The different grape varieties in the blend appeared to compensate for each other's shortcomings to produce a potent, well-rounded flavor. When compared with the sauces made from Pinot Noir (a wine made from just one type of grape), the Côtes du Rhône (a blend of several grapes) had a fuller, more even-keeled flavor. While both the Côtes du Rhône and Pinot Noir turned in impressive results across the board, the Côtes du Rhône was stellar. The Zinfandel tasted overcooked and jammy in the tomato sauce and turned the pan sauce bitter. The Sangiovese tasted great in the tomato sauce but made an astringent pan sauce and a cardboard-tasting stew. Based on these findings, we decided to try to find wines that would combine the most appealing qualities of the light/fruity and smooth/mellow wines, shying away from wines with an oaky influence and inexpensive jug wines.įocusing on this more narrow category-fruity/smooth/mellow-we selected four new bottles of wine: Sangiovese (a medium-bodied wine from Italy), red Zinfandel (from California), Pinot Noir (from Burgundy, France), and Côtes du Rhône (from southern France). The jug wine, meanwhile, made sauces that were overly sweet and simple. This wine is aged in oak barrels, and its resulting oak flavors did not soften as they cooked but turned bitter and harsh. The hearty Cabernet Sauvignon gave the sauces an astringent, woody bite that bullied all other flavors out of the way. The Merlot-based sauces had a somewhat overcooked, jamlike flavor, but they were also well-structured. While the sauces made with Beaujolais could be described as wimpy, this wine did contribute a refreshing fruitiness that mingled well with the other ingredients and complemented their flavors. Although none of the groups emerged as the winner from this first round of tests, what did emerge were some important attributes of good and not-so-good cooking wines. We began by cooking with a representative from each of the four categories: a light/fruity Beaujolais, a smooth/mellow Merlot, a hearty/robust Cabernet Sauvignon, and a jug of "mountain" (sometimes also labeled "hearty") burgundy. Omitting this type of wine from the testing, we began our search for the ultimate red wine for cooking. In previous tests, the test kitchen has found that these low-alcohol concoctions have little flavor, a high-pitched acidity, and an enormous amount of salt, all of which combine to produce inedible sauces. Ironically, the only type of wine not represented in these four categories is the "cooking wine" found on most supermarket shelves. With the help of local wine expert Sandy Block (who holds the title Master of Wine, an honor shared by just 18 Americans), we organized those red wines available in even a poorly stocked wine shop into four manageable categories based on flavor, body, and style: light/fruity, smooth/mellow, hearty/robust, and nondescript jug wine. To find out which red wines are good cookers (as opposed to those which are just good drinkers), We set up three tests-a quick tomato sauce, a pan sauce for steak, and a long-cooked beef stew-through which we could test numerous bottles. Choosing a good bottle for the kitchen can seem like, at best, a shot in the dark. The problem is that sifting through the enormous range of wines available is only slightly less confusing than trying to plough through Ulysses. In short, the wrong wine can turn an otherwise good sauce bad. But as with any ingredient in the kitchen, the choice of wine can make the difference between a sauce worthy of a four-star restaurant and one that's best poured down the drain. When a recipe calls for red wine, the tendency is to grab whatever is inexpensive or already open on the counter.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |