I'd like to hear from the old(er) timers

[MikeHill]

I cannot fathom why everyone seems to think that every human endeavor, from running the 100 meter dash to designing safe automobiles to eradicating disease as a result of scientific advancement, is better today than it was 50 years ago, except winemaking. Did humans all of a sudden get stupid when it comes to winemaking? What we really have here in this site is a large, inbred gene pool that draws its knowledge from other people in the same pool.

I think a lot of the people in this berserker gene pool are treating wine like art, and not a more scientifically objective achievement like the 100 meter dash. So people could admit techniques are objectively better, while asserting the subjective outcome is worse. Lots of (most?) old timers think art, music, architecture, you name it, is “worse” now than “back in the day”.

Now, if the vast majority of consumers prefer the modern product, perhaps it is “better” by the objective measure of what our Neanderthal taste buds prefer. Again, the WB gene pool does resemble hipsters at times, defining ourselves explicitly by our taste difference from the mainstream.

I say this as someone relatively new on the wine journey, but who has already noticed a self training of my palate to a certain “expected” taste of what is “good” wine. Do I drink what I like? Or do I drink what I’m supposed to like, then come to truly like it after I have been trained?

[John_Morris]

I cannot fathom why everyone seems to think that every human endeavor, from running the 100 meter dash to designing safe automobiles to eradicating disease as a result of scientific advancement, is better today than it was 50 years ago, except winemaking. Did humans all of a sudden get stupid when it comes to winemaking?

Do you believe that we have moved forward in all areas of human endeavor in the past 50 years – that progress has been universal?

[MChang]

I think the price of top Sauternes has decreased in recent years, making that experience cheaper to achieve.

[Victor_Hong]

I think the price of top Sauternes has decreased in recent years, making that experience cheaper to achieve.

Whereas insulin has skyrocketed.

[Victor_Hong]

https://www.wine-searcher.com/find/1998+australia+shiraz/-/usa

For fans of Australian ooze-monsters, today is the good-old days …unless if you had stock-piled the stuff.

[Greg_K]

I cannot fathom why everyone seems to think that every human endeavor, from running the 100 meter dash to designing safe automobiles to eradicating disease as a result of scientific advancement, is better today than it was 50 years ago, except winemaking. Did humans all of a sudden get stupid when it comes to winemaking?

Do you believe that we have moved forward in all areas of human endeavor in the past 50 years – that progress has been universal?

To me there’s another side to it - progress often comes in fits and starts; there’s no guarantee that the winemaking Jay touts is the direction wine will go in permanently. Lots of scientific “advances” don’t end up being right in something so untheoretical as wine; Guy Accad in Burgundy is a great example.

Overall I agree with Jay, that wine has gotten better in the last 50 years, but whether the small part of that change that’s due to Rolland is a net positive, or will be seen as more of a wrong brach remains hard to say. That said, Jay’s argument of “the average person who’s not into wine loves Saxum” is a red herring - this is a question for people who love wine, not for people who don’t care about it.

[Cris_Whetstone]

As someone who is in between I would just note that it is much more difficult to just say “lets splurge” and get that ‘agreed upon by all’ top wine. The prices really are on another level now. For the non-wealthy trying a top end wine is a real decision and not a mere whim.

There is likely more good wine across many regions and price levels. But there are also more wines that have veered away from the non-traditional. Many of those wines are same-y rather than singularly great. So likely more knowledge or research is required prior to purchase now than say in the 80’s prior to much of the ‘modernization’ of wine creation.

I agree with everything you say, Cris, except the bolded part. If you go back a few decades, there were definitely more poorly made and flawed wines on the market from the Old World, so you couldn’t blindly buy, say, a mid-priced Chianti or cru bourgeois Bordeaux with great confidence. So you sometimes had to do some research to avoid a different kind of problem.

What I meant was that in order to avoid the multitude of ‘good’ wines that exist now in a more homogenized mold you have to do some research and acquire knowledge that will allow you to find those that still make a more traditional styled wine. You could say its flipped from what you describe.

[Jon_Lawrence]

I think it is a great time to be a Champagne drinker. There seems to be more quality Champagne from more producers available now than at any time before. The price for top Champages have increased but not at the same rate as a lot of other wines (Salon excluded). I paid like $85/btll for 95’ Comtes on release which is less than I paid for '06 Comtes, but not by much. Just like all wines, the technology, quality control, etc. has improved. What has not changed as much is the stye. Climate change has allowed for more natural sugars to balance the acids, but this has been offset by a reduction in dosage. Alcohol levels are still the same, I never get a sense of ‘heat’ when a drinking Champagne. That Comtes style in the 90’s is similar to today. Krug still tastes like Krug and DP still tastes like DP (albeit maybe a bit less reductive in the case of the '08).

[Richard_Albert]

Having started in the wine biz to help with my college costs around the same time they invented dirt, I qualify as a vinosaurus. I left the biz for ten years, returned and left managing a normal wine and liquor shop to get into the extreme rarities in 1982 just north of SF.
From a business perspective:
1)When wealthy, sophisticated buyers found the shop in the pre internet days, they went nuts because the top wines from the top vintages from France, Germany, Portugal, and CA were in stock, under one roof. The broadcast fax machine was a “tech” breakthrough making inhouse dissemination of info was big boost to biz. Ease of access to inventories and pricing, big improvement, more knowledge and customer enthusiasm was a major positive influence to industry growth…
2)There was the Connoisseurs Guide, the Wines Spectator, Broadbent’s Great Vintage Wine Book as well as guides from Hugh Johnson, Harry Waugh, etc. Parker changed everything, soaring in popularity and influence and the wine market exploded via boomers. Oh yeah, t’was the dawn of points selling wines. good for biz, mixed results overall.
3)Due to lack of cleanliness throughout production meant there were more off bottles, definite improvement.
4)We airfeighted everything from Europe as refrigerated containers thru the Panama Canal were few in number and frequently unreliable, better handling/transport of product, much improved today.
5)Vinothque on the peninsula was an early wine cabinet producer, we sold many in the mid eighties via the Spectator. Many more folks with proper storage expanded interest in long term collectables and the size of consumer collections. A lot of great wines were ruined due to low humidity/cork dessication in air conditioned rooms.
6)We would ship to lots of states, round filing cease and desist orders from various states, until they confiscated shipments. Industry lobbyists owning legislatures and controlling shipping worse today as the three tier system expands power and influence.
7) As pricing escalated and we sold on the higher end of the spectrum a wholesale price list for the 1955 Bordeaux vintage was shown to us, Lafite lead the pack at $42/case. Pricing today for the top wines are a strong negative, things have become elitist and prohibitive. Restricting some of the best effort to the hands of the $trongest, a huge negative.
8)There were so many more classics available for so many reasons. Our First Growth Bordeaux and top producer GC Burgs verticals were deep and broad some going back to the teens and early 1920’s. We raided great cellars and inventories with strong buying power and a strong dollar. Dwindling supply understandable and a negative for you kids.
9)So many other regions produce high quality, diverse and reasonable wines great for consumer, but much more challenging to keep up with the latest as a retailer.
10)Decrease in distinctiveness, climate change influencing ripeness and wine styles, the popularity of fruit in your face wines and making which sells seem to have diminished terroir’s beauty and role in so many regions, too bad.

I gotta work now.

[Jay_Miller]

I think the price of top Sauternes has decreased in recent years, making that experience cheaper to achieve.

Putting on my old timer’s hat I recall the 1983 d’Yquem being the first high end wine I ever bought.

$25 for a half bottle at Garnet.

[Markus_S]

I think the price of top Sauternes has decreased in recent years, making that experience cheaper to achieve.

Whereas insulin has skyrocketed.

At last, one of your comments that made me laugh!

[David_Baum]

I’m 58 with a full cellar. Id give away every bottle in my cellar gratis and start over anew if I could be 30 again.

[Markus_S]

… my friend served escargot tat she had been growing in a fish tank all year and what had only eaten garlic greens for that year.

I would fathom those snails were inbred.

[J_a_y_H_a_c_k]

By the way - I forgot to mention that White Burgundy is the exception that proves the rule. The improvement in technology may be a significant component of why there is so much premox. As to the other comments above, I have some work that clients want me to do, so I will respond later, but as to whoever quoted me as saying “the average person who is not into wine loves Saxum,” I never said that and did not come close. If you can find me having said that, I will give you a bottle of Saxum for free. There is a fundamental approach disease that many people here suffer from. That disease is not knowing the difference between “I do not know the difference” and “I cannot tell the difference.” People often say to me that good wine is wasted on them because “I can’t tell the difference.” My response is uniformly, “you may not know the difference, but you can certainly tell the difference.” People should not confuse the two, especially when it comes to “knowing” that GC Burgs are great. I finally had a glass of Petrus a few weeks ago and although it was good, I found it to be only a tiny bit better than an off year of Araujo we drank right after it. Sometimes conventional wisdom is not so wise.

[J_a_y_H_a_c_k]

I’m 58 with a full cellar. Id give away every bottle in my cellar gratis and start over anew if I could be 30 again.

I would pay for shipping if I could trade my cellar for being 30 years old.

[Dav3_Dyr0ff]

Can I average it out by keeping my 55 yo income/position/retirement savings but getting the body/health of a 17 yo?

[Victor_Hong]

Can I average it out by keeping my 55 yo income/position/retirement savings but getting the body/health of a 17 yo?

Post a WTB on Commerce Corner. Then, wait for the FBI to respond.

[T_Altmayer]

By the way - I forgot to mention that White Burgundy is the exception that proves the rule. The improvement in technology may be a significant component of why there is so much premox. As to the other comments above, I have some work that clients want me to do, so I will respond later, but as to whoever quoted me as saying “the average person who is not into wine loves Saxum,” I never said that and did not come close. If you can find me having said that, I will give you a bottle of Saxum for free. There is a fundamental approach disease that many people here suffer from. That disease is not knowing the difference between “I do not know the difference” and “I cannot tell the difference.” People often say to me that good wine is wasted on them because “I can’t tell the difference.” My response is uniformly, “you may not know the difference, but you can certainly tell the difference.” People should not confuse the two, especially when it comes to “knowing” that GC Burgs are great. I finally had a glass of Petrus a few weeks ago and although it was good, I found it to be only a tiny bit better than an off year of Araujo we drank right after it. Sometimes conventional wisdom is not so wise.

I did not raise the issue, but since you put that challenge out there – and I love to procrastinate from work – I did a quick search. Here is your quote:

I would guess that the average non-geek wine drinker would find their wines a real crowd pleaser. Among those who arrogantly consider themselves to have well-trained palates (I put myself in that category), it depends on where they did their training.

Spoiler, you were not talking about Saxum and were responding David Bueker’s statement that he dislikes the Donelan wines he has tasted as too “goopy” (although you did mention Saxum earlier in the post)

[Victor_Hong]

I’m 58 with a full cellar. Id give away every bottle in my cellar gratis and start over anew if I could be 30 again.

I can print you a new birth certificate, once the cellar arrives at my apartment front desk.

[Andy_Sc]

I think the price of top Sauternes has decreased in recent years, making that experience cheaper to achieve.

Putting on my old timer’s hat I recall the 1983 d’Yquem being the first high end wine I ever bought.

$25 for a half bottle at Garnet.

Which proves the point of Michael to a certain degree: $25 translates to $66 in todays dollars vs the ~$150 you pay today for a new vintage. Not many highest end world class wines had such a „moderate“ increase.