Brian K Miller wrote:Yeah. A 2004 American Chardonnay is getting on in years, no? But-it was better stored than too many of my wines, and I've pnly had it a couple of months, so...the curse of bottle variation-or just not to my palette?
Mark Lipton wrote:Bob Parsons Alberta. wrote:Good thread Richard. I am having a "sort out butterfly sample day" (have to get these to the U of A) but thoughts can wander and I anticipate some great discussions here. Wide ranging area naturally, think a nicely oaked (Calif) version might be a good start but guess those "get-to-Macon" types will be here soon! Would Markham, Sterling or Four Vines be a good start?
Well, Dale did just post a note on an '05 Macon-Village. I'll add my own note about an '05 Maconnais (of a sort):
2005 Joseph Drouhin St. Véran
nose: minerals, pineapple, a hint of oak
palate: medium body, crisp, pineapple, good acidity
I bought this to see what a good producer like Drouhin could do in a good year like '05 in a region like St. Véran. This is Chardonnay from a region that straddles the Maconnais and Beaujolais, and as such is a cheap and potentially good white Burgundy. In this case, I was quite pleased. It had some of the character I look for in Chablis, without the lemony fruit that I usually find there. It was a bit rounder than Chablis but that might reflect year as much as region. Very nice for $13 and a decent match to my thrown-together linguine with white clam sauce for the final dinner of our vacation in Michigan.
Bruce Hayes wrote:Henry of Pelham Non-Oaked Chardonnay 2006
Medium gold color.
Something wrong here: very tart and peppery, lemon, bitter grapefruit rind toward the finish. Very sharp and acidic.
Bitter grapefruit finish.
The wine did calm down somewhat with time, but remained quite tart and bitter. Very disappointing.
This is the first time I have been disappointed with a wine from Henry of Pelham, so am thinking (hoping) it was a bad bottle.