"Easy to drink" wines

An article in the Food Section of today’s LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/features/food/la-fo-easydrink5-2009aug05,0,93262.story" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Discuss amongst yourselves…


For my two cents, any wine that is tasty seems to be far too easy for me to drink! [pwn.gif]

I have to admit, I consider most of the wines I like “easy to drink.” My cellar is loaded with older, more evolved wine (much of it stuff other people don’t really talk about or buy much…just that I think is in a very pleasant place) and younger wines (cases upon cases of inexpensive muscadet and sancerre) that I’m aging until I feel it’s easy to drink.

A lot of my friends love larger, more aggressive or otherwise more challenging wines. I find it fun to taste those, but it’s not what I open when I’m at home our out to dinner by myself or with a good friend.


We’ve actively championed such wines since we opened the doors 16 years ago this Monday…

I read that article this morning. Thanks for posting.

I don’t get where they site that somms and retailers avoid using the descriptor “easy to drink.” That is one of “easiest to understand” for most people. I am not sure where the author did his research. Silly.

It seems to me that the article is basically saying that ‘wine snobs’ and those ‘in the know’ such as somms do not like the term ‘easy to drink’ . . . I guess they feel the term ‘humanizes’ the process too much for them? deadhorse

There are some drinkers who prefer tannic monsters and to them, these are ‘easy to drink’ . . . many others avoid these wines like the plague because they are astringent-averse . . .

Just another example of how varied the ‘wine drinking community’ truly is . . .