Oregon Pinot Noir

[jbonne]

We've been drinking more and more Cristom, I couldn't agree more.

O'Reilly is owned by Owen Roe (is that right Jbonne?) and I think they do excellent 'everyday' pinot noir

←

yep, David O'Reilly has his hand in both Owen Roe and Sineann, along with O'Reilly's.

O'Reilly's is a terrific value. Sineann makes some of the best domestic pinot i've had (though i'm not a fan of how their '03s have tasted thus far) and Owen Roe wines (mostly made from WA fruit) are awesome too.

[LOS]

At the very top levels Burgundy is pretty amazing and offers a complexity and ethereal flavors and aromas that I have not found in pinot produced anywhere else on earth.

(isn't it interesting that this is the case with many other varietals-Cabernet/Bordeaux, Syrah/Rhone etc?).

However, those examples are few and far between!

After that things drop off a bit and I find that many New World pinots are often indistinguishable from their French counterparts.

Maybe it's me but in recent years I have found that a number of producers in Oregon and California are making pinots that are increasingly more complex and interesting--wines that reflect more terroir.

I've found completely the opposite. Specifically, that there are fewer and fewer producers in California producing Pinot that is complex and interesting, and that prices in Oregon have largely risen to a level where the savvy Burgundy shopper can find similar-priced burgundies that are much, much better.

The number of CA producers who are modelling their pinot on Williams-Selyem is steadily shrinking. The few names in CA pinot that I have some interest in -- Littorai, Arcadian, etc. haven't impressed me enough when I tasted them to make me shell out the $$$ to really find out what's going on there. I dropped off the Williams-Selyem list when the operation was sold. Maybe that was a mistake, but staying on didn't seem like a worthwhile gamble at the time. Dehlinger, Rochioli, Saintsbury, ABC are all hit-or-miss for me -- some wines over-the-top, some not. Not worth $50++ for a crap shoot.

And that's the *good* side of CA pinot. The dark side...let's just say it's very, very dark...virtually indistinguishable from Syrah, in fact. These wines will never be ringers for burgundy, until they're all OTH at age 60.

As for Oregon, there are still producers who deliver value there...Evesham Wood, St Innocent, Bethel Heights top the list IMO. Belle Pente. Amity deserves way more respect than they get. I haven't had the last few vintages, but Eyrie has always made classy wine. But the big picture here is that many are asking $25 for generic Willamette Valley bottlings, and $50 for single-vineyard wines. For $25, I could buy a number of 'lesser' burgundies that, for my taste, blow away these wines (Bourgogne Rouge from Lafarge, Georges Mugneret, or Cathiard, for starters). For $50, I can buy many different 1er crus that I find far more satisfying than Oregon wines priced at that level. I guess that's really where we part...our evaluation of the $25-$50 burgundy market. As long as you stay away from the 2002s, the prices are still quite reasonable.

Recently $50 or under:

2001 Fourrier Gevrey Clos St Jacques

2002 Chandon de Brailles Volnay Caillerets

2001 Robert Chevillion Nuits Les-St-Georges & Vaucrains

2001 Henri Gouges Nuits Les-St-Georges & Vaucrains

These are the kinds of wines that are "pretty amazing and offers a complexity and ethereal flavors and aromas that I have not found in pinot produced anywhere else on earth." If the price tag were raised to $65, that list would be much longer.

Recently $35 or under

2001 Mugneret-Gibourg Nuits-St-Georges Chaignots

2002 Chandon de Brailles Ile de Vergelesses

1998 D'Angerville Volnay Taillepieds

1999,2001 Denis Bachelet Gevrey-Chambertin VV

2002 Fontiane-Gagnard Pommard Rugiens

2002 Fontaine-Gagnard Chassagne-Montrachet Clos St Jean

2002 Bernard Moreau Chassagne-Montrachet Morgeots

For $35, there are very few Oregon pinots that can compete with these wines for balance, food friendliness and complexity. Not that there aren't any. But for my $35, there are only a very few Oregon producers that I would even consider giving my money to instead of Burgundy.

[JohnL]

At the very top levels Burgundy is pretty amazing and offers a complexity and ethereal flavors and aromas that I have not found in pinot produced anywhere else on earth.

(isn't it interesting that this is the case with many other varietals-Cabernet/Bordeaux, Syrah/Rhone etc?).

However, those examples are few and far between!

After that things drop off a bit and I find that many New World pinots are often indistinguishable from their French counterparts.

Maybe it's me but in recent years I have found that a number of producers in Oregon and California are making pinots that are increasingly more complex and interesting--wines that reflect more terroir.

I've found completely the opposite. Specifically, that there are fewer and fewer producers in California producing Pinot that is complex and interesting, and that prices in Oregon have largely risen to a level where the savvy Burgundy shopper can find similar-priced burgundies that are much, much better.

The number of CA producers who are modelling their pinot on Williams-Selyem is steadily shrinking. The few names in CA pinot that I have some interest in -- Littorai, Arcadian, etc. haven't impressed me enough when I tasted them to make me shell out the $$$ to really find out what's going on there. I dropped off the Williams-Selyem list when the operation was sold. Maybe that was a mistake, but staying on didn't seem like a worthwhile gamble at the time. Dehlinger, Rochioli, Saintsbury, ABC are all hit-or-miss for me -- some wines over-the-top, some not. Not worth $50++ for a crap shoot.

And that's the *good* side of CA pinot. The dark side...let's just say it's very, very dark...virtually indistinguishable from Syrah, in fact. These wines will never be ringers for burgundy, until they're all OTH at age 60.

As for Oregon, there are still producers who deliver value there...Evesham Wood, St Innocent, Bethel Heights top the list IMO. Belle Pente. Amity deserves way more respect than they get. I haven't had the last few vintages, but Eyrie has always made classy wine. But the big picture here is that many are asking $25 for generic Willamette Valley bottlings, and $50 for single-vineyard wines. For $25, I could buy a number of 'lesser' burgundies that, for my taste, blow away these wines (Bourgogne Rouge from Lafarge, Georges Mugneret, or Cathiard, for starters). For $50, I can buy many different 1er crus that I find far more satisfying than Oregon wines priced at that level. I guess that's really where we part...our evaluation of the $25-$50 burgundy market. As long as you stay away from the 2002s, the prices are still quite reasonable.

Recently $50 or under:

2001 Fourrier Gevrey Clos St Jacques

2002 Chandon de Brailles Volnay Caillerets

2001 Robert Chevillion Nuits Les-St-Georges & Vaucrains

2001 Henri Gouges Nuits Les-St-Georges & Vaucrains

These are the kinds of wines that are "pretty amazing and offers a complexity and ethereal flavors and aromas that I have not found in pinot produced anywhere else on earth." If the price tag were raised to $65, that list would be much longer.

Recently $35 or under

2001 Mugneret-Gibourg Nuits-St-Georges Chaignots

2002 Chandon de Brailles Ile de Vergelesses

1998 D'Angerville Volnay Taillepieds

1999,2001 Denis Bachelet Gevrey-Chambertin VV

2002 Fontiane-Gagnard Pommard Rugiens

2002 Fontaine-Gagnard Chassagne-Montrachet Clos St Jean

2002 Bernard Moreau Chassagne-Montrachet Morgeots

For $35, there are very few Oregon pinots that can compete with these wines for balance, food friendliness and complexity. Not that there aren't any. But for my $35, there are only a very few Oregon producers that I would even consider giving my money to instead of Burgundy.

←

I think we are approaching this from different perspectives with differing criteria.

I never mentioned price or value in my post.

I was merely making an observation that both California and Oregon were producing more and more interesting pinot noirs.

I do not understand your comment re: California. Are you actually saying they are producing fewer quality pinots/going backwards? Then you note that Oregon has some producers who deliver value.

But that these producers were/are few and far between.

Then you get into Burgundy. I think you are stacking the deck here.

Yes there are many fine wines at reasonable prices from Burgundy. There are also loads of overpriced wines and wines of poor to fair quality. Vintages are important--though less so with increasing technology and production methods.

I think you are giving short shrift to both California and Oregon. I have attended enough blind tastings to dispel the notion that new world pinot noirs can not "compete" with Burgundy on a number of levels in terms of quality. And the picture you paint for these wines is far too bleak and unrealistic.

If you are going to cite specific examples then we need to look at head to head pricing and taste blind.

In 1998 for eg--I attended a tasting of Pinot Noir from Burgundy, Oregon and Caliifornia with a large group of very sophisticated palates. 94, 95 and 96 vintages with primier cru wines from Mugnier, Roty, Rion, Arnoux priced at $40-$55 a bottle.

The three top wines--overwhelmingly were the Mueller Ranch 23 (California) the Evesham Woods Cuvee J (Oregon) and the Broadley Claudia's Choice (Oregon) priced at $25, $35 and $30 respectively.

Now I temper these results by pointing out that the Burgundies probably will show better with some age.

The upshot is: I think California and oregon are improving and Burrgundy is, well it's Burgundy!

[LOS]

Let me be clear: yes, I think California is making fewer and fewer pinot noirs that are of interest to those who value finesse in their pinot. Whether this means the wines are of lower quality, is a debate for another thread. The 16% pinots that are coming out of California these days are exactly the kind of wine that clobbers the competition in a tasting and clobbers any food you might pair with them. I don't like that style, so to my point of view there are fewer and fewer interesting pinots coming out of CA these days. So, for me, things are not getting better and better, they're getting worse and worse.

A quick note about blind tasting: I think there is some value in tasting blind. I think there is zero value in 'blind-tasting' 16% pinots from California made in a style to drink well yesterday and to be drunk as coctail wines in the same tasting with tradtionally made burgundies. Who wins these competitions says absolutely nothing about the relative quality of the wines. In fact, I think there is less than zero value in these tastings, because they lead you to believe that you have learned something.

As for Oregon, I think there is a small trend in the same over-the-top direction as California, but it isn't carried nearly as far. I will agree that there are more interesting wines from Oregon these days, simply because the number of bottlings has exploded in the last 10 years. More land under vines + more wineries = more bottlings. I think the percentage of interesting wines now vs then hasn't changed, though.

The reason that I brought up the price/value thing is because you did. You said

At the very top levels Burgundy is pretty amazing and offers a complexity and ethereal flavors and aromas that I have not found in pinot produced anywhere else on earth.

However, those examples are few and far between!

After that things drop off a bit and I find that many New World pinots are often indistinguishable from their French counterparts.

My point was, that as the price drops off, Burgundy still offers that something special.

Edited June 13, 2005 by LOS (log)

[JohnL]

I still wasn't referring to value--I was referring to quality levels.

Alcohol levels have nothing to do with why those wines won (this is a bad word) the tasting I noted.

The room was filled with very sophisticated tasters (I'll say I was one of the less so).

A number were industry professionals.

Those wines were noted to be more complex and showing better at that time.

Several other New World Pinots (including the Panther Creek Reserve) were noted to be too sweet or over extracted. I didn't like the Dehlenger either.

Interstingly my notes indicate I guessed the Evesham Wood to be a Burgundy!

What is significant about tasting wines blind are it levels the field period.

My experience is very few people can single out the Oregon or California or Burgundy wines with any consistency.

The high alcohol issue is valid. To a degree.

I also do not like the over oaked fruit bombs that are too often found in California and Oregon. Why I don't like them when found in Burgundy (and don't think they aren't there too).

I think the real problem is later and later harvesting--over ripeness not so much alcohol per se.

But these are problems with Burgundy as well.

In fact--Burgundy may underferform if anything--take Clos Vougeot--the vinyard is the same but the range of quality is remarkable depending on the vigneron!

From magnificent wines to obscenely overpriced drek!

My point is--Burgundy has had a long head start in mastering the pinot noir grape. The Clair Gevrey VV you refer to is from seventy year old vines. I doubt there are many vines over thirty or forty years old in Oregon.

We are just beginning to see what California and Oregon can do!

Will they ever make a wine to rival La Tache?

[LOS]

Alcohol levels have nothing to do with why those wines won (this is a bad word) the tasting I noted.

The room was filled with very sophisticated tasters (I'll say I was one of the less so).

A number were industry professionals.

Those wines were noted to be more complex and showing better at that time.

Several other New World Pinots (including the Panther Creek Reserve) were noted to be too sweet or over extracted. I didn't like the Dehlenger either.

Interstingly my notes indicate I guessed the Evesham Wood to be a Burgundy!

I've just got one last point to make: even industry professionals are subject to the palate-deadening effects of high-alcohol, highly extracted wines.

But you're also right -- many of the burgundies were likely too young to show well in the time constraints of the tasting.

[JohnL]

Alcohol levels have nothing to do with why those wines won (this is a bad word) the tasting I noted.

The room was filled with very sophisticated tasters (I'll say I was one of the less so).

A number were industry professionals.

Those wines were noted to be more complex and showing better at that time.

Several other New World Pinots (including the Panther Creek Reserve) were noted to be too sweet or over extracted. I didn't like the Dehlenger either.

Interstingly my notes indicate I guessed the Evesham Wood to be a Burgundy!

I've just got one last point to make: even industry professionals are subject to the palate-deadening effects of high-alcohol, highly extracted wines.

But you're also right -- many of the burgundies were likely too young to show well in the time constraints of the tasting.

←

You gotta just trust me!

Alcohol levels had nothing to do with it!

The fact is the Evesham Woods was "Burgundian" it was not a fruit bomb. It was simply a better more interesting wine.

In the end--I am basically with you--I just feel you are a bit "rigid" in your views of New World Pinot Noir.