Portland Wine Review

Georges Duboeuf 2009 La Trinquee Julienas

2010-12-16T20:26:00.003-05:00

Hello, long lost reader(s) (in case there are more than one of you). I have been chiding myself for once again neglecting the blog for so long, which I guess has finally paid off in that I was quite motivated upon arriving at home this evening to open some wine and write about it. I happened to choose this bottle without even thinking about the fact that it is a great opportunity to briefly mention the 2009 vintage of Beaujolais. It seems that 2009 is being universally heralded, by professional critics and savvy consumers, as a great vintage for Beaujolais, probably the best in a very long time. The wines I have tried so far have displayed greater depth, concentration, and tannin (not in a bad way at all) than most of the Beaujolais I am used to. I am seeing a tendency towards greater ripeness levels and greater extraction. Once thing that has really surprised me is how much I like this wine, which I tried recently at a tasting of, surprise, surprise, 2009 Cru Beaujolais. (please see the previous entry on Foillard's Morgon if you'd like a description of that term) I was surprised when this wine was unveiled because I have been rather underwhelmed by the Duboeuf crus that I've tasted in past vintages. This wine performed extremely well in its group at the recent tasting. So much so that I rushed out and bought 4 bottles, for the staggering sum of $15 apiece. If you want some Beaujolais from this vintage to lay down in your cellar for some years, I would highly recommend Marcel Lapierre 2009 Morgon. If you want something to enjoy now and over the next couple of years (during which time I suspect this wine will improve, if not even for 3-5 years), I can enthusiastically suggest this one. Here's a tasting note:

2009 Georges Duboeuf La Trinquee Julienas- distributed by Pine State, around $15 retail
The first thing I notice is a relatively dark color for the Gamay grape. It's still ruby, but pretty dark without being opaque. The nose is very pretty. It is quite floral and the fruit is quite pronounced, showing red and black cherry along with strawberry. There's also an earthiness, like fresh, clean soil, a bit of spice, and a slight green stemmy character that's helping to provide great balance for all of that fruit. I will note that greenness is often a negative element for me, but this wine smells in no way underripe. It's as if I'm smelling wild strawberries which are still on the plant, so I can get a faint whiff of the green parts of the plant in a good, natural way. The palate is more of the same. The dark cherries really show their stuff here, with the red fruit taking back stage at first, which is not what I usually expect from cru Beaujolais, but it is what I've come to expect from some of the wines from this vintage. The red fruit becomes more prevalent as the flavor progresses. There's plenty of concentration of flavor here to balance the tannins, which are significant yet superfine in texture. There's a tea component from the midpalate on that I really enjoy. The wine is so delicious that I've just practically chugged about half a glass while looking for further descriptors. All of the elements from the nose are present on the palate in varying degrees, and everything goes great together. There's really no awkwardness or imbalance in this wine. The fruit is a little candied on the nose, and there is a slight grapey component to the palate; I know these are part of what some people don't like about Beaujolais. But believe me, these characteristics are mild, so much so that I really think this wine is practically universally appealing. In fact, it's outstanding. 90 points from me, and I suspect that in another year or two this will be in an even better place than it is now. Do yourself a favor and go try a bottle. For that matter, try a bunch of '09 crus. Your palate will thank you, and so will your wallet as most are under $30 (many under $20) for wines that can be surprisingly good for those prices. I'll leave you with this thought: the Lapierre Morgon is even better than this wine. Try that, too. Thanks for reading. Please leave comments if you have anything to say.

Toques et Clochers Limoux Océanique 2008

2010-10-01T17:52:00.004-04:00

As seasonally as I seem to be drinking lately, I think I'll get this one last white in before what seems like an inevitable descent into the darkness of red wine season. Plus, I didn't have many reds around that are available in Maine as I haven't been buying much wine lately. I also just learned something and eliminated one of my nasty, unfounded preconceptions about wine (generalizations about wine are true even less often that generalizations about many other things -- and, yes, I realize that I have just made one) so I'd like to share my newfound knowledge with all three of you who probably read this blog. Limoux is an appellation in the Languedoc region in southern France. I often think Chardonnay (yes, this is a Chardonnay) and Pinot Noir should not be grown in the Languedoc in general and that the main reason they are is pure marketability. Particularly with Pinot Noir, and to a lesser extent Chardonnay, any plonk with a pretty label and a relatively low price seems to sell in the US. I think a lot of growers and producers in the Languedoc have capitalized on that by growing grapes for which their region is unsuited due to the warmth of its growing season. There's a LOT of very bad Vin de Pays d'Oc (Languedoc/Roussillon) Chardonnay and Pinot Noir out there and it is pretty sad that people continue to buy it. So, I was unfairly prejudiced against these varieties in this fairly vast region that contains many different mesoclimates (for those too lazy to look it up, a mesoclimate is the climate of a single site or specific area, often mislabeled "microclimate"). Well, this wine was suggested to me and I decided to try it. I then came home and looked up the region to discover that it is in the foothills of the Pyrenees and its vineyards are cooler than most (all?) others in the Languedoc due to their elevation and distance from the Mediterranean's influence. I guess I should have figured out that it might be fairly cool here since the appellation is best known for sparkling wines. I also shouldn't lump such a large area together and might want, in the future, to have at least some faith that wines carrying specific appellations (Appellation Controlee as you see on the front label of this wine) might be better than mass produced Vin de Pays wine (which is a lower designation according to French wine law but is not necessarily inferior wine). I am drinking this wine at a cool room temperature, maybe 60-65 degrees Farenheit, which is how I generally prefer Chardonnay.

Toques et Cochers Limoux Oceanique 2008 -- 100% (gasp) Chardonnay -- This wine is distributed by Easterly and costs about $19 retail.

The first thing that jumps out at me about the nose on this wine is the freshness. I get a slight SO2 burn, but it's not affecting the aromatics at all and I would bet that 20-30 minutes in a decanter would clear that right up. The wine just smells fun. It's got a distinct chalky minerality, as well as fresh lemon, pear, and yellow apple components with really well integrated and not too strong butter and toasty oak notes. I'm getting just a hint of a candied element, which I generally don't like, but it's slight enough that it's making the fruit aromas seem fresher and sweeter to me, so I hesitantly say that I actually like it here. The palate starts off with the more candied fruit, but that leads to a midpalate that's well balanced, less candied, and very much like the nose, which I like a lot. The finish shows more of that minerality I got on the nose, along with a little of the caramel that I often get in what I consider overdone (think 1980s Californian) Chardonnays. That detracts just a bit, but overall I like this wine quite a bit and I tend to be really down on a lot of Chardonnays. I'm certainly not going to call this outstanding (in my scale of [poor-acceptable-good-very good-outstanding-classic]), but I do think it's very good, which for under $20 Chardonnay impresses me. I like that it's medium bodied with decent acidity and seems lively and fun to drink. I'm sure it's reasonably food friendly, but it's working great just to lift my spirits on a dreary, rainy evening. The aromas and flavors seem nicely focused and delineated. I rarely drink Chardonnay (as I've said before) and I often have trouble pulling out individual flavor descriptors, but that wasn't the case at all here. I'll go ahead and score this wine an 86, which for me, for this category, is a solid buy. I will ask that you please pay more attention to my tasting notes and verbal quality description scale ("very good" for this wine) than to my numerical scores as the latter can make an ever evolving product whose evaluation can be affected by setting and time seem perhaps too specific and absolute. Personally, I like scores for my own reference. I have considered eliminating my use of them in this blog and altogether many times, and I'm interested in what you might think about that, so please leave a comment and let me know your opinion if you feel one way or the other (or if you prefer the 20 point scale, which seems better in some ways but I'm just not used to it). I've also decided again not to include specific retailers in the blog, as was the original plan. If you are interested in finding this or any wine mentioned you can probably get your favorite retailer to special order it or you can email me (missatiejacket@yahoo.com) and I'll let you know where I found it.

Kendall Jackson Chardonnay and a good wine

2010-09-07T14:32:00.002-04:00

So,
there have been some surprised reactions in the comments of the last
entry to the fact that I drink very little Chardonnay, and almost none
that's under $30. One person suggested that I should review
Kendall-Jackson Chardonnay before calling it "run of the mill" (which I
already called it, so, yes, I have some negative preconceptions which I
promise to do my best to ignore while tasting this wine). I don't think
there's anything wrong with a lot of the inexpensive Chardonnays out
there, it's just that they bore the daylights out of me. Almost every
one I've tasted (and here, as everywhere in the wine world, there are
exceptions) tastes generic and has nothing unique to offer. Part of the
issue is probably that Chardonnay is not an aromatic grape variety. In
extremely good examples it will show the character of the place and way
it was grown, including the character of the weather that growing
season. Lesser examples generally do not show such character, so they
simply taste like the results of winemaking decisions. The strain(s) of
yeast, the oak regime, and the amount of malolactic conversion (the
conversion of malic acid to lactic acid which results in a fuller
mouthfeel, softer acidity, and buttery flavor from the resulting
compound known as diacetyl), fermentation temperature and vessel, etc --
these things are what give the wine its flavor. This is still largely
true for better examples of Chardonnay, but those better examples tend
to have far greater depth of flavor, which is due in part, I believe, to
the wines showing a sense of place. As I can't really back up that
assertion scientifically, I will at least stand by the idea that the
greater examples will show something unique. Inexpensive wines besides
Chardonnay often have no problem showing unique, interesting qualities,
which is why I drink a lot of other white wines and almost no
Chardonnay. I know I've rambled and been a bit redundant, but I'm
trying to give an adequate explanation for and introduction to the ideas
that led to this tasting. Now that you think I'll definitely hate this
wine because of my preconceptions, let's begin. First, I will say that
I always do my best to evaluate wines objectively and that I would have
no problem with humbly admitting how wrong I was and how great this
wine is. Please see my post about Cru Beaujolais if you doubt this
fact. I tasted these wines several days ago but didn't get around to posting until today -- the tasting notes were written when I originally tasted the wines.

Kendall-Jackson 2008 Vintner's
Reserve Chardonnay, available almost anywhere that sells
wine for about $13

The first things that jump out at me on the nose are butter and oak. I
also get a bit of sweet yellow apple and a little yeastiness. The
palate shows those same components with some caramel. It kind of tastes
like a buttered caramel apple with a little nutritional yeast sprinkled
on top. There's also some lemon that I'm noticing now. It also tastes
like many dozens of other Chardonnays I've tried. I do believe there's
a little residual sugar here to increase the perception of fruit. I
suspect that this is because without it, the wine would really just
taste like butter, oak, and yeast. The wine is good, but so simple and
industrial tasting that it's just into that category from acceptable,
where I would have to be finding minor faults or significant imbalance.
The sweetness bothers me (for all you "I only like dry wine" people:
this is not a dry wine!), but there is some decent acidity here. The
more I taste it, though, the more it tastes like fruit juice mixed with
oak essence and some vodka. Understand that I'm getting that impression
as the wine warms. White wine at room temperature will not hide any
faults or imperfections. If you completely disagree with my assessment,
I urge you to try this wine at room temperature. I'm sure this will
alienate some readers, but I can't give this wine any more than 80
points. I will not finish the bottle. Plus, notice that their
"Vintner's Reserve" is actually their least expensive bottling. That's
deceptive marketing if you ask me. With so much wine out there, please,
even if you like this stuff, try some new things.

Now, on to a wine that I propose as an alternative to the KJ. It's not
Chardonnay, not because there aren't some decent ones out there at that
price, but because they're few and far between and I didn't track one
down today. What I did track down is another inexpensive wine from a
major category: a Pinot Grigio.

Re Teodorico 2008 Pinot
Grigio, Veneto -- I got this wine at Browne Trading and
it's distributed by Mariner. They have it priced at $12 and it was even
less for the tasting today.

I'm getting some dusty, haylike, even nutty character from the nose.
It's also got a bit of a stony minerality. Underneath this there is
some ripe citrus fruit and even some tropical fruit. The palate opens
with a nice combination of everything the nose had, and just as the
midpalate makes its way into the finish, the fruit really kicks up a
notch, showing some lemon, starfruit, and other fruits that I'm not
quite discerning (I should have tasted this wine first, but also my
palate is not in top form today). This wine seems brighter and more
alive than the KJ. Instead of feeling like I'm drinking an industrial
product, I feel like I'm drinking an energetic, fun wine that is simple
and straightforward but that's okay. For considerably less money than
the KJ, here's a wine I enjoy drinking. It's also in the "good" range
for me, but significantly higher at 84 points. Here's an example of
where scoring falls short, though. I'm sure you can tell by my writing
that I like this wine a LOT more than the last one. I know it's an
unfair comparison as they're different varieties, but I think
inexpensive Italian Pinot Grigio is, in general, pretty much just as bad
as inexpensive Chardonnay. They usually just taste like lemon, hay, and nothing else
and have bitter finishes. This wine has a lot more going on and, most
importantly, doesn't taste like other wines I can remember having. If
Browne Trading keeps their tasting price, which was considerably less
than $12, I would suggest picking up a few of these for what's left of
the warm weather.

If you now hate me, completely disagree, or think 80 is way too nice to the KJ (believe me, if I based my score more on personal preference than what I perceive as level of quality, it would not be in the "good" category, which would allow me to score it lower), let me know in the comments. I enjoy the interaction and it's nice to know someone is reading. For those who were completely bored by this entry, thanks for reading to the end and I will try to review something more interesting next time.

Dr. von Bassermann-Jordan 2006 Riesling trocken, Pfalz

2010-08-17T15:12:00.004-04:00

What's better on a nice Summer day than a dry, entry level German Riesling from a good producer? Okay, maybe a Grosses Gewachs/Erste Lage/Erste Gewachs from a good producer. But right now this wine is quite enjoyable. This wine would be great for breaking down those preconceptions of "Riesling is always sweet" or "I know there are dry Rieslings out there, but the German stuff is always sweet" or whatever variation on that theme we wine retail salespeople hear all too often. I'm not going to pretend to be some serious Riesling advocate. There are plenty of those out there who have been at it a lot longer than I've been drinking wine. I'm also not going to hop on the "Riesling is underappreciated and I'm just the wine nerd to tell you all about it" bandwagon. Plenty of wine writers wax poetic about the variety so often that it sometimes seems that Riesling is the most talked about underappreciated variety there could be. Plus I kind of don't want the general public to "get it" because I like the pricing structure that's currently in place and I don't want to see another category price itself out of my reach in the high end. Sure, Riesling in its many forms offers a dizzying array of possible, extremely good, food pairings. I will say that, despite my love of the dry stuff, the off dry versions seem the most flexible to me. That's not to say this dry version wouldn't go well with a wide variety of foods. It would. It's also downright delicious on its own as long as you can handle a good dose of acidity. Well, enough rambling.

Bassermann-Jordan 2006 Riesling Trocken, QbA, Pfalz -- I got this at Old Port Wine Merchants for $18 and it's distributed by Central:
The nose is of fairly light intensity (medium minus) and shows pretty pear and apple components along with a bit of a melon aroma, all of which are balanced by a distinct, slatey minerality and a slight flinty or struck match smell. I also notice a bit of paraffin and a floral character. These components are woven together quite well and sort of subtly caress my sense of smell, making me eager to taste the wine.
The palate is quite similar, though the minerality is a little more pronounced and the fruit a tiny bit less pronounced than each was on the nose. I have come to expect that from many of these dry rieslings. The attack is fairly tight, but the flavors flesh out nicely on the midpalate and into the finish. The whole experience, with the floral, fruit and stony components, reminds me of, ironically, a nice summer day. It's really a pretty wine. There isn't a lot of complexity here, but there doesn't need to be. I am more than happy for the price I paid and will probably pick up another bottle soon. I think this is very good and would give it 88-89 points.

I will say here that I always welcome others' opinions on these categories or specific wines. Please, if you have anything to say about this post, leave a comment. I do read them and I will respond, though I'm not always prompt. Even if you have had this wine and hated it and want to tell me that you think I'm a poor taster, leave a comment to that effect. I do really like to see some kind of name there so I can respond, but any comment is better than none. Thanks for reading.

La Croix Peyrassol 2008/;'''

2010-07-21T19:06:00.004-04:00

It's overcast and relatively cool this afternoon, so I thought this would be a fitting opportunity to break free of the white and pink wine rut I've been in lately. Not that I mind drinking the heck out of white and pink wines, but I do enjoy some variety. This might be surprising considering I'm writing about another French wine, but I truly do and I will try to review something soon that's not from the Old World. Anyway, this wine is distributed by Mariner and I got it at Whole Foods. If I'm not mistaken, I think I've also seen it at Old Port Wine Merchants. Embarrassingly, I forget how much I paid for it. I think it was somewhere around the $20 mark (a little under?), but hopefully someone will give the correct price in the comments.
The importer is Neal Rosenthal, another importer of mostly French wines (there's some good Italian stuff that he also brings in, as well as some Swiss stuff. I really like this importer. He focuses on artisanal producers and favors wines of elegance that truly express a sense of place. I think his wines are "French" in the way that we think about the elegant, subtle wines that many regions in that country can produce. I've included a picture of his back label in case any of that sounds interesting.This wine is an equal blend of Cabernet Sauvignon and Syrah and it comes from Provence, though it carries a Vin de Pays designation (more general, fewer restrictions) rather than an Appellation Controlee designation (more specific, more restrictions). The wine sees no oak, and I think that's helping to give it a great sense of freshness. In case anyone's not sick of reading my complaints on the subject, the wine is annoyingly sealed with a plastic imitation "cork". More on that in a previous post. The nose, while being of medium intensity, is rich and dark in profile. I get liqueur like aromas of black raspberry, black cherry, and black currant mixed with a grainy smell that reminds me of graham crackers. There's also a bit of a floral element and a minerality lying beneath the very ripe fruit. I also notice a touch of volatile acidity, coming across as a bit of vinegar and nail polish remover, but please understand that I am more sensitive than most people to this element and that it is so subtle that it's not bothering me. On the palate, the body is fairly light (medium minus) for a wine of such ripeness, but not at all lacking in flavor. The fruit is dominant on the attack, but the floral notes are not far behind, being more obvious to me than they were on the nose. I am thinking of purple flowers, maybe lavender. On the midpalate a bit of the stony minerality as well as some clean tasting dirt (as opposed to barnyardy dirt) come into play and balance the fruit nicely. I am noticing that the fruit is fresher on the palate than it smelled; not liqueur like but tasting like fresh juice in a really good way. Everything is joined on the finish by a good dose of that graham cracker element, which seems to intensify as the fruit fades. This wine evolves nicely on the palate and shows me that it is more "serious" than it might have smelled, given the distinct yet well integrated changes from attack to midpalate to finish, building in complexity through that progression. It's delicious enough to appeal to a wide range of consumers, yet interesting enough to appeal to nerds like myself. I might seem to repeat such sentiments often, but I assure you that I dislike many wines that I try. I try to review what I do like, so hopefully you don't think I'm too nice to the wines. Maybe I'll do a quick recap sometime of all of the wines I've disliked in the period of a couple of weeks. Please comment if that interests you or if you think that's a stupid idea. Anyway, very good wine and I'll score it 88 points. That's a buy for me, especially considering that if the nose were as nice as the palate I'd be into the outstanding range.

2008 Darting Risling Kabinett Dürkheimer Hochbenn, Pfalz

2010-07-05T16:17:00.006-04:00

I apologize in advance for my haphazard writing style and for probably not writing my best or most complete blog entry. I run the risk of reducing what (if any) respect you might have had for my writing by posting this without having had much sleep because I can neglect the blog no longer and I feel inspired by this delicious wine. This is a Terry Theise Selection. Theise is a fantastic importer (technically, he works with Michale Skurnik Wines out of New York as the importer, but Theise selects the estates) of German, Austrian, and grower Champagne wines (more on grower Champagnes another time). This is one of the few importers whose wine I will buy without question based on my trust of their palate. The wine is distributed by SoPo and can be had for about $19 retail. I got it at Browne Trading and I am told that it's also available at Rosemont on the Hill. I've decided to start including where I get these wines because of comments from long ago. The wine's nose is a bit reticent, but has a slight sting of sulfur and shows wet stone and steely minerality with hints of yellow apple peel, orange, and flowers. It smells extremely fresh and clean (I'm not getting any aroma of sulfur, just a bit of a physical sensation, which usually comes across as stinging or burning. I want to point out here that for most of the population, sulfur is nothing to fear, and that these wonderful German wines often have a bit more than most to insure their stability because of their residual sugar.). The palate is much more expressive, with similar components, but with the fruit and floral elements being more obvious (still dominated by stony minerality, though). The orange comes across distinctly as mandarin, and some of the fruit and floral elements combine to give me an impression of peach blossom. There is residual sugar (just a little off dry), but the high acidity cleans out any sensation of sweetness by the finish. I suspect that with a decant or a couple more years in the bottle this would open up a bit more, mainly because of the noticeable sulfur presence, which tends to decrease with aeration or bottle age. This is what I want in a Kabinett: clean, slightly off dry, not tasting like Spatlese as far as the ripeness of the fruit characteristics, and enough acidity to make it super food friendly. very good, and there's not much more I expect or really want from a reasonably priced (under $20) wine in this category. 88 points. I want more. And at 9% alcohol by volume, this is perfect for a warm summer afternoon. Of course, the only downfall to that is you might not get to enjoy it as I'm sure it would really shine: with shellfish or other light seafood. Sorry for the sideways picture. I'm not good with computers and I can't figure out how to fix it now that I've completed the post.

The glory of Cru Beaujolais: Jean Foillard 2005 Morgon "Côte du Py"

2010-06-14T13:00:00.006-04:00

Today I decided to be totally hedonistic and open a nice bottle of wine to have with lunch. This is before going to a dinner with fellow wine nerds where we will be drinking many truly great wines (at least by reputation). I wasn't planning on writing about this wine, but I'll tell you up front that I like it so much that this seemed like a perfect opportunity to write about the beauty of a good Cru Beaujolais. For those who don't know, many people unfairly think of Beaujolais only in terms of the juicy tasting Beaujolais Nouveau which, delicious as it is, is not the highest quality wine. This generalization is grossly unfair and untrue. There are 10 individual villages within Beaujolais that are known as the crus. "Cru" literally translates to "growth" but is often used by the French to designate a specific vineyard area or site. Within these crus there are some growers and producers making wines of far greater quality (and usually price) than the more basic categories of Beaujolais, Beaujolais Nouveau, basic Beaujolais, and Beaujolais Villages (theoretically, and usually literally, a step up in quality from the regularly labeled Beaujolais bottlings). One major difference between the higher quality wines and the juicy stuff is that the former are usually made with traditional vinification methods rather than what is known as carbonic maceration. Without getting too technical here, and as not to bore readers who already know all of this, carbonic maceration is a type of fermentation that produces aromas and flavors of artificially flavored fruit candy, bubblegum, and banana. Producers not using this method, but rather vinifying the wines similarly to other high quality red wines, are usually using fruit from one of these individual crus rather than bottling under the general appellation of Beaujolais. There are exceptions. I have even heard of a Beaujolais Nouveau produced without carbonic maceration. Edit: I also recently found out that there is some semicarbonic maceration, meaning some carbonic maceration and some regular, yeast vinification, used in this wine. I am humbly reminded that I should not generalize and there are, of course some high quality wines made with this method. So, again, I am humbled and will leave in all of my original text for the sake of honesty and as a lesson to myself to do my homework before writing about a wine. Getting back to my original text: in general, the highest quality wines will not say "Beaujolais" on the label, but will instead be labeled under one of these appellations: Régnié, Fleurie, Julienas, Chenas, Morgon, Moulin a Vent, Brouilly (the largest and most common of the crus), Cote de Brouilly, Chiroubles, and Saint-Amour. There are some accents of some of those that I didn't include, but I'm not too computer savvy and cutting and pasting kept on giving me italics. A cru Beaujolais might still be made with some carbonic maceration, (as this one is) but many are not. Another huge difference (maybe more important now that I know more?) is that the quality minded producers will use native yeast instead of specific lab cultured varieties, the latter of which also can contribute to the "tutti-fruity" banana type flavors. Morgon and Moulin a Vent are known as the most ageworthy crus (yes, many of these wines can age for ten or more years and develop beautifully), and Morgon is known for producing the most powerful wines. Within the appellation of Morgon there is a specific hillside known as the Cote du Py. This is supposed to be the finest site within Morgon. For those who haven't become too bored to continue reading, I'll now get into the wine.

Jean Foillard 2005 Morgon "Cote du Py" This wine is imported by Kermit Lynch, a wonderful importer of French and Italian wines. I am more familiar with his French portfolio than his Italian wines, but I can tell you that I find the quality and consistency to be quite high within the French offerings. His wines feature this image on the back labels:

This importer is represented in Maine by National and Wicked, but I'm not sure if this specific bottling is available. The current vintage is probably 2007 or 2008. I got this wine at a New Hampshire state store for $33. It is showing an array of red and dark berry fruits, including red and black cherry as well as red and black raspberry. The red fruits stand out more than the darker ones. It also has some spice components, both sweet and savory, and a gorgeous floral character, which is typical for these wines. It is medium bodied with medium minus aromatic and flavor intensity. There is complexity here to which my words are not doing justice. Beyond the surface flavors I have mentioned, there are other layers that are so harmonious that it's tough for me to find specific descriptors. What it comes down to for me is that this wine is delicious and so pretty. It seems delicate but strong, if that makes any sense. What I mean is that it's not a big wine but I'm sure it has quite a few years to go and will improve over that time. There's nothing here that I think will fade. The finish is fairly long (medium plus) and doesn't lose elements or thin out as so many finishes do. It hangs on nicely being beautiful and delicious. This wine is drinking wonderfully now, but I wish I had more so I could check in on it over the next five to ten years. It is one of the pricier Cru Beaujolais you're likely to encounter, but in the grand scheme of things I think it is undervalued at $33. I had a red Burgundy last night with a suggested retail of $40 and this wine puts that one to shame. The comparison is fair as this wine does remind me a bit of red Burgundy with brighter, California Pinot Noir style fruit, and these wines have a reputation for becoming more and more like their Pinot Noir siblings from the north as they age. This wine is outstanding and easily deserving of 91 points. (I gave the $40 Burgundy 82 points) Please, if you're not already familiar with this category, go out and try some Cru Beaujolais soon. They're great warm weather wines and they're very food friendly. I would even suggest serving them to those "I don't drink Beaujolais" snobs and not telling them until later that the wine is from Beaujolais.

Nasiakos Moschofilero 2009

2010-06-09T17:55:00.003-04:00

I just went to the Greek wine tasting at RSVP and was quite pleased with some of what I tasted. This wine -- The Nasiakos (producer) 2009 Moschofilero (grape variety) was one of the highlights for me. So I decided to come home, open a bottle, and write a review. Upon first opening this wine I noticed quite a bit of sulfur dioxide, which, in excessive amounts, gives me a kind of stinging feeling in my nostrils and sinuses when I smell the wine. Some aeration has reduced the sensation, but I still notice it faintly about 10 minutes after opening and pouring the wine. If I were serving this to people I would probably decant, as that often seems to help with this condition. Without digressing too much (when can I help it?), I feel the need to mention that there are sulfur compounds naturally present in all wines, even if none have been added. Also, for those who think they might have some kind of allergy to sulfur compounds, you are probably wrong. If you are able to eat dried fruit and a variety of fresh fruits without problems, you are not allergic to sulfites. If you are blaming a sulfite allergy on your headaches, you are not allergic to sulfites. Sulfur allergies give asthmatic symptoms, not headaches. So if you can eat raisins or apples without having trouble breathing, you're not allergic to sulfur. I hope I haven't been too brash in my partial explanation. I am usually much more polite in person, but writing to a faceless, nameless audience has given me the courage to vent my frustration that arises every time I hear someone tell me "I can't drink red wines because I'm allergic to sulfites" (whites generally have higher levels of sulfur dioxide than reds).

So, back to the wine. It's distributed by National and retails for about $11. The aromatic intensity is about medium. I'm getting pretty aromas of peach, nectarine (big time nectarine), flowers, and paraffin. I know this is a dry wine, but it smells sweet. If you've had much experience with Gewurtztraminer or Viognier you probably know what I am talking about. I'm also noticing subtle hints of bubblegum and baking spices. It does remind me of Gewurtztraminer, and I was told that the comparison is made often. The palate is quite a bit like the nose. As I mentioned, this wine is dry, meaning there is no residual sugar, but the flavor profile reminds me of sweet things. Again we've got medium intensity, and medium minus body. The acidity is also medium minus, which troubles me a bit as I think of trying to pair this with foods, though it would be great with a salad that might have a fruity dressing or a little fruit in it. The flavor profile is very much like the aromatic profile I described. There's a lot of fruit there and a strong floral element. The finish is quite long (medium plus) for a wine that isn't terribly intense flavorwise. I still notice the sulfur a bit and that is bothering me just a touch, but I assume that will continue to "blow off" (lessen) with more air. As it is now, I'm firmly into "good" territory, and bordering on "very good", with the excess sulfur holding it back just a hair. I don't smell or taste the sulfur, which can often come across similarly to a burning match, but I feel it in the back of the throat a little as well as in the nostrils. I suspect that if I had chilled the wine this element might not be noticeable. I didn't pick up on it at the tasting at all. That adds up to 84 points in my book, making this a definite buy. I'm glad I got 2 bottles. I can see me going through a fair amount of this wine this summer, especially when I want to sip a little wine in the sun and I'm not eating anything with it. There's a lot of wine out there. Please don't drink the same old stuff this summer when you can find unique, fun bottles like this one.

Alanera Nero D'Avola 2008, Sicily

2010-05-29T20:16:00.003-04:00

Your long lost wine reviewer is back! I decided today that I had neglected our (imaginary?) readers enough and, despite wanting a beer when I got home, I opened a bottle of wine. what commitment! Perhaps drinking wine when I wanted a beer is a greater sacrifice than finding the time to write an entry more often than I do? Of course not. Let's face it: I drink wine almost every night and it's been over a month since I've written about one here. Well, no more apologies or promises. I won't even complain about the plastic fake cork that sealed this wine (see how I snuck that in there?).

Let me start by saying I have no idea why Nero D'Avola is not a greater force in the US wine market. These wines often deliver the big fruit that many Americans crave while remaining food friendly and are generally very reasonably priced. Nero D'Avola is the grape variety and the wines are generally from Sicily, though the variety does pop up by itself and in blends in other parts of Southern Italy.

This wine is distributed by Devenish and can be found for about $13 at retail. It is showing bold, plummy fruit on the nose with a little peppery spice and dirt. I'm also picking up a hint of barnyard. Some of the fruit is a bit muddled and stewed, but there is some fairly fresh black cherry accenting the plum. It's also showing a bit of a perfumy, incensy character. On the palate this is fairly bold (medium plus intensity). It starts off just like the nose, but that leads into a midpalate of fresher, more focused fruit flavors which highlight red and black cherries as well as the plum. The finish (medium length) is quite balanced and almost elegant (certainly elegant compared to the attack). I really like the midpalate and finish of this wine as they show more balance and focus than the attack or nose did (not that the attack or nose are an unbalanced mess; they're nice, too). Picking the wine apart like this, I have unfairly failed to mention that it is downright delicious. It's not thought provoking, but I've finished a small glass just writing this review. I would say the wine is good, bordering on very good, but doesn't quite have the complexity for me to say very good. That equals 84+ points in my book, making this a definite buy. I think this wine shows how Nero D'Avola can appeal to those who like fruity New World wines as well as those who like earthy Old World wines. If you're not drinking Nero D'Avola and you like red wine I think you're making a huge mistake. Get out there and try some.

Laurent Miquel Père et Fils Syrah Grenache 2008

2010-04-28T19:48:00.004-04:00

Hi, again, I know it's not really soon, but I am here to write about a locally available wine, as promised. I will also embark on another quick rant at the end, but I promise to be brief this time and I will save it for the end in hopes that people will at least read the wine review as you don't have to wade through complaints about which you do not care. The wine in front of me is the Laurent Miquel 2008 Syrah Grenache. It's got the words "Père et Fils" on it, which I see all the time on French labels, but for which I never bothered to find a definition. I just looked it up and found that it translates to something along the lines of "father and son". Now I know. The region here is Vin de Pays d'Oc, so, again, we're probably talking Languedoc (France) here, though it could technically include fruit from Roussillon. I am sorry for you and the wine that I was drinking coffee earlier, because it certainly impairs my palate somewhat, but I think I can adequately evaluate the wine anyway. At least I don't smoke cigarettes. (Side note, I found it funny in the movie Mondovino [which, side side note, was a great movie if you're a bit of a wine nerd or if you just want a very opinionated look at artisanal winemaking versus making "globalized" or "international" styles of wine which has a lot of footage of people's nice dogs], seeing the super expensive winemaking consultant, Michel Rolland, seem to chain smoke cigarettes when most of his job is to taste wines and give advice based on his evaluations.) So, digression over -- here's my take on the wine:
$10, distributed by DaVine Wine
Nose: jammy blackberry with hints of red berries and a bit of nail polish remover (it's a touch more than I'd like, but it's not enough for me not to drink the wine), along with a little peppery spice. This smells like it's a warm climate wine because of the jamminess, but the intensity is medium and I don't smell heat from the alcohol. The palate is pretty similar, but the red berry fruit is more defined (still more dark fruit than red here), as is the black pepper, which is still not too overwhelming, as it sometimes can be for me. Intensity here is also medium, with medium to medium plus body. On the finish, the fruit fades faster than the pepper. The nail polish remover element (ethyl acetate) is a bit more pronounced than I'd like on the midpalate, but I don't notice it in the beginning or end. The finish is medium minus and quite peppery. Overall, this is a simple wine with a minor flaw and minor imbalance. As a result, right now I'm saying it's near the cusp of acceptable to good, but into the good territory. The ethyl acetate does become more apparent with air, but it's hardly noticeable upon popping and pouring. Keep in mind that my number scores are literal as the poor/acceptable/good/very good/outstanding scale goes, and thus seem lower than those of many professional critics. I'll give this an 81+. To be fair, if you like really fruity wines, you'll like this more than I do. At $10, I'd still say it's a solid value if you like wines like this or wines from this area.

Now the biggest problem I have with this wine: it comes sealed with one of those rubbery plastic fake "corks". I've complained about these before, so I'll stop there.

Muscadet and Proposed Legislation

2010-04-20T11:58:00.004-04:00

So, this is about a wine I recently got really excited about. I drank the wine last night, so please understand that I will do my best to describe it based on my recollection. The wine's aromas and flavors are fairly fresh in my mind because I was so excited about it. This is not the best or most complex wine, but I put it right at the top of very good, bordering on outstanding, and I think it's relevant that I review it here now. The reason is that this is another wine that is not available in Maine. I'm sure you might be asking yourself why I am bothering to review another wine that's tough to get your hands on. If you've read my other entries, you might now be worried about another tiresome, inappropriate political rant. Well, I do have political motives, but I'll try to be fair to those involved and not throw around accusations that are not true this time. I also really want to tell you about this wine, which is the best Muscadet I've ever had. Muscadet is a wine from near the mouth of the Loire river in France. The grape variety is called Melon de Bourgogne. These wines are generally fresh and light, with mineral driven flavors and something reminiscent of sea air. If you open up whatever wine resource you might have, you'll probably see these talked about as wines that should be drunk as young as possible; certainly nothing to throw in your cellar and age. Relatively recently in the long history of this wine region, a small number of growers have realized that if they drastically reduce what are normally very high yields and set out to make serious, rather than rather neutral quaffing, wine, they end up with something that is, indeed ageworthy and complex. I have been intrigued for some time as I have read about these wines but not, until last night, had the opportunity to try one. What's neat is that this wine has already been aged, though I suspect it will continue to improve for the next 5 years or so. The vintage of this wine, in case you couldn't make it out in the picture, is 1997. It is rare to find a well aged wine at retail in general, and almost unheard of to get a wine over 12 years old for under $20. That's what my New Hampshire resident friends (not me, of course; I live in Maine) were able to do, though, by mail ordering this wine. Okay, with tax and shipping it probably came to more like $25 a bottle, but I still consider that one of the best values I've seen for wine.

Before I get into a tasting note, I will say that my reason for writing, besides my excitement over the wine itself, is that there is a bill in the House of Representatives right now, H.R. 5034, that is going to make it very easy for states to pass laws that unconstitutionally prohibit interstate commerce, namely the interstate sales of wine. This bill would make it very difficult for a citizen to challenge the constitutionality of such laws, which is the main way they have been challenged in places like Massachusetts. I will try not to get too political here, but in short, I am for the Constitution and its enforcement, and I am for the right to buy wines not represented by wholesalers in Maine. I cannot buy from retailers in other states, but I now can buy from small producers who do not have representation in our market. I love having this right and applaud the lawmakers involved in recently granting it to citizens of Maine. Allowing states to stop such practices (many will due to the power of liquor wholesale lobbies in all states and on a national level) by writing laws that violate the Constitution would be a great injustice. It could also put a lot of small, quality minded producers whose only way of staying afloat is to sell directly to their small, dedicated customer base throughout the country. I implore anyone who shares my views in this matter to write their House representative and urge that person to vote against this bill. Here are a couple of websites where you can find out a bit more:
Decanter article
Facebook page
actual bill text
Wilson Act (bill would change)
If you do some searching you'll find much more.

So, if you're still with me and you haven't forgotten that this is a wine blog rather than a political one, here's my take on the wine:

1997 Pierre Luneau-Papin Muscadet Sevre & Maine Sur Lie Cuvee Medaillee (not available in Maine, was about $19)

At first, this wine smelled a bit funky. It had a dusty, musty aroma (not cork taint) masking some of the orange and peach that was still coming through. After a few minutes, the mustiness had blown off, revealing layered aromas of stony minerality, orange, peach, and hints of a saline quality and petroleum jelly (sounds weird, but it was interesting and smelled very good). On the palate, this wine was delicious. It was very similar to the nose. It had great finesse and freshness, and that mustiness that blew off was subtly showing itself as a sort of dusty, earthy flavor that was mingling beautifully with the core of fresh fruits. If I hadn't known better, I would assume this was a much younger wine, maybe 4-5 years from vintage. I only might think it was even that old because of the petrol element, but really some wines will show that in their youth, and the freshness of the fruit (fruit elements tend to start tasting dried out or stewed as wines age) would have me thinking this had been bottled within the past year or two. At close to 13 years, I've rarely experienced a white wine with this kind of freshness of fruit, and I've only seen it before in Riesling. Even the Chenin Blancs I've had with similar age have seemed more mature than this wine did (not in a bad way, but it was evident). Considering that those are some of the longest lived dry whites, and Muscadet is generally seen as one of the shortest lived, this is really interesting. It didn't quite have the complexity or progression of flavor for me to call it outstanding, but it is as high as very good goes for me. 89+ points.

If you're sick of reading about wines that aren't available here, or if you don't care and think it's still interesting, let me know by leaving comments. If you're in the former category, send me an email (missatiejacket@yahoo.com) and I will come to your place and open something not locally available that I think will show you why I do care so much about such wines. I will review a wine that is available in this area soon. I promise.

Puydeval 2008 Rouge

2010-04-08T19:40:00.003-04:00

Hi, folks! I'm still alive and my computer still works, regardless of what the inactivity here might have led you to suppose. I am here with an open bottle of the 2008 Puydeval, which is a blend of 60% Cabernet Franc, 28% Syrah, and 12% Merlot. The wine has been sealed with the dreaded plastic "cork", which I detest. These closures have been shown to leach flavor components out of the wine, though it hasn't (to my knowledge) been studied to what extent that effect might be noticeable. What really bothers me about this closure is that it does not reliably last more than about 2 years, if even that long. I once got a great deal on a case of wine with these closures that had been in bottle maybe a year or year and a half and was drinking fine. The last few bottles I got to were all oxidized, but all showed different levels of oxidation. Some were kind of drinkable (if you've already opened a few bottles, who cares?) and some went straight down the drain. The wine itself should not have been that bad yet. sad.

Back to the wine at hand: it's labeled as a "Vin De Pays D'Oc", which tells me it can contain grapes from anywhere in the Languedoc or Roussillon areas in Southern France, more likely Languedoc. It's distributed by National and is probably about $14 retail if I remember correctly. This wine is purple and almost completely opaque, except at the rim. It has a big nose of licorice, a jammy melee of somewhat indiscernible fruits, both red and black, but mostly black (my palate might not be at the top of its game today, but I didn't want to neglect the blog any longer), black pepper, a bit of graphite, and a bit of a floral character. I am able to pick out some blackcurrant in the fruit character, which is not as jammy as some but not really smelling like fresh fruit either. There's also a hint of alcohol and just a hint of paint thinner (ethyl acetate), which I usually consider a flaw right away, but it's very faint here and I can deal with it, along with a little cedar.

The wine's body is probably medium plus, as is the flavor intensity. The palate is a bit hot (alcohol coming through), but overall fairly pleasant. I notice a lot of blackberry and blackcurrant, along with that peppery spice and those hints of purple flowers and cedar. There might even be a barely perceptible (to me, but I think my recognition threshold is below average) amount of residual sugar here, which brings out the fruit more. Don't get me wrong; this is still a dry wine. The fruit here is fresher than it was on the nose (not as jammy), though this is clearly not a cool climate wine, which would generally have more definition of flavor and less heat from the alcohol. There is a bit of tannin, which is fine grained and enjoyable. I could see this going well with roasted meats or some kind of game. The finish is about medium, which is fine. If the nose were as good as the palate, I could get more excited about this wine. Frankly, I've not been drinking a lot of "New World" styled wines lately (I know it's France, but the Languedoc wines often taste more New World to me), and they're not generally my preference, so I might be being a bit hard on this wine. Every time I go back to it, though, the nose is kind of weird and the palate is really nice. Overall, I'd give this 84 points (good, almost very good) and say if you like this style it's probably right up your alley and priced fairly. EDIT: Later in the evening this wine started smelling really stewed, like I was cooking with wine. The flavor did not degrade nearly as much, but it did start tasting just a little more like my initial impression of the aroma. I would have to say, after the whole experience, that this is more of an 82+ point (good) wine for me. If it had shown as it did later from the start, I'd really be trashing it. Too bad. I think this is a great illustration of how unfair it can be to a wine and to a readership to make such snap judgments as we often do. A wine can easily change this much for better or for worse with a couple hours' aeration. I strongly believe that this shows how flawed a system of wine scoring and the power the professional critics' scores are. I have also noticed what a significant difference as little as six months more in the bottle can have on a wine, which again illustrates the same point. I will continue to use scoring as I am a hypocrite, but I would encourage people to pay more attention to the poor/acceptable/good/very good/outstanding scale than the actural number, and to always remember that we all taste things a bit differently and we can have vastly different preferences in taste. I was fortunate enough to buy this when Hannaford had it marked down after its time in the Limited Reserve bins, which is something to look for if you live near a Hannaford that has a bunch of those.

Thank you so much for checking back here despite so many weeks of nothing. I appreciate more than you probably realize that you would take the time to do so.

Harlaftis Winery Athanassiadi, Nemea, Greece 2007

2010-02-23T16:37:00.005-05:00

Hi, again. I sit in front of my computer once again with an open bottle of wine in front of me. This wine might interest some people (me included) because it is Greek. With the LONG history of winemaking in Greece it might seem surprising what a small portion of the US market its wines control. I believe we will be seeing more and more Greek wine as their general quality continues to rise with the help of more winemaking experience and better technology. This wine is from the Nemea region and I was told that it is made from 100% Agiorgitika grapes and sees no oak. Here are my initial impressions (the picture shows the wrong vintage):

Harlaftis Winery Athanassiadi, Nemea, Greece, 2007, 100% Agiorgitika, about $11 retail, distibuted in this area by So Po Wine Co
dark ruby with watery rim
nose: medium- intensity of juicy, almost candied red fruit (sweet red cherry, raspberry) and just a hint of peppery spice and green pepper
palate: quite like the nose. The fruit manages to stay fresh enough (not candied) that I enjoy it. The nose had me a little worried that the wine would taste "fake", but it doesn't. The lack of oak treatment is, I think, allowing the fruit to take the forefront, and the hints of spice and green pepper that I got on the nose remain just hints on the palate.
The wine has medium- body, acid, tannins, and length. It doesn't really change much during the palate and is a bit one dimensional, but that dimension is tasting good. I would call it good, probably 83 points for my palate, and considering that it comes from a category not hugely represented in our market, I think it is a reasonable value. I would recommend it to anyone who wants to try something new or anyone who knows they like this style of wine.

I would like to thank everyone who has made it this far for reading our posts. If you are reading, please leave us comments. We would love your feedback, including any suggestions or requests you might have.

2006 Barone Cornacchia Montepulciano d'Abruzzo

2010-02-16T17:58:00.005-05:00

Hi, again, folks. I'm running the risk of alienating those who check this blog solely for Galen's posts by writing my second in one day. Don't worry; I'm in a better mood now (I'm drinking wine). I am willing to take this risk because I am hoping my presence will encourage (or shame) Galen into continuing with this, his, blog. I understand that people wonder where to get these wines about which we write. I agree with the sentiment of not promoting any single retailer. I do think maybe it will help people to know who distributes the wines in this area. If you have a favorite wine shop you can ask them to special order you a bottle of the wine. That should be easy for them provided you can tell them which distributor to ask and that the shop buys from that distributor. If they don't buy from that distributor, you should be able to find someone who does. Now, on to the wine.

2006 Barone Cornacchia Montepulciano d'Abruzzo, about $15 retail, distributed by Easterly Wine
opaque ruby with lighter ruby rim
medium intensity (nose and palate), body, acid, and length; medium-, fine tannins
The nose shows some game and oak (comes across as smoke, toast, and plain old oak staves) with overtones of dark plum, red cherry, graphite, and dust.
The palate starts out a lot like the nose, but gives way to a fairly explosive midpalate with a lot more fruit dominance. The components are similar, and everything is still there, but the dominant flavors change. The finish is more like the attack. I also get a little raspberry and maybe some other dark berry fruit. Some coffee also emerges from the midpalate to the finish. The flavors are nicely balanced and I like the combination of earthy tones and fruit. As the fruit drops out on the finish, I am left with a slightly awkward bitterness that's costing this wine a point or two. The gaminess might be a little weird to those not familiar with that element, but this wine would go gorgeously with a variety of meats and would, with such a pairing, be pleasant even to such people. Personally, I think it's quite nice on its own and is delivering very good quality for the price and category. Heck, this is very good quality in general. If you like the reds of central and southern italy, this wine is for you. If you're not familiar with the montepulciano grape, this would be a good start. 86 points

If there are regions or varieties whose wines you want us to write about, please let us know by leaving comments. Thank you for returning after we let this endeavor go for so long.

Copain and a quick rant

2010-02-16T13:20:00.009-05:00

Sorry to anyone who cares that we've let this blog die while still an infant. I just stumbled upon it (yes, I had pretty much forgotten) and decided to look through my notes for a decent tasting note to post. This wine is not available in Maine (sorry ... the original idea was to review wines people can find, but I think it's okay since we haven't been doing that anyway), but I'm a big fan of Copain since the '06 vintage. They still won't ship to Maine because our stupid legislators can't properly create a law enabling small producers not distributed in this state to do so. These legislators claim that the new law is great and does allow such activity, but if someone as small as Copain spent the time and money necessary to do so legally, they'd probably be losing money shipping wine to Maine. The last thing I'll say, now that I feel better after having unfairly generalized about an entire group of people, some of whom might even know how to craft good laws, is that this note is from my pocket notebook and will not have the detail as others here. Edit: I am leaving the original text in here so you can laugh at my foolishness, but here's an update regarding Copain. With their next release, they will be able to ship to Maine. I guess they decided it would be profitable after all. Great news for us. If you like wines made in the style I describe here, I highly suggest getting on their mailing list. If you're not sure, I believe you can order the Tous Ensemble series (not single vineyard, but still very good wines) without being on their mailing list. So for now, for this blog, the score is State of Maine:1 -- Doug:-1 (I subtracted a point for being so rude). I hear Maine will even take back the rule about minors not seeing any wine tasting going on. Now maybe they can learn not to create these problems in the first place. I promise to post something better soon. If I fail to do so I encourage people to comment, blasting me as ruthlessly and unfairly as I have just blasted certain lawmakers (don't even get me started on the idiot from Freeport who thinks kids shouldn't see any wine tasting going on). I leave it to Galen to censor me if he sees fit.

2006 Copain Alder Springs "Spirit Rock" Syrah, Mendocino (picture shows wrong vintage)-- not available in Maine, but about $40-$45 on release, if I remember correctly - tasted 12/25/09
opaque purple with ruby, watery rim
The nose and palate of this wine are quite similar. I got blackberry juice, white pepper, green pepper (slight enough to be charming rather than off putting), other savory spices, underripe plum, and black cherry. When I delved further I noticed a little lavender. The length was medium- and the flavor and aromatic intensities were medium+. The wine was very pretty and quite fresh for CA Syrah. This was right on the border for me of very good and outstanding. I scored it 90 points, but I would have gone higher if the finish had held on a bit longer. These wines are built to age and I suspect that element might flesh out a bit over the next few years.

For those who aren't familiar with Copain, Wells Guthrie (cofounder and vigneron) has, since the '06 vintage been focused on sourcing fruit from the coolest sites in CA (mostly Anderson Valley and the rest of Mendocino) in order to create wines of balance and significant acidity (sorry I didn't note the acid in this wine) that will age well. I can't comment on ageability, but in my opinion he is certainly accomplishing the rest of his goal, and the balance and acidity make them great food wines. The pinot noirs are quite elegant and this syrah was extremely well balanced. The wines I've had so far are almost Old World in structure (the pinots are Old World in structure) and yet distinctly Californian in flavor profile. If this style interests you, I suggest trying his Tous Ensemble wines. They're his entry level line (the only ones blended from multiple vineyards) and great values. The '07 Tous Ensemble Pinot Noir is killer and currently being discounted in a couple of places. You can find the wines in Massachusetts if you go there ever, or I would suggest (if I advocated such things, which I do not) ordering directly from www.copainwines.com and having the wine shipped to a friend or relative in New Hampshire. Let NH have the excise tax since Maine doesn't seem to want it (or don't -- I'm not saying this is the right thing to do and am obviously against the illegal practice of transporting alcohol across state lines ... in fact, I have no idea how I acquired the bottle I just reviewed).

Chateau des Annereaux Lalande de Pomerol 2005

2009-07-01T17:38:00.003-04:00

83% Merlot, 12% Cabernet Franc, 5% Cabernet Sauvignon Deep ruby color with a watery rim. Medium body, acidity, alcohol (12.5% avb on label), and flavor intensity with medium minus, superfine tannins that are more evident on the teeth and gums than anywhere else.
This wine needed some air time. It was closed and almost unpleasant at first, but here's what's going on after about a half hour in the decanter. Nose has blackberry, plum, dusty, dirty earthy notes, and a chalky mocha element. The palate has nice fruit, like that of the nose, up front and gives way to a balanced midpalate that is quite similar to the entire aroma with a little more complexity, including a hint of tobacco. Strong fruit on the backpalate leads to a decently long (medium/medium plus) finish that gets a bit green and bitter at the very end. As the green, bitter flavors were dominating the wine when it was first opened, I think they might subside with more air or a little more time in the bottle, which this wine obviously needs anyway. My score reflects my current impression, but I do think the wine has the potential to be even better in 2-4 years. This wine was on the shelf for $20 and I think is a very good value at that price. I guess there still is some good Bordeaux that I can afford. Note: the awkwardness of the finish is diminishing with more time into what I think of as the pleasant side of Cabernet Franc. My score will stay the same, but I still see more potential here.
89 points

Wine Video? Why not.....

2009-06-25T21:27:00.009-04:00

When I started this blog I only wanted to review wines, no more, no less. However tonight I came across this video on hulu.com (dont worry its free and legal to watch): http://www.hulu.com/watch/79439/wine-for-the-confused.

This 45 min documentary follows John Cleese around California while he hosts a blind wine tasting, travels to different local vineyards, visits a restaurant, and finally invites wine professionals to his house, all for the sake of making wine more approachable and less 'posh.' I found it very interesting because it stared John Cleese, and because it is a documentary for basic wine appreciation, understanding and purchasing. The reason I decided to post this video on the blog was because the program made some great points that I want to stress.

1) No one should tell you what you should like. While reading reviews is a great way to find out about different wines, and read other people's opinions, I cant stress enough that reviews are just that, other people's opinions. I've heard a few good sayings that solidify this point, "Drink what you like, and all the rest is commentary" and "Trust your own palate." There are objective ways to evaluate the different aspects of wines, but those equations do not take into consideration that each person has their own palate and therefore enjoy different things. Personally I dont usually like the wines that Robert Parker (a big time wine critic) likes, typically I tend to enjoy the wines that Stephen Tanzer (another big time critic) enjoys the most. This is not always true, but its a good way for me to find new things that I may like.

2) Just because a wine is expensive doesnt mean that its good, and again the opposite is also true. Expensive doesnt always equate to quality, and inexpensive doesnt always mean its not good. Ive tried some amazing wines that were more than one months rent, but Ive also tried expensive wines that didnt really impress me. Also there have been some wines that cost less than a large pepperoni pizza that are aso impressive.

3) Try new things, and dont get stuck on trends. In the 80's and 90's merlot was a top selling grape, then a popular movie came out shunning merlot and praising pinot noir. Guess what...pinot noir sales when up and merlot went down. Personally I like merlot, some of my favorite bordeaux wines are predominately merlot.

4) Work on developing your palate, and building a vocabulary to help pull out specific features of the wines you like. The only way to do this is drink more wine.

5) Find a store that you like, and start a dialog with the employees. Dont be afraid to tell them what you like and allow them to make recommendations for new things.

So there are many other little tid-bits in this documentary as well as interviews with winery owners, grape growers, sommelier, and other wine professionals. I must admit that I wish it had more humor, but it covers some basics about wine, and is a good show for people just getting into wine. Don't worry this is not going to become a habit (reviewing anything other than wine itself), but again I thought this video made some good points and I wanted to share it with others.

Let me know what you think

Galen

Coto De Hayas rosado 2007

2009-06-24T19:04:00.007-04:00

Producer: Coto De Hayas
Country: Spain
Region: Campo De Borja
Vintage: 2007
Style: Rose
Grapes: Mostly Garnacha, some Tempranillo, a little Syrah, Cabernet Sauvignon, Chardonnay.
Declared Alcohol (on label): 13%
Approximate Price: $6/Glass
Date Reviewed: 6/23/2009
Reviewed By: Galen Ricci

Appearance:
Clear with a medium crimson color, thin watery edge and average legs.

Nose:
Clean (no cork faults or oxidization). The aroma had a medium intensity with youthful notes of, cranberry, cranberry juice, strawberry and orange peel/zest.

Palate:
As expected the wine was dry with medium to medium + acid, medium body, medium alcohol, and no perceivable tannins. The flavors maintained a medium intensity with notes of tart cranberry, sour strawberry, red cherry, and a touch of orange zest. The finish had a medium length.

Conclusion:
This rose's quality was good. The price range fell between inexpensive and mid-priced. As for the development, the wine is ready to drink and should not be aged.

Author's Notes:
I tasted this wine at a local restaurant and I was surprised because this wine looked and smelled almost exactly like fresh cranberry juice. I bet I could have fooled someone into thinking it was cranberry juice, until they took a sip. Of course this wine was served chilled, so I waited until it came closer to room temperature before taking any notes. As it warmed up the bouquet started to show a few more characteristics than just cranberry juice, but those aromas were faint, and even though I had my nose within millimeters of the wine, I was really searching for some extra descriptors. I would feel comfortable saying that the bouquet on this wine was a "one and a half" trick pony, but the jury is still out as I should really taste this wine again when Im sure its at room temp rather than guessing while sitting at the bar. Hey I was thirsty, so give me a break.

The flavors on the palate were much more defined showing red fruits (cranberry, strawberry, cherry), with a touch of citrus (orange zest), and this was well balanced with good acidity (very important in my mind). I also enjoyed the body because it had a pleasant weight that seemed to provide substance to the wine. The finish was also very nice since it lasted for a reasonable length and didnt show any signs of bitterness (sometimes I find that in large production roses because the crushing method might be a little more aggressive and the bitter oils from the seeds end up in the juice).

The palate was a more expressive than the bouquet, but there weren't layers of flavors to intrigue my taste buds for hours of enjoyment. Instead this wine was very straight forward and to the point, and that point was cranberry! Which isnt a bad thing especially at this price. While I was sitting at the bar I conducted an experiment and tasted this wine with two types of cheese. First bree, second gorgonzola. As to be expected it was delightful with the bree. The acidity of the wine cut through the creaminess of the bree, and added a little bit of pleasantly tart fruit to the rich cheese, an nice combination. As for the gorgonzola, well that was a completely different story, I wasnt expecting a good pairing, but I didnt expect a train wreck in my mouth either. What came together in my mouth was a train wreck with a truck full of cow shit. *Note to self, dont try that combo again, even if its for the science of wine pairings*

When it was all said and done I did enjoy this wine for providing me with a well priced, straight forward, all around good rose. This is a wine that doesnt require much thought because it puts everything in front of the consumer and doesnt have anything to hide. I would score this wine 87 points, since its balanced and enjoyable. If I paid 6 dollars for a glass then I bet it would be on a wine shelf at a retail store for around $9-$12, which is a stellar price. If anyone know how much this wine costs retail I would like to know.

E. Guigal Chateauneuf du Pape 2001

2009-06-21T20:43:00.011-04:00

Domaine: E. Guigal
Country: France
Region: Chateauneuf du Pape
Vintage: 2001
Style: Red
Grapes: 80% old Grenache, 10% Syrah, 5% Mourvèdre and others.
Declared Alcohol (on label): 13.5%
Approximate Price: $49/bottle
Date Reviewed: 6/21/2009
Reviewed By: Galen Ricci

Appearance:
Clear with a deep ruby/tawny core and a medium tawny rim. The color spread to the edge completely leaving no room for a watery rim. The legs were medium sized with an average speed.

Nose:
The nose was clean without any cork faults or oxidization. The aromas had a medium to medium + intensity and were clearly on the developing side of maturity. The bouquet showed Dark Cherry, Prunes, All-Spice, Cocoa, Coffee, Caramel, and had a slight Gamy tone.

Palate:
The wine was dry, with medium to medium + acid, and medium tannins. The alcohol, body and length also fell into the medium category. The intensity of the flavors were medium to medium - and showed, Red Cherry, Prunes, Leather, Smokiness, and a Gamy quality.

Conclusion:
Overall the wine fit into the good category, and is about mid priced for this region. This wine is ready to drink now, but can age longer.

Authors Notes:
I should start by saying that I purchased this wine at a supermarket in their close out section. It was a half bottle (375ml) for, no shit, $3.50. I also picked up a half bottle of veuve clicquot nv for $14, crazy I know. So now that I explained the situation about where I bought the wine, this might set the tone for what I think about this wine. 2001 in chateauneuf-du-pape was a stellar year, erobertparker.com scored this vintage in southern rhone as 96 out of 100, and noted that most of the wines were still tannic and were slow maturing. I agree that this wine was still tight, and needs more time to mature. However, I dont trust the conditions that it was stored in for the past few years (I know that this bottle was sitting on the grocery store shelf, probably standing up, for at least 3 years, because the most current vintage of this wine is 2006). So I decided to open this wine up and enjoy my $3.50 purchase, for the sake of this blog. Now on to my personal assessment of the wine.

I loved the color of this wine, I get really excited about older red wines because I really enjoy the transition from fruity to savory flavors that wines take on as they age. Red wines start to get a little lighter in color and the watery rim starts to disappear, which was the case with this wine. I thought the nose on this wine was wonderful, many layers of developed fruits, tied in with spices, kernel (coffee, chocolate), and animal (leather, gamy). Had I been sitting around with other people smelling this wine we could have found 20 plus different descriptors for the nose, all built off of a well made, mature wine.

The palate was a bit more challenging though, since I use the pop and pour technique (this wine should be aerated before consumption), the palate was not as interesting as the nose. The fruit, spice, kernel, animal aspects really ran together and didnt show themselves individually. In contrast, the alcohol was very well integrated into the wine, and didnt provide any excessive 'heat,' which was very pleasant. The tannins were not nearly as robust as I had expected, they were nice and velvety, but for this vintage and this region I was expecting a little more grip. Also I expected a little more weight in the body, but then I did some research and discovered that this vintage from Guigal was mostly grenache (producers in chateauneuf-du-pape are allowed to blend up to 13 different varietal), which in southern rhone produces wines that are typically low in tannin and color. As the wine had time to breath the flavors started to open up more and show more depth, but still I expected a lot more from this producer and vintage. I cant recall if Ive had a 2001 chateauneuf-du-pape, but I do recall enjoying a variety of wines from this region from various vintages, and most of them were younger and had a lot more character. The length on this wine was medium (average), and I was hoping for a lot more, even though it had a front, middle and finish, it still didnt last on my palate as I would have expected it to. If this was a smaller producer I might give them a more of a break, but Guigal is a large producer with land all over rhone, basically I expect a lot more from this wine. Am I disappointed? not a chance since I paid $3.50 for the bottle. I might have been disappointed if I spent $49 per bottle on this wine.

In the end it came down to the fact that the flavors on the palate were not as interesting or as intense as the aroma on the nose, add to that the length was too short for my expectation of this region. From my experience I would suggest that readers find other Chateauneuf du pape's within this price range. I score this wine 89+ points, there are much better examples of this region out there. Not to mention there are $15 spanish grenacha's with longer finish than this wine.

Egervin Bulls blood 2003

2009-06-20T19:57:00.012-04:00

Domaine: Egervin
Country: Hungary
Region: Eger
Vintage: 2003
Style: Red
Grapes: Kadarka, Kékfrankos, Blauer and possibly others
Declared Alcohol (on label): 12%
Approximate Price: $9/bottle
Date Reviewed: 6/20/2009
Reviewed By: Galen Ricci

Appearance:
Clear medium ruby core withe a light ruby/tawny rim. An ever so slight watery edge, and average moving, slightly colored legs.

Nose:
Clean without any cork flaws (TCA/TCB) or oxidization, and smells developed with a medium intensity aroma. Characteristics of Red Cherry, Red Raspberry, a little leather, and a sort of baked fruit smell, behind caramel (possibly from oak aging).

Palate:
Dry with medium acidity, medium - tannins, medium - alcohol, medium - body, medium flavor intensity and medium - length. Characteristics of Red apple, sour cherry, tart raspberry, plum and a little leather.

Conclusion:
The wine falls into the good category, it is ready to drink now, and is mid-priced for this style of wine.

Authors Notes:
This is the first bulls blood wine I have ever had. One of my wine classes covered Hungary, Austria, Romania, and Greece, so naturally we drank tokaji, zwegelt, pinot noir, and agiorgitiko from the respective regions. We did talk about bulls blood, but didnt taste one in class, so one day I saw it on a shelf for 10.99 and decided to give it a shot. So in all fairness I can evaluate the wine's attributes, but I have no other experience to compare it to. I kinda like it and for the price I feel as though this has been a good experience, I would buy another bulls blood again, but I would seek out another producer so I can see how this one compares. I like the body, and the 12% alcohol, the acidity is balanced. I would have like a little more aroma intensity, but the flavors make up for the lean bouquet. I really like the sour cherry and tart raspberry. Its should pair well with the bolognese sauce that I'm having for dinner, similar to a sangiovese from italy, except less tannins and lighter body. Which is not a bad thing. Most people would probably not like this wine because its lean, and a bit thin, but those who enjoy the experience of something unique and can appreciate lean wines might enjoy it more. Especially at this price, which believe it or not is about mid-priced for bulls blood. Im not going to score this wine, because I dont have another bulls blood to compare it to.

After some time I came back to this wine and Im starting to think that its slightly 'corked'. Its barely perceivable (if at all) on the nose, but on the mid-palate theres a little bit of a cardboard/musty flavor, however its only detectable for a brief moment before the sour/tart fruit takes charge again. In someways this doesnt surprise me because its not like bulls blood is flying off of retailers shelves, not to mention this is a 2003, so it could have been sitting around for a long time. I am not very familiar with bulls blood, and I can imagine this wine isnt really intended for prolonged bottle aging. Anyone else ever tried bulls blood?

Heres the wiki on bulls blood:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egri_Bikav%C3%A9r

Chateau Le Calvaire 2003

2009-06-20T14:17:00.015-04:00

Domaine: Chateau le Calvaire
Country: France
Region: Bordeaux Superieur
Vintage: 2003
Style: Red
Grapes: Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot
Declared Alcohol (on label): 13%
Approximate Price: $17/bottle
Date Reviewed: 6/19/2009
Reviewed By: Galen Ricci

Appearance:
This red wine was clear with a deep ruby core moving to a medium ruby rim. Almost no watery edge, which would indicate some age on the wine. The legs were average size, with average movement

Nose:
The nose was clean with no traces of corkage, or oxidization. The aromas had a medium intensity, with a developing profile. The characteristics were: Bell pepper, spicy pepper (jalapeno, green chilies), Dusty, and a touch of oak (possibly older oak)

Palate:
The wine was dry, had medium to medium - acid, medium tannins, medium alcohol, medium body, and medium flavor intensity. The flavors were: Dusty, green pepper, pencil shavings, and slight dark fruits (but so slight it was hard to discern the exact fruits). The wine maintained a solid medium - length.

Conclusion:
The overall quality of the wine was acceptable. Since its a left bank Bordeaux Superieur the cost is mid-priced. This wine is at its peak and should be consumed soon.

Authors Notes:
This wine was kinda boring, although it was balanced and nothing was wrong with it, it lacked any sort of fruit and excitement. In fact there was almost no fruit, the tannins were focused on the front of the palate, and the length was too short for a 2003 left bank bordeaux. Although it might still have some life left, I dont think its going to hang on much longer in the bottle. I would be confident in saying this wine was one dimensional and didnt really have much to say for itself. I could see this wine as basic bordeaux glass pour for around $7/glass at a restaurant, but again thats because there was nothing really wrong with the wine. It just doesnt stand up to other bordeauxs in the same price range. If this wine was in the 12-15 dollar range I might get a little more excited about it, but it really doesnt have a lot going for it, where many other wines from that region, and in the same price range, have a lot more going on. I would rate this wine 86+ points.

Commanderie de Peyrassol Rose 2008

2009-06-20T12:25:00.012-04:00

Domaine: Commanderie de Peyrassol
Country: France
Region: Cotes de Provence
Vintage: 2008
Style: Rose
Grapes: Syrah, Grenache, Cinsault, Mourvedre
Declared Alcohol (on label): 12.5%
Approximate Price: $20/bottle
Date Reviewed: 6/19/2009
Reviewed By: Galen Ricci

Appearance:
Clear with a medium intensity. The wine had a very salmon color with orange highlights. The rim had a slight watery edge, but the color advanced almost completely to the edge of the rim. The wine had average moving, watery colored legs, which could indicate a dry wine with medium alcohol.

Nose:
A very clean nose, no detection of faults or oxidization. The intensity of aromas was medium, and the development was very youthful. The Aromas included: Strawberry, Red Raspberry, Watermelon, Roses, a slight smokiness (possibly from the minerality).

Palate:
The wine was dry on the palate, the acidity was medium, and there were no perceivable tannins. The alcohol was medium, and the body had a medium weight. The flavor intensity was medium, with characteristics of: Rose Water, Watermelon, Fresh Strawberry, Fresh Red Raspberry, Light Red Apple, Wet Stone, and a very little bit of bubble gum. The length was medium to medium + and continually evolved.

Conclusions:
The quality was very good (better than good, but not quite outstanding). As for price category this a midpriced French rose. This wine is ready to drink now and should not sit much longer than 1-2 years on a shelf.

Authors Notes:
This was one of the best roses, I dare say, I have ever had! It is elegant, beautiful and filled with character. It has amazing balance and layers of fruit and minerality all supported by near perfect acidity. Ive tasted roses in the same price point that are no where near as interesting, refined or balanced. This would go perfectly with many foods such as cheeses, fish, light chicken dishes, but I would love to pair this wine with a blackened seafood dish (yes this is the street and co side of me). I would venture to say that 99 out of 100 people would call this a really good wine, and those who have tasted a few roses would say this is a great wine. I highly suggest people seek out this wine and try it! Im thinking about scoring wines, so I might as well start now. I would give this wine 92+ points.

I tasted this wine about an hour later and found that the same characteristics still prevailed, but a slight creaminess started to develop, which really piqued my interest. Im not exactly sure if some percentage of the juice had some malo-lactic fermentation, but as the wine had some exposure with oxygen it really became more rich with almost a medium + body. A real rockstar of a wine and something I would highly suggest, especially for first time rose drinkers.

Criteria for Evaluating and Reviewing Wines

2009-06-20T10:37:00.011-04:00

This is the very first blog for the Portland Wine Review and I would like to take the time to set the stage for my own evaluations. I'm basing my criteria on the information from the WSET (Wine Spirits and Education Trust) advanced level text book and their official tasting sheets (which can be obtained in a PDF format from the link at the bottom of this blog). This is the most recent course I have taken and is the foundation for my continual wine education. Each author has some formal wine training as well as a lot of experience in the business, but please understand that each of us will have our own style of evaluation and even though we are trying to be as objective as possible, each persons' senses, and personal tastes are unique and will influence the different assessments. With that said I have outlined each section with brief descriptions of the sections, but please refer to the official WSET tasting sheets that cover each section (with the exception of wine preparations). This is the format I have used during my courses, and continue to use since it provides definitive points of evaluation. I have posted a link for the tasting sheets at the end of this blog because they are a great reference since they provide the full ranges for each section. Thank you for reading the Portland Wine Review Blog.

--Galen

Wine Preparations

Temperature- All wines will be tasted at room temperature for initial reviews, however the reviewer may chill the wine after the first assessment as to note any changes.

Aeration- Some wines require decanting however to be as fair as possible the initial review will be a "pop-and-pour." Again the reviewer may chose to use any method to aerate the wine after the first assessment as to note any changes.

Foods- Some wines really need to be accompanied by food to show their true potential, but once again the reviewer will evaluate the wine first, then have the option to pair it with food and note the changes.

Appearance

Clarity- In terms of wine appearance is very important. Cloudiness could be an indication of a flaw in the wine or it could indicate various forms of filtration or non-filtration, sediment due to age, etc. Range: Clear, Dull.

Intensity of Color- Can tell a lot about the wine. what grape(s) used, the method of production, age, etc. Range: Water White, Pale, Medium, Deep, Opaque

Color- The differences in color is another facet of evaluation that will again be used to review the grape(s) used, the method of production, age, etc. Range: White Wines- Colorless, Lemon/Green, Lemon, Gold, Amber, Brown. Rose Wines- Pink, Salmon, Orange. Red Wines- Purple, Ruby, Garnet, Tawny, Brown.

Other Observations- Are there other features of the wine's appearance that are worthy of noting? I.E. Rim vs. Core color, tears/legs, deposits, petillance, tints/highlights, etc

Nose

Condition- This is a reference to any possible faults in the wine that were the result of storage, and without getting too technical, the idea of this section is to determine whether this wine corked or not. Range: Clean, Unclean (referring to faults such as oxidized, out of condition, cork taint, other)

Intensity- This section is used to determine the aroma intensity of the wine. Range: Light, Medium -, Medium, Medium +, Pronounced.

Development- Where is the wine in its developmental stage? Any where from youthful-tired/past its best, also has this wine received deliberate oxidation? Range: Youthful, Developing, Fully Developed, Tired/Past its Best, Deliberate Oxidation.

Aroma Characteristics- This is the good stuff! Is there something else to be perceived in the wine's bouquet? Range: Fruit, Floral, Spice, Vegetal, Oak, Other (The second part of the WSET tasting sheets provides an even further breakdown of each general flavor, i.e Within fruit would involve citrus which includes grapefruit, lemon, lime, orange, etc)

Palate

Sweetness- This section evaluates the sugars in the wine. Range: Dry, Off Dry, Medium Dry, Medium, Medium Sweet, Sweet, Luscious.

Acidity- This section evaluates the acidity in the wine. Range: Low, Medium -, Medium, Medium +, High

Tannin Level- This section evaluates the tannins in the wine, but does not provide descriptors such as velvety, biting, etc. Those I save for my author's notes. Range: Low, Medium -, Medium, Medium +, High

Alcohol level- This is a bit more difficult because some wine have high alcohol levels such as port, and some have lower alcohol levels like trebbiano. So to clarify, this section looks to determine whether the wine has a low-high alcohol range based on the grape(s), as well as the region. For example syrah from rhone might have a lower alcohol level than shiraz (same grape) from Australia. This might also be a time to note the authors perception of alcohol, for example does the alcohol integrate into the wine well or is it off balanced, again this section has some room for the authors discretion. Range: Low, Medium -, Medium, Medium +, High. With separate ranges for fortified wines: Low, Medium, High

Body- Evaluates the weight/body of the wine (i.e how does it feel on the palate?). Range: Light, Medium -, Medium, Medium +, Full

Mousse- This is for sparkling wines only, but in such a case the range goes from: Delicate, Creamy, Aggressive

Flavor Intensity- How prominant/intense is the flavor? Range: Light, Medium -, Medium, Medium +, Pronounced

Flavor Characteristics- This is another really fun part! What sort of flavors are involved? Fruit, floral, spice, vegetal, oak, other. (The second part of the WSET tasting sheets provides an even further breakdown of each general flavor, i.e Within fruit would involve citrus which includes grapefruit, lemon, lime, orange, etc)

Length- How long do the flavors linger on the palate? Range: Short, Medium -, Medium, Medium +, Long

Conclusions

Quality- This is another section where authors and readers may differ. Hopefully we (the reviewers) can make an objective (fingers crossed) evaluation of the quality of the wine, based solely on the grape(s), region, production, etc. and come to an objective conclusion (toes crossed too) about the quality of the wine. Is this wine true to its varietals, regions, production method. Not whether of not we like the wine, was it made well. Ranges: Poor, Acceptable, Good, Outstanding. Sometimes I find wines that fit inbetween these catigories so I might say, "very good" which is between good and outstanding.

Price Category- Although a little bit easier to determine, this does not refer to a set price for all wines, however it determines whether the wine is anywhere from inexpensive-high priced and even premium, based on the region, grape(s), producer, etc. This section will not include such descriptors as "over priced or under priced," it only evaluates the ranges of prices based on the aformost mentioned conditions. I will include my personal thoughts on the prices in the "Authors Notes" section. Ranges: Inexpensive, Mid Priced, High Priced, Premium.

Readiness for drinking- does it need time to age? is it ready to drink? or is it tired/past its best? Range: Needs Time, Ready to Drink but Can Age, At its Peak/Drink Soon, Tired/Past its Best.

Authors Notes:

This is going to be the section set aside for the author to speak their mind about the wine. We're all humans with individual taste buds, so this section is reserved for the authors personal thoughts and comments and is by nature the least objective section. Authors can provide scores, opinions, suggestion or anything they feel is important to share with the reader.

Official WSET Tasting sheets:

http://www.wset.co.uk/documents/ac_sat_14.08.08.pdf