Category Archives: Tasting Notes

Price: 11-15 bucks, Tasting Notes

Lodi Old Vines Zin Part 3: Gnarly Head

Leave a comment

This is Part 3 of my Lodi Old Vines Zin series.  Part 1 was the Spellbound 2005 and Part 2 was the (great value!) Ravenswood 2006. I have a few more bottles to try out so check back or subscribe to the RSS feed.  If you have some Lodi OVZ favorites, leave a comment.

Gnarley Head Old Vines Zinfandel 2006 Lodi

GnarlyHead_OVZLodi_snapshot.gifProducer: Gnarly Head

Grapes: Zinfandel (neither the label nor the website says whether it’s 100% or a blend)

Appellation: Lodi

Vineyards: 35-80 year old head-pruned vines in sandy soils.

Winemaking/Aging: Aged in not one, not two, but three types of oak: French, American and Hungarian. Neither the label nor the website says exactly how long it spends in oak or the % new.

Alcohol: 14.5%

Price: About $10-12

My tasting notes: Dusty dark fruit on the nose with lots of black pepper and a hint of green pepper. On the palate, I get spiced berries and plum. The  flavors are rich, but it quickly starts to feel a bit light/hollow. The finish is short and a bit hot.

Overall assessment: The flavor profile is fine, but the wine lacks the depth or intensity that I expect from old vines Zin. It’s pleasant, but not memorable. C

Free association: Lightweight and disappears quickly … like the Spin Doctors. (click for video)

little_miss_cant_be281x211

More info:

Gnarly Head’s tech sheet.

Lots of other bloggers have posted on this, including: Daily Wine Tasting, A Bottle A Week, Wine For The Cheap and Gabe’s View.

Some notes at Cork’d.

Price: 11-15 bucks, Tasting Notes

Lodi Old Vines Zin Part 2: Ravenswood

1 Comment

This is Part 2 of my Lodi Old Vines Zin series.  Part 1 was the Spellbound 2005.

I’ve always had a soft spot for Ravenswood. Vintner’s Blend was one of my favorites when I was first getting into wine and their No Wimpy Wines slogan was appealing to that early-20s guy still making the transition from of kegs of Natty Light from his college days (or if we were splurging, Killian’s).  Now that I’m more “sophisticated”, I still dig Zin, but I appreciate Ravenswood’s broad range of “County Series” and “Vineyard Designates” wines. So I have high hopes for this bottle, from the County Series.

Ravenswood Old Vines Zinfandel 2006 Lodi

RavenswoodOVZ_lodi_snapshotProducer: Ravenswood

Grapes: 78% Zinfandel, 21% Petite Sirah, 1% Carignane (this just barely qualifies for being labeled a Zinfandel; minimum is 75%)

Appellation: Lodi

Vineyards: Old vines in sandy soil. (Neither the label nor the website indicates just how old the vines are.)

Winemaking/Aging: Fermented with native yeasts in open fermenters, hand-punched.  18 months in 100% French oak, 25 – 30% of which was new.

Alcohol: 14.8% (ahem)

Price: About $11-12

Package: I’ve always liked the Ravenswood logo and relatively simple labeling with the appellation clearly shown.

My tasting notes: Deep color. Mixed berries, especially blueberries, on the nose, with pretty strong alcohol coming through along with some oak. On the palate, it’s a rich, plush wine with sweet plum, spice, and an slight funky earthiness that is very appealing. It finishes dry and spicy with some tannic grip and good length, though a bit hot.

Overall assessment: Overall, I think this is a dynamite wine for the price. Feels like the old vines squeezed out some of their essence for this wine. It feels … serious. B+

Free association: Something about this wine reminded me of the sadness of many of Patty Griffin’s songs. Top of the World is one of my favorites. (If you only know the Dixie Chicks version of this song and/or you’re not familiar with Patty Griffin, you’re in for a treat. A sad treat, but a treat nonetheless.)


More info:

Another Wine Blog tasted this wine single-blind and declared it a great value.

Other blogger reviews at Fiesty’s Wines and Gabe’s View.

Loads of tasting notes on CellarTracker.

Gary V. tasted the 2005 vintage of this wine on WineLibraryTV and loved it.

Price: 11-15 bucks, Tasting Notes

Lodi Old Vines Zin Part 1: Spellbound

Leave a comment

I enjoyed doing the Unoaked Chardonnay series last week so I decided to do another series. And after a week of nothing but white wine (which is very unusual for me), I decided to go to my sweet spot: Old Vines Zin. I kept it in the everyday price range ($10-15 for me) and picked a single appellation – Lodi – to focus on, hoping I’ll learn a bit more about it along the way. Maybe after I do 3 or 4 from Lodi, I’ll do 3 or 4 from another AVA (Paso Robles?) for a little compare/contrast.

Spellbound Old Vines Zinfandel 2005 Lodi

05 Spellbound zinProducer: Spellbound

Grapes: 99% Zinfandel, 1% Petite Sirah

Appellation: Lodi (map)

Vineyards: 52-year-old vines

Winemaking/Aging: Stainless steel fermentation. Aged in 50% French and 50% American oak (no indication of length of aging).

Alcohol: 13.5%

Price: I paid $15

Package: Synthetic cork closure. Kinda cool-looking bottle. The black & white label with the shadowy moon is pretty evocative. Just right for a Halloween party or your next coven meeting.

My tasting notes: Color is a bit lighter than most Zins in my experience. But the nose doesn’t hold back. I leaned in for my first sniff, planning to park my nose deep in the glass, and I literally stopped and jerked back. It positively reeked of candy and berry juice. So sweet-smelling! It mellowed a bit later, but the overall impression is of raspberry jam spread on the backside of a strip of leather or a plank of wood. On the palate, it stays in that intense, sweet, candied berry range with a little floral quality. Imagine Hawaiian Punch steeped in a handful of potpourri. (Anyone remember the store called World Bazaar that used to be in all the malls back in the 80s? You needed a gas mask to survive a trip in there with your mom.) It’s a medium-bodied wine, with a moderately long finish that leaves an impression mainly of oak.

Overall assessment: I’ll admit to having a positive bias toward old vines Zin — it’s the style of wine I want to like the most. But this one falls short for me. It doesn’t bring complexity so much as intensity in a very candied fruit way. I could see some people really liking the intense fruit — the flavors are very bright and clean. But I think it needs some darkness (mocha, earth, meatiness) to match the label and to make it feel more … serious. C+

Free association:

Punchy

Other info:

Winemaker’s notes.

The wine scored 88 from Wine Enthusiast and 80 from Wine Spectator, with pretty different tasting notes (collected here).

Price: 11-15 bucks, Tasting Notes

Naked is Good: Unoaked Chardonnay – Part 3

1 Comment

This is part 3 of my Unoaked Chardonnay series. Previous entries:

Part 1 – Clos LaChance Unoaked Chardonnay 2007 Monterey County

Part 2 – Toad Hollow Unoaked Chardonnay Francine’s Selection 2007 Mendocino County

Four Vines Naked Chardonnay 2008 Santa Barbara County

FourVines_NakedChard_BottleShotI originally intended this to be a 2 bottle series — just pick up two readily available unoaked Chardonnay’s and do a little compare and contrast. I was a bit disappointed with both bottles so I decided to extend the series. I stopped by Whole Foods (the flagship location at Austin HQ) and grabbed two more.

Producer: Four Vines

Grapes: 100% Chardonnay

Appellation: Santa Barbara County – one of the southernmost regions in California yet one of the coolest.

Vineyards: (from the winery) “Fruit is harvested from three south facing hilltop vineyards in the Cat Canyon in Northern Santa Barbara: Los Alamos, Loma Verde and El Camino.” Cat Canyon is in the unofficial sub-AVA of Los Alamos Valley. Info on Los Alamos Valley here and here.

Winemaking: Stainless steel fermentation, no MLF (malolactic fermentation), some aging on the lees.

Alcohol: 13.9%

Price: $13

Package: Screwtop closure. Label is a bit dull, they certainly could have done more with the Naked concept that they seem to have trademarked. Oh wait… if you look closely at the vines on the label and unfocus like you’re looking at one of those Magic Eye books you can see they they were drawn to look like four dancing naked women. A little too subtle, guys.

My tasting notes: Now we’re talking! Bright green apple aromas leap from the glass, with a hint of allspice maybe. More green apples on the palate, with a little pineapple juice. This is what I was expecting from these unoaked Chards: bright clean fruit, crisp and refreshing, while still rounder and more voluptuous than Sauvignon Blanc, Pinot Grigio, Riesling, etc. Nice. I think the cooler climate of Santa Barbara, and Los Alamos/Cat Canyon in particular, makes a big difference.

Overall assessment: A bit one-note perhaps, but delicious. Would be great for a party, Naked® or otherwise. B

Free association:

PinupApple

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jjsphoto/ / CC BY-ND 2.0

Other info:

Winery’s tech sheet.

CellarTracker tasting notes.

A review from KensWineGuide.com

Price: 11-15 bucks, Tasting Notes

Unoaked Chardonnay – Part 2

Leave a comment

This is Part 2 of my Unoaked Chardonnay face-off: Toad Hollow Unoaked Chardonnay 2007 Francine’s Selection (Part 1 was the Clos LaChance Unoaked Chardonnay 2007 Monterey County.)

I didn’t know this before I starting researching this post, but Toad Hollow is one of the pioneers of unoaked Chardonnay in the US, their first vintage being 1993. So I’m glad I picked this one up; it should serve as a good benchmark. The only caveat is that they employ malolactic fermentation (MLF) while the Clos LaChance does not.

2007_chard_labelProducer: Toad Hollow

Grapes: 100% Chardonnay

Appellation: Mendocino County (AVA, California)

Vineyards: 90% Mendocino County and 10% from Sonoma County

Winemaking: No oak aging (9 months in stainless steel tanks), but it does get 100% MLF and 8 months on the lees.

Alcohol: 13.9%

Price: About $12

My tasting notes: A bit more golden than the Clos LaChance, but less so than most Chards. It’s a little tight on the nose – once it warms up a bit I get melon, a bit of tangerine and a sort of plastery aroma. More melon on the palate with a pleasantly rich/viscous/oily mouthfeel from the MLF. I wouldn’t describe it as crisp, though it’s not flabby either. Lingering finish, but the flavor you’re left with is a little odd, actually. (I don’t get the same spice notes I got from the Clos LaChance, which were confusing me.)

Overall assessment: I really went back and forth on this one. Compared to the Clos LaChance, it is not as expressive of fruit, but it is perhaps more interesting overall. I still didn’t get the crisp green apple zing I was expecting this unoaked Chardonnay experiment to produce. In the end this is a pleasant and interesting wine, but the aftertaste is a bit off-putting, which keeps this from scoring better. C  (I certainly wouldn’t go this far.)

Free association: “Lost in our convictions, lips stained with wine / As the sun sank west of the Mendocino county line” – Mendocino County Line by Willie Nelson/Lee Ann Womack. (YouTube video here)

Unoaked Chardonnay Summary: I may have to extend this little series. These two left me disappointed. I think there are steelier, crisper, zingier examples out there that might appeal to my palate more. Perhaps you need to move up the price ladder to find good ones. After all, without the buttery/oaky “makeup”, the quality of the fruit is all the more important. If you have any recommendations, please leave a comment.

More info:

Several other folks liked this wine including: Wine Enthusiast (90 pts., Best Buy),  The Wine Curmudgeon, and Good Wine Under $20.

A few tasting notes & ratings on CellarTracker.

Nice article from Wines & Vines on unoaked Chardonnay that mentions the Toad Hollow (article is a couple years old)

Price: 10 bucks or less, Tasting Notes

Unoaked Chardonnay – Part 1

Leave a comment

This is Part 1 of a series of posts on Unoaked Chardonnay.  (Part 2 — the Toad Hollow 2007 Mendocino County — is here)

Unoaked is the way the cool kids are drinking Chardonnay these days.  I decided I’d pick up two widely available bottles this week and compare and contrast them. The first one I opened was the Clos LaChance Unoaked Chardonnay 2007 Monterey County.

CHH07FActually, the full name of this wine is: Clos LaChance Glittering-Throated Emerald Unoaked Chardonnay 2007 Monterey County (that’s quite a mouthful!). The folks at Clos LaChance have a thing for the hummingbird “due to its territorial nature and ability to chase away the grape-eating birds from the vineyards.” So they have a series of wines called The Hummingbird Series each named after a type of hummingbird they think reflects the wine in some way. I kinda like this idea except that you end up with some pretty awkward wine names: Clos LaChance White-Tufted Sunbeam Sauvignon Blanc, Clos LaChance Pink-Throated Brilliant Rosé, Clos LaChance Crimson Topaz Meritage.

Back to the wine…

Producer: Clos LaChance

Grapes: 100% Chardonnay

Appellation: Monterey County (AVA, California) (map)

Vineyards: 50% from the Riverview Vineyard near Soledad in the cooler northern half of the Salinas Valley. 50% from the San Lucas Vineyard (in the San Lucas AVA sub-appellation) in the warmer southern end of the valley. These are not estate vineyards, they are owned by Scheid Vineyards.

Winemaking: Stainless fermentation, no malolactic fermentation (MLF) and no oak aging.

Alcohol: 13.5%

Price: Around $10

My tasting notes: Color is a bit less golden than most (oaked) chards, more like a pilsner. On the nose, I note pineapple and pear and a spiciness I would normally associate with oak. Hmm… has my brain permanently linked chardonnay with oak to the point that I can’t disassociate the two? In the mouth, I get more spiced apple/pear and pineapple and a prickly/raw mouthfeel that (again) I would normally attribute to oak treatment. It certainly doesn’t have the buttery quality of oaky/MLF chards, though. Still, I’m starting to question my assumptions about what oak does and doesn’t contribute to a wine. I will need to compare to the other unoaked chard I picked up and see if I’m just imagining things.

Overall assessment: When I think unoaked Chardonnay, I expect crisp apples. I got apples, but not enough crispness for my palate. If you’re not going to give me crispness, seduce me with richness — but to be fair, that’s not the goal of this unoaked Chard either. Ultimately, I’d say this is a serviceable white. Certainly not a bad wine, but not something I’d seek out, and (unless my palate was just playing tricks on me) not a great representation of unoaked Chardonnay. C

Free association: Not what I expected…

seamonkeys
Note: I am NOT suggesting that the winery is misleading the buyer in any way, just that what I tasted was not what I expected.

So what do you think? Have you ever had this experience with an unoaked Chardonnay? Are spice notes a common characteristic of Chardonnay sans oak? Am I crazy? Leave a comment and let me know.

More info:

The winery’s tech sheet.

And here is the winery’s collection of reviews/notes.

This bottle was named Wine of the Week by Paul Lukacs in The Washington Times back in April.

A collection of tasting notes from CellarTracker

Price: 11-15 bucks, Tasting Notes

Marques de la Concordia Rioja Crianza 2005

2 Comments
The crayons on the table give you a sense of my tasting environment.
The crayons on the table give you a sense of my tasting environment.

I’ve been drinking a lot of the “new-fangled” Spanish wines lately, but it’s been a little while since I’ve had a Rioja.  Let’s see what this one’s got under the hood.

Producer: Marques de la Concordia

Grapes: 100% Tempranillo (I haven’t been able to find total confirmation of this, but several references to it for other vintages, at least on retailer websites)

Appellation: Rioja (D.O.C., Spain)

Vineyards: calcareous clay, hillside vineyards

Aging: 18 months in new French & American oak casks (This is a Crianza, which means it was required to spend at least 1 year in oak)

Alcohol: 13.5%

Price: $11.40 at Spec’s in Austin

My tasting notes: Grapey-purple, not opaque. On nose, I first get a lot of sawdust, but with coaxing the berry fruit shows up. First glass, drunk soon after pulling the cork, seemed hollow. Second glass better. The oak is coming through a bit harsh. Fruit is there, some plum and blueberry. A touch of spice. Finishes a bit creamy.

Assessment/score: Changed a lot as it breathed. First reaction was that I didn’t like it so much. Then I’d find myself thinking, why didn’t I like this before. Then I’d be back to thinking it just isn’t satisfying. I’m settling on… meh. C

Free association:

That's sawdust all over him...
That's sawdust all over him...

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/infinitewilderness/ / CC BY-NC 2.0

Another blogger’s take on this wine is here (End of the Vine).

More people’s tasting notes at CellarTracker.

Price: 11-15 bucks, Tasting Notes

Cline Ancient Vines Mourvedre 2005

Leave a comment

I’ve opened several bottles from Cline recently and I was in the mood  for this Mourvèdre.  Cline is one of the few Cali producers that focuses on this grape and they’ve got some historic old vines to work with.

Producer: Cline CellarsMV05AV

Grapes: Mourvèdre (100%, I think … but it’s not stated on the label or tech sheet)

Appellation: Contra Costa County

Vineyards: While Contra Costa County is generally very hot, the vineyard site for this (and other Cline wines from the appellation) are cooled at night by the adjacent San Joaquin and Sacramento rivers.

Aging: 10 months in American oak (25% new), dark toast, before being transfered to neutral barrels.

Alcohol: 14.5%

Price: I don’t recall what I paid for through the club, but these usually retail around $15.

My tasting notes: Candy on the nose, plus mint and maybe tobacco. More candied fruit on the palate. Like if Now & Later made a flavor called “chocolate-covered sugarplum.”

Assessment/score: The old-vine intensity manifests in a very candied way which is a bit “too much.” I don’t recall this in past vintages of this wine. For me, this is a C+ tonight.  I’d drink it again (it may mellow with more time in bottle), but if I were buying, I’d look for other vintages. I’ll look forward to trying the ’06 or ’07.

Free association:

candywarehouse_2063_703155137
WebSite_009

Price: 11-15 bucks, Tasting Notes

Drink Pink, Take 2: Routas Rouviere 2007

Leave a comment

After recently enjoying a rosé, the Bonny Doon Vin Gris de  Cigare 2007, and asking myself why I don’t drink pink more often, I picked up another — this time from France.

routas2007roseProducer: Chateau Routas

Grapes: 40% Grenache, 30% Syrah, 30% Cinsault

Appellation: Coteaux Varois en Provence (AOC, France).

Vinification/Aging: [from the producer’s website] The grapes are cooled and kept on their skins for 12 to 24 hours immediately following harvest, then gently pressed. All the Syrah and half of the Grenache go straight to neutral oak barrels after being pressed where they go through their primary and malolactic fermentation. The remaining Grenache and Cinsault are fermented in stainless steel tanks and blocked from malolactic fermentation. The two different lots are aged separately for five months and blended prior bottling.

Alcohol: 13%

Price: I paid $11 at Spec’s in Austin.

My tasting notes:  Very nice salmon/apricot color.  On the nose, I’m struck first by soapy aromas, like a heavily-scented hand soap — Wild SugarBerry Blossom, or something like that. There’s a bit of crayon box, too. And slightly oxidized aroma like sherry. Maybe I have an off bottle. Mrs. VINEgeek adds that there is a “creek water” element to it. In the mouth, it comes across somewhat sugary on the initial attack, like sugar-coated strawberries and raspberries, followed by bit of that oxidation I smelled (though not so much as to make it unpalatable). It has good acid and finishes dry.

Overall assessment/score: I hesitate to give this a score since there’s a chance I got an off bottle. Even without the possible oxidation, I think it was a bit out of balance. For my palate, this is not nearly as nice as the Vin Gris de Cigare. Here are some other people’s thoughts.  Also, Wine Spectator gave it an 87.

Free association:

who_owns_bath_and_body_works-741300

Price: 11-15 bucks, Tasting Notes

Montsant = Poor Man’s Priorat

1 Comment

Capcanes Mas Donis Barrica 2005 Montsant

MasDonis2005_bottleEven though I try not to be a score-shopper (“90+ only, please!”), it’s hard to pass up a 91-pointer for under $12 from an up-and-coming appellation: Montsant. It’s a relatively new Spanish D.O., formerly a sub-region within the Tarragona D.O. It essentially surrounds the Priorat D.O., which is home to many high-dollar cult wines. Like Priorat, Montsant is planted mostly to Garnacha (Grenache) and Cariñena (Carignane). Let’s check it out.

Producer: Celler de Capçanes

Grapes: 85% Garnacha, 15% Syrah

Appellation: Montsant (D.O., Spain)

MontsantDO

Vintage: 2005

Vineyards: 80+ year old Garnacha vines and  30+ year old Syrah vines

Aging: 8-9 months in new and old French and American oak “barricas”

Alcohol: 14%

Price: I paid $11.60 at Spec’s in Austin

My tasting notes: This wine brings a lot to the table aromatically.  There are berries at the core, but draped with layers of violets, clove, cedar, tar, Swiss Miss hot chocolate powder. I even caught a kind of a swampy smell. In the mouth, it’s pretty rich with jammy berries and spices, and a pleasant minerality. It gets a little hot & prickly at the end, but not too bad.

Assessment/score:  Very interesting wine for the price. It could easily pass for a $20-25 bottle, I think. Worth seeking out. B

Free association:

SM_Curved-v2

Robert Parker has given this wine 90+ points in several of the last 5 or 6 vintages. Here are his notes on this 2005:

“It offers up an expressive nose of slate, mineral, licorice, violets, black cherry, and blueberry. Layered, long, and complex, this spicy, hedonistic effort has 2-3 years of aging potential but can be enjoyed now without guilt. It is a great value.”

Robert Parker’s The Wine Advocate
91 Points