The place for all things wine, focused on serious wine discussions.

NYTimes: Asimov on WineGlasses

Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker

no avatar
User

TomHill

Rank

Here From the Very Start

Posts

8310

Joined

Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:01 pm

NYTimes: Asimov on WineGlasses

by TomHill » Thu Mar 16, 2017 9:14 pm

Interesting article in today's NYTimes by Eric on selecting wine glasses:
NYTimes:WineGlasses

Eric pontificates:
Eric wrote:For some time now, glass producers have promoted the self-serving idea that every sort of wine requires a distinctive glass to intensify the aromas and flavors of the particular variety. This is nonsense.

OhOh...he's going to be in deep $hit w/ ole GeorgRiedel now.

He also comes out against stemless glasses:
Eric wrote:A few words about stemless glasses: I don’t like them. Sure, tumblers are fine for unremarkable wines in casual situations. But for good wines, stemmed glasses are ideal. They can be held by the stem so that the temperature of the wine won’t be altered by the warmth of the hands, and so fingerprints won’t smudge the glass.

I find stemless glasses perfectly fine to use. I hold them by my fingertips, not in a full-hand grasp like a ham-handed Sabre fencer. I seriously doubt that there is any significant warming of the wine in the glass by my fingertips. As for the smudges on the stemless glass....as we say in Kansas...BFD!!
I've never seen the Libbey KentfieldEstate glasses he recommends for a budget glass.
Anyway...nothing profound for us wine geeks but an interesting read.
Tom
no avatar
User

David M. Bueker

Rank

Childless Cat Dad

Posts

35998

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:52 am

Location

Connecticut

Re: NYTimes: Asimov on WineGlasses

by David M. Bueker » Fri Mar 17, 2017 7:46 am

As usual, Asimov takes an extreme view to be noticed.

I agree that Riedel has gone too far, but Burg style glasses and Bordeaux style glasses show wine in a different way. Just from a convenience standpoint I tend to use a slightly smaller, Bordeaux style stem most of the time, but when I make the effort to use (and clean!) a Burg glass for Pinot and also Nebbiolo, the difference is clear.

I cannot remember the last time I used my random Tempranillo or Syrah glasses.

Stemless glasses are great for BYO dinners. Fewer stems means fewer knocked-over glasses.
Decisions are made by those who show up
no avatar
User

Jenise

Rank

FLDG Dishwasher

Posts

44971

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 2:45 pm

Location

The Pacific Northest Westest

Re: NYTimes: Asimov on WineGlasses

by Jenise » Fri Mar 17, 2017 7:05 pm

Pretty much on your page, David. I use Bdx and Burg bowls close to 100% of the time, though my use of the latter includes gamay and aged Southern Rhones. And I do have a chardonnay style Riedel that I usually drink champagne out of, or cheap(er) whites where compressing the flaws, vs. exposing them, is helpful. All the rest are just hooey.

But I hate stemless. My fingers are just too short and I bobble them.
My wine shopping and I have never had a problem. Just a perpetual race between the bankruptcy court and Hell.--Rogov
no avatar
User

Jason Hagen

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

813

Joined

Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:03 pm

Location

SoCal

Re: NYTimes: Asimov on WineGlasses

by Jason Hagen » Sat Mar 18, 2017 3:32 pm

Jenise wrote:But I hate stemless. My fingers are just too short and I bobble them.


Me too! I hate! them. I wish I didn't because as David said, they are great for wine dinners, but I continue to be the jackass with stems. But am very thankful my compatriots have gone stemless.

Jason

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon, Babbar, ClaudeBot, Google AgentMatch and 0 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign