Gabe's View on Tasting

Special thanks to Gabe from Gabe's View for his views on reviews!

Cat has asked me to check in today and speak to how I go about reviewing wines, so here I am. There will be a link to this post from my blog, Gabe's View. First of all I should mention that I don’t currently use a numbered rating system. It’s not that I’m philosophically opposed to them, they have a place, it’s just not the direction I’ve chosen to go. My approach starts with being a writer first. From there, I take a great deal of time considering each individual wine and doing the best job I can every time out in describing what the wines taste like to me and how my palate reacts to them. Along those lines I’m equally concerned that the words I use to describe them are carefully considered and well put together.

In terms of evaluating the wine and deciding to recommend it or not I take several things into consideration. Quality seems like an obvious one so I’ll just mention it. While it’s certainly possible to simply evaluate a wine on it’s own with no other considerations I take several other things into account. Perhaps one of the less obvious elements I look at is intent. A $10 wine made in prodigious quantities can’t in my mind be considered the same way as a $50 wine of which a few hundred or a few thousand cases were made, let alone highly allocated wines made in tiny quantities. In each case the winery or winemaker had different goals and plans for each wine. My goal in looking at intent is to decide if they met what my impression of that wines goal or intent was. An example of this is the Gnarly Head Cabernet Sauvignon I reviewed the other day. 100,000 cases of it were made and it’s commonly available for $10. For that price it does a good job. Clearly though, it’s not meant to fill the same parameters a single vineyard Cabernet from Oakville would.

In terms of how I actually go about things, my usual approach is to taste the wine by itself first. Then I continue by pairing it with whatever I’m eating that day. Most of the people reading my reviews are going to drink the wines with a meal. Taking that into account I evaluate them with a meal and often comment on how they went with that particular food. Many times after having the wine with a meal I take it back with me to my computer, or over to the couch if I’m parking myself there for awhile. This allows the wine to continue breathing and gives me the chance to evaluate it further. As an extension of this I’ll sometimes re-taste a wine after it’s been open for a full 24 hours. If it has held or improved I make a point of commenting on that as it speaks at least to a degree to that wines shelf life.

A few times a year I run a series I call “12 Days of…” where I focus on 1 varietal for 12 days. In those instances I often taste 2 or 3 wines side by side each day over a period of time and then write about several each day. This approach allows me to take a quick peek at one varietal over a semi-extended period. The wines chosen for these situations are a combination of various things. I try to mix and match well known examples, somewhat obscure or small production offerings and wines I’ve never had. On top of that I usually mix in some I’m quite familiar with so I can check in with how they’re doing in their current vintages. The ones I know well can also act as a measuring stick of sorts for the unfamiliar ones.

In selecting wines to write about I tend towards those that speak to me. I’m only going to be able to write about a small percentage of the wines out there so I prefer to spend my time and energy with the ones I’m passionate about. As long as a wine moves me or impresses me for some reason or another I’ll write about it. Sometimes that’s simply because it’s an amazing bottle, in other cases it’s due the particular release being it’s a good value that’s widely available. Or perhaps the wine strikes me a filling a particular niche well. People sometimes ask if I write negative reviews. I will but it’s rare. A wine needs to stand out as truly terrible for me to be moved to write about it. Words don’t come as quickly or easily for marginal wines. With good and great offerings, the words tend to come easily. Many of those reviews seem to write themselves.

As for what I drink? Well I’m willing to taste just about anything. My penchant leans towards the smaller productions and more obscure. But I tend to taste and write about just as many large production wines as I do smaller offerings. There aren’t any varietals I don’t like, but of course I have my preferences. My tendency is towards things made in what strikes me as their natural style. Pinot Noir and Chardonnay made with Burgundian intent. Merlot made with structure and age ability in mind. Deep, dark and brooding Petite Sirah etc. The list goes on.

I’d like to thank Cat for offering me the opportunity to share my thoughts about tasting on her blog. If anyone has any questions feel free to e-mail me through the contact form on my site, which I of course hope you check out.

Gutshot Wine Rating

Special thanks to Loweeel of The PSychos' Path for this insight into the PSycho's PSyche!

Hi, I'm Loweeel, PSommelier over at The PSychos' Path (are you sensing a pattern yet?), the one and only blog devoted to Petite Sirah. My good friend "Octocat" asked me to share how I "rate" wine with you. Tonight's sample is the 2001 Petite Sirah (Napa Valley) from Blockheadia Ringnosii. I picked out this particular bottle because the rear label claims that it is a "rustic, provincial wine[] with characteristics of peppercorn, earth and game with the influence of oak flavors kept to a minimum." I got this bottle for fairly cheap ($17.25) on winebid.

There's not a lot about it on CellarTracker -- the rating is 89.7 on three ratings, only one of which has notes (89); the other two are 89 and 90, by the same user, without notes. The ratings range from October 2004 through December 2005, so they're not particularly helpful with this wine.

As Gary Vaynerchuk keeps emphasizing, rating is very subjective. I'll be the first to admit that the results of my ratings are neither particularly consistent nor rigorous, and have a lot to do with my impression of the wine at any given time, how true it is to a platonic ideal of the variety or wine region, what food I'm having it with, my mood, and even the stemware. But what I do try to do when rating wine is describe in objective terms, or as close as I can get, what I'm smelling and tasting at any given time. Often, I'll keep a time series, and note how the wine changes -- e.g., write down the sensory data at pop'n'pour, and after every X minutes in the decanter. I also try to keep track of the stemware I use and how long I decant the wine.

Upon opening, there was some nice sediment attached to the cork, so I busted out the strainer/funnel, which trapped more sediment Other sediment remained in the bottle This being PS, I didn't want a blank data series, so I decanted the wine for about 2 hours 15 mins in the WineCountryConnect decanter before pouring my first glass into Riedel Vinum Syrah stemware I paired the wine with Buffalo London Broil
(marinated in cheap red wine for 90 mins, then packed in kosher salt for ~45 mins before grilled medium rare) sliced and drizzed with my famous Solera-style steak sauce, accompanied by sauteed spinach cooked in balsamic vinegar and red wine with cumin and pepper.

Upon pouring, dark ruby translucent rim, brilliant clarity without a hint of cloudiness (as might be expected from all the sediment that precipitated out of solution), but a very dense, deep, dark red color.

On the nose, not screaming aromatics, but quite pleasant. Blackberries, anise, pencil (graphite and wood), just a hint of tar. No real oaky or vanilla/cinnamon aromas.

On the attack, blackberries, black pepper, plums, softening in favor of the pepper and graphite towards the midpalate. Gets a bit liqueur-like right before the finish, which adds black raspberry and black cherry to the mix. Tannins are perfect right now, sweet and slightly chewy, noticeable but not dominating, and as usual with PS, the acidity is excellent as well, cleansing the palate for the next bite of food. The finish is about 20 seconds.

The wine really shines with some meat in the mouth, the fruit and leanness complimenting the gamy grass-fed buffalo.

My gut is that this wine is just short of 4/5 stars. Here's why -- The fruit, tannins, and acidity are all in balance. It's true to varietal in color, flavor profile, acidity, and tannins. The oak is extremely subtle, and pairs well with the food. It does nothing wrong (so loses no points), has an intruiging nose, and some layers and depths of flavors and scents that I can't quite pick apart yet, but which will reveal themselves more fully as the wine continues to open up.

And I'm right -- the 2nd glass is much more open. Blackberry pie filling on the nose, with a few bits of what smells like game meat in there as well, on top of the graphite from before. The more intense flavors carry over to the palate as well, fleshing out what was in the first glass a lean but enjoyable wine. It's still elegant and balanced, just more muscled -- it went up a weight class or two, but is still in wrestling shape. 3rd glass is more of the same -- a bit of cream from the Maltolactic fermentation, but still nice sharp acidity and a nice blackberries-and-cream finish. If I had to put a number on it, I'd give it a 91 -- it does everything well, has nice evolution as it opens, and shows wonderful complexity without being too big to have with food. And of course, I'd be lying if I said that the price were not a factor.

If you see this on winebid, or elsewhere, snatch it up if it's cheap. It's a nice bottle of wine.

How I Taste and Rate Wine

Special thanks to Sonadora of WannabeWino for today's blurb about tasting wine!

Cat recently asked me if I would be willing to contribute to a series she is doing on how wine bloggers taste and rate wines. I’ll put the post up here and cross-post it at my wine blog.

Let’s get rid of the easy one first: I don’t rate wines on my blog. The only place (I think, at this time) you’ll find “scores” from me is on WineQ where they ask you to to input a star rating from 1 to 5 stars. I honestly never found scores for wine particularly helpful. Theoretically, I understand the purpose in the marketplace and yada yada yada, but nonetheless, it truly does not help me in the least to see a giant “91″ plastered on a shelf-talker for a wine. Because I don’t necessarily know anything about the palate of the person who rated it, I have no idea if they have similar tastes to mine or not. I prefer to seek out people who seem to like the wines I do, and take their recommendations. For example, Dr. Debs over on Good Wine Under $20 and I seem to like a lot of the same wines. I trust her opinion and would easily buy a bottle (and I have bought bottles) that she’s written complimentary things about. I also like to find retailers whose tastes seem to run like mine and I will often take their suggestions for bottles I might like. I think I annoy Jill of Domaine547 because I tend to refuse to actually use her website and instead make her send me emails with recommendations.

Finding someone whose palate I jive with is more important to me than a score a wine received, and in writing my blog, I’m hoping people get from my descriptions and recommendations of various wines a sense of my palate and whether or not they like similar wines to the ones I do. I think that perhaps, over time, as consumers have wider access to the internet through various devices like iPhones and Blackberries, that maybe people will look for information on a wine they are considering as they are considering it, rather than relying entirely on a point system. Unless of course you like the wines your retailer recommends, then great, you’ve got an excellent way to find new wines to try that might be to your liking.

As far as tasting wine…well, I’d venture to guess that a good 75% or more of my tasting is done either at my kitchen table or on my couch. We have wine with dinner nearly every night, and my ritual is to pour the glasses, take the pictures, and take an initial sniff and sip before I have any food. I’ll taste a bit more as I eat, to see if I’ve made a good match with our dinner. My note taking occurs later, after I’ve finished dinner and moved over to my computer on my couch.



Me in my natural habitat.

And yes, I mean my couch, we each have our own :) I sit with my glass that has now been open for a good hour and start taking notes on the nose. This can last for a good hour or more depending on how complex the nose is. That’s where my comments about Matt being through his 2nd glass before I’ve even touched my first come from! Next I taste the wine. I do that gross sounding slurping thing to aerate the wine even further in my mouth. But I also sip the wine and drink it like a normal person drinking a glass of wine. Not everyone aerates wine , and I want to be sure it still tastes good, has a good mouthfeel, and finishes nicely if you are just sitting around sipping at the glass.

The rest of my tasting is done at wineries, restaurants, and organized tastings. The restaurant tastings tend to follow the method I use at home, usually minus the pictures and computer. At wineries, I have my trusty note pad, I ask lots of questions, and generally get annoyed when the staff tries to tell me what I should be tasting in the wine. Sorry folks, but really, that ticks me off. I spit everything in tasting rooms. Whoops, there’s another pet peeve…please keep spit buckets handy, I hate having to look around to find one, or worse yet, discovering there isn’t one at all and I have to ask for a 2nd wine glass to spit into! Gross! At large tastings, I become a juggler, with my notepad, tasting glass, water bottle, and spit cup. My trusty notebook suffers the most at these tastings as it becomes tie-dyed with various spills of wine. I taste quickly and move on to the next table. Generally, I only like to go to these during trade hours, otherwise they are far too crowded and people wear perfume. (Seriously, what is up with that?? How can you taste wine when you smell like a cheap….ok, we’ll censor that expression since this is a family friendly blog )

So there you have it. How I taste and rate (or rather don’t rate) wines! Thanks to Cat for posing the question to me! Seems especially relevant at this time as we seem to be embroiled in another dicussion in the wine blog world about the place and function of blogs, ethics, and many other navel-gazing topics.

Don't Be a Menace to Sonoma While Drinking Your Wine in the Parlour

Special thanks to Corrado from Corrado's Wine Diary for posting this little detour from the norm!

So Cheron asked if I’d rap a bit about how I taste and rate wine. Some background first. I would say I’ve been serious about wine for about 2 years, corrupted by this little site called wine.woot.com. My typical daily drinker is in the $12 - $18 range. The most expensive bottle I own is $120 (Retail value, Mondavi Cabernet Reserve). The most I’ve ever paid for a bottle of wine is around $60 (2006 Ty Caton Tytanium, Iron Horse Q Pinot Noir). My “diamond in the rough” wine is a 2005 Morgan Twelve Clones Pinot Noir, purchased for $18. Best Pinot Noir I’ve had under $30.

All that background wasn’t intended to be showy. My point was to give you, the reader, a paragraph glimpse at the wino writing this. Wine.Woot built my cellar and Vaynerchuck (tv.winelibrary.com) helped build my vocabulary. What follows is an unintentionally vino-erotic, blow-by-blow description of how I taste & rate wine.

I've pulled a bottle of Woot Cellars “Tøøthstejnn” (Sangiovese blend) from the cellar (55F; love winter in Vermont!). I paid about $10 for this bottle and purchased it about 2 months ago. Narcoleptics may want to simply skip to the next blog post or watch the dust collect on the nearest flat surface.

First thing I do is pull off the tin cap on the wine (I usually have to cut the plastic ones off) I've noticed that you can tell a serious winery (or at least one that wants to be serious) by whether or not they splurge on the tin caps. I've never had a better-than-average/good wine with a plastic cap. Sorry, off topic… (how's that dust lookin'?).

Next very important step is to remove the cork with my kick-ass double-action wine decorkerizer (note that this does not apply to screwtop wines). I check the cork for condition and see if there's anything cool printed on it. I sniff the cork and comment to self that I'm being retarded. Sniffing a cork is like Sex on Cinemax – all show & completely meaningless. I check the inside of the neck for schwag. If schwag = yes, strain into decanter, else proceed directly to glass selection.

My default tasting glass is a Waterford Mondavi Cabernet glass for meatier reds and a Spiegelau Vino Grande Burgundy glass for lighter bodied reds. I pour a bit of wine into the glass, swirl, sniff, ponder, swirl, sniff, taste. Assuming the wine is fine, I pour a proper amount (1/5 to 1/4 bottle) into the glass. Party on, Wayne!

Now the fun begins. I note the color, clarity, opacity, and saturation of the wine. This is where I try to come up with a new way of describing "red." Clarity is rarely an issue. I can’t recall the last commercially produced wine I had that had clarity issues. Opacity and saturation are different in my book (I haven't yet resorted to giving hue and gamma comments). For the Tøøthstejnn, I would say it’s wine.woot-website-theme red, bearing the typical moderate-bodied appearance of a Sangiovese. Colors out toward the edges getting more earth-toned. Color score: 5/5.

Now that I've dicked around the wine for 5-10 minutes, it's had a chance to open up a bit and ready for some serious schnoz action. A few vicious swirls and into the glass with the nose. I begin thinking of different ways to say, "smells like wine." Sometimes I get absolutely nailed with something obvious. Most of the time it's repeated trips back to the glass to try to tease out a few things. Fruit I'm decent with. Spices, not so much. I just realized that I tend to close off my right nostril with the glass and sniff with only my left; tried sniffing with my right nostril and didn't exactly get the same things (time to get out the pledge yet??). For the Tøøthstejnn, I'm kinda lost. I'm getting a lot of musty/woody aromas (socks?), some black raspberry, and wine (no, @&*%$... dammit, where’s that Thesaurus?). I'd probably give the TS a 10/15 on the nose. While it is fairly aromatic, it's got a pretty one-dimensional nose and doesn't do a lot to wow me.

After all this work, I'm now hella thirsty! To quote the great Paul Masson, I will drink no wine before its time… and IT’S TIME TO GUZZLE WINE! Since I've been writing for a few minutes, I take another sniff and decide that there's some kind of Tootsie-roll or molasses thing goin' on in the back ground. Beaming with pride at having pulled that out of my ass, I taste. I take a bit in, gently caress it around in my mouth, roll it around on my tongue (down people! I'm married!! Get back to dust patrol!), try to aerate a bit by sucking in air without drooling wine or aspirating it into my lungs (both of which occur at some point while learning to do this and are equally entertaining to those around you). Here I really just to figure out what's going on and what I want to pay attention to on subsequent glugs.

For the second taste I pay a lot more attention to what's going on. How does it feel? What's going on? Does it start off with a bang? What seems to happen between the instant you take a sip through the 10 seconds or so you move it around your mouth, to the instant you swallow, to what's left afterwards, how long it lasts, and if that finish continues to evolve new flavors after the wine has reached Mr. Tum-Tum.

For the Tøøthstejnn, I'd say it starts pretty big on flavor (dried cranberry), but doesn't really take off from there and coasts on through the mid-palate. Mr. Tannin and Mrs. Acidity wave their hands out the window to say, "Hey, we're here, but just passing through!" leaving a plume of earthy dried fruit that lingers on the palate quite pleasantly. Flavor I'd give 7/10 and Finish 8/10 or a total of 15/20 for Parker's scoring. I break them up because, well, I do. I typically like to describe each independently and always ended up scoring that way in my head so... voila. (Can you write "Pledge me!" on your coffee table yet?)

Now onto the BS portion of the show. Aging potential? I'm still way too much of a novice to be taken seriously with any predictions. I think I can tell when a wine will improve with age, but knowing when it should peak and when it will die, I'll leave that to the pros. I break Parker's "Aging/Potential" category down into "Potential" and "Overall" ratings. Potential is where I describe what I think the future holds for the wine. Low potential means peaked or past peak. High potential means the wine will be better in the future than it is today. Overall is where I steal 5 points for my subjective rating of the wine and put it all together.

For the Tøøthstejnn, I'd give it an aging potential of 3/5, which is my default for, "I don't know, but it's a new vintage, so it can probably drink well for a few years, but it's drinking pretty damn well now." As an overall, I'd give it a 4/5. I can see where some folks would review it as 'watery' but I've had similar northern Italian reds that have a similar mouthfeel. This is not what I would call a "lush" wine, but it has good flavor, very nice balance, and doesn't have the fakeness you're likely to get from $10 wine (like the bottle of wine my in-laws brought to Thanksgiving dinner this year).

My Corrado-rating puts the Tøøthstejnn at 87 points, my 'gut rating' would have been 88 (where I would expect it to come out if I took the time to rate it properly). A better nose and fuller flavors could have pushed it up towards 90, but it's a solid 87+ wine today.

...and now my glass is empty, it's time to go fill my 375ml swing-top bottle, put it in the fridge, and enjoy the second glass of wine for the night. Come back tomorrow night! We’re going to do… FRACTIONS!

And now for something completely different...

Hey folks! Just in time for the Holidays, I've got something a little different and special cooked up for you. It's not wine nor food, but it is a special collaboration of a few wine bloggers. Over the next week or so, I'll be featuring a special guest blogger each day sharing his/her thoughts and comments about how we all score wines, just to give you a little insight into our psyches. I'm hoping this will add some depth of meaning to what you're reading here (and on their blogs) and provides extra value so that you really know why we score things the way we do.

Hope you enjoy, and have a great Thanksgiving!!

Veal Stuffed Peppers and Merlot

Merlot has been snubbed a little too often lately as being just one of those all-too-common wines. But this varietal has a lot of flavor that shouldn't be passed on. It's truly versatile, and pairs well with a wide array of meats. So for tonight I chose a meat that is considered white but eats like a red - veal!

Wine: 2004 Reininger Merlot Helix
Meal: Veal Stuffed Peppers

Tasting notes on the wine:

Color: 5/5
Inky, dark purple, almost black. The color runs just about to the glass. The liquid is clear, but opaque. Absolutely beautiful.

Nose: 14/15
Unlike the previous post, this is definitely one of those sit-and-sniff-all-day wines. Black cherries, blackberries, plum, leather, vanilla, woodsmoke... just wow. Very complex nose. Just beautiful.

Flavor: 7/10
Not as impressed with the taste of this. It's still really good, and drinks pretty well straight out of the bottle, but after a nose like this one had, the flavor is a bit of a let down. Jammy and tannic, some hints of cocoa come out. Fairly smooth, and after about 20 minutes in the glass, all the heat blows off. Oaky, dark fruits dominate the palate. Pleasant and easy to drink, but not as complex as I was anticipating.

Finish: 8/10
Smooth finish, lasts about 30 seconds. More oak, and once the wine opens up, you get vanilla and plum as well. Nothing special, but it's clean and enjoyable.

Aging: 3/5
It's truly a New World style, and I think there's enough tannic action and fruits going on that this will continue to develop for a few more years. Definitely ready to go now, but will probably drink well for at least another 6-8 years.

Overall: 4/5
A nice daily drinker. Easy to drink, and I can see this one holding up well to stronger meats, as well as being subtle enough for the more delicate cuts. Maybe a little overpowering for poultry and pasta, but pork and veal are just fine, as would be filet or strip.

Total: 91pts

Want to make this meal?

Veal Stuffed Peppers
3/4 lb ground veal
1/4 c white rice
2 large bell peppers
1 Tbsp butter
1 rib celery, diced
1/4 small red onion, diced
1 small tomato, diced
1/4 cup freshly grated parmesan cheese, divided
pinch Kosher salt
1/4 cup dried shitake mushrooms
1 tsp dried rosemary
1 tsp dried sage
1/4 cup panko

Reconstitute the mushrooms in warm water. Preheat oven to 375 degrees.

Meanwhile, triple wash the rice and put in a small pot with 1/2 cup of water on high heat. When water begins to boil, reduce heat to low and cover, allowing to simmer for 15 minutes.

Slice the tops off of the peppers and remove the seeds and stem. Dice up the tops, leaving the bottoms intact as a bowl. In a medium skillet, melt the butter, and add the diced peppers, celery, onion, and tomato, and sprinkle salt on top. Cook down until onions are translucent and veggies are tender-crisp.

Strain off the mushrooms, reserving the water, then dice the mushrooms. Pour 1/4 cup of the mushroom water into the veggies and allow to simmer uncovered for approximately 5 minutes. Strain the veggie mixture and reserve the liquid.

In a medium bowl, combine cooked rice, mushrooms, lamb, rosemary and sage. Mix in veggies until well combined. Add 1/8 cup cheese and panko, and mix well. Spoon into pepper bowls and place in a loaf pan with about a cup of water on the bottom. Sprinkle a little more panko on top. Bake for 45 minutes.

Meanwhile, pour reserved liquid into saucepan over medium heat and stir in remaining cheese, and reduce by half. Remove from heat until peppers are done.

Once peppers are done, plate peppers, and pour the liquid from the loaf pan (along with any solids) in with the reduced juice. Return to medium heat and reduce again by half. Spoon sauce over top of the peppers and serve.

Enjoy!

Capellini Prawns and Sauvignon Blanc

Shellfish and whites are a no-brainer, but sometimes finding just the right white for the preparation of the dish can be tricky. You generally want to find something crisp, light, and refreshing, and not overly sweet or fruity. This one pairs pretty well, although I think I could have done better.

Wine: 2007 Wellington Vineyards Sonoma Valley Sauvignon Blanc
Meal: Capellini Prawns

Tasting notes on the wine:

Color: 5/5
Sparkling sunshine. There's a few bubbles clinging to the side of the glass. Perfectly clear though, and the color runs very nearly to the edge of the glass. Excellent cling, especially for a white. It's a happy color to look at.

Nose: 12/15
Minerally, earthy. I get some pear and lemon zest in there, but it's a little hot. Pleasant, but not one of those sit-all-day-and-sniff noses.

Flavor: 9/10
Very true to the varietal, there are definite grassy and tropical tones to it. Grapefruit, pineapple and pear lead the forefront with a touch of dandelion. It is crisp, slightly tart like a sweettart, but a little on the oily side. I think this is because I had this closer to room temperature than intended. A second glass, chilled, removes the oiliness and keeps the flavor, even making it a little more tart. Although Sauvignon Blanc is typically a dry wine, this one seems to lean a little more to the semi-dry, almost semi-sweet side. Really nice by itself, works well with food too.

Finish: 10/10
This is one of those finishes that just goes on and on. You can still taste it long after you've put the glass down. Much more grassy on the finish, like lemon-grass and more of the dandelion. Very smooth and pleasant, and leaves behind a fresh feeling. Superb!

Aging: 1/5
It's a white, and Sauvignon Blanc is not exactly known for its aging potential. This one is ready to go, right now, and I wouldn't keep it longer than 3-4 years. Then again, I'd probably drink all mine long before then anyway! Drink this now - 2011.

Overall: 4/5
Really nice white. Well balanced, as I've come to expect from Peter Wellington's wines, and really easy to drink. I'm pretty excited about this one!

Total: 91pts

Shellfish is obvious for this, the sweetness and crispness should balance well with the typically sweet shellfish meat. I'd like to give this a swirl with sushi, and I think pasta with marinara would be good as well.

Want to make this meal?

Capellini Prawns
1 rib celery, diced
1 carrot, peeled and diced
1/4 red onion, diced
1 clove garlic, minced
pinch Kosher salt
1 Tbsp butter
1 Tbsp artichoke dip
2 Tbsp freshly grated hard cheese (like parmesan), divided
1/4 cup dry white wine
6 prawns
balsamic vinegar
4oz capellini (angel hair) pasta

Cook pasta according to package directions.

In a medium skillet over medium heat, melt the butter and add celery, carrot, onion, garlic, and salt. Allow to cook, stirring occasionally until the onion becomes translucent. Place prawns in skillet, allowing them to sit directly on the skillet (not on top of the veggies). Add wine. Cook prawns thoroughly until the shells are pink, then remove and set aside. Stir in artichoke dip and 1 Tbsp cheese. Remove from heat.

Toss skillet mixture with pasta and plate. Place prawns on top, drizzle with a little balsamic vinegar, and sprinkle with remaining cheese.

Enjoy!