The Ultimate Wine vs Beer Thread

This isn't really an official thing, just something that I've been thinking about. Recently, I started a bit of part time work at a LHBS that pretty much specializes in 90% wine and 10% beer extract kits. Sad, I know, but there isn't anywhere else to shop, which is why I order online. Anyway, these people are pretty ignorant of beer and think wine is the real "cultured person's drink." Talking about nuances and subtle flavors, etc, when in all honesty there isn't much to be said.

Now before you start sending white powder to my house that isn't confectioner's sugar, let me clarify.

Wine is good in and of its own right. There, I said it.

However, I believe that beer has more nuances, angles and complexity. More than any wine could ever hope for. Think about it. With beer you have the water, which actually affects the finished product. Then you have the contribution of the hops, which adds a good deal of depth. Then, of course, you have the grains, which are the back bone of the beer...the combinations of the grains are virtually infinite. Finally, you have the soul of the beer; the yeast, the stuff that really makes each beer unique. You don't have to be a math whiz to realize that if you took all of the possibilities and did a factorial equation, you'd have a virtually limitless amount of potential.

Whereas, with wine, and I can say this with some authority, there is less variation. The only difference you get is the type of grape and where it's grown as the base of the wine. That would be comparative to someone saying that beer is primarily dictated by its base malts, and where they're grown or kilned. That's even overlooking the fact that wines are fermented with a very limited array of yeasts. As you can see, much fewer possibilities. Beyond the grapes, you can add fruits if you wish or cask them in a variety of wood containers. Hm. Fancy that. The same can be done for beer. No advantage there.

Beer, by virtue of its versatility, can be conceivably combined with just about any adjunct a brewer is capable of skillfully integrating into a batch. Anyone who peruses the HBT forum can definitely see that there are a lot of creative brewers pushing the boundaries of conventionality in this regard. Just ask yourself this: how many categories and types of beer are there? Now, how many categories or types of wines are there?

All of that said, I'm not trying to start any feuds or insult anyone's preferences. I've made my feelings known, and have no intention of insulting wine makers on this forum. Most of this is due to me getting tired of people at the LHBS (customers and sometimes employees) obstinately insinuating that beer is a very basic, simple creation with very little nuance...these people obviously only know BMC.

That said, there's nothing wrong with a little healthy discussion.

I can only drink the lighter, fruitier wines. I've never been a fan of the way wine tastes. Maybe it'll grow on me over time, who knows, but I have very little desire to drink wine when I could have something else.

The thing is, I started out not liking beer that much too, and look where I am now

I don't think this thread will become much of an argument...uh, i mean debate thread, and heres why:

1) Beer is better than wine

2) By nature of it being a beer brewing website, every single person on here agrees with #1.

I don't drink wine or liquor. I'm strictly a beer man. Beer rules!

I do not agree completely. While the spectrum of popular wine may be narrower, I find no less complexity in a good wine as I do in a good beer. Grapes vary quite a bit depending on varietal and conditions to the point that you can tell the difference between regions (even if you cannot identify the regions) and also to the point of virtual infinity. The wine-making process also is not cut and dried, allowing the vintner to tailor a product, and blending allows for even more variety.

Beyond that, "wine" is no more limited to beverages made from grapes than "beer" is limited to fizzy, yellow beverages, so you have not allowed for all the potential complexities that can come in wine.

Without a doubt, beer is my first and greater love between the two, but I want them both and I see neither as "better" than the other in any way.


TL

Like it was mentioned, I don't think many will disagree, and I am certainly not going to. I freakin love beer. And I don't mean that in a stumbling frat boy kind of a way. I mean it in a way that I absolutely love beer regardless of any after effects.

You seem to view wine with the same eyes as a BMC drinker views beer...

Wine does not have to be made from grapes, you have the option of all kinds of fruits, flowers, herbs, and vegetables. I have seen recipies for garlic wines, dandaline wine, strawberry wine, apfelwein, lime wine, etc. etc. etc.

Yes beer is better (my opinion for social reasons)

EDITED FOR CLARITY: Beer in itself isn't better or worse, I prefer the act of drinking beer better due to the social scene I most often drink in...

but you need a stronger argument than:

EinGutesBier said:

Beer, by virtue of its versatility, can be conceivably combined with just about any adjunct a brewer is capable of skillfully integrating into a batch.

Click to expand...

Time for another beer...

Great reponses, I appreciate it - maybe I'll learn something yet. :cross:

Part of the reason for not quite "getting" wine, is perhaps that I haven't been able to really taste the variations as easily as others might. Obviously, I can taste the different fruits and grapes, but beyond that, I have more difficulty picking out the nuances than I would in beer. Sure, I can tell you that two wines are different and I can even tell you that two wines of varying age are different and why, but that's about it. I wouldn't be surprised if some of that frustration came across in my tirade, heh.

rmck1 said:

Yes beer is better (my opinion for social reasons) but you need a stronger argument than

Click to expand...

Aw, come on. I thought my argument was pretty good. : P

I can appreciate wine, and I think it can be just as complex as beer. The thing is, I think that with most wines you the complexity is pretty subtle, so you have to kind of look for it to appreciate it. With most beer, I feel like the interaction between the flavors is more obvious, and it can still be appreciated with casual sipping. I don't think it's fair to say than beer is better than wine or that wine is better than beer. Some beers are better than some wines, and some wines are better than some beers.

As for my preference, I like beer much better. Aside from champagne (which I adore!) there are few wines that I really love, and I usually only drink wine with a meal. Champagne I love, and I will use just about any excuse to get me some, the drier the better! Maybe part of it is that it makes everything seem like a special occasion. At the risk of making myself sound like a pansy, I'm also a big fan of rose champagne, usually the darker blends with more red. I swear it's not just because of the color, I like the flavor!

For a closing note, I'm totally fine with people liking and not liking whatever as long as they're willing to try new things and don't knock others for their preferences. I'm sure that everyone here can't stand it when people say they hate beer, and the same can be said for wine.

EinGutesBier said:

Talking about nuances and subtle flavors, etc, when in all honesty there isn't much to be said....However, I believe that beer has more nuances, angles and complexity. More than any wine could ever hope for.....
Whereas, with wine, and I can say this with some authority, there is less variation. The only difference you get is the type of grape and where it's grown as the base of the wine.....That's even overlooking the fact that wines are fermented with a very limited array of yeasts. As you can see, much fewer possibilities. Beyond the grapes, you can add fruits if you wish or cask them in a variety of wood containers. Hm. Fancy that. The same can be done for beer. No advantage there.

That said, there's nothing wrong with a little healthy discussion.

Click to expand...

You'll get an arguement from me. As a former wine researcher/enologist/vitner/etc. I can say that there are MANY things you're overlooking. From the home wine making side there may not be that many yeast strains available, but commercially the number of yeast strains rival the number of beer strains. The ability to blend different grapes means there are the same limitless possibilities of different combinations as there are in beer. However, unlike grains that only show minor variations depending on where they are grown, you get HUGE variation from the same grape varietal grown in a different region. There are wines/grapes flavored with noble rot/botrytis that adds complexity, wines that use air dried almost raisin-like grapes, wines that are intentionally heated and oxidized, wines that are fortified, etc. ,etc.

As far as beer having more subtle nuances, flavor, and complexity than "any wine could ever hope for" Give me a break. You're not drinking the right wines then. I won't say some beers don't rival the complexity of great wines, but they are the rare few. Drink a great Sauternes, vintage Madeira, vintage Port, a great vintage of Bordeaux, maybe a good Burgundy and see if you've had a beer that rivaled their complexity. I'm not saying subjective likability, I'm saying objective complexity.

I like them both! It just depends on what mood stikes me. I do drink more beer than wine though. I've got a group of friends that have been holding wine tastings for about 2 yrs now. All of our palates have got better and are much better at tasting the nuances between similar wines. It just took some practice

That being said, I do think beer is looked down upon by many wine drinkers because all they are familiar with is BMC. I like the major wine grape varietals, but actively seek out new (to me) and and less common varieties. What I find annoying with wineries (the wine buying public really) is the insistance on single varietal wines. Give me Blends!!!!! I want the best of the different varieties. Here I think the French do have it right, although our single varietal wine obsession is becoming popular there too. I think there is as much variety out there in wines vesus beers. There are BMC equivalents in wines, and you have to look harder for the craft wines that have more/different character.

There is some movement about promoting beer and food pairings. I actually think that beer pairs with a wider variety of foods than wine. Very few wines work with a simple salad with a vinagrette. The acid just kills it. Lots of beers though handle this pairing with ease. There is actually an article in the most recent Food and Wine that pitted I think it was the Dogfish Head brewer and some wine person to come up with pairings the same 7 or so dishes and compared them head to head. The results were pretty even. Some pairings were rated the same, some of the wine pairings were rated better, but an equal number of the beer pairings were rated as better

Just because they both contain alcohol doesn't really mean they deserve this kind of comparison. It's not an "either/or" thing, really. Beer and wine are very different monsters to me. They're both fermented beverages where the sugar comes from a natural product of the earth. That's about where it ends. I've been a wine geek/collector for years; I just spent 2 weeks in France, and tasted such an immense spectrum/panoply of wines that would make anyone who says "I don't like wine" eat their words. It's a bit like saying "I don't like food". I went through a horizontal tasting with Olivier Humbrecht of 25 wines, from dry Riesling to syrupy Selection des Grains Nobles. And what you really notice, what I've always noticed, is that the biggest difference between beer and wine is that beer is a primarily a product of the hand of man. The greatest beers in the world are inventions of man, recipes from a human being. Yes, yeast do their thing, and yes, grain might taste different from England and America. But it is ultimately a product that is very dependent on human ingenuity and interaction. One can make a great stout whether they're in alaska or india; but one cannot make Clos Windsbuhl Riesling if they're in South Carolina.

On the other hand, the "great wines" of the world in my opinion (especially somewhere like Domaine Zind Humbrecht) are more products of the place, the terroir, the microclimate, the soils, the water, the minerals. Some of the greatest wines in the world are those where human intervention into the winemaking process is minimal. No chaptalization, no added yeast (all wild), no chemical treatment, letting fermentation finish at its own pace, picking the grapes when the seeds are ripe rather than the alcohol potention reaches a certain point. Olivier Humbrecht is one of the modern fathers of biodynamicism, which is mostly pragmatic organic farming with a bit of astronomy hoobajoob mixed in...and I spent a couple hours listening to him sing the praises of non-interventionist winemaking, whilst his mindblowing wines backed up his assertions. Nicolas Joly in Savennieres will tell you that too (though he's a bit more nazi about non-intervention---he actually maintains that a wine should be "true" to its terroir before it is good).

Great wine is, above all else, an expression of a place, a grape that grows in that place, the conditions in that place during each growing season.

Great beer is, above all else, an expression of the hand of man.

Both have their merits, and I love beer and wine for different reasons. These reasons. And it's the reason why I make beer but won't make wine---something just doesn't feel right about buying a box of generic juice and fermenting it out. It's a bit hamburger-helper to me, no offense to those who like making wine. Maybe if I were a negotiant winemaker...but you show me when I can walk into a homebrew shop and buy juice from a hill in Savennieres. It just doesn't happen. This is why I like to make my own beer, but I like to drink others' wine.

landhoney said:

As far as beer having more subtle nuances, flavor, and complexity than "any wine could ever hope for" Give me a break. You're not drinking the right wines then. I won't say some beers don't rival the complexity of great wines, but they are the rare few. Drink a great Sauternes, vintage Madeira, vintage Port, a great vintage of Bordeaux, maybe a good Burgundy and see if you've had a beer that rivaled their complexity. I'm not saying subjective likability, I'm saying objective complexity.

Click to expand...

WORD. I'll put Zind Humbrecht's Hengst Vendange Tardive Pinot Gris up against any goddamned beer in the world in a complexity contest (if that's what we're worried about here).

Beer comes across as more complex because there's so much bad wine out there, and the good ones are subtler and more nuanced and require greater attention.

My 2 cents:

I like to drink beer more often than wine...but I appreciate a good bottle of wine or three with friends when we go out to a nice dinner. Wine has it's place in my life, but it comes in a distant second to beer. Those caveats aside, beer is my overall winner and here's why:

IMHO, the styles of beer are more variable than wine. I think anyone can easily tell the difference between a Lager, Pale Ale, IPA, Stout, Wheat, Pilsner. I think the differences between types of wine (aside from just red and white) are much harder to taste unless you have a more sensitive palette. The differences between Cabernet S., Port, Merlot, Burgundy are more subtle. This may be why wine is considered a more "cultured" drink, but I call BS on that. If anything, it's more of an "elitist" drink if only a small portion of the population can tell the difference between an oaky cab and a young merlot.

This is not to say that beer lacks complexity; quite the opposite. Not only do the base ingredients of beer (grain, water, yeast, hops) heavily affect the style, the adjuncts lend beer more complexity. I also think that the informal style of brewing beer, and the short brewing cycle allow brewers to be more creative in their craft.

I like wine just fine....but beer is better. It's cheaper, tastes better, allows for more variation because there are more ingredients used. It's also more complex for the same reason, but also becuase the process of brewing can be changed to affect the body and fermentability of the product. Oh, and last but not least...I can drink more beer in an evening that wine!

Beer is the new wine!

I'll have to say that I enjoy both wine and beer, depending upon the situation, food, company, and a bunch of other factors. Probably the most important factor is; how 'good' is the wine/beer we're talking about? I think anyone would rather drink a nice wine than a crap beer, and vice versa. There are excellent examples of both out there, which others more eloquent / knowledgable than I have outlined above.

However, I recently read Garrett Oliver's The Brewmaster's Table, which I highly recommend. Oliver makes a very interesting case for beer being the superior beverage. The crux of his argument is that wine basically only has three ingredients; grapes, yeast, water. Beer has all of the various types of base grains, specialty grains, adjuncts, flavorings, and yeasts that we are familiar with. There are probably millions of more combinations of beer ingredients than there are wine ingredients. As brewers, we all know that coming up with the perfect combo of ingredients is very nearly a holy grail. A perfect example of this is when your thrown together SMaSH brew turns out better than your five grain, 90 min mash, decocted, fermentation controlled monstrosity. And sometimes it's the other way around. Oliver feels that it is harder to make good beer than it is good wine as there are fewer factors to worry about. Of course, with wine you are often worried about cultivating the proper grapes, but after that you stick 'em in a barrel and wait for awhile. Oliver goes on to say that because of the multitude of factors and ingredients, making good beer is more of an art than making good wine is.

All of that being said, I enjoy both beer and wine when well done. I'm not sure I completely agree with Oliver(he may be a bit biased as owner of the Brooklyn Brewery), but the book is a really interesting read.

TwoHeadsBrewing said:

I think the differences between types of wine (aside from just red and white) are much harder to taste unless you have a more sensitive palette. The differences between Cabernet S., Port, Merlot, Burgundy are more subtle. This may be why wine is considered a more "cultured" drink, but I call BS on that. If anything, it's more of an "elitist" drink if only a small portion of the population can tell the difference between an oaky cab and a young merlot.


I like wine just fine....but beer is better. It's cheaper, tastes better, allows for more variation because there are more ingredients used. It's also more complex for the same reason, but also becuase the process of brewing can be changed to affect the body and fermentability of the product. Oh, and last but not least...I can drink more beer in an evening that wine!

Click to expand...

The first paragraph reminds me of the threads we have about when we give our homebrew to a BMC crowd/friend and they say it tastes like X, Y, or Z which we feel is completely wrong, and that they missed the boat, etc. etc. The reason they may say what they do is because they have not experienced the different flavors of beer, and have not 'trained' their palate. IMO, this is the same with wine. Have you tasted as much wine as beer(in a similar manner), if not then how can you say wine complexity is harder to determine then beer complexity? Is it that you have more experience with beer, and thus find it more accessible?

As to the second paragraph, we're not discussing personal preferences, or cost. The fermentability and body of wine can be changed, and is routinely. As to more ingredients; more ingredients do not implicitly mean more complexity when comparing apples and oranges.

Too much wine gives me heartburn. Too much beer gives me gas. Gas is easier to deal with, I'll take the beer

SWMBO drinks wind and beer.

I drink beer and wine.

We get along just fine.

blacklab said:

However, I recently read Garrett Oliver's The Brewmaster's Table, which I highly recommend. Oliver makes a very interesting case for beer being the superior beverage. The crux of his argument is that wine basically only has three ingredients; grapes, yeast, water. Beer has all of the various types of base grains, specialty grains, adjuncts, flavorings, and yeasts that we are familiar with. There are probably millions of more combinations of beer ingredients than there are wine ingredients.

Click to expand...

I've read and heard that argument many times, and I throw the BS flag each time. If anything, the multitude of ingredients makes it easier to brew beer, as you may have a number of different ways to achieve the same or nearly the same result.

A pastry chef is no less a chef because he only works with a handful of ingredients. In fact, do to the precision and perfection of his technique, he often is the hero of the head chef who has a zillion ingredients available.


TL

I don't think we'll ever agree upon the "superior" or "more complex" beverage. I just prefer beer. I also tend to prefer the company of fellow beer drinkers. I often find wine events, wine-focused establishments, and wine "people" very snooty. That's just not my style. I can be a pretty big beer snob, but that really only refers to my palate, not my attitude. Sure, I'm being a little stereotypical, but all stereotypes are born from some shred of truth...

I think Evan! really hit the point.
Beer is a craft product that is created through ingenuity and skill.
Wine is an agricultural product that is created though environment and care.

That is not to say that beer does not require good, fresh ingredients or that wine making is not a highly skilled craft but just that the prime reason for a good beer is skill and craftsmanship while wine is growing conditions and care.

I appreciate beer more than wine but I realize that wine has an incredible array of flavors and complexity also.

Just because there are more ingredients in a product does not mean it has more complexity or tastes better.

Craig

TexLaw said:

I've read and heard that argument many times, and I throw the BS flag each time. If anything, the multitude of ingredients makes it easier to brew beer, as you may have a number of different ways to achieve the same or nearly the same result.

A pastry chef is no less a chef because he only works with a handful of ingredients. In fact, do to the precision and perfection of his technique, he often is the hero of the head chef who has a zillion ingredients available.


TL

Click to expand...

+1! With wine, it's knowing what not to do as much as it is know what to do. As I said above, wine is less a representation of the human hand and more a representation of a place and time and grape. And I've read Brewmaster's Table twice and I don't remember Garrett making that argument per se. Either way, think about it: people all over the world make wine with plenty of ingredients...but there's a reason that a wine made from Vosne Romanee grapes is infinitely better, more respected and expensive than a bottle of kiwi-strawberry-banana-apple Arbor Mist. More ingredients don't mean sh*t, nor does "more variety of styles".

What is so amazing, to me, about wine is that the great wines cannot be replicated. Assuming I've gotten my skills and my system down to a science, I could brew 10 million gallons of the same exact Bock recipe and replicate it over and over and it'd be exactly the same. But just try to replicate the 2005 Anne Gros Clos de Vougeot by growing grapes in Kansas in 2008. There's something really special about the fact that particular vineyard sites and particular vintages are one-time things that can't be replicated by tossing a bunch of ingredients into a big pot. Not that beer is "inferior" by any means---my point, again, is that they are very different animals, and asking "which is better" is like asking "which is better: catalytic converters or distributor caps?"

I'm not all about complex flavor profiles or any of that other crap. I like beer, I don't like wine, enough said for me.

sigmund said:

I'm not all about complex flavor profiles or any of that other crap. I like beer, I don't like wine, enough said for me.

Click to expand...

Your contribution to the discussion is much appreciated.

TexLaw said:

I've read and heard that argument many times, and I throw the BS flag each time. If anything, the multitude of ingredients makes it easier to brew beer, as you may have a number of different ways to achieve the same or nearly the same result.

A pastry chef is no less a chef because he only works with a handful of ingredients. In fact, do to the precision and perfection of his technique, he often is the hero of the head chef who has a zillion ingredients available.


TL

Click to expand...

I think you can look at it either way;

Lots of ingredients = tough to find the ultimate combo with so much complexity

Few ingredients = tough to paint a masterpiece with a limited palate

Both situations require a talented artist for an amazing outcome.

I personally appreciate the amazing product, be it wine or beer.

The word "better" is used way to much when dicussing tastes. Different is a more apt term to use. As much as I hate the whole PC movement, often when the term "better" is used, the implication is that this makes one superior over the others who might have different tastes. One is not better than the other, just different. It is OK to use "better", but not in order to be holier than thou.

I get chided by my wife as often I'll describe a wine to someone as "and it was cheap too" My wife will correct me and say, "No, it was inexpensive." I like to find wines that are good values - great taste at a reasonable price - inexpensive, not cheap

Evan! said:

Not that beer is "inferior" by any means---my point, again, is that they are very different animals, and asking "which is better" is like asking "which is better: catalytic converters or distributor caps?"

Click to expand...

I agree with your points, but the initial 'question' was not 'which is better' but basically which is more complex. Arguing about which is better is indeed not the best, its subjective. However evaluating/dicussing which has greater complexity can almost be evaluated objectively. Taste a beer, how many flavors do get, now taste a wine and see how many different flavors you get. Without saying which you like better, evaluate which is more complex.

EinGutesBier said:

Talking about nuances and subtle flavors, etc, when in all honesty there isn't much to be said....

However, I believe that beer has more nuances, angles and complexity. More than any wine could ever hope for...

..You don't have to be a math whiz to realize that if you took all of the possibilities and did a factorial equation, you'd have a virtually limitless amount of potential.

Whereas, with wine, and I can say this with some authority, there is less variation...

Just ask yourself this: how many categories and types of beer are there? Now, how many categories or types of wines are there?

Click to expand...

These are the issues the OP discussed, nothing about which is 'better'.

landhoney said:

I agree with your points, but the initial 'question' was not 'which is better' but basically which is more complex. Arguing about which is better is indeed not the best, its subjective. However evaluating/dicussing which has greater complexity can almost be evaluated objectively. Taste a beer, how many flavors do get, now taste a wine and see how many different flavors you get. Without saying which you like better, evaluate which is more complex.

These are the issues the OP discussed, nothing about which is 'better'.

Click to expand...

If you're saying "better" is subjective and "complex" is objective, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. Complex is a completely subjective term, just like "better" or "best" is. Now, for the amount of flavors in each beverage, this again is subjective; it depends much on the person doing the tasting. My original point was that the different styles of beer were easier to differentiate than the different types of wine for most people.

landhoney said:

I agree with your points, but the initial 'question' was not 'which is better' but basically which is more complex. Arguing about which is better is indeed not the best, its subjective. However evaluating/dicussing which has greater complexity can almost be evaluated objectively. Taste a beer, how many flavors do get, now taste a wine and see how many different flavors you get. Without saying which you like better, evaluate which is more complex.

Click to expand...

Well, let's be realistic here: the thread's titled "BEER VS WINE". But I digress.

Either way, your point about "training" your palate is spot-on.

I just don't know how to approach this question from this angle, though, because it's not really clear how this evaluation is supposed to be framed. One could easily make the argument that beer is more diverse because the difference between an imperial stout and a berlinerweiss is so grandiose, while the difference between pinot noir and chard is less so.

If you're talking about complexity within styles, and not overall diversity of styles, then, again, this comes back to my original point and why its relevant: the fact that the terroir factors into a wine's profile, IMHO, makes up for (and surpasses) the lack of freedom of ingredients with regards to the relative diversity of styles.

Wow, I hope I haven't ruffled too many peoples' feathers. I wasn't out to challenge anyone's views or even disrespect them. Just wanted to state my own views and why I held them, but the best part of all this is that I've learned a lot about why people feel so strongly about wine. In all truth, Wine vs. Beer is a bit insulting and deep down, a misnomer, heh.

landhoney, I definitely respect your views and they make sense; I find it particularly interesting that you "specialize" in the styles of beer that are probably most similar to wine. Very cool.

Evan! same with you. Great arguments and well-stated. I noticed that you mention environment and terroir. Doesn't that mean the same argument could be applied to a lot of Belgian beers, for which terroir constitutes a great deal of their characteristics? I know that this has been mentioned in BLAM and Wild Brews, and I definitely agree. There's a reason homebrewers have to buy so many ingredients and rig things at home to replicate what is a natural state of a brewery overseas. I understand those beers are made with local ingredients, in unique local structures by local people - this, of course, makes them one of the most unique creations in the world of beer. Either way, I see this common point as a bridge between beer and wine, which helps my understanding of this conversation in general.

It's like anything, without a broadened experience one can never learn to appreciate the differences and complexities of a food or beverage. You gauge it all on your experience.

Although my experience with Wine is much narrower than some and I cannot pick up on some of the subtleties that someone with much more experience than myself would, I can still differentiate for myself what I feel is a good Wine vs. a crap Wine. At some point in time the band of my experience may move out to exclude ones that at some point I felt were good. This has certainly been the case for me in both Beer and Wine.

As for Terroir and Beer, I really don't think this has hit us yet because it is all inclusive meaning that all the ingredients are local. The trend with growing hops in the backyard is a start for this. Actually it is a reversion to how things were done traditionally and not a new concept, it's just trendy. For the most part your ingredients did not travel 1,000 miles from all directions to be assembled in one location. It is a much easier concept with Wine as it is locally grown grapes and water.



...actually it kind of funny because I was thinking about how the hops being grown in various regions is going to change things. And it will change the hops. Genetics will only carry you so far, but it is the combination of genetics, climate, soil, etc that will inevitably lead to differences (possibly great differences) in the Hop varieties I grow out back and those grown say in the Yakima Valley, or in Hallertau even if I get the Rhizomes from there. I had a first hand experience with this last year. My neighbor grew Vidalia Onions and I grew Walla Walla Sweet Onions. I can tell you they were light years apart in sweetness. His 'Vidalia' (no discredit to him, he is a much more experienced gardener than I am) were hot and lacked sweetness. This is in part culture, but very much so what needs to be understood is that the low Sulphur content in Vidalia, GA is greatly responsible for creating the Vidalia Onion's reputation.

TwoHeadsBrewing said:

If you're saying "better" is subjective and "complex" is objective, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. Complex is a completely subjective term, just like "better" or "best" is. Now, for the amount of flavors in each beverage, this again is subjective; it depends much on the person doing the tasting. My original point was that the different styles of beer were easier to differentiate than the different types of wine for most people.

Click to expand...

Completely Subjective?
Bud vs. Rochefort 8 - whch is more complex? Objectively you'd have to say the Roch, you're going to get more unique flavors from it than a Budweiser.
Suppose someone not versed in wine tastes a bottle of 1982 Latour, they say it tastes like wine. Then they go through a wine appreciation class for three months of tasting, learning,etc. Now they taste cherry, currant, vanilla, etc. etc. Were those flavors/complexity there before, of course its the same bottle of wine. The fact that they didn't pick up on them the first time doesn't change the fact that they are there. I may taste it as cherry and you as currant, but those flavors are still 'objectively' there.

landhoney said:

Completely Subjective?
Bud vs. Rochefort 8 - whch is more complex? Objectively you'd have to say the Roch, you're going to get more unique flavors from it than a Budweiser.
Suppose someone not versed in wine tastes a bottle of 1982 Latour, they say it tastes like wine. Then they go through a wine appreciation class for three months of tasting, learning,etc. Now they taste cherry, currant, vanilla, etc. etc. Were those flavors/complexity there before, of course its the same bottle of wine. The fact that they didn't pick up on them the first time doesn't change the fact that they are there. I may taste it as cherry and you as currant, but those flavors are still 'objectively' there.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the flavors are objectively there, but there is certainly a modicum of subjectivity involved, as no amount of classes or "palate-training" can turn someone with genetically pedestrian taste buds into a "supertaster".

When I sample beer, I try to pick out individual flavors. I'll think I've done a good job, then I'll go read a review on beer advocate. What I perceived as malty, with hop aroma and some fruitniness will be described by someone else as having cherry, date, tobacco flavors, etc... It's interesting how one person can pick up on so much more than another, and I would bet the same is true with wine.

I never cared for wine, but now that I've started brewing and tasting aged beers with alot of wine characteristics I could see myself liking it. I refuse to buy/drink wine now for the simple fact that I would rather keep spending large amounts of money on high-end beers. It's a PITA to decide what beers to buy at a specialty beer store adding wine (where wide varieties are more readily availbable) to the equation would be too much for me.

Evan! said:

as no amount of classes or "palate-training" can turn someone with genetically pedestrian taste buds into a "supertaster".

Click to expand...

My new favorite insult to throw: "Your taste buds are very pedestrian" :fro:

EAC enough for you guys?

landhoney said:

My new favorite insult to throw: "Your taste buds are very pedestrian" :fro:

EAC enough for you guys?

Click to expand...

Not pedestrian, plebian. Plebian adds a little bit more snobbishness to the insult. Ya can't get too fancy though. You want the person to know they've been insulted.

I can't drink wine by itself. I have to be eating something with it.

Beer on the other hand....great by itself and great with food.

I started taking a wine making class at my local community college just to broaden my view of fermentation a few months back. Let me first say I too believe beer is way better than wine but I didn't take this bias to the class, I only went because hey I like to be well rounded. Holy crap wine people can be total snobs. We got into hour long discussions about some grape variety that has subtle differentiations in taste depending on what sort of dinosaur sh!@ on the soil 5 million years ago. I couldn't believe the things I heard people say they could taste in the wines they had drank, I'm pretty sure wine drinkers start to make this stuff up. After 3 classes I promptly got a refund on the class and used the money to buy my first keg setup. I guess the short of it is, beer has more up from differences and it's so easy to make changes that you notice. Beer is far more complex than wine in my opinion, but try telling that to a wine snob.