(Re-Tasted July 2009) ... If memory serves correctly this is the first year that wine maker Darryl Brooker concocted this blend. I remember it having Gewurztraminer, Riesling, Chardonnay and some Pinot Gris – but then sometimes my memory fails as to content – but I do remember this was a very nice wine. In my conversation with Darryl, I remember him saying it leaned more towards a drink-now style than anything meant to age. I have learned over the years that winemakers can be pretty conservative about their wine’s age-ability assessments (especially Darryl, who seems to undercut everything); but this time I think he was right on the money with his assessment. Don’t take that to mean the wine has gone bad, it just has lost a lot of the freshness that made this wine so damn tasty a few years back. Today the first smell was a bit on the sulphury side, but that blew off in a minute of two. Next up the nose were some melon and apricot smells, but not of the fresh variety, and hints of floral began to peak out the more air that got in. The palate showed signs of floral, apple and over-ripe peach, but left a rather unpleasant aftertaste behind and the acidity seemed fairly flat too. After about two hours some acidity returned and the flavours blossomed a little more, but by then most people were onto red and had no use for a wine that didn’t wow from the start. My advice would be to decant this one and take your chance.
July 2, 2009
June 21, 2009
Chateau des Charmes 2005 Estate Bottled Riesling
(Re-Tasted June 2009) ... In 1967 The Lovin' Spoonfuls sang a song called "Boredom" ("my whole life is boredom"), these are the same guys that sang "Did you ever have to make up your mind" and "What a day for a daydream". Unfortunately, there was no day dreaming about this wine and we made up our minds pretty quickly ... in 2009 this wine was boring ("my this Riesling is boring"). I am sitting here on a sunny day in Michigan, staring out at a blue sky and the temperature heading north of 80 (that's about 25 on the celsius scale) and I am staring into a glass of Riesling that has either entered a very boring stage or its lifecycle or is on its way down. I would like to just believe it's in a "dumb phase", a place in a wine's life where nothing exciting is happening, but if you were to open it in another year, or had opened it the year before, it would sparkle. There was petrol on the nose and a touch of over ripe, bruised apple; the palate pretty much confirmed that, but the acidity and sweetness seems to have failed the wine and it just sat on the tongue without bringing enjoyment or pleasure. Not sure if I have any of this one left, but if I do it would be nice to look at it again in another year or so, to see if it really was just dumb or boring at 4 years old, either way, at this point anyway, it was a disappointment.
June 5, 2009
Chateau des Charmes 2002 St. David's Bench and Paul Bosc Vineyard Cabernet Sauvignon
To read the original review from July 2006 click on the vineyard below:
St. David's Bench - Paul Bosc Vineyard
(Re-Tasted June 2009) ... This is the story of two wines that might surprise you, even 7 years from their vintage date. First, let's take a minute to talk about the terroir of these two wines - or better yet, the proximity to one another. It may not seem like much separates these two vineyards, but that little stretch of road means so much. You see (for those who have been to Chateau des Charmes) the St. David's vineyard is what the Chateau sits in the middle of; while the Paul Bosc vineyard is located just across the parking lot; separated by a piece of asphalt called "York Road",
but amazingly that makes all the difference.
I opened these wines on two consecutive nights so that I could compare them. Starting with the St. David's Bench wine. This one had a lovely nose of toasted cinnamon, dried blackberries and black fruits along with a vanilla-cedar note. The taste was full of peppered-blackberries some tannin bite along with cinnamon and vanilla. As time wore on with this wine other flavours emerged, including hints of bittersweet chocolate, a cedar-black licorice finish and a pleasant cafe mocha aftertaste.
The Paul Bosc bottle was quite different. For starters, the first bottle I opened was badly corked, thankfully I was able to locate another in my cellar, but still you never like to see a wine you've been ageing go bad (or be bad from the start, as this case may be). Once the second bottle was opened the true smells and flavours of this wine came out. A nose loaded with black fruit, spice and some vegetal notes, though that blew off within the first 15 minutes. Taste-wise there were lots of spices and pepper along with some pleasant black fruit flavours. This wine showed little signs of its age, with no hints of the dried fruit that was in the St. David's bottle; and there was still quite a bit of youthful tannins, big fruit and spice.
It's amazing to compare these two wines ... sure it's just a road, but it's the road that makes all the difference; that and the two different soils the grapes are grown in. Both wines still have plenty of time left in them, though I would say the David's has less - say 3 or 4 years, while the Bosc shows no signs of slowing down in it's evolution, another 5+ years here.
but amazingly that makes all the difference.I opened these wines on two consecutive nights so that I could compare them. Starting with the St. David's Bench wine. This one had a lovely nose of toasted cinnamon, dried blackberries and black fruits along with a vanilla-cedar note. The taste was full of peppered-blackberries some tannin bite along with cinnamon and vanilla. As time wore on with this wine other flavours emerged, including hints of bittersweet chocolate, a cedar-black licorice finish and a pleasant cafe mocha aftertaste.
The Paul Bosc bottle was quite different. For starters, the first bottle I opened was badly corked, thankfully I was able to locate another in my cellar, but still you never like to see a wine you've been ageing go bad (or be bad from the start, as this case may be). Once the second bottle was opened the true smells and flavours of this wine came out. A nose loaded with black fruit, spice and some vegetal notes, though that blew off within the first 15 minutes. Taste-wise there were lots of spices and pepper along with some pleasant black fruit flavours. This wine showed little signs of its age, with no hints of the dried fruit that was in the St. David's bottle; and there was still quite a bit of youthful tannins, big fruit and spice.
It's amazing to compare these two wines ... sure it's just a road, but it's the road that makes all the difference; that and the two different soils the grapes are grown in. Both wines still have plenty of time left in them, though I would say the David's has less - say 3 or 4 years, while the Bosc shows no signs of slowing down in it's evolution, another 5+ years here.
May 30, 2009
Colchester Ridge Estate Winery 2004 Cabernet Sauvignon/Merlot
(Re-Tasted May 2009) ... Here's a winery I have been impressed with since the get go, so I was excited to see a bottle of their wine come up in my Taste it Again program. If you haven't heard of Colchester Ridge then you haven't been anywhere near the Lake Erie North Shore region (outside Windsor) and you're missing out on one the unsung and up-and-coming wineries of Ontario; year-in and year-out this "new" (est. 2001) winery brings out wine that are as good or better than anyone in the region, and great examples of the vintage in Southern Ontario. The Lake Erie region has a longer growing season than Niagara or Prince Edward County and even in "bad" years they take adv
antage of this extra growing time. 2004 is far from the best year we've had this decade, but in this wine you'd never guess it. Upon opening there's wood, lot's of wood (which in some cases is used to mask problem years),but thankfully it's not overpowering, though it was certainly enough to cause some initial concern. Twenty-minutes later all that changed. The woodsy started to settle down and revealed herbs and spices, there's a smoothness to the palate and hints of dark, slightly dried fruit began to emerge. Forty-minutes on and its herbs and subtle green pepper notes that take center stage, still with that nice easy smoothness. After almost two hours the wine has reverted back to the start with lots of wood and some herbal notes. If you've got some in your cellar now's the time to drink this wine, but let it sit open for half an hour before drinking, and then drink over the next two.
antage of this extra growing time. 2004 is far from the best year we've had this decade, but in this wine you'd never guess it. Upon opening there's wood, lot's of wood (which in some cases is used to mask problem years),but thankfully it's not overpowering, though it was certainly enough to cause some initial concern. Twenty-minutes later all that changed. The woodsy started to settle down and revealed herbs and spices, there's a smoothness to the palate and hints of dark, slightly dried fruit began to emerge. Forty-minutes on and its herbs and subtle green pepper notes that take center stage, still with that nice easy smoothness. After almost two hours the wine has reverted back to the start with lots of wood and some herbal notes. If you've got some in your cellar now's the time to drink this wine, but let it sit open for half an hour before drinking, and then drink over the next two.May 29, 2009
Mountain Road Wine Company 2002 Cabernet Franc
(Re-Tasted May 2009) ... I have been sitting on a mountain of 2002 wines from Ontario (no pun intended, I swear). It would be safe to say that I have at least 40 different bottles of 2002 just waiting for me to try them (either again or that have become "lost") - this number also doesn't cover the amount of multiple bottles I have, just the number of different wines. You see, 2002 was the first big vintage of the new millennium, some might argue 2001 was pretty good too, but 2002 was a year to crow about, and many wineries did. Since then we have seen good years in 2005 (although short cropped) and the monster 2007 (from which wines are still coming onto shelves). In my inventory I noticed I had a few different bottles from Mountain Road, I'll get into the reserves I little later in the week (which I had not previously reviewed), but I thought I would start looking back right here, with this 2002 Cabernet Franc.
This is a wine I would call a "window wine", that's because it drinks in a certain window; let me explain. I opened the bottle and was immediately struck by a peppery smell, then the green pepper materialized, I expected that because it was in my original note. But instead of fresh green pepper it was more of a roasted green pepper, with toasty charred-like notes. The flavours revealed littled, just lots of dry woodsy flavours. So out came the decanter and the trials began.
With quite a bit of air the wine's nose soften even more, still on the roasted green pepper side but soft and fairly aromatic (if you like the smell of green pepper that is). With air the palate produced more black pepper and spicy tastes along with biting tannins and plenty of acidity. The fruit has almost completed dropped out of this wine and the flavours have become mostly secondary characteristics (barrel notes - woods and spices). The longer it remained opened and the more air the more bitter the finish became, so the "window of drinking" is somewhere within 30 minutes to an hour of opening, or swirl it around in the decanter for about a minute or two.
This wine is rough around the edges and the finish is a little on the bitter side, so not one for drinking on its own. What I did find quite appealing was how well it did go with food. I decided on chicken tonight and with each bite and sip I took together I noticed the wine added a nice smokiness to the food - bbq'ed flavour without the grill.
This is a wine I would call a "window wine", that's because it drinks in a certain window; let me explain. I opened the bottle and was immediately struck by a peppery smell, then the green pepper materialized, I expected that because it was in my original note. But instead of fresh green pepper it was more of a roasted green pepper, with toasty charred-like notes. The flavours revealed littled, just lots of dry woodsy flavours. So out came the decanter and the trials began.
With quite a bit of air the wine's nose soften even more, still on the roasted green pepper side but soft and fairly aromatic (if you like the smell of green pepper that is). With air the palate produced more black pepper and spicy tastes along with biting tannins and plenty of acidity. The fruit has almost completed dropped out of this wine and the flavours have become mostly secondary characteristics (barrel notes - woods and spices). The longer it remained opened and the more air the more bitter the finish became, so the "window of drinking" is somewhere within 30 minutes to an hour of opening, or swirl it around in the decanter for about a minute or two.
This wine is rough around the edges and the finish is a little on the bitter side, so not one for drinking on its own. What I did find quite appealing was how well it did go with food. I decided on chicken tonight and with each bite and sip I took together I noticed the wine added a nice smokiness to the food - bbq'ed flavour without the grill.
April 28, 2009
Flat Rock 2004 Gravity Pinot Noir
(Re-Tasted April 2009) ... I have heard it said that Pinot Noir is one of those weird grapes that has an ebb and flow to its aging process. Here's what I mean: Let's say you open a bottle of 2004 in early January of 2008 and the wine is beautiful and succulent with lots of berries and cherries - the kind of wine you are happy to own, your experience tells you that the wine can age another 4 to 5 years with ease. Wanting to capture that wine moment again you open a bottle of the same wine 6 months later, it's lackluster, no sign of fruit and little indicatiojn that this is even wine. Ready to pitch your case of 2004 you get unexpectedly sidetracked and the wine remains in your cellar another year. You come across it and remember the nasty stuff you tried - curious you pop the cork and try it again ... this time the wine is sublime. And that's Pinot Noir, not just a heartbreaker but a head-scratcher as well. Today, I opened up my last remaining bottle of Flat Rock's 2004 Gravity Pinot - one of my favourites from that vintage - and I found myself disappointed. Sure there are Pinot smells here, earthy, anise seed, forest floor, and fruits that aren't exactly fresh but not dried out either. The taste is another mystery of sorts: earthy forest floor, dried cranberry, slightly raisiny, touch of anise but quite smooth. We call this a "dumb phase", for Pinto Noir - not showing great, but not showing all that well either - if I had another bottle I would keep it in the corner for another 6 months to a year and try it again.
April 25, 2009
Featherstone Estate Winery 2005 Riesling
(Re-Tasted April 2009) ... As I continue to experiment with ageing wine and vintage years I draw some rather interesting conclusions. One of which is that 2005 was not a good year for Riesling. Allo
w me to qualify that statement a little better: 2005 Riesling aren't aging very well. Riesling, one of the most ageable whites, with its high acidity and slight residual sugar, can age beautifully, developing flavours that are out of this world sublime. One of the signature smells and tastes of a well aged Riesling is petrol/gas/kerosene - a Riesling with 10 years-plus on it has this smell in spades, but they should materialize slowly over time. My findings so far, about 2005, is that those Rieslings have developed over-the-top petrol notes prematurely; and when I am talking petrol I mean sticking your head into a gas tank and breathing deep. Only 4 years from vintage date they should not have the level of gas that many of them do ... thus I can make the conclusion that the hot years (which '05 was) are unkind to the cool weather loving Riesling. This Featherstone offering follows that theory right down to the conclusion. The nose is fairly complex, adding spice and floral notes to that big petrol smell. The flavours fall off sharply with no fruit, no spice, no floral - a hit of something sweet mid-palate almost tries to redeem this wine, but it concludes with a bitter petrol aftertaste. These tastings of the '05s is a bell-weather for the 2007 Rieslings of Ontario - so unless you dig on petrol, early drinking is the key for these wines ... you can hold your 03s, 04s, 06s and the coming 08s.
w me to qualify that statement a little better: 2005 Riesling aren't aging very well. Riesling, one of the most ageable whites, with its high acidity and slight residual sugar, can age beautifully, developing flavours that are out of this world sublime. One of the signature smells and tastes of a well aged Riesling is petrol/gas/kerosene - a Riesling with 10 years-plus on it has this smell in spades, but they should materialize slowly over time. My findings so far, about 2005, is that those Rieslings have developed over-the-top petrol notes prematurely; and when I am talking petrol I mean sticking your head into a gas tank and breathing deep. Only 4 years from vintage date they should not have the level of gas that many of them do ... thus I can make the conclusion that the hot years (which '05 was) are unkind to the cool weather loving Riesling. This Featherstone offering follows that theory right down to the conclusion. The nose is fairly complex, adding spice and floral notes to that big petrol smell. The flavours fall off sharply with no fruit, no spice, no floral - a hit of something sweet mid-palate almost tries to redeem this wine, but it concludes with a bitter petrol aftertaste. These tastings of the '05s is a bell-weather for the 2007 Rieslings of Ontario - so unless you dig on petrol, early drinking is the key for these wines ... you can hold your 03s, 04s, 06s and the coming 08s.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
