Good friend Doug Frost is the second among only five people in the world to have passed both the Master Sommelier and Master of Wine exams. Author of several books, including "Uncorking Wine," "On Wine," and "Far From Ordinary: The Spanish Wine Guide," he is also host of Check Please!, a weekly public TV show filmed in Kansas City and the wine and spirits consultant for United Airlines worldwide. He is a founding member of the spirits and cocktail educational organization, BAR, (Beverage Alcohol Resource).Cheers magazine selected BAR and its founders as Innovators of the Year for 2007, and Frost as Beverage Innovator of the Year 2009. He runs two wine competitions, the Mid-American Wine Competition and the Jefferson Cup Invitational, the latter which is now in its seventeenth year. He also judges in more than a dozen other competitions. In his spare time, Doug listens to his massive weird music collection and continues to try to raise two (adult) daughters.

Doug and I tasted together in June of 2012. We used the 2009 Roger Sabon Châteauneuf-du-Pape and Riedel Vinum Zinfandel/Chianti Classico glasses.

Overall Tasting Goals 

TG: When you are tasting what are you trying to accomplish?

DF: It depends on the client for whom I’m tasting. The context changes per client. In tasting this wine I’m trying to decide if it’s delicious, how well made it is, what sort of ageability it has, and for whom is this wine made.

TG: By that you mean …

DF: Who is the best customer for this wine?

TG: If the context changes, if you’re just going to pick up a glass of wine and enjoy it, what are your goals then? 

DF: It might be food, it might be mood as in what style am I in the mood for. There can be times where a wine is perfectly well made and even delicious, but I’m not in the mood and really don’t give a damn about it. 

TG: What’s necessary for you, in terms of environment and equipment, to have a good tasting experience? 

DF: Spit cup! (One is missing from the table) Smell free and smoke free and not much other than that. But I really do have to spit to concentrate. 

TG: Is it more important for you to spit in order to assess vs. having a sip?  

DF: The latter doesn’t work as well for me. It’s the way I’m going to assess texture and volume, the structure. 

TG: And you do that better by spitting?

DF: No, I need to get a big mouthful and am just not in the habit of swallowing the wine at any hour much less this hour (9:00 am). It’s certainly part of the concentration process. It helps to provide a more concentrated environment, but I really have to mix a lot of wine with saliva in my mouth and you really can’t do that with sips.  

TG: What else in terms of equipment do you need?

DF: Some kind of white background that I can look at the wine against; good lighting.  

TG: What about glassware? 

DF: I’ll use glasses like these on occasion (Riedel Vinum Chianti Classico/Sangiovese), but most of the time I use the INAO because it’s a pretty cruel glass.  

Sight

TG: When you look at a wine, what are you trying to assess? 

DF: I really just want to see its youthfulness, the volume, how much alcohol it has, how much extract it has, and what the condition of maturity is at this point. My mentality is that I’m always looking at the rim first and then my eyes will linger down into the bowl to see how much color differentiation there is. With this wine, there’s some pretty significant color differentiation, and there’s a watery meniscus and a pink rim to it. So this wine is showing a bit of age to the coloring and it looks like it has a lot of alcohol volume and extract volume to it.   

TG: If I were you, how would I know how to compare the color in this wine to other wines I’ve tasted before? Is there some way that you bring up colors of previous wines to compare? 

DF: I think it’s a matter of trying to decide what colors are in front of me. Is there some purple in the glass? In this wine yes, so there would appear to be some hint of a hot climate. I’m looking at a series of colors as wine shows a color gradation down into the bowl. I’m looking to see how well can I see through the bowl and with this wine there’s quite a bit of extract; but the quality of the colors and the value of the colors and what that means in terms of outcome.  

TG: If I had to be you, how would you compare that to previous wines in terms of memory? 

DF: Just intellectually, I’m not carrying images of other wines in my head when I do this. 

TG: How do you know?

DF: I’m just not aware of that and that’s not what I’m trying to do. I’m just looking at a sheet of color and trying to decide what that sheet of color is. It’s like looking at a color chart.  

TG: So is there an actual chart you see? 

DF: No, I really don’t. I just look at what I would regard as a color chart like you would do when you select a font color. I look at art a lot, so I look at colors so I’m comfortable staring at colors and calling them by name.

TG: Practically everyone I’ve spoken to has some kind of visual device that they compare colors to. Do you use anything like that? 

DF: I cannot say that that is happening with me because there are multiple colors. It’s not really like that for me. But I’m also not real clue into color the way some people are. 

TG: How do you know when you’re done looking at a wine?

DF: When I’ve been able to draw conclusions; in this wine there’s a pretty significant amount of extract and alcohol and it looks like warmish climate; when I can draw conclusions of what I think about the wine, how young it is and what climate it is, of what grape and what extract. 

TG: Great. Could you actually demonstrate how you look at wine? 

DF: White background, tip the glass all the way over and get the wine almost to a 45 degree angle, get some light somewhere so I can see it.

Nose

TG: What are your goals when you smell wine? 

DF: I have a set of Master Sommelier familiar goals that I take a look at. Other than that, I’m just seeing if anything else feels familiar. I’m very much of the training. 

TG: So you’re trying to assess the wine for quality …

DF: Quality, character, various categories of fruit, herbs and all those things. I’m looking at all those categories.

TG: How do you know you’ve accomplished that? How do you do that? 

DF: As long as I’ve filled all those boxes I’m content. Like everybody else I’m looking for some kind of conclusion. I’m also trying to figure out which of those boxes is important to me. Then I’ll spend a lot of time talking about that because it’s something I’m hanging my hat on.  

TG: Is that something like an initial impression or is it something you get as you progress through the wine? 

DF: It could be either one. I would love it to be an initial impression but half the times it’s not. 

TG: When you smell the wine, in terms of the grid, is it something you see and periodically check in with?  

DF: Sometimes I’ll imagine it as it is on the slide. Other times it’s just dialogue. I know in my mind what I’m supposed to do because the slides don’t exactly sync up with where I want to go.  

TG: So how do you do that? 

DF: It’s just like saying the rosary: do flowers and then do spices. That’s how you do it? 

TG: OK but I’m trying to figure out how you do that. So if you smell this wine what is the first thing you check for?

DF: Whatever it smells like, in other words that first impression. The first thing I’m looking for is fruit and then probably flowers. But that’s completely contextual as I was drinking Riesling last night. Had I been drinking Bordeaux I wouldn’t have been looking for flowers.  

TG: I’m just trying to get back to your seeing slides. How do you do that? 

DF: Sometimes I remember the slides as they set up on the screen. But most of the time I’m just doing it again, like saying the rosary, almost automatically.

TG: If I was you, where would I see the slides? 

DF: Not anywhere particularly, I just go into a memory; I just remember what that slide looks like. The only thing that would perhaps be interesting to you is that the slide I’m looking at is just as likely to be an overhead as it is anything else (laughs). It’s old school.  

TG: OK, so I’m watching your eyes when you’re talking about the slides and they go pretty consistently in three places, here , here and here (the positions are literally slightly left, center and slightly right in front of his face). Where are you looking? 

DF: I think I told you that one of my daughters has said since she was six years old, “watch me, I’m Dad drinking wine.” And her eyes go back and forth like mine.  

TG: True because you’re processing a lot of different things. Back to the overheads. Are they out in front? To the sides? Where are they? 

DF: Again, it’s a particular memory and it might well be just the screen in front of me. I’m so used to looking at the screen. But it’s not consistent. Most of the time I wouldn’t need to draw on it because I would just go in a particular order.  

TG: It almost sounds like it’s auditory as well. Are you saying things to yourself? 

DF: No, it’s not auditory.  

TG: As you smell the wine what do you do? Your eyes consistently go several places in rapid succession. But for today it would be great just to pick out a specific fruit or other element in the wine and try figure out how you do it.  

DF: My eyes do go back and forth but they settle in once I get something. The first thing is savory.  

TG: Savory such as …

DF: Right now the wine is minty, basil and wet and dried leaves—some sort of herbal origin.  

TG: If I had to be you, how would I do that? How do you know you’re smelling those things? What do you see? 

DF: I’ll try but I really don’t get any particular images. I did read your article and thought about it, but images is not what I’m working from.   

TG: I think you probably do it but at micro-speed. Your eye movements are the fastest of anyone I’ve ever seen. So if we can just slow one of them down I would be curious to see what’s there.

DF: The whole thing for me, even now as I think about the fruit in the wine I didn’t envision a black cherry. I’m more likely to see the label on a can or jar when I try to picture black cherries. I don’t necessarily see a black cherry.

TG: So there’s a label? 

DF: As I call it up I can do that, but I’m not sure that’s how I’m associating aroma. But to your point, I don’t know that.  

TG: But if I ask you, for instance, what does a tangerine smell like? What do you do? Do you see the color orange? 

DG: Yes, definitely. 

TG: Do you see a picture of the tangerine?  

DF: Eventually. Let’s switch it out. For a blueberry it’s not very strong recall, I’m more likely to … It’s certainly the fruit I’m trying to imagine but it’s more like the color or a slice of that fruit. I’m trying to go through the process now in my mind to get an idea of what the process looks like. As I think about pineapple I’m more likely to think about sliced pineapple then a whole fresh pineapple—so I’m not looking at a whole pineapple.  

TG: To a great extent though the content is not really that important. You do seem to bring something up.

DF: Yes, sure.  

TG: So with the canned or sliced pineapple, if you get that can you show me where it is? 

DF: It’s pretty much right in front of me.

TG: 2D or 3D picture? 

DF: It’s three dimensional.  

TG: So is this framed or just sitting there in space? 

DF: I’m switching out fruit now and thinking about blueberries. It’s right in front of me and I’m looking at a close up of a blueberry.  

TG: So what happens if you take the close up of the blueberry and move it right up in front of your face? Does the intensity increase? 

DF: No, same.

TG: What happens if make the image tiny? 

DF: The whole process doesn’t make any sense to me. Make what tiny? I know what you’re saying but …

TG: OK so make it black and white. Take the color out of it. 

DF: It doesn’t have aroma then. 

TG: OK, at least we know that. What happens if you make the blueberry enormous? Like a billboard.

DF: Again, that doesn’t make any sense to me. In other words, the image I’m working on doesn’t change shape, it’s the same size.  

TG: Can you change the shape? 

DF: That would be something different.  

TG: Doug, make it a giant blueberry. What happens? Do the aromas get stronger or weaker? 

DF: I understand, I’m just trying to give you legitimate answers. It doesn’t change. I suppose if we’re making it really big it becomes more two dimensional and not real.

TG: I want to go back to the idea of picking out something in the glass and how you know it’s not something else. Is there a system where you compare it to other things? I’m still trying to figure out your eye movements. I have to tell you that your eyes just go nuts when you’re smelling. Your eyes are constantly going back and forth seeing and comparing different things.  

DF: (laughs) I don’t know. But certainly I was never aware of the eye movements until my daughter starting mocking it about eighteen years ago.  

TG: But how could you possibly be aware of it? 

DF: Because one is self-conscious at time when you taste with other people. So maybe I had been aware of it but not really until my daughter pointed it out.  

TG: Right and that’s also part of how you think in terms of eye accessing cues. Your eyes move to help access parts of your brain and your memory. Go ahead and smell the wine and let me know what you pick up.  

DF: It’s definitely funky. What is that? There’s also something that like olive paste mixed with black cherry goop and then there’s that savory element too.  

TG: What’s that right there? That’s the first time you’ve held your eyes in one place for longer than a few seconds.

DF: Right. I’m trying to sort it out, focus on the wine and now how I’m actually doing it.  

TG: Most people have a starting eye position and it seems like you have a starting sequence of about three different positions in rapid succession. Right here, here, and here. I’m just trying to figure out what you do. How do you figure out what things are? If you put your nose in the glass, how do you know it’s blackberry and not a garage door? If I had to be you, how would I do it?

DF: Well, I’m not sure and this wine is a bit funky. I’ll have to work harder to dig more out of it. So, how many people do you taste with that taste with their eyes closed?

TG: Not many, but you can still watch their eyes move with their eyes closed.

DF: Just wondered. 

TG: I will tell you that almost everyone looks down when they smell wine because that’s where most of us look when we talk to ourselves. But getting back on track, let’s see if we can’t figure out more. It sounds like since we’ve been trained, you go off the grid. 

DF: Right.

TG: So how do you see the grid? How do you know you haven’t forgotten anything? 

DF: It’s a little bit oral. 

TG: Are you talking to yourself?

DF: It’s an audible cue because I’ve said it to myself.

TG: So you’re internally saying, what about fruit, what about earth, etc.

DF: Right. With red wines I typically have to force myself to floral so at some point when I’ve stopped receiving information, or believing that I’ve stopped receiving new information that is important, I’ll say, “come one, let’s get on the grid.” Somewhere in my brain I’ve made that mental command.  

TG: Once you’ve received the information, does it go somewhere so you don’t worry about it but still know it’s there? 

DF: No, I try to capture it in some way. I’ll be taking notes and writing but instead I’m trying to mentally recall this. It’s almost as if it’s a Scrabble board and I put black cherry over here. 

TG: Not to be a pain in the ass, but when you say “put black cherry over here,” what do you mean by that? 

DF: I put the word black cherry over here (motions chest high to the left). But not an image.

TG: Interesting, so you deal with images of words and maybe not the actual thing you’re smelling.  

DF: Right. I chalk it up again to being a city boy and seeing a package of black cherries and not a black cherry.  

TG: But there sounds like a system where if you smell something you generate a word that represents whatever it is. 

DF: Yes and I can shift the words off to the left and right as I get new information. 

TG: That’s a really interesting system—it sounds as if the words hang around to the left and right of your internal field. So you can look at them again when you go to make a conclusion or to just think about the wine. True?

DF: Right, but it’s very much like speaking, as it were; like when you’re trying to give a talk and you’re trying to remember to talk about this, this, and this.

TG: So it’s like a check list.

DF: Right. To me it’s a very similar experience where I have to put the black cherry over here so I remember to say it. 

TG: But it also sounds like the images of whatever you smell then become words. Is that how it works? 

DF: They’re very much words.

TG: Which is why when I talk about images it sounds like Martian to you? 

DF: (Laughs) Yes, it’s fairly Martian to me although color even though it is a real concept just doesn’t work that well for me. I honestly think it’s because I have a very pedantic notion of what smells are. They’re still kind of new to me.  

TG: Pedantic meaning …

DF: That I’ll smell it, try to figure out what it is, give it a name and put it over here (motions to the left with his left hand about chest high). I have to dig deeper before I’ll find some kind of image. But the words are first (pauses). But you know they couldn’t all possibly be words. Some are words and some are images.

TG: I wouldn’t be surprised if they were all images initially and then they turned into words--and that’s your system for finding things.  

DF: Possibly.  

TG: Because maybe seeing the word triggers something else.  

DF: Seeing the word is definitely part of the process. I was thinking about the olive note in the wine and probably briefly saw some olive tapenade. I wasn’t going to say tapenade but then it made me think of ground up olives. Then that turns into the words black olives.

TG: If I wanted to be really picky about it, when you see the image of black olives, is it close up or far away? Where is it? Does the location have to do with how strong the intensity is? 

DF: I can’t generate any truthful answer to that. For me I’m too busy trying to figure out what these other funky smells in the glass are. There’s some kind of swamp gas going on here. 

TG: I’m not sure why I picked a Rhône wine as both of these have been funky (note the first bottle opened was corked). How do you know when you’re done smelling the wine? 

DF: When I find myself repeating the same things over and over. Then I’m done smelling the wine. Most of the time with a wine like this I don’t think I’m ever done. Last night with a Dönhhoff Riesling I just had one descriptor, grapefruit pie. That’s all it was with diced pineapple candies. But every time you back to a wine like that you do get more information or at least you hope you do. And if you don’t, then you get bored. 

TG: Well let’s taste it. 

DF: I don’t want to taste it yet because I haven’t identified everything (smells the wine again). So it’s like a black cherry, red plum; there’s a little bit a blueberry to it. Then in terms of flowers there’s nothing to worry about. There’s also nothing to worry about in the American oaky kind of a thing. I definitely do try to draw up an image surrounding a barrel; the outside of the staves and the inside of the staves. I literally try to picture that.  

TG: Where’s that? 

DF: Over here somewhere (points out front and slightly to the right). 

TG: Does the size of the image depend on the intensity of the aroma? 

DF: No, just my point of reference.  

TG: Just to get some detail, is this image on some kind of screen? Is it in 3D? What’s it like? 

DF: It’s just a partial image of a barrel.

TG: Flat? Three dimensional? 

DF: Three dimensional.

TG: We could play with this and ask what happens if you brighten up the image or make the colors really intense. Does it change the intensity of the aroma? 

DF: It just seems artificial; I can’t make any sense out of it. I’m changing something that’s supposed to be a representation of something real and it becomes not real. I don’t know what to do with that.  

TG: In other words, it doesn’t make any sense and kind of screws it up. OK, what about everything else, the earthiness, and the funkiness? 

DF: Just picturing herbs, grasses, and leaves; both edible and inedible. They’re kind of all over the place here (motions in front just above waist level).  

TG: OK.  And they’re all out in a field …

DF: No, I’m just referencing images out in front of me, like single leaves or a handful of leaves.  

TG: Do they become words? Do they need to become words or are they just there? 

DF: I have to name them so I guess it’s the same process with the fruit. I have to smell it, try to figure out what it is and then it becomes a word.  

TG: OK and just to be picky again, when you recognize something do you internally say to yourself, “oh that’s tarragon,” and then the word happens?

DF: Yes, the word happens after the recognition.  

TG: So there’s almost an auditory command like, “this is X.”

DF: Yes (after a long pause), it’s definitely auditory. 

TG: And it’s your voice saying, it’s X. 

DF: Yes, it’s an internal voice but it’s not necessarily mine.  It’s like sometimes you’ll talk to yourself in your own voice and sometimes in a different voice.

TG: Anything else in terms of the nose of this wine you want to mention? 

DF: Not really much else. There’s a little bit of a vegetal thing going on as well as the olive paste. I keep looking at various versions of the fruit now so the red cherry might be the pit. But I think I’m making a conscious effort to sort through these visual cherries in terms of what they actually look like. 

TG: Is it like trying to calibrate the quality of it or the age? 

DF: Yes, but the motivation and the mindset are just that I’m trying to smell and identify things and then I can understand what the conclusion can be from that. But right now I’m just trying to give myself to the wine and see what’s in it. 

Palate 

TG: Let’s do the palate. What are you goals when you taste the wine? For me, I’ve done 80% of the work when I smell the wine so the only thing I’m trying to do with the palate is confirm everything and then calibrate the structure.  

DF: I’m anxious to get into it and see what the weight of the wine is; so it’s very much like I want to have physical contact with the wine.  

TG: But you also go through everything you’ve smelled. 

DF: Yes, I’m trying to decide what’s going on. I have got all the cherries in a row with the plums and the currants. There’s a little bit of cranberry juice going on but those are all real physical sensations. I don’t even drink cranberry juice.  

TG: Do you need to check in with the list of words or the pictures to confirm all these things? Is that necessary or what do you do? 

DF: I’m not aware of a list of words so it’s more like it’s a list of 100 questions where I’m asking, is that currant?  OK, there’s currant, so is there cranberry? 

TG: So it’s auditory and you’re asking yourself those things? That’s got to happen really fast.  

DF: I guess so. 

TG: If you’re asking yourself if there’s any cranberry, are there any images? 

DF: If it’s cranberry, yes other things come up because I’m in the habit of bringing other things up. I’ll ask, why isn’t there strawberries? Or dried strawberries? It’s pretty much associative which is a sequence built on habit and not logic. Or maybe it’s built on logic but it’s not on what’s coming out of the glass. That’s because I’m one of those people who has to stay disciplined or else go off on a tangent.  

TG: As in stream of consciousness?  

DF: Or unconsciousness. And right now I’m getting a note of raisin maybe because I looked for it but I’m not seeing an image of it. I can call it out by saying it but the first thing that happened was a word and not an image.  

TG: Does the list of words change at all when you taste the wine? Or do the words just hang out there? 

DF: Hopefully but some of them are fading away. I’m trying to pull them back up again but with limited success.

TG: So you build the list of words as construct with the nose and then when you taste it and something’s not strong it just goes away or you forget about it.  

DF: Yes.

TG: So when you taste it, it might confirm it and reinforce it? Or is it not that important? 

DF: Well it is important but it might be an addition image of the word black cherry as opposed to the original word getting bold and big. 

TG: So when you say an additional image of the word, would it be positioned somewhere else?

DF: (Motions in front and left of center) No, it would be positioned right next to the other image. Visually it’s as if there are two images of the word black cherry literally right next to each other. So I’ll go, “Wow, there’s a lot of black cherry.” 

TG: Got it. 

DF: I’ve had that physical sensation before that there’s five words “black cherry” in front of me. This is of course what we do when we try to grid a wine.  

TG: True, if you think about it that’s exactly what we try to do. If four or five of us say one thing then we think it’s important in the wine. What about structure?  What do you do when you taste for structure?  

DF: I’m going to start the process over again. So I’m just tasting for sensation. I’m not even thinking about structure at this point. And then I can start physically feeling the tannins or there are literally seed tannins which I’m interpreting as more painful than fruit tannins and skin tannins. The fruit keeps coming in and there’s a little bit of an image there, some kind of juice. For me the whole structural thing is an intellectual decision. I’m just taking the information I have and saying that must be medium plus tannins.  

TG: How do you know it’s not just medium tannins? 

DF: Well I don’t know that it’s not medium. I have to make an intellectual assessment. I get too much physical sensation on my tongue and in the back of my tongue—in this case I think it’s more seed tannins—for it to be medium. So I’m still getting more of the physical pin prick of tannins. Certainly a very dry flavor in my mouth. And I look back at those fruits and go, well it’s moving more towards cranberry along with black cherry and raisin. It’s medium acid and it’s as if somebody has a couple of different wines in here because some of the fruit is desiccated, dehydrated, and raisinated and some of the fruit wasn’t—it’s very red cherry. It’s like somebody put a couple of different wines together.  

TG: In terms of calibrating, if you have to give someone an answer about structure, just like we make our students do, how do you go about giving someone an answer? 

DG: I’m medium acidity and medium plus tannins with this wine.

TG: Yes, but how do you know? How do you get precise about it? 

DF: It’s just an intellectual decision that I would expect more pain with high tannins. I would expect not to be able to notice raisins with more than medium acidity. On the other hand, I would understand if somebody said that it’s medium plus acidity. I might argue with them but it’s completely intellectual for me. 

TG: Not to be a pain in the ass, but what do you mean by completely intellectual? 

DF: It must mean that if anything, I’m looking at the grid, really more at the slide that has the low, medium minus etc.

TG: Do you actually see these things and then point to something and say, “it’s medium.”

DF: Yes. 

TG: That’s exactly the way I do it. I see almost a kind of slide rule with a red button that moves and finally stops at the right level of acid or whatever.  

DF: My moves but you hope it starts in the right place and often it doesn’t.  

TG: Got it.  

DF: With tannin I might say that it’s not painful enough. But that’s a very intellectual decision in comparing all the other wines with high tannin I’ve had and then saying, “this one doesn’t hurt.” 

TG: The scale is really interesting to me because I think most people need some kind of visual construct to be able to calibrate well; especially if a wine is acidic and tannic at the same time.  

DF: Absolutely, we always struggle with that and I don’t know that we have the answer either because we are tasting pH and not acid.  

TG: Home stretch. If you were going to describe to someone what you do when you taste the wine, what would it be like? You take a sip … what do you do?

DF: Very much trying to pull flavor out of it the whole time. I pull it in to try to get the physical sensation of tannin but now I’m sitting here comparing it to things. And probably comparing it to visual images than words. I definitely feel more of a black cherry paste and that was probably prompted by the vision of black cherry paste, whatever that is. Maybe in a pie. But maybe it’s not in a pie, somebody’s screwed up that fruit and I’m envisioning a mortar and pestle like fruit and sort of an olive paste image comes up as well.  

TG: In going back to these images, or they jars or cans or what? Or just smears of things? 

DF: More smears. Getting some black pepper and I see some peppercorns and not a pepper grinder.  

TG: If you had to take any of these images and we start changing the structure of any of them, what happens? Does it make it artificial? 

DF: Yes it does. It doesn’t make any sense. I tried to do it with the black peppercorns, make them bigger and my reaction is, “what the hell is that all about?”It takes me off task I guess is the more important thing there.   

TG: So it changes the experience so completely that it doesn’t mean anything? 

DF: I think that if there’s a value, as you’re describing it, in changing the size of the word “black pepper,” then that doesn’t alter anything at all because it’s a different process. I’ve this sort of array of words in front of me, and if you want me to make the words black pepper bigger then it’s no problem. It doesn’t seem weird or destructive at all. But if I try to make the image or the black peppercorns bigger, then I feel like I’ve been taken off task.  

TG: OK, so that’s the system. Let’s finish up. How do you know when you’re finished tasting a wine? 

DF: I don’t think I’m ever finished tasting a wine although there are some boring wines. There’s always information that I’ve screwed up and missed.  

TG: One thing I skipped over at the very beginning that I’d still like to ask: when you make a conclusion, what are you trying to do? 

DF: Describe it appropriately; describe it in a way that others would recognize the wine. That’s my conclusion and hopefully I’ve described it correctly. But as we talked about previously, I’m also trying to decide, is this wine going anywhere? Do I give a shit about this wine? It’s the first thing I do and I’m convinced that it’s because I was a salesman. I wasn’t into wine until I was selling wine. So the first thing I think about is, who would I sell this to? Who would like it? Who would get this wine? But I always think in those terms of who would get it versus who would like it. Or I guess I do. I tend to think that certain people tend to understand certain things and others don’t. We all understand different things. I get this wine we’re tasting but I don’t really care about it. Does that make sense? 

TG: Sure it does. The last thing before I let you get out of here and head to the airport is, what are your beliefs about yourself as a taster? 

DF: That I’ve got some skills that are very useful; that I have to be very disciplined intellectually to be consistent because consistency is my biggest fault.  

TG: Does being at the level you are and being considered a great taster, does that matter when you sit down to work?  

DF: Does it matter to me? 

TG: Yes, does it matter?

DF: Yes, it does. It’s like I feel like I have to be more disciplined because I know the truth is that I’m not a great taster.  

TG: What? 

DF: No, seriously, that’s how I feel about it. I can do things because I’ve figured out some stuff.  

TG: You’ve figured out, what, how to pass exams?  

DF: Yes, and I figured out how to intellectually take these things apart. But I don’t consider myself a great taster at all. I just know that I’ve managed to figure it out so that I can act as if I’m a great taster.  

TG: True. It’s amazing what you can do if you just pretend.

DF: Of course it’s not all pretense, but it’s definitely a little bit of a role play because I have some things that I’m good and some things I’m not. Most of the times you don’t know which is which. 

Master Sommelier Gillian Balance has spent over 20 years in the hospitality industry with stints at several well-known restaurants including Picholine, Cello Restaurant, Windows on the World in New York, and the Bacara Resort in Santa Barbara. Gillian has also worked in the Bay Area as the Plumpjack Group’s wine director, the sommelier at the Pacific Union Club in San Francisco, and at the Bottega restaurant in Napa Valley.  

In 2012 Gillian passed the final portion of the Master’s Examination becoming only the 19th woman to ever do so. Aside from her CMSA training, Ballance received the Higher Certificate of Distinction as well as her Diploma in Wines & Spirits from the British Wine and Spirits Education Trust. She also received a BFA from the Tisch School of the Arts at New York University.  

I met up with Gillian in May of 2013 when she was still the wine director at the historic lodge at Cavallo Point near the Golden Gate Bridge. We tasted the 2009 Double Bond Syrah from the Larner Vineyard in Santa Ynez Valley and used Riedel Vinum Zinfandel/Chianti glasses. I started the interview by asking her about the strategies she used to pass the three parts of the Master’s Exam.

Exam Strategies 

TG: You passed the exam in 2012 in Dallas. What parts of the exam did you have to take then? 

GB: I had tasting and service.

TG: So you got theory out of the way before then. Was theory the easiest for you? 

GB: Yes.

TG: How was it the easiest? Did you have an academic background? 

GB: I studied philosophy at NYU, but I think that it was more of completing the diploma for the WSET. I finished the diploma shortly before I sat for the MS Advanced Exam. I think it gave me the study regimen, the tools, and the approach that made theory not as impossible as most people make it out to be.

TG: If you had to give someone studying theory for the Advanced or Master’s exams, what would it be? What was your best practice? What worked for you?

GB: I would say to take a course like the WSET. The thing I see people studying for the MS theory exams doing is a lot of flashcards and Q & A. They study these questions for years without ever understanding why the questions exist. That’s what the WSET diploma program does for you. There’s no short cuts. You have to be able to write full length papers on carbonic maceration or any other topic. That forces you to study the subject in depth and find out the “whys” behind everything. I’m a very visual person as well so visual tools also helped me a lot. My study place would be filled with maps and colored pencil drawings. I also used a smart pen that allows you to record yourself asking questions. I would study a subject for a few hours and then use the smart pen to go over everything I’d just studied. Then when I was driving to work or where ever I’d listen to the recordings over and over again until it became part of me. 

TG: What about service? What was challenging for you with service? 

GB: I’m working on the floor now, but I think that the places I’ve worked at over the last few years haven’t really been super fine dining in terms of the detail of service, say like the French Laundry. I would get nervous because my approach to service day to day was more casual. I had to become really polished and really comfortable with more formal service. We have a gueridon here at the restaurant and Jesse Becker, MS, would come and work with me until it became second nature. Then I could focus on my demeanor and ask myself, “What is my demeanor going to be like when I approach a table of several Master Sommeliers and have to answer questions?” You really have to get the mechanics down before you can do that. I think for a couple of years beforehand I was just trying to get it all down at the same time. 

TG: That’s great. What about tasting? How was it for you? Tasting was by far the hardest part of the exam for me.  

GB: I worked really hard for two years on blind tasting with the group at the French Laundry once or twice a week.  

TG: When you think about tasting and those two years, was there something that changed or snapped at some point where suddenly tasting became easier? Where you could get in the zone before the exam and taste really well? 

GB: I think it became easier but only because of the work I did. When you’re working on tasting you don’t really step outside and see what’s changed in terms of your process. I also think that getting the opportunity to work with and listen to other tasters, especially Masters, was big. Just listening to different people’s approach was very educational. You can’t just rely on yourself, you have to collect things from everybody. But having had a support/tasting group for two years was so important. I feel for friends of mine who have tried to pass the exams but live in places where there’s no network or group like the one I had. 

TG: So the group was that important?

GB: Yes it was, for support and building each other up. I can’t imagine not having that group during the process. 

Tasting: Overall Goals 

TG: When you’re tasting as a buyer, what are your goals? What are you trying to accomplish? 

GB: First and foremost, I think of pricing and necessity; where the wine could fit in the program right now. Say if we were in need of Pinot Noirs to put on the list for $60, I’d be looking at wines in that price range and taking it from there.

TG: Makes sense but in terms of actually tasting it, what are you trying to assess?

GB: Overall quality is probably the most important thing. Any wine drinker knows quality. They may not know how to define it but they still know it. Our clientele here at the restaurant loves oaky, buttery Chardonnay, for instance. It’s our number one selling wine by the glass. Even though it may not be my personal favorite style of wine, I still need to find something that is really high quality in that category-which I believe I can do. But it takes time to learn that process.

TG: All true. What are overall important criteria for a good tasting? What do you need to have for a good tasting environment? 

GB: Just wine (laughs).

TG: That’s a given. But what else do you need in terms of glassware etc.? 

GB: We do a lot of tasting in the cellar because that’s where my desk is and where salespeople can lay out 20 wines if they need to. So we can’t unfortunately be that picky about the environment. But we have good quality glassware.

TG: What are your beliefs about tasting in terms of you as a taster? Is it easy for you? Difficult? 

GB: I think it’s important to do every day to some degree. Maybe it’s just tasting ten wines or tasting through everything that you’re pouring by the glass or whatever. There’s no shortage around here because we have an onslaught of distributors and brokers. A lot of people in the business live in this area so we end up tasting every day. I think that’s important. It’s like singing or dancing where you have to keep your body trained. You have to keep your palate trained in the same way. I also try to take the same approach every time even though I may not be writing notes or tasting according to a grid. I still try to have the same rhythm every time.

TG: Do you think you’re a good taster?

GB: I used to think I was an awesome taster (laughs). I had a fired up period when I was working at Windows on the World with Andrea (Andrea Immer Robinson MS); we had a 150,000 bottle cellar and we could taste anything we wanted as long as we recorded what we were opening. I was younger then and at that time you couldn’t stop me with blind tasting. When I got into the Master of Wine program my tasting was even more elevated. But then I got a big job with Plump Jack that consumed all of my time so I dropped out of the MW program. Three years into that job I decided to take the Advanced Course. I was out of practice and wasn’t feeling as confident. But over the last year before the Master’s exam I started to feel that way again. So it’s like anything else; you practice and build the skills. But I also think you can be an amazing blind taster, pick up a glass, and say exactly what it is but not know why the wine is the way it is. I think that could be the most important thing. 

TG: What’s interesting is that I’ve asked the question,“Do you think you’re a great taster?” to practically everyone I’ve interviewed and no one has said yes. Everyone—without exception—says that they are good tasters but have to work at it constantly—self included. 

GB: That’s because we’re wrong a lot! (Laughs) 

TG: True. Last question before we talk about the sight/appearance of the wine. How do you know if a wine is a great wine? What makes a wine great to you? 

GB: Having all the elements in balance. Having the structure, the aromatic qualities, and everything on the palate all coming together and really resonating. I really like wines where I can see layers of flavors before I even taste the wine.

TG: It’s interesting that you use the word “see” in describing your experience of a wine. 

GB: I do. I see layers of flavors in wine.  

TG: We’re going to get to that.

Tasting: Sight 

TG: Now let’s talk about tasting, specifically the sight. We can use the context of tasting for an MS-type exam setting. When you look at wine, what are you trying to do? What are your goals? 

GB: I think it depends on what I’m trying to do. This wine (Double Bond Syrah) has a beautiful sheen to it. I’m also looking at the depth of color and concentration of color; things I can get from the wine just by looking at it. So in looking at this wine I know that it’s bright, youthful, fresh young red wine from a full-bodied grape variety. 

TG: Knowing the grape variety is Syrah, do you check the color to make sure it’s appropriate for that grape?

GB: Yes, like I said there’s a sheen to it and it has a dark ruby core that fades gently to a really beautiful pinkish-purple rim.  

TG: But as you look at that glass and know it’s Syrah, how do you know it’s the right color for the grape? Is there a way that you check it internally against other colors? How do you know? 

GB: I don’t really know.

TG: Stop and think for a second, “this color is right for Syrah because …” How do you know it’s not Pinot Noir? 

GB: (Laughs) that’s a good question. Because it’s opaque.

TG: I’m just curious, because if you stop and go inside for just a second, is there a way you compare what you’re seeing in the glass right now to other wines you’ve tasted before.

GB: I’m sure that there is but I don’t know what it is.  

TG: Pause for a second and see if you can figure it out. I know what I do but we’re after your strategies. 

GB: I probably flash through color memories of every Syrah I’ve ever tasted. 

TG: What about colors for red wine?

GB: Yes, even colors for red wine. 

TG: Think about it for a moment; if that’s what you do I’m curious to know how you do it. Are there images of colors? A color gradation? Glasses of wine? 

GB: I think it’s a color gradation.

TG: Can you point to it? Can you show me where it is? In your mind’s eye? The easy way is to try to deliberately make it wrong. Say to yourself, “this is Pinot Noir,” and see what happens. Usually you’ll get a strong “no” of some kind. 

GB: I guess I see a color gradation right out here (points directly out in front of her face). The left side is lighter in color and right is deeper.

TG: Where is this gradation? How far out in front of you? 

GB: It’s right here (about six-eight inches directly in front of her face). 

TG: How wide is it? 

GB: It’s only about two inches wide. 

TG: So as you look at the gradation, do you then look at the glass and try to match up the color? 

GB: Yes.

TG: What happens when you find the match? Does something happen? 

GB: I think a little light goes off when I find the match. Wait, it’s like I see the paint strip in back of me.  

TG: You mean behind you? 

GB: No, it’s still in my head. 

TG: Still the same dimensions?

GB: Yes.

TG: Go ahead and find the main color of the wine and try to match it to the gradation. What happens? 

GB: A little light goes off. 

TG: What color is the light?

GB: its yellow (laughs). It’s like a small light bulb. 

TG: Where’s the light bulb? 

GB: It’s right in front of the gradation.

TG: If we’re talking about a white wine, is the color gradation in the same place or different place? 

GB: Same place.

TG: Does it go light to dark, left to right like the red wine gradation? 

GB: Yes. 

TG: What about the yellow light? Still in the same place? 

GB: Same spot. 

TG: Wow. Did you know that you do that? 

GB: No! 

 Tasting: Smell

 TG: When you first smell a glass of wine, what are your goals?  What are you trying to do?

GB: Like I said, I like to see layers in the aromas of the wine. 

TG: OK but before we get there, what’s important in terms of goals when smelling wine? 

GB: Is the wine good or not.

TG: So you’re checking the wine for quality. For hygiene? 

GB: Yes, checking to see if the wine is clean or not. But also does the wine smell good.

TG: What do you mean by “good?”

GB: Delicious.

TG: That’s pretty subjective. By delicious you mean … 

GB: Like something you would really want to drink, to enjoy.

TG: Got it. But also in terms of being a professional, what would your goals be in terms of smelling a wine.

GB: I want to make sure that it’s true to the varietal. I think there’s a lot of wine out there that smells good and tastes delicious but it doesn’t taste like the grape should. Then you just have to assess it for whatever it is.

TG: What could prevent a wine from tasting good or tasting like whatever the grape is? 

GB: Quality of the fruit; winemaking practices.

TG: Such as …

GB: heavy oak, too long maceration on the skins giving a coarse or gritty tannic structure in a red wine. Picking fruit too soon. Picking fruit too late. You can really tell if the winemaker is still experimenting when you taste the wine (laughs). I’ve never made wine but I think that as a winemaker you have to evolve in your style. And who are you practicing on? Us! 

TG: Go ahead and smell the wine. 

GB: I can actually smell it from here without lifting the glass and we’re not in a specifically neutral environment. 

TG: Wow, OK, pick up your glass. I’m curious, when you first pick up the glass, where do your eyes go? Is there a place that’s consistently comfortable for you? 

GB: My eyes go out and over the glass. 

TG: Right, they’re pretty much center and looking out at a 45° down but over the top of the glass.

GB: Yes.

TG: Just curious, smell the wine and then move your eyes to either side.  What happens? 

GB: It changes a little bit but it feels the most comfortable when my eyes are straight ahead. 

TG: I notice your eyes also go up to the left briefly as well.

GB: Yes and I also look to the side a lot when I’m smelling.

TG: Do you say anything to yourself when you first start smelling the wine? Any kind of verbal prompt? I’m trying to figure out your sequence.  

GB: I say something like, “what” or “what’s there?”

TG: What happens after you ask that question? You mentioned that you “see” layers of flavors. Does that happen then as in immediately? Or does something happen in between? 

GB: Yes it does. It’s like a cake.  

TG: If I had to be you, what would I see? What would I experience? What does that look like? 

GB: It’s not like a physical cake. It’s just brown lines like in my brain is making layers. Then I fill them in with what I get in the wine. 

TG: Is it like a wooden frame or just lines? What color of brown? Are the lines thin or thick? 

GB: Just a frame and it’s tan brown with thin lines. It’s like a layer cake in between the lines (she motions to the layers about ½ inch apart).

TG: It looks like the layers are only about half an inch apart. In your mind’s eye, how far away is these layers? (Gillian motions to about 10 inches right in front of her face). How big is it?

GB: It’s about eight inches tall and it’s square.  

TG: Is there a border on the square? 

GB: No.

TG: Does it just fade out? 

GB: Yes.

TG: What surrounds it? 

GB: It’s just sort of neutral, it’s white.

TG: Just curious, what would happen if you made the square larger? Would that make it easier for you to recognize aromas? Try it and see what happens.

GB: I’ve never thought about expanding it but it would probably change what I’m smelling.

TG: Fair enough, but let’s figure out what you do first and then come back to this. To recap, you see this square that’s about eight by eight inches. Inside the square there are layers. What do you see inside the layers? Colors? Images? 

GB: Brown layers with off-white in between; I fill in the layers with what I’m smelling in the wine. With this wine, in the first layer I would probably have a blueberry in my head. 

TG: Can you draw that for me? Motion with your hand and draw the square and show me what it’s like.

GB: It doesn’t really have a border but here’s the first layer (motions out in front of her face about 10 inches away and slightly to the right). It’s tan brown with a thin layer of off-white or cream color in between—just like a cake.

TG: But then these layers get filled in with various things. Does it start off blank and then you fill it in, populating it with different things you smell in the wine? 

GB: Yes.

TG: That’s a pretty cool system. So as you’re smelling this wine, the Syrah, what starts to populate in the layers?

GB: I look for fruit first so at the base I would see blueberry and blackberry.

TG: Does that become an image before it goes into the layer? 

GB: No.

TG: So how does that happen?  How does that get into the layer? 

GB: I don’t know.

TG: Hold the glass and smell the wine for a few seconds focusing on the blueberry and blackberry. See if you can figure it out because this is one of those things you probably never thought about or were even aware of.

GB: The frame is already there and then I fill it in with an image of blueberries.

TG: In the cream-colored part? 

GB: Yes.

TG: How does that happen? 

GB: I just smell the wine and then it’s there.

TG: Do you say anything to yourself at that point like, “that’s blueberry.” 

GB: I do and then I move on and try to build up the other layers. 

TG: So you start at the bottom and build up? 

GB: Yes.

TG: So as you smell the wine again what else comes up besides blueberries?

GB: Violets; crushed violet pops into my head. 

TG: When you say it pops into your head does it appear in one of the layers? 

GB: It came in a little higher up …

TG: Can you show me where it is? (Gillian motions out in front of her face about 10 inches away and about 10 inches off to the right of center). Hold the image of the crushed violets for a moment. What does that look like? Is it 2D or 3D?

GB: It’s flat and like dried crushed petals that are sitting right there.

TG: Once you see that image does it go into the second layer? What happens then? 

GB: It actually moved up another layer because it’s more of a top note. 

TG: I was just going to ask if there’s some kind of hierarchy in terms of the position in the frame of the image of the aroma as it relates to the specific kind of aroma.  

GB: Yes, so floral being a more delicate aroma is higher up. 

TG: As you think about this square, what would be at the top?

GB: Flowers. I would put all the fruits at the base. 

TG: Where would the oak go? 

GB: The oak would be somewhere right above the base, above the fruit.

TG: Let’s finish the wine. What else do you smell? 

GB: Black pepper. 

TG: Interesting; your eyes first went here (out front and slightly up) and then here (to the right where the layers are. Does the image first pop up here in front and then move to the layers? Is that what happened with the violets? 

GB: Yes.

TG: Did you also say to yourself, “black pepper?”

GB: Yes. 

TG: Is the black pepper above the fruit? 

GB: Yes and it’s in the middle between the fruit and the violets. 

TG: What else do you smell? 

GB: Tobacco.

TG: You did the same thing with your eyes so that seems to be your system: smell the wine and the image pops up here in front and then moves into one of the layers. Is the image of tobacco flat and two dimensional?

GB: Yes. 

TG: Is there a shape to the picture of the tobacco? 

GB: It’s round. 

TG: Where does it go in the grid? 

GB: It’s in the middle; it’s where I see warmth. 

TG: What do you mean by warmth? 

GB: I consider tobacco to be a warming aroma. 

TG: Does warming mean heat or warm feeling or…

GB: It’s a warm feeling; it’s where the sensual part gets filled in.

TG: Say more about that.

GB: Tobacco kind of strikes a sensual chord inside of you. You smell the wine and then think that at the base there’s this fresh vibrant fruit, so you see it at the base layer of the “cake.” In the middle is where all the warm sensual things are like oak, cedar, tobacco leaf, and coffee. At the top is where the floral and black pepper come into play. 

TG: Smell the wine again and check for any earthiness. I’m not sure if there’s any earthiness, but go ahead and check for it.

GB: There is a faint stony mineral component. I know this vineyard.

TG: So knowing that do you get a picture of the vineyard? If so, where is it? 

GB: It came up all over. 

TG: Like you’re standing in the vineyard.

GB: Yes and I’m actually there right now looking at the soil. It’s very chalky and stony.  

TG: Where in your “layers” does the earthiness go?  

GB: It’s between the warm central part and the fruit probably because it’s the earth component and it holds everything else up.

TG: Just curious, hold it there underneath the fruit for a few moments and see if it feels right. What happens? 

GB: No, it’s above the fruit.

TG: OK but what is the earth like? A picture or a texture? 

GB: It’s the crushed stony soil that I see. 

TG: Like a picture of the wine. 

GB: Yes, this it’s literally a picture of the wine.  

TG: Smell the wine one last time and see if there’s anything else.

GB: There’s vanilla; it looks like a vanilla bean suspended in air.  

TG: Where does it live in the layers?

GB: It’s also in the warm layer with the tobacco.

TG: Having said all that, are there any parts of the “layer” cake that are left blank for this wine? 

GB: From an aromatic stand point yes, but it will complete itself when I taste the wine.  

TG: Got it. Last question about this section: how do you know when you’re finished smelling the wine and it’s time to taste it?  

GB: I feel like I can always come back, so I don’t ever feel like I’m “done.” 

TG: Back to your layers. Is the set up for the layers different with each wine the same? 

GB: Yes.

TG: Are the layers something you’re consciously aware of what a picture of a wine actually looks like? In other words, do you have an idea of what the layers for an Alsace Riesling look like compared to those for a Rioja Gran Reserva? 

GB: Yes.

TG: Have you ever thought about practicing tasting by practicing with your layers and not tasting? 

GB: No, but I think it would be very interesting to do. I’ve never verbalized this before so it’s hard to explain. At the same time, it’s something that I would want to develop further. It’s funny that you mention the eye thing.  When I took the theory exam, Fred (Dame) said that I kept looking up—and that’s where I kept getting my answers from.

TG: Up and to the right or left?

GB: Just generally up. 

Tasting: Palate
 
TG: Now that you’ve smelled the wine you have a pretty good idea of what it’s about. When you finally taste the wine, what are you trying to do? What are your goals when you taste vs. smell?

GB: I think about whether everything that was pleasing aromatically is there on the palate. Does the palate match the texture in terms of what I thought it would be visually? When I think of texture I think of things like sweaters or wooly blankets.  

TG: I have a feeling we’ll get back to that when we talk about calibrating the structure of the wine. Go ahead and taste the wine and I’ll do so as well. First, when you taste the wine do you say something to yourself like you do when you first smell the wine? Or do you bring the layers back in? What happens?

GB: I bring the layers back in but now they’ve gone this way, 90 degrees to the right. They’re still in layers but now it’s more what about the texture, the alcohol and the acidity are like. 

TG: Do you literally ask yourself, “What’s the texture like?” or “what’s the acidity like?” Things like that? 

GB: That’s when I think of a sweater or a piece of chalk.

TG: Taste the wine again. How would you describe the texture? What’s it like? 

GB: It starts off kind of velvety.

TG: How do you represent that? 

GB: A kind of red velvet top or something like that. 

TG: Where is that?

GB: It’s here (directly in front about eye level).

TG: Is it an actual picture of it? 

GB: No, it’s more like the material.

TG: Does it change as the finish goes on? 

GB: It changes to a more slightly chalky feeling.

TG: After you get the chalky taste/feeling what happens to the material?  Does it go away?

GB: Yes. 

TG: How is the chalk represented? 

GB: It’s like crushed white chalk suspended in the air.

TG: What about the layers? Do they change if the intensity of the aromas change on the palate? Or do they stay the same? 

GB: They stay in the same place.

TG: Let’s talk about structure; the alcohol, acid and tannin. How do you calibrate the structure in a wine, the difference between medium and medium-plus acid, for instance.

GB: The tannin is medium-plus. 

TG: How do you know it’s not medium?

GB: Because it’s slightly elevated; medium would be right here (points out in front of her).

TG: What’s right there?

GB: Medium.

TG: Where’s low? (She points down lower) Where’s high? (She points higher but in line with where medium and low are). Aha! So there’s a scale of sorts.

GB: Yes, there’s a visual scale of sorts.

TG: What does the scale look like? Does it look like a ruler? Like a dial? 

GB: It looks like hash marks.

TG: It seems like they’re right out in front of you in the center about 15 inches away; medium is right at eye level with “high” up higher and low below eye level. How wide are the hash marks? 

GB: About 4-5 inches wide.

TG: Are the marks on a ruler? 

GB: No, they’re suspended in space.

TG: How do you use them to calibrate? Is there a button that moves? 

GB: No, my eyes move up and down them. So if I’m tasting a wine that has medium-plus tannin my eyes start at medium and then move up.

TG: So there’s some kind of marker for medium-plus? Or does it light up someway so you know? I’m trying to figure out how you do it.

GB: Not sure.

TG. Try this; taste the wine and try to make the tannin medium or medium-minus. What happens? 

GB: The hash mark pops up (laughs).

TG: Fair enough. What about acidity? Do you calibrate it the same way as tannin?

GB: No and this is so hard because I’ve never thought about it.

TG: Not a surprise given that you do it so fast and for so long that you’re not aware of how you actually do it. Try doing it the same way as tannin and see what happens. If it’s totally off your brain will show you how you actually do it rather quickly. 

GB: The acid part is more round like a circular scale.

TG: Where is it? 

GB: Right in front about a foot away. It’s about the size of a basketball.  

TG: How does it work in terms of low, medium, and high? Where is low acid on the circle?

GB: Low is right in the center and high is on the outside. Medium-plus is close to the outside.

TG: So how do you calibrate a wine? Are there concentric circles? Do the inner circles move? How does it work? 

GB: It’s kind of like a target.  

TG: Are there different colors? 

GB: No, it’s all blue—like peacock blue. 

TG: OK, but how are you absolutely sure that a wine is medium-plus acidity and not medium? How do you know? 

GB: I think I start in the center and then move out as the acidity elevates.

TG: As the acidity elevates do the different concentric circles light up? What happens? 

GB: Yes, they light up and get more intense in color.

TG: Taste the wine again and let’s figure out what you do for alcohol. First, how much alcohol do you get in the wine? 

GB: Medium-plus.

TG: Once again I have to ask, how do you know it’s not medium? Do you use the hash marks or the concentric circles? What do you do?

GB: I use the gradations—the hash marks.

TG: Do they look the same as the tannin hash marks? 

GB: Yes.

TG: So “medium” is straight out in front of you, “high” is up higher, and “low” is lower?

GB: Yes.

TG: How about the length of the finish? How do you calibrate that? 

GB: The finish is more like a runway and you’re on it and seeing how far you’re going on it.

TG: So if it’s a really short finish, what’s that look like? 

GB: It’s right in front of me and stopped.

TG: Where’s a medium finish? 

GB: Several feet out in front of me.

TG: And a long finish? 

GB: A long finish really doesn’t have an end. It goes all the way to a vanishing point. I like that.

TG: Great, one more thing; back to the layers. If a flavor really changes from the nose to the palate, what happens to it in the layers? For instance, if there’s more red fruit on the palate vs. the nose, do the layers change to reflect that? What happens? 

GB: I think I add layers or even take away in some cases.

TG: One more question about the layers; if you’re getting blackberry in the wine, is there literally an image of blackberries in one of the layers? Or is it 3D where you could reach out and grab the blackberries?

GB: I could reach out.

TG: Once it’s time to identify the wine what do you do? Do you bring the layers back and take a look at them again?

GB: In an exam situation structure seems to come to me first. I’m not sure if that’s because I like to get the structure out of the way to make room for the layers or if it’s because that’s how I approach a wine. I think it’s a little bit of both. Structure as in alcohol, acid, tannin, body, and finish come first for me.

TG: We didn’t talk about body. How do you calibrate something like light-bodied vs. full-bodied?

GB: I guess it’s a circle.

TG: So if it’s something light-bodied like a glass of Champagne, what’s that like?

GB: It would be a bright circle.  

TG: What about something like a Chardonnay?

GB: Yellow.

TG: And this Syrah? 

GB: It’s almost purple-black.

TG: What about something that’s medium-bodied?

GB: More red.

TG: It seems like this circle is right out in front of your face.

GB: Yes.

TG: What’s interesting to me is that you use all these structural visual devices, if you want to call them that, really quickly and unconsciously so you probably aren’t aware of using them at all.

GB: Yes and maybe it’s because I want to get structure out of the way so I can rearrange all the furniture if I need to.

TG: Meaning the layers?

GB: Yes.

TG: But do they stay relatively static? Or do things change a lot?

GB: It can change lot because the palate of this wine is very different from the nose. 

TG: With the layers, are they all the same width? Or if something is really dominant, is it wider than the other layers?

GB:  If something is really dominant it’s almost like the base of a pyramid. It’s wider.

TG: Did you know you did any of this? 

GB: I knew about the layers because it’s how I “see” wine.

TG: It might be interesting to see if somehow, either visually or on paper, you could create different layers for all the classic grapes and wines.  

GB: That would be really interesting.

TG: I say that because as time goes on, I tell students that they first have to figure out what strategies they use internally. Then they need to practice these strategies in terms of memory but without actually tasting wine.  
 
Submodalities

One more thing; submodalities. Let’s play with the structural elements of your layers to see if and how they can change your experience of the wine.  So let’s try a few things. First, what happens if you smell and taste the wine and then move the layers across the room and make them small? 

GB: It makes the wine a little fainter. It’s like you’re trying to distance something that’s internal. 

TG: Now reset and then make the layers huge—the size of a billboard. What happens?

GB: The wine expands and gets much more intense.

TG: Does it get harder to pick out the individual things? 

GB: Yes! Much harder.

TG: Reset and put the layers back. Now make the image of the layers black and white. What happens?

GB: The wine becomes much more muted.

TG: OK, reset again. Now take the layers and put them over to the left side. What happens then? 

GB: More muted. 

TG: Put it back where it belongs and leave it! Last thing: how do you know when you’re done tasting a wine? 

GB: That’s interesting because I’m still tasting this wine as we speak. I guess if I’m taking notes I’ve said everything I wanted to say. I guess that’s the point of completion. 

TG: Thanks! This has been a lot of fun.

Thomas Price, MS, is the head sommelier and educator at the Metropolitan Grill, Seattle’s premier steakhouse. Price came to Seattle in 1988 from Anchorage and managed beverage programs for some of Seattle’s top restaurateurs. In 1997 Thomas and his wife Jessica opened their own restaurant, Luau Polynesian Lounge. After selling Luau in 2004 Thomas started at The Met as a banquet server by night and by day began the arduous process preparing for the Master Sommelier examinations. Price was promoted to head sommelier at The Met in June of 2008 and passed the Master’s exam on his fourth attempt in May of 2012.

I tasted with Thomas in January of 2013. We used the 2009 RDV Rendezvous Merlot blend from Virginia and Riedel Vinum Bordeaux glasses. I began the interview by asking Thomas about his strategies for the three parts of the Master’s exam. I’m always interested in what strategies different students use to prepare for the exam. Thomas’ were unique and didn’t disappoint. 

Exams

TG: Let’s talk about the exams first and what worked best for you. We were talking about theory a few minutes ago. You said that you tried maps but they didn’t do it.  

TP: No.

TG: Most students say that they work, but you said that working with sounds files was really good for you.

TP: That was a better method for me. I was probably overstating it when I said that maps didn’t work for me. But focusing solely on visual learning was not successful. Once I went to audio bombardment and very exhaustive note taking, it really began to work.

TG: Going to the service exam, what part of the practical was hardest for you?

TP: Something you said once when you came up to Seattle to work with my group finally got me in the right mode. Before I just couldn’t get into character. I really struggled. I’d think this (the exam) isn’t real, I’m so stiff and wooden. Then you said something like, “we just want to be taken care of like we’re at a restaurant.” And that made all the difference in the world. So when I drop a little bit of red on the table cloth or I’m less than perfect at the job, I rise above and embrace the fact that I made a mistake and get better and keep going. That was really useful for me.  

The whole thing for the exam is that people worry about what’s going to happen and they think about “what wines are they going to pour me” or “what questions are they going to ask me.” If you’re thinking like that you’re just not going to be successful. I found that out the hard way as it took me four times to pass the exam. Ask me anything you want and make me do anything you want and I’ll persevere. I’ll persevere with style and class and I may not answer every question but I’ll carry myself like a Master. That’s when you know the difference.

TG: Sounds like being in what I call “game mode” for the service exam was the hardest part. Was the physical service difficult for you? 

TP: Yes, because as I mentioned earlier, I get nervous. I think part of it for me too was that I never achieved any academic success. I tend to put a lot of pressure on myself. When I was successful at service my technique was extremely smooth. I think the last time I did the decant it was a magnum which I do a lot of at the restaurant. We rarely use a cradle at the Met (Metropolitan Grill in Seattle). I practiced a lot with one but it never did feel natural to me. But really it was just a combination of everything. I would get nervous to perform in that medium which I think was the most difficult and unpredictable of all for me.  

TG: What again made the difference in terms of not being so nervous that you could really function well? Was it the feeling that you had to take care of the table? 

TP: Yes, I got into character. I kind of channeled our colleague Shayn Bjornholm who was a trained actor in a previous life. I’m not an actor, but I was that day; I was so in character that this was my restaurant and these are my guests. They’re not Master Sommeliers who are judging me on my performance. I’m going to wait on them because that’s what I’m really good at. So that was really helpful.  

TG: What about tasting? Was tasting difficult? It was by far the most difficult part of the exams for me. How was it for you?

TP: It was difficult for me because again it was about nerves. But in Aspen when I passed (May 2012) I took each wine individually. I remember working with Fred Dame MS and him saying to approach a flight like it was six different examinations. So I tasted the heck out each wine and then moved on to the next one. I think that if you can go wine by wine it’s much better. I was also not thinking, “They’re going to pour Grüner or Grigio and Chablis next to each other and I’ve got to figure it out.” For the first few exams that was my mindset. But in Aspen it was more like, “pour me anything you want. I trust my process and I’m going to evaluate the wine to the best of my ability.” 

TG: That’s a big shift.

TP: (laughs) Well the other way wasn’t working! 

TG: So for students in tasting, if you had advice for them what would it be? 

TP: In my practice I actually got away from Court-like tasting and did a lot of comparative tastings. My group always talked about the “why” and not just the end result—almost like a metaphor for the whole exam. So I really worked on why I would confuse Grüner with Chablis. We (the group) would do that and sometimes we’d see the labels and discuss differences. All this helped me in the examination format to be able to speak to the characteristics of the wine in a much more informed way.

Tasting: Goals

TG: The next part has to do with your goals in tasting wine. First, let’s take you in the MS tasting context. What are your goals? What are you trying to achieve? 

TP: I’m trying to evaluate the wine as thoroughly as I possibly can all the way down the line. But also--and this is another piece that I started to incorporate into my actual tastings--I ask myself, “Do I like it personally? Do I like the texture? Do I like the flavor?” Obviously, we all have wines that we like and wines we don’t like as much as others. I changed my tasting from just wanting to get the wine right to starting to think about if the wine would work for me or the guest in my restaurant. I let a little of that creep into my method for the exam and I think that was helpful too.

TG: What are your beliefs about tasting in general? Equipment-wise, what do you need to have a successful tasting? 

TP: I think you need good light and proper glassware. For Court-specific tasting I love to keep my own time. Some people don’t like to do that. But if you get the banker Chablis of all time and blast through it in two minutes it’s good to know that have that time in case you get a wine you have no clue about. Then you have some extra time to spend on it.  Otherwise, lighting is big but then so is glassware. I love specifically the Riedel Sangiovese/Riesling glass for tasting. I think from an aromatic perspective it really concentrates the aromas. Also make sure you’re hydrated, make sure you get some rest.  

If I can give one piece of advice to Master’s candidates it would be “don’t taste ten wines before you go in for your tasting.” I made that mistake a couple of times. Also, don’t over-taste before you go to the exam. I was so geeked before I went to my first couple of tasting exams that I tasted too much. You’ve got to taper off and trust your ability especially right before the exam. I tried a lot of different strategies but the one I went back to was one I used for my Advanced exam. Before I went in for my tasting I tasted three wines: Vouray, Rioja and Zinfandel. I know those wines and rarely get them wrong so tasting them was just a positive thing. It’s a better calibration for me than trying to taste other wines that I might struggle with. 

TG: What are your beliefs about yourself as a taster?

TP: I’m think I’m very strong. I started with some ability but with a lot of practice and some shifting of my approach I’ve become really solid. I’m think I’m really good at establishing a rhythm when I’m in the practice of doing it exactly the same way every time. Now when I work with students I tell them, “Come to the church of low, medium and high.” Not sort-of or slightly or a bit or kind of. Everything is low, medium or high. If it’s minerality sure there are gray areas because wine is a constantly morphing, changing thing. The wine you start with four minutes in may be showing some different characteristics. But low, medium, high is uber important. Then doing the wines in the same order every time. That’s a discipline because every wine has a different expression. Doing it the same way every time is an enormous part of the discipline.  

TG: Finally, what do you think makes for a great wine? 

  TP: Great question. I have this discussion with my guests and also with my colleagues. There’s a few things: price to quality ratio is big in the real world. DRC is a dream for a lot of people, myself included. Also if the wine costs four dollars a bottle or four hundred dollars a bottle if it tastes real. I know that’s an ambiguous term but what I mean is that the wine tastes like it was made in the vineyard and not like it was genetically engineered or manipulated. That’s a huge factor for me. Something we don’t discuss a lot but I try to use in my notes is texture. How does the wine feel in your mouth? I think that we are so busy with the structure—the acid, alcohol and tannin—that mouthfeel gets left behind. When I’m tasting for the restaurant or for pleasure that’s a big factor for me. It doesn’t have to be dense and plush but it’s how the texture works with the fruit and the structure that’s a key component for me. 

Tasting: Sight

TG: In terms of looking at wine to evaluate it either for professional purposes for your list or the MS context what are you trying to do? What are your goals when looking at a wine? 

TP: For both it’s making sure there’s no intentional flocculation whether the wine is old or however filtration or cold stabilization fits into the picture. I think you’re looking at the wine initially to try to get your feet underneath you in terms of where the wine might be, where it might come from and how it might taste. For the CMS tasting format I don’t spend a lot of time on sight. I think there are some wines like an aged Rioja or a Barolo where it can be a huge tell. But for me it’s more important to say all the things about the sight in 20 seconds tops. It’s different for everybody but certainly I would say to Advanced or Master’s candidates, if you’re 30-45 seconds into the sight you’re already behind.  

TG: Any other thoughts about the sight, the appearance of wine?

TP: With this wine that I’m looking at right now, viscosity is your friend. With the color description-wise, my ruby might be your garnet might be somebody else’s red. I think those descriptions are useful but the viscosity and staining of the tears in a red can be really important clues right at the start.

TG: What color would you call this wine? (2009 RDV Rendezvous Merlot blend from Virginia)

TP: I would call that a dark purple going out to some ruby notes; holding its color with a little bit of change at the rim; moderate-plus staining of the tears and high viscosity.  

TG: We’re going to get into some abstract questions, but how do you know it’s that color vs. something else? How do you know it’s not the color of Pinot Noir? 

TP: That’s a great question. It goes back to thing I was talking about; having confidence anchored in because I almost see the staining of the tears and the viscosity first. In my mind, I know that this can’t be a light-skinned grape varietal. 

TG: But in terms of picking out that color and being able to identify it, how do you know? 

TP: I don’t know. A lot of people will look at ruby red in an art book. I just never did that.  

TG: But there must be some way that you know. So as you take a look at the glass, in your mind’s eye how do you know it’s that color vs. something else? 

TP: I think that is just repetition of tasting a bunch of wines.

TG: How would you represent all that experience? 

TP: That’s a great question. I’m not a very visual learner or visual person.

TG: Let me ask you this: if I say think of the difference between something like Mendoza Malbec that’s purple and Rioja Gran Reserva that’s 20 years old.  Do you get two images in your head? 

TP: Yes.

TG: So when you pick up this glass is there some way in terms of a series of images or colors that you’re able to match the wine to a color you’ve seen before? That’s the question.

TP: I’m more abstract than that. I don’t want to sound like I’m winging it but I have a really good memory and I’m drawing on tastings that I’ve done in the past. 

TG: OK but how do you represent all that? Think about other Cabernet and Merlot-based wines and how do you know? 

TP: I don’t know.  

TG: I think it’s more that you do it so fast that you’re not aware of how you do it. But let’s slow it down for a second. And if I had to be you, what would I do? What would I see? What happens? 

TP: I think that I’m so excited to get into the wine that I do it really fast. I don’t really want to get locked in on it. It (the wine) looks ruby purple enough so we’re moving on. 

TG: I have to tell you that watching in watching you, you’re looking at the glass first and then you’re looking out here at several different points (out in front and slightly to the left of center and slightly up in several places). So I’m wondering if you hold your eyes out here, what happens? Take a look at the glass first and then go there and see what happens. What feels comfortable when thinking about color?

TP: It’s almost like in this format the train is on the track.

TG: When you say the train is on the track it means …

TP: It means it’s time to start evaluating this wine and I have a visual memory of what I call purple or ruby.  

TG: What are those memories like? Images of colors or images of glasses of wine? 

TP: Glasses of wine. 100%.  

TG: Are the images in a row? 

TP: This is great. So Stevenson’s book (Sotheby’s Encyclopedia of Wine) has pictures of everything from the lightest, brightest, cleanest wine to the deepest red. That series flashes in my head. 

TG: Do you have separate white images and red images? Or is it just one color gradation?

TP: It’s one.

TG: Are they separate images like the Stevenson book? 

TP: They’re like little slide images in my head.

TG: So what happens? Do you take a look at the glass and then the image continuum and match it up? 

TP: Yes.

TG: Does anything happen when you find the right match? Does something light up? Something happen? Does the slide change somehow?

TP: It’s almost like I go straight to it. It’s like your computer when you click on something and it gets bigger. It’s like I’m scrolling through and then match it up.

TG: So the image gets bigger? 

TP: Yes, it gets bigger and I know it’s a match. 

TG: Do you say something to yourself at that point?

TP: I say, “That’s it.” I also may say to myself the four or five things it could be. But some days I’m in the zone and not aware of any of this.

TG: Just curious, when you say you’re in the zone and you look at the glass, ID the color and say here are the three or four things it could be, where do those things go? Do you say those possible things to yourself? Do you see images? How does it work? 

TP: It’s words. 

TG: At that point is it your voice saying it or someone else’s?

TP: Mine.

TG: How do you get around the pitfall of pigeonholing the wine?

TP: Because I’ve got so much left to evaluate. Those potential things are floating through my head as I taste the wine but I really try not to force the wine into something. I think that’s something I’ve become really proficient at—really focusing on what the wine actually is and not trying to force into something it isn’t. Otherwise, there’s a lot of people living in my head at the same time. 

TG: That’s right because you have to acknowledge that kind of thought but then park it to the side and get back to it at the conclusion to see if it makes sense. Otherwise, you definitely will try to make the wine into something else.

Smell

TG: Now for the nose. In terms of overall goals in smelling wine, what are you trying to do?

TP: I’m trying to get the blueprint of what the wine is which will hopefully be confirmed on the palate; what it’s going to taste like, what its age is, and if there’s minerality and the like. I’m just trying to get a snapshot of what the wine will be. We’ve all been there when you get the wine on your palate and all the things you’ve said about the nose seem really dumb. But I think for the most part, as you become a better taster, the nose is the main thing. In my experience, when I put my nose in the glass and smell it for the first time, I try to think about what it is and 95% of the time it’s right for me—I know what it is. When I was a less accomplished taster I would try to find ways to talk myself out of that. Occasionally it doesn’t work because I still need to evaluate the wine.  

TG: Now it’s time to get to work. For the record we have the 2009 Rendezvous Merlot blend from RDV in Virginia as the wine we’re using today. Go ahead and smell the wine and focus and get in your zone. What I’m curious abou,t is where you’re looking when you put your nose in the glass which is almost straight down in front. Is that where you usually look when smelling a wine? 

TP: Yes.

TG: Just curious about something. So as you smell the wine what happens if you move your eyes up to about horizon level? What happens? Anything change? Smell better? Worse? 

TP: I get more lift, more high tones.

TG: It seems like you hold the glass at a fairly steep angle straight out in front and then look straight down. What happens if you move your eyes to the left or right? Brain-wise, does that feel better or worse?

TP: It doesn’t work. I need to be right in the middle.

TG: As you smell the wine, why don’t we start with the fruit. What do you get for fruit?

TP: Blackcurrant, black plum, and black cherry.

TG: Two questions: how do you know you’re smelling those things? And if I had to be you, what would I experience? 

TP: To begin, I didn’t do a lot of “go get some gooseberries” to learn what gooseberries smell like. It’s almost a life memory. I know what blackberry and black plums smell like.

TG: Agreed. But when you put your nose in this particular glass of wine, how do you know you’re smelling those things vs. anything else? How do you know? I also notice that you’re holding the glass with both hands.

TP: Yes, that’s how I do it. A lot of times I want the temp of the wine to be warmer so it’s a way of doing that. Otherwise, it’s been my method. But that’s such a great question and it’s awesome to delve into this.

TG: Let’s go back and do it again. You put your nose in the glass and your eyes go here (middle and almost straight down). At this point do you say anything to yourself? 

TP: No. 

TG: Anything like “what’s there” or “what’s going on?”

TP: It’s like I talked about doing it the same way every time. The initial scent on this wine is new oak. I get a very plush, lush, nutmeg, vanilla sort of aroma. But of course I have to be careful to stay in my method so that’s not the first thing I would note.

TG: Having said nutmeg and vanilla, how do you know it’s those things vs. something else? 

TP: Because of all the wines I’ve evaluated over the last 9-10 years. 

TG: Not to be a pain, but if I had to be you what would nutmeg and vanilla be like? How would I experience them? 

TP: I’m going to have to somehow convey that information to you.

TG: Exactly! But again, how would you know? If I had to be you, I would hold the glass with both hands at this angle, look straight down here, and then smell a lot of new oak influence. What would I experience for new oak? How would I remember that it’s new oak? 

TP: Baking spices, apple pie, everything. I’m a cooking fanatic. It’s my favorite thing to do. Ever since I’ve been studying for the exams, every time I make something I try to identify the smells as much as possible—fruits, vegetables, or whatever. If I’m making a salad with arugula, I’ll crush some in my hands and smell it so the next time I smell Grüner Veltliner I’ll be able to recognize it. Even if I just say the word “arugula,” this memory pops into my mind. It’s mostly driven by foods I’ve worked with. I’ve never been much of an aroma wheel person either.

TG: Pick up the glass again and go to all the oak aromas. From here I’m just trying to see what your eyes do. They go down here initially but I’m looking for the other place they go when you recognize something in the glass. All of this is to say that you have to have a way of drawing on all the memories you were just talking about—memories that help you identify something. When you smell vanilla and spices in this wine, how do you represent that to yourself? That’s what we’re after.

TP: It’s all smell memories.

TG: Memories like …

TP: Like apple pie filling.

TG: So apple pie filling and you’re looking out here to the left and about chest level. What’s there at that location where you’re looking? Is that a memory of you making an apple pie as you in a movie making apple pie? 

TP: Yes!

TG: So with the nutmeg and vanilla, what do you get for those? 

TP: Like making béchamel and putting a little nutmeg in it.

TG: Like making the sauce? 

TP: Literally me making the sauce.

TG: Great. Just so you know, this is what you did just now: when you mentioned nutmeg, you put your nose in the glass and looked down to your starting point then went very strongly out and slightly to the left to your memory of making the béchamel. Just for detail, when you see making the sauce do you see the actual ingredients or the process of actually making the sauce?

TP: I see the ingredient that I’m using and also smelling in the moment.

TG: Does the ingredient sit on something? Is it by itself? Remember this is in the context of me being you and experiencing what you are in the moment.

TP: The ragu is almost cooked down, the cream is almost cooked in and I’m grabbing a pinch of nutmeg and about ready to add it to the sauce.

TG: What about the vanilla, what’s that like? 

TP: Vanilla extract. As a kid, I liked to open a bottle of vanilla extract and just smell it. To me, it’s just a beautiful smell. That’s a very powerful memory for me. But I’m not necessarily accessing this memory while I’m smelling the wine because I’m so focused on what I’m doing. But to your point, I have to get there somehow.

TG: Go ahead and smell the wine again; what about fruit? Tell me about the fruit.

TP: Black fruits: black plum, blackcurrant, and almost a kind of blue or boysenberry thing too.

TG: That’s a lot of fruit.Which one is the strongest? Let’s pick one and figure out how you got there.

TP: Black plum.

TG: So for black plum, what do you get? How is that represented to you?

TP: I’m thinking of a place where we used to toss the disc around in Seattle; on the rare occasion of warm summer day where there were plums that were so ripe they were almost rotten on the trees. You could smell them in this orchard where we played.

TG: Is this like a movie of the memory and you’re in it? Like you could reach out and grab the plums? 

TP: Absolutely, and we would never eat them because they were so ripe they were almost turned. But that’s the level of intensity of the black plum on the nose of this wine—uber ripe.

TG: What other fruits to do you smell?

TP: There some blue fruit too; boysenberry, blueberry, and straight blackberry.

TG: How do you represent all those other fruits to yourself? We’ve got the movie for the black plums and what happens for the rest?

TP: This if funny because I really don’t eat very much fruit—I don’t really like it. How I access these memories is almost going back to when I was growing up in Juneau, Alaska. There wasn’t a lot of fruit growing there but we had blueberries. I remember having to eat them but not enjoying them. Now living in Seattle blackberries grow rampantly all over the place. My wife tries to get me to eat them and I still don’t particularly like them.

TG: Anything else for fruit we should mention? 

TP: No, I think the wine is very expressive and straight forward.

TG: OK; pick up the glass again and think about all those fruits. Can you pick them up sequentially quickly or keep them in mind all at the same time? How does it work?

TP: It’s sequentially. But I’m thinking that when I get to the palate the intensity or the amount of each fruit will probably change. There may be more blueberry vs. more black plum or whatever. I kind of card catalogue it.

TG: When you say “card catalogue” what does that mean? 

TP: In my brain I remember the three primary fruits.

TG: Are there literally cards? You’re pointing to the right side of your head by your ear.

TP: Yes, it’s right back there. It’s like the purpose of my whole process is to not only get the wine right but to also evaluate it completely. So on the palate--if my nose didn’t let me down and those fruits are still in the wine--I need to let to let whoever wants to know, be that an MS panel or a distributor, about what’s going on in the wine.

TG: OK, but what I’m trying to do here is build a sequence of what you’re doing. It seems like you smell the wine, your eyes move up here, and then you get total body memories of things in the wine. That’s at least what I’m picking up so far. But then does that information become a card that you store in your head? That seems to be where the info is going.

TP: This is interesting because I’ve never thought about it analytically. At that point, what it feels like in my head is that I do make an image because I might need it later--but then put it away. I’ve pulled the memories out, I’ve got the cards, and I don’t need the childhood stuff anymore.

TG: Not to sound silly, but what do the cards look like? 

TP: Like little flashcards.

TG: Like 3 X 5 cards?

TP: No, really small. They have to fit in my head! (Laughs) It’s almost like dragging your mouse on your computer over an image and it gets bigger. I can make the images bigger if I need to. With the blue fruit thing, if I taste it then the image will get bigger automatically because it’s so intense.

TG: But these images are to the side. How can you see them?

TP: It’s inside and like a voice and an image.

TG: But you still got an image, correct? 

TP: Yes. 

TG: Is the image flat and two dimensional? Or is it three dimensional? 

TP: Flat and two dimensional. 

TG: Are the images in the order that you smelled them? Or is it whatever is the most intense? 

TP: It’s whatever is the most intense is first.

TG: Does the MS grid have any bearing in terms of how you organize all this? 

TP: Definitely. But right now with the nose I’m just compiling evidence. By the time I get this wine on the palate I’ll put all the evidence in a perfect linear order.

TG: When you do that it sounds like you pull everything outside and put it right in front of you. You’re going from up to down right out in front of you about a foot away.

TP: Yes.

TG: When the images are inside can you look at all of them or do you have to look at things one at a time?

TP: I look at categories of things in sequence.  

TG: What about minerality? Smell the wine again and see if anything pops up for minerality. I’m curious if you use the same process that you did for fruit.

TP: Yes, I actually picture rocks inside my head.

TG: You mean rocks out here (out in front) or an image of rock inside your head? 

TP: Yes, out front. 

TG: Then that goes inside and becomes one of those cards that you store? 

TP: Yes.

TG: What does the image of minerality look like? 

TP: If it’s Chablis, it’s like the white cliffs of Dover or it’s galets for Chateauneuf. I’ve never walked the vineyards in some of these places so I have to rely on images I’ve seen in books. But the images are definitely there.

TG: The last thing is non-fruit; what do you smell in this wine? 

TP: There’s a lot of purple flower-violet happening in the wine.

TG: What’s that like? 

TP: It’s an image of the flowers.

TG: Is it 2D or 3D? Movie? Still image? 

TP: It’s 3D and like a vase of violets. But it’s also like a flower that grows in Alaska called fireweed and it has a very similar aroma to this.

TG: Is the image like a vase with flowers in space out in front of you? 

TP: Yes.

TG: It seems pretty close like you could reach out and touch it. Is it life size? 

TP: Yes and yes.

TG: Once you create that image, does it get filed in your head like the rest of the images? What happens to it? 

TP: They go back into the file. 

TG: What does the file itself look like? It’s a collection of images but what does it look like? 

TP: It’s like a box with cards in it. This if funny because this is what I was finally able to do in the Aspen exam—and what I’ve been able to do since. I’m able to empty out the box once I’m done with a wine and then refill it with the next wine. 

TG: That’s brilliant. But can you get that information back if you need it? 

TP: Yes and this sounds so nuts (laughs) because there’s another box—a hedge box.  

TG: So the first box is in your head and at some point you empty it; but you also want to keep the information when you’re done with the wine. Does it go into the “hedge box?” 

TP: Yes. 

TG: Where does this hedge box live?

TP: It’s sitting right in front of me, right by the glass of wine in case I have a question about it. 

TG: So it’s there and you can pull up information/images if you need it?

TP: Yes.

TG: Finally, how do you know when you’re finished smelling the wine? 

TP: When I’ve filled in all my boxes; when I’ve talked about everything I feel there is to talk about.

TG: Do you actually see the MS grid when you’re tasting to make sure you’re not missing anything? 

TP: Yes, very much so.

TG: Where do you see it?

TP: It’s out in front. 

TG: Yes, you’re looking right out in front of you 3-5 feet away almost at eye level. So periodically, you’ll flash it up and make sure you’re getting everything? 

TP: Right. 

Gilian Handelman is the current director of education and communications for Jackson Family Wines. She began her career as an assistant sommelier in 1987 at Pierce’s restaurant in the Finger Lakes region of New York. But quickly moved into the production side in 1988 in Washington State working six harvests for three different wineries. Gilian was hired in 1994 by Kendall-Jackson as Enologist, where she produced experimental wine, yeast, and barrel trials and tracked the 1,500-plus lots of wine made by the winery each year. In 2006 she was tapped to create a trade education program for the winery, where she developed training for KJ’s sales force as well as wine and food education and seminars for trade and consumers. 

In 2000 she was hired by Paige Poulos at Paige Poulos Communications to be the Director of Wine Communications. Here she developed PR and education plans for winery and industry clients; plans that combined sensory evaluation, winemaking, and culinary education with public relations and marketing strategy. In 2002 Gilian was hired by Wine & Spirits Magazine as their Director of Marketing and Education. Handelman created their Best New Sommelier program, coordinated and taught scores of classes at culinary and hospitality schools around the United States, and developed their lauded event program. Eventually Gilian was lured back to Jackson Family Wines in 2007, where she currently directs education for the family’s 34 wineries around the globe. Gilian lives in Berkeley, California with her husband and two children. 

I met with Gilian in May of last year. We used the 2009 RDV Rendezvous Merlot blend from Virginia and Riedel Vinum/Bordeaux glasses for the tasting. As for the session, it was clear from the outset that Gilian’s inner processing of wine is far different than most people’s strategies. She is a synesthete processing wine as a flow and shape of colors and movement. She’s created “maps” of many grape varieties and these can be found on the KJ website (http://www.kj.com/sensory-tour). Her strategy is unique--and remarkable as well.
 
Overall Goals

TG: What are your overall goals when tasting? 

GH: I’m trying to bridge the gap between language and the abstract. For me, it’s a different exercise because I’m trying to decipher what’s going on in the glass whether it’s for a blind tasting or for quality purposes. But when I’m speaking to an audience and trying to get them to come to a shared conclusion, what I’m trying to do is to get them to consider anything whether it’s shapes, sounds, frequencies, or hard word descriptors—literally anything that will create that “aha!” for the class. It’s a language aspect.

TG: What do you think the “aha!” moment is? What does that mean? 

GH: It really varies so much from person to person. What I’m looking for is the brow not to be knitted anymore. It’s like someone is thinking, “I don’t see it, I don’t see it, I don’t see it, I SEE IT!” Some people want the satisfaction that they’ve hit upon a descriptor that resonates for everybody. Other people want to understand a structural element. Some people just want answers to questions like, “what do you mean by framework?” or “What do you mean by high note?” Even if you have to resort to things like, “is it this?” (She sings high pitch) or “is it this?” (Sings low pitch); you do whatever it is to make all the brows to stop knitting. 

Sight

TG: When you look at wine in the glass what are you trying to figure out about it? 

GH: I’ve been spending a lot of time lately trying to unravel the 30-year mystery for me of how much bias goes into sight. This because I’ve had so many “kerthunk” moments in the last five years when I’ve been positing things to scientists and people who really taste analytically about how sight is such a huge predetermination of how people taste. What I’ve been trying to do is to open the space between my ears and think, “with this wine (glass in hand), it’s opaque so my sense is that it’s relatively low in acid and high in tannin and probably has wood on it, blah blah blah.” These are all things you get from visual cues. But now I’m trying really hard to think that maybe those things aren’t necessarily true.

TG: Why do you want to avoid doing that? I think to your point, sight, especially for red wines, builds instant expectations for fruit qualities and structural components. At least that’s a good framework to begin with. Are you trying to wipe the slate clean?

 
GH: A little bit. I think one of my pitfalls as a taster is that I have preconceived notions and they will drive me through things that I am missing. So something I’m really striving to do now is to stop my brain from saying, “I know what that is!” 

TG: Anything else about the sight, the appearance of a wine?  Anything to describe it? 

GH: The other thing about sight that I really like to pay attention to, and that I also encourage people to pay attention to, is the textural element; how the wine moves in the glass. That’s something I look at pretty carefully right away. That’s different from color.  It translates to sound for me.

TG: In other words when you swirl the glass and watch how the wine moves in the glass you hear sounds? 

GH: Yes.

TG: If a wine is really viscous and rich what sound is that? 

GH: Gloop, gloop, gloop. (Laughs)

TG: Is it just a sound? Is there anything that you see? Does the sound create any kind of pattern in your field of vision? I’m just curious.

GH: I don’t think so. I think it’s more like having observed Jell-O, jellies and candies hardening-- various things like that over the years. I just have a very firm sense of what texture means.

TG: What about something like Champagne or German Riesling that’s really light-bodied?

GH: Ffft! Ffft! Ffft! (Laughs again)

TG: What’s in between? 

GH: It’s more of a gentle swishing sound, like water lapping on the edge of a lake or the sides of a boat.

TG: Do you have a predisposition to any one of those? 

GH: Gloop, gloop, gloop is not attractive to me. 

TG: For all wines? What about something like a dessert wine? 

GH: For a Sauternes it’s OK. 

TG: What about a red wine?

GH: Much less so. Personally, I want more tension and more edges on my red. Also I’ve become more predisposed to not like so much glycerin-glycerol-texture in my wines. But that’s totally personal and not qualitative. 

TG: So one is about judging wine professionally and the other is personal. But it sounds like you like the higher acid, less alcohol red wines. 

GH: Yes, but there are definitely exceptions. I wouldn’t kick a Huet Vouvray out of bed and it’s a gloop gloop wine. 

TG: (Laughs) I agree. 

Nose 

TG: Go ahead and pick up your glass and smell the wine. When you really get into your zone, I’m interested in is where your eyes go; where you look. (She smells the wine) It seems your eyes go right out here (straight out and down about 15-20 degrees). 

GH: Yes.

TG: Does that feel really comfortable, like it’s the best place? Try it again.

GH: Yes, that’s it. Definitely. I don’t stare into the wine. 

TG: Most people do. Over 90% of the people I’ve worked with look down either center, slightly to the left, or slightly to the right. I think this is really important because it’s a starting point for your tasting sequence. It also helps to shut the world out so you can focus. Once you do that and smell this wine, what kind of fruits do you smell? 

GH: Mostly dark fruit; fruit that’s not stewed but more on the compote side or on the counter for a while side. 

TG: As you’re smelling the wine and telling me this, I see your eyes start here and then go out here (Straight out in front almost eye level). Question: how do you know it’s dark fruit and not something else? 

GH: Tenor.

TG: Tenor meaning …

GH: I also see and hear music a lot when I taste. For me, this wine is more of a basso sound (hums) vs. a higher sound. 

TG: When you say you see something, do you get images of something that’s dark fruit? I also have to note that you’re looking in exactly the same place as before. 

GH: Not sure. 

TG: Put your nose in the glass and hold the dark fruit and your eyes in the same place for a few seconds and see if anything pops up.

GH: No, I don’t see any dark fruit. I feel dark fruit whether it’s in the core of my body or in a smell memory.  

TG: But I’m curious because feelings tend to be evaluative—they happen as a result of an image or a sound. What I want to know is if there is an image that creates all this other stuff? Because again, how do you know it’s dark fruit and not red fruit or even a catcher’s mitt for that matter? How do you know?

GH: Right as in how am I pulling it from the wine. I guess it’s just an instantaneous reaction in my brain. There’s this thought that I’ve catalogued all these smells and there’s a synapse that’s telling me this is dark fruit.

TG: But what tells the synapse?

GH: I think, although I haven’t really articulated this before, that for me it’s sort of a family tree or a logarithm. Like you, I do the same kind of thing in terms of the fruit, the floral, mineral, veggie, and the rest. 

TG: As you’re saying those things, you’re going left to right just out in front of you. Is that how it works? 

GH: I always go left to right.

TG: Is that a grid? 

GH: It’s a like a family tree or a logarithm. If I’m starting with fruit (and I always start with fruit), then it would branch off here (points out front).  It happens really quickly and there’s only two worlds for fruit for me—white and red. In red fruit there’s also only two worlds, red and black. After that, the logarithm breaks off further.

TG: If I were you, what would all that look like? Is it like a picture of a tree with branches?

GH: It’s almost like electricity. Once I make those quick decisions, say that it’s in the black fruit world I’m asking if it’s fresh black fruit or prunes or whatever. 

TG: As you point to those places (out in front of her), are those images or what are they?

GH: I think they are lines of connect in my brain that are leading me to one framework or another. 

TG: I’m still trying to get to how you know it’s black fruit vs. something else. So if I had to be you, what would I do? So far I know that you put your nose in the glass and some kind of tree appears quickly; but you somehow take everything into consideration and then recognize something specifically. From there, it becomes a subset of different variations of whatever it is. But what does all this look like? 

GH: It’s like a family tree or an electron; almost like when you match up electrons and protons. There’s lines of yes-no, yes-no for me.  

TG: Are there any pictures that have to do with all this? I’m just curious if there are images somehow in the process.

GH: I don’t think there are pictures. I think there’s a memory but it doesn’t look like an image because I’ve been smelling things for so long. I remember walking around as a kid with my Mom smelling things in markets. It’s more of an association. It’s not emotional as it it’s recognition of some kind.  

TG: But how do you recognize something? That’s the question. If you recognize anything specifically, how do you do it? Say it’s something really strong in a wine such as a fruit or a rose; how do you represent that? 

GH: If we really do go there, I think it’s a shape. For me round, dark fruit is sort of amorphous and blobby. Red, vivid fruit is spiky. And it’s not necessarily something like, “there’s that shape of a tear drop.” It’s not that clear cut for me. It’s more like thought flowing into shape. So round, black fruit that’s kind of stewed is amorphous; back to the gloop gloop. In fact, all the fruits I smell will go into those kind of roles. Maybe that’s what it’s like for me, a channel of shape and sound. “So (speaking in a high voice) this is a tiny channel that is bristly, high-noted, and cleaver-shaped. Then (speaking in a much lower voice) this amorphous pool of a shape.” I don’t think I see actual pictures of things. 

TG: Interesting. Where does that come from? Where do these shapes come from? Inside your head? Out front? 

GH: It comes from my whole body (laughs).

TG: Not only that but it seems like there are sounds that accompany all this too.

GH: Yes, inside my brain. 

TG: So you project these amorphous shapes along with pitches and frequencies in terms of how rich or how acidic the fruit is.  

GH: I do this all the time especially with the structure of a wine—the liquid takes a shape.

TG: We’ll get to structure in a bit. In the meantime, you mentioned dark fruits. Are there any red fruits in the wine, anything sour?

GH: Near the end there’s some plum notes like plum skin.

TG: What about things like flowers, herbs, and even earth?

GH: There’s kind of a cured leather or cured fruit leather to which then to me goes flat. It’s not amorphous anymore and that I think is just associated with fruit leather. Whenever I think of fruit leather I always think of flat.

TG: As in a flat shape?

GH: Yes, there’s also some subtle perfume in this wine but it’s more of a bass-noted or woody perfume. That’s getting into the wood world but it’s still kind of in the fruit-natural things world.

TG: Finally, what about oak? How do you know there’s oak?

GH: There’s a cocoa note which to me is a dark almost round, puffy character. Oak characters to me are more bristly.

TG: When you say bristly, what do you mean? What does that look like?

GH:  It looks like a claw (laughs) because it’s “grippy.” Then there’s the spice-oak elements which I’m picking in the wine which are almost like roasted spice elements. They’re like little bits of roundness but it’s not a large puffy thing.

TG: Thinking about all those things together, what does that look like? Once you put your energy into a shape and/or color how does it appear? It seems to be almost like an arrangement. Do all the shapes happen at once and stay there or does it happen one thing at a time? 

GH: It eventually all comes together so that there’s the puffiness and the roundness. But that round jam note anchors it all and then there’s stuff laid on top it. 

TG: So the shape of the fruit anchors it all and everything else is around it like little satellites? 

GH: Yes.

TG: In other words, there are shapes instead of actual images? 

GH: Yes.

TG: A bunch of different shapes? Do the shapes have any color or any texture? 

GH: No.

TG: Are they just outlines?

GH: There’s definitely texture. Now I’m also picking up some resinous notes in the wine. It’s almost like blood orange notes and dried citrus and they’re kind of curly shaped.

TG: You’re pointing to them right out in front of your face. It’s interesting that your entire field is very close to you in proximity. It’s all within 12-14 inches in front of you at eye level. What happens when you taste the wine? Does all this change? If one flavor gets stronger than it was on the nose, does anything change? Or does it all stay the same? 

GH: Your right, it is all intimate for me; it’s right here in front. But what changes is that it takes off.

TG: Takes off? As in …

GH: Away from me.  

TG: Just curious, smell the wine again and take your arrangement of shapes and push away from you about 10 feet. What happens to the wine? Just push it all the way.

GHY: I kind of lose control of it.

TG: Can you make sense of the wine anymore? Or does the wine smell different if you push it away?

GH: Yes, it smells higher noted. It’s like I pushed the bass away.

TG: Reset it. It sounds like there’s dimensionality to this as well as depth. What happens if you smell it and make the shape flat? Like two dimensional and flat right out in front of you.

GH: I lose the whole screen.

TG: But is there any part of the wine that smells stronger? Different?  

GH: It’s kind of like all the left over notes like soy and fruit leather.  

TG: So the major things go away?

GH: Yes.

TG: Makes sense. So reset it and let’s taste the wine.

Palate 

TG: Now that you’re tasting the wine keeping all those shapes in mind, does anything change? Or do they stay in the same kind of arrangement?

GH: Now what happens is that I check the assumptions from the aromatic profile and things open up quite a bit.

TG: Meaning that the field gets larger? 

GH: Yes, it gets quite a bit larger this way (pointing up) and that way (side to side).  But it never, ever grows down. I don’t know why, but that’s the way it is. It grows in width, in height, and in depth.  

TG: So how much larger does it get? 

GH: At least a hundred percent bigger. I feel and see huge spikes.

TG: Huge spikes? What does that mean? 

GH: I’m very influenced by structure in terms of my visuals and my sense of things, which is why when I’m teaching a class in front of people I’m motioning like this all the time (waves her arms). 

TG: You’re literally showing them what you get out of the wine.

GH: Right! It’s really a three-dimensional model on my palate.

TG: Do the shapes stay the same? Do they get bigger? 

GH: No, the big amorphous thing is still there and that’s the center of the whole structure. What’s happening elsewhere is that tannin and acid are stretching either forward, or up and out. With a tannic wine like this I’m looking very carefully at how the tannin crescendos and where it pops out. This is a little bit like those fruits that have spikes on them. I think it’s like a passion fruit because it’s fairly round. They don’t take on square shapes for me so they’re fairly round. It’s almost like this is a vision of my palate right in front of me.

TG: It’s kind of an arch right in front of you.

GH: Right, front to back. So what’s happening is that the tannins take shape on the palate.

TG: When you say, “takes shape,” what does that mean?

GH: They get spikey. 

TG: Meaning that on the curve of the wine shape there are spikes that come up? 

GH: Yes, there are spikes that come up through the curve.

TG: Again I have to ask, is there any color to all this? Or is it just shapes and outlines?

GH: In reds no but some whites have a color.  

TG: But in red wines in terms of all these different fruits, spices, and other things, there’s only shapes with outlines? Are they filled? How does it work?

GH: They’re definitely filled. It’s like a big rubber casing that’s filled and things are shooting out the end of the casing making the rubber stretch which is what I meant by the passion fruit. Then in the back there’s this kind of roller coaster and other stuff stretching through the casing.

TG: Roller coaster meaning what?

GH: Cascade—like a cascade of what’s going on. There’s tannin and acid, and it (cascade shape) goes up (motions with hands) coming back down and then goes up again. 

TG: So it’s the shape of the palate of the wine. Does the structure define the movement of the shape? 

GH: Yes, the structure.  

TG: How is high acid different from low acid? 

GH: For me high acid definitely goes up (whistles). With acid there’s usually an up and sometimes an out.  

TG: How would that be different? 

GH: Because of the way I perceive acid on my palate. Whether I feel a burst at the end of the wine like fingers moving, or a turkey tail, or a slow build of acid that takes off like you’re going up a roller coaster.

TG: How about alcohol? How is that represented to you? 

GH: I don’t perceive alcohol that much. The only way I’m influenced by alcohol is by retro-nasal.  

TG: What about something that’s really high in alcohol like a port? 

GH: If it’s really high in alcohol it’s almost like a burning or a gaseous.

TG: You’re making a motion off to the side and up.

GH: Right, it’s off to the side and up but all also through the palate. It’s constantly kind of burning in there like roiling gas.

TG: How about residual sugar? What’s that like? 

GH: I don’t know because I don’t have anything like that in the glass. 

TG: True, but if you had a young vintage port, what would the sweetness be like?

GH: It’s that base “mattress” again (pointing right underneath her chin). So if this is all a reflection of my palate, and I think it is, then this base mattress is a kind of soft, couchy thing going on the bottom of my palate. 

TG: So you’re literally projecting all this right out in front of your palate? In front of your face? 

GH: Yes.

TG: Have you ever thought about taking different grape varieties and drawing maps of what all this looks like? 

GH: Yes, I did it and they’re on the Kendall Jackson website. 

TG: You did? Then I have to check it out to see what all of them look like.

GH: You’ll see them on the website and in some instances, I did several maps for a single grape like Cabernet. I did maps for three different Cabernets but you’ll see that they all have a similar shape. That’s because I feel that tannin and texture work together in such an unusual way. To me, the tannin dictates a huge amount of what that shape looks like. It’s not just the grape variety because you can taste Cabernet from the Oakville bench from a big time producer at 15% alcohol and to me the shape is a lot like a Central Coast Syrah. It’s got that zauftig kind of shape. But Cabernet from Howell Mountain or Pauilliac is much more spikey. So I can’t necessarily put a shape to a specific grape.

TG: So structure is really important. Does a shape with all these aspects just keep going and changing every time you taste the wine? Or does it stop changing at some point.

GH: It does change after three to five minutes. What’s left is this kind of end of the roller coaster or like foothills or steps left by the tannin on my palate. And often for me, and this is how I pick up minerality; there’s literally pebbles or gravel.

TG: Do you see pebbles or gravel? 

GH: I see different shapes of rocks on my palate at the end. 

TG: You mentioned no colors for red wine but some colors for white wines. 

GH: I should revise that because there’s no color for most reds. But if something is really different from what I’m tasting day to day (and that can change depending on where I am or what I’m working on), there might some color. That’s usually if something is really blue or really red in terms of the fruit. There’s also a spike or a frequency. Blue gives me a frequency that sounds like a high-pitched buzz. It’s almost musical.

TG: Do you have a music background? 

GH: No.  

TG: How does sound enter so much of what you perceive in wine? I have a formal musical background and it doesn’t really transfer over into wine. 

GH: Not sure why. I’ve always been very sensitive to music and it’s affected me emotionally quite a bit and that affects me physically.  

TG: What kind of music? 

GH: All kinds but I particularly love classical and even reggae. I love syncopation.

TG: When you say classical, what kinds of classical music?

GH: Primarily French horn and cello. I love piano too and those are certain frequencies (sings a pitch). Things that vibrate at a middle base line frequency as opposed to more of a base frequency are less interesting to me.  

TG: Just curious, are there other things in your life where these frequency and shape things come into play? I’m not sure what that would be but do different people have different frequencies for you? 

GH: Frequencies definitely enter the picture around certain situations. 

TG: Does it have to do with stress? 

GH: Probably, but it also has to do with real happiness. So for instance my favorite time of the day is right before sunset and that is a shape that is incredibly amorphous and really generous and flowing. 

TG: Is there a sound or pitch that goes with that? 

GH: It sounds almost like a harp. It’s extremely gentle and sounds of water too.

TG: Really interesting. You’re very much a synesthete when it comes to tasting in that you bring in other senses to the tasting experience that don’t usually come into play. I think that pitch really help you calibrate things. If something in a wine is off then the pitch of the wine is probably off for you too. So if it’s not quite right it probably bugs the hell out of you.

GH: True.

TG: But as for shapes and pitches in tasting, not many people do that. For most of us, especially those of us trained in the MS program, tasting is very visual and locational. A lot of it has to do with pictures. 

GH: It’s funny because I’m not very good at memorization of specific wines like “X” producer from 1982. But I can remember the shape of the wine. Like I can also pretty much remember any face or voice I hear but I may not be able to remember a name.

TG: What parts of you strategy do you try to teach people? Do you try to get them to hear different pitches with different kinds of wines? 

GH: I encourage them to consider that there are other modes of communicating about wine which is arguably the area that trips people up the most. They can feel they’re not establishing a connection around what they’re supposed to be tasting with people. Or they can feel inferior in some way because they don’t have the language expected of them. I’m really trying to encourage people to consider that there are other modes of communication than words to discuss wine. 

TG: That’s great. I want to try one more thing if only to be a pain. I want you to smell and taste the wine and as you’re smelling, what happens if you put a picture of whatever the dominant fruit up there? 

GH: That does happen to me a lot in the beginning of tasting a wine before I’ve had a chance to dissect it. And this was the exact same picture I had when I first tasted the wine—which is like moss and mud.

TG: I was asking about fruit. So how does that happen? 

GH: It smells like moss and mud to me. The natural world of it is a very huge aspect for me as well. It’s really important and I often see landscapes or waterways when I smell and taste.

TG: Just curious, are those landscapes or waterways life size? 

GH: No, they’re very intimate; whether it’s like a river bank or a dried up gravel bed or other things like that. It’s literally like a section of earth or an overturned log or a crushed flowers or what have you. Those are the only visuals I tend to pick up. 

TG: And those are like flashes? 

GH: Right. 

TG: So the overall impression of the wine gives you something like that? 

GH: Yes and sometimes it’s kind of fecund and gross like a tide pool with rotting critters.

TG: One last question: when you teach beginners, what’s the “aha!” moment you want them to have? 

GH: That their voice is relevant. I tell people that they don’t have to describe the wine. What I’m asking them to do and what other people in this community will ask to them to do is to share some sort of connection around what’s in the glass. So they can come up with any kind of entry point in terms of describing it. They can describe wine musically or as a person. They can describe it as an emotion or they can dissect it and totally take it apart. They can describe a wine as the color purple. At some point you have to have a connection to the understanding that language is bringing to two people. What you’re trying to do is to connect over something that isn’t saying anything at all. It’s like when you’re trying to connect over a piece of art. It’s just that with wine you have so many more cues than just visual. You can say a wine reminds you of a piece of velvet because that’s true for you. It’s all about finding a way to connect.

TG: I think a major disconnect for most people is that the wine is visual; that internally the experience and sequence of smelling and tasting have visual aspects to them. At the same time, someone who is a beginner and picks up a glass of wine is really intimidated because we’re using a vocabulary, a language, that’s really intended for another sense—not smelling or tasting. 

GH: I agree. You just can’t expect people to come into a first tasting and start getting a lot of things right away. But your smell memory is yours and if you smell Clorox in a wine or Barbie legs it’s fine. It’s more like you’ve got all these memories logged and you can use them with wine. 

This is the fourth and final post of my list of markers for classic grapes and wines. The last post included markers for Cabernet family grapes, Pinot Noir, and Gamay. This final post will include markers for Rhône grapes and more. As I’ve previously written, the intent of posting my list of markers is for the reader and/or student to use them as a starting point for putting their own list together. I hope this helps in some way. A santé!

VI. Grenache

Southern Rhône Grenache Blend

Sight: medium to deep ruby.
Nose: ripe, intense baked red and black fruits, wild savory herb (garrigue), black and white pepper, mushroom, stony earth, and large wood (not barrique). Some wines display pronounced game, dried meat and soy/jerky qualities.
Palate: full-bodied and dry to bone dry.  
Structure: alcohol: medium-plus to high; acidity: medium to medium-plus; tannin: medium-plus to high. 
 
ID Keys: the best Southern Rhône blends like Châteauneuf-du-Papes and Gigondas combine ripe-baked red and black fruits, high alcohol, pepper, garrigue, stony earth, and considerable tannins. Stylistically, lower-end wines such as simple Côte du Rhone are light, fruity, and sometimes made with carbonic maceration. Wines from better appellations such as the two above can be powerful, tannic, and very age worthy.

Australian Old Vines Grenache

Sight: deep, opaque ruby red.
Nose: ripe, powerful, intense red and black fruits with black pepper-spice, pronounced mint-eucalyptus, a touch of earthiness, vanilla, and oak spice.  
Palate: full-bodied, powerful, and dry. 
Structure: alcohol: medium-plus to high; acidity: medium to medium-plus; tannin: medium-plus to high.  
 
ID Keys: a full-throttled red with very ripe, jammy red fruits, pepper-spice, and a pronounced minty quality, with high alcohol and lots of tannin.  
 
VII. Syrah

Northern Rhône

Sight: medium to deep ruby with purple highlights.
Nose: black and red fruits, white and black pepper, floral, sour green plum, bacon/smoked meat, Mediterranean herbs, tobacco ash, stone-mineral, and oak.
Palate: medium to full-bodied and dry to bone dry.
Structure: alcohol: medium to medium-plus; acidity: medium to medium-plus; tannin: medium-plus to high.  
 
ID Keys: look for the combination of floral, red and black fruits, pepper, greengage (sour green plum), tobacco ash, smoky-meats, and stony minerality.    
 
Australian Shiraz - Barossa

Sight: opaque ruby purple.
Nose: ripe, concentrated black fruits as well as red and dried fruits; also black and white pepper, sweet spice, leather, and wood. American oak is traditionally used giving the wines pronounced vanillin, coconut, baking spices, and sawdust. It's also important to note that many producers now use French oak or a combination of French and American oak. 
Palate: full bodied and dry.  
Structure: alcohol: medium-plus to high; acidity: medium to medium-plus; tannin: medium to medium-plus and infrequently high. 
 
ID Keys: typical Barossa Shiraz is rich, ripe, and powerful, and can sometimes be confused with Zinfandel. Shiraz usually displays more depth of color than Zin; also look for the emphasis of black fruits, pepper, mint, leather and the use of American Oak. Mint and eucalyptus notes are very common. 

VIII. Mourvèdre

France: Bandol

Sight: very deep ruby.
Nose: ripe black and red fruits, pronounced savory herb, pepper-spice, reductive earth-farmyard, and wood. 
Palate: full-bodied and bone dry to dry. 
Structure: alcohol: medium-plus to high; acidity: medium-plus to medium-high; tannin: medium-plus to high.  
 
ID Keys: Mourvèdre-based wines combine ripe fruit, savory herb, and earthy aromas with considerable tannins. Some wines display considerable reductive qualities as well.

Spain: Monastrell – Murcia/Jumilla

Sight: opaque ruby purple.
Nose: ripe even jammy black fruits with fig, date, and prune; also savory herbs, pepper-spice, and vanilla-oak notes.
Palate: full-bodied and dry with ripe fruit and more earthiness than on the nose.
Structure: alcohol: medium-plus to high; acidity: medium to medium-plus; tannin: medium to medium-plus.  

ID Keys: Monastrell from Jumilla combines ripe, jammy fruits, savory herb, and notes of both mineral and earth—but not nearly the tannin as found in wines from Bandol.  

IX. Nebbiolo

Piedmont: Barolo and Barbaresco

Sight: medium to deep ruby-garnet with considerably rim variation. Orange and brown can be found at the rim even in young wines. 
Nose: rose petal floral, tar, dried red cherry and cranberry, vegetal-forest floor, mushroom/truffle-earth, and wood; a unique combination of floral and earthy aromas. 
Palate: medium to full-bodied and bone dry.  
Structure: alcohol: medium-plus to high; acidity: medium-plus to high; tannin: high. 
 
ID Keys: color gradation (orange in the rim), high acidity, and very high tannins make Nebbiolo fairly easy to recognize.  Also look for the dried fruit and floral qualities. The wines are often austere, tart, and incredibly tannic when young.  

X. Sangiovese

Tuscany: Chianti Classico

Sight: medium to deep ruby. Can display rim variation in youth.
Nose: bright red fruits with tomato leaf-green herb, sandalwood, chalky earth, and wood notes. Some wines have Cabernet blended in and display darker fruit qualities as well.
Palate: medium to full-bodied and dry. 
Structure: alcohol: medium to medium-plus; acidity: medium-plus to high; tannin: medium-plus to medium-high.

ID Keys: tart red (and black) fruits, anise/herbs, sandalwood, chalky earth, and high acidity are key factors. The use of Cabernet and new oak can alter the Sangiovese character, sometimes considerably.

Brunello di Montalcino: Brunellos are made from 100% Sangiovese Grosso and see longer time in wood by law; thus the wines tend to be more evolved on release than a typical Chianti Classico or Vino Nobile.  
 
Vino Nobile di Montepulciano: Vino Nobiles are allowed up to 30% other grape varieties other than Sangiovese and often display more black fruit characteristics as well as a larger percentage of new wood.  
 
XI. Barbera

Italy: Piedmont

Sight: medium ruby to ruby purple.
Nose: bright, tart black and red fruits, bitter green herb, floral, and mushroom-earth. Small barriques are sometimes used and give the wines vanilla, sweet spice, and toast notes.
Palate: medium to medium-plus bodied and dry to bone dry.  
Structure: alcohol: medium to medium-plus: acidity: medium-plus to high; tannin: medium to medium-plus. 

XII. Tempranillo

Spain: Rioja Reserva and Gran Reserva

Sight: medium to deep ruby garnet.
Nose: dried red fruits, dried herb, and sunbaked earth; traditionally made wines show pronounced American oak character (dill-dried herb, vanillin, sweet spice, sawdust).
Palate: medium to medium-plus bodied and bone dry to bone.  
Structure: alcohol: medium to medium-plus; acidity: medium-plus; tannin: medium to medium-plus.  
 
ID Keys: traditional Rioja Reserva combines dried red fruits, leather, earth, and pronounced American oak flavors. Gran Reserva wines show even more oxidative character. It’s important to note that more producers are using French oak or a combination of French and American oak. 

XIII. Zinfandel

California--Dry Creek Valley

Sight: medium to deep ruby.
Nose: a combination of red, black, and dried fruits with black and/or white pepper, bramble-briar, sweet spices, oak, and high alcohol. Some wines also display notes of peach-apricot and yogurt.
Palate: full-bodied and usually dry, but full-bodied wines often display jammy or stewed fruit with a touch of residual sugar.  
Structure: alcohol: medium-plus to high; acidity: medium to medium-plus; tannin: medium to medium-plus.  
 
ID Keys: the tendency for Zinfandel to ripen unevenly is a key to recognition; some wines will show both raisiny and under ripe fruit in the same glass. Generally, Zinfandel tends to be a full-throttle red with ripe, jammy fruit, and pepper-spice qualities.

XIV. Carmenère

Chile

Sight: deep ruby.
Nose: ripe black fruits with pronounced pyrazenic notes: green peppercorn, green herb/pepper-vegetal. A touch of earthiness is common. 
Palate: medium to full-bodied and dry. 
Structure: alcohol: medium to medium-plus; acidity; medium to medium-plus; tannin: medium to medium-plus.  
 
ID Keys: Carmenère  is similar to Merlot with supple fruit, but the vegetal green peppercorn qualities make it unique and unmistakable.  
 
XV. Malbec

Argentina: Mendoza

Sight: deep ruby purple.
Nose: ripe black cherry/berry and cassis with tart cranberry secondary notes; also violet, green herb, iron/blood, and wood spices. Some wines can display a touch of dusty earthiness.
Palate: medium-plus to full-bodied and dry.
Structure: alcohol: medium-plus to high; acidity: medium to medium-plus; tannin: medium to medium-plus. 
 
ID Keys: a combination of deep purple color, ripe and unripe fruits and floral qualities. 

XVI. Pinotage

South Africa

Sight: medium to deep ruby. 
Nose: blackberry, mulberry, green pepper, peppercorn, green herb, iron/blood, and medicinal notes. 
Palate: medium to full-bodied and dry. 
Structure: alcohol: medium to medium-plus; acidity: medium to medium-plus; tannin: medium to medium-plus.

ID Keys: bright black fruits and the peppery-medicinal-band aid quality are keys to recognizing Pinotage. 

For a country about half the size of Texas, Italy is a land of extremes. In the south, Sicily is closer to Tunisia than Rome with Mediterranean and African influences visible across the cultural spectrum. In the far north, Alto Adige is almost as equally removed from the universally held stereotype of a Tuscan landscape of misty hills lined with Cyprus trees dotted by the occasional terracotta topped villa. The region was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire until the end of WWI. Bolzano, its major city of some 100,000-plus, is just a leisurely 90 minute drive from Innsbruck Austria, site of the 1976 winter Olympics. It’s no surprise that over 70% of the people in Alto Adige primarily speak German and rarely Italian. 
 
Several times during my recent stay I overheard one of the local winery contacts say that they had gone to school in “Italy” or were about to head south to vacation in “Italy.” I would remind said person that we actually were in Italy only to be met with a shrug and the briefest hint of a smile. Regionality, as it does elsewhere in Italy, runs deep. I can’t blame any of them. One look at Bolzano and its surroundings and you’re definitely not in mainstream Italy, much less Kansas. Take, for instance, the remarkably steep hills encompassing the Santa Magdalena DOC that jut up dramatically from the northwest section of the city you’ll know why. With its black diamond slope terraced vineyard, one could easily be in the Wachau of Austria or the Mittel Rhein of Germany.  
 
In terms of wine production, Alto Adige is one of the Italy’s smallest regions with just over 5,000 growers farming some 13,000 acres. Napa Valley, by comparison, has over 39,000 acres under vine while the Chianti DOCG has over 41,000 acres planted. But quality here is king with over 98% of the wines produced of DOC level. The region’s climate combines alpine influence with warm temperatures during the growing season. That’s because the Dolomites and the Swiss and Austrian Alps in the north act as an enormous rain shadow protecting the area from temperature extremes during the winter. Mediterranean influence from the south makes for some of the hottest temps in Italy during the summer. Together both create wide diurnal shifts with a marked separation between high daytime and low night temperatures. For viticulture, that means the fruit—both apples and grapes--achieves good ripeness levels and yet retains high natural acidity, a magic combination that makes the wines versatile and in some cases lends considerable potential to age. 
 
The Alto Adige region is patchwork of valleys and mountains with vineyards planted between 600 and 3,300 feet. The soils range from calcareous and limestone near the ever-present Dolomites, to volcanic porphyry and moraines, the remains of glaciers that retreated from the region some five to six million years ago. The region is home for over 20 grape varieties with the soil largely determining the variety planted; whites on the chalk and limestone closest to the Dolomites and red grapes thriving in the Moraines and porphyry-based soils.

Geography: the Flux Capacitor

Think Back to the Future movies and the Y-shaped circuit that enabled the stainless steel DeLorean to journey through time (http://backtothefuture.wikia.com/wiki/Flux_capacitor). The comparison works. Alto Adige’s three major valleys form a letter “Y” with Bolzano as its hub. 

To the northeast is Valle d’Issarco, just minutes away from the Austrian border. Chiusa and Bressanone are the most important towns and the historical abbey, Abbazia di Novicella, is one of the leading coops - producers. The abbey dates from the 12th century and the Santa Maria Assunta is one of the most beautiful small basilicas I’ve ever seen—it’s a must see. Here in the Valley d’Issarco the soils are mainly granitic and white grapes predominate with some excellent Schiava produced as well.

The Val Venosta lies to the northwest with Merano the major city. The Venosta is the driest region in Alto Adige and also one of the centers for apple production. It’s the most scarcely planted valley of the three with poryphry and volcanic soils; whites predominate plantings. The region is also known for its mild climate and Merano has long been regarded as an excellent spa town. 
 
The Oltradige valley in the south is the largest of the three valleys and the heart of Alto Adige wine production. Appiano and Caldaro are the most important villages. Limestone and porphyry soils are found as well as moraines. White wines account for 56% of the production with vineyards planted between 1,000 and 2,300 feet. The village of Tramin, a spiritual home to the Gewürztraminer grape, is also located here.

At the center of the flux capacitor is the city of Bolzano, one of the warmest parts of the entire region. Here the vineyards of the Santa Maddalena DOC rise steeply out of the northwest part of the city. The soils are poryphry-based and perfectly suited to Schiava-based reds as well as Lagrein.  
 
Coops: a Reality Check

One belief I had to quickly shed while in Alto Adige was a long-held notion that coops are mere factories cranking out oceans of wine mediocre in quality at best. Over 70% of the wine in Alto Adige is coop-produced and a lot of it is very good to outstanding. In talking to winemakers, I learned that the region’s vineyards are severely fragmented in terms of ownership just like Burgundy. Thus, like Burgundy commercial winemaking on any scale can only exist in a cooperative context. Vineyard owners are generally non-wine professionals and have had the vineyards passed down to them by older generations. The relationships between coop winemakers and vineyard owners were closer to a négociant/owner in terms of the emphasis on quality fruit and lower yields. Terlano is a perfect example of one of the several Alto Adige coops making exceptional wine.  

The Grapes

Here’s a quick survey of the major varieties from the region.

Whites

Pinot Bianco: grown throughout the region. Pinot Bianco isn’t usually a grape that gets everyone dangerously excited but I was surprised, no make that shocked, at how well it can age give the right conditions. To point, Klaus Gasser of Terlano opened bottles of the winery’s Pinot Bianco from 1982 and 1955. The ’55 was deep golden in hue and still very fresh and alive. So much for the belief that whites don’t age well. Old wine aside, Alto Adige Pinot Bianco shows bright citrus fruit with white blossom notes on the nose and steely minerality on the palate. It’s a delicious shellfish wine.

Pinot Grigio: there’s an ocean of Pinot Grigio made all over northern Italy, much of it unremarkable. The best wines from the variety are definitely from Alto Adige and combine bright green pear/pear skin, and juicy citrus fruit with wet stone minerality.  

Gewürztraminer: it’s interesting to note that in Jancis Robinson’s just published and completely brilliant tome “Wine Grapes” (over 1,200 pages and weighing in at 6.7 pounds) a listing for Gewürztraminer is missing in action. Searching the index one is pointed to the Savignin entry with the explanation that what we call Gewürztraminer is actually a genetic mutation of the other Alsace grape. Not sure what that does to the village of Tramin’s claims to be the ancestral if not spiritual home for Gewürztraminer but there you are. In terms of style, Alto Adige Gewürztraminers have all the pungent floral and spicy fruit qualities one expects from the grape without the blowsy quality. At best, the wines are luscious, spicy, and
perfumed. They’re also delectable with soft-ripened cheeses.

Riesling: the few Rieslings I tasted during the week reminded me of scaled down versions of Austrian bottlings with tart citrus fruit and stoney minerality.  

Grüner Veltliner: one comes across Grüner in the north near the Austrian border. Here the style resembles the lighter versions from the Austrian Kamptal region versus the richer Federspiel and Smaragd wines of the Wachau. Still there’s plenty of the peppery and slight vegetal notes that make Grüner so delicious.

Kerner: another grape that usually goes under the radar and for good reason—it’s not exactly riveting. But I did find several wines, most notably the Praepositus from Abbazia di Novacella, to be delicious, with ripe Fuji apple and quince notes and a wonderful floral quality.

Sylvaner: I’ve long thought the Silvaners from Franconia (especially those from Hans Wirsching) to be the best on the planet. Now I’m more than willing to concede that there are several producers making outstanding Sylvaner in Alto Adige with all the smoky succulent apple/pear and tart citrus fruits one could hope for.

Sauvignon Blanc: here is really the only instance I found a bit of identity crisis among all the Alto Adige wines. Not really a surprise given that Sauvignon Blanc suffers the same wicked fate in California as well--not knowing whether to emulate New Zealand or Sancerre, and sometimes heading directly in between with unique, sometimes bizarre results. The best Alto Adige Sauvignons were sharply etched and citrus-dominated while others suffered from either too much sulfur or too much oak. However, there is great promise for the grape here.

Moscato Giallo: thought to have been brought to the region by the ancient Romans. Dry and succulent, fully dessert sweet versions are
made.

White Blends: blends based on Chardonnay, Pinot Bianco, Sauvignon Blanc, and Pinot Grigio are a long-held tradition in Alto Adige, and they can be quite good as well as age worthy. In particular, Manicor’s Reserve della Contessa and Terlano’s Nova Domus Riserva are outstanding. 

Reds

Schiava: I’ll go out on a limb here by saying the next uber geek hipster red wine will be Schiava. It’s a wonderful combination of Pinot-elegance and tart Barbera acidity with unique savory qualities. Light in color, fairly concentrated, and Beaujolais-like, it can be served chilled and goes with any and everything. You might see it also labeled as Vernatsch or Edel Vernatsch (remember the German influence!). The best Schiava-based wines are from the Santa Maddalena DOC where they are blended with a maximum 10% Lagrein. Try one—it’s delicious!

Lagrein: other than ease of pronunciation (it rhymes with wine), Lagrein could also be the next total geek wine. Malbec-purple in color but with Merlot-soft tannins and a tart, savory, and floral character all its own. Another must try.  

Pinot Noir: the Pinots I tasted during the week reminded me of Spätburgunders from Germany with tart cranberry/rhubarb fruit, and beet, tea/herb, and earth notes. Elegance and finesse are common hallmarks.

Merlot: primarily grown in the warmer south closer to Trento; bottled both as a single varietal and blended with Cabernet Sauvignon. The best examples have lush black fruits, herbal notes and minerality.

Cabernet Sauvignon: ditto above, with the best examples showing vibrant blackcurrant and herb notes with clay earth.

Moscato Rosa: my new favorite sticky. Moscato Rosas are luscious, just-right sweet, and spicy. Chocolate wine!

Random Thoughts

Apples! Alto Adige is the center of apple production in Italy and one of the major suppliers to the European continent. The valley floors are filled with apple orchards with vines on hillsides and terraces. However, a high bounty is placed on top orchards grown on steep hillsides.

Foods: when in Bolzano, makes sure to try the local dumplings called knödels, made from cheese, beets, speck (local ham like prosciutto), or spinach. The crunchy unleavened bread called schüttelbrot is also delicious.  

Restaurants: Patscheiderhof is an old farmhouse restaurant outside Bolzano built in 1776 that serves traditional local fare including delicious knödels.

Favorite Wines of the Trip

1. 2012 K. Martini & Sohn Pinot Bianco, “Palladium”
Lots of intensity and ripe fruit for Pinot Bianco with vibrant acidity and a touch of chalky minerality.

2. 2012 Castelfeder Pinot Grigio
Racy citrus and Pippin Apple fruit with notes of bitter almond and mineral.

3. 2012 Erste Neue Pinot Grigio
Sleek, supple texture with tart acidity; flavors suggest green pear, citrus blossom, and chalk.  

4. 2011 Abbazia di Novacella Sylvaner “Praepositus”
Ripe pear, green melon, key lime, and citrus blossoms with mineral underlay; focused, concentrated, and racy with an intense mineral mid-palate. Outstanding.

5. 2006 Cantina Terlano Sauvignon Blanc “Quarz” (from magnum)
Tart citrus, restrained grass/herb notes, and pronounced salty mineral; the palate is racy and seamless; wonderful balance and length.

6. 2010 Cantina Terlano Nova Domus Riserva
A blend of Chardonnay, Sauvignon Blanc, and Pinot Bianco. Vibrant Fuji apple/green pear and white flowers with bright lemon citrus notes.

7. 2011 Cantina Val Isarco Gewürztraminer “Aristos”
Ripe peach, tangerine, and ginger spice flavors with pronounced floral notes.

 8. 2012 Elena Walch Schiava
Tart cherry and cranberry notes with savory herb and a touch of earth.

9. 2011 A. Egger-Ramer Santa Maddalena “Reisegger Classico”
Richer than regular Schiavas with more depth of fruit and earth/mineral notes. Juicy, ripe, and forward with tart finishing acidity.

10. 2011 St. Michele Appiano Pinot Nero
Smoky cranberry and sour cherry fruit with beet root, tea, leather, and spice; lots of mineral on the mid-palate with older wood and tart
acid on the finish

11. 2011 Castel Sallegg Lagrein
Ripe black fruits with violet, anise/herb, green leaf, and earth/mineral notes; more restrained on the palate than expected, but still very juicy and fruity with tart acidity and minerality on the finish.

12. 2009 Kellerei Kaltern Passito Moscato Giallo “Serenade”
Fruit dried for 4-5 months and then aged in wood for two years; 210 grams residual with nine grams total acidity; crystallized pineapple and preserved lemon with honey; luscious fully sweet with honey, dried flower and anise notes; utterly delicious.

The Wente Clone Turns 100

This week saw two important celebrations for 100th birthdays in the wine world. First, an outstanding symposium at Wente Vineyards in Livermore on Monday celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Wente clone of Chardonnay. I was fortunate to have the opportunity to chair a panel of industry experts that included Phil Wente from the winery; Greg LaFollette, winemaker and owner of LaFollette wines; Stephane Vivier, winemaker for Hyde de Villaine wines; Nancy Sweet of the Foundation Plant Services at U.C. Davis; and long-time colleague Chuck Hayward of J.J. Buckley Fine Wines in Oakland. Our mission was to map the birth and evolution of the Wente clone of Chardonnay in California over the last century.

 Before you leave this page to go microwave something or turn on the Weather Channel, allow me to explain as it’s become all too easy to bash anything remotely related to the Chardonnay grape. In fact, we’ve gotten just as good at berating Chardonnay as taxes, the dismal weather in the Sunset District of San Francisco during the summer, or how remarkably annoying Katie Perry’s voice is after a very short period of time. But all this fuss over the popularity of Chardonnay is a very recent thing. Consider for a moment that in 1960 there were only 260 acres of Chardonnay planted in the entire state of California. That’s right, 260 acres, or less than half a square mile for anyone doing the math. Further, the state agricultural census listed Chardonnay as a “miscellaneous” white grape until 1968. Mind you, a varietal bottled Chardonnay wasn’t even commercially sold until 1936. It was made by, you guessed, Ernest Wente. 

It was the famous “Judgment of Paris” tasting in 1976 and the success of the 1973 Chateau Montelena Chardonnay that initially spurred the tremendous growth of Chardonnay plantings, much of which was comprised of the Wente clone or variations thereof. One could even argue that the most site specific grape in California from the 1970’s through the late 1980’s was Chardonnay because of the consistency of the plant material (as in the Wente clone).  Today the Chardonnay world is very different indeed. As of 2010, there are over 95,000 acres planted in California, an increase of over 400 percent from those long ago days of the early 1960’s. Combine that with the factoid just recently released that the white wine market in the U.S. is now the largest wine market on the planet, and Chardonnay becomes even more important to our wine gestalt. In the end, we may complain about Chardonnay all day--but we simply cannot ignore it.

As for the symposium, it was a wonderful blend of Wente family history (truly one of the great families of California wine) with a lot of technical data including spider graphs (which always make me squint) about the morphology and evolution of the Wente clone through the years. The big surprise of the event was Chuck Hayward’s “CSI” work on uncovering how the Wente clone got to Western Australia from California in 1955. The answer is via Dr. Harold Olmo of U.C. Davis clonal research fame, who OK’d the initial shipment of vine cuttings and who also went on to help establish several of the best cool climate growing regions in that state. 

Also notable were comments made by fellow Masters and good friends Peter Granoff and Sally Mohr. When asked about sommeliers and why they need to consider Chardonnay for their programs, Peter responded by saying that sommeliers need to “put their egos aside” and just do their jobs. Sally Mohr responded by pointing out that while everyone makes such a fuss over white Burgundy, we’re at the point now that where the best Chardonnay vineyards in California should be considered the equal of their Burgundian counterparts in terms of wine quality. I completely agree with both. 

The entire symposium can be viewed in three parts via U-Stream:

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/23405528

d’Arenberg Turns 100

The second big birthday bash happened this past Tuesday night at the Old Mint building in San Francisco. A group of more than a hundred gathered to celebrate the 100th anniversary of d’Arenberg, one of Australia’s most unique and iconic wineries. If not familiar, the winery was founded in 1912 by Joseph Osborn, a teetotaler and then director of Thomas Hardy and Sons winery. Osborn purchased the 60 acre Milton Vineyards in the hills just north of the townships of Gloucester and Bellevue, now known as McLaren Vale. Fruit was sold to local wineries until the construction of a cellar in 1928. In 1943 Frank’s son, Francis d’Arenberg Osborn (known as “d’Arry”), returned from school at age 16 to help his father run the business. d’Arry eventually assumed management in 1957, and in 1959 launched his own label called d’Arenberg, named after his mother Frances Helena d’Arenberg. The d’Arenberg wines quickly started winning medals in major competitions and within 20 years the winery gained both national and international recognition. The rest, as they say, is history.

Today Chester Osborn, the fourth generation, oversees winemaking duties. The vineyards are still located in McLaren Vale about an hour’s drive from Adelaide. The climate, while definitely hot during summer months, is all about diurnal shift as the nights are much cooler due to the proximity to the ocean. That makes for wines with high natural acidity regardless of the ripeness level--and high acidity means good balance and longevity, both hallmarks of the d’Arenberg wines. 

Chester makes as many as 16 different wines in any one vintage, from a Pinot Meunier-based sparkler all the way to a tawny port-styled fortified sticky. My favorites over the years have been the Riesling called the “Dry Dam,” the old vines Grenache called the “Custodian,” and the reserve Cabernet called “Dead Arm.”  It goes without saying that all the d’Arenberg wines have quirky names with a story behind each. Beyond that, Chester is all about sustainable practices in the vineyard, and minimal--and I do mean minimal--intervention in the winery. In terms of the latter, only traditional basket presses are used and the wines are rarely, if ever, racked during barrel aging.  That’s because Chester believes a certain amount of reduction is needed to offset the natural oxidation that a barrel environment provides. 

The event started off with a tasting of over 40 wines including older vintages as well as newly released Shiraz and Grenache vineyard designates from the 2010 vintage. Here are notes on my favorites:
 
Older Vintages

2004 “Dry Dam” Riesling: quintessential Aussie light saber Riesling with intense lime and mineral flavors and atom-smashing acidity.

2002 "Thieving Magpie" Shiraz-Viognier: projectile blueberry and violet plasma. Amazing aromatics with a seamless, spicy, and delicious palate. Hedonistic.

2001 "Galvo Garage": a Cabernet blend with Merlot and Cabernet Franc. There’s a common notion that Aussie wines don’t age well and that the Cabernets are second rate. I think we can toss both ideas out in the backyard next to the square wheel and the eight track player. At 11 years young the Galvo is vibrant, harmonious, and just starting to show its stuff. 

New Releases

2010 “The Beautiful View" Grenache: wild strawberry jam meets a pepper grinder beneath a grove of eucalyptus trees. Rich, juicy, spicy, and savory. 

2010 “The Vociferate Dipsomaniac” Shiraz: an immensely concentrated red with dark fruit compote, exotic Asian spices, and savory herb notes. Think Humvee in ballet slippers. Shameless. Take cover.

http://www.darenberg.com.au/


Cheers! Happy 100th to both the Wente clone and d’Arenberg. Here’s to 100 more!

Double Bond came across my radar through a good friend and colleague. This small Central Coast winery was founded by biochemist John Klacking. The winemaking team is headed up by retired physicist John Thunen, who has a long successful track record in small batch production. Double Bond’s portfolio is made up entirely of limited production single varietal wines from established vineyards in Edna Valley and Santa Barbara County. Especially noteworthy are the Chardonnay and Pinot Noir from the Edna Ranch and Wolff Vineyards in Edna Valley, and the Syrah from the Larner Vineyard in the Ballard Canyon of Santa Ynez Valley.  Partner Sean McCaffrey says the philosophy of Double Bond is all about combining the best fruit sources with minimal winemaking. The results are impressive. Here are my notes for the wines.

2008 Chardonnay, Edna Ranch Vineyard, Edna Valley 14.2% $28 SRP
Notes: bright, forward tropical fruits with Meyer lemon-lime citrus, a touch of savory herb, and vanilla cream spice. Elegant, well-balanced, and seamless. The best Edna Valley Chardonnay I’ve tasted in a very long time.

2008 Pinot Noir, Wolff Vineyard, Edna Valley 13.8% $45 SRP
Notes: cranberry, sour cherry, and beet aromas with notes of red flowers, lavender, black tea, and barrel spice. Forward, supple, and very long.

2009 Pinot Noir, Wolff Vineyard, Edna Valley 15.2% $45 SRP
Much riper style than the 2008 vintage. Ripe, plummy fruit with notes of craisin, savory herb, mint, and pronounced barrel spice. Rich, lush, and spicy.

2008 Syrah Lanner Vineyard, Santa Ynez Valley 15.9% $48 SRP
Ripe black fruits with kirsch, pepper spice, black licorice, dried savory herb, bitter chocolate, and coffee notes. Touch of heat on the finish. Dense, powerful, and concentrated.