Wine Enthusiast Magazine
Subscribe
Led Zeppelin, like a Ravenswood Zinfandel?
We all know the arguments against the 100-point scale, but the question is, what’s better? Some years ago, Kermit Lynch, the Berkeley wine merchant and importer, who was definitely not a fan of the points system, suggested in a seminar that people get creative with how they convey the style and quality of wine.
He recommended that people compare wines to art, to architecture and other forms of creativity instead of reducing them to digits. It was a fun idea, and I spent the rest of the day rating wines by architectural styles. Something like a 1961 Haut Brion would have been the wine equivalent of a Georgian townhouse in D.C. A Hanzell Chardonnay 1990 conjured a Bel Air contemporary mansion, and so on.
But lately I’ve tried comparing wines to classic rock sounds. I have two teenage sons, they both play guitars in garage bands, and they love Led Zeppelin (above, Robert Plant, left, and Jimmy Page), Jimi Hendrix, Pink Floyd, the Who and Metallica (classic to them). So I’m listening again to a lot of the songs I grew up on, and realizing how well or poorly they have aged, like wine.
So instead of rating them on the 100-point scale, here are some wines I’ve tried recently, and how I’d rate them on the pop-rock scale. My apologies to the departed Wine X magazine, which had the guts to take this tack even if their ratings never caught on.
Pine Ridge Chenin Blanc Viognier Clarksburg 2006 ($14)
Like Fleetwood Mac, breezy, harmonious, fun to enjoy, even stays with you after you swallow. My real tasting notes say: Light, delicate, fresh and soothing to sip. A charming white wine with fresh apple, Anjou pear and slight buttery undertones.
Ravenswood Zinfandel Sonoma Valley Barricia 2004 ($30)
The Led Zeppelin of Zinfandels because it lays on the power, the brute force of rock, but does it in such an intricate, creative way that it’s timeless. Real tasting note: An extra-sophisticated Zin with enticing and complex aromas of raspberry, mint and sandalwood, full body, fine tannins, generous raspberry and cherry flavors and a lingering finish.
Pinot Noir Russian River Valley Oivet Lane Methode a l’Ancienne 2004 ($57)
The Pretenders come to mind because this wine is feminine, soulful and assertive. Real tasting note: Tasty, seductive wine with plenty of sweet, spicy oak aromas and flavors, and just enough fresh cherry and raspberry to back it up. On the soft side with earth undertones on the finish.
Chateau Clerc Milon Pauillac 1989 (now $120)
Maybe the Moody Blues. Considered near-great at the time, this Bordeaux fifth growth from a great vintage is enjoyable but just about ready for retirement (at least this bottle was). Real tasting note: Medium-deep color going mahogany on the rim, intitally funky aromas, soft texture, flavors diving from cherry and cola to leather and earth.
Surely some of you can come up with better, more contemporary references than these.
Filed under: Critics/Competitions
12 Comments
January 24th, 2008 at 4:00:54 PM
Cool approach. Thanks for throwing the zeppelin reference in there, that always brightens my day.
January 25th, 2008 at 7:21:02 PM
Hmmm, I’m going to have to work on what wine to drink when I’m listening to Echo and the Bunnymen and Oasis.
January 26th, 2008 at 1:24:58 PM
Veeery interestink, but…
I’m thinking of a night at/on Lake Cumberland (KY) when there was a total eclipse of the full moon, and Don, Kim, Theresa and I went skinny dipping. We were drinking MD20/20. So, I would say MD20/20 is like “London Calling” by The Clash. Is that what you mean?
January 27th, 2008 at 2:58:03 PM
From a creative writing point of view, this is a nice notion, and your notes are interesting. However, just as a 100-point scale is based on a taster’s enjoyment and preferences, this system remains esoteric to those familiar with the bands referenced. Additionally, after 50 or 100 of these types of tastin notes, the writer ends up struggling to find the metaphore rather than on conveying the essence of the wine.
We should simply describe what the wine smells and tastes like and what its texture is? (yes, there are absolute, reproducible and consistent descriptors). There is a way to do this in an interesting, engaging (and not dry) manner and still reach the most number of readers without having to employ any literary gimmicks.
We all share the same physiology, the grapes can only produce specific aromatic compounds and phenols (at various levels of ripeness and rowing sites) and all that is required to communicate a wine’s character accurately and clearly is a language which draws on these basics. That requires only a little time and attention invested in becoming good sensory observers.
January 28th, 2008 at 6:29:51 PM
I can certainly see Raveswood being Lead Zeppelin. Relating wine to a hard driving band with a great deal of variability has me a bit confused as a consumer. Will it be Mad Dog, Going to California, You Shook Me or Fool in the Rain?
Don’t give up! I think you’re onto something.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:59:55 PM
You know, I was thinking about something very similar last week (being a part-time musician as well as wine consultant, it doesn’t take much for me to connect the two). It would be fun to match up some wines with their theoretical musical counterpart.
Beaujolais Nouveau & Britany Spears, anyone?
January 30th, 2008 at 10:21:25 AM
haha, Britney/Beaujo is a great combination. Bubblegum characteristics at first glance and maybe some cherry but lacking any depth in the core!
February 1st, 2008 at 7:45:39 PM
Arthur had some good thoughts in his comment. Of course we would run out of bands, and not everyone would get the references. Just look at John Hoover’s reference to the Clash and MD 20-20. I have to say I actually get that one, having played the Mad Dog drinking game in college with that esteemed wine. But where there are common cultural references, I’d like to see people use them, rather than use too much wine-speak with thinly sliced nuances of mocha and toasted coconut. I applaud wine drinkers and bloggers who get imaginative with at least a part of their descriptions. I remember a voluptuous J. Lasalle Blanc de Blancs Champagne that was the Marilyn Monroe of bubbly to me.
February 1st, 2008 at 8:43:54 PM
It may be my background, but I believe in keeping it simple. When I review a wine, I try to use standardized nomenclature – particularly to convey intensity of aroma or flavor. For things like asringency and tannins, I try to use common foods.
February 3rd, 2008 at 6:26:50 PM
We’ve written some of our tasting notes using classic rock song titles, e.g., from Zep and from Deep Purple. Makes it more fun!
February 4th, 2008 at 10:43:13 PM
Ok–I met Robert Plant in 1990. Got my picture taken with him too. One of the coolest experiences ever…He’s a legend–obviously so is Ravenswood. Did Kermit try the 2002 Ravenswood Monte Rosso Zinfandel? That one has backbone, just like Led Zeppelin… (It was the deciding factor when I couldn’t buy all the vineyard designates the day I visited. Went home with the Monte Rosso and the Dickerson.) I still find myself listening to Led Zeppelin after all these years, and their re-mastered stuff keeps sounding better and better everytime it’s newly re-mastered.I get goosebumps. Same for the Ravenswood–everytime I try a vineyard designate, I get goosebumps. Cool comparison…Rock ON!!
February 5th, 2008 at 11:01:20 AM
It does make me appreciate the attempt to make the judgment of wines more under understandable, but just like the judgment itself the comparison is still subjective to the beholder’s personal taste….. If one was never into Led Zeppelin or Moody blues, how would one relate to the comparison?