A post on a fellow wine blog got me thinking the other day about older vintages of wine -- buying them, cellaring them, drinking them. The question under consideration in that blog was a simple one that many wine drinkers ask: is it worth it? Specifically, is it worth it to cellar wines for a long time, or is it worth it to pay big money for older wines at restaurants or at auctions.
The answer, like many of life's subjective quandaries, is that it depends. Here are the things it depends on:
1. Your patience. Are you willing to let things sit around for a while? Obviously not an issue if you're throwing down big bucks at a restaurant.
2. Your cellar. Is your storage (or theirs) reasonably suited for keeping wines well? (55-65 degrees Farenheight with minimal to moderate fluctuation; 60% - 70% humidity)?
3. The wine. And this is the tricky part, because most of the wine you might consider aging (or buying at an aged premium) actually turns out to be nothing special.
That last point needs a little elucidation. Many winemakers will tell you, even label their wines so, that their wines will drink well for a certain period of time. Take your average Napa red wine, for instance, the Niebaum-Coppola Estate Merlot whose label says: "The 2001 Niebaum-Coppola Estate Merlot will age beautifully over the next 10 years."
What does this mean exactly?
It means that UNDER THE RIGHT CELLAR CONDITIONS for the next 10 years, this wine will be DRINKABLE.
The emphasis above is important. Assuming that your cellar is in good shape, this wine won't spoil. But what does it mean to be drinkable for the next 10 years? Well that's a very interesting question.
Here's an interesting tidbit that I didn't manage to include in my recent post about my "chat" with Robert Parker. I asked him about how in the world he can score wines not for what they taste like now (indeed some of his highest rated wines he says are really undrinkable now), but for what he thinks they will taste like in 10 or 20 years.
He said that he has a great track record of predicting which wines will age well, but even the best critics have a mixed record of predicting wines that will IMPROVE over time. That's a pretty important distinction, he said, because there are indeed some wines that do improve over time, reaching a point of quality and character that just cannot be achieved by pure winemaking alone.
This came as somewhat of a revelation to me -- even though it's sort of obvious. Aging = lasting to be drinkable. Improving = transforming into something new. Let's look again at that statement from our friends at Niebaum-Coppola:
"The 2001 Niebaum-Coppola Estate Merlot will age beautifully over the next 10 years."
Yes, but will it improve? It's sort of like looking at Sean Connery in his early James Bond films and making a bet as to whether he'll become sexier in the next 20 years. In hindsight the answer is most certainly yes, but taking a bet in 1963 when he made From Russia With Love was just that, a gamble.
For many of us, deciding to keep some bottles in the cellar, even under good cellar conditions is just as much of a gamble. A majority of wines don't actually improve over time, they just "last." Will they be drinkable in 5 years? Sure. Will they be better than they are now? Not likely.
Adding to the frustration of most ordinary consumers (and the alienation of many first time drinkers of Bordeaux in particular) is that there are a lot of wines that are designed to be aged, regardless of whether they will age well or not. Many French wines are crafted in this way -- heavily tannic to the point of mouth numbing oakness. Waiting for those tannins to mellow in the bottle is not something that most people have the patience to do, and the sad thing is that many who do wait are not rewarded by wines that have significantly improved -- they have only just become a little easier to drink. Accessibility is not really improvement.
I recently had the opportunity to try some older wines, a bunch of 1982 Bordeaux and a few Bordeaux from the 1960s. It was my first real chance to try wines that a lot of people buy at auction, and the type of wines that you see deep in the middle of big wine lists at fancy restaurants with four figure price tags. The experience was incredibly eye opening. Most of the wines were somewhere between what I consider lackluster to reasonably good (between 6 and 8 on a scale of 10). I thought to myself, "People really waited years and paid gobs of money for this stuff?"
However there were a few AMAZING wines, and these were just astonishing. An '82 Cos Estornel (Bordeaux Cabernet blend) and an '88 Chateau Climens (Sauternes), specifically. As opposed to the other wines which were intellectually interesting (i.e. to see how a 22 year old wine tasted), these made me think, "OH, so THIS is what the fuss is all about." These were wines that it seems to me had not just lasted, but had improved. The characteristics of age (mellowing of fruit flavors, softening of tannins, dulling of acidity) combined with the elements that were part of the wines primary flavors and aromas had given the wine something more, a different type of character than I have tasted in any "young" wine (between 0 and 10 years old).
It's clear to me now that many older wines (even those that are supposed to improve) require a certain sort of masochism, the same sort I attribute to drinkers of single malt whisky. The 1961 Chateaux Margaux I tasted the other day was milky brown like bad coffee, and tasted like it too. There are people who like this sort of thing (indeed, just like single malt, there are people who consider it to be the finest expression of alcohol), but it's certainly an acquired taste, and an expensive one at that.
Parker (who's in his fifties) says he doesn't buy these big ageworthy French wines anymore because he won't be able to enjoy them in their prime (30 years from now). Mostly the wines that he adds to his cellar regularly are meant to be drunk within the next 5 years or so.
So what to make of all this? If you're going to age wine, make damn sure its the really best of the best stuff that will improve with age, and make sure you know that it's the sort of improvement that you know will actually taste good to you. The rest of the wine you buy should be stuff that you will realistically consume in a 3 to 5 year timeframe.
What this means to me, and I suspect to many of you, is that your cellar if you have one or are planning/dreaming of one should be smaller than you think. You basically are looking for only about three to five times as much wine as you can drink in a year.
And let's see, if I do a little mental arithmetic....
Looks like I better get drinking.
2013 Rhone Rangers Tasting: March 23, San Francisco Vinography Unboxed: Week of March 10, 2013 Bilancia Wines, Hawke's Bay, New Zealand: Current Releases Vinography Images: Across the Valley Drinking Off the Grid Vinography Images: Behind the Gate Vinography Unboxed: Week of February 24, 2013 The Best of Napa's 2011 Cabernets: Tasting at Premiere Napa Valley Great Dirt is Not Sentimental: Ted Lemon on Terroir Vinography Images: Vineyard Bowl
Masuizumi Junmai Daiginjo, Toyama Prefecture Wine.Com Gives Retailers (and Consumers) the Finger 1961 Hospices de Beaune Emile Chandesais, Burgundy Wine Over Time The Better Half of My Palate 1999 KirÃ¡lyudvar "Lapis" Tokaji Furmint, Hungary What's Allowed in Your Wine and Winemaking Why Community Tasting Notes Sites Will Fail Appreciating Wine in Context The Soul vs. The Market 1989 Fiorano Botte 48 Semillion,Italy