I had the Underwood Pinot Noir in a can and it had no nose at all. I gave it 80 pts. It lacked varietal fruit character for my palate.
Wine in a can?
The more I think about it, I don’t drink anything in the can.
I don’t eat when I’m in the can, either.
I don’t like to mix excreting with ingesting.
There’s one way to find out whether wine from cans is inherently inferior, or whether the only problem is psychological. Field Recordings “Fiction” (and probably others) comes in both bottles and cans, so a blind tasting comparison should put the issue to rest.
The hard core scientists could even put some of each aside for a few years and then revisit.
Those are, as best I can tell. the four different Reidel straws…aren’t they. Understand they’re only $30/straw.
Tom
I had a bottle can few sips of this once. Was in my hotel room on some business trip as a gift. Didn’t try the straw, but it was not good straight out of the can or in the hotel glasses.
Canned wine is not new. Wrote this in 2011: http://palatepress.com/2011/12/wine/can-packaging-from-beer-world-work-with-wine-too/
In recent news, Gallo is doing canned wine now, too…
I agree the Underwood wines are solid for the price point. We sell the PN in bottle but not the can.
Funny story since you’re in Chicagoland Mark…
Last summer they released the cans nationally. NY is one of the states you have to apply to for label approval separately, they do not necessarily just accept something approved by the feds (TTB). Well, the Underwood folks stamped the generic 5 cents redemption value on the top of the can as they would with beer or other returnables. However, wine containers do not have redemption value. The NYSLA rejected them. The 5000 cases of Underwood cans were unsaleable in NY, I heard they shipped them to Chicago to sell them off.
Also, Underwood’s red can here is an ‘NV Red Wine,’ not a Pinot Noir.
I’ve never tasted the wine, but from the first time I saw the picture I loved the idea. I decant wine into plastic bottles for backpacking and kayaking. Having it available ready to go in a stable, lightweight container seems like the perfect answer to portability problems.
P Hickner
I’ve got no objection to the can as a container for wines meant to be consumed short-term. My problem was with the specific “wine” inside it.
My question is: how many of you would drink it out of the can, and how many would pour it into a wine glass?
You might want to reconsider this; you could create a closed ecosystem!
Just don’t forget to have someone switch the bottles for you at least twice a day!
I got a can of the Pino Noir a couple of weeks ago at a local Craft Beer/Wine/Growler shop that screams Hipster.
I poured it into a glass. You cannot really get a sense of the nose on it from the can. The quality of the wine was good for $13 a bottle Pinot. It was delicate, fruity, light tannins and I would buy it again. But most likely I would buy it in the bottle. It I were at a BBQ and this was available, I would probably drink it out of the can.
Gourmet cheese/charcuterie/sandwich store around the corner from work sells the field recording can and bottled product. their employees claim they could not discern any difference between the two once poured into a glass. Seems like a nice picnic/tailgate/party option.
I would be up for buying wine in a can—same with craft beer: they’ve improved the liners to avoid the metallic taste—but I wouldn’t drink it out of a can. A recent book my wine and book club read featured a woman who drank Gin and Tonic out of a can. Not surprisingly, she was an alcoholic.
It would still be good for picnics, camping, etc.—having bit the bullet and switched to plastic wine glasses, getting rid of the glass bottle would be great. I get that it doesn’t work for some. I own a great stainless steel growler that imparts no notable taste to beer. I would frankly prefer to dump wine into it for our regular BYO concerts on the square, but I assume this would weird others out.
On the water, in the mountains, and poolside, we use plastic wine glasses like these.
P Hickner