Comments on: Who are you calling dumb?

by: Austin

Mon, 11 Jun 2007 21:20:49 +0000

Tom,
It has been my experience that some of the “dumb” wines you have described can reawaken over time. This muted-ness may sometimes simply be a phase in the evolution of the wine. Thus the brave soul with a case of the dormant wine may be well-advised to cellar the wine for another year or two and try it again. Like a caterpillar, it may simply have taken some time in a crysalis to become an even more attractive butterfly.

by: Tom C

Tue, 03 Apr 2007 21:13:32 +0000

Garry-

Great question, but kind of hard to answer…for me much of it is simply intuition, but the thing that helps me most is TEXTURE & COLOR…if a wine is dumb, but still chewey, glycerin-y, darker in color, and “weighty”, regardless of how old the wine is, I’m guessing that the wine is truly dumb.

If however the wine is thin, faded, etc. there is a better chance than not that the wine is shot

But, I’ve been wrong both ways - in the end, it’s an educated guess, but the more educated (read “experienced”) you are, the better you “guess”

TOM CIOCCO

by: Garry

Tue, 03 Apr 2007 04:30:29 +0000

How do you tell the difference between a wine that is going through a ‘dumb’ stage and those many wines, whose weekest point- the cork, has failed, and be come ‘flat’.

Bring on the screw caps revolution!

by: Tom C

Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:48:32 +0000

Andre-

Hard to describe to someone else what muted fruit vs. devoid of fruit completely in the first place…the way that it shakes out for me is dumb or muted wines give flashes of nice fruit or show lovely aromas at very low to nearly undetectable levels - sort of like a very nice but quickly fleeting sensation.

In my opinion, austerity and fruitlessness are not necessarily connected. Also, I would use the descriptor “austere” mostly in terms of the palate, while at least in my experience “mute” or “dumb” usually refers to the nose.

TOM CIOCCO

by: Andre

Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:00:10 +0000

Hey Tom,
Nice article, as always. I’ve experienced this dummy phase most with malbec, most recently the 2004 Achaval Ferrer Quimera and the 2005 Achaval Ferrer Malbec. These wines showed very muted fruit with great structure and texture, accompanied by graphite and cedar notes. The hint of fruit presented just seemed odd considering all the other characteristics that were just right. Actually, my first ever malbec, the 2004 Obra Prima, was the same way. I’ve chalked this observed tightness up to immaturity, rather than varietal character, though I’m no expert.

One thing that does puzzle me is: how do you know when they’re muted as opposed to just not there. As above, I’d assumed that a developing wine is well structured, showing good tannin and acidity, yet little of the expected primary varietal character. On the other hand a fatter, smoother, wine, showing the same tightness, would just be past its prime or plain inexpressive. Am I right in my understanding of a “muted” wine.

Also, would “austere” be a descriptor of a muted wine. Should such character be expected to fade as the wine matures or does this characterize the latter wine described above, less generous?

Thanks in advance!