I think sometimes hype (or at least enthusiastic reporting) is necessary to get people to try new things. Not everyone naturally gravitates towards the unknown. Quite the opposite in fact. So if people only “drink wines that appeal to them” then no one would ever try anything new.
I have definitely had cultivars (or producers) where I have not enjoyed them, and then been compelled to “give them another chance”…only to be pleasantly surprised by how much better my experience was the second time. And this was only because i chose NOT to only drink what appealed to me.
A fair comment.
True hype perhaps never finds the niches, relying more on gathering larger numbers of followers who see others buying into it, so they think they should as well. I would think of red Burgundy and the Langhe’s nebbiolo wines as getting hyped in wine enthusiast circles. Likewise when a leading critic lauds a producer, such as Burlotto, the secondary market may react to that hype with (IMO ludicrous) price rises.
However I’m absolutely in favour of those wines, regions, producers who are on the fringe / under the radar, getting a mention. Some forumites are very good at this, and picking two out without intending to underplay others who taste widely, @TomHill and @Otto_Forsberg both have really diverse coverage in what they taste and sometimes that will spark me to try a grape I’ve not tried before. I’d also recommend the Hugh Johnson pocket book, which does give remarkably broad coverage, even if it needs people to delight in the nooks and crannies if that’s what they seek.
Awesome. Will be sure to check those folk out. Thanks for the heads up.
Blockquote
Just ran this report on CT:
Pinot Noir 13.5% Consumed (9,653,513)
Cabernet Sauvignon 12.7% Consumed (9,092,876)
Red Bordeaux Blend 10.6% Consumed (7,602,599)
Chardonnay 9.5% Consumed (6,788,063)
Syrah 5.9% Consumed (4,245,646)
Red Blend 4.4% Consumed (3,149,480)
Zinfandel 3.7% Consumed (2,643,848)
Red Rhone Blend 3.5% Consumed (2,517,510)
Sangiovese 3.4% Consumed (2,433,581)
Sauvignon Blanc 2.6% Consumed (1,842,594)
Champagne Blend 2.5% Consumed (1,773,679)
Tempranillo 2.3% Consumed (1,627,888)
Riesling 2.1% Consumed (1,492,738)
Nebbiolo 1.9% Consumed (1,349,508)
Merlot 1.8% Consumed (1,316,923)
Grenache 1.8% Consumed (1,273,916)
Malbec 1.3% Consumed (895,143)
White Blend 1.2% Consumed (835,980)
Rosé Blend 1.0% Consumed (719,118)
Cabernet Franc 0.9% Consumed (663,284)
Given that Champagne blends could also include PN, the grape is doing quite well in the CT-verse.
This video is useless. Six minutes and 21 seconds I’ll never get back.
I have the sadz.
No.
I think Pinot Noir is overrated. I think that some of the very finest wines in the world are made from Pinot Noir. I think that most of the best sub-$50 wines in the world (I.e. almost all of them) are not Pinot Noir.
If someone offered me a Pinot Noir and a similarly priced Aglianico or Cabernet Franc, I’d probably never choose the Pinot.
I don’t think it is at all, it’s a brilliant grape, but I’m just personally in a phase where I can taste the sameness and typicity in many of them, so I’m having a little break from it. I look forward to getting the compulsion back one day.
Ah, pinot noir, my mysterious and alluring love for whom I sneak past Cab and Bordeaux for fleeting glimpses of the joyfully ethereal thing that it does for me.
Cabernet and Bordeaux are Othello and Richard Iii, Pinot is Hermia and Lysander in a bottle.
Pinot doesn’t need pants, it’s wearing a bra that opens in the front!
I did a tasting at Olivier Leflaive, the sommelier said, if you are going to buy cheap, do not buy Pinot Noir. If you are going to buy expensive, then definitely Pinot Noir.
The Pinot Noirs that hit the G-spot are way beyond my pay grade these days.
Yeah whenever somebody hears I am into wine, they say something like, so and so is into wine, you should talk to him. Then we talk and he asks what I’m into and I say mostly Burgundy and then it’s like crickets. If I said Napa Cabs I’m sure the conversation would go a lot further.
Outside of this forum? Wine Berserkers is a tiny slice of the serious wine enthusiast world. There are lots of Burg drinkers outside this forum. Heck, even in my own small circle I drink with (or at least I did when we got together before COVID) more than a dozen folks who are seriously into Burgundy, and none of them post here.
As a percentage of wine drinkers, burgundy drinkers are relatively rare.

As a percentage of wine drinkers, burgundy drinkers are relatively rare.
That I will agree with.

Just ran this report on CT:
Pinot Noir 13.5% Consumed (9,653,513)
Cabernet Sauvignon 12.7% Consumed (9,092,876)
Red Bordeaux Blend 10.6% Consumed (7,602,599)
Chardonnay 9.5% Consumed (6,788,063)
Syrah 5.9% Consumed (4,245,646)
Red Blend 4.4% Consumed (3,149,480)
Zinfandel 3.7% Consumed (2,643,848)
Red Rhone Blend 3.5% Consumed (2,517,510)
Sangiovese 3.4% Consumed (2,433,581)
Sauvignon Blanc 2.6% Consumed (1,842,594)
Champagne Blend 2.5% Consumed (1,773,679)
Tempranillo 2.3% Consumed (1,627,888)
Riesling 2.1% Consumed (1,492,738)
Nebbiolo 1.9% Consumed (1,349,508)
Merlot 1.8% Consumed (1,316,923)
Grenache 1.8% Consumed (1,273,916)
Malbec 1.3% Consumed (895,143)
White Blend 1.2% Consumed (835,980)
Rosé Blend 1.0% Consumed (719,118)
Cabernet Franc 0.9% Consumed (663,284)Given that Champagne blends could also include PN, the grape is doing quite well in the CT-verse.
Nice job, but I would lump Cabernet and Bordeaux blend together.
I’d be willing to bet that you’d see a higher population of Burgundy drinkers on CT than the general population as well.
I have had those dizzying moments where the glass of wine in front of me transcended analysis, and time stopped. Not often, and not every wine rated 100 for me afterwards, but somehow those holy grails tend to ignite passions, and it seems most people experience them with Burgundy.
I don’t; yes definitely some of the wines were made with Pinot Noir, but I have had just as many of those moments with Cabernet, Cabernet blends and Syrah.
As I watch the prices of Rousseau, DRC etc go $3k and higher, I can think of no wine, transcendant or otherwise that I would pay that kind of money for.
If you look to some of the less prominent appellations, you can find some pretty nice Burgundy reds (Mercurey, Fixin, Marsannay, others). Sure, not mind-blowing but can find wines that deliver a lot of pleasure per dollar.
-Al
I didn’t watch the video, but it looks like the thread is mostly linking PN to red Burgundy. My two favorite red grapes are Nebbiolo and Pinot Noir, but my PN is entirely from Oregon. We drink 1-2 bottles a week of wines in the $25-75 range which I consider both excellent value and excellent quality. So I have answer the OP’s question with a resounding NO.

I have had those dizzying moments where the glass of wine in front of me transcended analysis, and time stopped. Not often, and not every wine rated 100 for me afterwards, but somehow those holy grails tend to ignite passions, and it seems most people experience them with Burgundy.
I don’t; yes definitely some of the wines were made with Pinot Noir, but I have had just as many of those moments with Cabernet, Cabernet blends and Syrah.
As I watch the prices of Rousseau, DRC etc go $3k and higher, I can think of no wine, transcendant or otherwise that I would pay that kind of money for.
Just depends on a lot of factors, not least of which how much you drink and how much wine you have. I rarely buy lower priced wines now because I don’t drink that often and have too much wine already.