Red Wine with Fish

I don’t drink much wine that costs $6. I drink a lot of Pinot Noir. For $6, the Pinot Noir you get is probably not very good. Well, actually, the bottle is empty and the cork missing. $6 Pinot Noir doesn’t really exists from what I have seen.

Anyway, I tasted the Campo do Borja Vina Borgia, a 100% Grenache wine that was selling at our local Roth’s grocery store for slightly under six bucks. I figured it would be amusing. Nope. It was very impressive. It would have been impressive for twice that. Or three times.

Plum, cherry and spice on the nose and bright red fruit, white pepper and black current in the palate. Impressive acid and barely a hint of the stewed quality I so often find in hot-weather wines. Nice clean red fruit on the finish.

Really, really nice. It’s simple and straightforward and went great with the wok-fried lamb, chard and baked rice dish I made.

Recommended at twice the price. A steal for the actual price.

I know Hal Medici prefers his 2002, but at least as of right now, I would rather be drinking this one. Light to medium in body, with pretty red and black fruit and nice clove-like spiciness, this paired quite nicely with the roast leg of lamb. Aroma of dried strawberry with a hint of toast and vanilla and that funky smell that my friend Rob likes to call “Pinot Stink”. Nice bright food and a sweet raspberry finish.

It is drinking really, really well and I expect it is pretty close to its peak.

2001 is a funny vintage that a lot of the locals, my boss included, don’t like. It was cool and damp and most of the wines are light in color and extraction. I can’t rightly say I remember what they were like when released, but I find I like the vintage a great deal, particularly for food-friendliness. I think I just might try to find a little more of this wine.

This is the third in the case of Otis Kenyon wines I have bought. The first one was the “Matchless” red which,

despite being the least expensive of their wines, was excellent. The Merlot from 2005 was decent, but a little hot. I have yet to try the Cab. The Syrah is very impressive–probably my favorite so far–although at the price-point I would probably go with the Matchless since I am guessing it is mostly made from the Syrah anyway.

Like the Matchless–and unlike the Merlot–the Syrah had bright acidity and red fruit. At first opening, it almost seemed tart, but after a few minutes it opened and softened. Aromas of dried strawberry and toast compliment red cherry and milk chocolate on the palate. The finish is long with vanilla and a touch of coffee.

I suppose this isn’t an earth-shatteringly complex wine, but it is beautifully fresh and fruity. The tannins are soft and any structure is from the rather impressive acidity.

This is among the most Pinot-like Syrahs I have had. Other than being a little bit fuller on the palate it would pass for an Oregon Pinot in a warm year. I actually thought the Matchless might have had some Pinot blended in, but I think it is their Syrah I was tasting. Interesting.

Generally, people underestimate how well Oregon Pinot Noirs can age. I am often asked at Chehalem how long to cellar a wine for and I generally give a monologue on ageability rather than a pat answer. You can all it copping out if you want, but the question is a tough one. My experience has shown that Oregon does the most ageable Pinot in the country. But that assumes you like what becomes of our Pinot Noir when it has been in the bottle for a while. If you like the big, juicy berry fruit, drink them in the first couple years, because that isn’t going to get any better. But for my palate, the fruitiness is replaced by something lovely and interesting.

Case in point: the 2000 Medici East Vineyard Pinot. Not a fruit bomb by any stretch. The fruit was pretty, but staid. The color was red-orange with definite brick-color developing. The nose had that distinctive funk of old Pinot and oak which smells a bit like BBQ sauce and maraschino cherry… (wait for it)… but in a good way. The wine was light-bodied with earth and red fruit and a bit of a tart bite, which I liked very much. It finished with flavors of coffee and cherry, with still a touch of tannin after all these years.

It was fantastic and worked perfectly with the grilled Copper River sockeye I made.

Interest Factor: ***+
Yum Factor: **
Value: **

Beautiful wine. If you are ever in Newberg, Oregon, visit them at the Dark Horse tasting room.

Again, over at the Chehalem weblog:

The 2005 Domaine Jean-Marc Pavelot Savigny-lès-Beaune 1er Cru La Dominode exhibited a deep, dark red color. Pretty red/black fruit aromas with a touch of barnyard. Sour cherry fruit and cocoa flavors which showed a bit of leather after some time in the glass. A big, sharp hit of tannin and a bitter bite at the end.

More detail on the wine over there…

Interest Factor: ***
Yum Factor: ***
Value: ***

Bordeaux is not a region I know much about. That said, I buy a bottle from time to time to try and learn more. Wine: it makes learning fun! What I have learned is (no mystery) that at it’s best, or even at it’s just pretty-good, it is the most amazing Cab/Merlot/Cab Franc, etc. in the world. Give a good one 10+ years and you get something subtle, complex and food friendly.

The Graves I opened for dinner tonight with roast leg of lamb was almost a good example of this. The color was still deep, dark red with a slight trace of brick at the edges. The nose had that lovely forest floor you get from Bordeaux blends after a few years, a trace of cedar and plum. The palate was sweet with tobacco, spearmint and fine tannins. The finish was long with a bit of spice. Unfortunately, there was a bitter taste that detracted from mid-palate and finish. It wasn’t overwhelming but it was noticeable and I didn’t like it. Drinking it with the lamb and roast vegetables helped, but I still felt like this was a near miss; almost a really good wine.

Interest Factor: **
Yum Factor: *
Value: **

I have recently bought a couple of Walla Walla wines because of an particularly good deals I have managed to get. I am starting to realize that there is a pervasive style in the region that I find vaguely enjoyable but not particularly interesting. The Cabernet Sauvignon, in particular, is the most distinctly different from those from other regions. The Amavi 2005 Cab is no exception.

The color is almost black with a deep red/burgundy at the edges; a nose of molasses with a hint of blackberry liqueur. Flavors of malted milk balls and mocha finish with a bit of cocoa. The soft texture is almost exactly like chocolate milk.

None of these qualities are unpleasant to be sure, but where the wine falls short is structure and acid. There is the slightest hint of fine-grained tannins; this in a 2005 mind you. I would bet the pH is 4 or maybe higher.

I really like a Cab to have some back-bone, some acid and some of that green-olive quality that seems to be so out-of-vogue right now. Don’t get me wrong, this wine, like all the other Walla-Walla Cabs I have had of late is extremely easy to drink, but it is also completely un-challenging and probably will not age particularly well.

The 2004 Pepperbridge Cab was a little more structured and I found it a little more compelling. I am not sure at this point whether that is a matter of vintage, vineyard or style. Even the Pepper Bridge didn’t hold my attention nearly as much as Ferraro’s 2004 Cab (an Oregon winery sourcing fruit from the Columbia Valley), or a number of wines I have had from California, not to mention Bordeaux.

I haven’t given up on the Walla Walla wines just yet. I haven’t had enough of them to make a sweeping judgment and, frankly, even if the experience of a glass ends up more akin to a mocha milkshake than a great wine, that isn’t the worst imaginable fate.

Interest Factor: 1/2
Yum Factor: **
Value: ** (given the deal)

It’s been a while since my last post: working six days a week and house-remodeling related activities have put a damper on blogging for a spell. I should be able to pick up the pace again soon. Some time had passed, too, since our last tasting group meeting. This was our first varietal tasting, we tend to do regional tastings, but decided to branch out a bit for this session. The funny thing about varietal tastings, for better or worse, is the tremendous range of wines you get. If you do something like “Syrah”, you might get hugely ripe fruit bombs next to big barnyardy stinkers (in a good way) and delicate cool climate wines. At times, you finish feeling like you know less than when you started.

In this case, the range both in style and quality was wide, but other than one overripe tar-pit of a wine, the rest nicely showed different sides of the varietal (or blends thereof). In general, these wines were fairly approachable, so I didn’t feel like we were doing the wines a great disservice, like the juvenile Barbarescos from our last tasting.

2002 Deisen Barossa Grenache ($30)
My favorite. Big graphite on the nose. Big strawberry on the mid-palate and a long, somewhat jammy finish. Big and bold with quite a bit of tannin but still very nice. The only flaw was a hit of alcohol on the finish that the huge fruit couldn’t quite balance out. Rating: ***

2005 Koehler Grenache Estate - Santa Ynez Valley ($20)
This was my second favorite. Loads of acidity. In fact, a bit much at first, but either it mellowed, or my palate adjusted, Funky red fruit on the nose, big red fruits and gobs of acid on the palate and a tart cherry finish. Much more delicate than any of the others. Very pretty. Rating: **

2003 Domaine Le Clos des Cazaux Gigondas ($26)
This one actually was a blend of mostly Grenache, so we cheated a little with this one. Lean red fruit and a burned quality on the nose. Medium weight red fruit on the mid-palate and loads of bitter tannin on the finish. Nice silky texture but the finish seemed to overwhelm the other components which were rather staid. Rating: *

2003 Rosemount Estate GSM ($28)
Another cheater wine. GSM is “Grenache, Syrah, Moverdre” and I think only about half Grenache. Rich red fruit and pepper on quite a lovely nose and a very nice smoked bacon and cherry cola finish. The mid-palate is pretty weak, in fact it was basically missing until about 30 minutes in. Still, it has some very nice qualities. Rating: *+

2005 Artazuri Garnacha Navarra ($11)
Overripe prune bomb from start to finish. This one tasted cooked. Some people thought it was a problem with the bottle, but I am not convinced. Generally everyone hated it. Rating: Blech! No!

2006 Bodegas Borsao Garnacha ($15)
Lots of people’s favorite although I didn’t love it. Black current and brine on the nose. Pruney fruit and bacon in the mid-palate. Short, tart finish. It was a bit cold when the tasting started, but even after warming up, I had trouble with the strange aromatics. Still, not without some appeal. Rating: 1/2

Next month: Cru Beaujolais

I was really looking forward to this one. In the last year I have really grown fond of Barbarescos as you can see from recent postings. Mostly I have to thank Nostrana for that. They have a very nice list of Produttori Barbarescos for a very fair price.

Last night’s tasting was certainly interesting. As always, we didn’t give them enough time to breathe. I think for the next one, we need to have them opened earlier in the day. They were all too young; even the 2000 could have used a couple of more years. A number of them showed definite promised and began to really get interesting after an hour or two.

Sydney and I struck out as far as what we brought. I picked up a Produttori Langhe Nebbiolo for the low end, while technically not a Barbareso, I thought it would be interesting. I also had a Produttori single vineyard Ovello from 2001 which I expected would be too young, but really interesting. I figured if it showed promise, I would pick up another one. Well, no luck, it was corked. Badly corked… not that there is any other way to be corked. So I pulled it from the tasting and will return it. Sigh.

2003 Marziano Abbona Barbaresco Vigna Faset ($41)
This was in my top two and ultimately landed at number one. It had a huge nose of graphite and concentrated red fruit. The palate and finish were both red fruited and the wine seemed perfectly balanced, unlike many of the others which were highly tannic or a little hot. I think this one is just closer to ready than some of the others. Yum. Rating: ****

2000 Produttori del Barbaresco Barbaresco Riserva Asili ($40s)
Started as my favorite and then ultimately bounced to second. Again red fruit and a little funk then reminded me a little of old Pinot Noir. The palate was… well, very nice and tasted like something that begins with ‘D’ but I can’t read it. The finish was very long and spicy. Rating: ***+

2003 Che Storia Barbaresco Che Storia ($15)
Another nice one, although not with the depth of the last two. Red fruited with a little smoke in the nose. I little less fruit on the palate. The finish was very short at first, but grew as the night wore on at which point it became a bit short and medicinal. Good value. Rating: **

2004 Ronchi Barbaresco ($42)
Again, the smell of graphite, but denser than the others. Giant red cherry and huge, huge, huge tannins. I didn’t love this one, but a number of others did. I agree with them that this might be excellent a few years down the road but now it is just astringent almost to the point of being unpleasant. Definitely interesting though. Rating: *

2004 Produttori del Barbaresco Langhe Nebbiolo ($15)
We brought this one. I picked it out. I can own up to that. Strawberry jam and cloves on the nose. Light on fruit and tannin and a little hot on the finish. The nose was nice, but the palate wasn’t much to speak of. Not bad for the money, but not great either. Better to get the Che Storia. Rating: meh

2003 Produttori del Barbaresco Barbaresco ($28)
Didn’t love this one either but it did ultimately overtake the Langhe Nebbiolo. It was a little cold to start and it improved while it warmed up. Fresh red fruit on the nose. Tannic with cherry on the nose. A touch of reduced quality in the finish. Rated it a “meh” but did so early, so I think in fairness it should be a “meh+” or a “*-” to a “*”.

A couple of lessons learned: don’t drink the Barbarescos too young or if you must, decant them well ahead of time; sink the extra dough into the single vineyards–it is generallly worth it. Or if you don’t have the dough, buy the 2003 Che Storia: $13-$15 at Trader Joe’s and very respectable. Finally, more a lesson confirmed than learned: I like Barbarescos. Yum.

We managed to squeeze this tasting in at the end of November. Due to harvest and general craziness at this time of year, we almost missed it. But we met at Chehalem and tasted 5 Albariños through a thick haze of fruitflies–it’s that time of year.

Overall, I wasn’t as impressed with these as the wine of our previous tastings, particularly at the price point. That said, it was informative and there were a couple of very nice ones.

2006 Martín Códax Albariño Rías Baixas
This was almost everyone’s favorite. Nutty at first, then flowers and honey on the nose. Nice big fruit and a long honey finish. A touch of sweetness but nice acidity to balance. Rating: ***

2006 Salneval Rías Baixas
No nose at all at first, then opened up to a floral scent. Lean and lemony with mineral quality. Rating: **

 2005 Campus Stella Albariño Rías Baixas
Nice lemony quality with great texture but ever so slightly corked, I think. Had potential, but kept getting worse as the evening continued. Too bad. Bottle flaw, no rating.

2005 Do Ferreiro Albariño Rías Baixas
Sulfury gun-powder quality at first which blew off. Opened to nice lemon and spice. Long mineral finish. Rating: **

2003 Bodegas As Laxas Rías Baixas
Sweaty socks and cheese whiz on the nose. Yuck. Somewhat pleasant petrol palate. Just couldn’t get past the socks. Rating: No stars for you!

Interesting, but nothing blew me away. Next month will probably be Barbaresco. I loves them Barbarescos. Stay tuned.