Wine Tasting Notes 2003

[Robin Meredith]

2001 Kurt Darting Durkheimer Michelsberg Kabinett

Boy, did I love this wine. Huge extract, almost like a Spatlese Trocken. Very broad impact on the palate, maybe a bit monolithic now (just a bit), with a very nice touch of limey acidity emerging on the finish. Purchased from Chambers Street Wines at a typically amazing price (somewhere in the $12 to $14 range), a truly astounding value.

Intellectually, I know this wine has the potential to develop some additional complexity in the bottle, but it's hard to pinpoint exactly where and when it might improve - it really is drinking beautifully now (I'm a bit of an acid buff, but even if you're not you would probably find this very approachable). I've got a case, so I'll spread it out over time, but don't be afraid to pick up a bottle for short-term drinking.

Side note: Rovani didn't report on these, so they might hang around a bit longer than other offerings.

[Beachfan]

Selbach Oster Mosel Kabinett 2001.

Surpirsingly complex, crisp, tropical fruit. I haven't had many German wines, this is the first that had complexity as opposed to being sweet and monochromatic. I had it by the half bottle at Roxanne's, a real bargain at $17.

["T"]

Landeyran Saint Chinian Grains de Passion 2000: $35.95 cdn

Medium deep red tones. Cherry and dark berry notes along with bright floral characteristics on the nose.

Palate mimics the nose with a bit more fruit and a nice balance of acid and tannin.

Gres Saint Paul Coteaux-du-Languedoc Antonin 1999: $29.95 cdn

Rich red tones from the middle of the glass to the rim. Rich cherry fruit, garrique, deep earthy aromas but not dominating.

Big mouthfull of cherry and raspberry. Fruit is well contained with a firm balance of acid and tannin.

Puech-Haut Coteaux du Languedoc Saint-Drezery Tete de Cuvee $53.95 cdn

Sweet red fruit on the nose along with the smell of damp dry grass in the field. Not funky corked but sweet wet straw.

Black currants, blackberry compote(cooked berries), eucalyptus, anis on the palate. Medium acid with firm tannins.

After one hour of the bottle being openned rendered more fruit on palate and more relaxed tannin.

Marquise des Mures Saint Chinian Vielles Vignes (old vines) $27.99 cdn

Cherries, strawberries and floral notes on the nose. Violets, rose petals.

Palate mimics the nose with cherry flavours mingling with floral notes held in check with a medium dose of acid and tannin. Good long length with a smack of eucalpytus on the finish.

Soft, smooth wine with a good concentration of fruit.

That's it for now.

Edited April 2, 2003 by "T" (log)

[guajolote]

Thanks T,

Do you approximate price points for these?

Thanks

[Robert Nesta Marley]

Landeyran Saint Chinian Grains de Passion 2000: $35.95 cdn

Medium deep red tones. Cherry and dark berry notes along with bright floral characteristics on the nose.

Palate mimics the nose with a bit more fruit and a nice balance of acid and tannin.

Gres Saint Paul Coteaux-du-Languedoc Antonin 1999: $29.95 cdn

Rich red tones from the middle of the glass to the rim. Rich cherry fruit, garrique, deep earthy aromas but not dominating.

Big mouthfull of cherry and raspberry. Fruit is well contained with a firm balance of acid and tannin.

Puech-Haut Coteaux du Languedoc Saint-Drezery Tete de Cuvee $53.95 cdn

Sweet red fruit on the nose along with the smell of damp dry grass in the field. Not funky corked but sweet wet straw.

Black currants, blackberry compote(cooked berries), eucalyptus, anis on the palate. Medium acid with firm tannins.

After one hour of the bottle being openned rendered more fruit on palate and more relaxed tannin.

Marquise des Mures Saint Chinian Vielles Vignes (old vines) $27.99 cdn

Cherries, strawberries and floral notes on the nose. Violets, rose petals.

Palate mimics the nose with cherry flavours mingling with floral notes held in check with a medium dose of acid and tannin. Good long length with a smack of eucalpytus on the finish.

Soft, smooth wine with a good concentration of fruit.

That's it for now.

wow. you paid a lot of money for those wines. i've been really curious about puech-haut, though; thanks.

["T"]

Actually I tried them at a tasting so it didn't cost me much at all. What I do find expensive is when people open 1st growth Bordeaux as soon as they get them from their retailer. Drinking a $400.00-$500.00 of wine years before they are meant to be drunk is my definition of expensive bottles. Mind you, for the sake of charting a wine thoughout its life it is equal to the first chapter in a novel so I supose important. That said, I still find it a very expensive experiment.

Just an opinion.

[Claude Kolm/The Fine Wine Review]

1989 was the year of the bicentennial of the Revolution in France, and when one went to the cellars to taste the wines in 1990, there was much enthusiasm among the producers who thought that everyone would want wines with an “89” vintage. (Interestingly, even in Bordeaux, where 200 years later there was still great antipathy to the Revolution, producers expected to capitalize on this numerical coincidence.) As a result, the wines were expensive when released (prices for current vintages of the same wines generally are only be about 10-15% above the prices for 1989s in 1991-92). I daresay that no one reading this today could care less about drinking a wine because it was from the year of the bicentennial (or even an American wine from 1976, our bicentennial).

It was a warm vintage and the grapes arrived at the cellars at elevated temperatures. Thus, cellars not equipped with cooling equipment may have had troubles. Overall, yields were about 5-6% higher than in 1988, although some of the real stars of the vintage, such as Dujac and Pousse d’Or came in with significantly lower yields than in 1988.

When I went to taste the wines in barrel, there was much foolish talk about 1989 being the vintage of the century. Like the 1988, these wines were extremely dark in color, but beyond that, they in now way resembled their 1988 counterparts – the 1989s were lower in acidity and considerably less precise in representation of their respective terroirs. The problem seemed to be that the wines showed the effect of too much sun.

Too much sun seemed continue to be the problem for many years, as enjoyable as the best wines were. I remember asking Christophe Roumier about five years ago which of his wines he thought were drinking well. He said 1989 and 1992, and although the former had the better reputation, he would rather drink the latter. I was in agreement. However, I must admit that as the years go by, I find that I gain increasingly more pleasure from top 1989s that I drink. The wines should be regarded as at their peak now, and although top crus will continue to hold their quality for some time, I do not foresee continued improvement in the wines. The best are simply splendid for current consumption. Beware, though, that the quality revolution was slow in spreading, so the number of producers making topflight wines was considerably less than today.

1989 may be the last vintage in which the Cote de Beaune generally was more successful than the Cote de Nuits. Domaine de la Pousse d’Or, where yields were especially small, was a particular standout, as were the wines of Lafarge. Other highly successful Cote de Beaune producers included de Montille, Comte Armand, Pothier-Rieusset, d’Angerville, Lafon, and Jacques Germain – the usual suspects.

On the Cote de Nuits, Dujac’s wines were/are even better than the 1988s, Méo-Camuzet was extremely successful, as were Leroy and Rousseau, and an inconsistent producer, Manière-Noirot in Vosne-Romanee, made wonderful wines in 1989. Chevillons were good, too, as were Rouget’s wines, and I had some good Bruno Clair, Lucien Boillot, and Philippe Rossignol wines. But there were relative disappointments, including Maume and Roumier (still very good, nevertheless), and the few Ponsots that I had were disappointing in more than the relative sense. Curiously, I am not able to locate any notes on DRC 1989s. Last, the wines of the legendary Henri Jayer were simply phenomenal in this vintage, as a magnum of Cros Parantoux split among five drinkers demonstrated last November.

Best regards,

Claude Kolm

The Fine Wine Review

[Florida Jim]

A few along the way:

1999 Pierre-Bise, Anjou (Rouge): very stemmy nose with solid cherry and berry scents with a sour earth note; tastes about like it smells; medium finish. An ugly little wine that was palatable but just.

2000 Belle Pente, Riesling: still rocking along with lovely, fresh scents and flavors, nothing overdone or disjointed and just a hint of RS. Lovely wine, all the time.

2000 Tribut, Chablis: tasted several bottles over a week’s time and each was clearly of its place, ripe, clean and longer than I would have expected. Will benefit from short term cellaring but tastes very nice today.

2001 Dr. L, Riesling (QbA): pleasant albeit sweet; for drinking with food and not with out. Solid but not much else.

1991 Montelena: just plain great cab. Smoothing some but still well structured and in no danger of diminishing. Yummers.

2000 Michaud, Cuvee Prestige Brouily: I written too many times about how good this is – it still is.

2000 Clos Roche Blanche, Gamay: perplexing wine; not especially impressive on the nose or palate but solid, of its place and quite minerally. Interesting now but not fascinating. Hold.

2000 Remondo, Rioja La Vendimia: ricjh and ripe with lots of dark fruit and dirt with nice red fruit tones. For now and the next several years.

2000 Brander, Sauvignon Blanc: very crisp and quite spicey. Needs a year or two but as good depth and should get better and better.

1998 R&V Dauvissat, La Forets: softer than expected (I attribute that to vintage) but full flavored and nicely persistent. Good wine but I have no idea if time will serve it well.

2000 Saitsbury, Pinot Noir Carneros: a touch woody but not too much and full of spice and fruit. Excellent with lunch fare.

2001 Sandord, Pinot Noir: a little too much oak here but nice fruit and sustain. Maybe the wood will integrate.

1994 Pesquera: Wood soup. Too bad because there is some nice fruit trying to get out.

1993 Lytton Springs, Lytton Springs, Zin.: Drink now; showing at (or just past) peak despite being some what raisined and a touch stemmy. Still, this vineyard and producer have made a good wine here if not at the level of the 92 and 94.

Best, Jim

[Beachfan]

Great notes; thanks.

BTW I thought my last 91 Montelena (this year) wasn't quite as good as 8 months ago. But I like them fruity.

[Florida Jim]

BTW I thought my last 91 Montelena (this year) wasn't quite as good as 8 months ago.  But I like them fruity.

Was it really your "last" or do you have more?

I have a whole lot of "fruity" wines that I would love to trade for more of the 91 Monty. I was quite impressed with it, which may tell you more about my palate than the wine. :)

Best, Jim

[Craig Camp]

Twenty years ago Montelena was a deity in California. Today it seems often overlooked as so many hot shots have flashed on and off the scene. I have always found these wines exceptional and one of the most age worthy wines in California.

I drank most of mine too soon.

[Florida Jim]

I drank most of mine too soon.

Craig,

While I understand some regret, if you enjoyed them when you had them, perhaps that tempers it some.

Best, Jim

[Craig Camp]

I drank most of mine too soon.

Craig,

While I understand some regret, if you enjoyed them when you had them, perhaps that tempers it some.

Best, Jim

They are very fond memories.

You mention both the Sanford and the Saintsbury being over-oaked - do you usually perceive them this way. I have always seen the Sanford as a good 'terroir' winery making wines that taste of place and never thought of them in the past as being over-oaked. Saintsbury was always overtly fruity to me - that strawberry Carneros Pinot taste. Have they both increased or somehow changed their barrel programs?

Are the Brander wines still barrel fermented - you note it as being crisp? I just found a bottle of 1981 Brander SB at the bottom of another case. I am not optimistic.

[Florida Jim]

You mention both the Sanford and the Saintsbury being over-oaked - do you usually perceive them this way. I have always seen the Sanford as a good 'terroir' winery making wines that taste of place and never thought of them in the past as being over-oaked. Saintsbury was always overtly fruity to me - that strawberry Carneros Pinot taste. Have they both increased or somehow changed their barrel programs?

Are the Brander wines still barrel fermented - you note it as being crisp? I just found a bottle of 1981 Brander SB at the bottom of another case. I am not optimistic.

Craig,

This bottle of Brander was my first and I had not heard of them before. Hence, I have no information on them.

The Sanford was too oaky for me, the Saintsbury was not. I noticed oak in the Saintsbury and it is always my preference not to, but it was not "over-oaked."

The Sanford, OTOH, was - for my palate. And I am acutely sensitive to wood, so take that with a grain of salt.

Plain truth; I prefer not being able to sense "oak" in any amount in wine. Its effects are fine, its profile is not.

But that's just me - YMMV.

Best, Jim

[Craig Camp]

In comparing the Sanford and Saintsbury (trying to forget the oak) which do you feel had the best fruit complexity and terroir?

[docsconz]

Twenty years ago Montelena was a deity in California. Today it seems often overlooked as so many hot shots have flashed on and off the scene. I have always found these wines exceptional and one of the most age worthy wines in California.

I drank most of mine too soon. 

I find Montelena to be one of the most consistently good California Cabs year in year out. Some friends and I did a vertical from 1982 to1997 a couple of years ago. IMO the early 90's were drinking best at that time.

[Florida Jim]

In comparing the Sanford and Saintsbury (trying to forget the oak) which do you feel had the best fruit complexity and terroir?

Craig,

'Might be a little early to make that call. They're both still pretty young and pretty primary - nothing showing to indicate complexity or place.

Best, Jim

[Robin Meredith]

Are the Brander wines still barrel fermented - you note it as being crisp? I just found a bottle of 1981 Brander SB at the bottom of another case. I am not optimistic.

I'm working from memory here, so I may not get all the details right, but I believe Brander makes as many as four SB cuvees, only one of which (Cuvee Nicolas, I believe) is primarily barrel fermented. Their basic cuvee, another odd bottling whose name escapes me (Cuvee Natalie??) that may include a bit of Riesling, and their super-premium Au Naturel all lean toward the tank-fermented style (although I wouldn't be surprised if a portion of the Au Naturel juice is barrel fermented).

IMHO, this is a really cool winery - staking out turf as a SB specialist is an unusual choice (especially in the heart of Santa Barbara County), but they do a nice job with it. I've also had some decent reds, including Bordeaux varietals and blends under the Brander label and Pinot Noir under their Domaine Santa Barbara label.

Edited April 9, 2003 by Robin Meredith (log)

[Robert Nesta Marley]

i believe you're correct.

indeed, brander's forte is SB, since the, what, late 70s, no? they've served as an early benchmark for a pretty long time, before santa barbara wines were cool.

it's not only the Nicholas that sees wood now, though; although most of their cuvees don't.

in new york they're distributed by domaine select estates now if you're ITB. more cool peoples.

[David Russell]

Re Brander's two high-end sauvignons, the Cuvée Natalie and the au Naturel. They both start life as the same exact wine, fermented in stainless steel, in a cold room, with--and this is the unusual part--up to 24 hours of skin contact. Then the juice is run off to undergo élevage: the Natalie into French oak (the percentage of which is new I don't recall at this moment) and the au Natural into another stainless steel tank. The latter, therefore, never sees any oak at all, and neither one of them is barrel-fermented.

As for oak in the Sanford pinot, I'm assuming this is the "regular" bottling: that cuvée sees very little, if any, new oak, so what you're perceiving as oak is probably something else.

[Florida Jim]

As for oak in the Sanford pinot, I'm assuming this is the "regular" bottling: that cuvée sees very little, if any, new oak, so what you're perceiving as oak is probably something else.

David,

It certainly wouldn't be the first time.

A while back I started complaining about the oak in some of the Flowers pinots. Greg L. (winemaker) came on and asked me to pick the best vintages and the worst of them. I wound up picking the ones with the most new oak.

His comments then were simply that yeasts and other items used in the winemaking process can smell or taste like oak to the person who is not fully familiar with the smell and taste of each.

Quite a lesson.

Perhaps, from now on, I will just say a wine smells or tastes "like" oak. :)

Best, Jim

[Florida Jim]

With assorted cheeses:

1999 Hirtzberger, Gruner Veltliner, Honivogl:

beautiful nose with scents of oleander, white fruit, light spice, mineral and freshly turned earth/

medium body, very integrated and texturally smooth, flavors follow the nose with good depth and remarkable integration, concentrated and intense, perfect balance/

long, long finish.

As together a wine as one could imagine, especially in view of its youth. This producer continues a long list of winners.

With mushroom quiche:

1997 Zind-Humbrecht, Pinot Gris, Rangen de Thann, etc.:

bronze in color/

aggressive nose of sweetened turpentine (how’s that for an odd descriptor), flowers, well caramelized onion, very ripe grapes and big spice/

full body, flavors follow the nose with a good bit of cut, concentrated and very intense, nice balance/

very long finish.

Nothing here for the faint of heart. A powerful wine of strong flavors and great intensity. Exquisite with the dish.

Grilled tenderloin steaks covered with arugala and a lemon dressing:

1996 Dom. des Remizieres, Hermitage, Cuvee Emilie:

magnificent nose of meat, warm flowers, perfume, red and black fruits, pepper and mineral/

medium body, fantastic flavors follow the nose and leave one wanting another sip immediately, concentrated and intense, fairly well resolved structure, an almost unbelievable sense of harmony, lovely balance/

long finish.

‘Never heard of them before – will seek them out from here on. A wine at its peak and what a peak. Fabulous.

Best, Jim

["T"]

Great notes. The pairing of the mushroom quiche and the Zind- Humbrecht PG sounds as though they were meant for each other, although, some sweet caramalized onions and smoked bacon makes everything better

[pixelchef]

Lightly carbonated, fruit-sweet with a gentle acidic tang typical of Mosacto d'Asti. Gorgeous peach and tangerine aromas lead into a crisp, tart (yet light) flavor. Sweet with balancing acidity and a fresh prickle on the tongue. I thought I detected marshmallow on the nose as well, is this typical?

In any case, I really enjoy this varietal. It is such fun to drink -- makes me giggle with every sip.

[KatieLoeb]

I can't think of anything more romantic than sipping a bottle of chilled Moscato d'Asti accompanied by some really ripe strawberries on a warm summers day with one you love... { big sigh}

I LOVE this wine. It's sweet, both literally and figuratively. It makes me giggle too I particularly like the Moscato from Vajra. Very lightly frizzante and quite peachy. YUMMMMMMM...