Wine Musings Vol#107

What? A new wine musings? Could it be? Well after a much needed rest, the muser has decided once again to muse. For now. Just to mix it up a bit. I feel like Gary Vee (lol). Here are a few from the vault that merit mentioning...

****++Wine of Merit: Roses de Jeanne, Le Creaux d'Enfer, Champagne, NV (2006): Back with a bang! This is an utterly profound 100% pinot noir, saignee sparkler from Cedirc Bouchard. Very small production from a very small (.032 hectare) parcel in Champagne. Nuanced notes of minerals, pomegranate, rhubarb and tamarind. Very aromatic, with wonderful detail. The palate is chiseled and energetic, good acids, great depth . Long finish. Majestic.

***++ Chateau Leoville Poyferre, St. Julien, Bordeaux, 1995: Bulls eye on this wine's drinking window, though in no hurry at all. Expressive elements of cassis, blackberry, cedar, iodine and grilled bell pepper. Wonderful concentration and depth, front to back. Finish is fine and adds sweetness. Exactly what I hope for from a claret. Wish I had bought more back in the day.

***++ Laurel Glen, Sonoma Mountain, cabernet sauvignon, 1986: Meal-in-a-glass nicoise olives, tar, grilled mushrooms, maturing red fruit, sage. Full on the palate, wonderful balance and depth to the fine, furry finish. Really a stand-out of the evening. I wish they (Napa/Sonoma) still made them this way. A gift.

***+ Restalte, Ribera del Duero, Crianza, 2005: Pure exubernace in a glass. Aromatically explosive stuff. Wonderful effusive notes of red/black raspberry, rosehip, tisane and yes, tagine spices. Somehow very well balanced on the palate, with some new world chocolate and vanilla. But I keep coming back to the nose. My mother-in-law used to have a huge, thickly cut diamond ring that she called "The Wower". This wine is wower material. Great QPR.

***+Merus, Napa Valley, cabernet sauvignon, 2004: No explanations, no excuses. No one will confuse this wine with anything other than a big, brawny, Napa cab. What it lacks in sophistication it makes up for in sheer pleasure. Thick, blueberry pie, treacle and espresso notes. All singing, all dancing. Not much on focus or precision on the palate, just more big, bombastic fruit, mocha and vanilla. Not my everyday cup of tea (or should I say slice of pie) but fun while it lasts. Yum.

*** Windgap, James Berry Vineyard, Paso Robles, grenache/syrah/mouvedre blend, 2007: Awesome. Raspberry, white pepper, bacon and maple. Lively. More red berry and pepper on the palate. Full, coating but still bright...yummy. Pax has really hit a homer with this Wind Gap label. Kudos.

Wine Musings Vol#90

Wine of Merit: ***++Clos des Papes, Chateauneuf du Pape, 1995: Elegant. This wine has aged into a lovely, balanced, almost Burgundian chateauneuf. Warm, rich cherry compote, kirsch, red peppercorn, toasted caramel. Touch of earth and lavender. The palate glides, with more pepper and red fruit. Finish is long and spicy. With time the acids become more pronounced as the fruit fades. Drink now.

***+ Castello di Camigliano, Brunello di Montalcino, 1997: I have posted on this before. A wonderful, full, rich brunello. Deep, chocolate covered black cherry, caramel, cigar tobacco and smoke. Generous, layered, coating palate. Velvety. Furry, long, lithe finish. Great.

***Viader, Estate, Diamond Mountain, cabernet sauv/franc, 1994: Another lovely, aged, nuanced wine. Elements of plum and black currant, roasted meats, sage, espresso and violet. Good concentration and integration, front to back. Finish is resolving but still fine.

***Laurel Glen, Terra Rosa, Sonoma mountain, cabernet sauvignon, 1990: This wine was made before Patrick moved the Terra Rosa label to Argentina. Lovely, mature sonoma cab. Turned earth, roasted plum and chocolate, anise, cigar box. The palate is thinning a bit but still generous through to a resolving, fine cab finish. Great balance. A nice find while digging through the cellar.

***Windgap, Russian River Valley, pinot gris, 2007: Springtime in a glass. From the lovely vermilion color to the whiff of fresh blossoms, this wine conjures up picnics on the great lawn with not a cloud in the sky. Persimmon, beach nut, orange blossom. Touch of spearmint. A hint of line dried fresh laundry. The palate is rich with minerals and slightly citrusy. The finish is clean and fresh if a bit abrupt. Great food wine.

***Marchese Frescobaldi, Nipozzano Riserva, Chianti Rufina, 2005: Delicious. Fresh, unpretentious chianti, happy to be quaffed from a tumbler in the company of a nice pizza. Bright cherry fruit, blood orange, grilled fig, zesty pepper, chocolate. Medium, friendly spicy finish. Mmmm....tasty.

Wine Musings Vol#85

Wine of Merit: ***++Laurel Glen, Counterpoint, Sonoma Mountain, cabernet sauvignon, 1991: A wonderful surprise. I have always admired this sonoma mountain producer but I was floored by the complexity, nuance and grip of this second label edition. I couldn't help but think of Figeac with its mature red/plum fruit, Indian tagine spices, loam and sois bois - but also Graves, given the pronounced graphite, smoke, autumn leaf and mineral elements as the wine expanded over time. Wonderful delineation and depth on the palate with more plum and mineral. Tannins are fine and the finish still long. Great wine punching well above its weight.

***+Schweiger Vineyards, Estate, Diamond Mountain, cabernet sauvignon, 1994: Lovely. Great, integrated mountain fruit elements. Blackberry, baker's chocolate, nicoise olives, brair. Palate is generous and coating but never fat, with a pronounced mineral note. Finish is lively but nicely built in to the overall palate impression. Just perfect to drink right now, though it will likely hold on for awhile.

***Beaulieu Vineyards, Georges de Latour, Private Reserve, Napa Valley, cabernet sauvignon, 1992: An excellent example. Not nearly as ripe as previous bottles, this wine showed elegance, stature and strength. Deep red and black fruit, cassis, licorice, chalk and menthol. Firm, integrated palate with good length and a velvety depth.

*** Richard Partridge, Napa Valley, cabernet sauvignon, 1998: I believe this was the first vintage for this winery. An auspicious start. Open knit, full aromas of chocolate covered black cherry, cassis, cedar, clove. Round mouth feel with integrated vanilla/hazelnut, plum and spice. Good balance and length. Lovely to drink now.

***Del Dotto, Napa Valley, cabernet sauvignon, 1995: Nice wine. Tangy, plump red fruit driven style. Slightly over ripe. Cafe au lait, grilled meats, a touch of gaurrigue. Oak is integrated, palate silky, finish medium length. An overall good bottle of mature Napa cabernet that should be consumed over the short term.

**++Robert Sinskey, SLD Estate, Stags Leap District, cabernet sauvignon, 2002: Very nice, if a tad underwhelming. Typical, spicy red SLV fruit. Complementary notes of grilled fennel and incense. Good fullness and weight, more fruit and with some minerals on the palate. Perhaps a bit vague. Yummy, if under performing.

Wine Musings Vol#41

Wine of Merit: *****Laurel Glen Estate Sonoma Mountain Reserve, cabernet sauvignon, 1990: Just writing the wine notes for this gives me goose bumps. A quick story: Patrick Campbell, the owner and winemaker at Laurel Glen, has only made a few reserves in the history of this storied winery. He has never submitted them for review. For the 1990 he bottled only 300 magnums, which he only sold through his customer list and gave to friends. And he also bottled a handful of Methuselahs – or 6 liter bottles. And he gave me one as a gift (I assisted him with the naming of one of his wines)! And we opened it for Thanksgiving 2007. I will forever be indebted. I have had this wine once before, over 10 years ago. It was truly an amazing and remarkable wine then. Funny thing, I went back to my notes and they were almost identical to the notes I am about to publish. Then, like now, I noted the signature elements that allow for a favorable comparison to the very best that Leoville Las Cases has ever had to offer – indeed Patrick has always made, in my opinion, very Bordelaise wines, with amazing depth, concentration and balance – the elements I most prize. With moderate coaxing, this wine reveals a whole cornucopia of nuances, loamy earth, truffle, deep red fruit, tar, Gaeta olive, melted licorice, baker’s chocolate. Wow. 15 minutes in, the wine is signing and downright youthful (I am sure the large format helped). Sensational. No surprise, this wine is only 12.5% alcohol, not fooling the palate with numbing thickness but instead relying on the natural weight and structure to provide great, indeed voluminous mouth feel, with more fruit, chocolate, olive and minerals. The finish is long and succulent, gaining power over time, youthful and still very strong. I am sure this wine is good for another 5 to 7 years at the least, but is amazing to drink right now. Thank you, Patrick!

****Aubert, Ritchie Vineyard, Sonoma Coast, chardonnay, 2004: Every bit as good as previously noted. Tonight it is the freshness that strikes me as particularly alluring. Sure, the wine is wonderfully nuanced and complex, sure the viscous oily mouth feel and weight connote a serious effort. Still, with everything this wine has going on, it is fresh and bright, not heavy handed at all. Really special. A delight.

***Medlock Ames, Bell Mountain, Alexander Valley rose, 2006: Different from most rose wines which start fresh and then degrade over time, this wine is actually getting better with a bit of bottle age. The flavors are integrating and the wine itself is becoming more harmonious…an even greater pleasure to drink. As noted, a wonderful food fine – I had this with some sushi and a groovy “Caribbean Roll” - spicy tuna, avocado and fried banana and walnut on top. Lovely.

***Clos Pegase, Hommage Artist Series, Napa Valley cabernet sauvignon, 1993: I am a sucker for Artist series labels. Mouton, Kenwood and yes Clos Pegase. While the latter two will never be confused for the former, the labels are beautiful and the wines are expertly crafted – and well worth purchasing. This wine has softened substantially since release but is absolutely not over the hill. In fact some mild coaxing releases lovely, nuanced red fruit, plum, cardamom and Asian spice from the glass. The palate has thinned slightly – offering red fruit, licorice root and nutmeg - but there is no drop off front to back and the finish is resolved but fine and very pleasant. A great wine to have with a yummy herbed soft cheese or a nice roasted bird. Delicious.

*++Deloach, RRV, chardonnay, 2004: This winery has gone through quite a bit of transformation. Initially quirky and making handcrafted wines (some very good some not) the winery was sold by the founders to Big Vino in 2003. Recently Greg LaFolette, he of Flowers and Tandem fame, has been making the wine. While not something to search out (the pinot is in fact something to avoid), the chardonnay is not all that bad –in a Costco wine around $12 kind of way. Not overblown, it is pleasant and well balanced. Hibiscus, pear and Meyer lemon. Not super concentrated…light on the palate but not thin. Finish shows some spice and more citrus. A wine that, if they were serving it at a Bar Mitvah, I would happily drink.

*+Rutz Cellars, Dutton Ranch, RRV pinot noir, 1993: I believe this was a very early attempt by the folks at Rutz…I can only hope the winemaking has improved. The issue with this wine is not that it has aged poorly – in fact my recollection of this wine on release is that it has actually improved a bit with time. Still, this wine is hot, disjointed and over manufactured. It does offer some nice notes of typical varietal fruit, black cherry liquor, vanilla and green tea. It is unfortunately more than a little over extracted, astringent with way too much oak making for a bitter attack and finish. Not very pleasant, though with air it softens a bit.

Wine Musings LTD: Palmer vs Montelena

Notes taken December, 2005:

Nothing exceeds like excess – that said, this tasting was more focused than most, really exploring the signatures of Chateaus Palmer and Montelena. I think the net/net is where we figured we would net out – I have become one of the scores of “Palmer Heads”. While I have always appreciated the wine, this tasting really succeeded in detailing why this wine is so good – and in great vintages it is ethereal. And Montelena is nothing if not consistent. A very obvious signature. Honestly, the wines showed marked improvement in the 90s from the 80s, probably thanks to better wine making tools and technique. I am glad I started buying their wines in 1991.

1st flight: Getting our sea legs. All 3 wines were surprisingly concentrated given their age. Wine one was elegant and perhaps the most fragile of the 3. Mature color to the rim, red fruit, cigar box, cassis, minerals. Really, super good, nice grip, with decent length. With time in the glass more pronounced vanilla and hazelnut. I thought Palmer, turned out to be the 82 Margaux. Wine 2 was lovely as well, a bit darker in color, I thought it suffered from some TCA on the nose. Still… perfumed, violets and black fruit. Integrated on the palate, perhaps a bit thinner than wine one, furry tannins on the finish makes the loss in the mid palate more pronounced. Still, very good. It was the 82 Montelena from magnum. Last wine was dynamite. Also showing a mature color, and red fruit, and tar on the nose, it had a more concentrated crème de cassis thing going on, some cream and pronounced tobacco. I thought this wine was more muscular than wine 1 and so guessed Margaux. Turned out to be 83 Palmer. Most liked wine 3, than 2 than 1, I think. At least I did!

2nd flight: 1st wine was pure elegance. Beautiful red and blackberry fruit, autumnal, tobacco and licorice. Thick full palate, perfectly integrated. Fool me twice, shame on me. It was the 85 Palmer. Wine 2 was something of a dud. Way overripe, stewed fruits and soy, rasiny and blown out. Maybe a bad bottle, but these elements persisted across multiple bottles, in a more integrated way, throughout the Montelena vertical. This was the 85 Montelena. The sleeper of the flight was the 86 Laurel Glen, which was fabulous. Black fruit, mint and yes, forest bottom. Palate coating, great mouthfeel. A bit of heat on the finish tells me this is probably ready to go. Great wine. I flip flopped the LG and the Montelena out of respect for Monti, never again. I think the consensus was 3,1,2.

3rd flight: Some really good wines here as well. Wine 1 was on the softer side nose wise, but showed excellent structure underneath. A little bit more brooding, it offered sweet and minty black fruit, some chalk, lead pencil and cedar which told me Paulliac. It was the 89 Pichon Lalande. Very sexy. Love this wine. Wine 2 had the signature “raisinette” (to quote Bill Rogers) chocolate, raisins and a touch of soy. Firm, complex, still seems youthful. 87 Montelena. The 3rd wine offered solid color and structure, was perhaps more floral and perfumed than other vintages, great balance and integration with sweet tannins on the finish. Again, an incredibly elegant glass of vino. 89 Palmer. Not sure of the table order, mine was 1 and 3 neck and neck, then 2.

Into the 90s we go…

1st flight: Wine 1: Wow! Great wine. Dark and brooding. Still showing the chocolate and raisin thing, but much more depth and concentration, adding minerals and a licorice like element to the fruit. Fantastic. I have always liked this wine and drank too much of it early on. Couldn’t stay away. 1991 Montelena. Wine 2 showed a garnet/almost ruby color, very good extraction, church incense, tobacco, rose petal and jammy red fruit. Wonderful integration and yes, elegance. 1990 Palmer. Wine 3 was for me best in flight. Solid, dark red/purple. Mocha, earth, espresso bean, red fruit. A St. Julien like signature and palate – but since there was non I knew it was the 90 Dominus. Here, finally, the Palmer seemed a bit outclassed by the rivals.

2nd flight: Wine 1 was really, really good. Opulent, mocha and red fruit (seems like there is a lot of Merlot in this wine), bramble and some iodine. Deep, complex, stunning palate. The merlot gives the 95 Pahlmeyer away. Nice bottle. Wine 2 was deep purple, consistent through to the rim. More chocolate and black fruit, much less of that stewed fruit/soy thing, floral and cedar. Lovely wine fine tannins, great balance and integration. The 1996 Montelena shows a marked improvement in my book and I am confident it will cellar well. The 1995 Palmer was particularly good. Great concentration of minerals, red fruit and tobacco, maybe more perfumed cigar box. Big, firm tannins, amazingly young, I am glad I have a bunch of this wine and will leave it in the cellar for a while. Hard to judge ranking here, they were all wonderful.

3rd flight: The 99 Palmer was fantastic. A bit of a sleeper I think. Thick, licorice like fruit on the palate. More black fruit than red, mocha, tobacco and some bramble. Wow. Very young and very good. The 1997 Montelena was also very good. It showed great depth, again mocha and raisins but also black fruit and much better complexity and integration. Big structure without losing balance, a very nice wine as well. I thought the 1996 was better. The 99 Margaux again had me thinking Palmer. Perfumed, maybe a bit feminine, nice red fruit and mocha with some autumn leaves and cigar box. Very nice wine that will probably drink a little earlier than others but still offers great grip and length. I would/will buy more of the 99 Palmer - in fact maybe I’ll sell the 97 Montelena and pay for it that way! Easy choice, 1 then 3 then 2.

I forgot the mystery wine. It turned out to be the 2000 Falesco Montiano. Italian Merlot (100%)! Made in the Lazio region, not a region we think of as wine producing. To me it was very new world, lots of purity of forward fruit, not a lot of structure, very “international” in it style. I didn’t get the mocha element, instead thinking it almost more blueberry. I guessed Grenache. A very, very nice glass of wine…but not what I think of when I think Italy.