WineLovers Discussion Group

Last night it was steaks on the grill and fresh (picked 30 minutes prior to cooking) corn on the cob.

The wine was an "old" friend.

2001 Cap De Faugeres (Cotes de Castillon)
Deep ruby red. Cassis, plum and diminishing oak aromatics. This bottle is significantly more integrated than the last time I had one many months ago. Round, rich, fruity, with an again diminishing edge of tannin. We're probably within 6 months to a year of full peak on this wine. It's not getting any more complex, but it's becoming dangerously drinkable. Half the bottle disappeared very quickly. Very tasty, and a great value slowly fading away with the dollar/eruo and vintage hype for 2003 and 2005.

The conflicting feelings come when I drink a bottle like this humble Bordeaux or a Muscadet or Gamay. There's so much to like in a wine like this that I wonder why I buy the $30 bottles, much less the $100 bottles. To answer an earlier question, I would spend $500 on a bottle of wine, but would I really and truly enjoy it more; I don't think so. As I was sitting with my last few sips of the Cap I came up with a quick mental list of high QPR wines that I could drink forever:

Cap De Faugeres
D'Aiguilhe
Pepiere Muscadet Eden or Briords
Schmitt-Wagner Kabinett
Donnhoff QbA
Brocard Chablis

To name a few...it seems the list could go on as long as I needed it to.

David M. Bueker wrote:The conflicting feelings come when I drink a bottle like this humble Bordeaux or a Muscadet or Gamay. There's so much to like in a wine like this that I wonder why I buy the $30 bottles, much less the $100 bottles. To answer an earlier question, I would spend $500 on a bottle of wine, but would I really and truly enjoy it more; I don't think so.

A true sense of satisfaction! Sometimes I get the same feeling when opening one of my home made wines where everything came together right and I am actually surprised at how good it is. Most of my wines are decent, but once in a while...
Its these times that my hobby is really rewarding.
(sorry for this digression in your thread)

yes, but like everything, when you repeat repeat repeat it becomes a bit dulling to the senses (hello zen meditation!).

Perhaps if you only drank the simple quaffers you would not be able to appreciate their spontaneous gaiety the same way as if you interspersed them with sullen overpriced bores.

Rahsaan wrote:yes, but like everything, when you repeat repeat repeat it becomes a bit dulling to the senses (hello zen meditation!).

Perhaps if you only drank the simple quaffers you would not be able to appreciate their spontaneous gaiety the same way as if you interspersed them with sullen overpriced bores.

So true, but I was mulling the QPR list over in my mind and it's so darned long. Perhaps once my German order comes in this fall I should go the next 6 months without buying anything over $20. (Actually I should go 6 months without buying anything...)

David M. Bueker wrote: There's so much to like in a wine like this that I wonder why I buy the $30 bottles, much less the $100 bottles. To answer an earlier question, I would spend $500 on a bottle of wine, but would I really and truly enjoy it more; I don't think so.

Sometimes feel the same way when I reach for something 'humble' and it just hits the spot. However, although I have wines and producers that I return to on a regular basis, I don't stash cases of certain QPR wines away simply because I wouldn't cycle through them fast enough and I like the variety of finding new wines more than drinking the familiar shoe.
Sometimes savoring the moment works best with these types of wines, because I find they change with age and not always for the better.

Mark S wrote: I don't stash cases of certain QPR wines away simply because I wouldn't cycle through them fast enough and I like the variety of finding new wines more than drinking the familiar shoe.

I mostly agree, but the QPR wines I am talking about generally have a pretty long shelf life. Cap de Faugeres can go 7-8 years, while a wine like the Schmitt-Wagner kabinett likely has a 15-20 year life. So a case does not need to be finished quickly.

David M. Bueker wrote:So true, but I was mulling the QPR list over in my mind and it's so darned long. Perhaps once my German order comes in this fall I should go the next 6 months without buying anything over $20. (Actually I should go 6 months without buying anything...)

Perhaps 6 years, given your cellar.
But is there an under $20 sparkling wine in your mental list? If not, you might allow yourself to spend more than $20.

A very interesting topic, David, and one that would have even more ramifications if we weren't all beyond the rational in buying wine.
Charles

Charles Weiss wrote:

David M. Bueker wrote:So true, but I was mulling the QPR list over in my mind and it's so darned long. Perhaps once my German order comes in this fall I should go the next 6 months without buying anything over $20. (Actually I should go 6 months without buying anything...)

Perhaps 6 years, given your cellar.
But is there an under $20 sparkling wine in your mental list? If not, you might allow yourself to spend more than $20.

A very interesting topic, David, and one that would have even more ramifications if we weren't all beyond the rational in buying wine.
Charles

Sparklers are indeed a problem. I think I could be satisfied with Roederer Estate and Bugey, but I am not sure. There's also Huet VOuvray Petillant which can be had for under $20 with some luck. I think we'll need to broach a Huet on the 19th.

Rational? Who needs to be rational?

Well, this sent me to my cellar list. I served this wine at a wine tasting six or so months ago and found it to be showing heavy on the merlot, very floral, and I didn't care for it as much as I thought I would. Still, knowing that my taste in BDX is similar to yours, you present an argument that's more compelling than my memory of the wine as it was then, and I hoped to find that I had six left. Well, not quite that lucky, but I have two for which I paid just $14 each. I see I also have an 00--any recent experience with that one?

I agree with Rahsaan about too much of one thing, at the moment, anyway. My wife and I have evolved into alternating between rustic and simpler wines, such as those from Castillon and other "lesser" Bordeaux Region appellations, and classed growths. I did it first to test this value approach for our future years on a fixed income, but came to enjoy the contrast for the present.

It occurred to me that form followed function in that we alternate every week between a rustic Adirondack home and a plusher suburban one. Maybe when we stop coming back into civilization, we will gravitate to rustic only wine. And that will be fine.

David M. Bueker wrote:Cap De Faugeres
D'Aiguilhe
Pepiere Muscadet Eden or Briords
Schmitt-Wagner Kabinett
Donnhoff QbA
Brocard Chablis

Nice list. I always have most of these, except the Schmitt-Wagner, which I will look for.
Have you had the '05 Donnhoff yet? Looks like it's arriving.

Jenise wrote:Well, this sent me to my cellar list. I served this wine at a wine tasting six or so months ago and found it to be showing heavy on the merlot, very floral, and I didn't care for it as much as I thought I would. Still, knowing that my taste in BDX is similar to yours, you present an argument that's more compelling than my memory of the wine as it was then, and I hoped to find that I had six left. Well, not quite that lucky, but I have two for which I paid just $14 each. I see I also have an 00--any recent experience with that one?

If you thought the '01 was too Merlot then the '00 is not going to be your cup of tea. It's a bigger, lusher cousin of the '01. In fact, I would then say steer clear of the '03, as it makes the '00 look wimpy. The '01 is indeed rather Merlot, but I found it to be quite linear and strong, if softening with age, perhaps reflecting the vintage. The '02 is around some places, and I am tempted to try it. Given that you only have two '01s left I would hold off for 6 more months. I have 5 more and can sacrifice 1 again after the holidays and post a note.

Jenise wrote: I see I also have an 00--any recent experience with that one?

Jenise,

What was that inexpensive '00 that we both tried, in '03, I believe, with the explosive nose? I thought it was Cap de Faugeres, but I can't find my notes.

Covert

Wasn't it Cambon La Pelouse?

David M. Bueker wrote:Wasn't it Cambon La Pelouse?

Yes, sure was. I remembered it about a half hour after I asked. Then felt stupid because no late ripening Castillon would likely have that kind of nose.

One of the main issues for me with a lot of "big-ticket" wines these days is that they're arbitrarily placed in those stratospheric price points, since so many of them tend to be unproven new brands. It's not the same to drop $100 on a nice bottle of, say, Vosne-Romanée 1er Cru from a parcel and producer you know and trust, knowing that the price has come to that (to me ridiculous) level over many years than to drop the same amount for the latest pointy super-Rioja or California Pinot Noir.

But your meditation makes me think of something else: Why some QPR greats are indeed so great. I think of Marc Ollivier, or Jean-Paul Brun, or Clos Roche Blanche, or André Iché, or Thierry Puzelat, or any number of others (yes, these are al Louis/Dressner imports; no, I'm not shilling fro Dressner here, just giving credit where credit is due), and realize that one of the best things about a wine like, say, Clos Roche Blanche Gamay, is that it's been with me, consistently gorgeous and nicely priced, for a good number of vintages. I can go back to bottles from '96 and say "Hello, my good friend..."

Which I find a very rare and valuable thing in today's wine world. And which perhaps explains why I was so damnn upset when my favorite $15 Rioja Reserva over the past two decades (MOnte Real Reserva from Bodegas Riojanas: It wasn't always $15; when I started buying it, it was merely a couple of bucks a bottle) nt over to spoofulation and the Dark Side. A betrayal of my trust in its consistency, is what I saw.

Then again, I'm a freak.

David,

A hazy memory's coming back to me this morning, that I've had the 00 and that is why I chose the 01 for the tasting I was doing. The 00 was big and juicy for a Bordeaux and similar attributes would help the 01 show well in a tasting of 01 wines from around the world, which was the theme. Not a job for a Cantemerle or wine of that ilk. Anyway, I'm totally fine with merlot, I think what I found with the 01 was that I didn't get much else besides the floral merlot bouquet in the nose. I look forward to tasting a bottle that's had a little more rest and development.

David M. Bueker wrote:I think I could be satisfied with Roederer Estate and Bugey, but I am not sure. There's also Huet VOuvray Petillant which can be had for under $20 with some luck.

David, have you tried the NV Pinon Vouvray? $15 before discount, and pretty good for my tastes

Dale Williams wrote:

David M. Bueker wrote:I think I could be satisfied with Roederer Estate and Bugey, but I am not sure. There's also Huet Vouvray Petillant which can be had for under $20 with some luck.

David, have you tried the NV Pinon Vouvray? $15 before discount, and pretty good for my tastes

Nope. Another one for the list.

The list keeps expanding the more I think about it. I had forgotten Baumard Savenneires. Even the 2002 Clos de Papillon was around $20 locally when I got a mixed case discount on release.

And in response to Manuel, I agree that an expensive wine with pedigree is a different thing. Wines like Ridge Monte Bello, Pichon Baron, Salon, Donnhoff Auslese (um...yeah), etc. are in a different class. I keep trying to get myself into a pattern where I essentially buy 11 bottles of things to just drink and 1 bottle of "the good stuff" to round out the mixed case. It's hard. I have only had limited success.

I do find it hard ot believe the amount of untried, untested $75+ stuff that gets bought in quantity and cellared. I'm expecting some serious cull parties in about 5 years.

Salon? Too much bottle variation, at least in my experience. Of course, when you get a great bottle, something like '83, '85 or '88 Salon can be sublime. But I've had enough duds getting to the sublime experience to know I must hedge my bets, which, by the way, have gotten too damn expensive in more recent vintages with that house.

Is Monte Bello still worth buying? I believe the last bottle I actually purchased was from the mid-1980s.

Of course, since I no longer buy young Bordeaux (apart from the obscene prices, too much of it is incredibly spoofulated and unworthy of serious cellaring), I have a lot more money to spend on other, more satisfying things. By this, of course, I mean Barolo...

Dale, NV Pinon Vouvray is certainly very worthwhile, and the 1996 which was available until the last year or 2 at the same price was better still, but neither is really a Champagne substitute IMHO.

David, Roederer Estate is my "go to" relatively inexpensive sparkler too though hard to find for under $17 these days. But unlike their "L'Ermitage", which is much pricier, it wouldn't be confused with a decent Champagne either.

Bugey is, well, Bugey.

Cheers,
Charles

Try Gruet Rose or Blanc de Noir, both around $15. Roderer used to be my favorite, but we did a blind tasting of cheap (under $20) sparklers, and the Blanc de Noir was the clear winner. They're made in NM, of all places, by the Gruet family of Champagne fame. Another good QPR sparkler is Cristillano (sp?) Cava, but Gruet's my favorite.

Niki (Dayton OH) wrote:Try Gruet Rose or Blanc de Noir, both around $15. Roderer used to be my favorite, but we did a blind tasting of cheap (under $20) sparklers, and the Blanc de Noir was the clear winner. They're made in NM, of all places, by the Gruet family of Champagne fame. Another good QPR sparkler is Cristillano (sp?) Cava, but Gruet's my favorite.

In another thread on the board I have rather loudly declared my dislike of Gruet. Of course I was in a bad mood at the time, but I still don't like it.

Manuel Camblor wrote:Salon? Too much bottle variation, at least in my experience. Of course, when you get a great bottle, something like '83, '85 or '88 Salon can be sublime. But I've had enough duds getting to the sublime experience to know I must hedge my bets, which, by the way, have gotten too damn expensive in more recent vintages with that house.

Is Monte Bello still worth buying? I believe the last bottle I actually purchased was from the mid-1980s.

Of course, since I no longer buy young Bordeaux (apart from the obscene prices, too much of it is incredibly spoofulated and unworthy of serious cellaring), I have a lot more money to spend on other, more satisfying things. By this, of course, I mean Barolo...

Wow, we need to drink together some time. We're like two curmudgeons in a pod. I have had very few (1 exactly) bad experiences with Salon. Based on my frequent samples, I would have to say that the bad bottles were poorly handled in distribution, or just plain too young. I was at a tasting about 3 years ago where a bottle of '90 Salon was written off after 15 minutes. Well 2 hours later it was one of the greatest Champagnes I had ever had in my life, and Laura and I had most of it to ourselves.

Monte Bello? I don't know. I don't drink it. I just age it. I drink other people's bottles. The '91 was amazing in 2004. The '94 is great but oh so young, and the '00 is really good, but it's so early.

I buy Bordeaux, as I love Barton (not buying '05), Baron, Branaire and Montrose (or as I call it...Bontrose). I happily stocked the cellar before things got too out of whack. '04 may have been my last vintage. I love Barolo, but i buy it in 1 bottle increments. Talk about prices...