Florida Jim

With a rustic pasta and bean soup and grilled, crusty bread: 2003 Laderas de Pinoso, Viñedos de El Sequé, Alicante: 80% Monastrell (Mourvèdre), 20% Cabernet Sauvignon; 13.5% alcohol; 100% yummy; warm plum, salt and tar aromas; satin smooth on the palate with flavors that follow the nose, excellent integration, some complexity, perfect balance; long, super fine-grained tannin finish that still leaves the mouth watering. Wonderfully round in the mouth, good depth but this juice lives on its balance. About $8. Imported by Eric Solomon. Best, Jim

My understanding is that Rueda is often a blend of verdejo and viura. This is not designated as a "Superior" so I suspect the amount of verdejo is something like 25%, at best. But I don't know much about Spanish wine and am very willing to learn. Best, Jim

2003 Las Brisas, Rueda: Nose of orange skin, peach and chalk with lightly floral accents; harmonious in the mouth with bright, ripe citrus, lemon, peach flavors, some depth, well integrated; and a persistent, slightly tart fruit and mineral finish. This is a refreshing wine with good cut, nice complexity, 13% alcohol and is obviously well-made. About $8. Buy more. Best, Jim

2003 Gressamí, Gramona: Musk melon and chewing gum (not bubble gum) nose; similar flavors, viscous, some depth and medium length. 11.5% alcohol and a well-made wine that seems perfect to accompany dishes with cooked fruit in them. About $12. 2003 Marqués de Riscal, Rueda: Peach and grapefruit nose; flavors echo the nose with slight RS and an ultimately sour finish. About $5. 1994 Vincent Arroyo, Petite Sirah Reserve: Piercing green oak on the nose; solid fruit and overwhelming, sour oak on the palate. Left decanted 24 hours and it’s just as bad. No hope that this will integrate the wood or become palatable. Badly made. About $20, on release. 2003 Viña Nora, Albariño: A bit of sulpher at the outset gives way to ripe apple and peach scents with some sassafras hints; crisp and acidic on the palate with little depth but a nice freshness; medium finish. For drinking now and with lighter fare; not exceptional but not bad. About $10. 2001 Moccagatta, Dolcetto d’Alba: Honest dolcetto nose, straight-forward dolcetto flavors (black-raspberry, etc.) and decent length. Nothing to write home about but clearly of its place and of sufficient quality to buy again. About $6. 2001 Trevor Jones, Grenache Boots: Pleasant wine that is too big on alcohol, to thin on flavor and relatively soft in the mouth; hot finish. Nope. About $16. 2001 Graham Beck, Old Road Pinotage: Way oaky on the nose with plush, soft fruit on the palate almost overwhelmed by the wood and a short finish. Tolerable but why? About $16. Best, Jim

I liked 2000 as well as any, but for me, picking vintages with this house is truly splitting hairs. Best, Jim

Almost every year, I buy a case of the Dönnhoff, Riesling Qba. It took a few years but I finally realized that this is terrific wine in almost any vintage. I like to drink it out of syrah glasses (and don’t care who knows it) because its aromas are all about white fruit and cherries and stones with hints of flowers tossed in and those little Riesling glasses seem to contain it. Expansive is my preference. Its never too sweet, always representative of the Nahe, full-flavored, balanced and impeccably made. Tonight we opened the 2002 version of this wine and my wife and I are sitting around acting like the cartoon characters from the Guiness commercial, smiling manically and shouting to each other while toasting and eating a dish of homemade pasta with pine nuts in brown butter. The food has just enough fat to let the cut of the wine take hold and the pasta/pine nut flavors are calm enough so that the lovely fruit and mineral tones of the wine slide across the palate with intensity and a long reprise after swallowing. Simple fare with great wine. 9.5% alcohol, $16. “Brilliant!” Best, Jim

2003 Bonny Doon, Il Circ Ruchè La Donna Cannone: 14.5% alcohol, produced and bottled in Italy; milk shake texture, hugely distorted and chocolate-ized flavors, disjointed and a burning, vodka-esque finish, this is one of the very worst beverages (it damn sure ain’t wine) that I have had the misfortune to encounter. DNPIM. 2003 Bodegas Ercavio, Tempranillo Roble: 13.5% alcohol from vineyards in Toledo, 5 months in oak; elegantly scented with spice, black fruit, dust and light raspberry aromas; fuller and more powerful on the palate with rich flavors that follow the nose, fine but noticeable tannins, good balance and a clean, tannic (but not astringent) finish. From the nose, I thought it would be a lightweight; it wasn’t, but neither was it huge or misshapen in any way. Delicious and, for $8, I will buy a case tomorrow. 2002 Domaine du Clos du Fief (Tete), Juliénas: Wonderfully open and smooth with a rich palate, expansive nose and long finish. About as good as it gets – and that is very good, indeed. Superb. 2000 Mont Marcal, Cava Brut Reserva: 11% alcohol and very fresh tasting with earthy scents, a tiny and energetic bead, and, a toasted almond, very slightly bitter, finish. No RS detected. Another delicious wine for only $9. Best, Jim

When Cotarella was just getting started at Palazzola, he didn’t seem to be so enamored of new wood. I still have some of the 95 Rubino in the cellar waiting for its day. But the stuff I’ve tasted recently has convinced me that manipulation and new oak are his watchword and I have no use for either. I recently tasted Sertoli Salis partial sfursat wine (I understand they do a full blown version as well, but I have not tasted it); quite odd and I’m not sure I liked it. Too much oak for this taster but some of the low-end stuff, both red and white, coming from this producer is really nice and well priced. I always thought Serpico had too much lumber. I like aglianaco but I don’t think Feudi does. I’ll just stick with their whites. This takes me back to nights in Spoleto; wonderful wine. And this from a guy who has little use for cabernet sauvignon in any manifestation. This is very well made wine. Nice list. Best, Jim PS I responded to this before I realized who "bills" is; now that I do realize, the quality of the list does not surprise.

2002 Giacosa, Roero Arneis: Its best showing yet with tropical fruit, citrus and sassafras scents and flavors, round but bright in the mouth and good length. Really coming into its own. 2000 A. et P. De Villaine, Mercurey Les Montots: Opens sharp on the nose and tart on the palate but quickly softens with airing into a well-balanced, charming, light-weight wine driven by red fruit and accented with earth tones. Could use a little time in the cellar but drinks well now. $15. 2002 A. et P. De Villaine, Bourgogne La Digoine: Just terrific Burgundy that opens with air and delivers precise red fruit and earth scents and flavors with such style and grace it is difficult to believe this costs $20. Exceptional wine with a future. 1999 Belle Pente, Pinot Noir Murto Vnyd.: More black fruit than red, lovely spice tones and accents reminiscent of leaves and loam; so much better than a recent ’99 Wahle that I’m surprised they’re from the same house. Rich and concentrated with a long, smooth finish. Superb now and shows signs of further development. 2001 Poeira, Douro: Made from traditional Port grapes, this is wonderfully concentrated and precise with a cool presence in the mouth and lots of complexity. Delicious and interesting – I do wish I would have bought more. Best, Jim

2002 Gilles Robin, Crozes-Hermitage Papillon: Quite spicy on the nose with cool plum and black pepper scents competing for prominence; mid-weight, clean and focused across the palate with flavors more in the black fruit spectrum but nice spice and bacon accents, structured and concentrated; long finish. Although the Cuvee Alberic Bouvet from this producer is generally a more complex wine, this is neither simple nor without ability to develop in the cellar. 12.3% alcohol, $12 and another fine effort from a producer I have learned to trust. 2003 Ca’ del Solo, Big House Pink: A blend of virtually every red grape one can think of and pinot blanc, this juice is about 13% alcohol, deeply colored for a rosé, and refreshing for its bright acidity and lack of RS; full flavored, crisp and a joy to drink on a warm afternoon with lunch (especially with a nap to follow). A Bonny Doon spin-off. About $8. 1999 Moccagatta, Freisa: My first thought is, Lambrusco gone awry. This smells of black raspberries, is bone dry (assertively so) and is fizzy. Diane says leave it out and hope it goes flat but I am thinking it’s the perfect base for sangria. In any event, not a table wine by any stretch and a most unusual beverage; thankfully, it’s only $6. 2003 Castaño, Monastrell: 14% alcohol is easily carried by this Yecla red that smells of earth and dusty black plums; tastes dense, clean and fresh with flavors that follow the nose, evident tannins and a medium length finish. A little rustic but an interesting food wine for only $7. 2000 Dom. de la Janasse, Vin de Pays de la Principauté D’Orange: 14% alcohol, a blend of syrah and merlot that smells like Châteauneuf du pape and has a rich, almost salty palate with black fruit and spice flavors, round in the mouth with medium length. Rather more pleasant than I expected for the blend, good accompaniment to a cheese plate and only $8. Best, Jim

ok, so sort of like how a shiraz has that nearly cloying weight to it but can at the same time show off noticeable berry flavors that aren't necessarily part of that sticky sweetness? ← More like how shiraz can have that cloying weight whereas a Lafarge, Bourgogne looks thin and feels weightless in the mouth and yet has all this bursting flavor of cherries and earth. Point being, weight and intense flavor need not coexist in the same wine. Between milk-shake and water for weight; between water and bourbon for flavor. BTW, some people define "concentration" to include weight and texture - I don't. To me its about how strong the flavors are; that's the kind of concentration I look for. But this whole discussion reminds me that one can not describe how beautiful the Mona Lisa is; we are using amorphus concepts that say more about the viewer or taster than about the painting or wine. Best, Jim

Exactly. Lacking in intensity and therefore, difficult to describe otherwise. I suppose you could say that is in comparison to other wines but that is not what I'm thinking when I smell the wine or write about it. I just don't smell much. I distinguish between weight in the mouth and strength of flavor. A wine does not have to be texturally lush or weighty to have a vivid flavor profile. For myself, I prefer that wines have less weight and more flavor. Agreed. But I think it is also about gaining confidence in your ability (however you describe that ability). And I would suggest that, since we are talking about subjective perceptions, the adjectives we use will be value loaded in accord with our own histories and preferences. There is no standardized language of description any more than there is a single standard for what is good or bad. Personally, I try to convey a feeling I have when tasting the wine rather than any type of reliable analytic description. But that's my way; I'm sure others do it differently. Best, Jim

Look for Chat. Beylesse, Rose (in the blue bottle) available throughout the Indies. It brought me back to rose. Best, Jim

Brad, Vandergrift suggest it to me and I have looked for it for several years. Then all of a sudden it shows up locally. At least I knew what it was when I saw it! Best, Jim

NV Jean Milan, Champagne Brut Blanc de Blanc Spécial: A torrent of tiny bubbles and the prominent scent and flavor of lemon; crisp and cleansing in the mouth. Lovely. 2000 Vieux Telegraph, Châteauneuf-du-Pape La Crau: A loose knit, attractive wine with smoke, bacon, mineral and red fruit scents; flavors that follow the nose, moderate concentration, some complexity with airing; and a medium length finish. Delightful now and I see no reason to hold it. 2003 Dolium, Syrah: A 14.5% syrah from Argentina that is neither hot nor overdone; evidences bacon and black fruit on the nose and palate with spicy black pepper on the finish; and although it will never be especially complex, neither is its delivery simple or boring. At $10, a wine worth another taste. 2003 Le Clos du Tue-Boeuf, Touraine La Guerrerie: Smells of raspberry sweet-tarts, dirt and rhubarb; same flavors in the mouth with a couple of tablespoons of sugar added; “bitter beer” finish. A nasty piece of work and a poster child for how bad the 2003 vintage in France can be. DNPIM. (On release, I just thought this needed a little time. Wrong.) Best, Jim

2001 Artadi, Rioja Viñas de Gain: Warm cherry and leather scents; soft, somewhat diffuse on the palate with flavors that echo the nose but toss in a bright black pepper accent on the finish which is of medium length. Very integrated, smooth and quaffable but I see no future here. Drink today. 1999 Paloma, Syrah: Reticent on both the nose and palate with solid syrah fruit and little complexity. ‘Nothing wrong with it but nothing to excite. 2002 A. et P. De Villaine, Bourgogne La Digoine: Reluctant nose with red fruit and wax scents; lightweight on the palate but intense flavors of cherries and other pit fruits mix with a light earthy-spice tone, extraordinary balance, focused; medium length finish. Quite something – clean, clear pinot noir that could come only from Burgundy. Delicious. 1999 Bruno Giacosa, Nebbiolo d’Alba: This wine is more polished and fruit driven than a recent tasting of the ‘01 Valmaggiore bottling with clean, juicy fruit on the nose and palate, an easy to drink texture and medium length finish. Nice but does not carry the complexity I am looking for. 1998 Sertoli Salis, Valtellina Superiore Corte della Meridiana: This is the sforsato from Salis and while it has a similar aromatic and flavor profile to Amarone, it only has 13.5% alcohol and lacks its weight and body. We paired this with an Italian sheep and cow’s milk cheese called “Bosina” and it was the perfect accompaniment. A savory, somewhat idiosyncratic wine with a spicy side. Best, Jim

Funny boy. Best, Jim

2002 Jumilla, Altos de Luzón: 50% monastrell, 25% cabernet sauvignon, 25% tempranillo; sees French and American oak over 12 months; 14% alcohol; jammy smells (but in a good way) with distinctive cab. fruit aromas coupled nicely with odors of well seasoned smokers pipe, asphalt, warm spices, dark plum and accents of salt and wood smoke – a complex and enticing nose; medium body but quite dense in the mouth, flavors echo the nose, very concentrated, intense, structured, grippy/tannic and long. The Monastrell is dominant across the palate and ripe enough so that one almost tastes the sunshine. The wood is merely a hint here and there and the wine’s overall impression is of excellent complexity. A delicious wine that will cellar at least medium term. A Jorge Ordonez selection distributed in FL by Stacole; full retail $15. 2003 Ostertag, Les Vieilles Vignes de Sylvaner: This had an oddly sour finish and was not particularly interesting in any respect. Not bad or flawed, just not to my taste. Others liked it better. 2003 Burgans, Albariño: Soft and easily accessible; fuller in the mouth than expected; pleasant wine but ultimately limited. Drink now. 1999 Leroy, Volnay Santenots: Brilliant. Powerful without being overdone, structured but in balance, focused yet deep; of its place and years to go to peak but lacking nothing, save complexity, in the interim. Volnay may not be the ultimate expression of Burgundy, but this wine will keep me thinking about what is the ultimate expression. A terrific future. 1999 Jean-Luc Colombo, Les Collines de Laurie Syrah: Maybe a bit musty on the nose but still bacon and Cornas-esque fruit; the palate is clean and echoes the nose (except for the must), nicely integrated but lacking any real punch of authenticity; medium length. A polished rendition of Cornas-like wine that falls short of those origins but is easy to drink and enjoy. 2002 Coudert, Clos de la Roilette, Fleurie: Decanted one hour; best showing yet with wonderful raspberry, face powder, spice scents and an integrated, deep (maybe somewhat closed) palate, good structure, focus, balance and length. Great wine, thoroughly enjoyed. 1991 Montelena, Cabernet Sauvignon: A bit of sour oak distracts from an otherwise cassis and mineral nose and palate; good concentration, grippy tannins, focused flavors and little complexity; an almost drying finish. Not it’s best showing and the finish makes me wonder about its shelf life. 2001 Elyse, Cabernet Sauvignon Tietjen Vnyd.: Big sour oak on the nose nearly eclipses the fruit; better on the palate but somewhat creamy and woody also, excellent fruit flavors, concentration and good balance, nice length. Not my style but I can understand why others enjoyed this more. 2000 Tres Picos, Borsao Garnacha: Over-ripe, over alcoholic (14.5%), overdone, all of which leave me wondering why it tastes good. But I don’t much like grenache anyway, so I passed on more than a taste. Others enjoyed it. 1998 Castel del Monte, Il Faicone Riserva: An aglianico and sangiovese mix that has just a touch too much earth/wood on the palate but is otherwise terrific juice. If time will heal the wood problem (and I think it will) this could be spectacular. (BTW, the label was in such bad shape, I am not sure of the name of the producer or the spelling of the name.) 1994 Flora Springs, Trilogy: A sort of softened version of what this wine has always been with just a little too much oak on the nose. Not a bad wine but nothing that makes me want to cellar it for a decade. Drink now. 2001 Bruno Giacosa, Nebbiolo d’Alba Valmaggiore: There are not enough superlatives to describe this beautifully perfumed, medium weight, utterly authentic nebbiolo. A truly complex wine drinking very well now but in no danger of fading. Wines like this are such a pleasure . . . 1991 Schramsberg, Blanc de Blanc Champagne (magnum): From the days when CA could use the word champagne on the label. As I was opening this I felt very little pressure against the cork until the very last moment; and that worried me. But this was not only delicious but answered two questions I have had for many years: why does one age champagne? and, does champagne go with dinner? A lot of people whose opinions I respect have talked favorably about both aging these wines and about the variety of foods they go with but I had not experienced anything that reinforced those opinions. Now, I have. This had many very energetic streams of tiny bubbles and retained them throughout the evening. It had deep pear, apple and melon scents and flavors accented with clay and stone elements. Mouth filling, mellow, light on the palate but quite intense and, perhaps best of all, an extraordinarily persistent finish. Genuinely superb! Went as well with cauliflower casserole as with grilled tuna; an eye-opening experience. Best, Jim

David, First, I suggest you read "Cote d'Or" by Clive Coates. It will give you a good bit of background (albeit somewhat dated) and will orient you to the appellations and the overall atmosphere of the region. It is a long read but a rewarding one. Second, taste. Go to every tasting you can. Third, if you buy, buy very little - no more than 1-3 bottles of anything. Enough so that you can try it several times with several different meals over time. But not enough so that you have too much of it if you find its not your thing. IMO, Burgundy is one of thiose regions where producer is more important than the appellation or the vintage. Jadot and Drouhin make wine from a great number of appellations so they are a good starting point. Also, they usually cost a bit less than others. My favorite "can't miss" producer in all of the Burgundy is Robert Chevillon; he makes wines in Nuits-St.-George. Knowing Burgundy takes a lifetime; knowing it well, takes two. So don't get frustrated - you are not alone. Best, Jim

Its the third day after I opened the 2001 Protocolo (rouge) and I am beginning to wonder about perhaps buying more (it was recorked and allowed to sit out on the counter). It cost less than $7, a very attractive price, but on the first day I'd have sworn it was zinfandel from California. Now, it is more in line with its 100% Tempranillo content; more rustic (as opposed to polished), more distinctly tannic (which is what I think of when I think of Tempranillo) but still strongly flavored and quite dry (but not astringent) on the finish. I am thinking that cellaring a few of these might be an interesting (and inexpensive) experiment. Comes a first dinner with folks from an internet wine board; I know they like big, powerful, California style wines but, to be honest, I don't. What to take? I decide upon an old friend; the 1993 Vincent Arroyo, Cabernet Sauvignon and it is a resounding hit. They like it for its strong flavors and power in the mouth; I for its complex notes of fruit and mint (which seems to morph into light herb) and its length, which is truly exceptional. It has taken all of 11 years to get this good; its initial years were very tannic and made me question whether it would ever come to this. But here it is; of its place, of its style and, "surprise, surprise," delicious. It puts me in mind of the two domestic 1991's I favor, the "Montys" (-lena and -bello) and I like it slightly more than good bottles of the 1992 Groth, Reserve, which has always held a special place in my heart. The release price was $25, which included shipping, delivered to my door. Were that there were more domestic cabs. that could answer that call. Best, Jim

Nice dump. Best, Jim

2003 Gessamí, Gramona: A light-weight wine with a sort of flat, not sweet cream-soda flavor and some pretty floral and white fruit aromatics. More viscous than I expected and very easy to drink. 2002 Joël Taluau, St.-Nicolas-de-Bourgueil V.V.: Red currant, leaf and mineral aromas; the same on the palate with excellent clarity, balance and integration, bright acidity and good length. There’s something almost lacy about this. Good now, better in a few years. 1999 Belle Pente, Pinot Noir Wahle Vnyd.: A poor showing with green aromas and candied flavors distracting from what, I think, is a pretty concentrated and unmanipulated wine. Hold. 2000 Burgess, Cabernet Sauvignon: Ripe, clean, supple, wine that tastes of the variety, has no overlay of oak, is balanced and interesting. And it costs $20. A good, reasonably priced California Cabernet – “and the walls came tumbling down!” 1999 Gilles Robin, Crozes-Hermitage Cuvee Alberic Bouvet: Getting smoother as it ages but losing nothing of its authentic flavors and harmonious delivery. Not overly complex today (but enough to keep it interesting) yet delicious and a tremendous value. 1999 Texier, Côte-Rôtie V.V.: Reference standard Côte-Rôtie with a complex but beguiling nose of fruit, iodine, fresh herbs and earth; wonderful concentration on the palate without heaviness, deep flavors, although the tannins are not absent they have resolved somewhat; immense length. As impressive a wine as appears anywhere in my cellar and one that also appears to have a very long life ahead of it. Sensational. Best, Jim

2000 Nikolaihof, Riesling Im Weingebirge Smaragd: Restrained and lyrical; heard as a harmony singer; no solos, not showing power or size but elegance and balance. Fleeting, yet memorable. 1998 Giacomo Conterno, Barolo Cascina Franeia: A distinguished, cultured gent of fifty-something; greying hair at the temples, laughing blue eyes, disarming with old world manners and good humor; no one knows he runs a marathon in a respectable time and doesn’t collapse at the finish. Well, maybe the ladies know. Something special. Best, Jim

2002 Boudin, Chablis Fourchaume: Clean and aromatic nose with a floral tone; showing more compact and streamlined then in the past with citrus, stone and vinous elements on the palate; good persistence. Closing up, IMO, but still tasty; became rounder with air. 2003 Folliard, Morgon Côte du Py: Rich strawberry and black fruit scents; equally rich and round on the palate but not flabby; medium length. More of a “cocktail” Beaujolais, but good wine, nonetheless. 2000 Domaine Drouhin, Pinot Noir Laurene: Solid in every respect; there is nothing to fault it for nor to distinguish it. Did seem somewhat closed so perhaps cellaring will be beneficial. 2000 Guigal, Châteaneuf du Pape: Pleasant smelling, medium bodied wine that could be from anywhere but was enjoyable, even so. NV Ca’ del Solo (Bonny Doon), Big House Pink: Racy, full-flavored rosé from a plethora of varieties with 13% alcohol and an $8, price tag. Delightful cold; less so at room temp. 1999 Produttori del Barbaresco, Barbaresco: Redolent, big-boned, tannic wine with ample fruit, gentle wood and good structure. Better cellared for several years to shed some tannin but paired well with cauliflower soup with truffle oil. 2002 Baudry, Chinon Les Granges: Berries and leaf accents on the nose; silken but bright across the palate with flavors that echo the nose but add stone accents; good length. Has come together very well; a joy to drink and a bargain at $12. Real wine. 2002 Coudert (Clos de la Roilette), Fleurie: Excellent wine, closing down. Hold. 1996 Pertinace, Langhe: 70% Nebbiolo, 15% Barbera, 15% Cabernet Sauvignon; a lesser wine than the Produttori, Barbaresco mentioned above but still well balanced, masculine and structured. Will be better in time yet good accompaniment to home-made pizzas today. 2002 Bruno Giacosa, Roero Arneis: A sappy “little” wine that is perfect by itself or with light lunch fare. Drink now. 2002 Anselmi, Capitel Foscarino: To me, an amazing wine for $15, showing ripe fruit, superb balance and more depth of flavor than any other Soave (or look-alike) I’ve tasted. Layers of fruit and mineral, a savory accent of fresh herb, beautifully balanced in the mouth; a wine of finesse and latent strength. All the “there” there that one could ask for; excellent now and in the short term. Best, Jim

Chris, Thanks for the report. I am pleased that my experience showed more fruit and depth than what you describe. I feel fairly confident that my bottles' best days are ahead of them. If you have more, I do hope they show better. Best, Jim