TM


Tasting Notes
September/October, 2005

Tasting Notes Contents Page

QPR Winner   I give this award to wines that demonstrate an excellent Quality to Price Ratio. They are sometimes more expensive than the wines featured in my Best Buys section (which is cut off at $20), so while every Best Buy is also a QPR Winner,  not every QPR winner is an official Best Buy.  QPR winners are simply wines that are great values for a relatively  reasonable price. 

Alsace   Argentina    Australia   Bordeaux    Burgundy  Calif./USA  Chile  Dessert/Sparkling  
Germany   Hungary  Italy     Loire    Rhone/South/SW France    Spain

Alsace (except dessert/sparkling)
1999 Riesling "Cuvée Ste-Catherine--Schlossberg" (Weinbach)
Dry and weighty, this has a superb finish, and rich, oily texture,  but some oddities, too. The nose seems herbaceous (said one taster) and perhaps laced with a little dill (said moi).  It is fragrant and fascinating, deep and lingering, but yes, a touch eccentric. I liked it, though. 90 points.

2004 Pinot Gris "Cuvée Albert" (Albert Mann) QPR Winner
Dry, but fruity, and very bright, this focused pinot gris is spicy, almost a restrained Gewurz. It is friendly and charming, easy and sunny, but not perhaps really distinguished or long. I like this if intended for drinking young, and it is hard to imagine anyone disliking it for good basic drinking in an appropriate $20-ish price range. 88 points.

1994 Gewurztraminer Vendange Tardive "Clos Saint Imer" (Burn)
Unctuous but dry-ish, this very deep, very concentrated Gewurz is fruity and focused, penetrating and precise. With air, the trademark gewurz lychee notes pop out on the finish and nose. Its intensity gives way a bit to just a little sweetness as it airs out, but this is wrapped pretty tight in all respects. Very nice, layered and complex. 92 points.

[Return to Top]  

Argentina (except dessert/sparkling)
2004 Malbec (Sorbus)
Simple and a touch tart, with a little lemon in the finish, this nonetheless has some redeeming virtues, including an appealing texture, a certain richness, and tasty blueberry nuances. It seems ready to drink now, more or less. It is not a distinguished wine, but at only $8, it is a good value in an everyday wine, destined for relatively early consumption. This winery is known as "Banfi" in Argentina but cannot market that way here. 82 points.

2004 Malbec/Cabernet Sauvignon (Sorbus)
Sharper, and not as lush as the Malbec, above, this is more structured, and a lot tighter. Tannins pop out on the finish, and the flavors are relatively muted, making me thinking this would benefit from a short stay in the cellar. It is certainly not a long term wine, but should drink well for a few years. It is likely to be an attractive every day wine considering its modest $8 price point.  84 points.
 

2004 Malbec "Organic" (Andalhue)
Robust and full, this puts together some structure and depth, relatively speaking.  It shows tight at the moment, with some significant tannins on the finish, and gives you the feel of fullness in the mouth. A nice, inexpensive wine at $10.49, although a bit muted in flavor at the moment. 85 points.

2003 Malbec "Classico" (Cinco Tierras) QPR Winner
Full bodied, powerful and tight, this has some brightness around the edges, nice depth of fruit in its price range and a serious backbone. Its body and spine make this a lot of wine for $9, and a real deal. It is not ready to drink, and should be cellared for a year or two, I suspect.  87 points.
 

2003 Merlot Reserve (Cinco Tierras) QPR Winner
Well focused and sunny, this is a very pleasing Merlot, not that I have associated Argentina with Merlot. There are cherry nuances and the fruit is relatively expansive and open. There is no reason this can't be drunk now, and I would treat it as a short term wine. Although I can't award big scores to something this ready this soon, it is a wine that is extremely pleasing and attractive at this point, gentle, flavorful and balanced. About $11, although a few bucks more in some places.  87 points.

2003 Malbec Reserve (Cinco Tierras) QPR Winner
Downright powerful, and very tannic, this is big in structure and fruit flavor.  Focused and intense, it shows fine depth, and also a lively, sunny disposition. Underneath there is plenty of fruit, and it expands with air. It shows beautifully, tastes better.  A super deal and a downright steal at around $11, although the price may escalate to $15 in places that don't buy in quantity. Still worth it. Not quite ready. 90 points.

2003 "Bonarda Reserve" (Cinco Tierras) QPR Winner
Lush and laced with blueberries,  this is dripping with fruit flavor, and is well structured, too. The tannins are relatively riper here than on the Malbec, but there is a sufficient backbone for support, as well as some brightness on the finish.  This is perhaps more immediately appealing than the Malbec Reserve, above, but it is no slouch in any department.   A super deal and a downright steal at around $11, although the price may escalate to $15 in places that don't buy in quantity. Still worth it. This winery is known as "Banfi" in Argentina but cannot market that way here. 89 points.

2003 Malbec "Premium" (Cinco Tierras)
Although the price tag goes up here, I'm not sure I liked this as well as the three prior selections from this winery.  As with the "reserve," it shows big and rich, but also rather tart, and perhaps there was a touch of heat on the finish, too. I liked the flavors, and the attack, but the finish disappointed. I was just as happy with the "Classico," at virtually half the price, although it is not quite as deep.  Around $15-$20.  87 points.

2002 Malbec Reserve (Durigutti)
The price here ticks up, but is certainly fair at $18-$23, depending on how your retailer buys. The packaging ticks up, too, as the bottle is big and impressive. The wine is pretty good, though,  although perhaps not as good as the packaging.  I thought it showed a bit sharp at first, but the pieces came together well, and it showed some complexity for its price level, too, a certain earthy note on the finish. Focused, intense and gripping, it is a very well made wine, if not quite as lush or flavorful as some of the Cinco Tierras selections, above.  89 points.

2002 "Familia" (Cinco Tierras)
This comes in a fancy, "cult wine" like bottle, although the price is more like $23-$25. It is a proprietary blend of 50% Merlot and 50% Malbec. It is remarkably robust, tannic on the end, and very rich, and very deep in this price class. It is intense, too, not a fruit bomb, and there are touches of acid on the finish. This is opulent and powerful, rather tightly wound, too.  Very nice. This winery is known as "Banfi" in Argentina but cannot market that way here. Their other label here is "Sorbus." 90 points.

[Return to Top]  

Australia (except dessert/sparkling)

2001 Chardonnary "Art Series" (Leeuwin)
Showing heavy oak on the front, this nonetheless has focus, and acid in the back, and there is some hope its parts will integrate better.  Still, there is a bit too much vanilla and not enough fruit as it shows now, and this does need to cellar well to show a better score. 90+ points.

1998 Shiraz/Cabernet "Meshach" (Grant Burge)
Vanilla, coconut--lots of oak, in other words--lead this off. The wine seems soft and simple, pleasant, but not showing enough fruit or mid-palate depth to soak up the obvious oak.  If this could integrate a bit better, it might seem elegant, but as it is, it just seems a touch short of fruit with few redeeming qualities. 88 points.

1991 Shiraz/Cabernet "Black Label" (Wolf Blass)
Although this is a blend, it tastes cab dominated. It shows it age--you don't think this is a young wine--but it still seems to be rewarding to drink, and fresh, albeit heading to tertiary. I liked this better out of the gate than a some time later. As the fruit faded a bit and thinned a bit, you could taste the vanilla scented oak more easily, and it was clearer that the oak had not integrated quite as much as it needed to. The first tastes were cleaner and more appealing. Still, this does a lot right, and is a nice example of a maturing, blended wine. 88 points.

1995 Cabernet Sauvignon (Moss Wood)
Impeccably balanced, this pretty much has it all. It shows bright, raspberry nuanced fruit up front, but it is round and increasingly complex as it airs out. As it airs out, the fruit gains some darker notes, a touch of plum perhaps. This is a beautifully constructed, well balanced, round and sensual wine. 94 points.

[Return to Top]

Bordeaux (except dessert/sparkling)
2003 Chateau Cambon la Pelouse QPR Winner

Although this is more likely to appear around $18 a bottle instead of some of the super deals that could be found with the exceptional 2000, I still liked this a lot for the price. A blend of 50% Merlot, 30% Cabernet Sauvignon and the rest Cab Franc, this projects a rich, opulent feel, with pure velvet in the mouth. The fruit was tasty and flavorful, but the texture and mouthfeel were the best parts. This was a wine that just felt...hmm...comfortable. Something that you could drink with pleasure all the time, that would seem familiar and well done. Something to drink, not obsess over. 88-90 points.

2001 Chateau Kirwan

Bright purple color is the first thing you notice on this wine. The structure makes it lively but friendly, giving it an elegant, sunny feel. The depth is not remarkable, but it gives the wine a charming, easy feel. This is going to be a modest ager in my view,  approachable already, but needing a year or two to settle down. I'd say it peaks from 2006-2011 for its best window of drinking. 88-90 points.

[Return to Top]  

Burgundy (except dessert/sparkling)
2003 Chambolle-Musigny "Vielles Vignes" (Lignier-Michelot)
This warm vintage produced some very ripe grapes, and you might be forgiven if you think this is California pinot noir instead of Burgundy. Opulent and rich, this is deep and concentrated, almost syrupy in the mid-palate. I personally thought this was a decadent, rather flavorful Burg, that was an awful lot of fun to drink. Burg purists, you know who you are, may wonder where the acid and definition is. Deal with it. From Hubert Lignier's nephew, on his own since 2000 (everything in the old world has decades if not hundreds of years of behind it, right?) Around  $47 a bottle. 90-92 points.

2003 Morey St. Denis "Les Chenevery" (Lignier-Michelot)
Still ripe and rich, this is not quite as thick in the mid-palate as the Chambolle, above. It does, however, have beautiful fruit, and more definition, and retains a ripe, flavorful demeanor, with succulent fruit. Pricing in the mid-$50s. 90-92 points.

2003 Morey St. Denis "Faconnieres" (Lignier-Michelot)
The lightest and most delicate of the three Lignier-Michelot wines here, this is nonetheless bursting with flavor, if a bit short on the finish.  There is a certain grace and charm that I appreciated here, but I wonder if this will turn into anything distinguished with some age, or just something correct. I'm betting on the latter. 88-90 points.

1990 Morey St. Denis "Clos de la Bussière" (Roumier)
This old favorite is holding on fairly well, and aging gracefully, although I have to admit I liked it more younger. It is still intense on the finish, although you can taste the strawberry notes marking maturing fruit. The finish is also bright, as well as a bit short at this point, and the tannins surprise. It is medium bodied at best, and the fruit has thinned some. I think there is also some sign here that the fruit is drying out a bit. It certainly isn't the lush, gorgeous, flavorful wine of its youth any more, although some might argue for keeping it even longer in order to allow the tannins to resolve. Still, for my money this is on the downslide, if ever so slightly, and should be drunk. Really, fifteen good years for a wine of this stature isn't chopped liver.  88 points.

1990 Pommard (Rossignol-Changarnier)
I liked this very briefly. It showed good weight and fullness in the mouth, along with a bit of barnyardand a lot of tannins. The structure took over this wine in short order, though, and what flavor the fruit showed simply disappeared, leaving little besides tannins and acid.  It went flat too fast, in fact in thirty minutes, and there wasn't much left that was particularly interesting when it did. Austere and charmless. 79 points.
 

1995 Gevrey-Chambertin "Clos Prieur" (J. Roty)
Caught in an awkward stage, this is showing completely disjointed, with all of its components at war with one another.  It opens very tight, rather tannic, with bursts of acid. It shows hard and ungiving, rather sharp, a bit shrill. I did have a sense--and it was hard to get more than that--that this had a chance to integrate much better and calm down. At the moment, though, it was very difficult to find the fruit, and one could only speculate that it would come around. 86+ points. 

2001 Meursault "Les Poruzots" (Boillot)
This opens very bright, with a touch of lemon, but that quickly gives way to well integrated lees nuances. There's a bit of oak, too, but the whole here is pleasing, gentle and well integrated. Tasty and amiable, yet interesting enough to be a wine of some distinction. 90 points.

[Return to Top]  

California/USA (except dessert/sparkling)
2000 Zinfandel "York Creek Late Picked" (Ridge)
Although Ridge tends to rail against high alcohol wines and the trend to same, this hits 15.8%. I would add that it is more successful than most of their zins in this difficult vintage, many of which have seemed harsh, hot and hollow, even though with lower alcohol levels. The extra ripeness and perhaps alcohol helps give this some body, which many wines in this vintage really needed.  The fruit here certainly has that slightly overripe feel, but it is tasty and it stands up to Ridge's oak treatment, which is more than I can say for certain other Ridge products in this vintage.  The wine has nice depth for the vintage, and some tannins on the finish. It shows a backbone and structure, and after being opened for an hour, it was evolving and getting better. The fruit tasted sweet and inviting, all the while, and the wine is drinking and evolving well at age five. It showed decently the next day, although the fruit was sweet enough that it almost seemed to have some residual sugar, and it was not handling the alcohol as well any more. 89 points.

2004 Pinot Noir (Sineann)
This Oregon pinot running around $45 a bottle, is a fine mouthfull, full bodied and rich. Yet, the flavor and the weight also come with elegance, and a balance that can be appreciated. The fruit has a certain dark, burnished, rather than very bright demeanor. If I had one critique, I'd say the finish was fairly modest. Still, this is a very nice wine that should have many fans. 89-91 points.

2003 Pinot Noir "Russian River Valley" (DuMOL)
Lovely, fragrant red berry fruit opens this wine up. It is a pleasure to smell and taste. That said, the mid-palate is a bit light and delicate, although it is certainly "pinot-like" and elegant. I think this will drink well on the younger side, and is likely to please most. I would have liked a bit of a longer finish and a little more depth. Perhaps it will put on some weight in the cellar. 89-91 points.

2003 Syrah "Castelli-Knight Ranch (Pax)
I wasn't so sure I liked this winery early on, but they seem to be gaining strength and getting better. All of these Rhone clone wines are around $50-$55, not cheap, but becoming more interesting. This bottling, from the Russian River Valley, is a big, big mouthful. I really liked everything about it--it had depth, a supporting backbone with firm tannins, and I smelled just a little of that trademark "bacon fat" aroma that Northern Rhone syrah gives one. I think that with cellaring, this will develop similar aromas. Beautifully structured, this is a winner. 92-94 points.

2003 Syrah "Griffin's Lair" (Pax)
This is not quite as stern as the Castelli-Knight above, showing more expansive and open fruit. It is still focused and precise, although there seems to be a bit of heat showing here, too, and some harshness from the combined structural components. This is still interesting, but I didn't like it nearly as much as the Castelli, above. 88-90 points.

2003 Syrah "Cuvée Moriah" (Pax)
This is in fact more of a Chateauneuf-du-Pape blend, than pure Syrah. It is another big winner. Big, powerful and heady, it shows aggressive tannins, but also nice fruit, and covers its alcohol well. It's a mouthful, and rather tasty at that. 91-93 points.

2004 Syrah "Cuvée Christine" (Pax)
This barrel sample is grapey and unevolved, showing plenty of tannin, but mostly sweet, sweet fruit, and new oak. This needs to come together, as it is showing its components individually way too much, but it has a lot of promise. 89-91 points.

2004 Syrah "Alder Springs" (Pax)
Another barrel sample, this is a big mouthful, powerful, throwing off tons of flavor, and with some focus. It did seem like the flavor flattened quickly with a little air, and this could be an awkward time to catch this. There is a sense of considerable depth, but the fruit became muted rather fast. It was hard to get a good read on this, and I'd rather be conservative. 89-91 points.

1994 Pinot Noir "Cuvée DD" (Kalin)
This winery is known for the aging ability of its pinots, although some argue that is rather erratic. This wine, running around $450 a case and re-released, seems well past prime to me. The first bottle was browning and oxidized, and showed simple, strawberry notes.  The performance was of sufficient concern that the distributor opened a second bottle. The second was better, with some nice cherry notes, but thinning, and still showing past prime, although I suspect that with more air we would see a little more structure, too. Still, it's hard to get excited for the price demanded. 83 points.

2003 Zinfandel "Howell Mountain" (Black Sears)
You may know Black Sears best as Turley's vineyard, but here they have branched out on their own. This shows spice and pepper, with acid and ripe tannins mingling with sweet fruit. It is well balanced in the mid-palate, and is likely to be a rather harmonious wine with some cellar time. 89-91 points.

2002 Cabernet "Tanbark Hill" (Togni)
What some would call the trademark Togni notes, green bell pepper, stands front and center on this wine, and that is not necessarily a good thing. It does have a beautiful focus, and ripe tannins, even though the mid-palate seems rather modest. Some will think the green notes rather vegetal, though, and hardly appealing. At around $60 a bottle, it would be easy to pass on this. 88-90 points.

2002 Meritage (Wolf Family)
This is 85% Cabernet Franc, with the rest Cabernet Sauvignon. This relatively new winery shows a lot of effort and a good attempt at making special wine. It is open at first, but the tannins pop out quickly. There is a lot of power here, but also excellent fruit. The astringency on the finish will give some pause, and with a new winery you wonder if it will all work out with a few years of cellaring. Certainly, there is more astringency here than one sees on most '02s.  Still, I think this is a pretty good effort that is promising. 90-92 points.

2002 Cabernet Sauvignon (Wolf Family)
Herbal, with touches of rhubarb, this is fruity, if not quite classic in its flavor profile. It is also a fairly big, full mouthful, with some focus, and unlike the Meritage, above, riper tannins.  As with the Meritage, this has to come together and show itself as a complete wine. Running around $50 a bottle. 89-91 points.

2002 Cabernet Sauvignon (Buccella)
The new Napa wines just keep on coming. This one is made by Mark Herold, of Merus, and runs around $100 a bottle. I liked the texture and focus on the wine, but in the time I had to spend with it, it seemed shy of mid-palate depth. You can only hope it was closed and dumb, and that some air or cellar time will let it put some weight on. The winery blurb talks of power and concentration, but I don't see much here of either. It's a new wine. Maybe it will go places I don't expect, and I only had a little time to spend with it. 88-90 points.

2002 Cabernet Sauvignon "Jake's Creek" (Harris Estate)
And the cult wines just keep on coming. Mark Herold is also the winemaker here, and this winery has priced this early offering around $100 a bottle. It does have a beautiful bouquet, and it was a pleasure to just smell. The flavors are pure and tasty. It is very intense on the finish, but the intensity perhaps evolves into harshness, and the acidity, alcohol and general structural components seemed a bit overbearing for the time I had to spend with this. It certainly has some basic issues in place, like pristine, pure fruit, but the wine is badly disjointed at the moment. Hopefully, that will be corrected with time. 89-91 points.

2002 Cabernet Sauvignon "Treva's Vineyard" (Harris Estate)
If you thought $100 a bottle was a bit cheeky, this goes right to $150. Yikes. It is a nice, full bodied wine, that expands in the mouth, and shows superb flavor, and excellent fruit, dark, tending more to plums. Despite an alcohol reading of 15.3, I thought this held its alcohol better than the "Jake's Creek," above, which sometimes seemed a bit questionable in its balance. I rather liked this, but it would be hard to buy at the price. 91-93 points.

2003 Petite Sirah "Palisades Vineyard" (Carver-Sutro)
Beautifully structured, this is is tight, intense and very tannic, but with superb depth of fruit in the mid-palate. It is tightly wound, and a little astringent, but I think this has all its components in place. I would expect this to show beautifully with a few years in the cellar. Its balance seems impeccable, and it is built so that it can age. 91-93 points.

2001 Pinot Noir "Edna Valley" (Campion)

This is, so I am advised, a single vineyard wine from "Firepeak Vineyard."  It is pleasant and rather simple, with a candied finish and some brightness around the edges. It drinks rather well as a fairly basic Pinot, but is a bit short and light, and lacks distinction. Pricing a bit over $30 makes it a bit expensive for something that comes off as an entry level Pinot Noir.  84-86 points.

2002 "Special Selection" (Caymus)
Priced at around $85 a bottle a retail, if pricing I saw from a distributor holds true, this seems like a good price point for Caymus SS, a wine that I've seen selling for a lot more in other years. I liked the 02 very much. Big and rich, laced with blackberry nuances, the fruit is very sweet and lingers on the finish. There is some acid in the back, but the wine does seem disturbingly laid back, and a little too supple, but a lot of '02s are showing that way.  I would like to see some more structure on this wine emerge with air and cellaring, but I think it has a chance to be at the upper end of my rating.  In the time I had with it, I did sense some tannin burbling underneath, and this wine badly needs some. Its got the fruit. 91-94 points.

2003 Pinot Noir "Taylor Lane Vineyard" (Belle Glos)
Focused, with cherry nuances, this drinks smoothly and easily.  This comes from Caymus' owners, the Wagner family. I loved the purity of fruit on the finish. That said, the wine is a bit too easy and not perhaps as well structured as one might expect for something in a mid-$40s price range. Still, I think this will be a pleasure to drink, if not perhaps as distinguished as it could be. For this to merit a score on the higher end, it needs to show me something more on cellaring.  89-91 points.
 

2002 Cabernet Sauvignon "Signature" (Darioush)

Here's an interesting parable. This was served to me initially from a newly opened 6 liter bottle. All I got was oak, and it seemed sweet and flamboyant, to the point where I thought it was their Shiraz. I didn't much like it, although it had some good points in depth. As it turned out, that demeanor of the wine was atypical, and it seemed like a barrel sample coming from the 6.0L. I got a glass next from the regular 750ml and it was hard to believe it was the same wine, now showing much more brightness around the edges, some focus, and better integrated oak. It also did not seem quite as rich and opulent. I think this is a going to be a pretty nice cab from this winery, and probably their best effort to date. They have gotten some flack for pretty bottles and underperforming wines in the past, but this vintage looks more interesting.  At a retailer, plan on around $65 a bottle.  90-92 points.  

1994 Cabernet Sauvignon (Philip Togni)
The first taste of this wine revealed something suave--and mostly pickle juice. Togni makes beautifully crafted wines, but they have this green, bell pepper trademark that many, myself included, find offputting. The initial showing of this was elegant and succulent, bright and suave--but pure pickle juice. I held half a bottle (no one wanted to finish it!) until the next day, and it was far, far better. Still suave, the pickle note was better integrated, and the fruit still flavorful, tannins more pronounced, if anything. This is a very fine wine in many respects, but I have to mark it down for that green note. Those who are more tolerant of it, may rate this much higher. For me, it coulda been a contender. On Day 1, I didn't want to drink it at all, though. This will be a "different strokes" wine, for sure. On Day 1, the score at that moment, without decanting, might have been 10 points lower. 90 points.

1997 Cabernet Sauvignon (Seavey)
Coming from a vintage that has a reputation as creating soft fruit bombs, this cab is all about structure. It has a very tannic, firm backbone, but also excellent depth of fruit. It is not even close to being ready to drink, needing at least another three years in my view. It is full bodied and powerful, and very focused. With air, it does have a certain austerity, but drank beautifully the next day. 95 points.

1994 Cabernet Sauvignon (Dalla Valle)

Succulent and bright, this has a mouthwateringly acidic finish, lovely raspberry notes, and persistent flavors. I never quite saw it open, though, and it seemed a bit angular at times. Still, I think this has a fine future, as well as an interesting present. Not quite ready. I sometimes found the acid too high. 93 points.

1994 "Monte Bello"  (Ridge Vineyards)
This shows very bright, seems big in the mouth, but also tight and austere. It becomes elegant, and the fruit gets sweeter with air. The next day finds it far better integrated, a very charming, elegant wine that has developed a more velvety, softer texture. This, in my view, is not a great Monte Bello, but it can be a pleasure to drink. It is not quite ready--needing another year or three. When the fruit opens fully, it should be very charming, but lacks the depth and penetration to be really exceptional.  92 points.

1994 "Opus One"
This opens stinky and gamey, with a certain "charred" feel. I couldn't help wondering if it had seen some heat somewhere along the line.  I was pleasantly surprised to see it expand in the glass, and for awhile I was rather liking it. The gamey notes did not quite blow off, but the fruit developed. By the end of the evening, it slid again, though, and nothing that happened really overcame its problems.  Needs to be retasted. From this bottle, 88 points.

1994 Cabernet Sauvignon (Quilceda Creek)
Smooth and elegant, this is thin in the mid-palate, lacking depth. It improves slightly with air, enough to be enjoyable, but never acquires distinction or sufficient weight. It becomes a pleasant, middle-of-the-road cab, foursquare, correct and simple. 85 points. 

1994 Cabernet Sauvignon (Kathryn Kennedy)
All tannins and acid, especially acid, this won the prize for least amount of taste-able fruit on the evening. This was ferociously tannic young. I was curious to see what would happen to it, and bought one. Just one. Thank goodness. The wine is a classic example of structure overwhelming fruit. The fruit is pretty much gone. What's left is not terribly interesting. 77 points.

2004 Sauvignon Blanc "Signature Selection" (Bianchi)
Although this is marked at 15% alcohol, everyone was shocked to read that on the label, because the wine seems perfectly in balance and even graceful. Drink the stuff first--read the label after you form an opinion!  This has the trademark Sauv Blanc grassy nose, and it seemed beautifully balanced, with everything well integrated and in perfect harmony.  I would recommend drinking it on the younger side and it seemed to show beautifully right now. If it lacks the distinction you might expect to find in a wine to cellar, for which reason I cannot really rate it higher, it is still classic SB, perfectly charming, and with a very respectable mid-palate, and lovely nose. 88 points.

2003 Pinot Noir "La Neblina" (Radio-Coteau)
I am not quite as sold on Radio-Coteau as others, but clearly it is a winery on the right track. This bottling has a big, pungent nose, and lots of intensity. It seemed a bit heady, too, but projected lots of flavor and had fine depth of fruit. There seemed to be a certain stewed quality, though, to the fruit. Perhaps it will integrate better with some cellaring.  This is a rich, opulent pinot with considerable structure that needs a couple of years, at least, in the cellar to settle down. I'd like to see it cellar well and improve, and then we can talk about where the score finally goes. 89+ points.

2002 Pinot Noir Reserve (Fort Ross)
This young winery seems to be doing a lot right. The reserve bottling runs around $50. The nose is fragrant, throwing off seductive red berry aromas. The fruit is very sweet, and is reasonably deep in the mid-palate. I liked the seductive texture, too. Just when you think this is gentle elegance personified, there is a heavy hit of acid on the finish and the flavor is a bit subdued. It improved considerably in the glass, projecting raspberry nuances, although it seemed a bit heady. This is my first pinot from this winery, and I think it is going to go in the right direction. Hold this for another 1-2 years before trying it again. I think it will be a very harmonious wine, ultimately.  90 points.

1999 Pinot Noir "Klopp Vineyard" (Merry Edwards)
Graceful, elegant and utterly seductive, this velvety pinot noir is both mouthfilling and lively. The flavors are delectable, and the wine is impeccably balanced, showing good depth of fruit, flavor, touches of acid and ripe tannins. The fine depth is complemented by caressing texture, pure velvet, soft and gentle. This is not a powerhouse, but it is no wimp, either. A pleasure to drink, and drinking about as well as it will right now. 92 points.

1999 Pinot Noir "Cuvée du Tonnelier" (Brick House)
Beautifully focused, this is bright and lively, sunny and charming. The tannins are very ripe, and the wine is a bit more compact, a touch less flavorful than the Merry Edwards, above. Although the presentation of the wine is excellent, there is certain herbal, bell pepper note that I could have lived without. Still, I enjoyed this on the whole, and it was mostly tasty, and well constructed. It is drinking nicely now, although can certainly hold a few more years. 89 points.

2004 Chardonnay "Jack Ranch--Edna Valley" (Bianchi) QPR Winner
Raised 62% in oak barrels, this spent six months on lees, and hit 14.5% alcohol. This is a good example of how statistics can tell you some things but not everything. The wine is beautifully balanced, well received by all who tried it. The lees nuances stand out, giving the wine a toasty note on the finish. The oak seems well balanced with the rest of the wine. It has some brightness on the finish, too, but mostly projects an easy, charming feel, with just enough intensity to keep you interested. For most of the time I spent with this, I thought it handled its alcohol well, but I did think a bit of heat showed through towards the end. This drinks well now, and doesn't seem intended for aging of any consequence, which is the main point holding it out of an "A" level category. Still, for short term drinking, very nice. 89 points.

2001 Grenache/Syrah "The Ventriloquist" (Sine Qua Non)
The nose was fabulous, pungent and powerful, projecting waves of raspberry notes. It seemed like this was going to be a big winner. It wasn't. Served blind, it performed poorly and impressed no one, largely because of complaints about the acidity and/or alcohol. There was certainly something in the wine that lent it a "searing" quality (the adjective often used),  heat more than anything else in my view. The wine seems actually fairly light in the mid-palate, bright and elegant. It is not something that was deliberately looking to be heavy handed, in other words. The fruit is flavorful, nuanced by red berries, and quite tasty. So, there is still a lot here to like. It is hardly a total failure. But no one really liked it, or thought it was particularly worth the money after the bag came off. There was much speculation as to whether time in the cellar would help this. We'll find out the hard way. Not decanted. 88 points.

2002 Estate Meritage (Lancaster)
After the '01, which I royally disliked, a wine with insufficient fruit and too much tannin and acid, this is a step up. But it is a fairly small step for a pricey wine intending to make a premium statement. It has a lovely, crushed velvet texture, and cures the mistake of its '01 predecessor by backing off the tannins and acid. That is, the balance here is far better, and this is a seductive wine with a fragrant nose. That said, there is little intensity or depth here, and the wine is pleasing, but not truly distinguished. I think everyone who tries it will enjoy it, but not everyone will think it is worth the $65 tariff. 89-91 points.

2003 Pinot Noir "Cohn Vineyard" (Kosta Browne)
This has classic pinot noir weight from a Burgundian perpspective, making this wine elegant and ethereal, with a silky feel, rather than very concentrated, heavy and/or overbearing. Contrasted with the "big, bigger and biggest" style some pinot producers affect, this will strike some as a departure and a pleasure. Others will pine for a little more depth. That said, the fruit is very sweet, finishing candied. It is a jarring aspect that rather changes the rest of the picture. Not that it tastes bad, just that it seems to strike a different balance and become something more showy. With cellaring, will the fruit calm down, and integrate, giving this a more classic profile? That's the question. 88-90 points.

2003 Pinot Noir "Kanzler Vineyard" (Kosta Browne)

Rich and full bodied, this features ripe, supple tannins that give the wine a lively note, some brightness around the edges, and most of all, fine, concentrated fruit. The fruit is sweet on the finish, but not as candied as with the "Cohn," above. This has the feel of a star Pinot Noir in the making if it develops well in the cellar, having good balance, fine depth, and persistence. 92-94 points.

2001 Cabernet Sauvignon "Estate" (Signorello)
This Bordeaux-blend is cab dominated, and gets 58% new oak. It is beautiful, and at roughly $40 a bottle, a fine price point for a Napa cab. It is deep and well structured, and shows some power on the finish, too.  The balance is beautiful, with fine fruit and a backbone. It puts it all together. There aren't a lot of "deals" in Napa. This is one. 92-94 points.

2002 Cabernet Sauvignon "Spottswoode Estate Vineyard" (Spottswoode)
Supple and elegant, this seems lovely, nuanced with gentle cherry flavors, and a touch of plum. It is bright and charming, although its tariff of $110 seems steep. I think with time this will develop some complexity and resemble a nice Bordeaux. It will win a lot of fans for its elegance, although some will want a bit more beef, so to speak.  90-92 points.

2002 Syrah/Petite Syrah "Relentless" (Shafer)
Ripe and succulent, this features beautiful sweet fruit that is flavorful and delectable. It is softly textured and elegant, supple and rich. This will drink well and easily, and should be approachable rather young. Utterly charming, this is another seductive wine from Shafer. In retail stores, this could see pricing in the mid-$50s. 91-93 points.

1998 Cabernet Sauvignon "Rutherford" (Pine Ridge)
I wasn't expecting much from this at this juncture, but I was pleasantly surprised. In the context of the vintage, this is a fine success. It has developed beautifully in the cellar, showing plum notes on the fruit, and a respectable if not overly deep mid-palate. It is beautifully balanced and goes down easy. It is ready to drink, and shows little tannin or persistence at this point, but the fruit is fresh and can develop further in cellar if you like them older. Still, this is a good time to go for this. 88 points.

2001 Cabernet Sauvignon "Stags Leap District" (Pine Ridge)
Running around $70 retail, this is smooth and elegant, and lovely. The fruit is ripe, with a touch of anise mingled with herbs on the finish. It is supple and charming. What it is not, however, is particularly deep or intense. In its present incarnation, it seems likely to drink well young, and be a medium term ager. I enjoyed this, but many will find its price point daunting. 90-92 points.

2003 Pinot Noir "Premier Cuvée" (Archery Summit)
This winery is owned by the folks from Pine Ridge, and represents a blend of various properties. It is probably the best value in their lineup, priced in the mid to upper $30s. Varietally true, this is impeccably balanced, a meld of nice fruit and lively, supple tannins. It tastes rather good now, but I think will show better in a year or so, and be at best a mid-term wine, best consumed on the earlier side. Still, this has a beautiful feel to it, and nice flavors. 90-91 points.

2002 Pinot Noir "Red Hills Estate" (Archery Summit)
The price about doubles here from the "Premier," above, and is likely to hit $70 or so retail. This is a better wine, to be sure, but I'm not so sure it is enough better to justify the doubling of the price. It has beautiful red fruit and a silky, sensual texture. The tannins are supple, and there is some brightness around the edges. I think this will age a bit better than the "Premier," too. Whether it is  worth doubling the price--that's up to you. 91-93 points.

2002 Pinot Noir "Arcus Estate" (Archery Summit)

Priced identically to the "Red Hills," above, this shows a touch of plum, and seems darker and richer, but not necessarily more interesting. It has a gorgeous velvety texture, and is often sensual and lovely, but it also seems to be laced with some green notes that I did not care for, that made me wonder about stems. This has an awful lot to recommend it and if you do not object to its green aspects, you'll like it a lot more than I did. 89-91 points.

1996 Cabernet Sauvignon (Seavey Vineyard)
I know some folks who wondered whether this would age, but one thing Seaveys do is age. Having just opened the very tannic, completely unready 1997, I can say that this is lush, richer wine--and better. Unlike the '97, it is quite drinkable now, although its depth of fruit, and youthful demeanor make it often seem like a barrel sample. It is grapey and primary, smooth, succulent and lush. But another thing Seavey, a vastly underrated winery, always does is provide structure and backbone to their wines. So, too, here--with an hour or so of air, the tannins begin to emerge and they are considerable. This has a long life ahead, but is bursting with flavor now. 97 points.

2000 Pinot Noir Garys' Vineyard (Loring)
Well, if you haven't drunk this by now, you should have. One good thing is that with age it has acquired much more typicity, is very pinot-ish, and hardly dead. It offered little on Day 2, but was pleasant enough with nice, gentle strawberry notes and some tertiary hints on Day 1. It has little of the exuberant fruit you may have liked when it was young, and it is a bit basic and simple at this point, a routine quaffer. 84 points.

2002 Syrah "Lauterbach" (Pax)
Packed with fruit in the middle, this has herbal nuances around the end, and lots of tannin and alcohol. Its intensity is quite forbidding at the moment. In another sense, it is surprisingly laid back, giving you the feeling that with air or a couple of years in the cellar, it will seem much better balanced. It is not particularly heavy, and the finish is modest.  This is charmless at the moment, but you hope it has some potential in cellaring. 88+ points.

1996 Cabernet Sauvignon Reserve "30th Anniversary Bottling" (Mondavi)
This special "winery only" bottling celebrating the 30th anniversary of the winery, is super. If there is a better red wine that Mondavi has produced since the late '70s glory era, I don't know what it would be. Smooth and silky, with a velvety texture, it is nuanced by cassis, with a touch of herbs. It is deep and concentrated, as well as flavorful, but in a round, sensually textured fashion. It is not just deep, it is caressing to the palate. The tannins are supple, but they are present, and the wine has just a little brightness around the edges. Its elegance combined with its texture and persistence make it a winner. A bit more of a firm backbone would make it even better, but it is very fine. Its texture alone makes it a big winner. 95 points.

1997 Cabernet Sauvignon (Pride)
Deep and concentrated, this friendly wine shows sweet fruit and has integrated very well. It is robust, but charming, without harsh tannins, and completely open and expansive. The sweet fruit is a pleasure to drink and the wine shows better balance than you think it has at first. Tasty, and a fine showing for the "regular" bottling. 92 points.

1994 Meritage (Viader)
Sweet, supple, and easygoing, this shows tertiary notes with air, and is obviously maturing. It is still fresh, bright and lively, though, and develops more and more typicity with air.  Drink now--won't improve, but is pretty delicious at the moment.  91 points.

2001 "Midnight Oil" (Sine Qua Non)
The first bottle of this I had was tight and closed. So, this one I decanted for three hours, and that was the difference that was needed. This wine, 95% Syrah, is big and burly, but surprisingly supple, too. There is nothing overbearing about it. The fruit is open and ripe, throwing off waves of flavor. The finish has some brightness to it, with very ripe tannins, and the wine is actually beautifully balanced. This is pretty sexy.  (Note: I had another bottle of this about 3 months later, and if anything it showed even better. It had no decanting in a decanter, but was double decanted for six hours. It was not only lush and tasty but showed those bacon fat notes that Rhone syrahs acquire. Very impressive.)  I like this better than the '02.  This is the revised December, '05 score, although just a point higher: 96 points.

1999 Syrah "Hudson Vineyard" (Kongsgaard)
Others liked this better than I. For one thing, I thought it had a nuance of some rubber or lanolin that I didn't particularly like. Plus, it is very disjointed at the moment, showing tight and tannic, and it is hard to get past that haze of tannins, especially on the finish. Still, this is beautifully constructed wine that seems firm, with a nice core of fruit. I'm told it was decanted for three hours before being repoured into the bottle. I'd like to retaste this in a couple of years to see what is there when the tannins moderate. 89+ points.

1995 Insignia (Joseph Phelps)
Focused and beautiful, this is another super Insignia, which is surely one of Napa's most underrated wines. It shows great typicity, and a lovely nose. It is tightly wrapped at the moment, and in need of air to expand and show its stuff.  The tightly wrapped core presages many layers to be unwrapped as this airs out. Very nice, and next time, remind me to decant. This has not peaked yet, and should continue improving in the cellar. It has a significant upside still. 95 points.

1998 Syrah "Shell Creek" (Clos Mimi)
This starts off with an unpleasantly funky nose, that made me think "reduction." The wine itself has flattened out.  Although I liked the texture, it seems a bit simple, soft and formless. Add that nose, and there wasn't anything here to like much. 84 points.

2001 Syrah "Bunny Slope" (Clos Mimi)
This projects rather appealing raspberry notes on the nose, which follow through onto the palate. It goes a bit tart on the finish, and although I thought it mostly handled its 15% alcohol well, it might have been more useful to have dropped a point or two. Nice fruit and nose. 88 points.

[Return to Top]  

Chile (except dessert/sparkling)
2001 Syrah "Folly" (Montes Alpha)
Served blind, this made me think "Araujo syrah."  I was pretty sure it was new world, for the dark oak overlay, the touch of licorice, and the opulent, rich fruit. So, it was Chile--and a premium Syrah, around $55 or so a bottle. It's a big mouthful, ripe, and a pleasure to smell.  It seemed to finish a bit short, the fruit overwhelmed a bit by oak at first. I was pleased to see it develop beautifully, develop some balance and structure, and ripe tannins. There is quite a backbone, in fact. It became anything but a fruit bomb, while showing admirable depth. Very nice. 93 points.
 

[Return to Top]  

Dessert/Sparkling
1995 Dolce (Far Niente)
This Sauternes imitator from Far Niente pleases as always, but as always, you have to wonder what you could be buying from Sauternes for the same or less money.  It is scented with oak, and for the weight of this vintage, the the oak seems a bit much. Still, the wine has lovely flavors, and a bright, nicely focused attack, not weighty at all, but persistent. I've had better Dolce, but this is still a very nice one, if you can ignore the price. 92 points.

NV Madeira Boal "Boston" (Rare Wine Company)
This importer has taken to blending together small lots of old wines, with different blends named for different cities. I didn't like their austere Charleston Sercial much, but this "Boston" blend is delicious, relatively rich, with a beautiful nose, filled with nutty aromas, which follow through onto the palate. It is a beautiful wine to sit and sip after dinner--or, just because you want to. About $35 or less a bottle.  90-92 points.

1997 Passito "Peagna TB" (Tommaso Bussola)
Almonds and nuts lead off this moderately sweet wine, with features a lovely, lingering finish as its best feature. It is focused rather than rich, with a touch of liqueur on the end. It is pleasing to drink at all times, but just a bit short of truly impressive. Very nice, especially the nutty finish. 90 points.

2001 "Late" (Mer Soleil)

This has an unctuous mid-palate, but doesn't go very far in that direction. It is sweet, like a true dessert wine, but laced with moderating pear notes, mingling with the apricot.  I liked how this showed, but I couldn't help think it was a sort of compromise--making a true dessert wine in TBA style while trying not to really make a big, rich wine. That said, the interplay of the pear and apricot nuances is very appealing, and this will go as well as an aperitif as a "true dessert" wine. Pricing at a bit over $30 per half makes it rather too pricey to use as an aperitif, though. Still, very nice on the whole. 89-91 points.

1985 Champagne Brut (Krug)
This is impeccably balanced and moderately restrained at this point in its life, but it is hardly a wimp. There is still toast around the edges, as well as a bright, zesty finish. The finish is by far its best feature, lingering and compelling, pristine and penetrating. A super performance, nuanced by grace and elegance. 93 points.

2000 Port (Dow's)
I just loved this gorgeous wine. It is rich and very sweet (more so than I usually get from Dow), and simply lush. The wine drips sweet fruit over your tastebuds, and it is hard to forget. The tannins seem relatively refined and subtle for Dow, but it just tastes too good to much care if this will be a classic ager. 95 points.

2001 Sauternes (Les Tuileries)
This opens tight, oaky and showing little but those creamy, creme caramel and botrytis notes. However, I was pleased, and a little surprised, to see this open nicely, integrating some of the oak, and showing nice, expansive fruit. This will drink well on the younger side.  It is moderate in weight and sweetness, and reasonably priced around $20-ish. A good value in a nice vintage.  88 points.

2001 Sauternes (Chateau Suduiraut)
This is tight at the moment, but lurking underneath is an unctuous quality that is a pleasure to see. It has a beautiful, very sweet finish that lingers, and reveals the layers in this wine. Spicy, and capable of cellaring well, this is delicious at the moment, although it already seems to be tightening up. Very classy. 94 points.

1994 Blancs de Blanc "Late Disgorged 2004" (Schramsberg)
This could be about the USA bubbles I've had. It has beautiful balance and a very elegant feel, yet with enough toast and lees notes to be flavorful and rich. Simply delicious, and completely charming. If you think fine sparklers only come from France, try this. 94 points.

2002 Rosé Brut (Schramsberg)

Bright, but round and supple around the edges, this shows nice depth, as well as elegance. This is fresh and fruity, can cellar for a couple of years at least, but  I like how it shows now. 90 points.
 

[Return to Top]

Germany (except dessert/sparkling)
1990 Spatlese "Graacher Himmelreich" (Pauly-Bergweiler)

Mature and burnished, this has modest depth of fruit left, and seems to be drying out a little. Yet, it still has life, refreshing acidity, and impeccable balance, even if it finishes a bit short and simple. This needs drinking, but it is quite pleasant to drink. 88 points.

1991 Riesling Spatlese "Zeltinger Sonnenuhr" (Selbach-Oster)
Sprightly and bright, this is riddled with lemons. It still has fruit, although it seems completely dry. Actually, the wine also seems young and fresh, resolving nicely and showing itself to be lively, although rather delicate and thinning. This shows hardly a hint of tertiary notes, but by the same token the lemony acidic notes predominate as it probably always has, leaving the fruit in a modest, though still viable, position. I wouldn't call this distinguished, but in its own way it is interesting and vibrant. 88 points.

2001 Spatburgunder Trocken "Assmannshauser Hollenberg" (Kesseler)
This pricey, cult-ish German pinot noir was a big disappointment. The weight is quite nice, and there is some modest structure supporting the fruit. There were points when I was thinking that this could have been fun to drink. However, the wine was spoiled by a funky note that at first I thought was sulfur, and later concluded was evidence of reduction. As it stands, it seemed a bit simple as well as rather funky, but the funk was for sure the bigger problem. It didn't blow off in the couple of hours during which I was exposed to the wine. 82 points.

2000 Riesling Kabinett "Hackenheimer Kirchberg" (Ch. W. Bernhard)
Soft and fruity, this does display some acid in the back and expands considerably in the glass...for awhile.  The delicate sweetness rolling over the palate is rather pleasurable. There were moments when I was liking this quite a lot, but the wine was exposed, ultimately, as a bit short and a bit hollow, its up front nuances pleasing, but going nowhere fast. Still, if it winds up a bit simple and short, it shows very well in some respects and is very pleasing to drink. 85 points.

1999 Riesling Auslese "Koberner Weisenberg" (Von Schleinitz)
This wine evoked mixed feeling in me. On the one hand, the fruit and sugar produced a confection so attractive and delicious that it was simply irresistible. It is round and sexy, hard to stop drinking. On the other hand, there wasn't much acid perceptible, the structure took a back seat, and the wine seemed soft, a bit modest in the mid-palate impression, and a little too easy.  It certainly didn't feel like a wine that would make old bones or reward cellaring, granting that it is fresh and young tasting.  Call this a lot of fun, if not exactly profound. 91 points.

2000 Riesling Spatlese "Urziger Wurzgarten" (J.J. Christoffel)
In this unheralded vintage, Christoffel made a pretty nice wine. If it sometimes seem a bit modest in the mid-palate, it is still a pleasure to drink, laced with mineral nuances and showing a beautiful balance between acid and sugar. This is drinking well now, and is quite delicious and refined. I could rate this higher still if it did not give some indications that it is a medium to short term wine. 89 points.

 

[Return to Top]

Hungary (except dessert/sparkling)
2003 "Syrah Egri Selection-- Szarkas Teto" (Grof Buttler)
Served blind, I thought this was a nice quaffer, correct, tasty and charming. It lacked depth and finish, though and seemed a bit simple. I'm told this became a cult wine in Hungary, from the Eger (Bull's Blood) wine growing area--but something intended to be more and different. It originally sold for around $6 and then evidently soared to $60 as its reputation increased. It's nice--but $60 is a stretch. 86 points.
 

[Return to Top]

Italy (except dessert/sparkling)

2004 Valpolicella "BG" (Tommaso Bussola)
Very bright, this wine is cheery, but without much lushness. I like the sweetness of the fruit, and the perfume of the wine, but the depth is modest, and this is on the simpler side. The good news is that this is a lower rung entrant, costing only about $16 or so a bottle. 85-87 points.
 

2001 Amarone "BG" (Tommaso Bussola)
Now, this is another story, obviously, than the easy little Valpolicella, above. Ripe and rich, there is power to spare everywhere, announced by some piercing shards of tannin and acid. This is also very rich, though, and packed with sweet, delectable fruit. Its opulence, supported by a stern spine, makes it a pleasure, the proverbial iron fist in velvet glove. Roughly $50 a bottle. 92-94 points.  

2003 Morellino di Scansano (Morisfarms)
Simple cherry fruit starts this off, and then there is an overlay of rather significant tannins on the finish. It is simple but tasty, although it finishes a bit short but for the astringency. I think this will drink well for a short window of time, and then fall off rapidly. For what it is, a $15 wine, it sports a good backbone and some sturdiness. I'll be interested to see if it comes into balance, though. 84-86 points.

2001 Morellino di Scansano Riserva (2001)
Mouthfilling, with big fruit, this is luscious and delectable.  It finishes respectably long, and full of flavor. The tannins here are very refined and ripe, providing a lively feel to the wine, without much astringency. Very tasty.  A good value, priced in the upper $20s.  88-90 points.

2001 Avvoltore (Morrisfarms)
This is a Super Tuscan blend of 75% Sangiovese, 20% Cabernet Sauvignon and 5% Syrah, starts off with a pungent nose. I really liked the fragrance and power of the bouquet. It is full bodied and very ripe, with a beautiful balance between its tannins and fruit. I liked the blackberry nuances, and the general texture of the wine, which rolls smoothly over your palate.   A little over $40 a bottle. 92-94 points.

2000 Barolo "Monprivato" (G. Mascarello)
Running around $65 a bottle, this is a wine that many will love, but that seemed a little too oriented toward structure for me. That said, there is still plenty here to like. It is elegant and graceful, at least until you get to the astringent tannins on the finish. I'm just hoping there is enough mid-palate depth to do a good job of soaking those tannins up. 88-90 points.

1999 Barolo "Monprivato" (G. Mascarello)
Big and powerful, also around $65 a bottle, this shows great structure, but also sweet, flavorful fruit.  The finish is mouthwatering, lively and flavorful. There's a lot of everything going on in this wine. 92-94 points.

2001 "Dicatum" IGT (Fattoria Montellori) QPR Winner
This single vineyard Tuscan wine is 100% Sangiovese. It is big and powerful, with significant tannins. It is tightly wound, and showing it, at the moment, preening with power, but I think there is plenty of nice fruit here. Priced in the mid-$20s, this is a very fine buy in a wine that can age. I want to see the tannins come into balance with the fruit, though. 88-90 points.

2001 "Moro" IGT (Fattoria Montellori) QPR Winner
The "Moro" is a blend of 80% Sangiovese, 10% Cabernet Sauvignon, and 10% Malvasia. It runs a mere $12-$13 or so a bottle, and what a nice buy it is at that price. It is drinking well now, and absolutely delicious, with primary fruit, acid in the back and enough tannins for backbone. Tasty, ripe and succulent. This may not be a long termer, but it is a pleasure to drink right now. 88-90 points.

2003 "Salamartano" IGT (Fattoria Montellori)
This Super Tuscan is 50% each of Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot, and is a Big Boy.  It has tons of stuffing, great depth and lots of tannins to go with it. I think this wine is packed, and a deal at around $28 or so. 90-92 points.

2001 Aglianico del Taburno (Ocone) QPR Winner
Simple and pleasing, there is nonetheless power lurking in the background here. I liked the way the fruit presented itself today, and hopefully the tannins do not overtake it. I would tend to drink this in the shorter term, but it has tannins...the question is whether the fruit keeps up. Still, there is plenty of tasty fruit showing today and I rather enjoyed this. This wine from Campagna runs about $13 a bottle. 85-87 points.

2000 Amarone (Zenato)
This opens sweet, with supple tannins, and some brightness around the edges. There's a bit of a burn, but the sweet fruit ripens and expands, and covers it well. I liked this more and more, the more it sat, although it surely lacked the distinction of the Reserva, below. 89 points.

2000 Amarone Riserva (Zenato)
The nose is powerful and pungent, and the minute you open this, you know there is a LOT going on. It is powerful and opulent, big and rich. It is very deep, and finishes sweet, with a sugary touch. It rounded into form more and more with air, but this powerful, young wine is just a baby, experimenting with the world, and promising more to come. The more it sat, the more powerful it became.  In a very opulent, take no prisoners style, this wine is pretty fine, exuberant and something of an exhibitionist. 95 points.

1998 Amarone "Ambrosan" (Nicolis)
Dark and burnished, this is a very different wine than the Zenato. It has the benefit of a couple of more years in the cellar, but it is much more restrained, and shows a certain dark fruit quality, perhaps plum.  It projects much less power, but has beautiful balance. As it opens and evolves in the glass, the fruit sweetens, and it shows structure. It is ripe and rich, and sweet, too, but its parts meld together beautifully. It seems to drink very well now, and lacks the upside of the Zenato Riserva, but it is arguably more fun to drink tonight. 92 points.
 

1995 Valpolicella Superiore (Dal Forno)
This is not what you would call basic Valpolicella.  It opened flat, powerful, and rather too heady. It seemed tough to like, even though trying hard to make a statement. What it really needed was a lot of air, to smooth out the tannins, and wake up the fruit so it could balance out the acidity and tannins. The acidity level seemed a touch too high.  It evolved beautifully, though, and the fruit got riper and sweeter. I began to like this a lot, but I rather preferred the 2000, below. This wine is not close to being ready.  92+ points.

2000 Valpolicella Superiore (Dal Forno)
Big and powerful, this is tight and tannic, but the tannins are very refined. The fruit opens obvious and delicious, but this goes in almost the opposite direction of the 1995, above, shutting down after its initial evolution, and becoming very gripping on the finish. As with the '95, this is not your basic Valpolicella!  Both of these wines seemed a long way from ready, this one in particular, but I liked the glimpse I got of the fruit here a touch better than on the 1995. 93+ points.

2001 "Fabius" (Ciacci Piccolomini)

This makes a modest first impression, showing a hit of oak, but not much else. It seems a bit dull and simple. The mark of a fine young wine is one that can improve and develop with air, and a couple of hours later this had dramatically improved. The supple tannins and acid gave it a livelier feel, and the fruit seemed sweeter, more able to withstand the gradually integrating oak overlay. This Italian syrah is very new world in style, but tastes pretty nice. 90 points.

2000 Barolo "Campe della Spinetta" (La Spinetta-Rivetti)
Huge, very ripe, and packed, this presented a lot to like, although no one really seemed to like it all that much. In truth, the fruit is remarkably concentrated, and presented in a velvety soft package that is leavened by big tannins on the finish. If that were all, this could get big scores, even if seeming very new-wave-ish for Barolo. There is a ton of oak showing on the wine, though, in a style that made it seem more like Zinfandel than Barolo. All that said, I still rather liked this. It was just tasty, the nose was exuberant and pungent, there was a ton of great fruit. You hope this will calm down with some age, though, because one thing it is not at the moment is reminiscent of Barolo.  This sure won't be a traditionalist's view of Barolo. 90+ points.

1996 Barolo Falletto --white label" (Giacosa)
Tight and gripping, as you might expect, this was not decanted. The tannic finish is astringent and mouth drying, but there is plenty of fruit packed in there before you get there, in a focused, very intense core. This is a beauty whose main problem is that it is just 7-8 years away or so from being ready to begin its plateau of drinkability. Still, there is a lot here, the fruit has fine depth and velvety texture, and  perhaps with long decanting you might take a chance. Or better yet--drink the '97, below.  There is a lot of potential for improvement here. And if you think this is tight--don't even think of opening up '96 red labels. 95+ points.

1997 Barolo "Rocche del Falletto --white label" (Giacosa)
If the '96 is a bit too stern at the moment, this seems a bit too soft, unusually forward for big name Barolo.  It was a pleasure to drink, to be sure, showing spicy, ripe tannins, and beautiful, succulent fruit, that seemed wide open (but wasn't quite). Still, it also seemed a touch too soft. I was happy to see that some two hours later tannins were emerging and this had more of a backbone than I thought it did initially. After all, the '97s may be ripe, but this is still Barolo and still Giacosa, and not exactly cheap wine. Alas, as this was expanding and entering a new stage, it was gone not long after. I guess people liked it well enough.  94 points.

1998 Barolo "Bric del Fiasc" (Scavino)

This, like the La Spinetta, above, is new wave Barolo, but considerably calmer and better balanced. The extra two years of cellar time may have something to do with that, too. The fruit is sweet and flavorful, the tannins are ripe and refined.  Although it does have some oak-induced roundness, unless you are really an oak-a-phobe, this seems judicious and well used for its style. The wine in fact has a rather charming, gentle feel to it, although there is a wakeup call at the end in the form of those familiar Barolo tannins. This is very pleasing, and graceful in many respects, and drinking rather nicely now. It is certainly a lot more approachable than most Barolos. 92 points.

2001 La Grola IGT (Allegrini) QPR Winner
Well priced, this runs under $20 a bottle. Allegrini did do something unusual here, replacing a traditional blending grape (Molinara) with 10% Syrah. There is also 5% Sangiovese, 15% Rondinella and 70% Corvina Veronese. The wine seemed a bit foxy to me, with herbal notes, perhaps some game, and plum nuances. I wasn't entirely fond of the nose. Hoewver, the fruit flavor was delicious, and the wine was bright, its sunny demeanor drilling home the fruit into the palate. There's a lot here to like at the price. 87-89 points.

2001 Palazzo della Torre IGT (Allegrini) QPR Winner
This wine is invariably a QPR winner, showing lots of succulent, tasty fruit in a package generally running around $17 or so. This incarnation shows fresh, grapey fruit, that has an easy, friendly feel. However, there is some structure here, and the wine has a bit of a bite on the finish. Simply a good value, year-in, year-out. 87-89 points.

2000 La Poja IGT (Allegrini)
This unusual Veneto wine is a single varietal (Corvina Veronese) from a single parcel of the La Grola vineyard (see the "La Grola" note above, and it has made me a fan of Corvina in many vintages. Allegrini says that this is the perfect terroir for this varietal. They seem to be making their case. This 2000 has beautiful fruit, sweet, nuanced with plums, darker notes. It is a touch grapey and exuberant at the moment, but this has the structure to hold, considering the big tannins on the end. Still, I think this would be quite approachable now. This is priced for current release and distribution in the low $40s, which is very reasonable for a wine of this quality and individuality. 91-93 points.

2001 Villa Giona IGT (Allegrini)
Sweet and grapey, this seems a bit funky at times, too. However, the fruit flavor is so tasty and well supported by structure, that it was easy to get past that. This wine combines Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Syrah, making it a Veneto answer to a Super Tuscan. The flavor lingers on the palate, and seems pure and pristine. Delicious. Pricing in the mid $70s hurts, though. 90-92 points.

2000 Amarone Classico (Allegrini)
This is big everywhere, in tannin, fruit and flavor. The fruit is gloriously sweet on the finish, but the firm backbone gives this a very focused and precise demeanor. There is no flab here, and the wine does not have the over-the-top feel some Amarones deliver (for better or worse). The finish is penetrating and respectably long. This has all the earmarks of a vin de garde that will always just plain taste great. Priced in the mid-$60s for current release. 92-94 points.

2000 Taurasi Baiardo (Aminea)
The first vintage of this wine from Campania was in 2000, and Taurasi is the first Southern wine to get a DOCG. So there is "new" all over the place here. This runs in the mid $20s, a reasonable price point. I wasn't necessarily thrilled with the balance here, as there are not only big tannins on the end, but rather prominent shards of acidity. Still, this is a lot of power for a wine in this price range, and with further cellaring and/or some air, it might improve and develop some harmony. At the moment, it is a little too disjointed and sharp, and I'm not convinced it is going anyplace really good. 85-87 points.

2001 Aglianico Monsignore IGT (Aminea)
Around $17 a bottle, this 100% Aglianico is bright, even a bit tart. It has good fruit underneath, but it is obscured by its structural components. When this settles down, it should be a respectable drink, but I doubt it will be anything more than an every day quaffer. 84-86 points.

2003 Isola dei Nuraghi IGT "Perdera Vineyard"(Argiolas) QPR Winner
This is 90% Monica, a Southern grape most people don't know. If you don't know Argiolas, a great value producer in Sardinia, though, you really should. This is a nice value at under $13 a bottle. It is fruity and fresh, soft but exuberant. It is a bit simple and unstructured, and meant for drinking near term. Enjoy it for its supple demeanor and fruity flavors. 86-88 points.

2003 Costera IGT (Argiolas) QPR Winner
One of my favorite value wines in most years, this is 90% Cannonau, the rest equally divided between Bovale Sardo and Carignano, as with the Perdera, above. This takes the fruit flavor of the Perdera, but adds structure and a certain serious mien to it. The finish has some penetrating qualities, too. It retains the delectable and soft fruit, and drinks beautifully. Drink young-ish. Around $13.50 a bottle, and for the extra few pennies, a better wine than the Perdera. 87-89 points.

2002 Korem IGT (Argiolas)
This winery doesn't just do cheap. With this bottling, the prices begin to rise, this coming in around $40 a bottle, and 55% Bovale Sardo, 35% Carignano and the rest Cannonau.  It is certainly richer and fuller than the Costera. It has more depth and concentration, a beautiful mouthfeel and some welcome tannins to permit graceful aging. It is nicely structured and nicely packed in the mid-palate. For the short term, i.e., now, you'll like the Costera as well or better. 89-91 points.

2001 Turriga IGT (Argiolas)
This is 85% Cannonau, with a bunch of other local grapes mixed in, from the "Turriga" vineyard. I've never warmed up to Turriga, for some reason. This has many things to recommend it, being bright and lively, with a focused, precise nature. It has good depth, too. However, it also seems to have some bell pepper notes that I did not particularly care for. I liked the Korem better--but this is much higher priced, hitting the mid-$60s. Very nice, but I am frankly underwhelmed. Although this has a depth and class that the Costera obviously does not, I could be just as happy drinking the new Costera every year. 88-90 points.

2004 Merlot Pesano IGT (Falesco) QPR Winner
"Pesano" is Falesco's new branding in 2004 for its basic Merlot, and the '04 is a beauty. Traditionally one of the great values in wine-dom, the price of this looks to run around $15 this year, a bit of an uptick. Still, this is just lovely, featuring waves of sweet fruit, in a beautifully balanced wine that is a pleasure to drink. This is a short to mid-term wine, but while it is at peak, it is going to be delicious. 88-90 points.

2001 Montiano IGT (Falesco) QPR Winner
Falesco's flagship Merlot from Lazio is terrific in this vintage. It is rich and full bodied, with some dusty tannins on the end. It is beautifully structured and balanced, showing grip, penetration, and a tight focus, as well as succulent fruit. I liked this a lot. Around $43 a bottle, and worth every nickel, but I have actually seen some stores with this on sale for $29.99--a steal.  92-94 points.

2001 Marciliano IGT (Falesco)
70% Cab Sauvignon and the rest Cab Franc, this runs in the low $50s. I liked the Montiano better, though.  This is smooth and sensual, with ripe fruit obvious on the attack, and tannins in the back. Nicely structured, the backbone supports a certain richness to the mid-palate that I rather liked a lot. Suave, gripping and very nice. 91-93 points.

1999 Brunello di Montalcino (Ucelleria)
This opens with a bit of funk, earthy on the nose and a little gamey. That blows off, though, and what the wine otherwise promised--great depth--is a promise fulfilled in spades. The mid-palate is deep and layered, and the wine's only flaw seems to be lack of a backbone. Forty-five minutes of air cures that, and this wine shows considerable tannins at the end. It is powerful, intense, focused and complex, with fine depth and a lingering finish.  This improved and expanded for every second I had it. Exceptional, and one of the deepest, tastiest Brunellos I've had in awhile, this should cellar very well, too.  It is approachable now, but needs an hour of air to show what it has.   95 points.

1997 Chianti Riserva (Montevertine)
Friendly and charming, this opens bright and spicy, but a little simple and short. It expanded with air, putting on some badly needed weight, and adding some flavor, to the point where I rather enjoyed it. This is a wine that to me should be drunk now or in the near future. It remains a bit short and at times seems a bit too elegant, but it drinks well at the moment. 89 points.

2003 Nebbiolo d'Alba (Giacosa)
For Nebbiolo d'Alba, this comes in at a striking $390 or so a case, so it had better be a step or two better than the generic red that often comes labeled like this. It is in fact very good. It is certainly about as powerful as any Nebbiolo d'Alba you will have, although the tannins here seem riper and will ameliorate faster than with, say, typical Big Boy Barolos. There is excellent depth and quality of fruit, and certain round mouthfeel I liked.  This wine would do better with a little cellaring, but will come around quickly, and should hold remarkably well for Nebbiolo d'Alba.  I could see this still drinking very nicely in 2013. 89-91 points.

2001 Barbaresco "Santo Stefano" (Giacosa)
This burly wine has a lot of power on the finish, and ends astringent. It seems to have some richness in the mid-palate but is understandably tannin dominated at the moment. Its richness kind of sneaks up on you, though, as it sits in the mouth. Ripe and sensual, but likely to meet some resistance at $160 a bottle. 91-93 points.

1998 Barbaresco "Gallina" (Giacosa)
Laced with almonds and nuts, this seems to be showing tertiary notes, and seems a touch more mature than you would expect from the vintage date. The texture projects a certain warm feel to the wine that has nothing to do with heat, more like something familiar and reassuring that you might drink by the hearth with game. That said, this didn't seem to me to have the focus or distinction I looked for, and the price is awfully high, around $105 a bottle. This seems to be coming around soon, and approachable now. I liked this better than the '98 Santo Stefano, below, but neither showed well, and it was an underwhelming performance for this duo. 88-90 points.

1998 Barbaresco "Santo Stefano" (Giacosa)
This seemed so old from this bottle that I asked that a second be opened. The second was better, but not impressive in any way. The wine seems to be maturing fast, losing color, and throwing off waves of tertiary notes. If I didn't know better, I would've thought this was a lot older. It certainly seems to be approachable now, earthy and nuanced with forest floor and leaves. Two bottles opened with a professional representative present. It just seems too far along too fast. I liked the Nebbiolo better than this--so that gives you a clue as to how disappointed I was. 87-89 points.

1999 Barolo (Giacosa)
This basic Barolo (if basic Barolo is $105 a bottle), shows very well. It is pure power at first, and it is hard to find the fruit. Then, it reverses, and the tannins become harder to find. It could use a few years to settle down, needless to say. The finish is excellent, with good acidity driving home the fruit. Lively, and tasty. 91-93 points.

2001 Barolo "Falletto" (2001)

At about $150 a bottle, this has to deliver, and does. Full bodied, packed and dense, this nonetheless has beautiful balance, with firm tannins, a sensual mouthfeel, and  a long, superb finish. Tasty, well structured and aromatic, this looks to me to be a big winner. 94-96 points.

2003 Colli di Salerno Rosso IGT (Montevetrano)
This is 60% Cabernet Sauvignon, 30% Merlot and 10% Aglianico. This is beautifully done. The nose is redolent of raspberries, and is powerful and appealing. The wine has a soft, velvety texture, but there are significant tannins on the finish to wake this up. It seems impeccably balanced, and very tasty, with a nice, ripe mid-palate supported by tannic backbone. I think this will drink well on the younger side, but it needs a couple of years to settle down and harmonize. The only problem here is the price, which in this vintage looks to be hitting around $85 a bottle. 91-93 points.

2002 Nero d'Avola Riserva "Don Antonio" IGT (Morgante)
This is a big, exuberant wine, with lots of tannins on the end. Its structure seems superb, not the least because it supports a concentrated mid-palate, and the wine has focus as well as depth.  This is often my favorite Sicilian wine, and it does not disappoint in this vintage, which was very troublesome for other areas in Italy. 91-93 points.

2003 Sondraia (Poggio al Tesoro)
This Tuscan wine is a joint venture between Allegrini in Veneto and well known importer Leonardo Locascio. It consists of a Bordeaux blend: 65% Cabernet Sauvignon, 25% Merlot, 10% Cab Franc. Retail pricing was not available at the time tasted. It shows beautiful red berry fruit flavors, and as it expands, seems like classic Cabernet Sauvignon, which plainly dominates. Well structured, with good focus, it seems both flavorful and balanced, and likely to be very appealing for mid-term drinking. 90-92 points.

2002 Merlot Rosso IGT (Redigaffi)
This famed Merlot, running over $100 a bottle, shows remarkably well in this difficult vintage when one sees "2002" and "Tuscany" and flinches. I thought it was superb. Full bodied and rich, there is a great finish, driving home the fruit flavors. It seems gorgeous at a very young age, the only question being whether that is a bad sign, presaging a wine that will not hold well. I did not have time to air this out.  Nonetheless, its concentration and ripeness speak well of its performance in this vintage, and they obviously tried very hard to justify their cult wine status. 92-94 points.

1995 Brunello di Montalcino "La Casa" (Tenuta Caparzo)
Dusty tannins dominate this wine that is short of fruit, and rather thin. It shows off some simple notes of dried, cherry fruit, that makes you think it is slightly older than it is. Earthy and short, it opens a little, goes nowhere fast and seems a bit hollow. Even when the tannins moderate a bit, it seems charmless and austere, the fruit hard to find. 84 points.

1997 Brunello di Montalcino (Mastroianni)
This opens with an explosive nose, promising ripe, savory fruit. You could smell this from a foot or two away, perhaps the most powerful nose I've ever had on a Brunello. The fruit is sweet and ripe, with a certain darker note, perhaps a hint of plum. The mid-palate is solid. As it airs out, though, you find not a fruit bomb, but a wine with beautiful supporting structure that develops more complex nuances. The ripe tannins give it a lively feel and some intensity. The more air it has, the more charming it becomes. Drinking well now. 93 points.

1998 Brunello di Montalcino (Friggiali)
If the Mastroianni was ripe, this goes a few steps further to the point where I was thinking it was a bit overripe. It is certainly rich and opulent, with chocolatey notes. The fruit is succulent and very sweet. This is not a "structure" wine, but there are soft tannins on the finish and some acidity, too, enough to prevent it from seeming odd and flabby.  It resolves into a very appealing wine that, if not entirely profound, is entirely delectable. I liked this a bit less as it aired out, but it certainly had its moments. Drink young. 90 points.

1999 Brunello di Montalcino "Pianrosso" (Ciacci Piccolomini)
This is tight and a bit closed at the moment, opening smooth and bright, with reticent, albeit primary fruit. Aeration did this a world of good, as it put on some needed weight, and the fruit woke up. The brightness of the wine made the fruit flavors linger on the palate, but it is not quite fully awake yet. I'd say this is approachable now, but it is not ready, and will drink better around 2009. 92+ points.

1995 Brunello di Montalcino "Montosoli" (Altesino)
The nose is game and one suspects....brett. The texture is smooth, but it seems a bit short at first. Time and air helps the gamey notes blow off, and big, dense, concentrated fruit emerges. The mid-palate is dense, and this wine's mid-palate concentration is a  big plus. Combined with the sensual texture, the core of fruit coats the palate with velvet. This was a slow starter, but I liked it more and more as time went on. I could've done without the funky notes.  93 points.


 

[Return to Top]

Loire (except dessert/sparkling)
2003 Chinon "Poplinières" (Olga Raffault) QPR Winner
D