I frequently tell people to record their tasting notes, to experience how wines change as they age. It's the best tutorial on wine aging that we can give ourselves.
Today I opened a bottle of a Barbera kit I started in August 2021, two years ago. I looked at my notes and realized I have not recorded tasting notes in almost 1.5 years, so I tasted un-aerated and aerated samples.
Why both? Because aeration can make a tremendous difference. A few years back I poured samples of a wine for my sister-in-law. She didn't believe both glasses were the same wine, they were so distinctly different.
Following are my tasting notes on this wine.
At Bottling (01/17/2022)
Saved a glass before adding glycerin, to compare against the modified wine. Base wine is a bit fruity with a sour aftertaste — this is not bad, I like it. This will be a good wine for hearty foods. At the end there was a couple oz of wine among the cubes, this was mixed with an equal part of modified wine. The oak taste is a bit unpleasant, especially tasted along side the base and modified wines. This is good evidence that stirring during bulk aging homogenizes the wine.
01/21/2022
I poured 2 glasses, one plain and one using an aerating pouring spout. Both glasses have a nice, fruity aroma. I didn’t detect much difference.
Non-Aerated: initial taste is fruity with a sour finish on the back of the tongue. Oddly enough, it’s pleasant.
Aerated: This wine doesn’t have a lot of tannin to soften, but the fruit is enhanced and the sour taste is softened. To serve this wine, I will use the aerator.
No doubt, this wine is young and will improve with age, but it’s very drinkable now. The hard part will be not touching it, as it’s nice now.
03/04/2022
As with the first tasting, I poured 2 glasses, one un-aerated and one aerated. Unless otherwise noted, this will be my tasting SOP. As with the last tasting, both have a fruity aroma, and I don’t detect any significant difference between them.
Non-Aerated: Fruity up front, and the sour finish is diminished.
Aerated: A bit more fruity up front, even less sour finish than the non-aerated. This wine has a stiffer, heavier spine than I expected. To explain — I expected a quick drinker, fruity and non-tannic, while having a decent body. While it is a quicker drinking wine, it’s got more depth than I expected. I suspect the follow-on tastings will be surprising.
Given when I bottled it, it may have been in bottle shock the last time. This is not the same wine, 6 weeks later.
03/24/2022
Note: I do not look at previous notes before recording impressions, to keep this as honest as feasible.
Non-Aerated: Initial taste is fruity but not sweet. While some fruity wines give an impression of sugar, this one does not — it tastes like what I expect Barbera grapes taste like. There is still a pleasant hit of sourness in the aftertaste.
Aerated: Not as fruity as the non-aerated, and there’s definitely some tannin there, but it tastes like it’s the backbone of the wine, a stiffener, not an up-front flavoring. The sour aftertaste is not as strong as the non-aerated.
08/14/2023
Seventeen months have passed since the last recorded tasting, I’m down to 7 bottles of this wine.
Non-Aerated: The nose is muted as is the flavor. It’s got fruit, but honestly it’s disappointing for a 2 year old wine. Granted, it’s a concentrate-only wine with no skin packs, but I’m not impressed.
Aerated: Once again, aeration proves its value! This really opens the wine up. The nose is a little stronger, but it’s still not all that strong.
However, the aerated wine is fruitier, with a nice backbone of tannin keeping the fruit from being overpowering. It’s got a bit of a sour aftertaste, but at this point it’s more of an accent, and not a flaw. I’m not going to conserve my remaining bottles, but I will miss it when it’s gone.
Today I opened a bottle of a Barbera kit I started in August 2021, two years ago. I looked at my notes and realized I have not recorded tasting notes in almost 1.5 years, so I tasted un-aerated and aerated samples.
Why both? Because aeration can make a tremendous difference. A few years back I poured samples of a wine for my sister-in-law. She didn't believe both glasses were the same wine, they were so distinctly different.
Following are my tasting notes on this wine.
At Bottling (01/17/2022)
Saved a glass before adding glycerin, to compare against the modified wine. Base wine is a bit fruity with a sour aftertaste — this is not bad, I like it. This will be a good wine for hearty foods. At the end there was a couple oz of wine among the cubes, this was mixed with an equal part of modified wine. The oak taste is a bit unpleasant, especially tasted along side the base and modified wines. This is good evidence that stirring during bulk aging homogenizes the wine.
01/21/2022
I poured 2 glasses, one plain and one using an aerating pouring spout. Both glasses have a nice, fruity aroma. I didn’t detect much difference.
Non-Aerated: initial taste is fruity with a sour finish on the back of the tongue. Oddly enough, it’s pleasant.
Aerated: This wine doesn’t have a lot of tannin to soften, but the fruit is enhanced and the sour taste is softened. To serve this wine, I will use the aerator.
No doubt, this wine is young and will improve with age, but it’s very drinkable now. The hard part will be not touching it, as it’s nice now.
03/04/2022
As with the first tasting, I poured 2 glasses, one un-aerated and one aerated. Unless otherwise noted, this will be my tasting SOP. As with the last tasting, both have a fruity aroma, and I don’t detect any significant difference between them.
Non-Aerated: Fruity up front, and the sour finish is diminished.
Aerated: A bit more fruity up front, even less sour finish than the non-aerated. This wine has a stiffer, heavier spine than I expected. To explain — I expected a quick drinker, fruity and non-tannic, while having a decent body. While it is a quicker drinking wine, it’s got more depth than I expected. I suspect the follow-on tastings will be surprising.
Given when I bottled it, it may have been in bottle shock the last time. This is not the same wine, 6 weeks later.
03/24/2022
Note: I do not look at previous notes before recording impressions, to keep this as honest as feasible.
Non-Aerated: Initial taste is fruity but not sweet. While some fruity wines give an impression of sugar, this one does not — it tastes like what I expect Barbera grapes taste like. There is still a pleasant hit of sourness in the aftertaste.
Aerated: Not as fruity as the non-aerated, and there’s definitely some tannin there, but it tastes like it’s the backbone of the wine, a stiffener, not an up-front flavoring. The sour aftertaste is not as strong as the non-aerated.
08/14/2023
Seventeen months have passed since the last recorded tasting, I’m down to 7 bottles of this wine.
Non-Aerated: The nose is muted as is the flavor. It’s got fruit, but honestly it’s disappointing for a 2 year old wine. Granted, it’s a concentrate-only wine with no skin packs, but I’m not impressed.
Aerated: Once again, aeration proves its value! This really opens the wine up. The nose is a little stronger, but it’s still not all that strong.
However, the aerated wine is fruitier, with a nice backbone of tannin keeping the fruit from being overpowering. It’s got a bit of a sour aftertaste, but at this point it’s more of an accent, and not a flaw. I’m not going to conserve my remaining bottles, but I will miss it when it’s gone.
