Are San Marzano tomatoes a meme or is it really worth the extra money?

Oh wow, it's literally the very first episode.

Ok, that makes sense. It's not that the San Marzano's are bad, but that buying something closer to home is probably going to maintain its flavor better.

I think the best canned tomatoes for americans are the san marzano "style" ones grown in new jersey or california. Just as good but half as much money

but like, canned goods stay good for a long time, I doubt an extra week on a container ship is going to seriously affect the taste

It's a long unsteady journey. I honestly couldn't tell you what in particular is changing their flavor, but I trust ATK to be honest with their flavor evaluations.

Are they the same strain, just grown in different soil? America has lax naming laws when it comes to food, so it's hard to know.

Keep in mind that San Marzano is a type of tomato grown in a specific place, a place that got famous for growing good tomatoes. It's no assurance of quality. It's like wine. Some of the world's best wine comes from Bordeaux. That doesn't mean every bottle of wine that says Bordeaux on it is going to be better than any other bottle of wine.

Bordeaux is a specific style of production, though, not just a place. That's how the Californians justify calling their stuff Bordeaux. I suppose you're saying it's the same with San Marzanos?

They are the same strain I'm p sure some muh heritage fags from Jersey petitioned the government to bring them over here so they could make authentic sunday gravy on the cheap. I know that terroir is a thing but honestly the Naples area is good for tomatoes only because the soil has a high phosphate content and tomatoes love that shit

That sounds pretty reproducible with modern ag techniques

>"the good news is, buy american"
>show is literally called america's test kitchen

This was also years before people like Rachel Ray and Giada started pushing San Marzano tomatoes, which was around the time they started showing up in literally every grocery store. If the host thought they were a huge fad in the 60's and 70's they were probably far more expensive.

>Californians justify calling their stuff Bordeaux.
That's obscene.
>the same with San Marzanos
You can certainly plant "San Marzano" tomato plants and put them in your garden. They're the same type of tomatoes grown in San Marzano, just like Cab Sauv and Merlot are the same type of grapes grown in Bordeaux.

>That's obscene.
Eh. It is a specific process, and if you're copying it, why not? It's not like they say it's from Bordeaux, and anyone who cares enough to know the differences already knows whether or not they think Cali can pull off that style of wine. Personally, I think they're just as good, if not better depending on the year.

Easy. Only buy if DOP stamped, if it's readily available to you and you like the taste of them. A bunch of American companies make great canned tomatoes.

Because diluting the value of a protected name is just being a dick. Anyone who knows wine can guess that your Cab and Merlot blend that spent a little time on oak is probably trying to ape the Bordeaux style. So there's no reason to spell it out unless you're trying to ride on the coattails of a name that doesn't belong to you. It'd be like some Chilean wine putting the words "Napa Valley" on their wine, because they consider that a "style".

It's bullshit.

But Napa Valley isn't a specific style, and Bordeaux is. How do you get that across on a bottle without using the name?

A lot of balsamic vinegars are made via the Orleans process, it's just a name for a way to do things. People aren't calling California Bordeaux wine clarets for a reason

Bordeaux is more than a style, though. It's a protected name and a region. Ignoring that because "hurr durr I'm in California - Eurofag rules don't apply to me!" is just being a dick.

>packed in tomato puree

It's a variety of things, like most words in the English language. How do you get across that you're using the Bordeaux process without using the word?

You're being a moron, see

Fuck off already

People who know even the slightest bit about wine can tell, as I said here Really? Then why is the name Bordeaux legally protected everywhere else?

How would they know if the info isn't on the bottle? Sure they could look it up, but do you do that when you're out browsing wine?

You can try to build a case for American exceptionalism as much as you want, but there is no case for it. It's a matter of belief. And when it comes to wine I don't share your belief.

You're specifically avoiding the question of how they should disseminate this information, because there is no good answer.

What about gin? London Dry Gin is a style/process of making gin originally from London, but anyone aware of that doesn't get mad when Americans make London Dry Gin.

More accurate Veeky Forums definition for your service:

coopted value, positivity or desire by displacement or abstraction of an idea to an unrelated product or idea, in the form of an over-arching or containing idea; often, but not limited to in picture or word form.

Example: reusing mason jars was economical beverage temporary storage solution in a home environment, but using Ball brand mason jars in a restaurant environment provides none of the value or benefits, as Ball brand mason jars are costly compared to typical beverage glasses, are not ideal for drinking from, and are not used for canning in a majority of restaurants, so are an added expense that adds zero value to the customer's product.

Dude, an oaked Cab-Merolt blend is pretty obvious to anyone who knows wine.No less obvious than what the same thing would be if you blended in a little Sangiovese.The first is trying to cop a Bordeaux, the second is trying to cop a super Tuscan. You don't need to spell out obvious shit like that. The only reason to do so is because you want to trade on the prestige of a name that isn't yours to use.

And how do you know that that is what you're buying, if it's not on the label? And if you're putting it on the label, why would you not want to simplify it to one word? There's just no reason not to use the word Bordeaux.

>pretty obvious to anyone who knows wine
So alienate the rest of the market to avoid people like you sperging on the internet?

>implying the kinds of people who defend mislabeled products would be caught dead admitting that one wine can be any different than any other wine
You're on the "all food is the same it tastes fine to me" board, you can look forward to a bunch of links to that trick where they dyed a white wine and lied to some testers and they got confused therefore sauternes is literally the same thing as thunderbird

>There's just no reason not to use the word Bordeaux.
How about the fact that the use of the name is legally protected, and dicks in California just don't give a fuck. Yet another reason not to drink their crappy wine.

It's only legally protected in some parts of the world. Assuming that's not the case where you're at, there's no reason not to use the name. It's not like legality is an objective statement on the morality of an action.

You are talking like putting a "Bordeaux" label on a wine only means one thing, when it means two separate things that have little to do with one another. That is why you are a moron, because you don't understand the difference and are sperging out about it while other people are trying to help you understand

I agree, but in the wine world putting the name of the region that pretty much started the French export wine business on a bottle of California wine just makes your product look as stupid as bootleg toys from China.

Not an argument

They're actually (relatively) respectful of the word bordeaux probably because the silent X isn't useful when trying to market a wine to a culture that gets angry when challenged to pronounce new words that you can't sound out with your mouth while making strange facial contortions at the intense intellectual exertion

They even trotted out a special term, "meritage", whose pronunciation they they take great pains to promote as "rhymes with heritage" lest anyone get triggered by the possibility of frenchified pronunciation

It's burgundy that they rape, particularly but not limited to the term "chablis"

The argument usually goes like this: "people are stupid and can't tell the difference anyway, therefore why not, we've gotten away with it in the past therefore it's in the consumer's interest that we continue to lie to them"

That may have been the case at one point, but it's certainly not so now.

I understand the distinction you're trying to make, and it's doublethink. It's like saying you can call California sparkling wine made in the methode champenoiose Champagne. Unfortunately you legally can in America, but it just makes you look like an idiot.

>doublethink

No, that is not what this word means.

And ultimately, if it accurately describes what's in the bottle, I don't see why anyone should care. The wine world has already learned to make distinctions between the name of the place and the method of production, and there's no going back. Culturally, you've already lost this battle.

>it just makes you look like an idiot.
na m8 it makes you look like a dick about terms

Only in the US, and given the quality of most of the wine we make I wouldn't consider the standards here very good ones to adopt.

lol ok

> The wine world has already learned to make distinctions between the name of the place and the method of production
I don't know any person who genuinely thinks that sweet pink wine made from mystery grapes can accurately be described as "chablis", and yet, that seems to be what you're arguing here

Cali wine regularly dominates international competitions you colossal dipshit

Found the guy who only knows about wine from the judgment of paris wiki article

There are some great california wines but the vast majority of it is garbage and the good stuff is way overpriced because it has a "big name"

It's practically impossible to get a california wine that doesn't smack you in the face with oak chips and mega purple without spending at least $30, and even that's no guarantee, because here in the US wine is considered a fancy thing for special occasions, so big spenders spend big on the marthas vineyard and the kronos and drive prices through the stratosphere. But "everyday" priced wine is designed to cater to people who don't really like wine but respond well to loud, obnoxious flavors. It's a completely different product, and tastes essentially the same whether it's $8 or $35. Basically the kraft singles of wine.

Meanwhile European winemakers are producing for a culture that drinks wine every day, so inexpensive stuff, even thought it's not necessarily suited for cellaring, makes the most of what it is without trying to grab your face with a freddy kruger claw and ram it into a pile of oak staves. There's some terrible stuff, musty or overly green or whatever, and sometimes over-oaked too, but as a general rule it's at least possible to get humble, enjoyable wine for reasonable prices, if you shop the european side of the market.

So yeah, if you're cherry picking the absolute top of the market, that no real people can actually afford, then california wine has a great reputation. But if you're a regular joe, it's shit.

I bet you think the Bordeaux method has to do with winemaking and not mildew control.

I think they're really good, and usually get some if I'm going to make tomato sauce.