What does Veeky Forums think about whine snobbery?

>Are you retarded

Yes, extremely

Thank you for clearing that up.

Absolutely wrong.

This is true, sans the racist police forces. Those actually do exist in quantifiable numbers. Racism might not be the motivation, but it's still a direction.
>get your arrest numbers up
>fluff them by finding a black person and do everything in your power to provoke them

ITT people who are pleb tier when it comes to Wine Knowledge.

Snobbery is always bullshit. But the problem with wine is that at a certain level it becomes a luxury good. And luxury goods inspire all kinds of pretentiousness and snobbery simply because they're out of reach for many people.

I like wine, and I love good wine. I dislike wine as a symbol of being "upscale". But I liove in the US, so to get good wine I have to associate with people who see wine as something of an upscale thing. And I have to pay more for it than I'd like to. But I have no choice.

only the Japanese can take snobbery and shallow material obsession about something as mundane as wine to the height of making an entire unironic manga series about it. :^)

Absolutely correct.

I never said they'd taste "the same", just stated that snobbery is load of crap if you're pretending you're hot shit for drinking a wine from 2012

A wine from 2012 is going to taste like mediocrity no matter the variables.

Depends on what 2012 wine it is....

Not really.

The nuances in the flavor take time to become pronounced.

4 years is not enough time.

Wine flavor is like a tree.

It takes time to get the nuances/usable lumber.

Secondary flavours and nuances associated with maturation take time to develop, however a good wine will have exemplary primary fruit, great structure and balance from the start.
A shit wine will not.

>It's an acquired taste
translation:
>I paid for it so I may as well pretend to like it

yea nah just don't buy it again

Blacks don't really need a lot of provoking in order for them to commit crimes, sadly

Find me a statistic that supports police being racist and not blacks committing a disproportionate amount of crimes for their population size.
I'll wait.

The vast majority of wines are meant to be consumed within 5 years when released. Only specific wines mostly Burgundy and Bordeaux are meant to be aged long. Older is not always better, wines can age past their prime.

Also there is a shit ton of factors not only vintage and varietal, soil, region, weather, altitude, techniques used, barrel aging etc.

The more different wines you taste the more you appreciate wine, tasting the same bottle after you've developed your palette can be quite different.

Wine snobs are annoying, true. But doesn't mean wine knowledge equates to snobbery. I know a bit about wines and doesn't mean I'll scoff at a good cheap simple wine

Straw man invented by bitter fast food eating losers looking for reasons why their terrible taste is just as good as the mean snobs on TV

>can differ white and red
>ughhhh what a snob

>hey guise it's my birthday tomorrow and I'm going to a bar for the first time, what can I order so that I look like an expert 50 something fedoric gentleman
This is the "question" that creates the perception that wine snobbery is an actual problem. Young fools who grew up in a gamified culture that subdivides everything into power levels have this stupid idea that the core purpose of drinking alcoholic beverages is to appear sophisticated. In order to "level up" they research rules and customs because they're afraid of ordering a drink that they haven't spent a lifetime preparing to be seen drinking.

With such a mindset, it's more appealing to seek out drinks with a simple and easy set of terms and "rules" (whisky is particularly favored) that they can follow religiously in order to give off the appearance of being sophisticated.

Some beverages have a lot more regional variation, complicated reasons for price and perceived value, and so on, compared to other beverages. Wine is easily the most confusing if you are looking for a simple set of rules to rigidly observe in order to stay in your crippling shell of social anxiety.

And thus the false problem of "wine snobbery" is born. It's more complicated than islay vs speyside, ice vs no ice. Since the purpose of drinking is to act out the rituals they read about on the internet, and they see evidence (such as wine experts mistaking an expensive wine for a cheaper wine) that they themselves might be humiliated and end up on YouTube in a viral cringe video, they develop this fear response in relation to wine.

>usually right

Nope, just about 50%. Meaning you could pick the crustiest nigger from Detroid and his opinion on fine wines would be just as valid.

>doesn't mean wine knowledge equates to snobbery.
Very true words. Though to someone who is not into wine any evidence of knowledge about wine might seem like pretentiousness, because they might view enjoying wine as inherently pretentious.
>doesn't mean I'll scoff at a good cheap simple wine
I'm always excited to find something inexpensive and delicious, because there's a lot of poor quality cheap wine out there. And your point about aging is well taken, too. Wine is best consumed at its peak. For most wines that means young. But the bottle age thing on some vintage wines is for real. For most of us that's a whole other world, because we don't have our own cellars and/or the disposable income to buy aged wine. Wine meant to be aged might nor reach it's peak until decades after it was bottled. The problem with such wines is that they're usually expensive as fuck, so they're out of reach for the average wine drinker.

>Straw man invented by bitter fast food eating losers looking for reasons why their terrible taste is just as good as the mean snobs on TV
This.

The real reason prices are high on wine is simply supply and demand, then scarcity, common economic terms. When someone does find something they like, maybe and probably influenced by ratings done by other people (with more of a palate), they tend to stick with what they like and know, and rebuy it the next time and then maybe even a case for their next party or for their aging. A lot of the better wines of the world, today, aren't craft things like you think they are, but rather real science has been applied to every step of the process. The chemical analysis removes quite a bit of the skunks from the market.

The rest of the "best" wine is a very careful marketing of those "I tried it before and liked it" bottles carried out at food and wine festivals by the regional distributors like Southern Wine and Spirits (supplies half the US states), to a great target audience: people who attend food festivals, everyone from owners to chefs, hospitality and catering folks, and their clients with big pocketbooks who dine out, host parties, and talk to their friends who do the same. Samples make the world go round. They buy all of a wineries stock, and then, well, they push it out into the market. It's a well oiled (lubricated) business machine, with events throughout a year to drive home the profits.

Case in point: Santa Margherita pinot grigio. Mediocre taste but highest selling and on every restaurant menu. Let's not mention they are 50% owned by an italian conglomerate that owns 50% of 100s of other italian exports from Hugo Boss to Parmalat. Let's not even talk about Patron, another medium quality product, created by half of the John Paul Mitchell creator (hair dude). Friendships/partners, it's how the world works.

It's retarded. Especially with wine you typically pay for what you get (strike that, reverse it), but there's quickly diminishing returns past a certain cost. For most people I'd say that's about $25/bottle.

>It's retarded
>For most people I'd say that's about $25/bottle.
You can get a perfectly drinkable bottle of Cotes du Rhone for $12 just about anywhere on earth, so either you're suggesting that your entry level Burgundy is inherently twice as good as a midrange CdR, or, just maybe, people buy wine from more expensive regions because they like to drink them and the cost isn't a big deal to them.

I dated a girl who basically never drank and only thing she knew about wine was matching white with fish and light meats, but because she spent $200 a month on wine that she mostly gave away as gift she considered herself a cultured wine expert.

all wine tastes like pickled vinegar so wine snobbery is 100% poofs with dead fucking tastebuds.

Mouth audiophilia

Not a bad comparison. Both are kind of expensive hobbies based around appreciation of nuances of sensory pleasure.

Read my post again. The peak of diminishing returns =/= average price for a decent bottle

>Let's not even talk about Patron, another medium quality product,
Patron is pretty good. It's just not nearly $50 per fifth good.

I got your post just fine f.a.m.

Maybe you should re-read mine.

You made an implication that wasn't correct. Clearly, you did not understand my post.

Maybe you should think about your post more carefully and then try to think about why the only logical conclusion was correctly drawn from it

Television has pushed this image. Look at any Shonda Rhimes show - the successful women are always drinking wine. It's become a symbol of a woman having "arrived" on television.
Whether or not something is worth the price has a lot to do with what someone expects to pay. Someone used to McDonald's prices might balk at Five Guys. Same goes for wine.

It's stupid, vine should be enjoyed.

Also expensive =/= good.

For example, you can buy this bad boy for 7€, and it's a bloody fucking wonder in the summer.

all spooks and placebos

remember that in blind tests they can't even tell

>you
>logical
U 'avin a giggle m8?

Good post. I like you.

And the dumb fuck I am forgot to attach the image.

>in blind tests they can't even tell
That doesn't really mean much of anything. Who eats and drinks with their eyes closed? The other senses are part of the appreciation of food and wine. If you hold your nose nothing tastes like much of anything.

Quite right. Poor neckbeards can't even afford a simple pair of Wharfedale bookshelves so they try and deflect by raving about fake "problems" like $10k S/PIDF cables because anyone with better than Creativelabs PC speakers obviously doesn't understand science

>expensive =/= good.
You are correct. Scarcity has much more to do with price. If a particular vineyard got famous for consistently producing good wine their wines will command a high price. Does that make it automatically better than the wine produced by a less prestigious place? Nope. But a place with a reputation to maintain is going to be careful about what ends up in the bottle with their name on it. And that's what you're paying for when you buy expensive bottles, along with some vintages being better than others. If one year was much better than others people will pay a premium for wine from that year.

>>in blind tests they can't even tell
>That doesn't really mean much of anything. Who eats and drinks with their eyes closed? The other senses are part of the appreciation of food and wine. If you hold your nose nothing tastes like much of anything.
A blind test means you do have your eyes open, dude. It only means you don't know the source by seeing the original bottle for prejudgement (or can be influenced by graphics on the label). You would not have your eyes closed. It's figure of speech related to scientifically controlled studies (blind, double-blind, placebo group). Sound familiar?

> It only means you don't know the source by seeing the original bottle for prejudgement
Actually you're also not supposed to know what it looks like, that's why they make special glasses for that purpose

You can tell a lot about a wine from looking at it

For instance an aged red will have rust colored edges, a pinot noir shouldn't be inky black, etc

An aged wine that still tastes fresh and delicious is worth pointing out, just as a pinot that has been tampered with, or whatever

One of the reasons people complain about "parkerization" is that certain styles of wine do very well in blind tests which don't reflect real world conditions. Most people do not drink 50 samples in a row, spitting in between each sip. A lot of people have an interest in whether a wine is made according to traditional techniques rather than industrial additives. If your drinking habits are similar to a professional wine tasting event, then sure, you can go by those 100 point scales, but for the rest of us, it's ok to accept some subjectivity in exchange for tasting impressions that are more reflective of real-world conditions.

I make my living in the music business, and have a bunch of friends in the restaurant and wine businesses. There are a lot of parallels. Trying to explain the nuances of wine to someone who doesn't get it is as difficult as explaining the differences between an LA-2A and an 1176 to someone whose ear isn't tuned in to hearing what a compressor does.

>parkerization
not a thing

made up non-existant entity

doesn't even have a wiki article

just a bunch of fucking gigamemers on shitty blogs

literally ASMR is more of a thing than this

this is literally just damage control from winefags who have been BTFO by blind testing

You really suck at wiki, just as with most other things in life:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._Parker,_Jr.#Impact_on_the_supply:_the_.22Parkerization.22_of_wine

>relegated to a subnote on a real wiki article

this is parkerization
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkerizing

Try not to backpedal so hard, you could break something

>WINEKEKS ARE RULED BY ONE MAN

CANNOT make this shit up lads

For being such autistic snobs they are controlled by a wine dictator

Absolutely unheard of

The Superior alcohol subcultures like whiskey and beer would never ever EVER succumb to this level

Absolutely fucking unheard of that this Mr Parker would Rule You, thus making such a term an illogical impossibility to anyone who isn't a winecuck

I'm glad you learned something today, user

I learned to have even less respect for the cuckolds of wine

The most important thing is that, slowly, you're starting to form opinions based on knowledge, rather than feelings

But it showed my instinct of disdain for winefags was correct.

My only snobbishness with wine is

A) Always decant dry reds, or at least pour it into glasses a few hours before drinking

B) General pairing guidelines (no reds with chicken or fish, no whites with red meat, sweet wines only at beginning or end of meals)

Spending more than $30 for a bottle of wine is a meme. I don't doubt some high priced wines are "better" but they are usually only 5-10% better than a $25 bottle for 400% the cost which doesn't make sense in my book.

Don't buy bottom shelf, though, anything less than $10 for 750 ml is barely fit for cooking.

Black people are just dumb and easy to catch committing crimes

I also wanted to add that domestic wines are usually good enough quality and good priced, particularly for Americans. I can get a very lovely $15 Francis Ford Claret from California which is absolutely top notch. Hard to not drink the whole bottle in 2 days on my own.

>666
Devilish.

And that's a very important thing. You've learned some facts, and now you can associate your feelings with facts. Having a fact-based grasp of reality is more important than you know

If you want to take your meming to the next level, you should learn about the anti-Parker, Ms. Alice Feiring

Parker has fallen out of favor in the last decade or so and now we slavishly follow the words of Ms. Feiring who teaches us that ripeness, juicy flavors, oak influence, and consistency are all Very Bad Things. Basically take everything Mr. Parker taught us, and invert it

Wine should taste like lawn clippings, smell like goat piss, have less than 10% alcohol, and be completely unpredictable from bottle to bottle. Nothing should be aged for more than 10 minutes, and any manufacturing process that controls for faults, no matter how harmless, is a Very Bad Thing. This is what True Authentic Non-Interventionist™ Natural™Wine™ ought to be

>One of the reasons people complain about "parkerization" is that certain styles of wine do very well in blind tests which don't reflect real world conditions
It also reflects a change in values. Parker doesn't give a fuck about typicity. He just likes wines that appeal to him, which at a big tasting when your palate is half shot means highly alcoholic, fruit forward wines. Whether they're good representations of their style is irrelevant to him.

I think that's kind of silly, because a wine's type has an effect on my expectations of it. For example Macon Villages and Chablis are both Burgundy whites made from Chardonnay. But with the Chablis I expect steely minerality, whereas the Macon ought to have a touch of oak and maybe a brief malolactic fermentation, giving it a rounder texture with a hint more creaminess while still having a similar mineral character to the Chablis. How much I like those wines does indeed have to do with how well they live up to my expectations of their style. It's not at all a blind taste thumbs up or down kind of thing for me at all.

Basically wines should be treated like dog breeds? Judged on how well they represent the best qualities their own kind. I can get behind that, its a lot more of an objective standard because even if you don't like a certain wine, you can admit that it tastes exactly like it should.

So your entire community is contrarian hipsters with a very long (decade[s]) cycle time

OK, let's be clear: drinking good wine, spending a lot of money on wine, being discerning, etc. does not make one a wine snob.

Wine snobbery is more like rejecting perfectly good bottles at restaurants, pretending to know as much as a master sommelier, carrying around a fucking flight case with your wine gear in it, etc.

>palate can deteriorate
nice meme, feiringfag.

Yeah, pretty much. 10-20 years depending on the community. For every "anything but chardonnay" hipster out there who only drinks rkatsiteli fermented in kvevri, there's a faggot who goes out of his way to provocatively sip california chardonnay so that hey can jump down your throat for saying that you don't like butter bombs and it's {current year} california is back

Don't act like any other beverage culture is any different

Of course you'd go to the population most likely to commit crimes to get your numbers up.
That's not racism, that's reality. You seem to confuse the two.

If you are in the mood for a butter bomb why not? Plenty of creamy and buttery food that would works well with chardonnay.

This is how wine has been traditionally judged, especially in France. It makes much more sense to me than Parker's bullshit.
Just aboput anyone who knows what to look for can taste the difference between an oaked and an unoaked Chardonnay. Is really obvious. Same goes for malolactic fermentation. There's no great mystery to tasting this stuff in wine. Oxidization is pretty fucking obvious as well, but in most styles you're hoping not to taste that.

I drink pic related just to see who counts as a wine snob among any group of acquaintances who show up for dinner.

Admittedly, 9 out of 10 times they chuckle at the concept of canned wine in a good natured manner and often ask for a can themselves.

But there's always that 1 guy who gets massively ass devastated that I would even have such a thing in the house, where I might potentially serve it to guests.

>Because of his powerful influence, Parker has had two château owners offer him the sexual favors of their daughters
Shit I want to get Parkerized now

This trigger me not gonna lie.

I get more meta-devastated that you run little psychotic social experiments during dinner parties, but I like it. I'd still be your friend.

Butter bombs are ok if you're in the mood but I rarely cook the kind of food that calls for it

Also you can do malolactic without making the entire bottle taste like microwave popcorn. See: ABC

Wow BTFO so hard lol

hahaha you have got to be fucking kidding me

And this is why I love it so much. Thanks for being honest with me. I'll go crack open a can right now and drink to your health. ;^)

Don't slip and fall on the way back to the computer, old man.

Get off my lawn

of course fucking Oregonians feel the need to do some hipster shit like this

Actually they're making fun of hipsters. It wouldn't surprise me if they came up with the concept of canned wine as a huge troll:

youtube.com/watch?list=PLhVpGLSqsjciKGrjqV6V6RiD8-h7uirHe&v=wMGzj0_Qeng

did you even read what i posted lad

you're assblasted about parker except the fact is you're spewing BS like 'le palate deteriorating' which is literally impossible unless you're 90

based

cant' tell if triggered or not

gigabased

diagnosis : fractured ass

What he means by "palate deteriorating" is that if you taste about fifty different wines in a row, #51 is going to give you a very different impression than it would if you were sitting down for dinner and having your first sip for the evening

I'm not sure what the "assblasted" thing is about, I suspect you think every reply to your posts was written by one person, which is not the case

quit samefagging old man

Wow, still just vomiting utter bullshit. This might be true of barolo or really tannic wines, but most high end (non cab) wine sold is meant to be drunk before it is 4 years old.

The correct answer

ummmm no

Most of this is true, but just so you know, most ultra premium wine sales are direct to consumer. Meaning that customers buy an online allocation or visit wineries in napa or sonoma or wherever, then have their 5 cases or whatever shipped to them.

Margins when wine is sold to distribution basically disappear, so you can make money but it has to be by volume.

You can read as much as you want into the Gallo and Constellation funded informal studies. The more wine you drink, the more you recognize the wine quality and price are very strongly correlated.

This might be a good opportunity to call out the fact that Americans' primary exposure to nice wine happens at fancy steakhouses where the only wine getting consumed are, in fact, cabs and (in rare cases) barolos or super tuscans.

I had a steak and potatoes friend over for drinking some fresh, delicious loire cab franc a few years ago, he complained that it "needs more age". While he was right that it didn't taste like an aged wine, that's how it was supposed to taste. If you stick that kind of wine in a cellar it's just going to taste mediocre and flat in 10 years time.

Though it's bad, It's still not as bad as the triple IPA drinking ass goblins I had to deal with in the beer community.