WTN: An evening of South American wines

[Brad Ballinger]

The Twin Cities contingent of the Boys from eBob congregates monthly at various wine-friendly restaurants as an excuse to open a bunch of wines and nosh on some pretty decent chow. The wine theme changes from month to month. I had to miss the June gathering, which was German wines, but cursedly was in town for last nights South American wines theme.

I didn’t have one bottle of South American swill in my cellar, so I had to go retail hunting for something to bring. The retail scene for South American wines here in the Twin Cities is fairly dismal. Two places I went to over lunch had pathetic selections. I stopped by another retailer en route from work to the dinner, and found a better selection, but still nothing special. An Argentine colleague is showing up next week with some Luigi Bosca Malbec for me. If only his arrival was one week earlier.

For those who get very far down the list of notes below, you will notice a redundancy. Part of that is due to the homogeneity of the wines. But, to be fair, another part of it was due to my building lack of interest in really taking the time and concentrated effort to write more detailed notes for these bottles of plonk. There’s a lot of new oak and a higher than average amount of residual sugar in many of them. I don’t know if that is the South American perception of the North American market, the way they happen to like their wines south of the equator, or if they are trying to take market from those who are buying Australian wines under $20. Whatever. On to my personal night of hell.

2003 Crios de Susana Balbo Torrontes, Cafayate, Argentina. Had I known it was going to be all downhill after this beautiful wine, I would’ve bogarted one of the two bottles that were open. Torrontes is the grape in this wine, and the wine is sort of a hybrid between Viognier and Gewurztraminer. It’s floral, has a peach pit element, but also brings on some spice. The nose shows lemon drop, honeysuckle, peach, and spice. The flavor profile is similarly complex and layered. Clean and long finish. Looking back on the even, the discovery of this wine was worth sacrificing my palate on the ones to follow. This wine runs between $10 and $15, and is worth snapping up. A good summer sipper and salad wine.

2003 Pascual Toso Sauvignon Blanc, Maipu-Mendoza, Argentina. The nose is an over-the-top blend of grapefruit, charred bell pepper, freshly-mowed grass, and popcorn. Oily on the attach and woody-astringent on the finish. To me, it is out of balance, and the oak treatment adds nothing. Others liked it well enough, though.

2001 Segú Chardonnay, Maule Valley, Chile. The first aroma on the nose was licorice. After that is was all oak all the time.

2000 Leonardo Falcone “Santa Cecilia” Tannat, Paysando, Uruguay. Dusty, tart fruit, rose petals on the nose. One of the more pleasant noses of the evening’s wines. Light-bodied in the mouth with tart fruit and acid. Once you swallow, though, there is no indication that you had anything in your mouth. The bottom drops out of the finish. It’s a pleasant wine for a picnic or casual fare, but that’s it.

2002 Broquel Malbec, Mendoza, Argentina. One of the more extracted wines of the evening. There is also a high “extraction of oak.” Lots of dill on the nose that takes precedence over the black fruit. Could be any highly-extracted oaky wine made anywhere in the world.

2000 Escudo Rojo (de Baron Philippe de Rothschild), Maipo, Chile. Grilled veggies, smoky nose. And then comes the diesel fuel. A bit reductive. Needs air. Hard to evaluate.

2000 Trapiche Malbec “Oak Cask,” Mendoza, Argentina. Oak cask. No shit. It wasn’t as steroidally oaky as some of the other wines, but this wine was still all about the oak.

2002 Norton Malbec, Mendoza, Argentina. This one didn’t show off the oak that many of the other wines did. Red and black fruit on the nose. Some vanilla. Tart, candied fruit on the palate. Fairly one-dimensional, but a wine that is easy-drinking and non-offensive.

2000 Altos “Las Hormigas” Malbec, Mendoza, Argentina. The most controversial wine of the night. People either loved it or hated it. I hated it, and the reason I did is because I firmly believe this is a wine flawed by brettanomyces. People loved the barnyard funk on the nose (there were murmurs that it was Bordeaux-like). I don’t mind a little barnyard and manure, but to my nose this wine also showed me band-aids. Not a good thing in wine. In the mouth it was metallic and alum-like, the fruit sucked out of it. I often use the phrase “tomato sauce that has reacted with an aluminum pan” to describe the sensation, and that’s what this was. But people with a high tolerance for brett won’t mind it.

2002 Michel Torino Malbec, Cafayete, Argentina. Sweat socks, caramel, sherry, candied sweet fruit. Nasty stuff.

2001 Familia Zuccardi “Q” Tempranillo, Santa Rosa Vineyards, Mendoza, Argentina. This wine shows more balance and structure than many of the others. You can even tell it is tempranillo and not just “red wine.” It still needs to come together a bit, but there is a core of sweet red fruit that stops just short of being syrupy. Decent acid. Oak is there as a component, but not hogging the stage.

2001 Carmen Petite Sirah Reserve, Maipo, Chile. The other heavily extracted wine of the evening. Nose of litter box, rye bread, and apricots. Flabby and fat in the mouth. No acid, no structure. Dump and move on.

2001 Concha y Toro “Marques de Casa Concha” Cabernet Sauvignon, Puente Alto, Chile. Dill on the nose. Better balanced than some of the other wines this evening. Average cabernet that could’ve been made anywhere.

1998 Irurtia “Ca’ del Sacramento,” Carmelo, Uruguay. 25% each of cabernet franc, cabernet sauvignon, merlot, and malbec. A wine that was more interesting than good. This was quite a departure from the other red wines of the evening, with the exception of the other Uruguayan wine. This one didn’t try and overwhelm you with extracted fruit and oak. But it was out of balance and came across as alcoholic to me. It also seemed to have been fading, and perhaps was better 2-4 years ago. If anything, it was a nice break in the action.

2001 Veramonte Primus, Casablanca, Chile. Blend of carmenere, merlot, and cabernet sauvignon. Oak, dill, and cat piss. Does nothing for me. Lacks acid and structure.

1999 Veramonte Primus, Casablance, Chile. Blend of carmenere, cabernet sauvignon, and merlot (actually listed in a different order from the 2001, but no percentages given). More of the same. More dill. More diluted. More lacking in acidity.

2001 Los Vascos Cabernet Sauvignon Reserve, Colchagua, Chile. This is a property of Lafite Rothschild. Nondescript, blasé new world cab whose greatest attribute is that it doesn’t really offend.

1999 Norton Privada Estate Reserve, Mendoza, Argentina. 40% malbec, 30% cabernet sauvignon, 30% merlot. A more promising nose than some of the other wines. Promises complexity of fruit and spice, and perhaps some balance. But in the mouth it’s too damn sweet.

1999 Luca Cabernet Sauvignon, Altos de Mendoza, Argentina. There’s 10% malbec in the blend. Like the Norton Privada, there is a compelling nose here. But there’s no acid whatsoever on the palate. Or maybe my palate is starting to take a beating, and I’m finding it increasingly difficult to detect more subtlety in these wines.

1999 Bodegas Lopez-Lopez Finca El Zorzal “Patrón Santiago,” Maipu-Mendoza, Argentina. Blend of cabernet sauvignon and merlot. Perhaps the wine is a bit tired (or, again, perhaps my palate is). This seemed to show more balance and dimension than the other in-your-face wines of the evening. The tannins are a bit dusty, but it is a better food companion than many of the others.

2000 Concha y Toro “Don Melchor” Cabernet Sauvignon, Puente Alto, Chile. I believe this is the top wine from Concha y Toro, and it is better made and more complex than the Marques de Cosa Concha. There is cinnamon and coffee on the nose, in addition to the cassis-like fruit. Some spice comes through on the flavor profile. Overall, it’s still a bit on the sweet side, but there is some structure and layering. Could stand up to many $50 Cabernet Sauvignons coming out of California today.

1994 Trimbach Gewurztraminer, Sélection de Grains Nobles, Alsace. Well my palate wasn’t too shot to enjoy this beauty. And no one could locate a South American dessert wine. I know that Montes and Santa Julia make one each, but the dessert wines aren’t in the portfolios of the local distributors who carry those wines. If I were to be sarcastic, I’d say this wine had less residual sugar than some of the Malbecs. Of course, that would be untrue, but the statement goes to the conclusion that this wine has tremendous balance. Acidity is still active and lifting. Again, not overly sweet, and a wine that calls for more savory fare or cheese than for sweets. It would be a great wine with foie gras. The long finish turns a bit raisiny, but that’s not an entirely bad thing.

While it could be that I just haven’t had enough South American wine (and not that I’m going to correct that anytime soon), it strikes me that these wines are wines that can come from anywhere in the world. What is unique to South America in terms of what one might want to call terroir? By comparison, one might say that California (and even Australia) have a greater focus on terroir than South America. Perhaps it’s all about growing super ripe grapes and nothing more.