I’ve been trying to give Cali wines a chance. Honestly I have. But with the exception of some wines from the Russian river valley, I haven’t been having too terribly much luck. Alas dear readers, the wine we are reviewing for you tonight again drives me back to the old world, forever forcing me to besmirch the good name of wineries in California along the way.
The Dry Creek Heritage Zinfandel reminds me of too many movies that are coming out these days. You watch the trailer (smell the wine) are intrigued and excited by what they have shown you (the nose is strong and vibrant, promising unspeakable heights of wineology). And, as such, lured to the theater (actually having a glass), where it suddenly seems flat and two dimensional, as if they somehow managed to edit down the only good parts of the movie for the trailer (or…the nose was the only noteworthy part of the wine).
The problem for me is that it's not bad per say, but rather it's boring. The nose is fantastic, lush, ripe, and promising of delights, but the wine itself is a bit flat and forgettable. The steak we had perked it up a bit, but in all honesty, that was probably just the joy from a solid well cooked bone-in NY strip elevating the wine. In remarking on it, probably the most telling statement was when I looked at Kerri and said “this wine doesn’t even have the decency to punch you in the mouth with fruit like the rest of its west coast brethren”.
All and all, I am going to give this one a pass. At $15-20 there are much better wines out there to go have (and much better Zinfandels for that matter (Redemption Zin…I am looking in your general direction).
Meh.
Showing posts with label California. Show all posts
Showing posts with label California. Show all posts
Saturday, October 9, 2010
2007 Dry Creek Vineyard Heritage Zinfandel
The facts:
2007 Dry Creek Vineyard Heritage Zinfandel
Region: Sonoma County, California
Variety: 87% Zinfandel, 13% Petite Syrah
Aging: 9 months in American and French oak (39% new oak)
(photo courtesy of www.drycreekvineyard.com)
My take:
Given that this is a California Zin, I expected it to be big and bold – and it delivered (though not in a punch you in the mouth kind of way). I also liked it more than I expected, given my penchant for old world style wines.
The wine looks dark red in the glass. It smells spicy and big with hints of green pepper on the nose. I’d say it smells dark red to purple. It pretty much tastes the same way – dark red to purple. It’s big up front with a good bit of spiciness in the middle. And it’s definitely dry. It’s drier and spicier if you pull air over it.
We tasted this wine with a small range of cheeses and red meat, all of which changed the character of the wine to varying extents. A reserve gouda (not particularly aged or smoked) completely erased the spice and the complexity of the wine. I thought the gouda made the wine dull and rather creamy in texture. A manchego dulled the spice a bit (not completely) and made the flavor much more grapey (read purple). Finally (my favorite with this wine), a garlic and spice boursin mellowed the dryness, but still left you with a range of flavors and a good bit of spice in the middle. And the wine was quite good with red meat. The effect of the red meat was similar to the boursin, for me.
Somewhat to my surprise, I rather enjoyed this wine and would definitely have it again.
Price point: An internet search found this one anywhere from $12.99 to $19.49.
2007 Dry Creek Vineyard Heritage Zinfandel
Region: Sonoma County, California
Variety: 87% Zinfandel, 13% Petite Syrah
Aging: 9 months in American and French oak (39% new oak)
(photo courtesy of www.drycreekvineyard.com)
My take:
Given that this is a California Zin, I expected it to be big and bold – and it delivered (though not in a punch you in the mouth kind of way). I also liked it more than I expected, given my penchant for old world style wines.
The wine looks dark red in the glass. It smells spicy and big with hints of green pepper on the nose. I’d say it smells dark red to purple. It pretty much tastes the same way – dark red to purple. It’s big up front with a good bit of spiciness in the middle. And it’s definitely dry. It’s drier and spicier if you pull air over it.
We tasted this wine with a small range of cheeses and red meat, all of which changed the character of the wine to varying extents. A reserve gouda (not particularly aged or smoked) completely erased the spice and the complexity of the wine. I thought the gouda made the wine dull and rather creamy in texture. A manchego dulled the spice a bit (not completely) and made the flavor much more grapey (read purple). Finally (my favorite with this wine), a garlic and spice boursin mellowed the dryness, but still left you with a range of flavors and a good bit of spice in the middle. And the wine was quite good with red meat. The effect of the red meat was similar to the boursin, for me.
Somewhat to my surprise, I rather enjoyed this wine and would definitely have it again.
Price point: An internet search found this one anywhere from $12.99 to $19.49.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
2005 Surfrider Red - reviewed by Kerri
The facts:
2005 Surfrider Red
Region: Malibu Newton Canyon, California
Variety: 73% Merlot, 26% Cabernet Sauvignon, 1% Petit Verdot
Aging: French oak, 18 months
Winemaker: Christian Roguenant
My take:
Upon first pour, the wine was rather red and smelled red-pink. A full glass looks purplish and smells a little jammy.
The first sip was rather surprising. I didn’t get that full, in your face, jammy sip of a California wine that I was expecting. On the contrary, it is more mellow than what I normally expect from a California wine. After reading about the wine and the winemaker at the Rosenthal Estate website, it's not that surprising. The winemaker lived in Burgundy for some time and the wine is aged only in French oak. (For reference, I make it a practice not to read anything about the wine before I taste and draft my review. I don't want to be biased or unduly influenced by what I read prior to writing my review.)
I’d call this one a good sipping wine.
I find it to be medium bodied with a nice mouth-feel. It’s not too dry (though it’s more so if you pull some air over it), but it’s also not very creamy. It’s somewhere in the middle. Very nicely balanced. The downside to this wine is fairly short and you’re not going to get a huge amount of complexity from it. Like I said..., a good sipping wine.
Price point:
$24-$29
Frankly, though I think this is a nice wine, it’s too short and not complex enough in my opinion to warrant that price tag. $15..., sure. $30...,nope. (We must have gotten this one through wine club or as a gift.) That being said, the label says, "For each bottle purchased, a donation is made to the Surfrider Foundation, a grassroots, non-profit, environmental organization that works to protect our oceans, waves, and beaches."
Hey wait, does that mean my wine tonight is tax deductible? ;)
2005 Surfrider Red
Region: Malibu Newton Canyon, California
Variety: 73% Merlot, 26% Cabernet Sauvignon, 1% Petit Verdot
Aging: French oak, 18 months
Winemaker: Christian Roguenant
My take:
Upon first pour, the wine was rather red and smelled red-pink. A full glass looks purplish and smells a little jammy.
The first sip was rather surprising. I didn’t get that full, in your face, jammy sip of a California wine that I was expecting. On the contrary, it is more mellow than what I normally expect from a California wine. After reading about the wine and the winemaker at the Rosenthal Estate website, it's not that surprising. The winemaker lived in Burgundy for some time and the wine is aged only in French oak. (For reference, I make it a practice not to read anything about the wine before I taste and draft my review. I don't want to be biased or unduly influenced by what I read prior to writing my review.)
I’d call this one a good sipping wine.
I find it to be medium bodied with a nice mouth-feel. It’s not too dry (though it’s more so if you pull some air over it), but it’s also not very creamy. It’s somewhere in the middle. Very nicely balanced. The downside to this wine is fairly short and you’re not going to get a huge amount of complexity from it. Like I said..., a good sipping wine.
Price point:
$24-$29
Frankly, though I think this is a nice wine, it’s too short and not complex enough in my opinion to warrant that price tag. $15..., sure. $30...,nope. (We must have gotten this one through wine club or as a gift.) That being said, the label says, "For each bottle purchased, a donation is made to the Surfrider Foundation, a grassroots, non-profit, environmental organization that works to protect our oceans, waves, and beaches."
Hey wait, does that mean my wine tonight is tax deductible? ;)
2005 Surfrider Red
Surfrider!
Yes, you did indeed read correctly. I just had a wine called Surfrider. Normally, the mere name would knock it off my radar, and my wine fridge as I (a) have an aversion to wines with stupid names, and (b) an aversion to wines with stupid labels. However, that being said, every month I get two bottles of random wine in the mail, and apparently they have a better sense of humor than I do (or a love of variety...but hey...details right?), which would indicate how this whole affair came to be.
Sidebar – Note to wineries
Labels with funny pictures, or strange logos, or pictures of cats, or Studabakers with a surfboard coming out are unlikely to sway me into purchasing your wine. I don’t like surfing, I like California even less, and while I do adore kitties I suspect they would get in the way of my wine glass, and thus might detract from the drinking experience. Pro Tip: Include the grapes, their percentage and the amount of time your wine was in oak, the wines name, and your name. Nothing else is necessary.
That out of the way, Surfrider came to us by way of our wine club. It espouses to be a Californian Bordeaux wine (by varietal composition). The wine comes out in a rich red color, and a slightly fruity nose, and while I don’t normally get into this sort of thing, its chock full of cherry. It’s a good competent wine, and it’s well made, and very drinkable. The balance is nice and the tannin level is near perfect. It’s really just a bit one note for me. It’s pleasant, well mannered and tasty. It is also lacking in anything vaguely akin to soul. The wine is devoid of any personality or interest past being a delightful beverage.
Bottom line: It’s tasty, I’m going to drink it, and marvel at how well balanced it is, but for the $25 price I’m going for a Reserva Malbec, or Rhone wine.
Yes, you did indeed read correctly. I just had a wine called Surfrider. Normally, the mere name would knock it off my radar, and my wine fridge as I (a) have an aversion to wines with stupid names, and (b) an aversion to wines with stupid labels. However, that being said, every month I get two bottles of random wine in the mail, and apparently they have a better sense of humor than I do (or a love of variety...but hey...details right?), which would indicate how this whole affair came to be.
Sidebar – Note to wineries
Labels with funny pictures, or strange logos, or pictures of cats, or Studabakers with a surfboard coming out are unlikely to sway me into purchasing your wine. I don’t like surfing, I like California even less, and while I do adore kitties I suspect they would get in the way of my wine glass, and thus might detract from the drinking experience. Pro Tip: Include the grapes, their percentage and the amount of time your wine was in oak, the wines name, and your name. Nothing else is necessary.
That out of the way, Surfrider came to us by way of our wine club. It espouses to be a Californian Bordeaux wine (by varietal composition). The wine comes out in a rich red color, and a slightly fruity nose, and while I don’t normally get into this sort of thing, its chock full of cherry. It’s a good competent wine, and it’s well made, and very drinkable. The balance is nice and the tannin level is near perfect. It’s really just a bit one note for me. It’s pleasant, well mannered and tasty. It is also lacking in anything vaguely akin to soul. The wine is devoid of any personality or interest past being a delightful beverage.
Bottom line: It’s tasty, I’m going to drink it, and marvel at how well balanced it is, but for the $25 price I’m going for a Reserva Malbec, or Rhone wine.
Monday, October 19, 2009
2005 Concannon Limited Reserve Petite Sirah
The facts:
2005 Concannon Limited Release Petite Sirah
Region: Central Coast, California
Winemaker: Adam Richardson
Variety: Petite Sirah
This wine is one of our regular stand-bys. We almost always have it on hand and drink it pretty often. We first tasted it at the DC International Wine & Food Festival a couple of years ago. We wandered by a table that was tasting wines from Big House and Concannon. The guy who was pouring the wine told us the Big House wines are more popular, but we liked the Concannon Limited Release Petite Sirah better than the Big House wines. And yes, that is a mouthful (no pun intended). I’m saying “Limited Release Petite Sirah” deliberately because the Concannon winery makes more than one petite sirah. The Limited Release one is the only one we’ve tried, but they also produce a Reserve Petite Sirah and a Heritage Petite Sirah. I’m also deliberately spelling it the way they spell it – makes it easier for you to find online, should you be searching for it.
At the time, when we first tasted it, neither of us could believe there was actually a California wine that we enjoyed. Now, that could have had something to do with the amount of wine we had already consumed that day, so when we saw it at the grocery store (yes folks, even Safeway carries it), we decided to give it another try. And we were pleasantly surprised once again. So we tend to keep it on hand. I’d call it a good sipping wine – not one that requires or demands food.
So here’s my take:
The wine smells dark red, maybe a little purple, with just a bit of the stringent alcohol scent/sensation. Upon sipping, it’s spicy and more complex than I’d expect from a wine in this price range and I think it has a rather long finish. It's on the dry side and I might call this one full-bodied.
As an aside, I’d love to have someone in the industry give me a light-bodied, medium-bodied, and full-bodied wine one after the other so I can feel the difference. Maybe then I'd actually get it. I had an experience like that at the International Wine Expo some years ago, when a pourer perfectly demonstrated for me what oak smells and tastes like. Ever since then I've been able to smell oak on a wine and now I know that I dislike oak aging of white wines – especially American oak. Anyway, back to our regularly scheduled program....
Drinking the LRPS (that’s the texting shorthand for Limited Release Petite Sirah, heheh) with Italian food (red sauce) made it taste a bit more on the purple side than red and made it less dry; kind of mellowed (dulled?) it out a bit. It definitely seems less complex and less spicy after the red sauce.
Price point:
$10 - $14 per bottle
2005 Concannon Limited Release Petite Sirah
Region: Central Coast, California
Winemaker: Adam Richardson
Variety: Petite Sirah
This wine is one of our regular stand-bys. We almost always have it on hand and drink it pretty often. We first tasted it at the DC International Wine & Food Festival a couple of years ago. We wandered by a table that was tasting wines from Big House and Concannon. The guy who was pouring the wine told us the Big House wines are more popular, but we liked the Concannon Limited Release Petite Sirah better than the Big House wines. And yes, that is a mouthful (no pun intended). I’m saying “Limited Release Petite Sirah” deliberately because the Concannon winery makes more than one petite sirah. The Limited Release one is the only one we’ve tried, but they also produce a Reserve Petite Sirah and a Heritage Petite Sirah. I’m also deliberately spelling it the way they spell it – makes it easier for you to find online, should you be searching for it.
At the time, when we first tasted it, neither of us could believe there was actually a California wine that we enjoyed. Now, that could have had something to do with the amount of wine we had already consumed that day, so when we saw it at the grocery store (yes folks, even Safeway carries it), we decided to give it another try. And we were pleasantly surprised once again. So we tend to keep it on hand. I’d call it a good sipping wine – not one that requires or demands food.
So here’s my take:
The wine smells dark red, maybe a little purple, with just a bit of the stringent alcohol scent/sensation. Upon sipping, it’s spicy and more complex than I’d expect from a wine in this price range and I think it has a rather long finish. It's on the dry side and I might call this one full-bodied.
As an aside, I’d love to have someone in the industry give me a light-bodied, medium-bodied, and full-bodied wine one after the other so I can feel the difference. Maybe then I'd actually get it. I had an experience like that at the International Wine Expo some years ago, when a pourer perfectly demonstrated for me what oak smells and tastes like. Ever since then I've been able to smell oak on a wine and now I know that I dislike oak aging of white wines – especially American oak. Anyway, back to our regularly scheduled program....
Drinking the LRPS (that’s the texting shorthand for Limited Release Petite Sirah, heheh) with Italian food (red sauce) made it taste a bit more on the purple side than red and made it less dry; kind of mellowed (dulled?) it out a bit. It definitely seems less complex and less spicy after the red sauce.
Price point:
$10 - $14 per bottle
2005 Concannon Limited Reserve Petite Syrah
So I have a dirty little secret. It weighs on me heavily at times, and today is the day that I free myself from its crushing weight. Given that, I think perhaps its best to just put it out there before I go on.
Our house/table wine is Californian and I love it dearly.
Yes…yes… I know it may come as a shock, and I can certainly understand why it does. I spend more time talking shit about Californian wines than I do writing sonnets about French ones. And while I am sure this admission will bring jeers, this wine is certainly worth enduring the mockery that comes from my love affair with a left coast wine. That being said, we ran into this wine as the DC International Wine Expo a couple of years ago, and to this date I don’t think any wine we have had at a large venue tasting has had such a a lasting impact on me. It’s the Concannon Limited Release Petite Syrah, and I think its wonderful.
There I said it. Its like a weight has been lifted from me.
The gentleman who was pouring it was pushing the distributing wine group's Big House series of jail themed wines (true story….) and mentioned that the Concannon was the lesser known “off brand” (As a slight tangent, I cant think of anything that makes less sense than jail themed wines other than say….a Wookie on Endor, but hey, they do silly things out in Cali so who am I to judge). As you would expect the big house wines sucked being single note, huge and jammy as is the coin that Californian wines typically trade in. It was this off brand however that really did capture my attention, and I dare say undying devotion. The moniker off brand does this wine a great disservice, but hey, that’s how it was presented.
First and foremost it’s a Petite Syrah. For those of you not in the wine industry, a Petite Syrah is basically like a Syrah (or Shiraz) that doesn’t suck….or maybe I am just editorializing a tad. Regardless, the wine is a rich red tending more towards the purple, and the nose is fruity and light. The flavor is where it shines for me. I find it incredibly soft on the palette, so much so, in fact, that you can fill your mouth with wine holding it there without a hint of tannins or alcohol, simply meditating on the soothing blend of soft complexity. With air pulled across said mouthful, again we are treated to a dizzyingly complex array of flavors and aromas without the least hint of overbearing tannins. The complexity, the softness, and ease with which this wine goes about it's busniss all belie its modest price tag, and are what make it shine in otherwise crowded wine racks.
For the record I am well aware that I am swooning over a $13 wine. Did I mention the price? While not a dollar twice (but granting, that the reaction is indeed satisfaction) the Concannon is a steal. It’s widely available, and infinitely drinkable, and for those nights that you want a glass (or three) of wine and don’t feel like getting into something new you cant beat it. It’s also widely available, finding its home in most reputable wine shops, as well as grocery stores.
I love it, and don’t think I have had more bottles of any single wine other than this one. Which makes sense, because if I had the same number of bottles of $30 bottles of wine, I would need to force Kerri to get a second job. To summarize, you are unlikely to find a wine of the complexity and character in this price range. And if by some miracle you did manage to make that happen, it’s likely that you would be telling me about it when you showed me your pictures of the Loch Ness Monster, Leprechauns and Big foot.
Run out to buy a bottle or six now.
Our house/table wine is Californian and I love it dearly.
Yes…yes… I know it may come as a shock, and I can certainly understand why it does. I spend more time talking shit about Californian wines than I do writing sonnets about French ones. And while I am sure this admission will bring jeers, this wine is certainly worth enduring the mockery that comes from my love affair with a left coast wine. That being said, we ran into this wine as the DC International Wine Expo a couple of years ago, and to this date I don’t think any wine we have had at a large venue tasting has had such a a lasting impact on me. It’s the Concannon Limited Release Petite Syrah, and I think its wonderful.
There I said it. Its like a weight has been lifted from me.
The gentleman who was pouring it was pushing the distributing wine group's Big House series of jail themed wines (true story….) and mentioned that the Concannon was the lesser known “off brand” (As a slight tangent, I cant think of anything that makes less sense than jail themed wines other than say….a Wookie on Endor, but hey, they do silly things out in Cali so who am I to judge). As you would expect the big house wines sucked being single note, huge and jammy as is the coin that Californian wines typically trade in. It was this off brand however that really did capture my attention, and I dare say undying devotion. The moniker off brand does this wine a great disservice, but hey, that’s how it was presented.
First and foremost it’s a Petite Syrah. For those of you not in the wine industry, a Petite Syrah is basically like a Syrah (or Shiraz) that doesn’t suck….or maybe I am just editorializing a tad. Regardless, the wine is a rich red tending more towards the purple, and the nose is fruity and light. The flavor is where it shines for me. I find it incredibly soft on the palette, so much so, in fact, that you can fill your mouth with wine holding it there without a hint of tannins or alcohol, simply meditating on the soothing blend of soft complexity. With air pulled across said mouthful, again we are treated to a dizzyingly complex array of flavors and aromas without the least hint of overbearing tannins. The complexity, the softness, and ease with which this wine goes about it's busniss all belie its modest price tag, and are what make it shine in otherwise crowded wine racks.
For the record I am well aware that I am swooning over a $13 wine. Did I mention the price? While not a dollar twice (but granting, that the reaction is indeed satisfaction) the Concannon is a steal. It’s widely available, and infinitely drinkable, and for those nights that you want a glass (or three) of wine and don’t feel like getting into something new you cant beat it. It’s also widely available, finding its home in most reputable wine shops, as well as grocery stores.
I love it, and don’t think I have had more bottles of any single wine other than this one. Which makes sense, because if I had the same number of bottles of $30 bottles of wine, I would need to force Kerri to get a second job. To summarize, you are unlikely to find a wine of the complexity and character in this price range. And if by some miracle you did manage to make that happen, it’s likely that you would be telling me about it when you showed me your pictures of the Loch Ness Monster, Leprechauns and Big foot.
Run out to buy a bottle or six now.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
2007 Il Cuore Rosso Classico
The facts:
2007 Il Cuore Rosso Classico
Region: Mendocino, California
Winemaker: Dennis Patton
Variety: 51% Syrah, 26% Zinfandel, 12% Sangiovese, 6% Carignane, 5% Merlot
Aging: “Modest oak barrel” aging according to their website
This wine is all about mixed messages for me. The label leads me to be skeptical.
I have a hard time taking wine seriously, when it has kitschy things on the label (like the hearts, cats, etc.). But this is a blend of Syrah, Zin, Sangiovese, Carignane (for some reason in California, they add an E on the end), and Merlot. I usually like a red blend, so that led me to be hopeful.
My take:
It looks purple in the glass and upon seeing it, we both remarked, “Well this is a California wine.” It smells purpley-black to me.
The wine is big up front and a bit of spicy in the middle, but more so if you’ve pulled air over it. If you’re just sipping it, the middle kind of falls flat. It has a rather long finish (maybe 10 to 15 seconds) – longer than I’d like, actually because I’m not a huge fan of the taste.
It tastes the same way it smells – purpley-black; almost like dull blackberries, as if they were not tart or sweet, but bland. Because it's a California wine, I expected a more intense flavor, but didn’t really get it. And then the finish is a bit gray.
I’d call it medium bodied and not dry.
Now, all that being said, I went and read up on the wine after tasting and describing it. Turns out Il Cuore is Italian for “the heart” and is a tribute to the Italian immigrants who first planted grape vines in Northern California. Sheds a bit of light on the label, which was designed by Dan Rizzie, a cubist artist. All that is well and good, but it doesn’t make me like the wine any better. It’s just not my style. (I did mention at the outset of this endeavor that I’m biased toward old world style wines.)
If you like California-style wines, you might enjoy this. I read other reviews that indicated this embodies a Northern California wine.
Price point:
$10 - $13 per bottle
2007 Il Cuore Rosso Classico
Region: Mendocino, California
Winemaker: Dennis Patton
Variety: 51% Syrah, 26% Zinfandel, 12% Sangiovese, 6% Carignane, 5% Merlot
Aging: “Modest oak barrel” aging according to their website
This wine is all about mixed messages for me. The label leads me to be skeptical.
I have a hard time taking wine seriously, when it has kitschy things on the label (like the hearts, cats, etc.). But this is a blend of Syrah, Zin, Sangiovese, Carignane (for some reason in California, they add an E on the end), and Merlot. I usually like a red blend, so that led me to be hopeful.
My take:
It looks purple in the glass and upon seeing it, we both remarked, “Well this is a California wine.” It smells purpley-black to me.
The wine is big up front and a bit of spicy in the middle, but more so if you’ve pulled air over it. If you’re just sipping it, the middle kind of falls flat. It has a rather long finish (maybe 10 to 15 seconds) – longer than I’d like, actually because I’m not a huge fan of the taste.
It tastes the same way it smells – purpley-black; almost like dull blackberries, as if they were not tart or sweet, but bland. Because it's a California wine, I expected a more intense flavor, but didn’t really get it. And then the finish is a bit gray.
I’d call it medium bodied and not dry.
Now, all that being said, I went and read up on the wine after tasting and describing it. Turns out Il Cuore is Italian for “the heart” and is a tribute to the Italian immigrants who first planted grape vines in Northern California. Sheds a bit of light on the label, which was designed by Dan Rizzie, a cubist artist. All that is well and good, but it doesn’t make me like the wine any better. It’s just not my style. (I did mention at the outset of this endeavor that I’m biased toward old world style wines.)
If you like California-style wines, you might enjoy this. I read other reviews that indicated this embodies a Northern California wine.
Price point:
$10 - $13 per bottle
2007 Il Cuore Rosso Classico
They say packaging is important, that it can draw you in and make you want to purchase or try a product. Or…. if you are me, it also has the possibility to make you completely discount a product and write it off entirely. Meet my friend Il Cuore. They decided to jazz up their label and put hearts all over the bottle. I'd say I'm not sure why, but the sheet we got with wine club went into detail about it, and its a bunch of crap that some clod in marketing wrote to try and justify it...or they are just chumps. True story. We aren’t talking about just one heart here, there are no less than 5 hearts on the bottle, the foil is even emblazoned with a heart. Awwww…. how precious. Gee…. maybe the hearts will prompt me to pick it for a romantic occasion OR maybe they will warm my black heart and get me all sentimental. Or more likely they will give me yet another reason to talk shit about Californian wines and reinforce my theory that they are, by and large, so devoid of character that they need to resort to clever packaging to ever have a chance of leaving the shelf when there are French, Spanish, or Italian wines in stock.
Ok…I feel better now. Or not. Hearts people…. Seriously? Why not just put a kitten on there? Or an Alien! With Lasers! And a robot. Now, that my friend, is a wine I would buy just because of the label! I should note I did, in fact, once buy a wine called Nostradamus, because A. It came in a clay jug, and B. It's named Nostradamus, and who isn’t going to buy an Eastern European wine named after the premier soothsayer of our time. I’m not sure that’s a good thing to admit but it’s neither here nor there.
On the plus side it’s a blend, weighing in with a good 51% Syrah 26% Zinfandel and 12% Sangiovese. Now I likes me some blends, and if anything can save a Cali wine, its going to be mixing some grapes together. And it works here for the most part.
Poured, the wine splashes into the glass with a warm purple-red hue. Its rich and dark and when swirled clings longingly to the side of the glass. The nose comes off a bit grapey for me but surprisingly low on the alcohol aroma. I wouldn’t call the aroma particularly complex, one good sniff and swirl and you can pretty much get its full measure.
Time to taste.
Gut reaction:
The wine deserves a better label. It doesn’t really suck badly enough to be festooned with brick brack and a cubist doily for a label. I found the syrah to give it a nice soft base on the pallet with the zinfandel punching it up and providing some wow factor (I’d note, that wow factor for me is typically unnecessary and generally what I dislike about Californian wines, I prefer them subtle). I don’t quite know what the Sangiovese is adding, but I found the wine to be balanced and there was no flavor or aroma that was glaringly out of place. It’s smooth, medium bodied and drinkable. Ultimately, the wine ends up being a bit jammy for my tastes, but if you tend to like the offerings of our Western coast, then you might want to give this one a try.
And one of these days, if you all behave and eat your vegetables like you are supposed to, I will let you in on my dirty little secret and tell you about the Californian wine I adore.
Ok…I feel better now. Or not. Hearts people…. Seriously? Why not just put a kitten on there? Or an Alien! With Lasers! And a robot. Now, that my friend, is a wine I would buy just because of the label! I should note I did, in fact, once buy a wine called Nostradamus, because A. It came in a clay jug, and B. It's named Nostradamus, and who isn’t going to buy an Eastern European wine named after the premier soothsayer of our time. I’m not sure that’s a good thing to admit but it’s neither here nor there.
On the plus side it’s a blend, weighing in with a good 51% Syrah 26% Zinfandel and 12% Sangiovese. Now I likes me some blends, and if anything can save a Cali wine, its going to be mixing some grapes together. And it works here for the most part.
Poured, the wine splashes into the glass with a warm purple-red hue. Its rich and dark and when swirled clings longingly to the side of the glass. The nose comes off a bit grapey for me but surprisingly low on the alcohol aroma. I wouldn’t call the aroma particularly complex, one good sniff and swirl and you can pretty much get its full measure.
Time to taste.
Gut reaction:
The wine deserves a better label. It doesn’t really suck badly enough to be festooned with brick brack and a cubist doily for a label. I found the syrah to give it a nice soft base on the pallet with the zinfandel punching it up and providing some wow factor (I’d note, that wow factor for me is typically unnecessary and generally what I dislike about Californian wines, I prefer them subtle). I don’t quite know what the Sangiovese is adding, but I found the wine to be balanced and there was no flavor or aroma that was glaringly out of place. It’s smooth, medium bodied and drinkable. Ultimately, the wine ends up being a bit jammy for my tastes, but if you tend to like the offerings of our Western coast, then you might want to give this one a try.
And one of these days, if you all behave and eat your vegetables like you are supposed to, I will let you in on my dirty little secret and tell you about the Californian wine I adore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
