When Wine Tasting Notes Go Bad. . .
How useful are wine tasting notes to you?
Well, before we get too far, I do want to add the disclaimer that what is to follow in this post may very well hang me by my own noose, but it is all in the interest of bettering myself and my critique of wines on grapesrgreat.com.
What I mean is, if you read a review of wine that is say 3-6 sentences in length (which I find to be typical in “shelf talkers” found at grocery stores and wine shops as well as in widely read wine publications Wine Spectator, Wine Enthusiast, and Decanter, to name a few), what do you really take away from the blurb that helps you understand what is in the bottle? The implication here is not that tasting notes are not useful, but simply that in most cases I find that I tend to mentally erase 90% of what is said and only pick out the few descriptors that I may find appealing or offensive to my tastes. The following are real life examples of what I would describe as truly ridiculous descriptors of wine:
Shrimp shells, Gravenstein apples, Valrhona Chocolate, Sandalwood, Grandma’s purse, worn saddle leather, etc. just to name a few.
The common theme among most of these that I find to add very little value and if anything help to propagate the snobbery that surrounds wine, is the unnecessary adjective in each instance. Gravenstein apples? How about apples? When did apple lose meaning enough to require further description? How many people have such a strong familiarity with this particular obscure variety of apple to immediately pull away additional knowledge of the associated wine than if “apple” was used alone? Similarly, “Asian Pear,” “Bing Cherry,” and “Thompson Seedless Grapes” could all be paired down (I was joking with Thompson. . . at least I haven’t seen it yet) to great efficiency and effect. Terms like “worn saddle leather” and “shrimp shells” are just literary tricks designed to make the writer feel like they are earning their paycheck. I also believe that terms like these work to alienate all types of wine drinkers who buy a bottle and expect to be punched with a flavor of Asian pears, only to find that they don’t pick out that particular flavor and immediate feel that their palate is unsophisticated or somehow inferior. Just know that the wine critic isn’t always right and no two people taste things the exact same way.
On the flip side of this coin, the type of the descriptors that I find particularly helpful (and I try to use in my own musings) are the more vague, broad sweeping terms that give more of a sense of the style of wine than any specific flavors I might find. Terms that describe the level of acidity, the fruit concentration, or the mouthfeel/body tend to give me enough information to basically know what I am getting into. Dark fruits versus red fruits (for red wines) is a good comparison to make because different wines from the same grape can go drastically different ways on this (California Pinot tends toward dark fruits whereas Burgundy Pinots tend to be brighter with red fruits). In addition, calling a wine bright or “high-toned” tends to accurately describe a high acid wine and luscious or flabby would generally describe low acidity (luscious = good, flabby = bad). A quality wine review should also mention the level and type of tannin in a wine. A harsh, hard to drink wine may be described as having “gripping” tannins whereas wines with low levels of tannin could be said to be soft, smooth, or drinkable (I do not like describing wines as drinkable, seems like a left-handed compliment). Once in a while, I will admit that I taste and wine and something strange immediate pops into my head (e.g. watermelon jolly ranchers, banana bread, lil’ Smokies, etc.) because, dang it, the wine tastes just exactly like that! When this happens, I feel compelled to share that with others because of the novelty of it. I would be remiss if I didn’t include these in my tasting notes, even though they may be of limited use to the readership. Let me know if you have any particular feelings on this topic or if you have come across any awesome descriptors of wine worth sharing. I also suggest you check out the now long gone www.winelibrarytv.com or www.dailygrape.com, as Gary V. is king of describing wines in such terms as “like Mr. T punching you with a velvet glove.” Cheers!
2008 Enzo Boglietti Langhe Nebbiolo – A Birthday Treat!
My wife took me out to a local modern Italian restaurant last night for my birthday. . . and what a lovely wife she is! The bottle we chose to pair with our dinner was a Piedmont Nebbiolo from Enzo Boglietti in Italy. The waitress was very knowledgeable and described as having the mouth feel and finesse of a Pinot Noir with the tannin structure of a Cabernet (read: grippier and more drying). While I am not aiming to do a formal review here, I have to say that she was spot on. Much darker in color and flavor than I was expecting, the tannins seemed to resolve very well after the bottle was open a half hour or so. It was a very pleasant wine to drink and paired perfectly with the Brie and apple flat-bread concoction we ate as an appetizer. The only downside was that we ended up taking about a third of the bottle home with us and drinking it 3 hours after opening, found it had fallen almost completely apart. Given the $25 retail price tag on this wine, I would definitely buy it again and I applaud the wait staff at Savona in Dayton for knowing what they are talking about. At the risk of sounding snobby, I find that way too many restaurants, even those touting their wine selection, are satisfied with the fact that the wait staff just push whatever wine they have the most of in-stock and have probably never even tried it and have no knowledge of the wine beyond what they can read off of the list or bottle. Did you know that Italian wines make up more of the foreign imports into the U.S. than any other country? Cheers!
Hasty Tasting Reviews #2
My wife and I attended a tasting this weekend as our Valentine’s Day gift to each other. This was the second time we attended this particular tasting and find it to be an incredible value for the wines presented. The tasting is small featuring roughly 40-50 wines from all over (slightly USA-centric), with many different styles available. Below are some of my extremely brief notes on the more memorable wines of the evening (in no particular order):
2006 Coniglio Diamond Mountain Merlot ($40): It’s “merlot-ness” is apparent, but the structure and texture are impressive. 89 pts.
2005 Coniglio Napa Cabernet Sauvignon ($30): The merlot had more guts, but this certainly delivers Napa Cabernet character for the price point. 88 pts.
2008 Frank Family Vineyards Napa Cabernet Sauvignon ($50): Tasted side by with the Coniglios and on this night, this one stood above the rest. Dark fruits and some herbal notes with good structure and smooth tannins. 90 pts.
2008 Justin Isosceles ($59): Definitely a crowd pleaser, but it tastes like they left in a good helping of residual sugar. In a big sturdy wine like this, I am skeptical when they taste sweet because “rs” (residual sugar) tends to be used like make-up to disguise an otherwise unimpressive wine; still great. 91 pts.
2008 Casa Lapostolle Clos Apalta ($84): Even the snootiest of wine aficionados would have to admit that this wine is well made and delivers the goods on a silver platter. In a tasting of 40+ wines, I tend to pour out a lot to limit my intake, but I took the time to savor this one. 91+ pts.
Non-vintage Justin Obtuse Port ($29): This Cabernet based fortified wine was surprisingly and pleasantly un-sweet. Some toasty character, but I would suggest eating dessert with it. It is a bit much to take all alone. 87 pts.
Chocolate Shop ($11): This is not wine. No score. Tastes like tootsie rolls.
2008 Klinker Brick Old Vine Zinfandel ($18): OMG! May be the best Zinfandel I’ve ever tasted for the money. Dark brooding fruits and perfect balance and complexity, For The Win! 91 pts.
2009 Klinker Brick Farrah’s Syrah ($18): Also very good, but the Zin stole my heart this time. Definitely a worthwhile value Syrah. 89 pts.
2007 Spring Valley Vineyards “Frederick” ($47): Cabernet Sauvignon. Comes across as very young (read: bright and tannic) but with a ton of potential. Needs cellar time, probably 3-4 years. The brightness and good acidic backbone remind me of a Barolo. 90+ pts.
2006 Col Salare ($62): Cabernet Sauvignon. Darker and more luscious than the Spring Valley, but didn’t ring my bell quite as well. 89+ pts.
2009 Erath Estate Pinot Noir ($33): Good representation of Oregon Pinot Noir; more delicate than many from California but retains good concentration and length of flavors. 88 pts.
2007 Franciscan “Stylus” ($45): They claimed this is normally a $100 bottle, and it is very good; I just don’t know about a whole $100 of my hard-earned dollars. Certainly worth $45 for a nice home-cooked meal in a few years. 90+ pts.
2009 Beringer Knights Valley Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon ($56): A lot of regular wine drinkers might not even be aware that Beringer makes some higher end wines, but this one is a blockbuster. If you love the inviting structured fruit, well-integrated oak, and a future full of complexity, then Sonoma Cabernet may be right in your wheelhouse. Sort of brambly and young now, but I would say buy 2 and drink one now and one in 8 years. 92+ pts.
2007 Sbragia Dry Creek Cabernet Sauvignon ($28): After tasting this wine, I would have guessed it to be in the $50-60 range. When I found out it was under $30, I was fairly floored. This is another wonderful Sonoma Cab; consider it a younger brother to the Beringer. 89 pts.
2009 Bodegas Penalba Lopez Ribera Del Duero Finca Torremilanos ($15): You could easily enjoy this wine and finish the bottle in the time it would take you to pronounce the name. Good complexity and full of flavor for this price point. 88 pts.
2009 Hope Family Wines Treana Red Wine ($30): The label on this bottle is sort of goofy looking, but I was surprised at the quality. Well made Cab blend that drinks just fine all by itself, or would perfectly compliment any manner of hearty dishes. 89 pts.
2006 Steltzner Stags Leap Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon ($80): This wine is dynamite, but at the same time hard to appreciate at this point. When a wine is built for greatness (high extraction, a fair amount of oak, high tannins, etc.) it will be in relative balance throughout its life, meaning that no single aspect will stick out no matter when you drink it. At this point, however, all of the flavors seem sort of simplistic and muted. I would give this one 10 years at least and I can almost guarantee that it will blossom into a sexy seductress of a wine. 91+ pts. now, could be 94-96 pts. given that you pop it at the right moment.
2009 Cellar Cal Pla Mas D’en Compte Porrera Black Slate Priorat ($20): For the price, this is the clear winner of the evening. It smells like a bowl of roses and is perfectly balanced on the palate with a finish that goes on for days. Imagine eating a bowl of black cherries in a cedar lined closet with a bouquet of flowers in your hand and you’re half way there. 92 pts.
2005 Rocche Costamagna Barolo ($29): For thirty dollars, this had a lot of the good character of a Barolo. The trouble is, I can’t tell if it is just too young or if it might not have the stuffing necessary to outlive the tannins and the fruit and spice will die before it smooths out. 88 pts.
2009 Chateau Foria Chateauneuf Du Pape ($40): Another stand out wine of the evening. I actually re-tasted this one at the end of the night to relive the wonderfully integrated oak and vanilla character along with the spice box and leather character that is beginning to become apparent. Harmony in a glass. 92 pts.
2007 Viader ($100): This wine is way too young to even say much about. The couple next to us were gushing about it, but I felt it to be extremely tight and muted at this point. I can tell it is well made by the balance and good acidity, but not much else can be said at this point. 90+ pts.
2007 Dare by Viader ($45): This wine is so named to help people remember how to pronounce Viader 
. Meant to be the baby brother of the namesake above, this one is much more approachable at this point with more resolved tannins and secondary flavors and aromas. Certainly a good Cab for the price and prestige. 90 pts.
2009 Chateau La Croix De Berney Puisseguin-St. Emilion Bordeaux ($20): Sorry to end on a down note, but this wine seemed sort of grapey and one-dimensional to me. Would probably be a good Tuesday night pizza wine. 86 pts.
That pretty much wraps it up. The good news is that if you live in Ohio, there are currently distributors with these wines available, so feel free to ask for them at your local wine shop if you feel so inclined. Cheers to my longest post to date (congrats if you made it this far), and Happy Valentine’s Day!
P.S. I type this as my lovely wife prepares a home-cooked meal of scallops fettucine alfredo 
Hasty Tasting – Rapid Reviews Written Swiftly
I have a few quick reviews jotted down at wine shop tastings and other such events where I didn’t exactly take the time to mull over the details. I tasted these wines probably over the last 6 months or so. I present them here in an unedited format for your enjoyment:
The following are from a Coturri Winery Tasting:
Rose’ – Great acidity w/ grapefruit and pear. 89 pts.
06′ Pinot Jewell Vineyards – Dark and jammy. Doesn’t taste like a Pinot but good. 88 pts.
Merlot – Drinkable. 85 pts.
Sandocino – Pretty awesome, blueberries and smoke. Great balance but tannins need time to resolve. 90 pts.
Petit Sirah – Licorice, black cherry, and Swedish Fish. Oaky, delicious. 89 pts.
Primitivo – Stinky and smoky. Cola and black raspberries. (no score given)
Other odds and ends from various tastings:
08′ Sineann Pinot, $38 – Smells jammy, little lake water with oak on top. Some cherries, alcohol apparent. Overdone. 86+ pts.
07′ Federalist Zinfandel, $29 – Aromatically challenged. Some zin character comes through with a punch of fruit. Slightly muddled. 87+ pts.
03′ Ridge Del Carlo – Big earthy nose. Slightly browning at the edge of the glass. Smells incredible and you can tell it has some age. Big mouthfeel, very elegant and well-balanced in its bigness. Still a little cloying. Truckloads of fruit and complexity in the mid-palate. Some pepper and mint. (no score given)
07′ Silver Oak Alexander Valley Cabernet, $70 – Aroma is very big and concentrated with an oak blanket. Currants and blueberries with an herbal quality. Bright acidity, very well-balanced. Lots of tannin, but has lots of everything. Will be fantastic. 92+ pts.
Hope you enjoyed the uncut, unrated wine reviews. I apologize for any grammatical atrocities. Cheers!
My So-Called “Safe Bet” Wineries
So on this wonderful Saturday morning I’m sitting here browsing the web and I came up with the idea for a “safe bet” list of wineries that I feel could be very helpful to my readers in a more broadly ranging and general sense than my otherwise very specific wine reviews. This list comprises wineries with which I feel I am very familiar and is limited to those who I feel offer very consistent quality and value at their respective price points. My goal here is to put these wineries’ names somewhere back in your mind so that the next time you are at the grocery store or wine shop, you might just recognize a few of these labels and be confident that the wine in the bottle will be well made and enjoyable for whatever occasion might call for it. I took the extra step of pairing this list down to wineries from which I have never had a disappointing wine. Please also feel free to add your comments on any additional wineries you might be fond of and be sure to include the price range of their offerings:
Price Range: $5-$25
Bogle (full range of varietal and blended wines) Bogle Website Bogle Petit Sirah Review
Mumm Napa (primarily sparklers) Mumm Napa Website
Casillero Del Diablo (division of Concha Y Toro, Chilean reds and whites) Casillero Del Diablo Website
Price Range: $20-$40
Ridge (primarily zinfandel and zin-blends, but also cabernet if you can find it) Ridge Website Ridge Review
Seghesio (primarily zinfandels but also sangiovese if you can find it) Seghesio Website Seghesio Review
Coturri (very rustic wines, “sulfite free”, and various varietal wines) Coturrio Website
Mollydooker (readily available fruit bombs from Australia) Mollydooker Website
Michael David (famous for 7 Deadly Zins and Petit Petit ‘petit sirah’) Michael David Website
Gundlach Bunschu (‘gun-lock bun-shoe’, good red blends and cabs from Sonoma) GunBun Website jjj
Hedges (Washington red blends) Hedges Website Hedges Review
Alexander Valley Vineyards (their cabernets taste more expensive than their price, a good thing) AVV Website
Price Range: $40+ (I could list a ton in this category, but have stayed with those that are readily available)
Cakebread (Napa cabernet and chardonnay as well as zinfandel) Cakebread Website Cakebread Review
Silverado Vineyards (cabernets and super-tuscan blends from Napa) Silverado Website
Belle Glos (single vineyard pinot noirs, typically with wax dipped bottles) Belle Glos Website Belle Glos Review
I may augment this list in the future, but I feel this is a good starting point. Let me know if you have had or do have any of these wines, and give me an earful if you think they were junk (you won’t ).
Cheers!
2009 Turley Cellars Howell Mountain Zinfandel Cedarman. . . Zin critics beware!
$29, 16.2% alc./vol.! www.turleywinecellars.com: If the wine world has rock stars, Helen Turley is certainly the Paul McCartney of wine. She has worked as a winemaker/consultant with all kinds of producers and has been in the game for years and years. To that effect, any bottle that she had a hand in making will probably cost you around the same amount as a ticket to a Paul McCartney concert, somewhere north of $100. If you noticed, the wine being reviewed here was nowhere near that expensive, but then again Helen Turley has not actually been the winemaker at Turley Wine Cellars since 1995. I did, however, sit on a waiting list for about 18 months before I was offered an allocation of Turley wines. This was the only bottle I purchased in the first go-round and it is the cheapest bottle they offer. I thought I would give them a test run before really investing in what has been called the best Zinfandel made.
It is obvious from the color and the nose of this wine (as well as the date on the bottle) that it is very young, but the nose is so massive and floral and toasty and elegant I might have paid money just to smell it. I get cinnamon and dark berries (blackberries and blueberries predominate) as well as an unmistakable cream layer that I have trouble rationalizing I can actually smell. A slight oakiness also comes through. On the palate this wine has a hammock full of fruit and the best way I can describe the overall effect is to describe it as drinking a berry pie. There are blackberries, blueberries, and cherries as well as a slight sweet and toasty note (the crust ). The best part is the balance. You would never know that this wine is over 16% alcohol until just at the end of the finish because the pure fruit, the fine tannins, and the acidity all work to keep everything in perspective and under control. Despite my ravings, there aren’t a ton of what you would call secondary aromas or flavors in this wine right now. These tend to be described in less fruity and more complex terminology like leather, cigar box, tar, etc. I have no doubts whatsoever that this wine will develop wonderfully into an entire bouquet of subtle complexities, but you better give it 5-10 years. Most exciting Zinfandel I have had in some time (my wife gushed about this wine for hours afterward!) 93+ pts.
A Gem of Brilliance from Steve Heimoff
I intend this to be a very quick entry so I allow any of my readership to give me grief if I go very long. As I was perusing some of the archived entries on Steve Heimoff’s blog (wine taster for Wine Spectator; California wines) I came across this quote that I find to be of some brilliance, and presents a way of thinking I had not previously considered. Many people, myself included, like to talk about whether or not a wine (specifically a varietal wine) represents the character or that grape well, or if it has a good level of “varietal typicity.” Steve’s point in the following quote makes a lot of sense in that it is almost moot to talk about typicity in any real sense:
“The concept of ‘varietal typicity’ has much less meaning than it used to. Maybe it has none. Have you ever heard a young blogger use the term? When you taste a lot of wines from all over the place, you soon realize that ‘varietal typicity’ in, say, Pinot Noir is as elusive as human typicity in the population of Oakland, which is one of the most ethnically diverse cities on Earth. It would be as improper to claim that Burgundy represents ‘varietal typicity’ in Pinot Noir as to claim that true ‘human typicity’ is found only in the white population of Oakland!”
I would go on to say that the “used to” that Steve uses here probably references a time in which grape varieties were largely local (e.g. Pinot Noir only comes from France, Riesling is only grown in Germany). I think a more useful way to talk about things would be to compare wines with similar geographic situations against each other. Drop me a line if you have any thoughts on this, I thought it was pretty interesting.
