I agree. What’s the point of this post? It seems you already found the wines you like after trying the world’s bounty, and now you are asking “Have I missed anything?” This is rather like the person having one religion and then, at death’s door, thinking “Maybe I should have converted to (fill in the blank)? Is it too late to change?”. You found your sweet spot (and those two you choose are non too shabby), revel in them and be happy. You will be none the wiser.
I don’t think that you will find any wines that are better than the ones you listed. All wine are not created equal. If you do find them let me know because I want some too. But I would still say you should find some producers in other regions that make the grade for you. Ones that make great wines that will improve with age. And enjoy them for what they are. With the big plus being that when you get back to the wines you really love, they seem all the better.
I would say “aged Cote Rotie and Hermitage”, otherwise they are not so interesting. I guess you could say the same about Barolo. Burgundy can be interesting at various stages, depending on the vintage and winemaker.
Oh, don’t be a stick in the mud, Ken. He isn’t trolling. I know what he means, even though I would add Northern Rhones and German Rieslings to the list for sure, and others if I pondered longer.
There’s something challenging about Burgundy and Barolo/Barbaresco. They’re wines that force you to taste and retaste and show different facets of themselves with each sip. I love classic Napa cabs, too, for example, but they don’t offer that to me. Nor does claret, though I savor the memory of many great bottles of Bordeaux.
Gerhard, man do I agree with your high Grenache CdP premise. My tastes are now definitely in the Burgundy, Barolo, Rhone corner. I have lately been drawn in- like as into a black hole-by riesling and just about anything from Huet.
Not to nitpick, but I guess this is where I disagree a bit. Burgundy often seems to be very easy to appreciate under the right circumstances–I know all sorts of neophytes who have no trouble recognizing a great (or excellent) bottle when they taste it. But I know quite a few wine afficionados who have very little appreciation for Barolo, presumably because of its backwardness and high acidity.
Still, for me, I am struck by how Barolo grows on you, to the point where it can easily become an obsession. Real liquid Viagra (unlike those big honkin’ Merlot that some tasters seem to think fit the bill)…
I’d be quite happy with red burgs and Barolo in a stuck-on-a-deserted-island scenario, but lately have had great experiences with rieslings of all sorts (those Austrian rieslings are amazing) and malbecs from Argentina. “Have” to go to Greece in the fall (poor me) and will exploring Xinomavro and Assyrtiko. Always something new under the sun.
John, trolling is exactly what he did. You know no one loves B&B more than me, but to suggest that no wines other than those from Burgundy and the Langhe can provide this is laughable, and a troll. I gave a number of examples. If you haven’t had a bottle of Margaux or Haut Brion “that force you to taste and retaste and show different facets of themselves with each sip” then I feel sorry for you.
And here I will once again enrage (or estrange) my fellow Barolo-geeks, but imo the 1991 Montelena is the equal of the 1978 Monfortino (but neither is the equal of a great Giacosa). Of course, this is just my opinion. The OP clearly states his opinion. So asking for other recommendations when there are so many obvious ones is a troll.
I’m certainly not enraged or estranged from any wine comment made by you or any other wine aficianado.It’s only an opinion.It’s not politics,it’s not religion…it’s not baseball… …and that’s what we’re here for…to share and discuss them.