After reading the new thread on abv (linked below), I began thinking about the fact that I tend to prefer wines with higher abv than most. It’s not so much that I prefer higher abv in and of itself, but that many of my favorite wines are higher abv wines such as, Amarone, Barolo, Brunello and CDP. Abv is not so often a deterrent for me as it seems to be for many others.
Before I got more serious with wine, I drank much more bourbon and rye, and generally of higher proof, so basically, I am curious if this is true or similar for others who have a high tolerance for alcohol content in wines and if those who really prefer lower abv, were or were not coming from whiskey or something else high proof.
I also noticed that I enjoy oakier wines, and again this seems to match up with coming from drinking aged bourbons. To be fair though, I always had a high tolerance oak with bourbon as well, enjoying many which others would call oak bombs.
Anyone finding these correlations or similar ones regarding abv or oak?
“Your ideal alcohol level for a medium/full bodied red?”
I would be surprised if drinking spirits didn’t raise your tolerance to alcohol. And I’d guess those of us who lean toward more restrained Old World wines are more sensitive than others to the newer style of higher ABV wines.
In wine, I don’t like for the alcohol to be conspicuous – high enough that I can distinguish it as an element. In the worst case, I can sense it in the throat like a spirit. To me, that’s too high. I like Scotch and bourbon and I love amaro (though I prefer my amaros under 25%). So in my case, it’s not an aversion to alcohol itself; it’s how it sits with the rest of the wine.
It’s the same thing with oak. I have no problem with it in bourbon or Scotch, and I expect some on young Bordeaux, Rioja and cabs and top-flight red and white Burgundy and California chardonnays. I like the oak on Ridge zins, too. (Not everyone does.) But there is a style – across regions – where the oak completely dominates, so much so that a Brunello is hard to tell from a Napa cab from a Ribero del Duero or an Argentine malbec or Australian cab-shiraz blend.
Moreover, oak can be a sucker tool. The oak vanillin is like vanilla in foods, or garlic. It is often a crutch to cover up the fact that the other ingredients aren’t that interesting. Can pasta with just butter and gobs of garlic be delicious? Absolutely, but it’s ultimately one-dimensional. It’s like Hostess Twinkies. Same thing with heavy new oak treatments and wine.
Finally, the higher the alcohol, the more a wine takes on oak flavors (the alcohol acts as a solvent), so it’s common for excess alcohol and oak together.
I should add that there is oak and there is oak. There are lots of different kinds (American and European species, different regions), different aging regimes and different char levels. So some barrels meld better with particular wines than others. And some produce an oak flavor that tends to overwhelm everything else.
I guess it’s depends on producer, but I generally wouldn’t refer to either Brunello or Barolo as high in ABV, at least not when comparing them to either Amarone or southern Rhone wines (or a lot of California Cabs and Pinots, for that matter). To me there’s nothing overly complicated about the question - your tastes are simply a product of what your palate does or doesn’t react to - some people enjoy oaky, buttery Chardonnay and some folks like me abhor them.
As any number of posters have said over the years, it would suck if we all wanted to drink the same wines - vive la difference!
Not sure. I don’t like spirits precisely because of the alcohol. And, I rarely like Porto or Amarone, although that seems to be about an aversion to both alcohol and sweetness. Moreover, my tolerance for high-alcohol Zin, Syrah, and Cab seems to have fallen off over the past couple of years. I’ll still drink them if there is enough goodness to overcome the heat, but I’m less likely to seek the wine out again. I’m not sure if this is natural variation or a one way road.
When it comes to beer, on the other hand, my favorites are IPAs in the 8.0% range (except for Tree House Julius, which is 6.8%). Had a Tree House New Decade Do-Over earlier this week that was 8.6% and very easy to drink.
I was really into, and still enjoy, scotch and tequila, but generally don’t like to feel/taste the alcohol in my wine. That being said, I do tend to prefer higher ABV reds, but more so the ones that manage to hid the alcohol well, despite there being a lot of it.
There have been a lot of 15% wines out of Piedmont in recent years – nebbiolo and barbera – some of them balanced, some showing the alcohol too prominently for my tastes.
My tolerance for alcohol tends to be regionally variable. As a life-long Southern Rhone fan, I am, perforce, tolerant of pretty high abv (though there is little doubt that the wines have become relatively higher octane since 2000). When they go over 15%, I start to notice it in an adverse way. With Bordeaux, high abv generally coincides with high extraction, which is not my most favorite thing in the world. With oak, if I can taste it, I don’t like it. Again–to an extent, the amount it takes it tastse it seems regionally variable. I am highly intolerant of any new oak on Rhone wines. I used to think that was true for all wines. But I do like Baudry Croix Boissée quite a bit. And I am a fan of Sociano Mallet, which I was amazed to learn is 100% new oak. So my rule on oak is that I detest it except when I don’t
Very well said, Jonathan. On that last point, I think you know I’m a huge fan of Sociando. It has always struck me as well that they generally use 100% new oak and that, every more surprising given the flavor profile, there is only like 5% Cab Franc in the cepage.
I have a tannin + sulfite sensitivity. Not bad, I still love wines with both but I can tell instantly when a wine has a lot of sulfites and overly tannic wines are a guaranteed hangover with just 2 glasses.
That said, it’s made me more appreciative of ageing where the sulfite and tannins react slowly with oxygen and other compounds in the wine. I can drink aged Barolos and Bordeaux’s with no ill effects.
With whites its just the oak for the tannins, so I try to avoid the oak bombs for young wines but have learned which oaked chards mellow with age and I can drink them with impunity as well after they’ve had some time in the bottle.
As for ABV, I prefer lower, but don’t want RS with most wines so I’ve been gravitating to wines that have enough fruit and aromatics to balance it out. But at 15% I’m expecting some serious depth of fruit like an Amarone . Anything less with that much heat and I’m probably not buying a second bottle. I’ve had a lot flirting with 14%+ that seem to be keeping the balance, so I know they’re out there.
I think it can change over time. When I was in my 20’s, I gravitated to extracted wines from Barossa and high-oak Cabernet from Napa. As I got older, I started to enjoy more restrained wines. Now, I drink mainly pre-1990 Italy, 1960’s-80s’ CA and current vintage Northern Rhone/Loire/Burg.
Can’t say I have much oak tolerance - except to the extent I expect it to integrate over time. As for ABV, I think the answer is (a) global warming - I could argue that my tolerance has increased as ABV has in wines I like; and (b) balance - I’ve learned that higher ABV is fine as long as everything else is in place to support it.
Ultimately, my wine choices tend to be guided by my food choices and I don’t eat as much big food. So, very often I open leaner, more subtle wines.