Home bar

I bought another original wine cooler. Such a transparent cork with a liquid inside is put into the freezer before freezing and turns into an "icicle" cork





The wine, plugged with such a cork, becomes ideally chilled in a few minutes.

[Larissa]

Larissa, witty contraption
and where is it for sale?

I bought on Amazon, Tanya.

And this is considered a classic set for a home bar:

I only have a 12 point, a flaw ...

I only have a 12 point, a flaw ...

And I have 11 and in several copies

[in the shop:]

Today I read a useful article that explains how to distinguish natural from fake wine. I want to share.
What to look for first in the shop:
* Obviously, but let's clarify: the wines in the boxes are of low quality. Normal wine is never stored in this form.
* The sugar content in wine should be as follows: in dry wines - up to 4 g / l; in semi-dry - up to 18 g / l; in semi-sweet - up to 45 g / l, in sweet - at least 45 g / l. If there is more sugar and the label does not say that the wine is fortified, then it was added artificially.
* If salicylic acid is present in the wine, it means that the wine was made in violation of the technology. The scary ingredient E220 (sulfur dioxide) will be present in any wine, as it is a natural by-product of fermentation.
* Date of manufacture must be stamped separately from the main information on the label. All fonts must be clear, without typos, blurring, printing defects. The inscription on the label must correspond to the inscription on the cork.
* Vintage (which means, infused in oak barrels) powder wine does not exist. As well as artificial dry. This is because it is cheaper and easier to make a sweet concentrate, roughly similar to the taste of wine.
* If you are a connoisseur of a certain brand of wine, then you should be alarmed by changing the original bottle (asymmetric, branded) to a regular one.
And at home:
* When you add a pinch of regular baking soda, natural wine will change color due to reaction with grape starch. The synthetic will remain the same.
* When a few drops of glycerin are added to natural wine, it will sink to the bottom and will not change its color. If the glycerin changes color to yellow or red, then this is powdered wine.
* When shaking a bottle in a good drink, the foam will collect in the center and subside quickly enough. In a low quality product, foam will collect around the edges and slowly settle.
* Put a drop of wine on a regular piece of chalk. If the stain lightens after drying, the wine is natural. If the stain has changed color, it contains dyes.

[dopleta]

dopleta, thanks for the information.

[dopleta]

dopleta, Larissa, can you share a link? Very interesting thing

[Larissa]

Larissa!

The scary ingredient E220 (sulfur dioxide) will be present in any wine, as it is a natural by-product of fermentation.

I don't know who wrote all these recommendations, but after this nonsense, I don't want to read the rest of the nonsense.
Sulfur dioxide is not a fermentation product; it is specially added as a preservative.

It seems that a person who was very far from wine was writing. And this sticks out on many points.
Wine is not stored in boxes, it is poured and sold in them. It is, of course, not of the highest quality, but it may well be normal.
It seems that someone pulled something from the Internet, edited it not very competently and wrote "their recommendations".
I do not at all consider myself a master on the issue of wines, but, to be honest, this set of tips just jars.

For those who are interested in this question, it is much more useful to look for something more adequate on the net.

Sorry, if suddenly my post seems harsh, I didn't want to offend anyone, I just wanted to save people from taking these nonsense on faith.

[Igrig]

IgrigYou absolutely did not offend anyone, because, for example, it was quite enough for me to learn from the article that this additive is harmless, and this is the main thing for me. And about cardboard boxes, excuse me, I disagree, knowing from professional sommeliers that there is no good wine in them and cannot be by definition. What else do you disagree with? Share, we need to know the truth! For me, the main value of the article is that it is possible to identify a fake at home using simple methods. Or do you think they are wrong?

would you like to share a link?

GruSha, Gulsine, I will share, just what are you talking about?

[not]

It seems that someone pulled something from the Internet, edited it not very competently and wrote "their recommendations".

Wrote correctly - plausible, let's say, but from widespread information. Not really, apparently, going into, whether it is reliable or "the myth sits on the myth ...".

Igor to

people not took this nonsense on faith.

it is necessary not to stigmatize information, but to bring reliable information with explanations. Otherwise it DOESN'T WORK!

To

look for something more adequate on the net.

,
you need to have a decent base on this issue. Otherwise, it is IMPOSSIBLE to separate the grain from the chaff in the modern information field.
For example, having an idea of ​​the biology of microorganisms in general and biochemistry in particular, but not knowing the information on wine-making technologies, I do not remember offhand microorganisms that produce exactly sulfuric anhydride. And, already half an hour shy away from and-no, I find about yeast only the phrase quoted many times

Yeast releases a small amount of sulfites during fermentation, so even biodynamic wines that are so popular contain sulfites

or

Interestingly, sulfur dioxide itself is contained in any wine, even if it was not specially added. This is because SO₂ is a natural by-product of fermentation. During the production process, yeast produces about 10 mg of sulfur dioxide per liter.

.
But so far, I have not found reliable (for my preconceived taste) information (the prescribed metabolic pathway for the formation of sulfur dioxide by yeast or at least the accompanying microflora + quantitative studies). In an amicable way, here you need to raise a decent layer of microbiological, and not biochemical, information in order to get to the bottom of the truth. And know where to look! Who needs it in the internet?

Larissa, about sulfur dioxide, of course, is distorted. Living organisms produce a lot of various compounds that we use, for example, as medicines, but which can also be safely poisoned. A question of quantity, excuse me for the banality ... Another thing, from a practical point of view, is that the WHO does not yet object to a certain content of sulfites in wine, considering such a quantity to be safe for health. So, focusing on the WHO standards, you can sleep drink wine calmly if there are no allergic reactions to SO₂... At least until other information is received from WHO.

[GruSha]

GruSha, Gulsine, I will share, just what are you talking about?

[Elena]

it is necessary not to stigmatize information, but to bring reliable information with explanations. Otherwise it DOESN'T WORK!

Elena!
You see, with this phrase you are urging me to take the path of the author of "recommendations". Pull information from the network and say: "Believe !!!"
The fact is that I do not have professional skills in this area, I am not an expert in it. But, for example, it seemed to me that you are a specialist in the field of microbiology (or something similar). Therefore, I believe that it will be most productive if everyone makes a choice: either to believe the "recommendations", or to find the truth himself.
Once upon a time, I worked as Santa Claus for many years! And the experience gained in small mini-performances with children suggests that a person cannot be made laugh if he does not want it!
So it is here - it is impossible to convince anyone! Everyone can be convinced of this if they watch all kinds of talk shows!
As for the dioxide, I am very far from microbiology, and I do not know if the dioxide is formed during fermentation. But I know for sure that vineyards are treated against diseases and pests with various sulfur-based preparations. The remains of which are on the bunches and end up in the wine, relatively speaking, "naturally". Not to mention the fact that the dioxide is added to the wine specifically for preservation ... It is not for nothing that E220 is called ADDITIVE!

you need to have a decent base on this issue

Absolutely agree.

it was enough to learn from the article that this additive is harmless, and this is the main thing for me. And about cardboard boxes, excuse me, I disagree,

Larissa!
This additive is harmless in the amounts allowed in wine. In fact, it is very, very toxic.
I wrote the following about wine in cardboard bags: "It is, of course, not of the highest quality, but it may well be normal."That is, I did not claim that the wine is exquisite, good. It is most likely not a single-varietal wine, but it may well be prepared in the traditional way, but, of course, it is not aged in barrels. The simplest thing. on the menu, in addition to bottle wines, there is also draft wine, which is always cheaper, and I was never disappointed if I took it for dinner. It is usually called that: table wine. And, by the way, there are many ordinary wines in stores, which they have the category of canteens, in contrast to different categories: regional, DO, IGP, DOC and so on ... Naturally they are cheaper, but for good food, if it is not exquisite, they are quite suitable. Vogotten Field and Esteban Martin: the usual price is about 700 rubles, but due to constant discounts, they are almost always sold for 350 rubles. There is no need to expect a revelation from them, but they are not bad for dinner. But not for 700 rubles!

A few words about traffic jams. Natural cork is not quite an ideal option, you may encounter a defective cork and the wine will be spoiled. This is a very, very rare occurrence, but I came across it once. Also, a bad cork can crumble into small pieces and fall into the bottle ...
Do not be afraid of plastic corks, for example, I do not see a difference in taste, but no one will most likely see it, maybe only a sommelier with many years of experience - but are there many of them among us?
Do not be afraid of screw caps, they have better barrier properties than natural cork.

Yes, I don’t buy wine in packages, I don’t buy Russian wine, I have never bought and will not buy Abkhazian wine.
The packages are not so "refined", the Russian one, what I tried - I don't like it, or the price is too high, despite the fact that the quality can vary in the widest range, and besides, many manufacturers make it from bulk (wine purchased abroad in cisterns not of the highest quality - up to 40% -50 %% of the production volume). There is no need to talk about Abkhazia - after the war there are practically no vineyards left, wine is made from wine materials from Moldova.
Therefore, I cannot say anything about advice on how to define natural wine or "powder" (although, as far as I know, wine is not made from powder - this is a conventional designation of wine that is made in an unconventional way, for example, from grape cake, poured with water and other further additives.) Theoretically, wine can be made from powder, but this can no longer be called wine unambiguously.
Abroad in Spain, France, Italy in the store, you can safely take wine costing from 6-7 euros - it will not disappoint at all, more expensive than 10 euros the wine will already be very good,> 20 euros - excellent., But the upper price limits for wonderful wines simply no!!!

For example, I myself would drink brunello or Planeta wine every day, but, alas, because of our prices, I can only allow this in Italy ...

All this is my personal opinion and I do not pretend to be the ultimate truth. But I have the right to have it!

[GruSha]

GruSha, Gulsine, I bought this ice plug for the Amer. Amazon. Then it cost $ 12. I look, now it's 22

🔗

! English is also available, price from 13 to 25 pounds

🔗

, but delivery is, in my opinion, too expensive.

You see, with this phrase you are urging me to take the path of the author of "recommendations". Pull information from the network and say: "Believe !!!"

Well, that's really not close!
I urge to bring verifiable information that you personally believe is correct. And verifiability is easy to organize - attach a link to the source to the information. Whoever is interested in infa will not be able to search for it again in the Internet, but go and, assessing the quality of the source, take note of it or forget it. And so you rejected the repost, but did not give any arguments!
Moreover, Larisa invited you to constructive dialogue:

What else do you disagree with? Share, we need to know the truth!

[Elena]

Elena!
A small example. There is a widespread belief: "To get rid of the bitterness in eggplants, you need to peel them."
If I give links to this phrase, then any person, going to these links, will simply read that it is necessary to peel the eggplant in order to remove the bitterness. Is he the one to check the truth of my opinion?
I have lived in this world for quite a few years, my wife and I just love eggplants. In absolutely all forms. I will say quite frankly that for many decades that we have been cooking eggplants, we have almost never met bitter varieties. We never peeled them ...
Everything seems to be normal with our taste. Moreover, some say that almost all the bitterness is in the skin, others say that the chopped should be soaked, others say that they start to taste bitter if they are overripe and turn yellow. Maybe once in Soviet times, eggplants were bitter, but even in Soviet times, we did not peel them and I do not remember the bitterness. Most likely, this is where the tips for peeling eggplant come from ...

Therefore, a counter question, do you agree that sulfur dioxide is an ADDITIVE, which is specially added (sorry for the tautology) to the wine material? Who do you believe, those two sources that talk about dioxide as a natural fermentation product, or those sources that talk about artificial introduction into wine for preservation?
Here I am about it! It is a matter of faith in one source or another.
Frankly, in order to dig up more or less reliable links, you need to shovel a huge amount of information. I spend quite a lot of time on various forums (not professional sommeliers, of course) where wines are discussed. Of course, I myself follow the links, study the information. But to restore all the information in order to substantiate in detail each point refuting the "recommendations" is too labor-intensive pleasure.
Moreover, I pointed out the obvious nonsense of some advice, after which anyone can conclude whether it is worth wasting time and reading further. Honestly, I did not delve further into the theses about the correct grading of wines by sugar content and other points, but here's another pearl phrase: "The inscription on the label must correspond to the inscription on the cork!" At best, the name of the manufacturer can be indicated on the cork. But even such information is found in only 5% of cases. Most often the cork is without any inscriptions at all !!! And what information from the label should be present on the cork?

A constructive dialogue, undoubtedly, is present on my part, but not in the form of links, but in the fact that I expressed some of my thoughts!

[need]

Igor,

oh, we lit the flood here. Hopefully not in vain!

In the context of conducting discussions, it is worth distinguishing between information that is easily verified empirically at home (since we are at a culinary forum) and empirical (conditionally empirical - initially someone obtained it empirically, but we can neither confirm nor deny this at home).

Your eggplant example is of the first type. If they don’t bitter to me (and they don’t bitter to me, and I don’t clean them either), then why am I going to follow the links? If they are bitter to me, I will start trying ways to deal with it. I will choose the easiest one to perform. If it doesn't help, I'll go in order of complication (increasing the amount of time and other costs). The question of faith, IMHO, is not at all worth it.
It's another matter, if the question is, why is it bitter for some and not for others? This is already a conditionally empirical question. And there is room for imagination. Someone will read that it depends on the temperature conditions of growing (I come up with it on the go !!!) and calm down. Someone will start digging further and find out what exactly happens in eggplants under what conditions at the biochemical level, what substances cause bitterness, etc. The third will go in the other direction altogether - towards the individual sensitivity of the bitter taste receptors. Personally, I will check the accuracy of all versions, if suddenly this information turns out to be necessary to me for some reason.

About corks, I can add that, for example, in Australia, cork corks are not used. I will never claim that no one will ever. But we only saw plastic, and the Australians confirmed that this is the norm.

The question of sulfur dioxide as a question of faith is also not worth it for me

(ugh, again this expression. Apparently, faith in information is not peculiar to me, I check everything)

I know that it has bacteriostatic properties. I understand why it is added to wine. What is there to believe or not believe in?
The information about sulfur dioxide interested me from an academic point of view, because I don't remember this about yeast in the course of university biochemistry and biotechnology. Perhaps she was not there; it is possible - I forgot. There is no question of faith here either. If infa exists and I have it need - I'll find her. She can confirm the thesis put forward or refute it - the main thing is that it is documented.




Of course, not everyone is as scrupulous about information as I am. Of course, it is laborious to provide reliable information. But everyone decides for himself whether and how much time should be spent on this. Well, and, accordingly, if you respect the readers (I'm talking about the quality of information now), then they are to you the same way - first you work for your reputation, then your reputation works for you.
In any case, Igor, thank you for a pleasant, albeit somewhat distracted, conversation!

[Elena]

Elena!

And thank you for your understanding and respect for my opinion!

An interesting video on YouTube: Who and how evaluates the quality of wines in Russia

[Happy New Year 2020 !!!]

Happy New Year 2020 !!!
In November 2019, Roskachestvo completed the largest expert study of wine in modern Russian history. Buyers can see the results of the work that took the experts several months. 7,000 kilometers of run along the wine roads of southern Russia, 600 samples, 34 members of the jury and the Supervisory Board. The result is 350 best wines of the country in the category up to 1000 rubles.
🔗

All these estimates are very relative. For example, I do not like Riesling, but he is in the forefront.

[Tanyusha]

Tanyusha, of course, I agree, because everyone has different tastes and preferences. For example, I like Chardonnay from whites.

[Yulia]

In November 2019, Roskachestvo completed the largest expert study of wine in modern Russian history.

Yulia,
Pleased with the phrase:
"RED WINE. Among red wines, the percentage of quality samples was higher: 56.8% of samples were evaluated by experts as worthy of attention."
This means that 43.2% of wines do not deserve attention at all ...
To put it quite roughly, about half of the wines are disgusting.
Mark Twain spoke a little differently, but something draws me directly to his words: "October is one of the most dangerous months of the year for trading on the stock exchange. The rest of the dangerous months are July, January, September, April, November, May, March, June, December, August and February. "

This means that 43.2% of wines do not deserve attention at all ...
To put it quite roughly, about half of the wines are disgusting.

Apparently it is, but they wrote the truth. But a start has been made, as they say. We must somehow promote a domestic manufacturer
Moreover, the assessment was given to the wines of the middle price range, not the premium line.

[Tanyusha]

All these estimates are very relative. For example, I do not like Riesling, but he is in the forefront.

Tanyusha, there it is not about our preferences, but about the quality of the goods.