Kendall Jackson Chardonnay and a good wine

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

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/;'''

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

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"

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

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

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.