Nevan

Really good WA red wine under $10 may be hard to find . . . under $10-$20 is a more reasonable range—you'll tend to get a detectably better wine if you can spend that $5-$10 more. And in that range there is a lot of choice, since the largest of Washington's wineries focus on delivering good value. You might try products from Hogue Cellars, Columbia Crest, Chateau Ste. Michelle, and Columbia Winery (different from Columbia Crest). They all make a variety of solid wines at reasonable prices. Besides Avalonwine.com, check the local wine shops for tastings and timely recommendations of new releases—Esquin in Seattle is great, so is Pike & Western. Depending on where you are, there are plenty of others.

KatieLoeb is quite right about Foris wines: very good quality, very good value, underated producer. One note though, if you are visiting the Willamette Valley (the focus of the previous posts) don't expect to be able to visit Foris: they are located hundreds of miles to the south in the Illinois Valley, just this side of the California border. In fact, their "Fly Over Red" (which is definitely an excellent wine at a great price) was given that name because of all the people (including wine writers) who fly up from San Francisco to Portland in order to visit Oregon's wine country outside of Portland . . . thereby flying over—and completely missing—Oregon's other wine country in the proposed Southern Oregon AVA. PS, Bistro Maison IS superb, but don't overlook the Dundee Bistro in Dundee, just to the north of McMinnville.

In my opinion, the idea of summarizing an entire vintage as "worth" this or that, is a monstrous oversimplification that should not be persued. There are far too many variables in any "vintage for pinot" to make such a sweeping generalization useful (this may be especially true for Pinot noir, but it certainly also applies to other varietals). And I won't even go into the issue of "investing" in wine . . . that is an entirely other subject. The weather conditions in a given year provide a background to the vintage, but it is the combination of regional mesoclimates, site specific microclimates, vineyard management practices, clonal selections, cellar practices, winemaker skills & style, etc. that produce the actual character in any given bottle. In a so-called "bad' vintage there will be individual sub-regions that experience enough weather variation to make their wines distinctively better than those of another subregions, even though they are from the same vintage ("vintage" here being synonymous for "weather conditions" rather than "growing year"). Likewise, no matter what the character of the "vintage," there will be some producers who make better (or worse) wine than others. Take 2002 in Oregon as an example. A very long and warm August through October gave us "great" vintage weather, and winemakers had unusual freedom to decide when to pick. So, some would say it is a great pinot vintage to "buy into." But the fact is, the quality of wine in this vintage especially, is more determined by the decisions the winemakers made. Warmer sites produduced very rapid ripening, and some winemakers chose to pick too fast, resulting in high alcohol cocktail wines that lost a lot of character . . . even in a "great" vintage. Higher altitude sites ripened more slowly, and many of those wines show more structure. Sites with young vines produced very different pinots than sites with old vines . . . so which are the best to "buy into"? It was worse in 2001. Some rain during harvest caused some producers to pick too early, resulting in thinner wines than other producers who chose to wait it out (I remember Ken Wright showing me--in the rain--his "concentrator" where water was being removed from the juice). But since the rains were no where near what they used to be (pre-1998), it is a vintage that was still characterized as extremely good . . . though there are some definitely less than "extremely good" wines. In California, where vintage variation is less, there is still wide variation in the quality of pinots from any given vintage. Even so, folks like Roochiolli (among many others) have proven skilled at making superb wines pretty much all the time . . . so the quality of the vintage is less of a factor than the quality of the producer. So, to end this minor rant, if you really want to "invest" in Pinot noir, I'd suggest following the producer (and your own taste of the wines), not the reputation of the vintage. But then, I wouldn't recommend wine as an investmenbt in the first place!

I first knew SLT in San Francisco and thought it was a kicky local product. Now that there's one in Portland, I try to make a point of stopping in every drive I take to our great metropolis. They do a great job (I love the Staub products)! For KNorthrup (whose rantlet was on the lack of a Crate & Barrel in Portland) and other Portlanders, I just saw this story that says Crate & Barrel has finalized their new Portland location in Southwest, opening fall of 2004 (Portland Sur La Table)

dlc - - any suggestions on where I/we all might find this wonderful sounding wine? I live in the boonies, so it would have to be via Internet/mail. I know how rare/expensive TBAs are, but for a good one, I'm willing to pry open the pocketbook!

Yes, this has been my biggest issue with nearly ALL the Pacific Northwest late harvest-style wines: lack of acidity. They have pretty flavors of sweet fruits and flowers . . . but so does canned fruit cocktail juice. I am on a constant hunt for a sweet wine maker in this region who knows the importance of acidity in balancing and brightening a late harvest wine--and mostly I've been disappointed. The closest I've found is Andrew Rich's late Harvest Gewurtztraminer, but even that could do with more acidity.

2000 Ice Wine, Pinot noir, St. Hubertus Estate Winery, Okanagam Valley (British Columbia, Canada) Polished old gold color, hinting at a dainty pinkness, but looking closely, there is no redness at all, just a deep honey gold color. Deep and high-toned aromas of spiced honey. Surprisingly thin texture (for an ice wine) carries nicely sweet (but not as intensely sweet as some ice wines) and flowery flavors of apricots, honey and . . . grapes. Lacking acidity, the sweet flavors are a dessert-unto-themselves, and a refreshing denouement to a short round of traditional pinot noirs. (Note: this is a true ice wine, unlike most American “icewines”, meaning the grapes were hand picked and pressed naturally fully frozen—at –13 degrees centigrade at 48.4 degrees brix

2000 Merry Edwards, Russian River Valley Pinot noir, Klopp Ranch (California) Dark and rich purple color—perhaps too rich . . . Muddled aromas include old milk and dried blackberry fruit. Thick in the mouth with flavors of dark cherry pie and blackberry cobbler, but without ancillary layers of complexity. Drying tannins and good acidity give the wine a lively feel. The finish has a menthol coolness that is an interesting counterpoint to the drying fine-grained tannins. (The next morning the wine hadn’t changed much, but perhaps the fruit flavors were more forward and better focused. Note: Wine Spectator gave the wine a 91 and Tanzer rated it 89. Our group was mystified . . .)

1999 Williams Selyem Pinot noir, Sonoma Coast (California) Light rose petal red color. Initial big musty/gamey/leathery aromas gave rise to question if the wine was corked. Consensus on smell alone was no (and that was from the winemakers in the group), rather that there was some not-unpleasant brett in the wine. In the mouth the wine was thick, velvety, full of ripe red boysenberry fruit—much richer and more pleasing than the nose led us to believe: an organoleptic conundrum!? (Next morning the funky aroma was completely gone, replaced with a tart dried cherry and roasted meat smell. The flavors were, if anything, sweeter and deeper, with an added creaminess and “aged pinot” meatiness not seen at first blush. Note: Wine Spectator gave this wine an 88 and Stephen Tanzer gave it a 91.)

1998 St. Innocent, Seven Springs Vineyard (Willamette Valley, Oregon) Younger purple rims, medium-hued brick-tinged ruby color. Sweet aromas of vanilla and leather hover above under-ripe red fruit and rose petal notes. Tart red cherry fruit flavor with a subtle sweet foundation that is nicely countered by a cranberry edge. Drying mouth feel with dusty tannins and ample acidity. Flavorful and pleasing but not deeply layered. (Next morning the wine seemed remarkably unchanged. Note: Parker (Rovani) gave this wine a 94, and Spectator a 91. The group, composed of Oregon wine weenies, was surprised the wine showed so well. In my cellar I discovered there are two slightly different label versions. Holding the bottles up to the light, the wine color in one label version was clearly more red and the other more “orange.” We sampled one of the “redder” bottles. Makes me wonder . . .?)

1996 Calera, Jensen Vineyard, Mt. Harlan Pinot noir (Central Coast, Mt. Harlan AVA, California) Brownish edges, great gamey nose with caramel overtones and layers of cherry and strawberry fruits. Excellent mouth-filling feel, lots of plumy fruits, especially raspberry and currants, accented with tons of spice cake and an edgy earthiness. Powerful acids on the finish, fresh and full tannins. Tremendous character, very burgundian, superb! (Tasting the wine this morning it showed more figs and dried cherry notes . . . still quite fresh and very satisfying . . . quite a breakfast wine!)

1997 Clos de la Roche, Hubert Lignier (Grand Cru, Morey-Saint-Denic, Côte d’Or, Burgundy) Full brick red color. Big earthy, meaty aromas of dried cherry and strawberry (described by one tasting group participant as “tres French stank”) that hinted at brett. In the mouth there is a controlled explosion of red cherry, dried oregano, black raspberry, pencil shavings, campfire smoke, orange zest flavors. Clean acid balance with a long finish whose tannins sneak up on you from behind, silently leaving you with a pleasingly puckered mouth. (The next morning this wine offered even more complex aromas, with added notes of warm pumpkin, melon, and smoldering leaves The texture felt more velvety, and the tannins more drying. The overall experience was still beautiful and stimulating. Note: Parker rated this a 94 and Tanzer a 92 . . . the group, while roundly disparaging the whole notion of ratings, felt that this time the experts were, if anything, overly conservative!)

Our tasting group, dubbed “The Purely Pinot Group” met last night for our periodic tasting of . . . purely pinot noir. Usually following a theme (vintage, region, producer, etc.) this set of seven wines was instead a short ramble through California, Oregon and Burgundy, with a concluding side trip to Canada. We called this tasting “A Pinot Miscellany.” Summary notes follow in separate postings in order to facilitate later searches for individual wines. All the wines were tasted blind. Though it is not at all our goal to rate or rank the wines (we are simply after broadening our tasting experience), inevitably the group tended to favor some wines over others. This is MY order of preference, and it generally reflects the group sentiment: 1997 Clos de la Roche Hubert Lignier 1996 Calera, Jensen Vineyard, Mt. Harlan 1998 St. Innocent, Seven Springs Vineyard 1999 Williams Selyem, Sonoma Coast 2000 Merry Edwards, Russian River Valley, Klopp Ranch 1998 Torii Mor, Quail Hill We ended the tasting with a 2000 Ice Wine of Pinot noir produced by St. Hubertus Estate Winery, Okanagan Valley, British Columbia (VQA)—which we all found really interesting and intriguing. Tasting notes follow in separate postings, spaced out for delivery ease (or perhaps, just spaced out tasting notes . . .).

To answer your questions, yes chaptalization (and acidification) is legal in Oregon . . . though a useless concept for vintages since 1998. As for being anonymous, well, I'm strictly a local wine writer and absolutley small potatoes. I'm also unfamiliar with proper net-community etiquette (eGullet is my first online group grope, and I already seem to have blundered into some mistakes), and felt that I was here because I wanted to learn and share, not promote and brag, so it seemed better to just use my middle name. I didn't want to be thought of as forwarding my own agenda every time I posted because that's not really what I'm about (probably why I'm small potatoes!). Maybe that wasn't the right approach and I've made another big mistake, I don't know?? Thanks for the tip on Kacher not distibuting BF . . . didn't know that! Yes variability in Oregon Pinots is a reality, especially in older vintages, but widely tasting through the more recent vintages tells me that the variability is lessening as 1) vineyards mature, and 2) young winemakers mature. Finally many producers have been around enough to have gained a bit of a track record. As for Panther Creek, one of my favorite pinots from Oregon of all time was their 1999 Knights Gambit Vineyard (which was a very small, one-time only release). The PC wines in our tasting were still quite tannic and even harsh, though that really appealed to some in the room!

Last Monday, a group of us convened in Portland for the 2nd I-Guess-We'll-Make-It-Annual All Friends Post-IPNC Oregon Pinot Noir Vintage Review Tasting The object of the tasting was to deepen all of our tasting histories with Oregon pinot by sampling as broad a set of Oregon’s premier pinot producers from a single vintage as we could gather together and swallow in a sitting (prior to dinner). Last year we did 1996 and found them to be far better wines than the prevailing wisdom held. This year we did the less-than-vaunted 1997 vintage and found them to be as variable as everyone expected, but with some particularly pleasant surprises. Attendees included two Oregon winemakers, two wine retailers, a local wine writer (me) and some ardent and knowledgeable consumers. I won’t provide consensus tasting notes for each wine (it’ll take me awhile to compile the audio tape), but will present the wines and overall comments from the group, for those interested. We blindly tasted the following (in order), all 1997 Oregon pinots (with one surprise ringer): 1) Sokol Blosser, Redland Vineyard 2) Flowers, Camp Meeting Ridge (a ringer from Sonoma) 3) Elk Cove, Roosevelt 4) Herschel 5) No Wine 6) Bethel Heights, Southeast Block Reserve 7) Ken Wright, Carter Vineyard 8) Archery Summit, Arcus Estate 9) Archery Summit, Cuvee du Ronde 10) Cristom, Reserve 11) Beaux Freres 12) Chehalem, Ridgecrest Vineyard 13) Domaine Serene, Evenstad Reserve 14) Torii Mor, 4 Winds Vineyard 15) Torii Mor, Temperance Hill Vineyard 16) Panther Creek, Shea Vineyard 17) Panther Creek, Freedom Hill Vineyard 18) Broadley Vineyards, Claudia’s Choice 19) Broadley Vineyards, Marcile Loraine 20) Evesham Wood, Cuvee J 21) Steveson-Barrie, Glasgow Vineyard 21) Torii Mor, Balcombe Vineyard 22) Torii Mor, Olson Vineyard A few words on the vintage. 1997 was the largest yield Oregon had ever seen to that time. Generally, clusters were large, yields per vineyard were large (lots of dropped fruit before harvest, but still lots left at harvest time). 1997 was the last vintage of significant rain during harvest (at least through 2002), and depending on when individual producers picked, fruit concentration was affected by rain (I don’t think there were any concentrators in use then . . . unlike today). Consequently, 1997 has a reputation for relatively light wines, high acids, low extraction, and less than optimal ageability. In his summary comments, one of the winemakers said that most vintages since 1997 have been a “cake walk” relative to 1997 . . . and that 1997 was a vintage to learn from, whereas recent vintages were not. For him, the wines showed that there were many poor picking and winemaking decisions made, and that in general, winemakers had tried to make bigger wines than the fruit would allow. Today, he felt, Oregon knows a lot more and would likely make better wines given the same vintage conditions. His summary comment was that if we had just tasted 22 red burgundies, we would have had a lot more fun (I'd have to agree)! The other winemaker seemed to concur, commenting that the wines showed a lot of manipulation (chaptalization, for example), but that it was unavoidable given the vintage. He also noted that the wines were from vineyards that were much younger then, and that may have been reflected in the relativbely unconcentrated fruit, but that he was pleased to see there were a number of good wines that still retained body, flavor, and character. Other participants commented that they felt the vintage showed better than they expected it would, with wines that still retained good fruit and good textures . . . “even though some were kind of weird.” One comment I particularly agreed with was that the vintage showed the lighter style of Oregon pinot, which itself has fallen out of fashion, mostly due to the ability in recent vintages for Oregon to produce big extraction, high concentration wines . . . but that this character alone doesn’t necessarily make the 1997s worse wines. Throughout the tasting there were some wide differences of opinion on individual wines—indicating that the wines definitely still contained enough character to spark debate . . . they were not quite over the hill. In summarizing favorites, the group coalesced around a few wines that simply stood out as having more depth and vibrancy. The most frequently named favorite—and consensus choice for best wine of the evening--was the Elk Cove, Roosevelt Vineyard. The second most frequently named favorite was the Domaine Serene. In both cases people thought the wines retained full fruit and depth and were well balanced. Other wines receiving multiple votes for inclusion in the top 3 were the Torii Mor, Olson Vineyard, and Archery Summit Arcus Estate. I can’t wait for next year when we do the 1998s!

OK, about Bandon Dunes (should this be a different thread??) . . . First of all, I am not a golfer, so probably don't have the proper appreciation of the total Bandon/Pacific Dunes package. But, my wife is from Bandon and we have watched its development closely, especially in the realm of food & wine, since it is without a doubt the Southern Oregon coast's premier destination. A year ago we went to eat there and found the restaurant to have no atmosphere of any kind, the menu was meatloaf-and-steak-focused, and the wine list was minimal (not a single Oregon or even Northwest wine). I talked with a marketing person I know who has the owner of Bandon Dunes as a client. She said that you have to understand "it is all about the golf; anything else, including food and wine, is unimportant unless it brings in more golfers." Well, since there are no good places to dine (not just eat) within 150 miles of the Dunes (and I am saying this as a statement of fact, not hyperbole) it seemed to me they might want to use the restaurant as a lure to keep the golfers's dollars onsite. And now it seems they are trying to do that. Emphasis on "trying." In December we partook of the 2003 New Year Dunes package that included discount rooms, a party, and their "gourmet" dinner on New Year's Eve. The food was dramatically improved (though the wine list was abysmal), and the whole experience was much more positive. So, with some hope, we went to dinner there about three weeks ago. The restaurant still didn't have much atmosphere (very boxy with hotel-room-art on the walls and uncomfotably upright chairs . . . though the view is nice, even if you can't see the ocean . . . and you have to wonder why they didn't design it for the view that the site is capable of) but they now had linen table cloths and a more respectable place setting style (that included switching--without my having to ask--the clumsy initial wine glasses with appropriately shaped crystal when we ordered a good wine). The menu had been completely re-done with a much broader selection of entrées (a couple of local fresh seafood combos, more elaborate meat meals--though the signature meatloaf remains--and the requisite pasta and chicken selections thankfully NOT fried or cheese-sauce engulfed), reasonable appetizers, and a dessert selection. We shared a prawn cocktail that was crisp and nicely styled (as much as such a basic appetizer can be), with mixed salad greens that luckily didn't include shaved iceberg lettuce--though the cocktail sauce was nothing more than ketchup and horseradish. I can't remember our salad. I had the grilled salmon on a bed of garlic mashed potatoes with carrot and zucchini on the side (rather uncreative). It was good, not great, with the fish a bit overcooked and the potatoes a bit stiff--I had a hard time believing it was local fresh-caught. My wife opted for the rack of lamb with a port-pepper reduction. The meat was well cooked (seared on edges and appropriately rare inside) and flavorful. The garnishes and sides on both our dishes had the appearance of having sat under the heat lamp: over dry and limp. We didn't have dessert. The chef is a young guy from Coos Bay, not exactly known as a culinary center, and he seems to be trying hard and generally doing well (certainly for this region). His menu descriptions were a significant cut above any other local fare, and reflected some ambition. I think they are hobbled by a difficult kitchen location (everything is brought up stairs to the restaurant), perhaps some problems getting really goo ingredients, and an emphasis on efficiency over stovetop-to-tabletop quality. The servers were friendly and reasonably capable, though only knowledgeable beyond the point of what they've memorized (again, unsurprising for the area, where it is simply not possible to get any servers experienced at good quality restaurants) The wine list was also revolutionized. There were four flavors of the list. One was a listing of how many of the Wine Spectator's "Top 100" wines were in stock and orderable. The other was the "normal" list, and the third the "reserve" list. Our waitress also gave us a typed list of which wines were down to "the last few bottles." My, such choices! I took far longer deciding the wine then I did the dinner. The wine emphasis is explicitly focused on "big scores, big names." The Food & Wine manager, Phil Sobel, told me that this is what the golfers want: recognizable names at big prices. And Bandon Dunes has what has to be admitted is an excellent selection of those kinds of wines. They've added a number of Oregon pinots, but have opted for the names (Beaux Frères, Ken Wright, DDO) rather than wines of more interest (Broadley, Chehalem, Brick House). From Washington they were big on APEX, Andrew Will, Quilceda Creek. The California wines are equally "names": Silver Oak, various Opi vintages, Kistler, Rochiolli, etc. Bandon Dunes moves about $75,000 of wine a month out of its restaurant, and it must be a major profit center. I wouldn't order any Oregon wines (I won't pay $75 for a DDO that I can get . . . for less) so I opted for a luscious Goldeneye pinot (and paid $120 for it, more than twice the retail). It was by far the best part of the meal. At the Dunes there are plans for: their own private label wine (sourced from King Estate, so it will be solid but nothing to write home about), their own wine club (featuring local wine selections, some of which are rather dubious), a third (and eventually fourth) golf course, and a new intimate super-high-quality restaurant (with a view of the ocean, but it is years away). All in all, the dining experience was definitely "expensive/quality institutional," which is a major improvement, but still not a place I'd frequent for its quality--or value for dollar spent. The focus seems to be on prestige, especially with the wine, because that is what their crowd wants: trophies. The night we were there there was a table of five US senators dining, and apparently the General Motors CEO and key staff had been there the night before. I presume they order the Screaming Eagle. Phil is very experienced, and I think knows what could be done, and is working all the time on improvements. But his Las Vegas experience I think is more focused--again--on quality tempered by efficiency, rather than quality for quality's sake. At least that's the view from my perspective. It's probably a fantastic golf course . . .almost makes me want to take up the game . . .

Boy, the old days of train hopping in that geographically dramatic area sound great! And I'll bet the blue plate special was loads better than anything you can get at the golf resort (ask me about the food & wine service at Bandon Dunes . . .). Well, I thank everyone for the suggestions, even if none of them quite seemed like a "recommendation"! I guess I'll have to pack my own goodies with me. After having been in Prosser for the weekend (where there was but a single espresso stand--whose product was cooler than the temperature outside--fronted by a little "pray-before-you-pay" chapel that we tried our best to ignore) we were really longing for something good to eat. Looks like I'll have to lower my expectations as i go through the Gorge!

After a long hot drive from the Yakima Valley wineries yesterday (113 degrees in Prosser on Saturday) my wife and I were heading home along Hwy 84 and wanted to have a good dinner in either The Dalles or Hood River before we undertook the remaining 4 hour drive the rest of the way home. Not knowing anything about The Dalles, we went through to Hood River, where I had some minor knowledge of the town. A promising brew pub wasn't serving outside, had limited and very sweaty seating inside, and after standing in line for an unusually long time just to order a beer to stave off the 30-minute dinner wait . . . we left. We went into something called Pasquales but couldn't get by the chemical/smoke smell that hung in the dining room. We drove around and found . . . nothing appealing. We ended up at The Mesquitery and had an excptionally mediocre dinner. HELP!! There must be good places to eat in these two towns, I just don't know where they are, and since I'll be making this drive a lot more in the future, I need guidance . . . thanks for any recommendations!!

I always thought it was just a bad and tired joke from some dumb movie, but I really did last summer overhear two guys looking at wine bottles on the shelf and one said to the other "I really like that Mer Lot wine a lot." I swear to a diety! (ok, I know, not everyone is an oenophile, and it isn't nice to make fun of of the vinously-challenged, but these guys WERE in a wine shop, and I'm basically an elitist anyway . . . so I found it funny . . .if you don't find it funny, then don't laugh.)

I've been noodling in my noggin about this conception and I think it is perhaps more good than bad. Not that it's a place I'm likely to ever sample, even though I do find myself in Beaverton on occassion. BUT, most of the world are not eGulleteers, and for those majority of folks who think a mass-made-and-hung-up-to-dry pseudo-beef-patty on a sponge of white fluff is good eats, the fact that by visiting this concept they might get exposed to something called "curry" or "yaki soba" or anything "cubano" might open their eyes (and palates) to tastes a tad more "advanced". It's like Todai in Portland. A whole bunch of cheap (and cheaply made) sushi-like foods that can't come close to a good Japanese restaurant . . . but it is generally packed with people who (mostly attracted by the all-you-can-eat dangle) probably wouldn't otherwise sample sushi. It is my fond hope that Noodlin (like merlot?) can be an introduction that allows people to expand their food horizons. Dare I hope? And I totally agree on making it at home! The nearest "fine dining" establishment to my home touts their $14.95 over-cooked, over-sauced, so-called pasta (with exotic ingredients such as "peas" and "bacon"). I can make it so much better for so much less, and in about the time it takes to get to the restaurant. Same with Noodlin!

It seems to me it's not about "merlot" or "chardonnay," it's about how some people make merlot and chardonnay, and how some people prefer merlot and chardonnay to taste. If all you've ever had is the predominant style of California-made merlot (fat and oaky) or chardonnay (fat and buttery), then you may like that style only because you've never tasted these varietals made in different styles. Nothing wrong with that: trust your own taste--if you like it, you like it, and good for you! But DO try to taste widely in order to learn what your taste really is because there are all kinds of merlot and chardonnay styles out there. There is nothing inherent in either of these grapes that make them lesser or greater than any other grape--only growing location and winemaking style can determine whether one merlot wine is "better" (i.e., more to your taste) than another. So the key is, don't be daunted by what's "in" or "out" but rather go out and purposefully try different styles to see which ones you like. Read the critic's comments (not their ratings) to find which producers are making different styles and then go taste them. Find the kind you like, and damn the critics and hipsters if they don't agree! (Speaking of agreement, eatingmike is right on: find an Andrew Will Klipsun Vineyard Merlot to see how different merlot can be, and find a good crisp chablis to see the other side of chardonnay's character).

In regard to Domaine Serene, from my perspective there are two reasons why their wines are consistently strong: money and commitment. Not to be too crass about it, but owners Ken and Grace Evenstad can afford to spare no expense in the production of their wines. Of course, that starts with owning some outstanding (and no doubt outstandingly expensive) vineyard land in both the Dundee Hills and the Eola Hills . . . so their sites are really good. They can then afford to manage the vineyards with close care, hand farming, and lots of green harvesting to keep yields low. And the winery, well, what can I say? From a special "bug sucker" vaccuum on the sorting line to spectacular cellar rooms with all kinds of technology bells and whistles, everything is geared to keep the wine as perfectly as possible . . . . stuff that very few wineries can afford to equal. (The beautiful and still-new winery is not generally open, but I think they recently began offering tours by appointment . . . but I'm not certain about that). I also have a lot of respect for the folks working there. Winemaker Tony Rynders (who was once with Hogue, among others) is very focused on quality, and not just as a PR tool but, I'm convinced, as a kind of personal mission. I've been up there during harvest and watched Tony, Ken, Grace, and the whole staff from sales to receptionist standing all day long on the sorting line picking out bad stuff before the good stuff goes into the destemmer. Strictly speaking, they don't HAVE to personally do that, but they do. Having the resources to do everything right doesn't guarantee great wines (there are lots of great wines produced on a relative shoestring--and lots of family-fortune wineries that turn out mediocre wine), but in my experience Domaine Serene has definietly put their money to good use and become one of the most consistent northwest producers of high quality wines.

Not too long ago there was some discussion here about Domaine Serene's (Oregon) wines. Here a link to an interesting release they just put out regarding a blind tasting where their wines showed exceptionally well: Domaine Serene Tasting

Social generalizations are always difficult. So let me make a few of my own. I live in a very rural part of Oregon (moved from SF Bay Area 5 years ago) and find the attitudes of my neighbors stultifying and difficult to live with. However, I spend heaps of time in the urban parts of Oregon (Eugene and Portland) and loads of time with Oregon winemakers. In these environments I find all kinds of outspoken, challening, experimental, on-the-edge, eager-to-challenge-the-status-quo attitudes--FAR MORE than I experienced in over 25 years of living in the supposedly hip and liberal Bay Area. And as far as Oregon's winemakers go, I just can't express how wrong I think it is that they are even remotely passive and not wanting to make waves. Hell, when David Lett moved up here to grow grapes he was flat out told they wouldn't grow here. His take-no-prisoners attitude proved the sages wwaayy wrong, and he built a market and started an industry. Talk to him today, and he is as feisty and outspoken as ever. Lett too Old Guard? Then take Jay Somers, a young winemaker who is making some of the best New World white wines I have yet tasted. Talk to him and see how passive he is! He's challenging Oregon's old guard, he's doing it his own way, and he's carving a niche for himself based on quality and character (his and his wines). He is as much a pioneer as Lett was. Or how about today's mainstream? Ken Wright is one of our best known names. Talk about not being passive! He has innovated in everything from how grape contracts are structured to ecncourage vineyard owners to limit yields, to when to pull leaf in the fruit zone (doing it differently from the conventional wisdom), to how to sell wine. When he was at the top of his game, with virtual cult status for his pinot noirs and accolades from Parker/Rovani and the Spectators, what does he do? He goes off and starts another label to do Bordeaux and Rhone varietals. How many more examples do you want? Earl Jones planted the first Tempranillo Dolcetto and Albarino in the Northwest, and the wines are blowing away anything else made in CA. Myron Redford won't use new oak of any kind on his pinot . . . how against the grain is that? David Adelsheim brought in Dijon clones of chard and pinot when no one else in the New World gave a hoot about them. The whole damn industry wants to call it Pinot gris instead of grigio because we're trying to make a new style of the varietal that matches our climate (Don Lange was the first to barrel ferment Pinot gris, David Lett was the first to plant it anywhere in the New World.) Should I continue? Mr. Fat Guy is absolutely right. Oregon may have lots of issues to contend with in its winemaking industry, but the future is nothing but bright, mostly because these folks ARE pushing the envelope. Hell, average pinot yields in CA are still around 4 tons an acre, while in OR no good pinot producer would think about hanging that much fruit. All kinds of experimentation is going on in the vineyard and cellar up here, and while not everything hits on all cylinders all the time, the wins are big. Even our vintage variation is becioming less of a hinderance to quality winemaking because we have so much more experience now. Yes, we are young in the world of winemaking, but most of the folks that came up here to make wine (or who decided to stay here to make wine) did so PRECISELY because they wanted the freedom, to innovate. The OR wine industry does not yet have the kind of artheriosclerosis you see so much of in CA, which is why you can find so many different, interesting, even eccentric wines (that match the characters of their makers). And all this from that dull and conservative state that brought us the Death With Dignity Act, vote-by-mail, and one of the most innovative state-sponsored health plans in the country. Nope, we don't like making waves, not at all! "So if anything cool is going to happen . . . " (as it was expressed) you will probably find it in the state that is breaking all kinds of social (and vinous) norms. See, somebody in Oregon does like to speak up! -Nevan

Dear Jancis: It seems that the concept of biodyanimc farming (in the absolutist sense, not just heightened organic farming) is gathering momentum as a viticultural practice, both in Europe and America. I'm curious to know what your tasting experience has been with "biodynamie" wines: do you think the practice produces consistently better fruit? Are the wines noticeably better . . . or at least different? Do you feel this a fad of the times or a wave of the future? Thanks for any insight you can offer . . . and thank you for visiting us! -Nevan