+- WineBoard (https://www.wines.com/wineboard)
+-- Forum: GENERAL (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-100.html)
+--- Forum: For the Novice (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Chardonnay Pinot Noir (/thread-16133.html)
- K - 12-23-2004
hi, i just recieved a Jacobs Creek Chardonnay Pinot Noir Brut Cuvee and am wondering if its any good. I am VERY dumb when it comes to wine.... It has no year on it.
- winoweenie - 12-24-2004
Hi K and welcome to the board. This bubbly is made from both Chardonnay (white) and Pinot Noir (red) grapes. Brut means it's dry. I've not had this particular bottling but the Aussies are making some nice juice. Chill that hummer down and pull the cork. Merry and Happy! WW
- wineguruchgo - 12-24-2004
Happy Holidays K,
And welcome to the wine board!
Traditional bubbly is made from Chardonnay and Pinot Noir. Because it wasn't made in Champagne it can't say Champagne on the lable. Also, because they have blended wine from different years they cannot put a year on it. Not to worry, it's still good!
As mentioned by WW, Brut on the lable refers to the level of sugar in it. Brut is dry. If you find that it is too dry for your taste you can always mix it with fruit juice!
Chill it and pop the cork! Going to a New Years Eve party? Bring it along!
Enjoy it!
- Kcwhippet - 12-24-2004
Not so fast on the Champagne is from Champagne, guru. The U.S. just won a concession from the WTO, which ruled that the use of the term Champagne, as well as port, etc. is discriminatory to other producers who make similar products.
- wineguruchgo - 12-24-2004
Just another way of the good ol' US of A flexing their muscle. It's a respect issue and I totally agree with it.
The use of the term "Champagne" was written into the Treaty of Versailles and should be upheld.
Just my opinion.
I have a feeling that the rest of the world, especially those that signed the Treaty, will continue to respect the region and tradition.
- Thomas - 12-25-2004
I'm with you, guru. I could never figure out why an American producer would even want to use a foreign place name to identify a domestic product--lack of confidence maybe???
- wineguruchgo - 12-25-2004
Foodie I think it's the ignorant American rearing it's ugly head again.
How many people don't realize that sparkling wine is the same as Champagne, just grown in a different place.
Sure you are going to get incredible differences between the two if you have a savvy palate, but for the general public, it's the same thing.
Therefore, if the Americans can put Champagne on their bottle then people will buy more. Doubtful. Unfortunately the Americans just haven't embraced bubbly, anyones bubbly, and it's a marketing ploy.
- TheEngineer - 12-25-2004
Here's my $0.02.
I disagree with the US position that the naming is somehow unfair. Take for example, a simple example...ham.
The italians call it Prosciutto
The Spanish call it jamon serrano (or other areas)
The Portuguese call it Presunto
They are all kind of the same but with a most definite difference in them that everyone will notice the moment they taste it. If they make so that the US can use any one of those terms, I as a consumer am going to be confused as the US ham will not taste like any of these in general.
They do not let generic drugs have the same name. They should not let generic products gain the benefit of imitating the characteristics that I care about being able to differentiate against. I think that in fact the US should come up with it's own branding. It can be successful, like Levi's, Kleenex, etc,.. I mean what if the Europeans want to call all tissue paper Kleenex?? Yes it is trademarked name but it is generally accepted as a term as well. In Southern Africa, all shoes are called Bata, after the company that invested heavily in the country to make affordable shoes. Should Nike want to be selling Nike Air? or Nike Bata?
I think that the ruling is a poor decision on the part of the consumer. There are differences (as there should be based on consumer preferences) and as such I want to know about them.
Sorry, not flame but just my $0.02.
- dananne - 12-25-2004
The Treaty of Versailles? After WWI?
- Thomas - 12-25-2004
Engineer,
I agree with you, but the big difference in this situation is that names like Chablis, Burgundy, Rhein, Champagne are not brands or companies; they are places. Champagne is a place, a location on the map, where a particular winemaking process is employed, using specific grapes. The grapes and process can be duplicated, but the name of the place--well, that is the point.
- wineguruchgo - 12-25-2004
Yes Dananne,
The Treaty of Versailles!
Champagne
Though many people use the term "champagne" to designate all sparkling wines, in truth Champagne is a specific type of French sparkling wine. Champagne comes from the region of the same name in France. The area has produced sparkling wine since the days of the Roman empire, and still bottles some of the best vintages in the world.
The producers of Champagne carefully guard the right to use the name Champagne on a bottle, and have done so since 1891, when the Treaty of Madrid was signed. The treaty declared that only wines made in a particular region could use the name on the bottle. In 1919, the Treaty of Versailles, the peace agreement ending World War I, reaffirmed that rule.
I think it should be respected.
[This message has been edited by wineguruchgo (edited 12-25-2004).]
- wineguruchgo - 12-25-2004
Just one more thing.
Look what the Americans did to Chablis! Jeez! They destroyed a exceptional bottle of wine. Not many understand it to be what it is. They only understand it as jug wine.
- TheEngineer - 12-25-2004
Foodie,
I understand what you are saying and I know,...its like this really grey/gray line....sometimes I know my arguements probably could fall on either side.
I guess Ikinda want something else. Not saying that this is the answer but perhaps what I want is one level of heirarchy more.
For example with Champagne, let's call them all Sparkling wines, then the French can have their Champagne, the Italians can have theirs, etc,... California can have something else.
It's kinda like Bagles. I like Montreal Bagels and it certainly is different than New York bagels, and Chicago has their own minor differences. All are made with water, yeast, flour, in an oven but for some reason, they all come our different. I could take the ingredient and the oven and the technique from Montreal and then move them to LA and for some reason, it tasts different (everyone says its the water....... [img]http://www.wines.com/ubb2/smile.gif[/img] ...I guess I could bring that too!
The US has some very fine products and it is making the wine industry around the world respond. I would like to see them capture that as a Brand or some other classification too. Then we can buy Pinot Noirs from Burgundy or from California, or from Canada, or from,....etc.
This requires concessions from all sides as it is unlikely the French would allow their Champaign to come sub of the title Sparkling wine,....Then again, their most likely is an entire reality that I've don't know enough to know of it anyways, so....glad that this is electronic because my opinions wouldn't be worth the paper that they were printed on [img]http://www.wines.com/ubb2/smile.gif[/img]
Hey, it's Christmas,...I'm still wishing for Peace on Earth.
Oh yeah...btw,...HAPPY HOLIDAYS Everyone!
- TheEngineer - 12-25-2004
I just re-read my post....
hehehe....brevity is not one of my strong points...... [img]http://www.wines.com/ubb2/smile.gif[/img]
- Thomas - 12-25-2004
The point is: Champagne is not a wine; it's a place.
Anyway, Brooklyn bagels--13th Avenue--a touch of vinegar in the water is the answer...
There are two things that I have had outside of NYCity that are not worth having outside of NYCity: bagel and egg cream! [img]http://www.wines.com/ubb2/eek.gif[/img]
[This message has been edited by foodie (edited 12-25-2004).]