Reach DCP freelance writer Mike Rosenberg at MikeRosenberg@DaytonCityPaper.com or visit his blog at www.TheNakedVine.net

Astute observers of my monthly column know that I love me some meat. Well, I love most food in general, but I’m not sure that I could ever be a vegetarian. I tried removing animals from the ol’ diet during a brief, dark once-upon-a-time down Florida way, but it didn’t take. I’ve got too much of the “how do you know you don’t like it if you’ve never even tried it” hardwired into my palate, I guess.

I try my best to include potential food pairings with my reviews – pairings which often involve some suggestion of a meat dish. I do realize not everyone shares my particular omnivorous eating pattern. There are lots of folks, like my friends opening Kitchen 452 in Cincinnati, who choose to be more kind to our web-footed friends (and their hoofed, finned and clawed compatriots), sparing these critters a quick trip to Dinnersville.

One of the better dinner parties we’ve thrown involved an entirely meatless menu, so I’ve seen firsthand not only how much wine my vegetarian friends can throw down, but also how well vegetarian dishes go with well-paired wine.

In the interests of egalitarian dining, or if you’re considering doing some more meatless meals for health purposes or new year’s resolutions, here are some general wine recommendations to go with whatever meat substitute you’re planning to plate up for the evening.

All these recommendations should be viewed through the prism of one of my universal truths: “People make wine to go with what they’re eating.” For example, if you’re making an Italian-based recipe, Italian wine is your best bet. Tapas will work with Spanish wine. Also, if you’re making spicy curries or other Asian flavors, the classic pairings of riesling and gewurztraminer will likely be winners.

Tofu – The Swiss Army knife of vegetarian cooking, tofu is made by taking soy milk and adding a coagulant of some sort to curdle the milk. The resulting curds are then pressed into the blocks you see in the grocery store. The type of coagulant used determines the texture of the tofu, so combinations are often used. Acid-coagulated tofu creates softer, “silken” tofu while salts and/or enzymes create a firmer texture.

As for what wine to pair with your tofu dish? There’s not an answer to that question. Tofu in and of itself barely has any flavor, as you probably know. It does, however, absorb the flavor of whatever else is in the pot, wok, skillet or other cooking implement. Your wine pairing reflects the dominant flavor of the sauce. For Asian preparations, a dry riesling or a very light red like a beaujolais would be fine. For grilled tofu, especially if marinated, a fruity wine like a merlot would go well. For flavored tofu preparations like “soyrizo” or “tofurkey,” use the corresponding pairing for the meat. I’d go with rioja and either a pinot noir or a chardonnay, respectively, in those cases.

The same sort of pairing suggestions guide also works with tofu’s first cousin, tempeh, which is made from soybeans, fermented and pressed into blocks. This has a much firmer texture and can be used for kabobs, broken up for a ground meat substitute in something like vegetarian chili, etc. It has a slightly nutty flavor, but is generally pretty neutral.

Roasted vegetables – When you roast almost anything, the heat causes the sugars in whatever you have in the oven to caramelize, bringing out the sweetness and deepening the flavors as the cooking process proceeds. Sweet potatoes, zucchini, squash, cauliflower, broccoli, tomatoes – you name it. Tossing them in olive oil and sliding them into a 425-degree oven for an appropriate amount of time yields a scrumptious base for any number of dishes. Smoky, bright and slightly sweet works well next to a chardonnay that’s got body and a little oakiness. California chardonnays make an excellent choice with almost any roasted vegetarian preparation, as do most white Burgundies other than Chablis. Chablis’ delicacy gets run over a bit by roasted flavors.

Quinoa – America is finally catching on to this wonderful, nutty-flavored South American grain, which is one of the best meat substitutes out there as far as nutritional content goes. Quinoa (pronounced KEE-nwah) has a complete spread of amino acids, lots of iron and cooks faster than rice in most preparations. Often used as a side, much like brown rice would be, I find it’s also an excellent base for a Latin-flavored salad, tossed with bell peppers, black beans, lime juice, cilantro and such. The “regional” pairing works nicely here, so look for a red from South America. You can’t go wrong with either malbec or carmenere.

Beans, chickpeas and other legumes – Beans and their various cousins are also very high in protein, fiber, B-vitamins and all sorts of other goodnesses. The basic pairing rule is “the darker the berry, the darker the juice.” White beans like cannellini and cranberry beans, as well as chickpeas, like to go next to lighter whites. Sauvignon blanc and Chablis are good choices. For lentils, peas and the like – go with dry rosé or lighter reds like Chianti and Beaujolais. With kidney beans, black beans, and other dark ones, go bold! Zinfandel and earthy French reds like Cotes du Rhone and Bandol will pair nicely.

Thanks to Tiffany and the good folks at Balzac Communications, I had the chance to do a rundown of the Tin Roof Cellars portfolio. Tin Roof – a widely-available series of wines from California – produces a slate of reds and whites all available for around $8-9. All the wines are in Stelvin screwtop bottles, a delivery system of which I heartily approve, especially as an evening wears on.

Balzac sent me six of their recent releases. My thoughts on this set of yummies:

Tin Roof Cellars 2011 Chardonnay – Simply put, this is a solid, basic California chardonnay. Fermented in stainless steel and aged for five months in oak, the fragrance and flavors are largely apple and peach, with a strong shot of vanilla on the palate. There’s some woodiness and buttery, creamy flavors, but thankfully not too much of either.  It’s a little bit heavier palate-wise than chardonnays I usually prefer, but if you’re into a fuller style for whites, you’ll probably enjoy it.

Tin Roof Cellars 2011 Sauvignon Blanc – The grapes for this sauvignon blanc are from Lake County and the Sacramento delta, both cooler climate regions. Cooler climate whites tend to have a little more complexity in my experience, and that was the case here. At first sample, some slightly herbal overtones led to a green apple scented nose. This wine’s mouthfeel has pretty reasonable weight with tart apple and lime as the major flavors. The finish has a bit of an acidic bite, but that’s what you’d expect in a sauvignon blanc. I found it flavorful and drinkable, although this isn’t the season where I drink a ton of sauvignon blanc. I’ll keep it in mind after winter.

Tin Roof Cellars 2011 Cabernet Sauvignon and Tin Roof Cellars 2009 Merlot – The evening menu came up “steak and sweet potatoes,” so these two got a side-by-side tasting. The merlot is sourced from North Coast and Central Coast and includes small amounts of petit sirah. The cabernet is sourced from grapes across California and includes a splash of syrah in the blend. In all honesty, the cabernet was one of the better sub-$10 bottles I’ve had in quite some time. Good tannic structure, nice flavor and actual complexity within its dark cherry and berry notes. With both the steak and the chocolate, also a winner. An excellent effort.

As for the merlot – on its own, I wasn’t impressed. I thought it was rather flabby and unremarkable. I thought it leaned over to the fruit juice side of the ledger, and the tannins were so soft that they were almost unnoticeable. I did notice that this wine improved greatly with food. One thing I don’t see U.S. winemakers doing very much is making (or at least marketing) inexpensive, all-purpose table wine – wines that can be poured with almost any sort of food and be decent, as with inexpensive Italian chianti. This merlot showed a little more backbone as a complement to the strong, meaty flavors in the food – largely by staying out of the way. That would be this wine’s niche, in my opinion.

Tin Roof Cellars 2011 Lodi Zinfandel – When zinfandel began its recent meteoric rise in popularity, California winemakers engaged in an arms race to see who could create the highest alcohol fruit bomb possible. I cut my wine-tasting teeth on Sonoma County zin, but as the years went by, the profiles of most California zinfandels became so in-your-face that I stopped buying – turning instead to its Italian cousin, primitivo. This relatively inexpensive California zin gives me hope that the pendulum has begun to reverse its swing. Clocking in at a modest 13.5 percent alcohol, this wine actually has a lighter touch than some California pinot noirs I’ve tasted recently. It’s not especially fancy or complex, featuring raspberry and blueberry flavors in a reasonable balance with alcohol and tannin. With roasted meats, barbecue sauces and (of course) chocolate, it’s a nice quaffable entry that reminds me more of an import from Puglia than a California monster with some zin-based pun for a name.

Tin Roof Cellars 2011 Red Blend – The vast majority of domestic wines you’ll see in a wine store as “cabernet sauvignon,” “merlot” and so on are actually blends. If a U.S. wine contains at least 75 percent of a single varietal, it can be labeled as that varietal. (See above, for instance.) If a wine is called a “blend” (or “meritage” or “claret”), it’s a blend where no one varietal is above 75 percent of the composition. In this case, this wine is a blend of zinfandel, merlot and petit sirah. Honestly, I found it a little too fruity for my tastes. It reminded me a great deal of the merlot I mentioned before, although it’s got a little more structure. I got berries and cherries here with a tannic finish. All in all, I think it’s decent but unremarkable on its own. Like the merlot, however, it would work as a table wine if you’ve got some heartier fare on the table. I had it with roasted red pepper and eggplant soup and it worked just fine.

For more information on Tin Roof Cellars wines, visit  www.tinroofcellars.com.

Quick … “Austria” – what just popped to mind? The Hapsburg Dynasty? Any one of a list of composers longer than my arm? A certain ex-governor of Gully-fornee-uh? Probably. How about wine?

“Aha!” a couple of you might say. “I thought about wine! That groovy sounding grape Grüner Veltliner.” Well, bonus noogies for you. You’re absolutely right. Austria wasn’t exactly a major player in the world of wine until the last decade or so as more and more folks discovered that umlaut-speckled, mineral-slathered bottle of deliciousness. About half of the wine made in Austria is white, with Grüner making up two-thirds of that. Austria is on a similar latitude to Alsace and the mountainous terroir yields lean, minerally, acidic wine.

Austria actually has a long history of winemaking. There’s archeological evidence of wine production as far back as 700 BC in Austria. Through the Middle Ages, wine production waxed and waned, depending on various invasions, religious incursions and various pestilences. In the 19th century, Austrian wine really hit its stride, only to be laid low by that little louse phylloxera. Austria bounced back quickly, though, and after World War I, Austria was the third-largest wine producer in the world, selling largely to other Central European countries.

In the 1980s, though, everything came crashing down because of a scandal in the Austrian wine industry. Austrian wines are generally acidic, light-bodied and mineral-y. Some enterprising winemakers discovered that the taste could be “fattened up” a bit by adding small amounts of diethylene glycol to the wine. The more common term for diethylene glycol is … well … antifreeze.

Needless to say, this did the Austrians no favors. Even though there were only a small number of producers following this creative production method, many countries out-and-out banned Austrian wine. In the 1990s, Austria set up a control board for their winemakers to ensure quality. As a result, more care was taken in general in the production of wine, and a higher-quality product resulted. Quality versions of Grüner reopened the gates for Austrian whites and over the last five or six years there has been an increased demand for Austrian red wine.

Austrian reds are largely autochthonal varietals (you may remember this term, meaning “native grapes,” from our profile of 20 Mondi). These grapes, alas, don’t roll trippingly off the American tongue. Asking for “Blaufränkisch,” “Zweigelt,” or “Sankt Laurent” is likely to cause an accidental spray of saliva in the face of your unfortunate local wine salesperson.

I’d encourage you to practice your Germanic pronunciation, however, as there are some tasty offerings out there. So you know, the pronunciation of Blaufränkisch is “Blau-FRONK-isch,” the pronunciation of Zweigelt is “ZVEI-gelt,” and the pronunciation of Sankt Laurent (St. Laurent, as it’s sometimes written) is “Zankt LAUER-ent.” All of these wines are in the weight class of pinot noir and beaujolais, so if you’re looking for a red that’s a little different, these would be distinct possibilities.

Neckenmarkt 2009 Blaufränkisch and Neckenmarkt 2010 Zweigelt – I include these together because I found them to be very helpful wines, vocabulary-wise. Both have helpful phonetic spellings of the varietals on their labels. The Blaufränkisch is a very light and pleasant red. I thought it had a surprising depth of flavor for a wine this light in body. Lots of cherry and blackberry flavors without a full mouth feeling, although thankfully not fading into watery. As the wine opens, I got a little more mineral and a little more spice. An excellent summer red alternative, had I found it a couple of months ago. We poured this wine with some roasted grouper and vegetables and it went splendidly. About $10.

As for the Zweigelt, I was hit initially with a whiff of cranberries and graphite. Its taste is light – almost a bitter cranberry flavor. The flavor feels like it should be a lighter bodied, but there’s almost a glycerine-y thickness. (Um … what was that about antifreeze again?) The finish is graphite and light tannin. Not my favorite. Around $13.

Sattler 2010 Burgenland Sankt Laurent  – A very light, fruit-forward, flexible red that I found exceptionally easy to drink. I found it full of smooth berry flavors with a firm, pleasantly smoky backbone. I found it quite pinot noir-ish in character, although not quite as complex. I recently rigged up my little kettle grill to double as a smoker. I sugar-and-salt cured some trout filets and put them over the applewood. We had a little smoked trout with the Sattler. My tasting note reads “Holy crap!” An unexpectedly wonderful pairing. You could conceivably have this for a brunchtime red, as it’s clearly a wine that’s not scared of a little oil and a little salt. Solid for around $15-16.

Heinrich 2008 “Red” – So, what happens when you start blending these autochthonal grapes? Oftentimes, these grapes take on entirely different characteristics when blended as when poured alone. (Case in point – just about any non-Burgundian French wine will be a blend.) This Austrian table wine is a blend of 60 percent Zweigelt, 30 percent Blaufränkisch, and 10 percent Sankt Laurent. The result? A much darker, deeper wine than any of those varietals singly. This one has a very fragrant nose of cherries and herbs. The mouthfeel is considerably heavier, and the flavors are fuller. Those flavors resemble pinot noir: cherry and smoke – with some pepper thrown in for good measure. The finish is long, firmly tannic, and peppery. For a fairly unique experience, give it a run for about $18.

New offerings from Robert Mondavi

By Mike Rosenberg

Robert Mondavi is a ubiquitous label. I’m trying to remember the last time I walked into a wine store and didn’t see at least a few selections from Mondavi. One reason we should all appreciate Mr. Mondavi – back in the 1960s, Mondavi was one of the first vintners in California to label wine by varietal instead of by vineyard – which is now, of course, the standard in the nomenclature wine bottled outside France, Italy and a few other places.

Mondavi was known in the 60s and 70s for making high-end wines (and they still do – their 1997 reserve Chardonnay was rated #1 in the world). Over the years, the wild success of their more inexpensive labels like Mondavi Coastal and Woodbridge overshadowed their more premium bottlings (aside from some of the super high-end stuff like Opus One, done in partnership with Chateau Mouton Rothschild of Bordeaux). Mondavi has been trying to improve the marketing of its “inexpensive premium” wines, as well as giving a facelift to some of the less expensive lines. I had the opportunity to try a couple from each of these categories.

The first lot we received was from the “Napa Valley” series. These wines run $20-50 and are from selected sites within that appellation. This series includes a fumé blanc (aka sauvignon blanc, the wine that put Mondavi on the map), chardonnay, cabernet sauvignon, pinot noir and merlot. We had one bottle each of the pinot noir and the chardonnay:

Robert Mondavi 2010 Carneros Pinot Noir – This bottle definitely needs a chance to breathe before you get down to it. Short of giving it a good solid spin or decanting it for a bit, I expect you’ll be a bit taken aback by the initial tannin level. Once it calms down, there’s lots of vanilla on the nose, followed by big flavors of plums, cherries and smoke. The finish is firm, lasting and smoky. We thought that it went well with a challenging pairing of stuffed green peppers. Quite nice with dark chocolate, too. If you like your pinot on the bolder side, it’s a pretty solid choice.

Robert Mondavi 2010 Napa Valley Chardonnay – I imagine makers of California Chardonnay as engineers hovering over three dials labeled “oak,” “butter” and “fruit” – manipulating dials to generate an algorithm of time in barrel, type of barrel, percentage of malolactic fermentation, residual sugar, etc. to create a consistent profile. This Chardonnay, sourced from all over Napa with a little Sonoma fruit thrown in, had a winemaker crank up the “oak” and “fruit” knobs. On the nose and palate, you’ll experience ample but reasonably well-balanced oak. Flavorwise, I found pears, cantaloupe and oak in a relatively friendly, stable environment, which follows through to the finish. Poured on its own, the Sweet Partner in Crime and I split on this wine. I liked it, but she didn’t. With a slow-cooked fall vegetable soup, the roasted veggies played off the oak nicely, making it a tasty meal wine.

The second lot was two bottles of the “Robert Mondavi Private Selection” series. Near as I can tell, this is the rebranding of the less-pricey Mondavi “Coastal” line. Most of these wines fit squarely into the Naked Vine wheelhouse, retailing in the $10-15 range.

This pair of wines, however, came with some bonus swag. The wines came in a very attractive soft-side picnic basket with a roll-up picnic blanket, a travel guide to California’s Central Coast, and some very spicy salami. The implication seems to be that these are good picnic wines. We received one bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon and one bottle of Chardonnay. The Private Selection catalog also contains all the other major varietals: Merlot, Pinot Noir, Zinfandel, Syrah, a Meritage red blend, Sauvignon Blanc, Riesling and Pinot Grigio. How did this pair fare?

Robert Mondavi 2010 Private Selection Central Coast Cabernet Sauvignon – My first impressions were tart flavors over graphite – not a particularly pleasant combination. Thankfully, after some air, the flavors mellowed. Some blackberry flavors started to emerge, and the tannin calmed down a bit. The finish was tart and a bit clipped. We sipped on it some more and we each went through half a glass without thinking. We didn’t notice that it did anything special. My note says, “Well, it’s there.” Simple, straightforward and not unpleasant after decanting, it wasn’t exactly memorable.

Robert Mondavi 2011 Private Selection Central Coast Chardonnay – Returning to our “Chardonnay engineering” friends and their hypothetical three dials, this time they’ve got the oak dialed way back. There’s a hint of it at the very end of the finish, and a few notes floating through the bouquet and flavor, but it’s largely background, which is a nice surprise for an $11 California bottle. The butter’s turned up a little, as it has a creamier vanilla flavor, but it doesn’t go all the way to full-on buttery. Fruitwise, it’s actually got quite a nice balance of mango, pear and apple. I thought this was quite a pleasantly drinkable wine. We did another “breakfast for dinner” evening with this wine – and with an open faced omelet with sausage, a bunch of roasted veggies and mushrooms, it worked right well. With California Chardonnay, it’s a matter of finding a combination of the three dials that you like. I honestly enjoyed this one more than I did its doubly-priced cousin.

Reach DCP freelance writer Mike Rosenberg at MikeRosenberg@DaytonCityPaper.com or visit his blog at www.TheNakedVine.net.