After trying the Twisted Sisters Zinfandel a few days ago, I was looking forward to trying their Cabernet. I wish I had tried them in the opposite order; the cab is very nice, but not to the level of the zinfandel.
A very good example of what a Paso Robles Cabernet can be. Good fruit, a little spice, and the earth and tar undertones that make Paso Robles unique. And enough body and richness to handle the 14.2% abv with no problem.
If you like Paso Robles cabs, like J. Lohr or Coastline, this is a wine you should try, especially with a nice steak from the grill.
Recommended.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Elderton Barossa Cabernet 2006 - Australia
Tasting the 2006 Elderton Cabernet makes me think that 2006 must have been a tough year in Barossa. How else to explain a producer as good as Elderton making such a wine? There's a bit of nice fruit up front, but the balance is a little off, with the acidity punching through, and the fruit fades quickly. The finish is very short, perhaps 5 seconds or so. Lighter than I would expect for a wine of 14.5% abv, there is nothing objectionable about this wine, but nothing exciting either. It's the type of wine I might expect at a party or art opening, but very disappointing for a bottle costing $20.
Looking up the vintage on Parker's website, he rates the vintage as very good, although possibly still tannic. This is not coming across tannic, just weak (but at least it's not sweet like so many Aussie wines!). I'm left wondering what went wrong. Is it a bad bottle? It doesn't show an obvious flaw, just seems like a weak wine. Is Parker wrong? Well, I've disagreed with him in the past, but a good Barossa is right up his alley, so I expect his opinion to be at least close. Or did Elderton just not get it right? Hard to believe from a winery that's done so well in the past.
I've liked Elderton wines in the past, and while this would be good for a sub $10 bottle, at $20-$25, it's very disappointing. Not recommended.
Looking up the vintage on Parker's website, he rates the vintage as very good, although possibly still tannic. This is not coming across tannic, just weak (but at least it's not sweet like so many Aussie wines!). I'm left wondering what went wrong. Is it a bad bottle? It doesn't show an obvious flaw, just seems like a weak wine. Is Parker wrong? Well, I've disagreed with him in the past, but a good Barossa is right up his alley, so I expect his opinion to be at least close. Or did Elderton just not get it right? Hard to believe from a winery that's done so well in the past.
I've liked Elderton wines in the past, and while this would be good for a sub $10 bottle, at $20-$25, it's very disappointing. Not recommended.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Finca Flichman Barrancas Syrah blend 2007
I've long been a fan of Finca Flichman, but this is the first time I've tried their flagship Syrah based blend. I was not disappointed.
Like their other flagship wines (Tupengato and Dedicato), this is a very full bodied intense wine. Blackberry and blueberry are the dominate fruit flavors, but the fruit is secondary to the vanilla and chocolate, which is unusual in being evident in the mid palate, not just the finish.
Oddly, I enjoyed the wine greatly, finding it rich, smooth, and full of fruit and other great flavors, but my wife, who normally likes big full wines, did not care for it, saying it tasted like "tart cherries". Perhaps this is just a little too "old world" style for her tastes, although I find it very unlike a Rhone style wine (but equally unlike an Aussie Shiraz).
I've long joked that Argentina is good at growing two things, grapes and cows; and their wines work great with beef. But the extra bit of earthiness in the Barrancas may make it also work very well with a hearty pork dish.
Whether you want an earthier more complex alternative to an Aussie Shiraz, or just like rich full bodied wines in general, this is one that I can recommend.
Like their other flagship wines (Tupengato and Dedicato), this is a very full bodied intense wine. Blackberry and blueberry are the dominate fruit flavors, but the fruit is secondary to the vanilla and chocolate, which is unusual in being evident in the mid palate, not just the finish.
Oddly, I enjoyed the wine greatly, finding it rich, smooth, and full of fruit and other great flavors, but my wife, who normally likes big full wines, did not care for it, saying it tasted like "tart cherries". Perhaps this is just a little too "old world" style for her tastes, although I find it very unlike a Rhone style wine (but equally unlike an Aussie Shiraz).
I've long joked that Argentina is good at growing two things, grapes and cows; and their wines work great with beef. But the extra bit of earthiness in the Barrancas may make it also work very well with a hearty pork dish.
Whether you want an earthier more complex alternative to an Aussie Shiraz, or just like rich full bodied wines in general, this is one that I can recommend.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Calcareous Twisted Sisters Zinfandel from Paso Robles
In the past, I've been known to say "I've never found a Zin from Paso Robles that was any good; it's Cab territory". Well, never again. Not only is the Calcareous Twisted Sisters better than any other Zin I've had from Paso Robles, it's one of the best Zins I've ever tasted.
Rich fruit, very full bodied, but velvety smooth. Blackberries and vanilla, with just a bit of spice and pepper. The incredibly long finish (nearly 2 minutes!) has notes of chocolate that evolve into a hint of dried tobacco. It's a magical wine, one that is almost difficult to comprehend.
Although I typically drink wine by itself rather than with a meal, I try to think of what foods would match well with the wine I'm drinking. In this case, that's quite hard, because I think even a filet mignon would tend to detract from the beauty of this wine (although the filet would be greatly enhanced!) This is a wine that, even though it could add to just about any meal, may be best enjoyed on its own.
If this was a $35 bottle, I would recommend it. At around $20, it's a steal.
Very highly recommended.
Rich fruit, very full bodied, but velvety smooth. Blackberries and vanilla, with just a bit of spice and pepper. The incredibly long finish (nearly 2 minutes!) has notes of chocolate that evolve into a hint of dried tobacco. It's a magical wine, one that is almost difficult to comprehend.
Although I typically drink wine by itself rather than with a meal, I try to think of what foods would match well with the wine I'm drinking. In this case, that's quite hard, because I think even a filet mignon would tend to detract from the beauty of this wine (although the filet would be greatly enhanced!) This is a wine that, even though it could add to just about any meal, may be best enjoyed on its own.
If this was a $35 bottle, I would recommend it. At around $20, it's a steal.
Very highly recommended.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Aging Shiraz - Step Rd Blackwing Shiraz 2003
Many people may tell you that Australian Shiraz is not a wine to age. The bottle I'm drinking tonight proves them wrong, at least a bit. Blackwing is the lower priced wine from the Step Rd. winery. Unlike their main wine which is from Langhorn Creek, the Blackwing is from the "South Australia" appellation. The bottle I'm drinking is from the 2003 vintage, which was a pretty good year for this wine, although not quite as good as the outstanding 2002.
When it was young, about 5-6 years ago, it had a flavor profile that you might expect of a typical Aussie Shiraz; lots of fruit, a little spicy, but a little more elegant than the $10 and under bottles (Blackwing has sold for around $12-15; I have no idea what I paid for this bottle).
With a few years of age, it has lost some of the bright fruit flavors, and developed considerable complexity. The fruit flavors now tend toward more dried fruits, with dried cherries being the predominate one. But the magic is on the mid-palate and finish. There are now hints of leather, coffee, and even a slight earthiness similar to what I've encountered in a nice Croze-Hermitage. With a little aeration (IOW, slurping it), a wonderful dark chocolate sensation comes through on the finish, and while the finish is not the longest I've encountered, it is very nice, and at least as much as would be expected from a wine in this category. In my opinion, this wine has probably reached its peak, or at least is very close. I'll probably drink my remaining bottles within the next year or so. Not the aging potential of a classified Bordeaux, but still longer than most "experts" will claim (of course, this depends on how you like your wines; if you want a 'fruit bomb', then this is over the hill).
I highly recommend buying a moderate priced Shiraz and laying down a few bottles. Because it seems to age well, but faster than a big California Cab or French Bordeaux, you can see the effects of aging in less than a decade, plus get some pretty good wine. Just don't figure on holding it for more than 10 or so years, other than to see what can happen with a really old wine.
When it was young, about 5-6 years ago, it had a flavor profile that you might expect of a typical Aussie Shiraz; lots of fruit, a little spicy, but a little more elegant than the $10 and under bottles (Blackwing has sold for around $12-15; I have no idea what I paid for this bottle).
With a few years of age, it has lost some of the bright fruit flavors, and developed considerable complexity. The fruit flavors now tend toward more dried fruits, with dried cherries being the predominate one. But the magic is on the mid-palate and finish. There are now hints of leather, coffee, and even a slight earthiness similar to what I've encountered in a nice Croze-Hermitage. With a little aeration (IOW, slurping it), a wonderful dark chocolate sensation comes through on the finish, and while the finish is not the longest I've encountered, it is very nice, and at least as much as would be expected from a wine in this category. In my opinion, this wine has probably reached its peak, or at least is very close. I'll probably drink my remaining bottles within the next year or so. Not the aging potential of a classified Bordeaux, but still longer than most "experts" will claim (of course, this depends on how you like your wines; if you want a 'fruit bomb', then this is over the hill).
I highly recommend buying a moderate priced Shiraz and laying down a few bottles. Because it seems to age well, but faster than a big California Cab or French Bordeaux, you can see the effects of aging in less than a decade, plus get some pretty good wine. Just don't figure on holding it for more than 10 or so years, other than to see what can happen with a really old wine.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Mulderbosch Chenin Blanc (Steen) from South Africa
When I started getting into wine, it was long enough ago that there was still an embargo against South Africa, so I learned very little about their wines. I'm working to remedy that deficiency, and while I'm not yet a fan of Pinotage, I find that their Chenin Blanc can be wonderful.
The 2010 Mulderbosch is one of the best that I've had; a powerful nose of lime and mango, with great intensity on the palate of both citrus and tropical fruits. Unlike many American Chenin Blanc wines, this is not sweet, but rather very crisp and refreshing, a trait I've found among most of the South African Chenin Blancs that I've tasted. Mulderbosch is more powerful than most; maybe even too intense for the more sensitive palate. I'm drinking it by itself, and it's wonderful that way; but I imagine that a bit of fruit, like maybe cantelope, would be a good match with it. Even better, I think that it is crisp enough that it might pair very well with sushi, something I'll have to try in the future.
Recommended.
The 2010 Mulderbosch is one of the best that I've had; a powerful nose of lime and mango, with great intensity on the palate of both citrus and tropical fruits. Unlike many American Chenin Blanc wines, this is not sweet, but rather very crisp and refreshing, a trait I've found among most of the South African Chenin Blancs that I've tasted. Mulderbosch is more powerful than most; maybe even too intense for the more sensitive palate. I'm drinking it by itself, and it's wonderful that way; but I imagine that a bit of fruit, like maybe cantelope, would be a good match with it. Even better, I think that it is crisp enough that it might pair very well with sushi, something I'll have to try in the future.
Recommended.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Veranda Syrah 2009 - Chile
One of the great things about wine is that there is always something new. On the other side, that is also one of the downsides.
Shortly after tasting the 2008 Veranda Syrah a few weeks ago, I went to look for more, only to find that the vintage had changed. And I'll be honest; I don't spend my hours studying vintage charts to know how the 2009 may compare to the 2008. Outside of a few areas (such as Burgundy or Bordeaux), or extreme years (such as 2002 in the Rhone Valley), I think that other factors about a specific wine can have enough of an effect to outweigh a generalization of vintages. So while I was disappointed to not get more of the 2008, I figured that it's a good excuse to try the new vintage.
Well, I have to admit, I was disappointed. Part of this is certainly due to the fact that the 2008 was outstanding. And it's not a bad wine. Lot's of raspberry and currant on both the nose and palate, with just a trace of vanilla. There is a slight bit of spice, but it's not as well integrated as with the 08. But the biggest difference is that this new vintage is quite a bit lighter, and as a result, doesn't quite stand up to the 14.5% alcohol level. On top of that, the balance seems slightly off (compared to the 08), being a little more acidic.
The acidity is not a bad thing when pairing with food. It didn't quite work with the chicken kebabs I grilled up tonight, but I don't see that as a flaw of the wine, rather a poor choice of pairing (to be frank, I had my doubts, but couldn't come up with anything better). With a steak, I think the pairing would have been much better.
And I think that the balance will probably improve with time. After all, this bottle has been on the shelf just long enough to not have to worry about bottle shock (a note here; don't try a new vintage the day it shows up; often, a couple of weeks will make a big difference). But while the acidity may come into line, there is no hope for the lighter body.
Overall, a good, but not great, wine, especially if served with food or allowed to breath for several hours. But where the '08 was a great value, the '09 is not on par with other syrah/shiraz of the $18-$20 price range.
If you prefer the lighter/more acidic style of this grape (such as Croze Hermitage), you'll probably enjoy this and should consider trying it. But otherwise, and especially if your taste runs to the big Barossa Shiraz, not recommended unless you find it on sale.
Shortly after tasting the 2008 Veranda Syrah a few weeks ago, I went to look for more, only to find that the vintage had changed. And I'll be honest; I don't spend my hours studying vintage charts to know how the 2009 may compare to the 2008. Outside of a few areas (such as Burgundy or Bordeaux), or extreme years (such as 2002 in the Rhone Valley), I think that other factors about a specific wine can have enough of an effect to outweigh a generalization of vintages. So while I was disappointed to not get more of the 2008, I figured that it's a good excuse to try the new vintage.
Well, I have to admit, I was disappointed. Part of this is certainly due to the fact that the 2008 was outstanding. And it's not a bad wine. Lot's of raspberry and currant on both the nose and palate, with just a trace of vanilla. There is a slight bit of spice, but it's not as well integrated as with the 08. But the biggest difference is that this new vintage is quite a bit lighter, and as a result, doesn't quite stand up to the 14.5% alcohol level. On top of that, the balance seems slightly off (compared to the 08), being a little more acidic.
The acidity is not a bad thing when pairing with food. It didn't quite work with the chicken kebabs I grilled up tonight, but I don't see that as a flaw of the wine, rather a poor choice of pairing (to be frank, I had my doubts, but couldn't come up with anything better). With a steak, I think the pairing would have been much better.
And I think that the balance will probably improve with time. After all, this bottle has been on the shelf just long enough to not have to worry about bottle shock (a note here; don't try a new vintage the day it shows up; often, a couple of weeks will make a big difference). But while the acidity may come into line, there is no hope for the lighter body.
Overall, a good, but not great, wine, especially if served with food or allowed to breath for several hours. But where the '08 was a great value, the '09 is not on par with other syrah/shiraz of the $18-$20 price range.
If you prefer the lighter/more acidic style of this grape (such as Croze Hermitage), you'll probably enjoy this and should consider trying it. But otherwise, and especially if your taste runs to the big Barossa Shiraz, not recommended unless you find it on sale.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)