Though I drink wines from many regions of the world, the common denominator of the wines I enjoy seems to be that they are of a “traditional” style. I prefer Champagne with dosage, Rioja with obvious American oak, Barolo without barrique, Mosel with residual sugar, Napa, Burgundy, and Bordeaux without overt oak. It’s not as if all these wines are similar in taste, but they are all canonically considered “traditional”, and I (almost) always prefer them. What is it that they all have in common? Lower extraction and higher acidity come to mind…
I’m too tired tonight to do anything other than agree!
We are Willie Nelson, and they are Toby Keith.
I don’t know who Toby Keith is. But I get the point, so I’ll refer to the non-Willie Nelsons as the Taylor Swifts.
I like pairing foods with wines.
I’ve had higher level of satisfaction with, and enjoyed, the ‘Willie Nelsons’ with foods, more so with the same regional cuisines where the wines were produced. In general, I’ve not had the same level of satisfactory experiences with the Taylor Swifts.
How is the absence of overt oak a “traditionalist” thing, outside of Piedmont? That’s particularly untrue when it comes to Burgundy, which is “traditionally” a big, extracted and, yes, oaky wine.
How did Willie Nelson get to be traditional?? By living a long time??
A.,
I’ll agree with you, though I prefer lower dosage Champagne in general.
I think there’s a range of flavor that you get in what we’re calling “traditionally” made wine. I take the term to mean less intervention compared to most modern methods, but not zero intervention. Intention is important - are you trying to make wine with techniques to add flavors from selected yeasts, extraction through enzymes, “clean” fermentations through yeast foods, oak toast from new barrels, etc.?
I don’t want to get into a pissing contest about how bad all those things are. I’ve loved wines made in every which way, sometimes much to my surprise.
But for me - in my production and in the wines I find myself enjoying most - I think of this example:
The noise of winemaking technique is minimized so that a broader range of aroma and flavors comes out. I think of an orchestra. Loud is fine. But the most special moments for me are when things are quiet, when you hear the breathing of the woodwinds, the growl of the bow on the strings, the brush strokes of the percussion, all those little things that add up to the most moving (for me) music.
The Burgundies I’ve most enjoyed weren’t especially big and didn’t come across as particularly extracted and didn’t have much if any residual oak, at least after about a decade or so. Maybe I haven’t had the right Burgundies, but those descriptors seem more suited to some New World pinots.
Willie and the other Outlaws were traditional from the beginning in the same way that, for example, the Gang of Five in Beaujolais were traditional.
Agree. However, those burgundies are not “traditional”. Traditional burgundy, particularly in ripe years, was a big, structured wine. Put differently, people thought that adding a little big of Algerian sunshine made bad burgundies a better facsimile of good burgundy. Think about what that means.
My point about Willie is that there are always these changing definitions of what traditional is. Compared to what was coming out of Nashville, he was not traditional, but going further back he was. Look at Barolo and you see a series of changing winemaking techniques that goes back to the time of Louis Pasteur.
What is traditional?? It’s what we grow up with.
David, I am reminded of Andrew Barr’s books. In one of them he talked about how Avery’s 1969 Nyuits st Georges les Roncieres was 85% NSG, ten per cent Moroccan red, 5% Port mixed with a little glycerine.
And everyone always said Avery’s was traditional!
I was at a tasting in London some years ago where somebody opend up a bottle and tasted us blind. Most of us said it was southern Rhone…an old Bourgogne Rouge it was! Funny that…
Really? I would guess to say that less than 1% of red and white Burgundy are “big, extracted and, yes, oaky wine…” - Unless of course you live on a steady diet of Ponsot’s wines -
Long lived is a good descriptor.
Traditionally there were very few ripe years in Burgundy. They were the exception, not the tradition.
Since when are outlaws traditional? Aren’t outlaws usually braking the mold and doing things they shouldn’t? I know Willie is considered outlaw, but I just don’t get how he can be both.
Uh, I don’t know if Willie was ever was “traditional” in the way that Bill Monroe would have been. I think he was his own category.
This is quite true. Wonder how many of us would enjoy “traditional” sweet Barolo as was the way in the 19th century.
Like Pilate washing his hands clean and asking “What is truth?”, … what is tradition?
sorry, I don’t do yoga.
The Outlaws became “outlaws” for disdaining the direction country music had gone and going back to “their roots.” (Whether those are a real thing, or not, I leave to others.)
Kinda like punk is traditional, in that it saw what rock music had devolved into (Prog!) and punk was a return to basics.
I am stealing this from Wikipedia:
"Outlaw country is a subgenre of American country music, most popular during the 1970s and early 1980s, sometimes referred to as the outlaw movement or simply outlaw music. The music has its roots in earlier subgenres like honky tonk and rockabilly and is characterized by a blend of rock and folk rhythms, country instrumentation, introspective lyrics, and local flavor. The movement began as a reaction to the slick production, popular structures, and commercialization of the Nashville sound developed by record producers like Chet Atkins.
Early “outlaws” include Waylon Jennings, Willie Nelson, Kris Kristofferson, Johnny Cash, Merle Haggard, “Fifth Highwayman” Guy Clark, Jessi Colter, Tompall Glaser, David Allan Coe, Sammi Smith, and Tanya Tucker. Other associated artists include Hank Williams Jr., the Eli Radish Band, Leon Russell, Townes Van Zandt, Billy Joe Shaver, Steve Earle, and Gary Stewart."
The whole Wikipedia article:
I think there is a reasonable analogy to how we have seen wine appreciation go, but our hobby’s Chet Atkins is still riding pretty high!
Kris Kristopherson??? Really? I know you didn’t make the list but come on, I didn’t even think he was real, more of a reality tv kind of guy.
I like the stuff with the fruit on the bottom.