TM


Tasting Notes
May/June, 2007*
*Tasting notes for this issue are short because they were interrupted by a long tasting trip for the Wine Advocate, which results you will see posted in the WA, not here

Tasting Notes Contents Page

QPR Winner   I give this award to wines that demonstrate an excellent Quality to Price Ratio. They are sometimes more expensive than the wines featured in my Best Buys section (which is cut off at $20), so while every Best Buy is also a QPR Winner,  not every QPR winner is an official Best Buy.  QPR winners are simply wines that are great values for a relatively  reasonable price. 

Australia  Bordeaux Burgundy Calif/USA  Dessert/Sparkling  Italy   Rhone/South/SW France

Australia (except dessert/sparkling)
1997 Shiraz/Cabernets "J.S.M. (Fox Creek)
This wine was about $20 AUD at the cellar door, at the time about $13 US, not the type of price you expect to see holding well on Day 2 for a decade. Yet, it did. It opened poorly, the oak dominating. It took about forty minutes of air for it to come around, at which point the fruit finally showed itself, and its structure appeared as well. It was no longer a one-dimensional oak bomb, but a real wine, with backbone and nice fruit. The oak integrated more the next day, although the fruit faded a bit, too. It seemed like a completely different wine, more stern, more structured. I think I liked it best after a couple of hours on Day 1, but it showed an awful lot of character on Day 2. In its price range, that is nice argument to have. 90 points.

[Return to Top]  

Bordeaux (except dessert/sparkling)
2000 Chateau Lagrange
Beautifully focused, this remains a bit tight and tense, even after decanting. Still, its flavor improve every moment it is opened, and its bright demeanor drives home the fruit for a lingering, delectable finish. 92 points.

1985 Chateau L’Eglise-Clinet
This has some elegance and a rather penetrating finish, but it is ultimately tripped up by the vegetal notes, as it is laced with bell peppers and olives, and a little on the displeasing side for that reason. I liked its texture and general presentation, though. 85 points.

[Return to Top]  

Burgundy (except dessert/sparkling)
1985 Clos St. Denis (G. Lignier)
This opens a bit musty, and a little sweaty. It needs a few minutes to pull itself together. When it does, there frankly isn’t that much worth waiting for, as it shows light, with fading fruit, and forest floor notes. It seems to be well past prime. 82 points.

1990 Nuits St. Georges “Haut Poirets” (Machard de Gramont)

This smells old and over the hill on the nose, but with air, it briefly comes to life, having a few moments of liveliness, and showing some acid. The fruit flattens quickly after that, though.  This is past prime. 84 points.

1993 Nuits St. Georges “Vaucrains” (Dominique Laurent)

After a little aeration, this perks up nicely, showing some vivacity, and aging but still tasty strawberry-nuanced fruit. It doesn’t stay at peak for too long, and it lacks the structure to evolve for the better at this point. It fades considerably by the end of the evening. 87 points.

1993 Chambertin “Clos de Bêze” (Dominique Laurent)

This opens with a gamey nose, and some acid, seeming a little disjointed, showing sour cherry notes. It knits together nicely, though, and with air, its backbone shows itself and the wine evolves into something nicer, more intense and more interesting. It is not a great Chambertin, though. 89 points.

2000 Meursault “Gouttes d’Or” (Arnaud Ente)

Crisp and steely, this is fresh and initially comes along nicely. With more air the fruit fades a bit, and it seems rather too bright for me.  88 points.

2005 Bienvenues-Batard-Montrachet (Pernot)
Buttery and oaky on the edges, this is surprisingly approachable, but there is much more to come. It has a great finish and fine flavor at the outset, laced with lees nuances. I was looking for something to show intensity, however, and with a little air the acidity pokes through and makes this somewhat piercing. On the whole, a very nice performance. 93 points.

1995 Vosne-Romanée “Beauxmonts“ (Clavelier)
This displays tasty, cherry-nuanced fruit that tends more to raspberry as the wine gets brighter with air. It is silky and elegant, but perhaps a bit simple, too. Still, I liked its pleasing fruit, and it did show some earthy notes on occasion with air. 89 points.

[Return to Top]  

California/USA (except dessert/sparkling)
2004 Pinot Noir “Reuling” (Aubert)
Tight and closed on opening, this seems dry and austere but for the nose at first. It gradually opens, showing more fruit and considerable grip. Its tannins give it nice intensity with air. There is a bit of alcohol noticeable on this big boy, which pushes up near 16 points, but it mostly handles it well.   92 points.

2005 Chardonnay “Ritchie” (Aubert)

Penetrating and rich at the same time, this is long, bright and buttery. There is great fruit and a very fine finish, some spice and acid popping up to drive the fruit home. Listed at 15.6% alcohol, this seems to handle it remarkably well, but admittedly I’m beginning to wonder how much farther California’s escalating alcohol levels can keep going with ever escalating alcohol problems. Still, this does the job. 94 points.

2002 Chardonnay “Chloe” (DuMOL)

There’s a big hit of oak up front, but there is also acid in the back that cuts through it eventually and makes this wine penetrating. It ultimately develops some leesy notes, and becomes ever more attractive. 92 points.

2002 Pinot Noir “Blue Slide Ridge” (Marcassin)

This has great fruit once it comes alive, and its mid-palate is elegant.  It seems in fact, a bit light and a bit simple. When it wakes up fully and the structure begins to assert itself, it begins to seem more interesting but also it seems a bit harsh, and the alcohol a bit noticeable at times. 92 points.

2004 Pinot Noir “Cargasacchi” (Bonaccorsi)

Not really ready to drink, this shows intense and tight, with fine grip on the finish, and nice focus.  I think its balance is excellent, and its components should integrate well in a couple of years. I liked its muscle. It will be better in 2009. 91 points.

2003 Pinot Noir “Rosella’s” (August West)
Sweet and opulent, this has a bit of an oaky overlay at first, but it is seductive, and shows intensity on the finish as well. It is more or less drinkable now, and I’m not sure it will age terribly well, but it is a sexy beast that is quite tasty. 90 points.

2004 Cabernet Sauvignon (Buccella)
This is a lovely young Cab, tight and tannic, with an elegant mid-palate. The sweet fruit becomes succulent and fleshier as the wine expands in the glass and becomes ever more intense. Very nice, and built for medium term aging. 92 points.

2004 “IX” Proprietary Red (Colgin)

Big and powerful, this seems frankly over-the-top. It does have its good points, though. It shows fine grip on the finish, and as it airs out it starts to show some semblance of balance. The mid-palate is not particularly thick, although the fruit is very rich, and the oak very prominent. The wine shows some heat, and seems a bit heady. 93 points.

2001 Pinot Noir “Moulin Rouge--Pisoni” (Peter Michael)

Powerful and penetrating, this is a big and burly Pinot with rich and sweet fruit, and lots of everything. The alcohol becomes a touch noticeable with air, but is mostly handled well. It is a style that won’t appeal to everyone, but it does have some terrific fruit. 92 points.

1999 Cabernet Sauvignon (Jones Family)
This opened in a worrisome fashion, disjointed, and laced with piercing shards of acidity and alcohol. The body of the wine is rather elegant and the rest of it seemed well designed, but it just seemed harsh. About an hour of air helped this immensely, as its parts knitted together beautifully and in fact it became a relatively graceful wine with lots of typical Cab Sauvignon notes and nuances. It does seem to be aging fairly rapidly, thins out fairly fast, and shows mature notes readily. Still, it became quite tasty and classic. 90 points.

2003 Cabernet Sauvignon (Larkin)
This has a bit of fruit wrapped around oak, cloaked in some more oak, chocolate, vanilla and licorice. It seems a bit odd, and thins out fast. The fruit does not begin to keep up with the oak. It is simple and one dimensional. 87 points.

2001 Cabernet Sauvignon "Diamond Mountain" (Constant)
This shows surprising richness, but not quite as much intensity as I expected in this vintage, at least at first. It opens sweet, with oaky nuances as well as very ripe fruit protruding from the whole. Tannins finally do come out, however, and the wine finally displays a little grip on the finish.  It is on the sexy side, and perhaps also a little on the simple side, but it has enough backbone to make it a wine instead of a fruit bomb, and it is quite tasty. In fact, this has some points of similarity with the Colgin IX, above, although it is a little more restrained, and of course, a little more mature. 92 points.

2004 Cabernet Sauvignon (Chappellet)
This opens with hints of richness, and then the wine redoubles in intensity, showing some welcome structure with air. As it sat, it projects some menthol notes, and I don't know that I really appreciated its evolution, but it had its moments. 88 points.

1996 Cabernet Sauvignon "Hidden Spring" (Hart's Desire)
Decent, if simple and uninspiring, this middle of the road wine is correct and gentle, not much more.  It shows some mature nuances to it, and should be considered fully ready to drink. In fact, I wouldn't hold it much longer, if you are expecting best results. 85 points.

1992 Cabernet Sauvignon "Atlas Peak" (Per Sempre)
This seems older than it is, fully mature, and a little over the hill. It  is soft, showing little structure. As it airs out, it cracks a little more. There's a harsh note of charcoal around the edges as it cracks. 82

1994 Cabernet Sauvignon "Malibu--Newton Canyon" (Rosenthal)
Shrill, acidic and harsh, this unbalanced wine is not exactly aging gracefully. As the fruit fades, the structural components dominate it and make it hard to drink. There's a touch of liqueur on the finish, too. A few tastes were more than enough of this. 78 points.

1986 Cabernet Sauvignon (Burgess)
Fully mature, and then some, this has some gentle appeal at the outset, but there isn't much left here. It is chock full of tertiary nuances, and it is soft to the point of inoffensive. 80 points.

2000 Cabernet Sauvignon "Bosché" (Freemark Abbey)
I rather enjoyed this a little earlier, but as age catches up to it, vintage issues assert themselves. It opens very well, a bit lean in the mid-palate, but with good structure and some power. As the wine airs out, there are too many green notes, which I found offputting, and it seems rather basic. Considering its suggested retail price (over $50), it is not particularly interesting at this point. This was better young, and I suspect it is going nowhere but down. So, while it is not going to fall apart thanks to its backbone, it is better to drink this up now. 86 points.

2002 "Blend 352" (Core)
This is gentle and drinks well now. It is soft and a bit simple, fully mature, and perhaps then some. It has some character, showing some hints of game, and nice flavors. Its texture is soft and caressing. It has little finish at this point, and not much structure apparent. This needs drinking in the near future. 87 points.

1999 Zinfandel "Dogtown" (Turley)
A lighter styled Turley, this is bright and elegant, showing flavorful fruit that dissolves onto the palate. The mid-palate is modest in weight at this point. This is a very different vision of a Zin than you get with some of the offerings like the "Hayne Vineyard," as the Dogtown is not only light, but did make me wonder at times if it was too light. Still, it drinks very well today, and this is a great time to drink it. It will hold for another couple of years, but will not improve and may decline in the near future. Call this "at peak." 90 points.

1996 Zinfandel "Hayne" (Turley)
I've had the chance to track this wine over the years. In its youth, it was very tannic, powerful and impenetrable. It has finally opened for business. That said, I'm not sure it has aged perfectly. The fruit has opened, and projects richness and caramels. The alcohol is noticeable at times, though, and I liked the wine a little less after a lot of air. This is all relative. It is still quite good, though, and sports a penetrating finish and deep fruit. 94 points.

2005 Chardonnay "Rancho Santa Rosa" (Foley)
This fruit forward wine has a suggested retail price of $30, but is likely to be found for a lot less. I see street prices in the low $20s.  At that level, it is a pretty good deal and nice wine. It opens beautifully, showing lovely flavors, pleasing fruit and focus. It is big and ripe, but mostly friendly and flavorful, perhaps a touch heady. I liked how this evolved as long as I had it. It will be best drunk young, and it drinks fine now. The only criticism is that it will not likely evolve into anything better. 89 points.

1995 Dominus
This is a lovely, often forgotten Dominus. It may not be a great one, but it does many nice things. In keeping with the vintage, its hallmark is greater acidity and freshness, and it shows a certain succulence around the edges driven home by the acidity. It is drinking well now and impeccably balanced. 93 points.

2001 Dominus
This wine has come along well since my last taste, and while not fully evolved, is certainly approachable now. It seems to be in a somewhat richer style than the mid-90s Dominus bottlings, but as it airs out, it shows that it has the ability to come into balance and be more distinguished with age and cellaring. It is dense, concentrated and delicious. I am not sure I saw the structure that I have seen in other bottlings 95 points.

1997 Dominus
This bottling has come along beautifully, and with the passing years, I think I am liking it more. It combines elegance and richness, and you hardly notice either as particular adjective because the whole melds together so well. The finish is lovely, and it is showing mature nuances now, but the depth of fruit remains. I think I have somewhat underrated this over the years. 95 points.

1996 Cabernet Sauvignon "Georges de Latour Reserve" (BV Vineyards)
Weedy, a bit green and simple, this is laced with olives and bell peppers, not to mention a substantial dollop of oak that gives it a creamy texture. It is a remarkably basic and simple wine for its status. Its depth is modest, its finish average. You can only recoil in horror when you realize that this used to be one of America's most famous wines. 87 points.

1986 Cabernet Sauvignon (Chateau Montelena)
This opened weedy, tasting old, with some oxidation, and little more. Some air did allow the wine to pick itself up off the ground. It gained some power and the fruit became a little sweeter and more apparent, fighting through the tobacco, forest floor, and oxidative notes. As this aired out, I rather began to appreciate it, but it did little that was compelling. 88 points.

[Return to Top]  

Dessert/Sparkling
1990 Champagne Brut Chardonnay (Pol Roger)
Still big, after all these years, this has fine acidity, and just a hint of oxidation, but it is in great shape, relatively rich and toasty, with a penetrating finish. Delicious. 92 points.

NV Champagne Brut (Camille Savès)
Nice acid and a certain rich texture mingle together successfully here to create a wine that seems full and balanced, sunny and charming. I liked the lingering finish, too. 90 points.

1988 Champagne (Krug)
Big and toasty, this shows some oxidation, but lots of power and penetration, It is focused and pure, and holding very well for its age.  Its superlative finish is probably its best feature, as this wine just grips the palate and holds on like its life depends on it.

1971 “Don PX Gran Reserva” (Toro Albala)
Impeccably balanced, this shows raisins and nuts, a touch of syrup, penetration and focus. It is superlative in combining richness and balance, and its finish is excellent. 95 points.

2001 “Dolce” (Far Niente)
Bright and tangy, this overcomes its initial impression of being dominated by oak and vanilla. There is sweet fruit underneath and it is luscious and lingering. Very nice. 93 points.

1966 Port (Ferreira)
This opens with considerable reticence, seeming dominated by acids and medium strength tannins. After some time in the glass, having been poured from the decanter, it expands nicely, sweetens and shows it still has good fruit left. The more it aired, the more it opened, and the more I liked it. Its mid-palate is modest and although it is a clearly a wine aging and thinning, it shows little decay, although it has lost most of its primary fruit attributes. As this mellowed, it became quite charming. 89 points.

1980 Port "Colheita" Tawny (Niepoort)
The more Colheitas I taste from Niepoort, the more I want to find more of them. This beauty opens so fresh, young and and rich, almost sappy, that if someone told me it was a 2000, I would not have been surprised. It has fabulous aromatics. It is sweet with nuts and caramel cutting through the rich fruit. It comes down to earth a bit with some air, and the fruit begins to integrate into the rest of the wine, but even then its sweet, decadent personality shines through. This can live for many years, but it is hard to resist now. 95 points.

1983 Port (Ramos Pinto)
Opening with power and tannin, this turns sweet, sexy and sensual in a hurry. Its texture is beautiful and its fruit is sweet and delicious. It is a very elegant Port, that seems fresh and young, drinkable now, certainly, but with plenty of life ahead of it. Its balance is impeccable. 91 points.

2003 Port (Pintas)
The fruit on this wine seems amazingly sweet, a characteristic typical of the sexy 2003s. The fruit is what you might call "explosive," delivering waves of flavor and seemingly having lots of sugar. I think this Port is delicious, but I have never been quite convinced it has the structure to be considered great or monumental. Although I have not yet had a chance to stay with it for a long time, this second encounter would seem to underscore that. 91 points.

2004 Port (Pintas)
As with the difference between the 2003 and 2004 Pintas Tintos, Pintas takes a step up in this vintage, in my view. This seems much drier than the 2003, although the winemakers say the residual sugar figures are the same. The balance, however, is very different, as this Port is far more intense, and far more dense. It is not quite as hedonistic as the 2003, but it is more serious, with better structure and focus. This has some good cellaring potential. 91-93 points.

2005 Port (Niepoort)
This opens with notes of bitter chocolate, which gives it a distinctive note and some character, and then it begins to blossom. It becomes succulent and sweet, and then passed on to the next stage to show off its structure, drying on the finish. It is delicious and rather exuberant now, but ultimately I think this will become a rather elegant Port, impeccably balanced. I do not think I will ever like it as much as the powerful 2003 Niepoort produced, though. 92-94 points.

2003 Port "LBV" (Niepoort)
A typical hallmark of the vintage repeats itself here--another wine that seems simply decadent, very sweet and bursting with fruit. Underneath, it is delicately and actually nicely balanced in other respects. This surely lacks the imposing structure of Niepoort's monumental 2003 vintage Port, but it is a succulent and rather delicious LBV that provides some hints of what the big boy is about.  90 points.

2003 Port (Ferreira)
Another creature of its vintage, this '03 opens very sweet, then the power streaks in. The wine actually finishes a bit dusty for awhile. To excel in 2003, in fact, I think the Ports needed to show off structure, not just sugar and fruit, so tannin here is a good thing. The fruit gets richer, showing nice chocolate nuances to overlay the sugary notes. 92-94 points.

[Return to Top]  

Italy (except dessert/sparkling)

2004 “Magari” I.G.T. (Ca’ Marcanda – Gaja)
This Super Tuscan is a blend of Merlot (50%), and the rest Cabernet Sauvignon and Cabernet Franc in equal proportions. It is bright, showing lots of acid on opening, with an elegant mid-palate and just a touch of earthiness on the finish. I liked it, but thought there was a slight burn, and that it was a bit simple at first. It did evolve nicely, though, getting to a more respectable place and providing more harmony between its components.  It is not quite a truly distinguished wine in my book, though. 89 points.

2003 “Camarcanda” (Ca’ Marcanda – Gaja)
This Super Tuscan entrant from Bolgheri is a blend of 50% Merlot, 40% Cabernet Sauvignon and 10% Cabernet Franc. There were 1,800 cases produced. It seems slightly fuller in body than the Magari, with an excellent finish, which lingers and shows grip. There is a touch of herbs on the finish, which is mouthwateringly bright. It expands reasonably in the glass with air. 90 points.

2001 Brunello di Montalcino “Rennina” (Pieve Santa Restituta)
This Brunello is a blend of three vineyards. There were about 2166 cases produced. Full in the mouth, this makes an immediate positive impression, coating the palate. The finish is intense and powerful. The acidity is high enough to lend it a sour cherry note as it airs out. As it airs out the tannins become rather intense and drying, but they relent a little with some more air. This wine is sometimes a little angular, but it is often impressive. 90 points.

2001 Brunello di Montalcino “Sugarille” (Pieve Santa Restituta)
This single vineyard Brunello produced about 1,333 cases. Bright, but to my mind, with the acidity better integrated than in the Rennina, this shows power, but harmony. There are some drying tannins on the finish, but also some velvet on the texture, and some eventual harmony between the components of the wine.  The more I held this, the more I liked it, but it certainly needs a few years more in the cellar to show its stuff. There was no 2002 or 2003 of this wine, a tribute to Gaja's greatness. He was unhappy with the 2002 due to the wet vintage, and unhappy with the "roasted" 2003. They were sold off in bulk to negociants. 93 points.

2001 Barbaresco (Gaja)
This wine, the simply denominated Barbaresco, produced 5,000 cases. It is beautifully balanced, bright but the acidity --and everything else--impeccably integrated. It is also seductively textured, and simply a pleasure to taste. It has structure, but doesn't flaunt it. 92 points.

2001 “Sori Tildin” (Gaja)
As nice as the Barbaresco, above, is, this is simply another level. Earth, acid and fruit come together to produce a remarkably flavorful finish, nuanced by nuts and tar. The tannins kick in but they are hardly overbearing. The wine shows its breeding and balance at all times, remaining intense but not harsh. It is focused and deep, and expands nicely in the glass. For all of its obvious good points, it has a certain subtlety to it. This has 5% Barbera mixed in. 95 points.

2001 “Sperss” (Gaja)
I usually love this bottling, which comes from a vineyard Gaja bought in 1988. There are hints of cassis to the point where I wondered if I was tasting a Super Tuscan at times. It opens rich and ripe, but becomes more harmonious, a bright, silky wine with a lusher texture as it airs out. The tannins provide enough grip on the finish, which lingers, becoming more flavorful and more intense with air. Simply beautiful. 95 points.

1998 “Sperss” (Gaja)
The 1998 Sperss shows mature nuances. It is gentle and harmonious, with enough liveliness to be bright, charming and sunny. Its finish sneaks up on you--it is better and longer than you would think, with lovely, lingering flavors. It is a little drying on the end. This is a lovely Sperss, although not necessarily a great one. 91 points.

2001 “Darmagi” (Gaja)
Darmagi is usually my least favorite Gaja offering, because it shows green so often. I was surprised but pleased to hear Angelo Gaja himself call it vegetal, mincing no words, using no euphemisms. This is in texture lush and lovely, with some tang and spice, but the olives, bell peppers and general vegetal notes are not appealing. It is pleasant enough at times, but little more. There are only 800 cases produced. 88 points.

[Return to Top]  

Rhone/South/Southwest France
1990 Chateauneuf-du-Pape "Grande Garde" (Saint Benoit)
Bright, with a sharp burst of acidity in the middle, this shows thinning fruit, but it manages to knit its parts together with a bit of air. After showing some improvement, and shedding some of the tartness, this drinks quite nicely for awhile, before fading a bit. Pleasant and enjoyable, it is not particularly long or deep at this point. 87 points.

1994 Chateauneuf-du- Pape "Selection Reflet" (Cailloux)
This shows quite beautifully, with a lush, velvety feel. It projects lots of flavor, all driven home in a succulent, bright finish. With air, it becomes wide open, showing strawberry notes nuanced with game. This does need to be drunk in the near future, but it full and enjoyable at the moment. 90 points.

1998  Chateauneuf-du- Pape "Cuvée du Papet" (Mont Olivet)
A bit compact, lean and angular on opening, this wine seems tight, a bit intense, but not particularly generous. As it opens up, it is quite pleasant, but never seems particularly distinguished because its fruit just never seems fully to awaken. This needs a few years in the cellar, at which time it might wake up. I think it is a bit dumb now, and it certainly doesn't show as well as the score would imply at the moment. 91+ points.

1999 Chateauneuf-du- Pape (Charvin)
This opens beautifully, seeming lush, with a seductive texture. Its flavors are very enjoyable and it is bright and perky. At times it seems a touch hollow, though, and sometimes a little too elegant. It did expand a bit with air. Very nice, but not very long or deep, this is elegant and tasty. 89 points.

2004 Chateauneuf-du-Pape (Beaucastel)
Double decanted, this showed simply beautifully. It is an amazingly generous Beau, youthful, primary and ripe, seeming almost like a brand new release. Despite being double decanted, it is good enough to improve more in the glass, and take on some weight. It is bursting with flavor. I'm not sure it has the structure of really great Beaus. 93 points.

1994 Chateauneuf-du-Pape (Pégau)
This wine has transformed itself from a powerful, tannic beast to a wine at peak now. It has been fun watching its evolution in the cellar. It seems full in the mouth, bursting with flavor, a touch bretty, and simply succulent. It expands with air, and shows grip still, but it has a gentle side, too. This is now in prime time, and is simply delicious. 93 points.

[Return to Top]  

Spain (except dessert/sparkling)
2006 Rosado "Phedra" (Estancia)
Very fruity, and a bit candied, this is a fairly routine pink, pleasant and easy, a bit too simple. It goes nowhere fast. 84 points.

[Return to Top]