Re: no need to 'wine'
- From: "GeeDubb" <geedubb@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:30:41 -0700
"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:dli5u30g0r@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
GeeDubb wrote:
"Andy Schecter"
We'll know that coffee has approached the "prestige" of wine when the very best coffees are well out of reach for the common person.
but that's a matter of taste. I've tasted, supposedly top of the heap, wines that nearly made me throw up.
Are you sure they were actually good bottles? I remember an editorial in
Wine Spectator a while back in which someone had ordered a very expensive
bottle and having recognized the editor across the room invited him to come
over and have a taste, which he did. The person who had ordered the wine,
and the others at the table were going on expertly about how wonderful it
was. The editor did not have the heart to inform them that the taste about
which they were going on so eloquently was not that of expensive wine but
of rotted cork.
I've also tasted $5/bottle wines I though were quite good. (I don't claim to be a wine connoisseur, I like beer much better)
But then I don't like Sumatra coffee either.
Just my tastes.
Gary
-- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
It's very possible, thus the statement about 'tastes'. What some people claim as good tasting doesn't for me. I find it funny to watch people snort, swish, gargle and whatever else they do to try to extract the flavors that most can't begin to pick up on, me included. I think this true for coffee drinkers as well. I'm not saying these people don't taste the inner regions of the flavor wheel but my palette doesn't though I did pick up on the blackberry on one crop of Yemen Mocha that Barry had.
rotten cork, classic! but that was his taste opinion which the others tasters evidently liked (or assumed they like due to the cost of the wine).
Gary (beer and burger man)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: no need to 'wine'
- From: J. Clarke
- Re: no need to 'wine'
- References:
- no need to 'wine'
- From: pauliii
- Re: no need to 'wine'
- From: Andy Schecter
- Re: no need to 'wine'
- From: GeeDubb
- Re: no need to 'wine'
- From: J. Clarke
- no need to 'wine'
- Prev by Date: Re: no need to 'wine'
- Next by Date: Re: from the NYTimes
- Previous by thread: Re: no need to 'wine'
- Next by thread: Re: no need to 'wine'
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|