Yeah, yeah, I know this is a very subjective and difficult question, but a TN I saw in CT got me thinking. I’m wondering what people think is the best food wine. In other words, what wine is only so-so most of the time, but absolutely blossoms when paired with food? I know there will always be outliers (e.g. I had THIS Chianti Classico that was amazing on it’s own, but was also amazing with food…) and exceptions, but I’m curious what others think. I have my hunch of what will win (even if I don’t agree necessarily): Champagne. I voted for Chianti. To me, it’s a supremely versatile food wine and is mostly good but not great on its own (unlike Champagne, which is often epic on its own and also with food), but is awesome with the right food.
I mean you can’t really choose a region like this. Good acid and moderate abv are +++, heavier, higher abv, more extracted wines limit you and also you just can’t drink as much of those! Champagne and Chianti are the most likely (and versatile) choices for me.
I would have said Beaujolais for red and Kabinett for white, and then saw the comment in your post about the wine that is “so-so” on it’s own and then blossoms with food. These wines are excellent either way. I’m not aware of a wine that is only good with food, at least I don’t drink a wine that cannot be very good to excellent on its own.
Sorry but the question as posed makes no sense at all. The best food wine is whatever you happen to like with whatever you happen to be eating. And it changes from day to day.
There’s no characteristic that makes one wine food-friendly and another food-antagonistic. And it’s an extremely limited selection, which means “other” has to be the default. None of those are wines I drink with any frequency. And Champagne is probably the last thing I’d reach for. In thirty plus years, I’ve never bought a bottle for myself.
Greg, I largely agree with this though I might tweak it a bit. Prefaced with ‘it depends on the food and person’s palate’, I do think there are some characteristics that matter. For example, big, gloopy, alcoholic messes of wines don’t pair with much, in my experience. They can just overwhelm the food, even a big steak.
Certain characteristics ‘can’ be food-friendly; well-structured wines to cut the fat in a steak, for example. Or a bit of residual sugar to pair with spicy food (but, of course ‘not in all cases’).
In that regard I think the part that of the OP that doesn’t make sense is it’s maybe the wrong question. Because it’s less about regions and more about styles/characteristics, and those can cross region.
Champagne is the most versatile, but the question makes little sense…
The only thing that I generally try to avoid is high alcohol. For me that’s anything north of 14.5%. I can look past that for a zin to go with my burger, but in most cases, high alcohol mars food - or at least mars me such that I can’t taste the food.
With these three words, you have pretty much nailed what I especially enjoy in a wine: I can enjoy a glass or two (maybe more) by itself, and the wine is just as enjoyable when paired with a pretty wide range of food. As to your specific recommendations, I am “on the learning curve” with both, but can already see your point.
With respect, I’m struggling with the concept here. The results will be biased by what foods people like.
I also don’t see why wines that are good without food should be discounted. Yes there are specific wines that could be meh on their own but come alive with food (we had a Greek rose the other day that filled that brief). It’s a useful thing to know of an individual wine. But I’m not sure I’d apply the concept to a whole category. I struggle with the thought of white burgundy not being good on its own for example.
Many categories missing. Rioja. Rhône. Alsace. Sherry. Dry Riesling. To name but a few.