Ridge Monte Bello 1990-2002 in magnum

[MaxH]

Ridge Monte Bello Cabernets 1990-2002 in magnum (1.5 L) bottles. Tasted at Los Gatos, California (Manresa restaurant) July 2005. With the winemaker, some industry colleagues, other longtime Ridge fans. (A combined dinner-tasting held by a very long-time Ridge fan who furnished the wines.) The bottles were bought annually on release, kept in a single cellar. An unusual MB comparison because systematic cellaring of magnums is much less frequent than of regular bottles.

Overall the wines showed strikingly “young,” even at age 15. (That’s MB for you.) Concentration and balance were impressive, and personalities of different years despite consistent style -- like siblings in a large family. (Winemaker commented later that these wines were explicitly “assembled to be in balance” whether approached young, or left to develop often to later stages, as were appearing already in some of the vintages here.) Quick preference polls asking first and second favorites after each flight showed notable consensus. Not a corked wine in the bunch. (Winemaker discussed cork Quality Assurance. And barrels. And assemblage of wine from parcels. And sundry other matters, as is his style.) Below are more casual impressions than tasting notes, from less focus than in regular tasting groups I attend (samples were not even blind).

Notated with cépage in order Cabernet Sauvignon / Merlot / Petit Verdot / Cabernet Franc. Letter “T” stands for “Taste” in contrast to smell, and its first appearance marks start of tasting rather than smelling.

First group, 2002-1996.

2002 (74/18/8/0): Soft, alcoholic, soft young wood; Mexican-hot-chocolate aromas (chocolate, cinnamon, almond). T hard young wood, but berryish for this group, moderately concentrated.

2001 (56/36/8/0): Wooded, concentrated-fruit smells. T intense and concentrated with rather sweet fruit. Grape jelly. Almost cloying. Powerful young wood.

2000 (75/23/0/2): Toasty nose, dried orange peel, nutmeg or mace. T is on the fruity side, soft acid, some chocolate, tannins mild for this group. Long, young Cabernet finish.

1999 (72/25/1/2): Wood spices. Lumberyard. Sawn wood. Berries. Coffee-mocha. T very rich berry fruit in this one; like a chocolate bar with blueberries. Creamy note on palate, like vanillin.

1998 (70/24/5/1): Striking complex floral, herbal smells. Young berries, mace or jasmine, cinnamon?, marjoram?, coconut. T unusually concentrated; strong acid, hard; oak, cantaloupe.

1997 (85/8/4/3): Port-de-Salut cheese, maybe turpentine. Rich smells, ashy toast. Orange peel? Berryish, raspberry-turnover was the eventual standout smell besides wood components. T again ash toast, fine Cab character, tannins softer than in the’96. (This wine was very popular of this flight.)

1996 (80/11/9/0): Sassafras, oak. Cedar, dark berries -- blackberry? Nuts. (Hazelnut?) T Nuttiness, nutty wood, concentrated, high acid, bits of coffee.

Paused for small food course of squab and summer vegetables. Then second group of wines.

1995 (69/18/10/3): Wood smells, youngish fruit. Smells much younger than some of the later years. Bit of nutmeg. T pleasant truffly complexity, wood, notable acid, faintly underripe.

1994 (73/15/9/3): Sweet berry fruit; wood smells. T balance, concentration, tending to coffee flavors.

1993 (86/7/7/0): Rustic, faintly moldy? Hazelnut, and raspberry Pop-Tarts -- a famous exact smell that shows in some wines. T, is the fruit light here? Blueberries.

1992 (80/11/9/0, in 750ml rather than magnum): Highly rustic. Fruit acids. T notable acid, fruit down a little; hard.

1991 (85/10/5/0): Gamy, meaty smells. Ashy toast and hint of sauerkraut. Stilton cheese. T fine coffeeish, truffles, blueberries. (My and the table’s clear favorite of the flight.)

1990 (85/10/5/0): Truffly. Fine, maturing Cabernet aromas. Complexity. T cedary; impressive balance and development. Tannic.

Followed by course of roast prime rib-eye beef with fresh porcini, then cheeses. (Later, a little almond cake dessert.) The simple menu was worked out with chef to go with the wines.

For more information about Ridge wines, see www.ridgewine.com . The usual routine for Ridge Monte Bello fans is to order the wines at pre-arrival around the time of annual assemblage (from smaller parcels of wine), March-May. Public tastings at the winery are offered during and after the final assemblage, Web site has details. Wines are shipped approximately two years later, then released for retail sale. For background on how Ridge is perceived, particularly outside the US market, dig up Barbara Ensrud’s article “Wine: Ridge at the Pinnacle,” The Wall Street Journal, 18 December 1992. Or cover article by John Stimpfig, Decanter, March 2000.

-- Max (max@tdl.com)

Edited July 22, 2005 by MaxH (log)

[eje]

Oh, man I am so jealous!

A Ridge Howell Mountain Zinfandel was one of the first wines I consciously sought out as a young wine fancier. Finally drank it a couple years ago, to discover I hadn't stored it well. Mmmm...Motor Oil!

The Ridge Three Valleys Zinfandel is one of our current bargain faves.

Cheers, man, sounds great!

-Erik

[MaxH]

I enjoyed sampling these wines but it was a reminder of how much this producer takes the long view, like a classic Bordeaux or Brunello di Montalcino. (Santa Cruz Mountains growing areas incidentally are intermediate between Bordeaux and Piedmont by Winkler's old "degree-day" analysis for grape growing, acc. to Schoonmaker and Marvel’s 1941 book American Wines, for whatever that’s worth.) A reminder of times I’ve opened Monte Bello Cabernet at age 10-15 to find it “young.”

Last night, other friends who’ve bought Ridge wines for years opened Zinfandels from across the 1980s bearing the same winemaker’s brief label notes: Likely to develop for at least four years, etc. The wines were doing well at 20.

Another feature of the flagship Cabernet is how it steadily sells in pre-arrival to an appreciative public (for about half the final retail price). When I first bought it this way 25 vintages ago it cost $15, not cheap then; lately $60-65 on the same terms. But it can be compared to products selling for a multiple of that, without the 40+ year track record. Nor are there any clubs or mailing lists to get the discounted price, it’s available to all. And though I don’t know if it’s statistically significant or gets public notice, Monte Bello maintains a firm following among wine enthusiasts who have otherwise given up, more or less, on California Cabernets and even Bordeaux, out of trends of the last decade.

Cheers -- Max (max@tdl.com)