser is "Beechwood Aged". This has little to do with wood aging, but does condition, help the yeast and improve the beer (removing more of the off-flavours that are killers for a good, clean lager).
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
October 31st, 2011 at 11:51:20 AM
permalink
Quote: progrockerWith the microbrew revolution in full swing by the 21st century, there are indeed some beers produced with aging in mind. The most notable that I recall is the Stone Brewery Vertical Epic series, released once a year starting on 1/1/01, 2/2/02, etc. with the intent all will be at there peak on 12/12/12.
And yes, there are fine beers. The finest I've had was 30 bucks for a 750 mL bottle. DeuS, or Brut Des Flandres, which is brewed in Belgium and then finished like a champagne in France.
Granted. But in wines you don't have the equivalent of a Budweiser or Modelo producing millions of units every day, nor is wine popular as an every day, any time drink in the US or any other large country. To be sure in some countries, like Spain, France and Germany, wine is usually consumed at lunch and dinner. If that were the case in America or China, there would be a gigantic wine-maker selling millions of small bottles or cans every day. And wine would be a lot cheaper than it is now.
BTW I should point out I drink rarely. I like wine sometimes, but I don't like beer at all.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
October 31st, 2011 at 11:58:23 AM
permalink
Blind tasting at the next WoV meet ... oh, yes, It will happen.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
October 31st, 2011 at 12:05:24 PM
permalink
Quote: teddysBlind tasting at the next WoV meet ... oh, yes, It will happen.
Beer, wine or New Coke? :P
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
October 31st, 2011 at 12:29:17 PM
permalink
Quote: NareedGranted. But in wines you don't have the equivalent of a Budweiser or Modelo producing millions of units every day, nor is wine popular as an every day, any time drink in the US or any other large country. To be sure in some countries, like Spain, France and Germany, wine is usually consumed at lunch and dinner. If that were the case in America or China, there would be a gigantic wine-maker selling millions of small bottles or cans every day. And wine would be a lot cheaper than it is now.
Sure you do - Gallo sells well over 1M bottles/day, so does Constellation (owners of Mondavi and Clos du Bois), and so does The Wine Group (owners of Franzia and Almaden). And you can now buy wine in packaging similar to kids' juice boxes. I can't speak to costs, but there are very definitely "industrial" wine producers focusing on volume and low price points. I don't even think you can buy Franzia in anything smaller than a jug.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 31st, 2011 at 12:44:06 PM
permalink
Quote: NareedGranted. But in wines you don't have the equivalent of a Budweiser or Modelo producing millions of units every day, nor is wine popular as an every day, any time drink in the US or any other large country. To be sure in some countries, like Spain, France and Germany, wine is usually consumed at lunch and dinner. If that were the case in America or China, there would be a gigantic wine-maker selling millions of small bottles or cans every day. And wine would be a lot cheaper than it is now.
BTW I should point out I drink rarely. I like wine sometimes, but I don't like beer at all.
Wine is more common as drink in than beer in Italy, France, Portugal, Greece, among other places. These are relatively large countries. You need less wine to have the same amount of pure alcohol, so it's hard to compare the two, I guess exactly.
The difference seems to be there is not the same wide range corporatism of wine there has been with beer. That said people like Ernest and Julio Gallo have a lot of wine making under their umbrella. I suspect the big alcohol companies own some piece of the big wineries in Europe.
Lager beer is designed by it's very style to be relatively un-flavoured. Making a mass-production lager is hard... as you can't hide "off flavours" as much. It's suited to large scale, chemical-work style production, as every beer is meant to be the same. Whereas with wine, variation is much more common and seen as a good thing. It's much more of a hetreogenous market, and appeals to label buyers (I don't know of any of my wine drinking friends who are fiercely brand loyal to their wines, but the same is not true for beer drinkers).
Anyways, there is plenty of craft brewing happening across the world, both in beer and wine. Estates and farms sell their own wine (and ciders, too) across the farm gate. Quality is in the eye of the beer holder. I wonder if there IS a market for wine in small lots (single glass sized)? I wish there was much more available at a reasonable price in single serving packages as I love cooking with wine.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
October 31st, 2011 at 12:44:23 PM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremistSure you do - Gallo sells well over 1M bottles/day, so does Constellation (owners of Mondavi and Clos du Bois), and so does The Wine Group (owners of Franzia and Almaden). And you can now buy wine in packaging similar to kids' juice boxes. I can't speak to costs, but there are very definitely "industrial" wine producers focusing on volume and low price points. I don't even think you can buy Franzia in anything smaller than a jug.
I wasn't aware of all that. Still, how does that compare to beer?
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
