Not many posts lately - there are quite a few in the pipeline. Blame beer and gin.
We had tentatively planned a run up to Traverse City this week but that is 99% not happening, nothing's booked so you know, but hey...maybe...
In two weeks, however, we are 100% booked on hitting up New Orleans. We've never been, so it will be quite the scene.
We'll be hitting a number of the big name institutions - photos of food and beverages will be posted sporadically the week of July 11.
Showing posts with label site news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label site news. Show all posts
Monday, June 28, 2010
Tuesday, June 01, 2010
Tweet and Taste!
Check out the preview video:
Next week - Tweet and Taste Michigan. Monday, June 7 at 7 pm CST....Get onto Twitter and search #ttmi. If you have any comments make sure to toss #ttmi in there as well.
I haven't tried this in real time, but messing around with TweetChat has been quite enjoyable. I'm going to try it out - basically you just punch in the hashtag you want to follow (remember: #ttmi) and it refreshes automatically all posts AND adds the tag to all of your posts (one of my biggest problems was forgetting the tag).
Should be a good time - check it out on June 7th!
Next week - Tweet and Taste Michigan. Monday, June 7 at 7 pm CST....Get onto Twitter and search #ttmi. If you have any comments make sure to toss #ttmi in there as well.
I haven't tried this in real time, but messing around with TweetChat has been quite enjoyable. I'm going to try it out - basically you just punch in the hashtag you want to follow (remember: #ttmi) and it refreshes automatically all posts AND adds the tag to all of your posts (one of my biggest problems was forgetting the tag).
Should be a good time - check it out on June 7th!
Friday, January 22, 2010
And now...
The big slow down.
The past few days I've posted quite a bit - more than I had planned.
The "blind reviews" weren't supposed to be up for a while, but I have to admit I'm excited about it. I burnt off a few reviews (and even deleted a few that weren't tasted blind - I have extras of those wines and they'll be put to the test in time).
I have a few more in the can that shocked even me - a highly rated California Cab gets a shrug, a Michigan Pinot Noir gets over 90, and will my love for L Mawby or Two Lads hold up when tasted blind?
Time will tell. Stay tuned.
The past few days I've posted quite a bit - more than I had planned.
The "blind reviews" weren't supposed to be up for a while, but I have to admit I'm excited about it. I burnt off a few reviews (and even deleted a few that weren't tasted blind - I have extras of those wines and they'll be put to the test in time).
I have a few more in the can that shocked even me - a highly rated California Cab gets a shrug, a Michigan Pinot Noir gets over 90, and will my love for L Mawby or Two Lads hold up when tasted blind?
Time will tell. Stay tuned.
The blind era
I have made every effort to not let my biases creep into my reviews, but it's inevitable. Am I being too easy on the $5 wine? Too hard on the $50 bottle? Vice versa? I don't mean to, but I probably am.
Therefore it is, with pleasure, that I announce all wine will be tasted blind from here on out.
The way it works is simple - I will give Fran a vague suggestion for selecting a wine off the rack. She will open it and either pour the bottle into a carafe or mask it in some way. I will not know what I'm drinking until the review and score are finalized.
The selection process will be noted in each review - I may suggest a "California Cab" or a "Pinot Noir from anywhere" or maybe I'll ask for "something bubbly" - my suggestions are just that, she can take or leave them. Price will not play a factor, so I won't know if it's a $5 or $50 wine.
If you want to be insufferably particular, you can say I should call this "semi-blind" since I have an idea of what we own, but trust me - my memory isn't that hot.
Situations do arise when I may not be able to do it this way - I will make this clear in the review and most likely add an asterisk to the score.
Therefore it is, with pleasure, that I announce all wine will be tasted blind from here on out.
The way it works is simple - I will give Fran a vague suggestion for selecting a wine off the rack. She will open it and either pour the bottle into a carafe or mask it in some way. I will not know what I'm drinking until the review and score are finalized.
The selection process will be noted in each review - I may suggest a "California Cab" or a "Pinot Noir from anywhere" or maybe I'll ask for "something bubbly" - my suggestions are just that, she can take or leave them. Price will not play a factor, so I won't know if it's a $5 or $50 wine.
If you want to be insufferably particular, you can say I should call this "semi-blind" since I have an idea of what we own, but trust me - my memory isn't that hot.
Situations do arise when I may not be able to do it this way - I will make this clear in the review and most likely add an asterisk to the score.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
New things!
Things have gotten off topic a bit here, so let's get back on track....
I spoke of (subtle) changes before, here are a few of note:
1) All posts are categorized with an array of tags - country/state/region, varietal, and, if it's logical, producer.
2) Effective immediately, the ten point system is dead. I'm selling out and going with the 100 point scale that's basically standard in the wine world. Details on that can be found here.
3) Effective immediately, the official "value" designation is dead. I will comment on the wine's relative value, but the cost of a wine will not have any effect on its rating.
4) Prices given will only reflect approximate retail cost...referring to sales and clearance deals is pointless, isn't it? I know I can come off a little proactive, and for that I'm sorry.
5) I'm going to try to tweet interesting wine related links with a greater deal of frequency - check it out over here.
6) Do you have any suggestions? Site related? Wineries to hit up (within, let's say, eight hours of Chicago)? Let me know.
7) I'm still with Coco.
I spoke of (subtle) changes before, here are a few of note:
1) All posts are categorized with an array of tags - country/state/region, varietal, and, if it's logical, producer.
2) Effective immediately, the ten point system is dead. I'm selling out and going with the 100 point scale that's basically standard in the wine world. Details on that can be found here.
3) Effective immediately, the official "value" designation is dead. I will comment on the wine's relative value, but the cost of a wine will not have any effect on its rating.
4) Prices given will only reflect approximate retail cost...referring to sales and clearance deals is pointless, isn't it? I know I can come off a little proactive, and for that I'm sorry.
5) I'm going to try to tweet interesting wine related links with a greater deal of frequency - check it out over here.
6) Do you have any suggestions? Site related? Wineries to hit up (within, let's say, eight hours of Chicago)? Let me know.
7) I'm still with Coco.
Friday, January 08, 2010
Wind of change
Over the coming weeks and months there will be some (most likely subtle) changes here at The Wineauxs.
Every post is now labelled and I'll be working on correcting some typographicl errors (ha!), toning down some silliness while increasing some goofiness. There's going to be a general shift starting in a few months - fewer posts of better wines, so the rating system will probably be reevaluated as well. I also intend to tell Mr. Gorbachev to tear down this wall.
Monday, February 09, 2009
Post #499
The next post is #500 – which I find to be pretty insane.
We've had hits from all fifty states plus DC.
We've received hits from, at last count, 53 countries, including some interesting ones: Macau, Samoa, Lebanon, Oman, Singapore, among others. I hope our Singapore visitor didn't get caned.
We've received some nice comments, some pissed off people calling us snobs, some pissed off snobs calling us idiots, some pleasant (and not so pleasant) comments from winemakers, and some excellent recommendations from people about places to visit or bottles to try.
The future will bring more of the same, so I invite you to keep reading. We'll be taking an array of local trips in the coming months to try some wineries throughout the Midwest (suggestions welcome, so please drop a line) and hope to work our way to California at some point.
We've had hits from all fifty states plus DC.
We've received hits from, at last count, 53 countries, including some interesting ones: Macau, Samoa, Lebanon, Oman, Singapore, among others. I hope our Singapore visitor didn't get caned.
We've received some nice comments, some pissed off people calling us snobs, some pissed off snobs calling us idiots, some pleasant (and not so pleasant) comments from winemakers, and some excellent recommendations from people about places to visit or bottles to try.
The future will bring more of the same, so I invite you to keep reading. We'll be taking an array of local trips in the coming months to try some wineries throughout the Midwest (suggestions welcome, so please drop a line) and hope to work our way to California at some point.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
New rating system
I've updated some old wines, and new reviews from here on out will have the same system:
Wine: The rating of the wine, overall. Flavor profile, complexity, etc. This will be the same as it's been - see the side bar for descriptions of each number.
Value: Yes / Pass / No
The "Value" replaces the old "QPR" system which I think was too difficult to gauge in the current system - all that really needs to be answered is: "Is this 'worth' the asking price?"
"Yes" and "No" are straightforward - "Pass" means if there's something better easily accessible then skip it, but if you're at a store with a lousy selection and can't/don't feel like driving somewhere else, then it's fine.
Wine: The rating of the wine, overall. Flavor profile, complexity, etc. This will be the same as it's been - see the side bar for descriptions of each number.
Value: Yes / Pass / No
The "Value" replaces the old "QPR" system which I think was too difficult to gauge in the current system - all that really needs to be answered is: "Is this 'worth' the asking price?"
"Yes" and "No" are straightforward - "Pass" means if there's something better easily accessible then skip it, but if you're at a store with a lousy selection and can't/don't feel like driving somewhere else, then it's fine.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
New feature (of sorts) - Ratings
A lot of sites and publications assign points or grades which is something we've avoided. The more I think about it, the more I think a numbering system will be useful, if for nothing else than my own wine memory.
Actually - make that two numbering systems.
The first will be the basic rating - with a range from 1-10 (half points allowed). The rating is an evaluation of the wine as it stands with various factors in mind, but completely unconcerned with price. The number is totally subjective to our palates so they are to be taken with a grain of salt.
The second will be a QPR rating - this system was abandoned on 12/31/08, so posts between now and then will have "Quality Price Ratio." If we grab a $5 wine and we think it's a seven, that's impressive and the QPR number will be rather high, a $25 bottle that's seven will have a low QPR.
The numbers meanings are as follows:
10 - among the best wines (or deals) we've had.
9 - fantastic.
8 - excellent, I'd buy it again.
7 - I'll call this one "damn good."
6 - good, this is by no means a bad wine – a 6 would be a recommendation assuming the QPR is strong – but these typically would be considered to be just a bit too simple for nerdy study like this.
5 - fine, but completely boring.
4 - drinkable, but there are problems.
3 - there may be some redeeming value here but I'm not convinced.
2 - downright unpleasant.
1 - yikes.
Actually - make that two numbering systems.
The first will be the basic rating - with a range from 1-10 (half points allowed). The rating is an evaluation of the wine as it stands with various factors in mind, but completely unconcerned with price. The number is totally subjective to our palates so they are to be taken with a grain of salt.
The second will be a QPR rating - this system was abandoned on 12/31/08, so posts between now and then will have "Quality Price Ratio." If we grab a $5 wine and we think it's a seven, that's impressive and the QPR number will be rather high, a $25 bottle that's seven will have a low QPR.
The numbers meanings are as follows:
10 - among the best wines (or deals) we've had.
9 - fantastic.
8 - excellent, I'd buy it again.
7 - I'll call this one "damn good."
6 - good, this is by no means a bad wine – a 6 would be a recommendation assuming the QPR is strong – but these typically would be considered to be just a bit too simple for nerdy study like this.
5 - fine, but completely boring.
4 - drinkable, but there are problems.
3 - there may be some redeeming value here but I'm not convinced.
2 - downright unpleasant.
1 - yikes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
