4 ms·

You're crazy. Higher altitudes and steep slopes in California work very well for Pinot Noir. Pinot planted on flatland in the valleys, however, I would indeed l

You're crazy. Higher altitudes and steep slopes in California work very well for Pinot Noir. Pinot planted on flatland in the valleys, however, I would indeed leave alone.

Mikeb85 9y ago
Maybe, can't say I've ever had a PN from California that stacks up to the WV or Burgundy though.
- boulos 9y ago
  I would encourage you to try say Littorai or another small-scale Sonoma coast producer. I also enjoy Toulouse from Anderson Valley. Both have much cooler climates than say Napa and focus on wine that is both Burgundian in style yet distinct. I certainly agree there are great wines from Willamette, but don't miss out on ours!
- greensoap 9y ago
  William Sylem from Russian River. Golden Eye from Anderson Valley. I think they both stack up very well though I will admit they are a bit less earthy than a typical Burgundy.
  - mmmpop 9y ago
    +1 for Russian River. Rodney Strong has a damn fine RR Pinot for a reasonable price.
- cschmidt 9y ago
  Merry Edwards is just as good as Oregon (which I love). Her single vineyard stuff, in particular.
ibejoeb 9y ago
Elevation and slope are indeed important, but the comment was about soil, which is an equally important component of terroir. Burgundy is the standard for Pinot Noir, and WV certainly is closer than anything California offers in those aspects. Pinot noir is really tough in general. If not for Burgundy, we probably wouldn't cultivate it, because it's really not that good elsewhere. WV is producing a pretty good product, but it still has some of that "whole fruit" element to it. Of course, to each his own. California wine makers have recognized that they're not producing something like a Burgundy wine, and they have experimented in style. I don't enjoy it, personally, but I like that people are feeling free to experiment. Some people appreciate that distinct style on its own merits. I think it'd be good on pancakes. Nothing against CA either; I really don't like any new world PN.
- tmnvix 9y ago
  > Pinot noir is really tough in general. If not for Burgundy, we probably wouldn't cultivate it, because it's really not that good elsewhere. Have you forgotten about New Zealand?
  - malchow 9y ago
    Evidence mounting that author of parent is French. ;)
  - ibejoeb 9y ago
    No, I addressed that: "Nothing against CA either; I really don't like any new world PN." Again, at this level, it's getting subjective. NZ makes some good wine. I think the PN suffers similar detriments that California wine does: too much "whole fruit" or "jammy" character, and sometimes too vegetal like "bell pepper." Some of these might be the producer's choice. Then there are things that are just errors, especially bad handling of the oak.

You're crazy. Higher altitudes and steep slopes in California work very well for Pinot Noir. Pinot planted on flatland in the valleys, however, I would indeed leave alone.

Mikeb85 9y ago

Maybe, can't say I've ever had a PN from California that stacks up to the WV or Burgundy though.

boulos 9y ago
I would encourage you to try say Littorai or another small-scale Sonoma coast producer. I also enjoy Toulouse from Anderson Valley. Both have much cooler climates than say Napa and focus on wine that is both Burgundian in style yet distinct. I certainly agree there are great wines from Willamette, but don't miss out on ours!
greensoap 9y ago
William Sylem from Russian River. Golden Eye from Anderson Valley. I think they both stack up very well though I will admit they are a bit less earthy than a typical Burgundy.
- mmmpop 9y ago
  +1 for Russian River. Rodney Strong has a damn fine RR Pinot for a reasonable price.
cschmidt 9y ago
Merry Edwards is just as good as Oregon (which I love). Her single vineyard stuff, in particular.

ibejoeb 9y ago

Elevation and slope are indeed important, but the comment was about soil, which is an equally important component of terroir. Burgundy is the standard for Pinot Noir, and WV certainly is closer than anything California offers in those aspects. Pinot noir is really tough in general. If not for Burgundy, we probably wouldn't cultivate it, because it's really not that good elsewhere. WV is producing a pretty good product, but it still has some of that "whole fruit" element to it. Of course, to each his own. California wine makers have recognized that they're not producing something like a Burgundy wine, and they have experimented in style. I don't enjoy it, personally, but I like that people are feeling free to experiment. Some people appreciate that distinct style on its own merits. I think it'd be good on pancakes. Nothing against CA either; I really don't like any new world PN.

tmnvix 9y ago
> Pinot noir is really tough in general. If not for Burgundy, we probably wouldn't cultivate it, because it's really not that good elsewhere. Have you forgotten about New Zealand?
- malchow 9y ago
  Evidence mounting that author of parent is French. ;)
- ibejoeb 9y ago
  No, I addressed that: "Nothing against CA either; I really don't like any new world PN." Again, at this level, it's getting subjective. NZ makes some good wine. I think the PN suffers similar detriments that California wine does: too much "whole fruit" or "jammy" character, and sometimes too vegetal like "bell pepper." Some of these might be the producer's choice. Then there are things that are just errors, especially bad handling of the oak.