A long weekend of eating, wine drinking and hanging out – finally, the weather was more like it, too.
Learnt something important, too: can’t really seat 10 people around our dinner table...
With dinner on Friday:
Rockford Shiraz Barossa Valley "Basket Press" 2004
Thanks to Fredrik. Cheap press cork. Full, virtually opaque plummy ruby-red-black. Sweet chewing gum (cherry and plum) fruit, sugary almost, but with some milk chocolatey tannin and a slight acidity spike. Fruit deepens with airing, some earthy and tree bark notes surface. Held up well in the open half bottle for several days. Even so, in comparison to the Greenock Creek 1996s, this continued to remind me of Bazooka (the American chewing gum available in Europe until the early nineties) rather than wine. Rating: 88+/89(+?)
Dinner party on Saturday:
Aldo Conterno Barolo Bussia Romirasco 2004
Thanks to Erik. Slightly brighter, glossier, more evolved colour than Sandrone’s Le Vigne. Virtually unchanged since I last tasted it in September 2008. More evolved, and certainly more open and approachable than the Sandrone, but less structured. Pretty nose, if nuttier with oak. Oakier on the palate, too, and increasingly so with airing. Complex flavours, nice subtlety and depth of tea-like fruit, medium tannin. Good medium-plus body and length. If wine were entirely about terroir expression, I might prefer “pure” Romirasco to Granbussia Riserva. But as Rainer said, this could have been even better (more expressive) were it less oaky. 12 hours later definitely oakier and evolved than the Sandrone. Rating: 90+/91(+?)
Sandrone Barolo Le Vigne 2004
Thanks to Remo, who spontaneously decided he wanted to compare this to Erik’s Romirasco from the same vintage. First bottle was cork-tainted, second bottle as good as the one at a trade tasting a couple of weeks ago, but more fun to drink since served cooler using perfect stemware. Full ruby-red, black reflections. Dried rose petal, nice depth of fruit, quite complex and long. Comes across as unevolved next to the Romirasco. Already harmonious oak integration. Nice acids. Still youthfully dry tannin, but nicely black tea like (barely oak-induced at all compared to the Romirasco’s). 12 hours later floral, firm, balanced, just as one expects from young Barolo. Lovely wine, should age harmoniously. dp 91+/92(+?)
Bruno Giacosa Barbaresco Riserva Rabajà 2001
Thanks to Patrick. As good a bottle as I have had of this wine, amazingly, this was not too closed. Deep ruby-red, soft black reflections. Deeply fruity, complex, great terroir expression, very, very long. Aged in a two-year old 55 hectoliter cask, thus not exactly aged in „new oak“ as some sources claim, and indeed, none makes itself felt. A wine of impeccable freshness. Great acids, too. In terms of expression one of my favourite Giacosas in the “modern era” (especially ever since there is no Collina Rionda in the portfolio anymore). Great potential. One of the wines of the night. Wow! Rating: 96+/97(+?)
Sandrone Barolo Cannubi Boschis 1990
Thanks to Dani. Last had this nine years ago, this has always been drinking well, and judging from this performance, should continue to age well for many more years. What a beauty, this was the first (and only?) wine that made all ten people around the table speechless for at least a couple of minutes! Deep lightly plummy ruby-black. A bit reticent on the nose, but on the palate, so balanced and harmonious, complex, finesseful, deep and long that one does not pay much attention to what ultimately makes this wine so exceptional: its concentration. Fruit subtlety, some redcurrant and rose-hip, tea notes, soft white and black truffle, a touch of dark mint chocolate, a suggestion of thyme. “Otherworldly tomatoes”, as Rainer noticed. Completely absorbed oak. Great acids. The almost unnoticeable tannin retains excellent grip. Very, very, almost extremely long. Fruity-lively, finesseful aftertaste. If the nose/the aromatic profile were consistent with the palate/the flavours, this would be perfect Barolo. Oliver believes the 2004 will be every bit as good as the 1990 one day – Rainer and I have a hard time believing the 2004 is quite as concentrated and structured, but we look forward to being proven wrong! ;^) Rating: 99
Gaja Barbaresco Sorì San Lorenzo 1989
Thanks to Oliver, a bottle bought at auction not too long ago, but that appears to have been stored slightly warm and dry. First of all, the cork was so dry it crumbled to pieces. Secondly, the colour was an evolved garnet-orange. Thirdly, the wine smelled and tasted of aged ginger, tarragon, white truffle and Malaga, as well as some nuts. Nor did it at all improve in the decanter. Rating: N/R
Château Pétrus Pomerol 1992
Thanks to Christian, a pristine magnum. Deep purple-ruby, slight watery rim, looks impressive. Aristocratic oak, a touch of horsey brett, lightly truffley, fairly firm fruit of nice medium-plus complexity, nicely smoky, some earth. Fairly long on the finish. All in all the most powerful and at this stage still ageworthy 1992, if not as pretty and elegant as some (e.g. Haut Brion and Mouton Rothschild). Even so, I am not entirely sure I would indeed hold on to it if I owned any. Slightly showed a slight bitterness to its still firm tannin, increasingly so with airing. Rating: 90-/89(+/-?)
Dunn Cabernet Sauvignon Napa Valley Howell Mountain 1990
Thanks to Rainer. Opaque inky purple-black. More youthful, (much!) fresher, but also more closed than the 1992. Less opulent and fruity-thick, but more classic, in this case, huge, almost ridiculously powerful, intense and tight. Hugely tannic, youthfully tough, almost oversized, but utterly convincing. Admittedly quite hard, faintly grainy tannin, but flavourful and mouth-cleansing. Can this really be nineteen years old? Dark, tight blackcurrant, violet and herbs. “Ethereal eucalyptus”, as Rainer noticed. Cool, precise and extremely minerally. Minimal iodine top note for Dunn Howell Mountain, but some smoky graphite as in the finest Loire Cabernet Francs. High but still integrated alcohol. Consistently powerful, balanced, and very, very long on the finish. So fresh and lively. This barely opened up with airing. What a wine! Could use more time in bottle. Rating: 96+/97(+?)
Greenock Creek Shiraz Barossa Valley Seven Acre 1996
My first contribution that night. Deep plummy, still opaque purple at the center, slight watery rim. Plummy-sweet but noble plum, milk chocolate, minty-fresh yoghurt. Some wet earth and raw meat (but not at all gamy and over the top as in later vintages). Soft marzipan and vanilla oak. Long, creamy, round and smooth. Lovely, lively floral tea like, milk chocolatey tannin (especially for Barossa Shiraz). On the one hand, it becomes more and more apparent that this wine was made from young vines (9-year-old versus the 50-plus-year-old in the Roennfeldt Road vineyard), taking seemingly forever to develop more complexity (and maybe it does ultimately lack depth and potential for greater expression), on the other hand, the wine has always had that combination of impeccable balance and freshness that makes one think it holds lots of potential. That may ultimately mean very little, but I am certainly curious to see what will happen. It is amazing how little this wine has evolved since release. 12 hours later, the wine showed a little more meatiness to its fruit, but again, was barely gamier. Sweeter and plummier after 24 hours, seemingly yet more youthful. I remember noting two years ago that the 1996 Seven Acre had entered a transitional phase during which it might be wise not to open any more bottles, and indeed, I am now convinced the seemingly endless primary fruit phase in which the wine showed a barrel sample like harmony for so many years appears to have come to an end, and that there is little else left at this stage than to trust its balance and wait. Given the snail’s pace at which this has been evolving in bottle, however, I find it difficult to predict how long. Rating: 95(+?)
Greenock Creek Shiraz Barossa Valley Roennfeldt Road 1996
My second contribution that night. I was elated, surprised, shocked by the showing of this bottle. First of all, Fredrik had convinced me to open a bottle, as I was afraid the wine might still be closed (it was very much so three years ago). It showed greater balance and overall integration of fruit, acids and oak than the Seven Acre, however, on that almost ridiculous level of intensity and concentration that is all its own. What truly baffled me, however, was how much I liked this wine – it turned out to be at least Erik’s, Fredrik’s, Rainer’s and my favourite wine of the night, along with, in Rainer’s and my case, Sandrone’s 1990 Cannubi Boschis. Christian finds it by far the greatest Syrah/Shiraz he has ever tasted. To be honest, I still have a hard time praising virtually overbearing wine like this, but the terroir expression and complexity were so undeniable, with no element sticking out like a sore thumb at all (the wine manages to be both balanced and near-impossible to drink in quantity, seemingly a contradiction, but it apparently is not). Marginally more evolved colour than that of the Seven Acre, no doubt because it was aged in oak longer. Opaque, glossy, more coffee-tinged plum colour. Closer to over the top superripeness than the Seven Acre, but it is the awesome old-viney concentration that makes it taste almost rubbery-petrolly at first. Integrates its 15.2% alcohol with even greater ease than the Seven Acre its 14.6%, extraordinary balance given the monumental size. Incredibly complex and deep fruit and terroir notes. Hung game, earth, coffee. Someone said the finish was over two minutes long – maybe it was? No different 12 hours later, but served cool from the cellar (where I had put the decanter), the acids were fractionally more prominent, the alcohol integration slightly less perfect. As soon as it warmed up to room temperature in the glass, the wine was all violet-tinged blueberry fruit and earthy terroir notes again, with only a hint of pretty oak spice. After 24 hours almost Hermitage-like in expressivity, incredibly complex, concentrated, satiny yet firm, and extremely long. To think I considered selling it off after we had a first bottle three years ago! Virtually unchanged after 48 hours in the decanter, perhaps fruitier and more civilized, as well as harmonious and finesseful! Astonishing: that last glass of this monumental wine went down like liquified silk... Rating: 98+?
Tommaso Bussola Amarone della Valpolicella TB Vigneto Alto 2004
Thanks to Fredrik. Deep, lightly plummy ruby-red. Lightly heavy mocha milk chocolate to reasonably lively cherry chewing gum. Slightly Recioto-like sweetness. Sound, just barely integrated alcohol. Anise, vanilla and cinnamon oak (aged for 30 months in all new 500-litre French oak barrels). Comes across as roasted and barely complex at all after the 1996 Roennfeldt Road, but currently hides what seems fair enough complexity underneath. IMHO lacks depth and finesse, and/or potential expressivity. Fair enough length. 12 hours later riper raisins, livelier, nicely red-fruity, with improved alcohol integration. A wine that impressed more with purity and what I sometimes call “surface perfection” – not my favourite style of Amarone (I tend to prefer Bussola’s Recioto TB bottling), nor, it turned out, Fredrik’s. Even so, for admirers of the producer and style, the 2004 Vigneto Alto appears to be one of the promising Bussola Amarones so far. Rating: 91+/92(+?)
Dal Forno Romano Amarone della Valpolicella Vigneto di Monte Lodoletta 2003
Thanks to Remo. Only 16.5% alcohol labelled (versus the 17.5% in several of the top vintages in recent years), which prompted Fredrik to quip this is Amarone “for pregnant women and children”. Opaque purple-red. A whiff of volatile acidity, along with less integrated alcohol than e.g. in the fuller-bodied 1995. Fruitier, livelier, more tannic and longer than Bussola’s 2004 Vigneto Alto, but fairly oaky. Hugely tannic in fact, but fairly sweet (there is little to no residual sugar in this, surprisingly so for a 2003). Fairly expressive, but ridiculously youthful. Some chewy fresh licorice stick. Rainer finds this “a ridiculous effort, more like a second wine”, i.e. a Dal Forno Valpolicella compared to his best Amarones. I would not go that far, but am afraid this would have to be monitored closely (if one owned any – I would opt for other vintages), because it is tight like a fist now, but hardly one of Dal Forno’s most ageworthy efforts. Yet more of a fresh green walnut top note after 12 hours, as well as greener licorice stick, alcohol a little more integrated, more tannic bitterness. After 24 hours tannic and dry, plus, as Remo noted, this does not appear to have the glycerine to buffer it as other vintages do. Continued to remind me of a structurally down-scaled version of the 1990 after 48 hours, hampered by some of the virtual (literal?) indigestibility of the 1989 (it sounds counter-intuitive to say about wines of this size, but more stuffing would not hurt). All in all, 2003 does not appear to have been quite the success for Dal Forno that is has been for some of his lesser peers. Fredrik believes his greatest successes are the 1998 and 2004 – of course Rainer and my favourite so far remains the 1995, followed by the 1997 and 1990. Rating: 93+?
Quintarelli Giuseppe Cabernet Franc Alzero di Monte Cà Paletta 1997
Thanks to Erik. Glossy pruney-garnet colour, a bit like those beautifully polished old mahogany billiards tables. Oak, coffee, fig, date and prune, almost Tokaj-like. Not alcoholic at all, but quite full-bodied. Round, smooth. Really a bit mocha-like at first. Medium-plus length. Not the firm fruit, intensity or structure of classic Alzeros, there is something distinctly Recioto-like about this that, as Erik figured out the next morning, made it a perfect match with my terrine. After 12 hours more open, sweeter, creamier, richer and longer fig, date and coffee chocolate, even more ancient style Tokaj-, if not Banyuls-like. Some dusty Cabernet Franc leafiness and green bell pepper. After 24 hours, this just melted in the mouth like a sweet and juicy Filet Medaillon. Delicious, if impossible to categorize wine. Even so, this does not appear to have the backbone and overall structure of „classic“ Alzeros like 1985 and 1988. Rating: 94+/~95?
Dal Forno Romano Passito Rosso Vigna Seré 2003
Half bottle thanks to Fredrik. About 400 grams of grapes or 3 cl of wine per vine, Fredrik reports. Lightly pruney opaque purple. Faint but fresh green licorice stick to sweet, thick and pruney fruit, for a young Dal Forno evolved and a bit heavy-handed. “Not too complex nor floral”, as Rainer observed. A far cry from Dal Forno’s finest Reciotos, even so, currently drinking better, certainly much more easily, than the Amarone. After 12 hours sweeter as well as more tannic, nicely evolved prune/baked plum, improved alcohol integration. “Too heavy-handed, broad and charming, not focused enough”, Erik said, “more like a Bussola than Dal Forno Recioto”, Fredrik added. Needless to say, we all fail to see why the DOCG tasting committee would not permit Dal Forno to market this as Recioto della Valpolicella. Rating: 93(-?)
Robert Weil Riesling Auslese #19 Kiedricher Gräfenberg 1995
Half bottle thanks to Andrea. Youthfully bright yellow-gold. A concentrated and intense wine, floral and fresh, light-on-its-feet and lively dandelion, lovely yellow fruit (including pineapple and pink grapefruit finesse notes), firm and flavourful acidity, quite long on the finish. Less forward saffron and camomile than a half bottle a couple of years ago – amazing! Still in that in-between phase, not unapproachable, but could use (and deserves) more time in the cellar. Rating: 93+/94?
Úri Borok Vince Gergely Muskotály Aszúeszencia St. Tamás Dülö 2003
Thanks to Fredrik. Only 600 half liter bottles of this pure Sárgamuskotály (Muscat de Lunel) Aszúeszencia were made. 8.5% alcohol, ca. 365 g/l residual sugar. Medium copper-gold. Awesome, pure half-dried tangerine, so beautiful. Intense, lively, clean, ripe, precise, dense, structured, firm. The prettiest imaginable sweet bitter note, I thought, but: “slightly tough acids and bitter note”, Andrea said, who last tasted this when it was still in barrel (one has to like pure Muskotály Aszú – it is different and tends to be more youthfully tough, although this being a 2003, not too much so, I feel). Quite good body especially given the low alcohol level. Very, very long like most of Gergely’s best efforts. Just a hint at green tea (but then, that is usually a combination of Furmint plus terroir plus non-interventionist winemaking). Expressive for young Muskotály Aszú, especially in terms of finesse (which usually needs more time to surface). Another wine of the night, and not just to me! Rating: 96+/97(+?)
Daniel Vollenweider Riesling Essenz Wolfer Goldgrube 2005
Half bottle thanks to Fredrik. 480 g/l residual sugar at 4.5% alcohol. Lovely golden colour. Noblest buttery botrytis, lovely faintly brown-bready bitter note. Hugely oily-viscous, truly Eszencia-like for Riesling. Green tea reminiscent of Tokaj, too. “Almost medicinal minerality”, as Rainer says (= here meaning: intense, not at all unclean!), which gives the wine shape. Very low alcohol (as Rainer said, more would not have hurt the wine’s balance). Terrific, well-integrated acidity. Very, very long. All in all, still nicely short of cloying, but fractionally imprecise for an otherwise near-perfect wine. Youthful, no doubt, but certainly not closed, difficult to tell at what stage in its life this will best be appreciated. Rating: 96+?
No beer in the house (never drink any), so on to something lighter after dessert, as some were contemplating some/more cheese (= I never start having cheese before I have tasted/taken notes on all the wines):
Daniel & Martha Gantenbein Riesling Spätlese 2007
Thanks to Remo. 9.5% alcohol. Medium-pale yellow-green. More complex on the nose than the palate, which is lacking less in density than intensity/flavourfulness – a touch of residual yeast that keeps this from expressing itself more fully? A touch of grapefruit, nice bitter note to a core of apple and lemon. Some nice lime rind. Quite strong acidity. Medium minerality and length. Interesting and attractive since different from e.g. Mosel/Saar/Ruwer Riesling, but expensive for what it is. A bit more open, but no more intense 24 hours later. Rating: 88+/89?
With dinner on Sunday:
Joh. Jos. Prüm Riesling Spätlese #1 Wehlener Sonnenuhr 1990
A bottle I opened spontaneously for dinner, craved something great but less overbearing. Lively yellow-golden colour. Some residual CO2 that no doubt helps keep this so fresh. White peach, thick yellow spring flowers and herbs, green hazelnut, lemon rind and balm mint, soft veggie character, dusty-chalky minerals, barely petrolly at all. Almost Auslese-like thickness and (relatively speaking) oiliness at first. Stong acidity. Very long on the finish. 12 hours later much more Spätlese-typical, if with more body than most Spätlesen nowadays, enjoyed the remaining one and a half glasses with cheese and bread, terrific wine. Rating: 92+/93
Dal Forno Romano Nettare 1995
Half bottle thanks to Fredrik. L. 1.079 Passito blend of Turbiano (= Trebbiano Romagnolo) and Garganega. Over 300 g/l residual sugar at 11% alcohol. Primary copper amber-orange colour. Pours, looks and smells almost like Eszencia; on the palate more like a semi-old-style Aszú-Eszencia, without the mid-palate density of the best. Honey-like viscosity. Crystallized quince jelly, Cox Orange apple. Apricot jelly with Slivovitz someone said. “Miel de Sapin des Vosges“, Fredrik insisted. Faint brown bread crust. Just fairly complex, and virtually devoid of finesse and depth. Not too long. Medium rancio note. A whiff of varnish perhaps? „Honeyed and one-dimensional“, Fredrik concluded. I could not help thinking this bears some similarity to Chasselas. Improved with airing over the course of several days, insofar as the acidity became fractionally more flavourful, the wine sweeter yet more balanced overall, adding some black tea and mocha finesse notes. But the fruit never seemed particularly complex, and the wine ultimately remained a bit loose in the middle. Rather more volatile after a few days in the fridge. Rating: 88(+/-?)
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________
„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti