Back to the original question - Started on Cali Cabs and Bordeaux Reds over 40 years ago. Still focus on that. I have travelled to most of the significant wine regions in the world and have tried many things. For me the best experience is to try indigenous wine with indigenous food. It is the wine food pairings that highlight a region. So although I like Nebbiolo it remains fairly difficult to replicate that Osso Bucco Barolo pairing that I had in a Castle turned Restaurant in the Piedmont. If money were no object I probably would spend more time dabbling in high end Burgundy but fortunately for my pocket book, I still prefer Cab Sauvignon over Pinot Noir. Perhaps all roads donāt lead to Burgundy?
1 Like
My tastes have changed so many times over the last 30 years one would think I have a multiple personality disorder.
When I started, I loved big Aussie fruit bombs and disliked the silkiness of Bordeaux. Then, the tastes changed to Big Cali Cabs and Zins. After that it changed again to Washington Syrahs and Cabs. It kept changing to Pinots.
Now I am appreciating old world wines: Sangiovese, Bordeaux, CdP, Spanish Grenache.
I will say IMHO, I have yet to find anything that matches a Ribeye like a big Cali Cab.
What I have leaned is never go over the top and accumulate with any one varietal or area - tastes do change
1 Like
I guess so, but still, it doesnāt really work that way, either. I can understand if somebody uses the term that way, but this approach still results in a syntax error in my brain. Bitterness and astringency are completely separate things: you can have a terribly tannic wine without any noticeable bitterness. Or, rarely, you can have a wine with very bitter but not particularly grippy tannins. Usually, however, these bitter elements donāt even come from tannins, but instead from other phenolic compounds in the grapes (for example a Sangiovese can have a lot of sour cherry bitterness in its taste, even if the resulting wine is low in tannins).
FWIW, Iāve done some wine studies in the past, and one of the things we did in this study programme was fiddling around with a Beaujolais wine that was purposefully selected to be as low as possible in tannins. We had a few different kinds of powdered tannins which we used to make different kinds of wine-tannin concentrations and see how the wine changed. Wood tannins did make the wine quite bitter (instead of making it particularly astringent), but the effect was quite noticeable only in concentrations that were higher you normally see in oak-aged wines. Grape tannins increased the astringency as one would expect, but they didnāt really taste bitter - well, not until we added more tannins that you could normally extract from grapes. However, at that point the wine was also undrinkably astringent. Basically tannin juice, not wine. So even if tannins can taste bitter, they normally donāt taste. There are lots of other elements in a wine that can taste bitter, and are more likely to be responsible for the bitterness than the (grape) tannins. Although with the 1970ās wines it is actually possible that the grapes (and their tannins) were unripe enough to contain actually very short-chain (ie. bitter-tasting) tannin compounds that couldāve affected the wineās taste. However, you really donāt see wines made that way today! Achieving sufficient tannin ripeness shouldnāt be a big problem anywhere today.
So in this sense, the whole thing boils down to how the antonym of āastringent tanninsā is āsweet tanninsā - and, once again, that really doesnāt make any sense, at least to me. But youāre right, the topic probably would deserve a thread of its own!
Well as usual Otto, a thoughtful reply with some evidence based data. I would just say it is ābitterā and āsweetā that are antonyms - not astringent and sweet. Indeed it is the astringent finish without the bitterness that I would describe as sweet! But that may be my own interpretation.
Even some of the notable pundits can confuse the topic - here is part of a RP note on a 2012 Old Sparky Schrader - āFor whatever reason, this wine seems to show more chocolate, espresso roast, barbecue smoke, dense blackberry and blueberry fruit and enormous body with not a touch of heaviness or astringency.ā
I suspect what he intends to convey is no bitterness - I doubt he would give 100 points to a wine that was devoid of astringency - CS wines that have no mouth puckering finish are soulless. And granted some of the best wines you donāt really pick up on just how much tannin they have until you swish it on the sides of your mouth and then you realize just how much tannin is there - it just is seamless.
Even the science of astringency is confusing - is it a sixth taste?! I guess all I am trying to say is a wine can be mouth drying without being bitter. And to circle back to the original point of this thread - I would say that this is a taste that I have probably gravitated to more to over the years. Whether it is from aging wine until the tannins soften or seeking wines from riper vintages that exude this characteristic in their youth it is the finish that I like in a wine. My wife is much more tolerant of a bitter astringent finish - indeed she will eschew a wine that doesnāt finish with what she calls a ābite.ā
1 Like
This discussion of tannins has me thinking about another taste adaptation that can only come from significant experience drinking wine - how wines age. Understanding oneās preferences for age in wine is a slow process. For some people, 5 years is a lot of age. Or 35. And of course thereās immense variability in age-ability based on variety, season/weather, producer/wine-making, cork inconsistency, etc., etc.
For me, I prefer (top tier) red Bordeaux with 25-40 years of age, though have had some amazing bottles that are older than that. Right now 1989/90/96 is a rough sweet spot. Barolo and N. Rhone a little younger (more like 15-30 years), though Iāve had very few well stored bottles that were a lot older than that. Burgundy is more complicated for me, with a lot of dependency on level (village/1er/GC) and related wine making choices.
But my bottle age preferences have actually been pretty stable. I figured out pretty quickly that I like wine in these age ranges, and that hasnāt changed all that much.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing and there are so many wines I wish Iād bought more of, plus so many I wish Iād not bought at all. We live and we learn.
But actual changes in taste happen too. Thank goodness they do - life would be so boring otherwise. 15 years ago I would never have guessed that 30% of my cellar today would come from the Loire.
We discover new stuff all the time and sometimes that changes oneās perception of old favourites. My favourite region has always been Bordeaux: trying Clos du Jaugueyron and Closerie des Moussis completely altered how I felt about some of my more traditional wines.
2 Likes
My changes have been minor. I first got interested in wine in my early 20s. By 25, I had taken a wine appreciation class, worked at a winery, and made my first wine from some purchased juice. I was accepted into grad school for oenology but ended up not going.
I have always been fascinated by the endless variety and sought out wines from different grapes and regions. The cellar has always been more wide than deep. But this approach resulted in a lot of single bottles. The one change has been to buy more wines in a minimum of three bottles so as to be able to enjoy the same wine at different stages in its evolution. This is resulting is some contraction in the options available in the cellar but it is a trade off that I am more comfortable with now after many years of exploration.
Like others, I have also shifted more towards lower alcohol wines but only as I perceive them to generally have better balance. I donāt have an issue with higher alcohol wines when they donāt show overripe and remain balanced. Last week I had a taurasi that was 15.5% and loved it as it wasnāt overripe or heavy.
I started out drinking Bordeaux and Cali cabs in 1969. Bordeaux from 1962, 1964 and 1966 were plentiful and cheap. Sold the Bordeaux and bought more late 70ās cabernet. Then later sold the cabs and bought lots of 1982 Bordeaux. Tastes change over time and now I need more fruit due to aging taste buds.
1 Like
Changing taste over time is definitely a thing for me.
Some things I didnāt care for at first, but now love:
German Riesling
Italian Nebbiolo
Red Burgundy
Oregon Pinot Noir
Some things I used to love, but now donāt care for:
(Over)ripe Grenache - looking at you Chateuneuf
Overblown alcoholic Zins and Cabs
Things Iāve loved all along:
Red Bordeaux
White Burg (except for a decade or so of pre-mox, when it was banished from the cellar)
Loire whites and reds
Champagne
Northern Rhones
Sauternes/Barsac
Port (in limited quantities as I age and become less tolerant of alcohol)
Well-balanced Zins and Cabs
2 Likes
I started with Clean Slate Riesling. $4.99 or $7.99 I forget which. Went Juicy Cali Pinot - think Bel Glos. Back to Riesling, but better stuff.
Then I started doing a lot of tastings by region, by varietal, etc. and my taste went super broad. And theyāve stayed that way. Iāll have periods where Iāll really focus in (had a huge Beaujolais fall a couple years ago and Sumer of Rose this year), but thatās more for educational purposes and really learning a space than actual palate shift. Iām do for a Riesling refresh soon, as, if Iām honest with myself, have been cruising on auto-pilot for a bit.
Burgundy was never a thing for me b/c prices were already up there as I got into wine. Iāve considered going back on this as things have changed, but have not. Italy was too complicated and now I want to save it for when I can give it my undivided attention.
The journey is super rewarding. Curious where I end up next.
Thanks @R_Frankel for the prompt. Should have posted this here:
Inspired by the discussion from [above as well as] Approach to Aging Wines and prompted by @Ian_Suttonās comment:
For context, Iām approaching my late 40s. I would say that I have only been an avid wine āconsumerā but not really āseriousā about wine until recently.
Over my wine journey for the past quarter of a century, my palate for food has certainly changed but mostly just on the peripheral (I probably like veggies more and meat less than I used to, etc.). However, I have been less intentional with wine and am curious to hear how others have experienced changes in preferences over the years.
The one point of reference that I can share is my first introduction to serious wine a couple of decades ago by a close friendās father, who was a distributor. He opened a ā97 Quintessa to have with some homemade pasta. It was a life changing experience for me; this opened me to the world of fine wine.
Last year, I got my hands on a few more bottles and the experience was almost equally sublime. At least with regards to the ā97 Quintessa, I can confirm my palate has not changed. The wine remains as compelling now as it was then.
Including some photos of my recent Quintessa experience. Sometimes, first loves do stand the test of time. 
2 Likes
The more I drink the less I like! Yes, my preferences have changed over timeā¦.but for BDX varietals, Iād say they have honed over time.
I could drink Herold, Bevan and others all day long ten years ago, now I still appreciate big uns but it aināt an everyday thing, I need variety. Ten years ago Iād abhor restraint, now I need it, regardless of variety or terroir.
Iāve never liked GSM and still donāt, Italians and Australians donāt love me now, never have.
Spain has loved me and I have loved it, particularly for Rioja and Sherry.
Ten years ago, Napa SB was a toleration, now BDX white is a wheelhouse.
Ten years ago bubbles was whatever, now I love French bubbles, appreciating CA/OR bubbles and investigating Spanish Cava.
Some things change, others just get better.
Iāve been drinking less bdx/napa lately, more champagne.
Iām drinking less mediocre red Burg, no mediocre white Burg and a lot more cherries because they simply are that much better for the most part.
1 Like
When I was young I would actually say, and believe, that the first duty of any wine was to be red. Now I have more white white cellared than red; types like Riesling and Loire Chenin Blanc that age well. Now I say, with the oversimplification I should have left behind in youth, that the first duty of any wine is to have enough acidity.
I also used to think that Champagne was a waste of wine and money, and that view has certainly changed.
1 Like
Started with southern Rhone, then went to Napa/Sonoma, then German riesling. Then Willamette Valley pinot and chard. I still drink plenty of riesling and WV wines, but have been dabbling in Piedmont, Champagne, and BDX more recently.
2 Likes