Notes From The Cellar » 2005

☆ 2005 King’s Ransom Russian River Valley Pinot Noir

Steve — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 15:00:25 +0000

Earthy RRV Pinot Doesn’t Disappoint

In case you weren’t aware, pinot noir has a couple different faces it can show. As I mentioned when I paired its duality with Moonlighting, there are more fruit-forward pinots, and earthier, subtler pinots.

I tend to like them both for different reasons, but if I was pushed to choose, I would go with the earthy, mushroomy, a little dirty version of pinot noir popular in Burgundy. It’s not that I don’t like fruit¹ but the earth-tone side of pinot noir is simply more unique. There are plenty of grapes that make big, fruit-forward wine. But few that make the subtle dirty-but-you-like-it flavor profile of a good pinot noir.

Now, the issue, of course, is that if you try this and screw it up, you have wine that tastes like dirt. There are people who will like this, no matter what. But the true elegance, in my opinion, is arrived at when you can please the mushroom, forest-floor-seeking pinotards and still bring some of the “I like juicy juice” folks into the fold at the same time.

Obviously, one cannot please everyone, nor should anybody try. It makes for muddled shit, frankly. Have a perspective, go for it, don’t compromise. I just personally like it when some elements of both of pinot noir’s personalities end up in the final product.

Which brings us to this wine, the quite aptly-named King’s Ransom RRV Pinot Noir. In the glass, the wine is ruby in the center and clears up considerably to the edges. On the nose, you discover which kind of pinot this is: you get mushroom here, and forest floor. But there is a sweetness present as well, which I believe is actually the presence of the 14.5% alcohol. The sensation isn’t hot or burning, but rather a touch sweet. Like smelling Porto, which I have to admit, was a bit off-putting here.

The palate is balanced fairly well, neither the perceived sweetness nor the masked alcohol show off here. More forest floor, more moss, more mushroom. What tiny bit of fruit is here tastes spicy in a way, like lightly-brined raspberries. It’s strange, but not altogether unpleasant.

The worst thing I can say about this wine is that it simply does not live up to its price point. While it is tasty, and should please those who like this style of pinot noir, the price—truly a king’s ransom—will shy many, if not most, away.

Price Point: $80-$100

Footnotes

I am by no means a member of the anti-flavor wine elite

Hi! If you're seeing this message in your RSS feed reader or email, then pay no mind, move along, all is well. However, if you are seeing this message on a website, then the owner of that site is unscrupulously stealing my material! If you'd like to support the actual creator of this content, please leave this website by way of my own: Notes From The Cellar and leave these parasitic jerks in the dust! Thanks so much!

☆ 2005 Toad Hollow “Rod’s Pride” Pinot Noir

Steve — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:00:35 +0000

MacBadger Would Be Proud

So I drank this wine quite some time ago. Last summer, to be exact. I’ve intended to write it up since then, but things get in the way. For instance, I wrote my notes on this wine in an actual notebook. With a pen. It’s a Moleskine. I like them so much, but since I began using Evernote and my iPhone and iPad, I almost never take pen and paper notes.

Plus, my handwriting is downright awful. Embarrassing, even. Your first-grader’s refrigerator door art autograph is easier to read. Doctors sign Rx pads with more clarity. Chickens don’t scratch so illegibly. But after a bit of time, I was able to transcribe the notes from my own private hieroglyphics into actual English, put them into Evernote, and now, I can share them with you.

I drank this wine on a warm day in Walnut Creek, California. Spent with friends and a brief visit with some of my most ardently wino family members (I’m looking at you, Mike and Nancy!), it was one of those good days. The Walnut Creek Art & Wine Festival probably isn’t the kind of event that makes your radar, nor, in all likelihood, should it. If you live within 15 miles of the town, then you should probably make the effort, but I digress.

Scattered all over Heather Farms Park are tents. Some contain art. Others, craftworks of varying origin and value. And others still, contain beer or wine. The tents down on this busy, boisterous lawn (complete with the requisite local bands you’ve never heard of—even if you go to local music events) contain some decent juice, and are probably fine for most people. The very first time I had a viognier was at this event in (I believe) 2006 or so.

But some day, you have to graduate. To the premium wine tent.

I want to make it sound ominous and amazing, but it isn’t. What it is, however, is away from the din. Away from the overly-loud 70s southern rock cover band tortuously wailing through a rendition of… well, of something by Foghat, I guess. Away from crying babies, and the extra heat brought on by coupling grass and a distinct lack of shade.

And it does contain better wine. Like this wine. The “Rod’s Pride” Reserve Pinot Noir from Toad’s Hollow Vineyards. Pinkish-reddish in the glass, the wine’s color reminded me of the juicy surroundings of pomegranate seeds. The color is pretty prescient, as the nose is taken up by the lightly sweet, and yet robust fruit notes of pomegranate, cherry, and strawberry.

This is no subtle Burgundian, but it’s damn tasty. The wine is medium-bodied with a long finish and bright red fruit up and down the palate. Mostly the same as the nose, pomegranate, strawberry, and cherry. But also with a hint of mango, which I assure you tastes even better than it sounds.

I actually realize that, upon reading this back to myself, I’m making this wine sound like a fruit bomb. It’s not. It’s refined and elegant. But it is “new world” in the sense that you won’t find any of those Burgundian mushroom / forest floor / mossy notes here. This is a light, pink pinot noir in many ways. But it’s delicious, and long-finishing, and restrained.

And easily, easily recommended.

Price Point: $47

☆ 2005 Lambert Bridge Limited Selection Cabernet Sauvignon

Steve — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:00:24 +0000

Dry Creek Cab Good Now, Should Be Great

I’ve raved about the wines of Lambert Bridge before, and I’m not about to stop.

After more-than-impressive offerings of viognier and petite sirah, how would Lambert Bridge’s flagship cabernet sauvignon stand up to scrutiny?

Well. Really, really well. Like, scary good.

2005 Lambert Bridge Limited Selection Cabernet Sauvignon

The Limited Selection Cab is 100% Sonoma County cabernet sauvignon. It clocks in at a Californian alcohol level of between 14-14.5%, but for anyone used to Cali style wine, that isn’t all that high (this isn’t, after all, Paulliac).

There’s something incredibly Sonoma about Lambert Bridge and their wines. There’s a little farmer in these people, a little rancher. A whole lot of vigneron. Friendly, with unpretentious wine that still maintains some of its traditional roots. Not a hoity or toity anywhere to be found.

So, the wine: garnet red in the glass, the edges are a bit more ruby in color. Very, very pretty wine. On the nose are a mixture of very cab sauv aromas: rhubarb, blackberries, some bell pepper, a touch of earthy twigginess.

The wine is full bodied on the palate, with several of the same notes from the nose coming through brightly, including blackberry and a kind of tobacco leaf herbiness. Leather and earth, too. The tannins are a bit sharp, but the wine is incredibly drinkable now. Given 5-10 years for the tannin structure to round out and calm down a bit, and this wine should be even more fantastic.

But it’s incredibly good now.

Verdict: A-

☆ 2005 Marita’s Vineyard Cabernet Sauvignon

Steve — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:00:28 +0000

Meet Marita

This, my dear friends and people who read me because they hate me but want to see what I’ll do/say next, is some friggin’ Napa Valley Cab.

Marita’s Vineyard Special Private Reserve Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon (say that fivefold fast) is a pretty fantastic bottle of wine, if I do say so myself (and I do). Limited to 225 cases, this 100% hillside cabernet sauvignon is something everyone should try.

Unfortunately, by virtue of the fact that it runs a buck-and-a-half per, not everyone’s going to be able to. C’est la vie, n’est-ce pas, mes amis?

First off, the wine comes in one of the heaviest glass bottles I’ve ever encountered. Seriously, when I opened the box the bottle came in, I thought for a second it was a 1 liter bottle or something. It’s not, it’s a standard 750, but a good 10% taller and maybe 20% wider than most of the other 750s I have in my cellar. And heavy. Even empty (and hooo boy did I finish this one) the bottle felt like it might be half full.

I know the point of thick, heavy glass bottles is to lend a measure of elegance, perhaps even gravitas, to the wine. I couldn’t help thinking about the environmental impact of all that extra glass. Extra energy to make the bottles, if not recycled properly, extra glass in the trash/landfills and all.

It’s the exact opposite delivery mechanism mentality from the NPA, for instance.

But whatever, I’m not actually that concerned about it. Much more concerned about the juice, so shall we?

2005 Marita's Vineyard Cabernet Sauvignon

First things first: the wine is damn near black in the glass. It lightens to a rich ruby at the very edges, and mine showed just the slightest hint of tanning near the edge as well.

The nose is incredibly nicely balanced between some fruit aromas—mostly blackberry and rhubarb—and the other side of the cabernet aroma world, namely hints of leather and cigar box and cedar. On the palate, the wine is full bodied, and announces its presence with authority.

But it’s not a fruit bomb. It doesn’t “punch” you, as it were. And at 14%, it isn’t overly alcoholic for its robustness and size. It’s well balanced, all in all. The finish is long, the entire experience is lustrous and smooth, with soft, lush tannins and an overarching elegance that just rocks. It fucking tastes good, too, with fruit aromas of blackberry and black cherries that dance around.

Altogether, this is elegant, grown-up, still delicious wine, with lots of nuance and incredible balance. This is Napa Valley cab, writ large.

Verdict: 93/100
Price Point: $150

(full disclosure: this wine was provided to me as a press sample from VinTank)

☆ 2005 Uccelliera Brunello di Montalcino

Steve — Fri, 14 May 2010 15:00:50 +0000

Wine That Will Make You See God

I’m not even being all that facetious with the title. Nor am I saying this will make you “see God” in the way that spinning around really fast over and over and over again and tripping over the railing at the Grand Canyon and smacking your head on the way down, or overdosing on heroin, will make you “see God.” That’s too literal.

But there is a reason that wine is made on this planet. There is a purpose, there is a source of inspiration for it. I don’t know if that is “God” or what one person, or another person calls “God,” or if it’s just in some people’s blood, and in some terroir‘s dirt and clay, to make really goddamn good wine.

Whatever it is, this is it. This is the kind of wine, exactly the kind of wine, that makes people into winedrinkers.

Some people ask those of us in the wine blog whateversphere what wine “turned us” really on to wine. I still think for me it was a 2002 Saintsbury Carneros Pinot Noir I had on Valentine’s Day with my new-at-the-time girlfriend, later-to-be wife shortly after my 25th birthday, but it would have been this wine if I’d gotten to it a half decade earlier.

It’s good.

The ’05 Uccelliera is ruby red throughout the glass, with little to no change towards the edges. I think this is supposed to tell me something, perhaps even something specific, about the wine (newbie alert!!). On the nose is the slightest hint of heat, but only at first, a bit more vigorous swirling and it left and didn’t come back. Two major, major notes run roughshod over the nose: black cherry truffle, and espresso.

It’s so good.

Soft, lush tannins abound in this medium-bodied wine. Notes from the nose are present, but translated: more of a stewed cherry with the espresso, plus the introduction of an unmistakable—and, frankly, eminently elegant—cigar tobacco note. This wine, in part, tastes like the very best cigars smell.

Yum.

Oh, it also pairs orgasmically (ah, wait, no way, you’re kidding… he didn’t just say what I think he did, did he?) with oxtail—which, by the way, I was tricked into eating. It’s the greatest trick anyone ever played on me, ever, but still, a trick regardless.

Verdict: 97/100

2005 Uccelliera Brunello di Montalcino

☆ Pimento? Pimento.

Steve — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 16:47:23 +0000

2005 Clos Pegase Napa Valley Merlot

Every once in a while, I come across a descriptor I haven’t used before, or at least haven’t used for a particular varietal wine. I drank this wine last night, in fact it is bumping back a handful of fantastic Italian wines I have to review, because I just wanted to get this one out there.

Pimento. Pimento? Yup, pimento.

You may remember Clos Pegase (ok maybe not, but I do) as the creators of the wonderfully stinky sauvignon blanc I drank in Walt Disney World’s upscale California Grill restaurant in Orlando, Florida, last December.

Last night, the same four people (myself, my wife Heather, and my parents) were enjoying dinner together at a decidedly less tut-tut dining establishment, the impressive Chow in Danville, CA. I noticed a Clos Pegase merlot on the wine list, and as I intended to get a burger, this seemed to make sense as a quality choice.

The wine came to the table (a generous pour), and I sniffed and sipped without intending to review it, but then I was hit by something that took me a second to place. It was pimento.

Just a hint, mind you. The wine looks just like a merlot should, a dark ruby that doesn’t lighten too much to the edges. On the nose is a mix of dark cherry and raspberry jam, with a hint of vanilla, all in all this merlot gives you no surprises to this point.

Then, you sip. There is an earthy quality, a hint (very slight) of toasted oak, some good rich cherry jam, and there, on the tip of your tongue, at the front of the palate, is a slightly sweet, slightly peppery pimento note.

I liked it. It was more different than great, but it certainly wasn’t bad. The wine would score higher if I felt like it had better structure or more complexity to it. Still, it’s one I won’t soon forget, and this bit of nuance gives it a character you simply don’t often see in merlot. At $20-$30 per bottle, I’d say this is the wine for you if you’re in a merlot funk and have lost faith in this classic grape.

Verdict: B+

(photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rdvark/ / CC BY-NC 2.0)

☆ Dunn Howell Mountain, Through The (Recent) Years

Steve — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:43:39 +0000

I had the opportunity a few weeks ago to taste a vertical selection of Dunn Vineyard’s Howell Mountain Cabernet Sauvignon with cellar master and assistant winemaker, Mike Dunn.

I tasted the wine from the 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 vintages, and I have notes to share on each. What I can say at the very least is that Dunn is some very good wine. If you haven’t had it, get your hands on it. There are two labels: Dunn Howell Mountain and Dunn Napa Valley. The former is the more prestigious of the two, with 100% of the grapes coming from the Howell Mountain sub-AVA, whereas the latter will include up to 15% grapes from the Napa Valley floor.

Also a word of warning: these wines aren’t cheap. You’d be hard-pressed to find any of these vintages for less than the $75-$100 range per bottle. So keep that in mind as well. On to the wines.

2002 Dunn Howell Mountain Cabernet Sauvignon

A dark ruby red in the glass, this wine really has the Cali Cab look to it. On the nose is a wonderful wet stone note, a general earthiness, marked with a very dark fruit note (perhaps rhubarb). On the palate are notes of raspberry and cranberry, and while I found the wine nicely structured, the tannins seemed a bit rough for a wine already 8 years from harvest. Perhaps it needs just a bit more time.

Verdict: 86/100

2003 Dunn Howell Mountain Cabernet Sauvignon

Even darker-looking in the glass than the ’02, the 2003 Dunn is a dark, dark red. The nose is pleasantly subtle and complex, with notes of black fruit mingling with a leather note. On the palate, this wine felt more mature than the 2002, with softer tannins, good acidity, and subtle notes of raspberry. This is a pretty fantastic Cabernet, and not at all bombastic like some California cult wines seem to be.

Verdict: 91/100

2004 Dunn Howell Mountain Cabernet Sauvignon

Speaking of darkening wine… the ’04 is almost black at its core, though it shifts to a brighter red at the edges, a more extreme shift in color than the first two wines showed. The nose here is a bit hot, either its youth or the 2004 growing season showing its stripes, but it is a bit hard to get around. The nose also shows off some red fruit and a dulled, almost like cooked, blackberry. The wine is clean but strong on the palate, with notes of red fruit and leaves. It’s still a bit too hot, and needs some years, but will probably be very good after some more time.

Verdict: 88/100

2005 Dunn Howell Mountain Cabernet Sauvignon

This vintage shows off a bit more in the glass, the color is a rich ruby red in the core, and fades to an almost pastel color on the edges. And this wine is different from the previous three in other ways, as well: the nose is full of forest floor, mushroom and bark, and pine needles. Awesomely stinky in a way. On the palate this wine shows a lot of structure for its relative youth, soft tannins, a good balance of alcohol and acid, with pleasant notes of smoky leather, red cherry, and earth. My favorite of the bunch by a smidge, I think the 2005 Dunn will be exceptional in 10 years’ time.

Verdict: 92/100

(photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jocelyndurston/ / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

☆ 2005 Renato Corino Barolo

Steve — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:00:25 +0000

This Is Why I Drink Wine

I recently posted a collection of wine labels from my recent Mostly Italian Experience at Prima Ristorante on my personal blog, stevepaulo.com. One of the comments I got on Twitter when the post went up was about this wine. With good reason.

The 2005 Renato Corino Barolo is a fantastic wine. Period.

I almost feel like I should end the review here, but it would do this wine no justice at all. First, a caveat: the wine runs anywhere from $30-$45 per bottle retail, and this is a bit pricier than a lot of the wine I review. At under $35, however, I would still say this 100% Nebbiolo wine is a massively good QPR buy.

In the glass, the wine is a nice dark opaque red, that turns enticingly pink at the edges. There is a big, big nose on this wine: rose petals and hanging vines of violets mix liberally with cherry jam. Really gorgeous, and really big and bold. The floral aromatics are something else in this wine.

The wine is full bodied, with a wonderfully-velvety mouthfeel. There is good tannin and balance here, lots of structure. The major fruit notes are a ripe cherry, and a cool and clean red apple skin. Let me explain the last one: some appleness, but simultaneously bitter and sweet and sour, all kind of mixing together. It’s something special, and when I used that term to describe the wine, my wife didn’t believe me and wanted to try it herself.

Now she believes me. So will you if you come across this Barolo. Good, good, good stuff.

Verdict: 96/100

2005 Renato Corino Barolo

☆ 2005 Domaine Jaeger-Defaix Rully Premier Cru Clos du Chapitre

Steve — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:00:50 +0000

Red Burgundy To Write Home About

So I mentioned yesterday that I attended a wedding last weekend, and the wine served was Sterling Vineyards.

I had an interesting tablemate during dinner. He works at one of the fancier wine shops in San Francisco, and the sucker brought his own wine! One of those bottles was this, a premier cru red Burgundy.

The Domaine Jaeger-Defaix Rully is from Clos du Chapitre in Burgundy, a monopoly sub-region surrounded entirely by a stone wall. This sounds fascinating to me. The wine is entirely pinot noir.

The Burgundy is very, very light red in the glass. It’s isn’t pink (it is certainly no rosé) but it’s very light. On the nose are inviting notes of leather and earth. It’s a very rustic aroma, and pleasing.

The wine is light-bodied and dry, with soft tannins and an almost nonexistant, short finish. There are light red fruit notes that dance around, but it’s all very subtle. Very controlled. I want to get another bottle of this wine, and keep it under lock and key (and cool, and in the dark) for 5-10 years.

It’s something special, and something worth looking for. I wouldn’t pair it with something heavy like steak or roast pork, but as a celebratory wine, I can’t think of much better.

Verdict: A-

2005 Domaine Jaeger-Defaix Rully

☆ 2005 Santa Ema Cabernet Sauvignon

Steve — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 16:00:42 +0000

A Quick Trip to Chile

OK, not a literal trip to Chile.

This was my first South American Cabernet Sauvignon, if I’m not mistaken. From the Maipo Valley, the 2005 Santa Ema spent 9 months in French oak barrels, and then a handful of months in my cellar after being given to me by my father as a gift. I don’t even remember the reason, and I’m not sure that was particularly useful information. I’m also not sure I care.

At any rate, the Santa Ema is relatively average in alcohol content, at 14% ABV, which is a nice change if you’re like me, and getting tired of the 14.5%-15.5% that seems more common from a lot of American wines these days.

In the glass, the Santa Ema is a bright ruby red, fading a bit to an almost pinkish hue at the edges. On the nose are a bunch of red fruits: mostly raspberry, a little cherry, and even a hint of strawberry. Not what I’m used to from Cabernet Sauvignon, but enjoyable, if fruit-forward. Where are the black fruits? Not here.

The wine is lightly oaked and medium-bodied. The red fruit notes from the nose pass through to the palate quite nicely, and the wine is very fruit-forward. There’s a subtlety, however, that doesn’t seem to exist in the “fruitbombs” from Australia or California. Something cultural, perhaps?

Whatever it is, this extreme red fruit Cabernet is much more enjoyable than others I’ve had. Still not the best I’ve ever had, but easy to recommend. Highly, even.

Verdict: B+

2005 Santa Ema Cabernet Sauvignon