V Sattui was the winery that my friends and I liked best when we had our day in Napa. Sure, there were a ton of people there, but the food was good, the atmosphere around the place was great… And we got the “special” tasting, as described earlier, where we got to taste just about every single wine they had for the 3 wine tasting price. AKA, all the wines for $15. I remember thinking that the Riesling would be delicious with a nice thai green curry… But wound up buying port instead.
My PERSONAL hope (lover of dessert wines that I am), is that the Thursday deal will offer up some of their delicious Vin Santo. That stuff is second only to the 1971 Bodegas Toro Albalá Don PX Gran Reserva in my book. Yum.
I saw the Vin Santo on their webite and was very excited. I had the opportunity to taste quite a bit of it when I was in Tuscany last year…it was AMAZING! The Frangelica and the Port sound great as well. Have you tried them?
the red side of my cellar has been tilting so much from the weight, I think it is activating the San Andreas fault. Time for some whites. I believe the reislings pair so well with food. … now onto menu planning!
V Sattui Winery Riesling - Four Pack
Current numbers (updated each minute):
First sucker: MaskedMarvel
Speed to first woot: 0m 5.093s
what does it say about my sanity that I’ve been checking wine.woot (and purchased!) even while in Singapore… I think ww gets checked more often than my work email! Let me tell you, trying to figure out when the offer changes is much more difficult than it adding or subtracting an hour or 2 in the US. In for 1 before it’s gone (missed the mystery Wellington due to 17 hours in the air, but got the second!)
Thanks for the comments on Joh. Riesgling versus Riesling. And the Blue Nun Riesing info, too (though their most popular wine, and the wine that is easiest to find is the Müller-Thurgau based Qualitätswein [in die Hochflasche] which they wisely do not acknowledge…it also has been made drier and gained acidity in recent times through the addition of…Riesling).
Next question for the winemaker.
What’s the cellarability of these? Rieslings can be some of the most cellarable whites. Would that hold true for either or both of these? How long? What should we expect after that time?
iByron
(and the “i” is for, “I honestly have never had an aged Riesling, but am looking to try someday, especially now that I’ve had a d’Yquem!” )
I originally posted this info in July 2006 (Vina Robles thread). This is how the EU defines it (off-dry would probably fall under B):
Jul 4, 2007 11:34 AM
Some information regarding sweetness from the EU (bolding is my addition).
Article 16 COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 753/2002 of 29 April 2002 (warning: PDF) states:
"[T]he following terms may only be used on the labels of table wines, table wines with a geographical indication and quality wines psr, with the exception of the quality liqueur wines psr and quality semi-sparkling wines psr covered by Article 39(1)(b):
(a) sec, trocken, secco, asciutto, dry, tør, ξηρός, seco, kuiva, droog or torrt, on condition that the wine concerned has a residual sugar content not exceeding: (i) 4 grams per litre; or (ii) 9 grams per litre, provided that the total acidity expressed as grams of tartaric acid per litre is not more than 2 grams below the residual sugar content;
(b) demi-sec, halbtrocken, abboccato, medium dry, halvtør, ημίξηρος, semiseco, meio seco, adamado, puolikuiva, halfdroog or halvtorrt, on condition that the wine concerned has a residual sugar content in excess of the maximum set at (a) but not exceeding: (i) 12 grams per litre; or (ii) 18 grams per litre, where the minimum total acidity has been set by the Member State under paragraph 2;
(c) moelleux, lieblich, amabile, medium, medium sweet, halvsød, ημίγλυκος, semidulce, meio doce, puolimakea, halfzoet or halvsftt, on condition that the wine concerned has a residual sugar content higher than the maximum set at (b) but not more than 45 grams per litre;
(d) doux, süss, dolce, sweet, sød, γλυκός, dulce, doce, makea, zoet or sftt, on condition that the wine concerned has a residual sugar content of at least 45 grams per litre."
i find it absolutely fascinating that unspecific positive comments such as “if you haven’t tried this, then you should, because it’s great!” from which we learn nothing useful at all about the wines or the winery in question are so broadly embraced as-is, ie we demand no further clarification from the commentator, while similar but negative ones such as clay’s are not, ie we (oft immediately) demand further clarification from the commentator. which difference in treatment makes absolutely NO SENSE at all since the primary objective of this forum is to exchange information about the wine(s) currently being offered. the only logical thing to do w/ ANY nonspecific comment is to either request SPECIFICS from the commentator or ignore it until & if the commentator chooses to give them to us. but they are certainly not worth getting excited about either way IMO.
what are the ABVs for these two wines? others have asked this as well. the answer is not clear from the offering text.
what are the drinkability windows for them?
even if they were to be primarily intended to be enjoyed in the next couple of years, how well do you expect them to age? how well have prior vintages aged?
are you grandfathered in your use of the term “Johannisberg Riesling” (see below)?
[QUOTE=themostrighteous, post:110, topic:180863]
i find it absolutely fascinating that unspecific positive comments such as “if you haven’t tried this, then you should, because it’s great!” from which we learn nothing useful at all about the wines or the winery in question are so broadly embraced as-is, ie we demand no further clarification from the commentator, while similar but negative ones such as clay’s are not, ie we (oft immediately) demand further clarification from the commentator. which difference in treatment makes absolutely NO SENSE at all since the primary objective of this forum is to exchange information about the wine(s) currently being offered. the only logical thing to do w/ ANY nonspecific comment is to either request SPECIFICS from the commentator or ignore it until & if the commentator chooses to give them to us. but they are certainly not worth getting excited about either way IMO.
[/quote]
you are brighter than the sun (that’s self explanatory)
hey, WD, this exact same spam post (same language, different first-time poster) has been hitting various threads over the last couple of weeks. any chance the codemonkeys could prevent this from being posted? might be worth looking into.
the joh jos prum auslese mosel saar ruwer wehlener sonnenuhr is even better. (2005). After 2 hours in the decanter massive mouthfuls of honey, pears, bread. Almost like a syrupy champagne. Delicious. Of course… good luck finding that anywhere for $50 now. Your suggestion is still very good
Thanks for keeping us honest TMR. It is very true that few people are questioned for vague positive comments, though there is no more evidence provided to support them. I think there is a slight difference though in how we perceive positive vs. negative input: pos. is received a bit more skeptically and sort of as “well, you may like it, though I may not,” whereas negative often comes in as, “damn! That’s harsh!”. The negative can seem offensive and we naturally jump to the defense of the injured party. It’s as much about perceived abuse as it is about useful information.
)