Alsace (except dessert/sparkling)

1992 Gewurztraminer  "Clos des Capucins Cuvee Théo" (Weinbach)
1992 wasn't the best vintage for Alsace, but this winemaker did yeoman's work at time. Or, I should say ("yeowomens' work.")  There isn't much left here, though, to prove that point with.  The wine has lost a lot of varietal character.  The spice is mostly gone. The nose is OK, but nothing like what it had in its youth.  The piquancy that I look for in good gewurz is not there, and the voluptuousness I expect in Weinbach isn't there either. There is still some lychee nut flavor and impressive weight on the body for the vintage and in consideration of how muted the flavors are on the palate, but this wine, while pleasant, hardly resembles the signature statement that it is in most years from Weinbach.  The fruit has gone into gentle decay. Drink up.  84 points.

1995 Riesling  "Goldert--Clos St. Imer-- Cuvée La Chapelle" (Burn)
A bit harsh on the finish, and a bit light, this wine was a bit underwhelming for a grand cru.  The wine was also a bit odd.  I didn't find much varietal character, and the most predominant characteristic seemed to be a buttery texture with slight vanillin overlays.  It left me wondering whether the wine got some oak,  what type, and for how long.  Either way, it lacked penetration and was a long way from the star it should have been. 86 points.

1990 Gewurztraminer "Seigneurs de Ribeaupierre" (Trimbach) QPR Winner
After two heralded under-performing wines from Alsace (see above), this one outperformed expectations.  To be sure, this is not great Alsace, nor is it the style I especially prefer.  But at nearly ten years old, the wine is in pristine condition, has structure, fruit and bite, and good persistence on the finish.   The style is a bit austere and traditional.  The ripeness and voluptuousness one gets in most Alsace gewurz these days is missing. But the fresh fruit shows no sign of fatigue and there are pleasing caramel notes on the finish that I rather liked.  Elegant and focused.  (If you like this style, though, try some Schleret "Herrenweg."  Schleret is a relatively anonymous producer that I've come to like a lot.)  88 points.

1993 Pinot Gris "Clos Windsbuhl" (Zind-Humbrecht)
It may have been a so-so vintage elsewhere in Alsace, but Clos Windsbuhl is one of the world's great vineyards, and Zind-Humbrecht one of its greatest wineries, so what do we have here, class?  Quite.   Rich and ripe, a bit off dry, this pinot gris persists on the tongue and bursts with flavor.  Pinot gris isn't usually this rich or this good or this flavorful. At six years old, this is classic ZH in difficult conditions.   [As an aside,   I had to laugh recently when I saw some guy on the internet "accuse" Robert Parker of having created this style in Alsace, and then someone else called it the "dumbing down" of Alsace wines.  This is simply ridiculous. For all  this, I'm sure Parker would love to take credit, and we would all owe him an unpayable debt!  Weinbach, ZH, Barmes-Beucher.....  IF they are Parker's creations, good for him.  Of course, the main creator of the style is really Domaine Zind-Humbrecht, and especially, Olivier Humbrecht.   And the main, original  promoter of Zind-Humbrecht in the USA actually was not Parker but the owner of Lutece in New York, Alasatian-born Andre Soltner.   As for the even more ridiculous "dumbing down" comment,  ZH and Olivier took theories on ripeness, terroir and yields  in Alsace, an erratic region filled with both great wines and watery overcropped wines,  to a different level.   I've been drinking Alsace for nearly two decades now, and the improvement in quality has been dramatic, and the leader has been ZH.  If this is dumbing down, more of it, please.  It seems to me to be more like a rescue of a region that had developed a bad reputation and was in trouble.   Other than a few malcontents--there are always eccentrics-- just about everyone  lauds ZH, at least those who wants ripeness, intensity and flavor in their wines...but, hey, some people just don't like flavor, ripeness and intensity, I guess.  If you think ZH is a figment of Robert Parker's or anyone else's imagination, my simplest advice would be to try another wine region. These folks are simply one of the most consistent (great off-vintage performances!), most uncompromising, most skilled winemakers in the world. If you don't like them,  you really don't like vins d'Alsace.   See last month's tasting notes for three, stunning ZH classics!]  91 points. 

[Return to Top]

Australia (except dessert/sparkling) 

1997 Vat 47 Reserve Pinot Chardonnay (Tyrell's)
This is in fact not a blend, but pure chardonnay from Burg cuttings. Why they call it pinot chard---got me. But a beautiful wine that I enjoyed a lot. Bright and pure, the wine is refreshingly crisp, but the acidity is well balanced and under control. In fact, the dominant impression is of sweet fruit, with almost a lime rickey note on the finish. Elegant, charming and delicious. This gets about 2/3ds new oak, according to the label, but it hardly tastes like a wine that gets that much oak.  Will be better in a year, but drinking pretty well now. 90 points.

1988 Shiraz/Cabernet "Limestone Ridge" (Lindemanns)
This is a charming and seductive wine, that has a couple of flaws. First, the good news. The wine is sweet and flavorful. It is easy to drink, and very pleasing. Elegant it is. The bad news. At age eleven, it is showing a bit light. Perhaps it was always this way. I can't really say since I didn't have it young. To me, the fruit seems to be thinning, and too easily dominated by the oak. Therein lies the second bit of bad news. Lots of oak. The dominant impression on this wine is the trademark coconut, dill and licorice from heavy applications of American oak. The sweetness is not the fruit; just the oak, and as always, while it tastes rather good, it is hard to find the fruit buried underneath. At this stage in its life, with the fruit thinning,  more restraint would have helped a lot. 87 points.

[Return to Top]

Bordeaux (except dessert/sparkling)
1988 Léoville Las Cases
Tight and hard, this doesn't seem real big, or real tannic, but it is ungiving and charmless on opening. The good news is that it improves a lot. The bad news is that it doesn't improve enough for my tastes.  If served, I would recommend decanting this for an hour or so. It badly needs air.  Even with air, stereotypically for the vintage, it lacks opulence and flavor.  It is a bit too austere for its own good.  87-89 points depending on how it shows in the next stage of development. 

1988 Certan de May
This opens focused and lean, intense and a touch austere, but with air some notes of game and herbs break through for flavor, and the wine slowly, very slowly, acquires a touch of an approachable texture. This needs decanting if served.  Like the Las Cases above, it improves dramatically with air, but retains that austerity.  As a Pomerol, it survives the process, though, a bit better. 88 points.

1985 Certan de May
In contrast to the relatively charmless 1988s, above, this wine was fully open and tasty from the get-go.  The problem was that it seemed to lack depth and concentration, and seemed to have thinned. For a flavor profile, it showed some game and sauvage notes, and seemed rustic and distinctive.   I liked it, but it was surely too thin and showed a bit of decay. With air, it surprised me and got better.  The body put on a bit of weight and the gentle fruit retained its flavors. The velvety texture it acquired made drinking it a pleasure although I would have liked the fresher fruit of the 1988. 89 points.

1985 Lynch Bages
There have always been two things you could say about this wine. One, it was very pleasing, very well done and a great value. Second, it was amazingly overrated, named Wine of the Year by the Wine Spectator.  It became a bit of a symbol of the Wine Spectator's ratings at the time in certain quarters, and not in a good way.  This bottle shows a bit weedy, with the fruit thinning, and without a lot of flesh.  Typical bottle? I have not had one recently, so I cannot say, but would note that  the level was rather low. Still, I have found it typical of 1985s (especially in the Médoc) and 1983s to shed tannins and flesh faster than anticipated on first tasting. This bottle shows mature, and seems a bit old, but had enough life left to pick up weight in the glass and develop a bit of flavor. There were several off notes, too, though, some oxidation and  more decay than appropriate. In the end, it was  a pleasant enough bottle of Bordeaux, but a long, long way from wine of the year, or even wine of the night.  85 points.

[Return to Top]

Burgundy (red) (except dessert/sparkling)
1988 Bonnes Mares (Olivier Leflaive)
Leflaive is not known for reds, but there WAS a time when this firm actually was competent albeit not spectacular in pinot noirs. Here's one. This opens soft and supple, but underneath there are ripe tannins and structure.  The wine has a bit of bite, and avoids flabbiness. The flavors are expansive, fully open, and generous in velvety raspberry flavors. Completely ready, but held well all evening.   This is a great time to drink this, one of the best pinots I've ever had from Leflaive.   90 points.

1991 Bonnes Mares (Roumier) and 1992 Bonnes Mares (Roumier)
This presents a stark vintage contrast. For the first fifteen minutes, about as I'd expect, the 1992 is a big winner. Sweet and soft, with enjoyable cherry flavors, on this wine the texture is appealing and the flavors are pleasing. Then, it falls off a cliff.  With air, it declines steadily all night, flattening and losing flavor. Oh, not a bad wine. But constrained by the modest 1992 vintage. (Hey! Drink up those 1992s!)   The 1991 is another issue. This is also a vintage I dislike, but the best producers were able to make powerful, structured wines.  Often, they fall short in the charm, finesse and flavor categories. But not here. The wine has an attack that is expected, and opens hard and charmless, but then it becomes Burgundy. The raspberry flavors become intense and evolve. The wine begins to come into balance. No, not spectacular Bonnes Mares, but in a couple of more years, a wine no one will object to drinking. For the 1992,  87 points.  For the 1991,  91-93 points.

1990 Clos de Vougeot (Chateau de La Tour)
I have several notes on this wine, and they are all consistent in terms of style, and it gets high marks every time.  It is simply a stunner. Since birth, it has been marked by huge, incredibly sweet, flavorful bursts of fruit up-front.  Since birth, too, it has shown remarkable structure, and given every indication that this is   a Burgundy that is a long-haul wine, and that can be held with confidence.  It still shows ripe, flamboyant fruit, suffused with cherries and red berry overtones.   The tannins are still a bit too substantial and take over the wine in the first phase of aeration.  Although this wine needs some more time in the cellar, I was impressed with how its components integrated with even longer aeration.  Big, sweet, gorgeous and powerful, and showing as well or better than ever.   92-94 points.

1988 Grands-Echezeaux (Mongeard-Mugneret)
This is a focused wine with a pretty burst of raspberry fruit.  With air, the wine softens and expands, and the intensity of the fruit fades a bit. But the flavors remain on the finish. The wine acquires elegance to go with the flavor.  It seemed to me though to fall just a bit short of being really superb. There was a bit of seepage under the capsule, which may or may not have affected its showing.  90 points.

1990 Morey St. Denis "Clos de la Bussière" (Roumier)
One of the best values in Burgundy in its time, this 1er cru was always intense and flavorful, and so, too, now.  Like so many top notch 1990s, it shows remarkable backbone and structure to go with the intense, deep and concentrated fruit.   For longevity, the 1990s may be the best bet since 1978.  Sure, the 1988s will hold, too, because they have significant tannins, but they don't have the same balance of fruit and structure, for the most part, and I predict a lot of them will be short on fruit when the tannins come around.  But anyway...The components of this wine are melding together beautifully.  It is pristine and seems to be actually gaining power as it loses some of the baby fat.  Intense, carefully knit together.  A beauty, and it may still be improving.  92 points.

1991 Corton "En Charlemagne" (Senard)
Broad and expansive, this wine is great in the mid-palate, but no so impressive on the finish and the attack.  The flavors are a bit muted,  subtle strawberry perhaps. The wine seems at once gentle and austere.  It is a pleasing combination of everything, and it has excellent weight and the capacity to age more.   It is a pleasure to drink,  but lacks a bit of pizazz.    89 points.

1994 Morey St. Denis "Les Sorbets" (Charles de Vallière)
For a 1er cru 1994, this has impressive weight and depth, and good concentration. It made my first impression a good one.  Of course, a lot of 1994s seem plenty big, although a bit clunky and hard.  What this lacks is flavor.  It is pleasant enough to drink, in a sense, especially if you wanted a Bordeaux instead of a pinot noir,  but you keep waiting for that burst of fruit that can only be pinot noir, and it never seems to get there. I went back to it a couple of times over the course of an evening, and it just wasn't happening. Big, but flat, hard and  relatively charmless.  You have to admire its concentration, but it is hard to say that it was much fun to drink.  85 points.

1995 Corton-Renardes (Prince Florent de Merode)
This starts out seeming about right, just needing some air and time.  Unfortunately, it goes nowhere fast.  Supple tannins support the body, which is a bit too much on the light side for grand cru from the village of Corton, but it  has enough velvet to have promise.   This is a balance you can live with.  You think that with just a little more flavor, this is going to be an elegant charmer. The flavor never gets there.  Nor does the wine develop.  With air, it showed too much acidity on the finish (tending to volatile acidity at that) and became a little less impressive actually. It went only somewhat downhill, but it went there pretty fast, too.  The wine had its moments, and it had a bit of style, but for grand cru Burgundy, well, can I have my money back?  If you took the virtues of this wine and added them to the virtues of the "Les Sorbets," above, discarding the flaws, you'd have ONE really good Burg.  85 points.

[Return to Top]

Burgundy (white) (except dessert/sparkling)
1989 Pouilly-Fuissé "Cuvée Especiale" (Feret)
I drank this with curiosity. Namely, "why is everyone claiming to be so happy with this wine?"  Got me. Oh, it was pleasant enough. Nicely balanced, clean,  well preserved. But it seemed to do nothing particularly well at all. It seemed like routine Pouilly. Middle of the road everything.  88 points. 

1991 Chassagne-Montrachet "Vergers" (Niellon)
1991 was a year in which Niellon produced many memorable wines. Here's another. Rich and toasty, suffused with intense lees flavors, this voluptuous white Burg is deep and concentrated. The finish is long and memorable.  Just about everything you could possibly want in a white Burg of this status.  93 points.

[Return to Top]

California / USA (Red) (except dessert/sparkling)

1993 Pinot Noir "Allen" (Williams Selyem)
Not as deep as some WS wines, this is nonetheless in a traditional WS style. Namely, bright raspberry fruit, very forward and intense flavors, surprising structure and balance once you get past the obvious and overt, flavorful fruit. On first taste, it is all raspberries. An hour late, it balances out well and shows some class and breeding, too. Like most WS, this needs more cellar time than is first apparent, and I think it is a couple of years from peak still. It is a bit shy on depth for WS, though, and certainly not one of their spectacular efforts, but a very good one. 89 points.

1991 Cabernet (Laurel Glen)
This reminded me a bit of a fruit fly, and I was surprised. It opened tight, charmless and without any flavor. With ten minutes of air, though, the wine expanded beautifully, developing a medium body and a pleasing, expansive cassis and cherry notes. But it didn't last long. The wine continued to change rapidly with exposure to air, and not for the better. After awhile, like the fruit fly, it seemed to fade quickly. Excellent while it was on top, but a rather odd and disappointing performance overall. 87 points.

1990 Dominus
This has always been a wine that is velvety and seductive. This bottle was not perhaps showing its best. After the capsule was stripped off, there was some sign of leakage underneath. Still, while it seemed a bit less ripe and rich than past versions, and while it did not hold as well with air as it had in the last few experiences I had of it, it still showed well. For the first hour and a half, it was a dead ringer for a fine Bordeaux, with all the character and elegance one expects from Margaux, and a dollop of the velvet of Pomerol. The wine has acquired considerable complexity, compared to its youthful showings. The disappointment was that it lacked the special "oomph" it had in the past that provided a couple of extra layers of depth. I tend to attribute that to the condition of the bottle, rather than the natural development of the wine. 90 points even so.

1994 Insignia (Joseph Phelps)
Decanted about an hour before drinking, the Phelps showed me more richness and ripe fruit than it ever has before. In the past, this wine was shut tight and surrounded by considerable tannins. It has evolved beautifully, or at least it has evolved with the help of decanting beautifully. The depth is considerable, the flavors forward. Yet, the wine always seems impeccably balanced. With still more aeration, the tannins emerged again. This is a long haul wine that is nowhere near at peak. I think it needs five years. It will probably drink well from 2004 to 2014. A typically elegant, well made Insignia with both finesse and richness. Its eventual place in the world will depend on how it evolves in the cellar. 91-93 points.

1992 Pinot Noir (Beaux Freres)
It's hard to say enough good things about this wine, although I do prefer the way it showed a year or two back.  In its youth, it was simply a flavorful fruit bomb. I didn't think it would last more than a few years, and I really thought it would be best to drink it all up by1997. Young vines. Second vintage of a new winery. How long would this pinot last? Yet, the wine keeps surprising me, both in the glass and in the cellar. It keeps coming back when I think there is little more left. From this bottle, it still shows beautifully, although I do think it is certainly at a point where it is completely ready and can't safely be held too much longer without destroying some of its most charming aspects. But it's fooled me before. The fruit has developed some tertiary characteristics, but is still ripe and flavorful. The wine still holds up well to air, and there are enough supple tannins for support. Crushed raspberry velvet texture. Gentle and friendly, for all its depth. Still a big winner, but maybe a notch off its peak rating. 92 points.

1995 Zinfandel "Black Sears" (Turley)
Well, typical Turley. Black Sears isn't their most jam packed, nor their most flamboyant, nor their sweetest. But it has a little of everything, and as with so many Turleys shows ripe, sweet fruit with persistent flavor. Toffee and caramel overlays add some distinction to the very ripe fruit.  As always, I think these show a lot more balance than the horrifying--on paper--statistics would indicate.  90 points.

1995 Pinot Noir 25th Anniversary Signature Reserve (Carneros Creek)
I've never been able to warm up to Carneros Creek. The wines always seem to come possessed of a big rep and grandiose ambitions, and they always seem to fall short. So, too, here. Good weight and apparent depth can't make up for a wine that is short on charm and flavor.  It always seems a bit flat and a bit boring.  You keep waiting for the big breakthrough in ripe, sweet fruit. It never happens. Not on opening. Not an hour later. Not the next day.    This was a wine that bored me at the outset. I kept waiting for it to come around. I remain bored.  85 points.

1987 Pinot Noir "Benedict" (Au Bon Climat)
I bought a lot of this on release and drank up my last bottle a couple of years ago. I thought it had held beautifully then, and I've always thought it was the best wine Jim Clendenen has ever made.  To my shock, it is still stunning. This pristine bottle was perfectly stored.  Served blind, the wine show gorgeous red berry fruit, impeccable balance and not a sign of age. Guesses on age ranged from 1992 to 1995.  Served with the Roumier Bonnes Mares and the Leflaive Bonnes Mares, above, for awhile this was easily the best wine.  It clearly is ready and needs drinking; by the end of the evening, it started to show some cracks in the facade and the fruit was replaced by charmless tannins.  But it was a stunning showing, twelve years out,  for California pinot noir.  If you have pristine bottles, this should be drunk now.  91 points.

1993 Pinot Noir "Laurene" (Drouhin)
Speaking of American pinot noir, here's another beauty.  It is not quite ready to drink, but pretty close.  It is a wine I have followed closely since release, consistently rated above 90 points, and it keeps showing exceptionally well.   Bright and focused, surrounded by a haze of ripe, fine tannins, this wine delivers flavor with backbone.  Excellent intensity, purity of fruit. Tastes great!  92 points.

1996 Pinot Noir  "Sonoma" (Kistler)
Another beauty from Kistler.  Exotic and extracted, supple and flavorful, this wine full of fruit flavor, red berries and boysenberry.  It opened a bit disjointed, but in about half an hour, it knit together beautifully. Don't misunderstand my description, incidentally. This is not a flamboyant, over-the-top fruit bomb. To the contrary, it is well integrated and well balanced, and with air becomes very supple. This is not quite ready, but not far away.  It probably lacks the depth and intensity to be truly exceptional, but you won't regret buying it. 89-90 points.

1993 Zinfandel "Jackass Hill"  (Martinelli)
Intense and aromatic, this wine year in, year out, always seems to be about as thick as any Zin can be. I do not find it necessarily has as much flavor as some near-competitors (Turley Hayne for instance), but for sheer thickness, this is about as big as it gets. A couple of years of age have served this well.  The flavors poke through now, and there are pleasing caramel overtones.  For all of the wine's power, it comes into balance with air.  It is surprisingly well integrated after half an hour.  This is not my favorite zin, nor my favorite zin vintage, but it is a super performance that tests the limits of the varietal in this vintage.  93 points.

1994 Zinfandel "Jackass Vineyard" (Martinelli)
I guess there is something really special and different about the "Hill" than the vineyard. I generally think '94 is a better zin vintage than '93.  But this JV does not come close to the Jackass Hill. This has a bit of restrain, and a medium body. At times it seems more like syrah, with a Cote Rotie sort of  focus.   It is a fine zin, and full of flavor, but it cannot match the JH's depth.  It suffers only by comparison, though. 89 points.

1996 Zinfandel "Highway 101" (Turley)
Highway 101 is relatively new for Turley, and just off Geyserville. On opening, this is about as sexy as any zin you would want. Flamboyant, gorgeously perfumed, with toffee overlays, the fruit is sweet, ripe and invigorating.  It takes a couple of hours for it to  thin and settle down, and for sure, this does not have the pure power of the biggest Turleys.  There were times, though, when the pure flavor is simply a wonderful thing, and it developed considerable elegance as well, believe it or not. 91 points.

1994 Zinfandel "Hayne" (Turley)
On release, I was in the minority amongst my friends in thinking that this was too thick and tannic, and would profit by cellaring.  They liked the flamboyance. I saw a wine that had not yet knit together.  Three years later, I proclaim victory.  This has aged gracefully and gorgeously, and I like it better than ever.  No, it no longer strikes you as impenetrable, tannic monster of its youth. It is not as burly as the Martinelli '93 Jackass Hill, above.  But all those things work in its favor, because the parts have fully knit together now. The wine was thick, now it is rich and velvety.  It seems nicely balanced, but deep and long.  The lush mouthfeel is about perfect.  The purity of fruit was such that it seemed flawless.  It is deep and big, but seems balanced and attractive from all perspectives.   I've had this several times, and on the whole, I have to call this the best zin I have ever had. Now drinking perfectly.  98 points.

1994 Pinot Noir (Deux Chapeaux)
This pinot is the product of two famous sommeliers. It starts gorgeously and seems to be a big winner at first. It is medium bodied, shows considerable finesse, but is chock full of flavor and cherries. The texture is attractively velvety. I was liking it a lot. Not too long later, it seemed to crack up.  The wine has little depth, and finished with annoying acidity after awhile, and less and less fruit flavor.  Terrific for half an hour or so. All downhill after that.  This wine has a lot of promise, but it needs some work and attention to depth and concentration.  It makes me think that the winemaker aimed for finesse--and got weakness instead.  With this modest weight, you'd better have some low yields and old vines to get the necessary intensity.  85 points.

1995 Mourvedre "Enfant Terrible" (Edmunds St. John)
When I had this wine pre-release, I had two comments: (1) the best fruit that this inexpensive $10 Mourvedre has ever had. Surely, ESJ had produced a wine of amazing depth and flavor for its price range. (2) The acidity levels were out of whack, the wine was out of balance and it seemed liked someone decided to screw with Mother Nature and add a lot of citric acid.  What a tragedy. Now, four years from release, the wine still has amazing fruit. It is pristine, sweet and grapey, and it is hard to believe that $10 mass market wine has fruit this good.  But the acidity has not gone away either, and it certainly mars the performance. When you focus on the fruit, this is amazing wine. When you let it all wash over your tongue, it becomes a bit annoying at times. An old story....don't fool with Mother Nature.  85 points.

1995 "Les Cotes Sauvages" (Edmunds St. John) 
Meanwhile, also in 1995, ESJ was producing perhaps its best ever Cotes Sauvages, another of its many Rhone-clone offerings.  The price of this has inched up to around $20, but it has gotten to be a serious competitor in the Rhone clone sweepstakes.  The wine opens fairly light and feathery, the pretty velvet texture holding considerable appeal, even though the depth is modest. With air, it picks up some weight and becomes a fine, elegant, imitation Rhone-clone.  The fruit is soft and flavorful, tinged with blueberry and herbs.  The wine doesn't have the depth of the very best ESJ syrahs, but it is pretty close now. ESJ, of course, always aims for some elegance and finesse, so don't anticipate a blockbuster.  88 points. 

1992 Syrah "Durrell" (Edmunds St. John)
A few years earlier, ESJ produced what many think was the closest thing to a Rhone wine ever produced in America. Francophiles loved its elegance; New World wine advocates loved its pure fruit and flavor.  This bottle appeared pristine and representative. In which case....I have to say this wine is now starting to fade and thin.  It still opens elegant and slightly sweet, and I was by no means ready to pour it down the drain. With air though, it seemed a tad bitter on the finish and the wine showed just a few hints of cracking.  It was a great ride while it lasted. Drink up.  85 points.

1994 Ensemble (Beaulieu Vineyards)
Simply delicious--BV's foray into the Rhone clone field.   This wine does not aim for subtle. It is fruity and flamboyant, sweet and juicy.  The body is only of medium weight; it is not big and thick.  It is certainly fruit driven, however, blueberry nuanced, up front.  Drink now, because when the fruit goes, there is nothing there that will hold any interest.  With air, it faded a bit and this wine is certainly not intense. If it comes up a bit short, though, on the finish, it sure provides tons of fun while you're drinking it. Not the best QPR wine in the world (on sale at $22, marked at $29), but lotsa charm.  89 points.

[Return to Top]

1993 Chardonnay "Diamond T" (Talbott)
At age six, this wine, one of California's classic chards in my view,  is a bit different. It was always more structured and focused than some chards along the lines of the big bombs, like Marcassins, Kistlers, Peter Michael. It is even a little more subtle now. With air and warmth though, the fruit still coats your mouth, seems pure and clean, and brimming with flavor.  The wine is beautifully balanced and impeccable. Easy to drink, yet focused, relatively crisp and in the prime of life. For California chardonnay, this aging beautifully. Classy and well defined.  A pleasure to drink as always. 92 points.

1994 Chardonnay "Gauer Ranch" (Marcassin)
This has often been one of the poster boys for big, over-the-top chardonnay from this vineyard. The fruit is always huge and flavorful, but some question the balance. I don't care; they taste too good to argue with, especially young. For those who like that balance thing, and insist on Burgundy imitators, maybe you should hold them a few extra years, which, I would argue, may get you balance but harms the sexy flavors and pure pleasure.  But  this actually seems to have developed some balance. In past incarnations, it has been huge and all fruit. It stills has lots of fruit and lots of oak, but it has also calmed down some, the fruit has thinned some, and this is a lot closer to traditional chardonnay than ever before. The intense lees flavors linger, are still pretty, and are hard to forget. This didn't strike me as spectacular on this night, and I rather preferred the more overt flavors of earlier incarnations, but it was certainly very good. 90 points.

 [Return to Top]

Dessert / Sparkling Wines

1993 Late Harvest Riesling (Beringer)
Love it or hate it. This baby is pure sugar, pure thickness. Harvested at nearly 50% brix! They coined the phrase "cut it with a knife" for this wine. It actually has hardly changed at all in the last couple of years. Still unbelievably rich and sweet, and thicker than most trockenbeerenausleses would dare to be, the fragrant, apricot-nuanced wine is, depending on how you look at it, a tour de force of unbelievable intensity, sweetness, concentration and richness, or an unbalanced wine that lacks acidity.  Hey, quit carping. If you don't like the style, drink something else. But a wine this rich doesn't come along very often. Stop and savor. One final note: I was sure this wine would not age. In the last two or three years, it has hardly budged at all, let alone fallen apart. I find that rather amazing, and I'm newly impressed. 94 points.

1995 Late Harvest Riesling (Firestone)
I've had so many bottle variations on this wine, that I can only post this note as comic relief. Some of the bottles have been superb. Not this one. In fact, have you ever had a late harvest riesling with heavy brett? Me neither. But that's what this seemed like. In fact, just think "skunk." It was hideous. The palate wasn't bad, but you couldn't get past the nose, which was worse the off-putting. It was downright disgusting. Too bad, since in other respects the wine does a lot right. But you can't focus on anything else with that bouquet in front of your nose. Well, you learn something new every day, but I guess that I would like to avoid a few more lessons like this for awhile. 65 points.  P.s...A week later I tried another bottle. Call it delightful and a cross between apricots and cherries and give it 90 points.  I have to say, however, that the bottle variations on this wine are a concern. At its best it is great.

1983 Port (Graham's)
A long, long way from being ready to drink, this Graham's is sweet for an 1983, and it is a tribute to the style of the house that some sweet fruit pokes through to the top.  That's because this wine is thick and powerful, heavily tannic, and at times seems almost like sludge.  It is an immense wine, and one of the most promising 1983s I have had.  But you'll be a lot happier trying it again around 2010.   Don't even consider trying a bottle before 2005.  91-94 points.

1997 Riesling Beerenauslese "Geisenheimer Rothenberg" (Schumann Nagler)
This seems way to light for a BA. Maybe a few years of age and some oxidation will give it some weight.  But BA or no, the elegant fruit is chock full of flavor, it has a great finish, and the nuances of apricots linger.  I was disappointed in this a bit from the perspective of it being a dessert wine, but as something merely off-dry, it was crisp, sweet and elegant.  89 points.

1991 Muskateller Eiswein "Durkheimer Hochbenn (Kurt Darting)
I'm told this was an acidic monster when young. Can't say. All I CAN say is that I'm not a big acid freak, and this was super now.  The wine is very complex, and melds together lots of interesting flavors and nuances.  At times, yes, there are lemony notes from marked acidity.  But the somewhat syrupy sweetness is redolent of apricots and balances it well. The wine has intensity and a great finish.  It coats attacks your palate, and you don't really mind. 91 points.

1996 Abalonga Beerenauslese "Westhofener Steingrube" (Wittman)
This wasn't what I expected, in part because the importer's description of the wine was so bizarre. (If I recall correctly, words like "depraved" and "exotic" were used.)  At a minimum, I thought I'd be getting something sweeter and thicker.  As it was, it was a bad choice for a dessert wine.  But what I got was delicious. High in acid, but balanced by persistently flavorful fruit, the wine mingles pears and lemons.  It is lively and tastes great, and a pretty nice finish too.  I expected to be won over by depth and substance, but instead I got charm and distinction. Well, whatever. 91 points.

NV Tawny Port "Old Benson" (Rosemount)
When something underperforms, you always wonder how typical the bottle is, and that is always an investigation for another day. For this bottle...... This highly touted tawny from Australia had my mouth watering. Having just returned this Spring, I found the Aussie tawnies one of their best kept secrets, and most of the very best are not imported  here.  This old solera promised a lot, but didn't deliver much. On opening, it was nice.  It was austere for an Aussie tawny, not terribly sweet, but dominated by intense and delicious coffee flavors that made the wine very attractive.  With air the wine seemed to, if not crack up, go downhill.  The flavor dissipated, and it became most tannin. The impression was declining fruit, and I wasn't so happy at that point.  It didn't get better.  87 points.

[Return to Top]

Germany (except dessert/sparkling)

1990 Riesling Auslese "Kaseler Nies'chen" (Karlsmühle)
Sweet and elegant, refreshing and crisp, this wine is just a pleasure to drink today.  It finishes with more pure lemony acidity  than I would like, but since the fruit is so ripe and sweet, the acidity provides an intellectual counterpoint to everything else going on in the wine. Call me irresponsible, call it complex, but it worked very well here.  :)  With this level of ripe fruit surrounding the acidity, it isn't a problem even for me.  I wonder though if in ten years it will be the acidity that is left or the fruit. There seemed to me to be a hint that the fruit was thinning on this wine, and the lemons were pretty prominent on the back end.  A simple answer: drink now.  91 points. 

1991 Scheurebe Spätlese "Durkheimer Fronhof" Halbtrocken (Kurt Darting)
The nose has the obligatory cat pee and grass, but in modest ways.  The palate is even better. Crisp and bright, the citric acidity is balanced by at least some sweetness that the wine badly needed in my view.  As it stands, this is great summer wine, invigorating and balanced.  For my tastes, it marches up to the line of what I would consider too much obvious acidity, but thankfully never sets more than a toenail or two across it.  With the right food matchup, you might not notice.  88 points.

1996 Ruländer Auslese "Bopparder Hamm Feuerlay" (Weingart)
Charming, off dry wine of medium body and nice finish.  Pears and peaches on the finish, and a rich viscosity on the mid-palate make this a wine with excellent fruit and a pleasing demeanor.  Youthful and invigorating.  Delicious. 90 points.

1975 Riesling Auslese Bernkasteler Graben  (Pfarrkirche Bernkastel)
This wine shows its age like Sinatra approaching 50.  You know it is true, but it's hard to believe.  One tip-off is that suddenly things are bit rounder, and gentler.  You can tell this is an older wine if you think carefully about it. It is not really lively any more, except on the finish where there is still a hit of acidity.  But after that, it is beautiful.  Off dry still,  gentle and expansive, the pure fruit on this wine seems so fully open that it seems to be giving all that is possible for a grape to give. No diesel here.  The nose seems like a subtle flower--it isn't taking over the room, but it won't fade, either.  Excellent finish.  Nothing about this wine hits you over the head at first sip, but when you're done, you realize it was a pleasure to drink and you want more.   90 points.

1989 Scheurebe "Mussbacher Eselshaut" Auslese (Muller-Catoir)
I would like to tell you that I know what to make of this wine, but I really don't.  It seemed in warfare with its various components. Relatively dry for a Auslese, the initial impression was of somewhat bitter tangerine and acidity. It was unusual and not quite like any other off-dry Scheurebe I have had. With air, the acidity softened, and the wine became rounder and integrated better. The length was excellent. On the whole, I wound up liking its distinctiveness, but it isn't something I would like to go out buy much of.  I think it would be a controversial wine in many quarters. 86 points.


[Return to Top]

Italy (except dessert/sparkling)

1993 Barolo "Vigneto Neirane" (Burlotto)
New wave Barolo from a user-friendly vintage gets you.....this; a soft, relatively accessible Barolo, with rounded edges, some flavor, no astringency and a gentle demeanor.  True Barolo fans and tannins pigs will smirk.  I liked its accessibility, flavor and approachable style.  A tad short on depth for young Barolo.  87 points.

[Return to Top]

Loire (except dessert/sparkling)

1996 Silex (Daguenau)
This seems like such a step up on the Pur Sang, and a rather different style. The Pur Sang can be all acidity. This seems round and buttery, the edge is off the acidity, although enough remains so that it feels crisp and refreshing, especially on the finish. There are grassy notes, but the ripe fruit is open and expansive, and in balance with the rest of the wine's components. Too bad all sauv blanc doesn't adopt this approach. When they don't ripen enough, all you get is acidity, cat pee and grass.  90 points.

[Return to Top]

New Zealand (except dessert/sparkling)
1997 Sauvignon Blanc Marlborough (Vavasour) QPR Winner
Well, it's sauv blanc. Grassy.  You know what I mean. But I have to say, I'm really liking NZ sauv blanc these days more than a lot of French ones. While the NZ wines are clearly on the high acid side, and clearly grassy, they also have more fruit than acid, and they do not seem quite the chore to drink.  This has hints of lime and mango, and quite a bit of flavor to go with the acid and grass. A bit short of depth.  Hmmmm. Grass and acid.  It's beginning to sound like a '60s rock concert. But I liked the wine. 87 points.

1997 Cabernet/Merlot Hawkes Bay (Matua Valley)
I didn't expect much from this, but rather disliked it on opening. The fruit seemed a bit too pinot like, more berry than cassis, and it was surrounded by too much acid, and a touch tart.  I liked the way it developed, though, a day later.  The fruit always retained a lot of flavor, and unusual sweetness, but it got some character from a roasted cherry overtone it took on with air. The wine remained a touch too tart, but did a decent job of approaching balance. Medium weight, and a pleasing demeanor. Good finish. Enough tannin for aging as  a mid-term wine. The more air it got, the better it got and the more I liked it.   If this wine were just a touch less tart, I'd be liking it a LOT.  89 points.

1997 Pinot Noir (Ata Rangi)
Supposedly, one of New Zealand's best pinot noir producers. I see why.  A stunning raspberry nose gave way to a rather flat palate with a bitter finish. I was ready to trash this.  I held it. Tight, and tighter. Finally, the wine began to open. With every passing ten minute increment it became nicer and nicer.  I kept revising the score up every time I went back to it.  The fruit took on some cherry characteristics and developed into something tasty, if a bit candied and very sweet on the finish. For all of the sweetness, the finish seemed just a touch odd and bitter, although the fruit flavors covered up most of that. I think this wine needs about two to three years of cellaring before trying again.  The weight and structure were fine, and the wine had the finesse and demeanor of pinot noir. Let's see how this develops. It could be special, or just a brick short.  88-90 points.

Rhone/South/Southwest France (except dessert/sparkling)

1994 Chateauneuf-du-Pape (Vieux Telegraphe) 
On release, this was a flamboyant, fruity Chateauneuf that at times seemed so sweet and exuberant that (a) you couldn't stop drinking it and (b) you couldn't take it entirely seriously. A little cellar time has answered (b).  Some of the baby fat and exuberance has quieted down, but the wine seems deeper than ever, well balanced, and supported by ripe tannins for aging. In place of the sweet, youthful fruit, there is a distinctive game and bacon fat character around the edges. Its depth is now apparent, and impressive.  The wine is a bit different, but still beautiful, simply a great Vieux Telegraphe. 92 points. 

1998 Rosé Costières de Nimes (Mourgues de Gris)
This is a modest Rosé from Provence that provides a lot of fun at a reasonable price.  It reminds me a bit more of Tavel than Provence, but anyway....More than a dollop of rich, ripe cherry fruit, and an elegant structure make this wine a great, fruity summer refresher.  It faded after awhile and finished a bit harsh, but after all, this is a Rosé from Provence not La Landonne. In that light,  87 points.

1988 Hermitage Blanc (Chave)
I have to think that this was an atypical bottle.  It opened hard, tight and acidic.  But there was still a touch of fruit. I didn't like it, and wondered if it just needed more time. More time and air probably answered that question, at least for this bottle. It got more and more acidic, and became more and more unpleasant. The fruit became harder to find and the balance was non-existent.  It left me thinking of a Macon, not Chave Hermitage Blanc.  I'll need to revisit this wine to see how typical this was. The bottle looked OK. But it sure didn't taste OK.   By the end of the evening,  I didn't want to drink it at all.  79 points.

1989 Cote Rotie (P. Barge)
Let it all hang out.  No, not fruit. The wine is medium bodied at best, and shows too little depth, frankly.  But after that, the winemaker let other things go full throttle--brett, gamey notes and animal smells, which worsened as the wine aired out, but never became really intolerable.  If the winemaker had paid as much attention to the fruit, this would have been a great wine. As it was, it had a dollop of elegance and flavor,  but the sauvage characteristics overwhelmed everything else.  Some people will like this style better, but it is mediocre Cote Rotie. 87 points.

1997 Condrieu "La Doriane" (Guigal)
I had this recently and was seriously underwhelmed. This showed way better. Served with the Macon, above, I at first lost track of which was which. This viognier was so ripe, so relatively thick, that I almost mistook it for chardonnay. To be sure, next to the Macon, it is a much lighter weight wine. But for viognier it is remarkably thick.  The finish persists, seemingly indefinitely, and the fruit coats your tongue and stakes out a toehold for the future. Fans of a more delicate, more perfumed style of viognier won't find it here. However, if you just like concentrated, intense wine of great depth, this is it. 92 points.