Burgundians have been doing their thing for about 1000 years. I think there are a few good books on the subject. But if you think they’re doing it now for any reason other than money, well, you know, that’s just like, your opinion man.
Everyone else is definitely doing it for the money. Nobody is going into winemaking for the joy of agriculture.
It’s always a challenge to understand if Internet posts are serious or ironic. Which is this? Another option: a troll?
I guess my perspective on this is as a consumer (I am not a winemaker or in the business in anyway other than a consumer of wine). I find that for some wineries I quite like their “house style” and find the specific vineyards or other micro-sites don’t really speak to me in the same way - so I drink the house style. For other wineries, the house blend is ok or good but one of their specific sites is very special to my enjoyment and for those, I get the specific ones. I think the value of this as a consumer is that it can give us a greater range of possible styles to choose from as we work our way through the myriad number of wines. I think an earlier poster noted that if that specific one isn’t really specific or doesn’t speak to people in quite the same way, then the maker may choose to stop producing it.
I think the net of this is really that more choice is ultimately better for the consumer while at the same time can make it a bit more challenging to wade through to find what are your gems.
If we look at the big picture, we see that everywhere consumers have shifted from blended products, wherein one bottle of Cutty Sark tastes just like the last one, to relatively unique bottlings of wine, single malts, etc. We see ads featuring the farmer who grows spuds for MacDonalds or hops for Budweiser, as tho the guy just had fifty acres.
One way to look at it is that, if the market makes the wine, the winemaker can indulge his dream of bottling different cuvees based on vineyards or clones etc. Another way to look at it is through the eyes of an economist, who sees that single vineyard cuvees sell for more the blends, even tho the blend might make a better wine. This was a preoccupation of Sean Thackrey, who did create some fascinating blends.
And why is it that we always copy the French model? A friend–a former French teacher who worked in Chassagne–turned winemaker opined that maybe the best chardonnay in California might be a blend of different regions. Ch Chevalier made a Pinot that was a blend of Edna Valley and Carneros…delicious but not profitable enough,
Wow! I had no idea I’ve been wrong for the last 25 years! Thanks for helping me see the light.
LOL 22 years of wine board participation that’s a first for me.
Well … if you meant this ironically it missed the mark. Some people will take this as as serious comment and disagree/be annoyed/be offended. Eg. Mike Officer’s comment.
If serious, then I have to disagree. This board is obsessed with beautifully crafted wine and the committed wine makers who create them. When craft, commitment and profit go together then that’s a happy day, but it seems pretty clear from my own interactions with wine makers that there are a heck a lot of folks who are not primarily motivated by cash. Community, wine, craft, yes, even farming are typical motivations.
Sure, we are also obsessed with deals and prices, and are sad when wine we love gets too expensive. And sure there are profit first wine makers. But to say that “everyone else is definitely doing it for money” is obviously wrong.
There are lots and lots of books written about Burgundy…
The best, in my 2 cents…is Making Sense of Wine by Matt Kramer.
Peter, did you mean Matt’s Making Sense of Burgundy? Just referencing books about Burgundy.
Making Sense of Wine was my favorite introduction to wine book.
I think a lot of the recent super cuvées in burgundy feel like money grabs such as the Lignier mcm whatever and Millot Echezeaux 1949.
I love my craft as much as any winemaker alive, but by definition it’s a hobby until someone writes you a check.
That said, if I had truly understood the financials and the sheer amount of labor it takes to build and establish a winery when I began, I might never have done it. The industry in North America is filled with people getting into the industry for passion rather than money. It’s one of the reasons that profitability can be such a challenge(beyond the other obvious things like it being agriculture, and also quite difficult to do really, really well).
In Europe with so many previous generations there seems to be a more practical side to how they approach the industry, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t passionate about it.
Still, if I didn’t get a paycheck I would need a different job.
If it’s all about marketing, and tasting individual stuff is hard without context, shouldn’t restaurants just serve one dish that combines all the food?
What’s a pork chop on its own if you’re not getting the lamb too? What’s the chef holding back?
Why the fetishization of individual plates of food? Who’s to say the blend wouldn’t be better?
I would guess that as producers see what retailers are charging for their wines(the internet helps this), they will start to look at ways to include themselves in a bigger way in price increases.
Creating a super cuvee that doesn’t upset the apple cart for importers and distribution but allows them a bigger cut is a safer option. Hopefully the wine supports the pricing.
Also, I would imagine that Millot hears about pricing for wines like Lachaux and sees his wines as every bit as good. Pride will push a lot of these types of choices as well.
One example:
Let’s say, hypothetically that blending DRC RSV and Richebourg created a better wine.
Even if that were the case, my understanding is that they’d have to call it vosne Romanee 1er and it would sell for less.
I hope that’s tongue in cheek Mr. V. Though it kind of sounds like you’re describing a gyro…and good ones are a near perfect food.
It might be better and less expensive, but it would be SO much more boring.
“Hey guys, I have French Pinot Noir, American Pinot Noir, German Pilsner, and Willamette Valley IPA. What sounds good?”
Beer for me.
The official name of the book is Making sense of Wine. I am sorry my message cause confusion. 
In any event :
(1) in Chapter One : he wrote about - The Notion of Connoisseur-ship. He ended by saying that : the connoisseur must yield freely to the fact theat greatness is not just limited to …
(2) in Chapter Two : he wrote about - Wine in the Cellar and Society. Matt did not foresee that Bizot’s red …should be a must in the young and ultra-rich Chinese burgundy lovers cellar.
(3) in Chapter Three : he continued to write about - Appellation and Authenticity. He started by say that A world of made is not a world of born.
My 2 cents in that what Mr. Karmer wrote was not that accurate. Why ? Please explain to me : why a 2018 Marsannay Clos de Roy by Bizot is listed at CA$4816 in wine-Searchers and yet the same wine by Charles Audoin is at CA $58 !!!
One point that I think we all got out of last sat’s tasting that Alex Valdes and Brad England raised was how it was nice to drink some nice older wine from random vineyards. 90 Rousseau Mazis and 96 cazetiers may not have been the best wines but they were super distinctive. Who knows if I’ll ever drink them again. I’m pretty confident I’ll get another crack at the 88 and 96 big 3 but not so sure about those. Glad I got to try them.
In Matt’s defense he wrote that book more than 30 years ago. Much of today’s madness wasn’t even dreamed possible.
He also wrote a much drier but fairly complete(at the time) book called Making Sense of Burgundy.
My goal this year is to do an in depth tasting of a single vineyard, maybe Clos de la Roche or Ruchottes, anyone interested?