Andy Velebil wrote: ↑
03:51 Fri 04 Sep 2020
if took a Prime 30 day dry aged steak and cooked it to beyond well done because that’s how I like it; I’m quite sure you and probably every other cook and butcher would say I destroyed that piece of meat by cooking it too what I like. Just saying.
You might be surprised. I used to prefer my steaks medium to medium well because that's how my Mom cooked them when I was growing up. I've only recently (the last 20 years or so) started eating them medium rare.
So if you cooked your steak extra well done I might look at you funny and say that's not how most people cook their steaks, but if you like it that way then you should cook it the way you like it.
Just don't put ketchup on it.
(I used to do that, too, before I discovered steak sauce.)
uncle tom wrote: ↑
04:27 Fri 04 Sep 2020
Each to his own, but my interpretation of the word 'cloying' is an excess of sugar that has no integration in the wine. It is very much a characteristic of young tawnies rather than aged ones, and another reason why I prefer to drink them matured.
Google's definition is what I've always understood it to mean: an excess of sweetness, richness, or sentiment
. I think in most cases it's because the producer was going for some particular style and maybe it didn't quite work out right. I've also noticed that sometimes the same wine can seem fine or cloying depending on what other wines (or foods) I'm having at the same time, so I think there's a relative component to it as well.
To me it also implies texturally more viscous than normal. A sweet, rich, heavy wine.
JacobH wrote: ↑
16:34 Fri 04 Sep 2020
winesecretary wrote: ↑
23:23 Thu 03 Sep 2020
I have many times over the past quarter-century or so encountered on Madeira absolutist statements by wine makers that, when challenged with documentary (or bottled) evidence to the contrary they row back from in a way that makes that clear that the absolutist statements were simplifications for the English-speaking market. I think the 'you should drink tawny fairly soon after it's bottled' thing may ultimately be something similar. It's a good general rule but a long way from a universal truth.
I agree. A dominant theme in the marketing of most specialist categories of wine for decades has been to simplify them. I have some sympathy with this. For example, how many
members would be able to describe, accurately, the difference between a colheita and vintage Madeira?
You are also right that it sometimes goes too far. For example, I think I am right in saying that Taylor’s LBV was invented so that it could be sold on the basis that it didn’t need either further maturation or decanting. However, we all know that a bit of both improves it considerably.
However, I do think there is something in the differing tastes of producers and consumers. I am sure if you are a producer you end up drinking so much newly-bottled Port that you easily end up with a differing palate from the average consumer.
I only know the difference between Colheita and Vintage Madeira because I've started buying more of it lately. But yes, the terminology for Madeira can be confusing especially for a Port lover.
I think a lot of what we hear from the producers is meant for the average or even entry-level consumer, including the adage that tawnies should be consumed as close to the bottling date as possible. But advice for the average consumer doesn't really apply to us geeks, and I think it is easier for us geeks to educate newcomers than it is for the producers to do so. The producers need to have a simple, common, consistent message because they have to communicate with thousands of people all the time. We can provide more complete information and help guide newcomers into a deeper understanding of our passions.