Someone recently asked me this question, and I thought it was a really good question. Working in the bar and restaurant industry for over a decade, I guess most of my beer, wine, and spirit knowledge just kind of came to me. Or I learned of opportunities to pursue that knowledge through work, vendors, or conversations with coworkers.
So, my advice to someone looking to learn about wine. First, buy The Wine Bible. This book is incredibly overwhelming and challenging, even for people that know a fair amount about wine, to read cover to cover. But as you read through it, and learn more about wine, you can learn a lot from it, and it will make a lot more sense. It is also a great reference point.
Second, have fun with it. When you talk about wine, or beer, or spirits, you're talking about something that engages all of your senses. Sitting in a class, or reading a book, on its own, first of all, will just not be as fun as having a few glasses. Second of all, unless you learn by engaging all of your senses, you won't really learn in a useful way.
My advice is to do one, or all, of three things.
1) Taste with a friend that knows more about wine than you do. You, as the aspiring learner, should express what you see, smell, and taste first. Let them fill in the gaps or help you find the words you're looking for.
2) Print out, or have someone print out, tasting notes, either from the winemaker, or from the internet. Don't read the notes. Taste the wine you want to try, write down your own tasting notes, and then compare them.
3) Taste with another friend who doesn't know a lot about wine. Make sure you're taking turns "going first," or each of you write down your own tasting notes while you taste, then compare, and revisit the wine after comparing.
The keys to all three of these things are:
1) Actually taste the wine.
2) Taste it blind to the opinions of others. See what you experience first. This is the only way to truly learn wine, or to truly enjoy wine. The power of suggestion can be deceptive. If I tell you a wine is grassy, that is the first thing you will taste, or, if it's not, you will be so busy tasting for grass you miss the other fun flavors in the wine.
3) Use your friends, printed wine notes, books, or other resources, to help you find flavors and aromas you might not be as sensitive to. Everyone's senses work differently, and you may either not be as perceptive to a particular smell or flavor, or you may perceive it differently than someone else.
4) Use a knowledgeable friend, the label, wine notes, etc. to both learn "wine words" and to help you identify what you are tasting. Sometimes you will know exactly what you're tasting, but not be able to find the word, identify the flavor exactly, or connect it to something else. Hearing or seeing it right after tasting it will help you make those connections.
Hope this is helpful for anyone looking to learn more about wine. Luckily, in the last 5-10 years, I think largely because craft beer has popped up as serious competition, the wine world has become a little more casual. People are less and less concerned about "proper" training or using the right words, and more concerned about making wine, and the way we talk about it, approachable and something people can relate to. So remember, when you're tasting wine, it's okay to say what it reminds you of, even if it seems silly. After all, "cat piss" is an acceptable (and even desirable) way to describe some wines.
Friday, April 10, 2015
Friday, February 13, 2015
Does Bourbon have to come from Kentucky?
So this is a common question/source of argument.
Bourbon does not need to come from Kentucky!
Bourbon, or bourbon whiskey, can, in fact, come from any of the 50 states.
It must be made in the U.S., consist of at least 50% corn mash, be aged in new, charred, American oak barrels, and meet certain requirements for alcohol content at various points in its processing.
It is true that it takes its name from Bourbon County, Kentucky, and that most bourbon, and almost all well known brands or bourbon, are from Kentucky. There is also a designation, Kentucky Straight Bourbon, which applies only to bourbon produced in Kentucky.
People often ask why there isn't more bourbon out there from other parts of the country if it doesn't have to come from Kentucky. My best answer is three fold:
1) Convenience. Corn and the other grains commonly used in bourbon grow easily, and are available relatively locally, without the cost of transport, in Kentucky. There are also facilities in which to mash, ferment, and distill bourbon already in place, as well as rackhouses to age the bourbon in.
2) Competition. When there are already so many good bourbons coming from Kentucky, it is difficult to compete. Especially when so many people think that all bourbon, or all good bourbon, has to be from Kentucky.
3) Perception/marketing. Because of the stereotype most people hold of bourbon coming from Kentucky, as well as the fact that there is a law allowing Kentucky bourbons to be labeled as "Kentucky Straight Bourbon," it is easier and more logical to market a bourbon as being from Kentucky than as not being from Kentucky. A lot of branding behind bourbon also has to do with tying it to its Southern, and in particular Kentucky, roots. So you may have seen a bourbon made outside of Kentucky, and not even realized it, just assuming from the label and the spirit type, that it was a Kentucky bourbon.
Bourbon does not need to come from Kentucky!
Bourbon, or bourbon whiskey, can, in fact, come from any of the 50 states.
It must be made in the U.S., consist of at least 50% corn mash, be aged in new, charred, American oak barrels, and meet certain requirements for alcohol content at various points in its processing.
It is true that it takes its name from Bourbon County, Kentucky, and that most bourbon, and almost all well known brands or bourbon, are from Kentucky. There is also a designation, Kentucky Straight Bourbon, which applies only to bourbon produced in Kentucky.
People often ask why there isn't more bourbon out there from other parts of the country if it doesn't have to come from Kentucky. My best answer is three fold:
1) Convenience. Corn and the other grains commonly used in bourbon grow easily, and are available relatively locally, without the cost of transport, in Kentucky. There are also facilities in which to mash, ferment, and distill bourbon already in place, as well as rackhouses to age the bourbon in.
2) Competition. When there are already so many good bourbons coming from Kentucky, it is difficult to compete. Especially when so many people think that all bourbon, or all good bourbon, has to be from Kentucky.
3) Perception/marketing. Because of the stereotype most people hold of bourbon coming from Kentucky, as well as the fact that there is a law allowing Kentucky bourbons to be labeled as "Kentucky Straight Bourbon," it is easier and more logical to market a bourbon as being from Kentucky than as not being from Kentucky. A lot of branding behind bourbon also has to do with tying it to its Southern, and in particular Kentucky, roots. So you may have seen a bourbon made outside of Kentucky, and not even realized it, just assuming from the label and the spirit type, that it was a Kentucky bourbon.
Sunday, January 11, 2015
What's with Hops and Aging?
This is a topic that causes a lot of confusion, and understandably so.
The question usually comes from people who are just getting into craft beer, enough that they have tried various styles, and have done some reading about the history of beer, brewing, and various ingredients.
"If hops are a preservative, why do people say it's best to drink IPAs and other hoppy beers fresh?"
Well, here's where it's important to separate the way hops got into beer from the reason that we use them today.
Hops were originally used as a preservative in beer. This was before pasteurization and refrigeration, and especially refrigerated transportation and storage, were a thing. Hops kept harmful bacteria out of our ancestors' beer, which is the origin of their use in beer.
The safety of beer, however, no longer depends on hops. We now have pasteurization, effective packaging, and refrigeration from the brewery right through the consumer. So while it is true that beer was originally hopped for preservation, this is no longer the case. Yes, it's even true that some popular styles of beer we drink today have their origins (in a loose, rough, kind of way) in beers that were intended to have an incredibly long shelf life while traveling through various climates.
That being said, many beers, and in particular those styles originally intended for long life and travel (IPAs), are now hopped more for flavor and aroma than anything else. In fact, there are hops bred and engineered to emphasize particular flavors. Individual flavors from hops, like any other flower, don't hold up particularly well with age. They don't go bad, per se, they just don't fade.
So the reality of it is, if you were to open two beers, the same in every way, but one hoppier than another, and leave them out for a week, the hoppier beer might be "better," "safer" or "fresher" than the unhopped beer in a scientific way. It is less likely to be affected by harmful bacteria, or to make you sick. On the other hand, while it hasn't necessarily gone bad, it is unlikely to have the same citrus, pine, resin (think marijuana), or grassy notes that it had when it was fresh.
The same principal goes for aging beers still in their containers. Hoppy beers don't go "bad," and in fact, are probably less likely to do so than some of the beers we age (in barrels or in bottles) more frequently, but they also aren't as great. In fact, since many of the beers we age are more malt (sugar) focused, brewers generally have to make sure they have a significant alcohol content, and are also constantly testing barrel aged beers for the presence of harmful bacteria. You probably wouldn't have to be as vigilant if barrel aging an imperial IPA. On the other hand, the very fresh, floral, piney, grassy, skunky, or other flavors that make people go nuts for IPAs would be lost
So, the answer is that hops are, in fact, a preservative. They are, however, used in "hoppy" beers more for flavor and aroma, which fades over time. You would be perfectly safe drinking an IPA that has been in your fridge for a few months. It's just not going to have the clean, bright flavors it would have if drank while fresh.
The question usually comes from people who are just getting into craft beer, enough that they have tried various styles, and have done some reading about the history of beer, brewing, and various ingredients.
"If hops are a preservative, why do people say it's best to drink IPAs and other hoppy beers fresh?"
Well, here's where it's important to separate the way hops got into beer from the reason that we use them today.
Hops were originally used as a preservative in beer. This was before pasteurization and refrigeration, and especially refrigerated transportation and storage, were a thing. Hops kept harmful bacteria out of our ancestors' beer, which is the origin of their use in beer.
The safety of beer, however, no longer depends on hops. We now have pasteurization, effective packaging, and refrigeration from the brewery right through the consumer. So while it is true that beer was originally hopped for preservation, this is no longer the case. Yes, it's even true that some popular styles of beer we drink today have their origins (in a loose, rough, kind of way) in beers that were intended to have an incredibly long shelf life while traveling through various climates.
That being said, many beers, and in particular those styles originally intended for long life and travel (IPAs), are now hopped more for flavor and aroma than anything else. In fact, there are hops bred and engineered to emphasize particular flavors. Individual flavors from hops, like any other flower, don't hold up particularly well with age. They don't go bad, per se, they just don't fade.
So the reality of it is, if you were to open two beers, the same in every way, but one hoppier than another, and leave them out for a week, the hoppier beer might be "better," "safer" or "fresher" than the unhopped beer in a scientific way. It is less likely to be affected by harmful bacteria, or to make you sick. On the other hand, while it hasn't necessarily gone bad, it is unlikely to have the same citrus, pine, resin (think marijuana), or grassy notes that it had when it was fresh.
The same principal goes for aging beers still in their containers. Hoppy beers don't go "bad," and in fact, are probably less likely to do so than some of the beers we age (in barrels or in bottles) more frequently, but they also aren't as great. In fact, since many of the beers we age are more malt (sugar) focused, brewers generally have to make sure they have a significant alcohol content, and are also constantly testing barrel aged beers for the presence of harmful bacteria. You probably wouldn't have to be as vigilant if barrel aging an imperial IPA. On the other hand, the very fresh, floral, piney, grassy, skunky, or other flavors that make people go nuts for IPAs would be lost
So, the answer is that hops are, in fact, a preservative. They are, however, used in "hoppy" beers more for flavor and aroma, which fades over time. You would be perfectly safe drinking an IPA that has been in your fridge for a few months. It's just not going to have the clean, bright flavors it would have if drank while fresh.
Friday, January 9, 2015
Why is my beer hazy, or even muddy looking?
So, you've probably read my post on sediment in beer, but if not, that's okay.
Every once in a while, the sediment or haze gets extreme, or, if you've had the beer before, unusual even for the particular beer you're drinking.
This is usually the case in draft beers which are unfiltered or undergo secondary fermentation in the keg, and there's a few reasons this happens.
First of all, it is perfectly natural, and perfectly normal, and not a sign of a flaw in the beer, and definitely not that the beer is unsafe to drink.
As the post above discusses, sediment or haze is usually caused by the dead yeast cells remaining in an unfiltered or bottle/keg conditioned beer. This is why unfiltered beers, such as hefeweizens, wit beirs, and various Belgian beers are usually hazy and opaque.
On the other hand, sometimes the haze goes beyond opacity to actually make the beer darker, or almost muddy in appearance. While in hefeweizens, these beers usually pour within the normal color range for the style, and unless you are familiar with the particular beer you're drinking, you might not even notice, it can be particularly alarming in Belgian wit beers, golden ales, tripels, etc.
The reason this happens is fairly simple. Dead yeast cells are heavier than water and the other things that make up the majority of your beer. If a keg of beer sits stationary for a while, the yeast will start to make its way toward the bottom of the keg and become concentrated there, causing a darker, more murky appearance.
The way kegs work is that the beer being pulled from the tap is actually coming through the stem of the barrel from the bottom of the keg. This means that, depending on how long a beer has been sitting in a color, and how it was stored, the beer can be darker at either the beginning or the end of a keg.
If a keg has just been tapped, and is pouring with a muddy color, it is likely a sign that the beer has been in the bar's cooler for a while, and has been stored upright. Luckily for us, most unfiltered beer styles are not harmed, and may actually get better, from aging. On the other hand, if the keg gets darker toward the end, it is usually a sign that the beer has been on tap for a while, or was stored upside down before being tapped. In fact, many brewers recommend that their unfiltered beers either be stored upside down, or are agitated just before serving. The reason is that this way, the yeast is concentrated at the top of the keg. If the keg is on tap for a reasonable amount of time (a few weeks), the yeast will slowly settle, and the beer shouldn't pour "muddy" at all. On the other hand, if the beer is particularly popular, and moves quickly, the yeast concentrated at the top of the keg won't have time to settle/spread throughout the keg, and when the end of the keg is reached, the beer which was formerly at the top of the keg will have a high concentration of sediment, and will pour with a murky/muddy appearance.
As mentioned in my sediment post, I have heard (from very unscientific sources, of course), that the dead yeast cells are actually very nutritious. In most draft beers, they may affect the mouth feel of the beer, but honestly, if you were to blind taste the "bottom of the barrel" against a glass from the middle of the keg, you wouldn't know the difference.
So don't let the dirty/muddy appearance of that beer scare you. Enjoy it!
Every once in a while, the sediment or haze gets extreme, or, if you've had the beer before, unusual even for the particular beer you're drinking.
This is usually the case in draft beers which are unfiltered or undergo secondary fermentation in the keg, and there's a few reasons this happens.
First of all, it is perfectly natural, and perfectly normal, and not a sign of a flaw in the beer, and definitely not that the beer is unsafe to drink.
As the post above discusses, sediment or haze is usually caused by the dead yeast cells remaining in an unfiltered or bottle/keg conditioned beer. This is why unfiltered beers, such as hefeweizens, wit beirs, and various Belgian beers are usually hazy and opaque.
On the other hand, sometimes the haze goes beyond opacity to actually make the beer darker, or almost muddy in appearance. While in hefeweizens, these beers usually pour within the normal color range for the style, and unless you are familiar with the particular beer you're drinking, you might not even notice, it can be particularly alarming in Belgian wit beers, golden ales, tripels, etc.
The reason this happens is fairly simple. Dead yeast cells are heavier than water and the other things that make up the majority of your beer. If a keg of beer sits stationary for a while, the yeast will start to make its way toward the bottom of the keg and become concentrated there, causing a darker, more murky appearance.
The way kegs work is that the beer being pulled from the tap is actually coming through the stem of the barrel from the bottom of the keg. This means that, depending on how long a beer has been sitting in a color, and how it was stored, the beer can be darker at either the beginning or the end of a keg.
If a keg has just been tapped, and is pouring with a muddy color, it is likely a sign that the beer has been in the bar's cooler for a while, and has been stored upright. Luckily for us, most unfiltered beer styles are not harmed, and may actually get better, from aging. On the other hand, if the keg gets darker toward the end, it is usually a sign that the beer has been on tap for a while, or was stored upside down before being tapped. In fact, many brewers recommend that their unfiltered beers either be stored upside down, or are agitated just before serving. The reason is that this way, the yeast is concentrated at the top of the keg. If the keg is on tap for a reasonable amount of time (a few weeks), the yeast will slowly settle, and the beer shouldn't pour "muddy" at all. On the other hand, if the beer is particularly popular, and moves quickly, the yeast concentrated at the top of the keg won't have time to settle/spread throughout the keg, and when the end of the keg is reached, the beer which was formerly at the top of the keg will have a high concentration of sediment, and will pour with a murky/muddy appearance.
As mentioned in my sediment post, I have heard (from very unscientific sources, of course), that the dead yeast cells are actually very nutritious. In most draft beers, they may affect the mouth feel of the beer, but honestly, if you were to blind taste the "bottom of the barrel" against a glass from the middle of the keg, you wouldn't know the difference.
So don't let the dirty/muddy appearance of that beer scare you. Enjoy it!
Monday, January 5, 2015
Tasting Notes: Rosatello Rosso
Aroma: Smells almost like a moscato. Slightly effervescent aroma, with slightly sweet notes of peaches and berries.
Mouthfeel: Light bodied, but does kind of coat the mouth with an almost syrupy texture in the finish. The effervescence is noticeable, but not as prominent as you would think from looking at or smelling this wine.
Flavors: Confirm the nose, but stronger, and definitely sweeter. Almost tastes like a peach melba wine. Peaches and stone fruit with ripe raspberry, hints of strawberry and cherry. Almost, but not quite, cloying sweetness.
Overall: This is a semi-sparkling, sweet, red blend. Probably not everyone's cup of tea, and not the most refined wine I've ever tasted, but it is surprisingly tasting. It is just this side of being sickeningly sweet, so if you're not a sweet wine drinker at all, definitely stay away. Although it's hard to imagine in Chicago winter, I'm sure this would be a great wine for the beach or the pool on a hot, summer day. It's also only 6%. Overall, not a terrible wine if you know what you're getting yourself into and don't mind a slightly sparkling, sweet red.
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Tasting Notes: Hangar 24 Gordgeous
Aroma: Smells like when you lick the knife (am I the only one that does this) after cutting the first slice of a pumpkin pie. A hint of pumpkin, a lot of fall spices, and even a little bit of graham cracker which reminds me of the crust. Also do get a whiff of the alcohol on this one, which comes in at 8.5% ABV.
Mouthfeel: Surprisingly light on the palate for me. Goes right down, with no viscosity.
Flavors: The alcohol is the first thing I taste on this one, then it goes into some nice, roasty, coffee flavors very quickly. I get a lot of the pumpkin pie flavors again in the finish, which lingers for some time. It is more of the spices than the actual pumpkin. I get a lot of cinnamon, allspice, nutmeg, and clove, with just a hint of pumpkin.
Overall: I'm not normally a pumpkin beer fan, and I love this one. The combination of the high alcohol and the porter base beer mean there's a lot of strong flavors going on in this beer even without the pumpkin. The flavors are all strong, clean, and pleasant. The alcohol hits hard at first, but doesn't burn or come with cloying sweetness. The beer then moves cleanly into a classic, roasty, almost bitter coffee/porter flavor. It finishes with a wonderful pumpkin pie, fall spiciness. The flavors are different enough that none become overpowering, but because they seem to progress in order, they also never clash. This is definitely one of my fall favorites!
Monday, November 24, 2014
Tasting Notes: 2012 Sutter Home Pink Pinot Grigio
Aroma: Slight peach and stone fruit, with a sharp acidity (lemon and grapefruit).
Mouthfeel: Light on the tongue, although a little bit of a syrupy feel after it goes down.
Flavors: Definitely heavy on the peach. Also get a little bit of melon, kiwi, and a touch of strawberry. The citrus notes from the nose are absent, although it finishes with an acidity which leaves the mouth watering. A lingering finish of peach, and the strawberry becomes more prominent in the finish than it was on the palate.
Overall: This is, I guess, what you would expect from a pink wine from Sutter Home. Like other low-end pink pinot grigios I've tried, it is interesting how different it is from a traditional pinot grigio. The flavors and the mouth feel both have a definite sweetness to them which white pinot grigios lack. While hardly complex or refined, the flavors are pleasant, and I would consider drinking this again on a hot summer day, as it is a refreshing, easy drinking wine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)