Seeing as the only spirits I can muster any enthusiasm for drinking are sherry and port, I am starting to think about buying a set of port-sherry glasses. Now. I know the parameters for a port-sherry glass, and it has a 2-ounce capacity and a particular shape (which I don’t feel like describing here–it’s still early in the morning for me).
What I’m curious about this is. In my possession already are two types of glasses that I have deemed unsatisfactory for the intended purpose.
The first were advertised as “liqueuer glasses.” They are actually much larger than my father’s liqueuer glasses, which were purchased circa 1975, and are barely big enough to accomodate a pinky finger. In fact, when I measured out two fluid ounces and tried to pour them into the glass, it very nearly accomodated them, if I relied in surface tension to let the water mound over the rim a little bit.
The second type of glass I have are sherry glasses, but not port-sherry glasses. They have flat bottoms and they are sort of ugly, and I want to replace them. These glasses acommodated two fluid ounces very handsomely–with half an inch of room at the top, or more.
My question is this: which of these two glasses would be advertised as having a “two ounce” capacity? The one that can barely hold two ounces when about to overflow, or the one that holds two ounces when filled to a normal drinking level?
It would be the normal drinking level. You don’t get a brimming liquid in a one ounce shot glass of spirits, or in any other standad glass, be it for wine, etc.
I’d also say that the strict two ounces is for bars only, and in the home, you might be a little more generous. Just get a glass that’s the shape you want, and if it’s very roughly the right size, that’ll do fine.
Just to add: “liqueur glasses” are for… well, liqueurs (such as Bailey’s, Kahlua, Drambuie, etc), and not “fortifieds” such as sherry and port. The former group is generally in the 25’45% alcohol by volume range, and the latter around 14-18%. Thus, the former should be served in a one ounce glass, and the latter in a two ounce. I wouldn’t serve a sherry in a liqueur glass - it’d be like pouring a beer into a wine glass.
These are a bit expensive of an example, but something like them is what I’d be after were I you. These hold 3.75oz and are just about the right shape.
Those little tiny glasses you describe are best for things like grappa and aquavit where a tiny little bit goes a very long way.
Right. Unfortunately for my budget, I’m one of those snotty people who deny that the whole twentieth century happened, at least where tableware is concerned. Actually, as I get older, I’m pretty cool with everything up to WWII. I think that is progress.
Sorry for using incorrect terminology, TheLoadedDog. I do know that the liqueur glasses are only for very strong stuff; that’s why I’m after port-sherry glasses. As a personal preference, I do like smaller glasses rather than larger ones–I wish I could buy nice 4-oz wine glasses instead of the troughs available today. And when I was in high school and they lectured us about the evils of drink, I think that the American standard for “one drink” was four ounces of wine, not seven. I know–you like to spread out, in Australia.
Actualy, you’ve reminded me I did make a mistake there. I believe the standard table wine serving is in fact five ounces (though seven is common, and ten is not unheard of).
IME, the volume is measured at the about-to-overflow level. Which is kinda stoopid, but that’s what I’ve seen.
That being said–if you’re going glassware-shopping to the extent of buying stuff specifically for port/sherry, you could just go all-out and get the Riedel glassware.
(As for me, I just use liqueur glasses and refill as necessary.)
You bring back bad memories of the switch from line glasses to volume glasses for serving pints of beer in. You nasty person :mad:
That is the only area where I remember encountering the ‘x volume when brimful’ concept - which is stupid, and was only invented in order to shortchange customers.
I think your “mistake” is brought on by the fact that the average serving of table wine, unlike everything else, bears no relationship to one standard drink. Here are the Aussie standard drinks.
I have been careful about drink driving for years and always count my drinks but I assumed a “glass of wine” was equal to one standard drink. Only a little while ago I was reading the label on a bottle of wine and was horrified to see that it contained 7 standard drinks. But how could that be, there are only 4 and a splash serves in a bottle? And that is the trick - the standard wine glass is equivalent to a schooner not a middy. Who ever heard of a 3 oz serve of wine?
