—

In a funny mirror of the ever-ongoing debate between alcohol and balance that was recently revived by Adam Lee (of Siduri) and an unsuspecting Rajat Parr (of RN74), I was intrigued to notice that the alcohol of the 2008 ‘Black Lightnin” Pinot Noir bottling by Scherrer clocked in at 15%. Scherrer has a reputation for crafting food-friendly wines, usually at lower alcohol levels, so I was eager to see if this Pinot had the same liveliness as wines from my other favorite producers. The wine itself is an experimental bottling, due to the strange weather conditions in 2008. The first sniff blew me away. Hugely inviting and very floral aromas made me almost afraid to take a first sip. But with that sip came waves of red fruit, intermingled with black fruits and licorice, all framed in orange zest. Such wonderful minerality and balance! It reminded me of other examples of Pinot Noir with higher alcohol levels that I’ve enjoyed (Calera, Foxen, Sanford, Talley…). I don’t typically buy from the producers of frequently plush, opulent, higher alcohol Pinots, but it would be interesting to see the extent to which this sense of balance is the norm or the exception. (Alder Yarrow’s transcript of the panel involving the Lee-Parr exchange)

—

I just got an email offering Diamond Ridge’s Special Select Reserve Cabernet at 48% of it’s release price.

Three thoughts on this:

1 – Doesn’t significant discounting of your (I assume) top of the line bottling significantly hurt your brand’s image?

2 – Does anyone still buy the bulk of their wine at retail/release prices? The only bottlings I regularly buy without some discount are those coming from wineries with significant waiting lists for allocations, and I happen to love the wines.

3 – One thing I’d really like to see disappear is the use of terms like ‘reserve’ ‘proprietor’s select’ ‘special bottling’ ‘private reserve’ ‘unique’ ‘meritage’ ‘proprietary red’… Okay, that last one has a useful place and a nice sound to it, and meritage has its proponents as well (even though it’s never really caught on, and probably only confuses most consumers). In most cases, these wines are basically the same as the standard bottling, but with more of something (oak, hang time, glass, bull feces, etc.).  And I love seeing wineries with just a ‘reserve’ wine, which makes one wonder what happened to the basic bottling… Truth be told, I often prefer the basic bottlings (when they exist). But this old trend makes me think I should buy some Two Buck Chuck and relabel it as ‘Mike’s Crazy Awesome Super Secret Private Special Extended Aged Reserve XO (Extra Oak) Proprietary Meritage ™’. If I really want to make sales, I should combine this with a label that has a Capuchin monkey, an aardvark, and a couple of frolicking wombats. That should cover both the luxury-seeking and bargain-seeking ends of the market, because, as we all know, most consumers can’t tell the difference between expensive and cheap wines anyway.

—

Apparently someone linked to my Castello di Amorosa post on Bookface. I find that a bit strange, since I found the wines overpriced for the quality they deliver (a phenomenon not all that unusual in Napa). Maybe the link had something to do with the tourist value of the castle?

—

Finally, new and less snarky posts should be forthcoming in the near future.

2006 Monte Bello Chardonnay – Crisp citrus fruits framed by buttery buttery butter. The very full frame nicely offset by the lively acidity. Good length on the finish, but the overwhelming butter is killing me. 2 thumbs up (8)

2007 Carmichael Zinfandel ATP – A relatively elegant Zin, this has brambly red fruit in a racy, zesty package. Nice finish; I like this, so Dad probably wouldn’t be a huge fan. 2 1/2 – 3 thumbs up (9)

2008 Buchignani Carignane  ATP – Very round on the palate, nice red fruit – plums and cherries, mainly – with spices, lovely balance and good length. A bargain. 3 thumbs up (9-9.5)

2007 Santa Cruz Mountains Estate Cabernet/Merlot – Classic Ridge… red fruit, spices, licorice and cedar, with sweet tannins and lively acidity. Good length on the finish, but slightly hollow on the mid-palate. Should improve with time. 3 thumbs up (9+)

2006 Lytton Estate Syrah ATP – Dark fruit, spices and a hint of chocolate. Not overwhelmingly chocolatey or oaky like most of Napa’s interpretations, but not quite to my liking. This is good now, but it might be interesting to try it with more age. 2 1/2 – 3 thumbs up (9)

2006 Monte Bello – All kinds of spices and a plethora of red and black fruit – cherries, plums and blackberries – accented with hints of licorice and espresso. Almost weightless in the mouth, with spicy tannins and great length. This is great. 3 thumbs up (9.5)

Tasting notes:

2007 La Rinconada Chardonnay – Melon and citrus dominate, with some floral notes and great acidity and length. Very nicely balanced. 3 thumbs up (9-9.5)

2007 La Entrada Chardonnay – Rounder and plusher than La Rinconada, with honeysuckle and toasty notes. Also very well balanced, but I prefer La Rinconada for its freshness. 3 thumbs up (9)

2007 Flor de Campo – White Rhone blend, with lots of stone fruits and floral notes. Very round and plush, with seemingly low acidity.  2 1/2 thumbs up (8.5-9)

2008 La Rinconada PN – Spices compete for attention with  red fruits, all framed by a touch of orange zest, lovely acidity and ripe tannins. This has great length and would age well, although we drank this with Thanksgiving turkey. 3 thumbs up (9.5)

2008 Sanford & Benedict PN – Spices, red and black fruits all in one package. This is a bit denser and heavier than the La Rinconada, but still maintains a lovely balance, and also should age well. The contrast between the two wines from neighboring vineyards is illuminating. 3 thumbs up (9.5)

2007 Dominio del Falcon PN – Very floral, with lots of red fruits and a hint of citrus zest. A bit lighter than the previous two Pinots, but a very nice wine for drinking now or soon. 2 1/2 – 3 thumbs up (9)

—

Foxen

2009 Bien Nacido Steel Cut Chardonnay – This chardonnay was fermented in stainless steel and barrel aged for two months in neutral barrels. Lots of stone fruit notes here, and the acidity is well-hidden. 2 – 2 1/2 thumbs up (8.5)

2008 BN Block UU Chardonnay – This is the barrel-fermented chardonnay, with 20% of the barrels new. Not very buttery (which tends to be a good thing), with lots of pleasant citrus flavors. The acidity is also hidden here, but seems to be a bit more lively than the Steel-Cut. 2 1/2 thumbs up (8.5-9)

2009 Mourvedre Rose – Liquid strawberries, with nice balance. 2 1/2 thumbs up (8.5)

2008 Santa Maria Pinot Noir – Very elegant, and smooth; fruit forward with strawberries dominating. 2 1/2 thumbs up (8.5)

2008 BN Block N PN – More complex than the Santa Maria pinot. Red and black fruits predominate, with a fairly plush texture for a pinot. This has a long finish. 3 thumbs up (9-9.5)

2008 Hampton Family Vineyard Syrah – Spicy, with lots of dark fruits. Nice tannins and acidity. 3 thumbs up (9-9.5)

Foxen 7200

2009 Sauvignon Blanc – 11% Viognier, which adds pleasant stone fruit notes to the wine. These mix wonderfully with lemongrass and grapefruit, and the wine overall has great balance. 3 thumbs up (9.5)

2006 Volpino – A blend of primarily Sangiovese with some Merlot, this is something of a Santa Barbara interpretation of a Tuscan IGT. Lots of red fruits mix with pleasant spices. Balance is provided by nice tannins and acidity. 3 thumbs up (9-9.5)

2006 Santa Ynez Cabernet Sauvignon – A lighter and more elegant style than is usually found in Napa, with red berries, smooth tannins and hidden acidity. 2 1/2 thumbs up (8.5-9)

2006 Vogelzang Cabernet Sauvignon – This is a bit more structured than the Santa Ynez Cabernet, with dark fruit, licorice, nice tannins and balance combining for a very pleasant experience. 2 1/2 – 3 thumbs up (9)

2007 Tinaquiac Cabernet Franc – This is more noticeably structured than either Cabernet Sauvignon, with ripe tannins and good acidity framing the red fruit and spices that form the core of the wine. 3 thumbs up (9-9.5)

2007 Rancho Tepusquet Mission – Made from rare plantings of the Mission grape, this exhibits candied fruits, nice acidity and a long finish. While it may not be the most complex dessert wine around, it is definitely worth trying. 3 thumbs up (9)

2009 Z Gris – A rosé, redolent with melon and strawberry fruit. Simple, but very fresh and refreshing. 2 thumbs up (8-8.5)

2009 Viognier – Good typicity, with honey, stone fruits and hints of citrus. A bit on the plush side, with low apparent acidity, but with enough restraint to keep it from being overblown. 2.5 thumbs up (8.5)

2007 Z Blanc –White Rhone blend, like an amped up version of the Viognier. Very plush, but a bit out of balance. 2 thumbs up (8)

2006 Grenache – Very floral, loaded with strawberries and raspberries. Spicy and medium bodied, with a nice finish. 2.5 thumbs up (8.5-9)

2006 Z Cuvee – More complex than the grenache. Smoky and spicy, with similar red fruits and a bit more weight. Nice balance. 2.5 – 3 thumbs up (9)

2006 Syrah – Very smooth, dark fruits and chocolate vie for dominance. Very plush, nice finish, and low acidity. 2.5 thumbs up (8.5)

2006 Z-Three –Similar to the Syrah, but slightly more full-bodied. Dark fruits, chocolate, very plush with a nice finish. 2.5 thumbs up (8.5)

Some of the highlights from a very long tasting flight…

2007 Estate Pinot Noir – Predominately spicy red fruit, with great minerality. Slightly prominent tannins on the finish. 3 thumbs up (9)

2007 Rincon Vineyard Pinot Noir – Darker fruit than the estate Pinot, more cherries and plums than strawberries. Smoother too, but still maintains great balance. Nicely tannic on the long finish. 3 thumbs up (9.5)

2006 Bishop’s Peak Rock Solid Red Blend – Spicy and juicy, with lots of red fruit. Low acidity, seems very much like a good Cotes du Rhone. 2 1/2 thumbs up (8.5)

2006 Mano Tinta – Weightier than the Bishops Peak red blend, with nice structure and comparable juicy red fruit. Spicy, and despite its better structure, still an early drinker. 2 1/2 thumbs up (8.5-9)

The whites are the star here: some of the Chardonnay fruit is sold to Mount Eden for the Wolff’s Vineyard bottling, and the estate production of this wine exhibits a nervy tension often lacking from California Chardonnays. The Riesling is reminiscent of Alsatian interpretations, broader and more generous than many German Kabinetts.

The red wines are also very good, although lovers of big plush wines may not be satisfied. The Pinot Noir is delicate, offering a very elegant, zesty red-fruited alternative to the generally more plush versions found in Santa Barbara, and an excellent value. The Syrah is deeper in its flavor profile and structure, and would complement Santa Maria barbeque very nicely, as would the Brixie’s Red blend. Finally, the Petite Sirah is compelling in its elegance; wines made from this grape are often more brawny and rough-hewn than Wolff’s version, and yet this wine retains all of the typical brambly fruit and white pepper.

2007 Riesling (Dry) – Pale straw color, nice citrus nose, characteristic petrol and citrus flavors. Very smooth, Alsatian in style; slightly low acidity? 2 ½ thumbs up (8.5-9)

2008 Chardonnay – Dry farmed, old(ish) vines 35 years or so. High acidity, citrus, stone fruits and a slightly nutty note. Very long, clean finish. Should age. 3 thumbs up (9.5)

2007 Pinot Noir – Elegant, with lots of spices, some orange zest and friendly red fruit (think strawberries and cherries), with lovely balance and nice length on the finish. 2 ½ – 3 thumbs up (9)

2008 Petite Sirah – Very urbane and elegant, but with lovely balance and characteristic white pepper notes. 3 thumbs up (9-9.5)

I’m not entirely sure how these theories hold up with younger or less geeky wine drinkers. I am fairly certain that an informal poll of my friends would not peg these as reasons they do not think to buy or drink Bordeaux. First, Bordeaux is foreign, not as easily identifiable or understandable like Californian wines (branded Australia or Chile might be able to escape this). Second, unlike popular domestic or New World brands, individual wines from Bordeaux typically are not as widely distributed, and not inexpensive, so unfamiliar potential customers face an increased risk of spending more money on an unknown quantity when purchasing Bordeaux, when faced with the alternatives. Finally, in the price range my peers most often consider, wines from Bordeaux generally lack the jammy upfront fruit that people seem to seek out, instead offering up less familiar, more earthier flavors; more value can be had from other regions.

I’ll admit that I like a well-aged bottle of Ausone, Latour, Leoville Las Cases or Montrose as much as anyone, but these aren’t generally affordable everyday wines. I can understand the potential for disillusionment with lesser priced wines, but my complaint stems from the lack of typicity I’ve experienced lately. In their chase for critics’ points and increased sales, many wines are increasingly black-fruited and chocolatey, and could as easily come from California as Bordeaux, although a comparable California red would have more apparent fruit, and cost far less (unless it’s from Napa). Stylistically, these are a far cry from the overly earthy less-expensive Bordeaux that can be found, but they lack individuality.

—

Anyhow, now that I’ve gone off on a tangent, a short list of some wines I think could be added to Asimov’s list of interesting small wine producers in Bordeaux:

Mayne Lalande – Formerly a Cru Bourgeois Superior (until the classification’s annulment) in Listrac-Medoc, this was among my earliest introductions to Bordeaux. The 2000 vintage was spicy, with lots of fruit, some very welcome earthy notes, and pleasantly rustic tannins on the long finish. Enough personality to warrant returning for more bottles. (more about Mayne Lalande)

Patache d’Aux – This former Cru Bourgeois Superior, under the ownership of Domaines Lapalu, has improved dramatically in quality over recent vintages. The wines generally feature red fruit, spices, a pleasant freshness, and great balance for aging.

Grand Corbin Despagne – Recently promoted in the St Emilion classification to the rank of Grand Cru Classee, Grand Corbin Despagne produces, in some senses, a benchmark St Emilion. In terms of style, the wines stand in stark contrast to the highly concentrated and dark wines produced by others in the same appellation, usually emphasizing more red fruit flavors and spices.

Beyond these three producers, there are many others, and even entire appellations within Bordeaux, such as Fronsac, that have been making strides forward in quality; seeking out the best unknown producers simply takes time and patience.

—

Cardinale Winery

The Cardinale winery, perched on a small hill in the famed Oakville District, produces a single red blend sourced from hillside fruit. This is one of the ultra-premium wines in the Jackson Family Estates stable, with a deserved reputation for somehow being both concentrated and elegant, as well as long lived.

2006 Cardinale (14.8%)

Dark red, nearly black in color. Initially closed in, but after a little swirling, intoxicating aromas of crushed fruit, chocolate, flowers and graphite emerge. In the mouth, similarly closed,, with some faint saline notes, but when the palate finally opens up, dark fruits emerge, framed in coffee and dark chocolate. Lively acidity and refined tannins, along with a very long finish, round out the package. 3 thumbs up (10)

Ladera Winery

Nestled up in the Howell Mountain AVA, Ladera focuses its production on two hillside cabernets. The winery building was originally constructed in 1886, and was extensively renovated to house the existing winery’s fermentation vats. Ladera’s wines, sourced from estate vineyards in the Mount Veeder and Howell Mountain AVAs, undergo barrel aging in their extensive caves. Ladera is family-owned, and the wines are crafted by Karen Culler.

2009 Ladera Howell Mountain Sauvignon Blanc – Very nicely balanced, with melons and grapefruit flavors balanced by great acidity. 2 ½ thumbs up (8.5)

2005 Ladera Lone Canyon Syrah – Dark brambly fruit are framed by chocolate. Decent tannins and balance. 2 ½ – 3 thumbs up (8.5-9)

2005 Ladera Howell Mountain Merlot – Very floral aromas, with lots of red fruit. Medium bodied, with some tannins; this could age for a few years. 2 ½ thumbs up (8.5)

2005 Ladera Howell Mountain Cabernet – Plum and berry aromas. Similar in the mouth, with chocolate and coffee notes; good finish. 3 thumbs up (9)

2006 Ladera Howell Mountain Cabernet – Showing less on the nose than the 2005, very fruit forward – dark brambly fruit framed by coffee notes. 2 ½ – 3 thumbs up (8.5-9)

2005 Ladera Lone Canyon Cabernet – Very floral, with red and black fruit framed by spices and coffee notes. Great finish. 3 thumbs up (9-9.5)

2007 Ladera Napa Valley Malbec – Smokey, with lots of plush red berry flavors. 2 ½ thumbs up (8-8.5)

Robert Keenan Winery

Robert Keenan Winery is perched high in the Mayacamas above Napa Valley, in the Spring Mountain District. It was founded when Robert Keenan purchased the property, complete with a defunct pre-Prohibition winery, in 1974. He planted the property to vines, and constructed a new winery in time for the first harvest in 1977. Since then, the winery has built up a reputation for producing wines of great quality, especially those that represent its rustic estate, high in the Spring Mountain District.

2009 Summer Blend Chardonnay (13.9%, 11% Viognier) – This is a light, floral chardonnay with great length and balance. The viognier adds hints of melons to the usual green apple and citrus characteristics. 2 ½ thumbs up

2007 Chardonnay, Spring Mountain (13.9%) – Stony and coiled, citrus and pear framed with good acidity and a long finish. Should age well. 3 thumbs up

2007 Zinfandel, Napa Valley (14.3%) – Medium bodied and elegant, but with good brambly typicity. 3 thumbs up

2007 Syrah, Napa Valley (14.3%) – Red fruit, lively acidity and good freshness. 3 thumbs up

2006 Merlot, Napa Valley (14.3%) – Very substantial for a Napa merlot, with blackberries, plums and black cherries. The fruit are framed by dark chocolate, which manages to not intrude too much (as is often the case in Napa). Long finish and great structure indicate a good life ahead. 3 thumbs up

2006 Mailbox Merlot Reserve, Spring Mountain (14.3%) – Plummy, with nice tannins and great structure. 3 thumbs up

2005 Cabernet Sauvignon, Napa Valley (14.3%) – Good typicity, with blackberries, cherries, chocolate and coffee. Elegant, with great structure. This will also age very well. 3 thumbs up

2005 Cabernet Sauvignon Reserve, Spring Mountain (14.3%) – Lots of black fruit, blueberries, and some spices. Both dense and elegant, with great tannins and length. Will also age. 3 thumbs up

This paper evaluates whether tasting notes – the brief testimony that describes the sensory properties of wines – add value. The analysis is based on a sample of over 2700 recent vintage cabernet sauvignon wines evaluated by Wine Spectator. I estimate a dynamic wine price model to evaluate the marketing effect of the note, controlling for quality measures as well as other wine characteristics. The results indicate that the length of the tasting note exerts a strong positive influence on the wine’s price, even after controlling for quality. A 10 percent increase in the number of characters in the tasting note (about 23 additional characters) contributes about two to four dollars to the price of the wine. Further analysis reveals that the value of the tasting note does not come from the “analytical” words contained in the note but rather, from the more subjective component of it.

A few brief comments:

The cabernets included in the study come from the 2000-2006 vintages; these are represented in the analysis with dummy variables.

The ‘analytical’ component of tasting notes consists of words that appear in the Wine Spectator (WS) glossary. The characters making up these words are counted – longer words are better? To me this seems problematic, because these range from somewhat subjective components, like ‘spicy’ and ’round’, to ‘tannins’ (p 11). The point is to identify the portion of the tasting note that would be approachable to a wine novice, and this is – arguably – a good first shot at this. Still, the difference between ‘spicy’ and ‘subjective’ descriptors like ‘all-spice’ would probably have the same impact on readers, but be analyzed in a different manner.

One of the variables considered is the expected length of the wine’s maturity. This is taken directly from the WS tasting note, creating a potential endogeneity problem. It would make sense to cross-reference this with other sources, especially because James Laube (the WS critic for Napa) seems to prefer his wines young.

One of the indicator variables is the number of cases produced; this is supposed to proxy for yield (i.e. tons of grapes harvested per hectare). This is a stupid measure. While yield does tend to drive quality to a certain extent (appellations in France and Italy have relatively strict rules regarding yields as a way of guaranteeing minimum quality – assuming the winemakers don’t screw up), this is orthogonal to case production. The number of cases produced more directly captures the size of the source vineyard(s). It shouldn’t be too difficult to get data on actual yields, although it may be time consuming.

Ultimately, the finding that the subjective component of a tasting note positively influences prices is unsurprising. It would be interesting to compare the WS effect to that of other critics, such as Steve Tanzer or Robert Parker/Wine Advocate. It would probably vary by region as well. Still, I have to admit, I find the subjective aspect of tasting notes to be somewhat less informative than the tech sheets that wineries sometimes post on their websites (especially when considering the purchasing decision).