Champagne/Sparkling Wine Tasting

It’s too early to report that I’m drinking anything, but I’ll tell you that I had some fun wine last night - a sparkling wine from Provence, vintage 2010, Cinsault/Grenache extra brut, methode traditionelle.  Lovely.  And right now I’m listening to the Pointer Sisters - such fun music!  It’s early in the day and I almost never blog early, but I don’t have any real obligations until later today.

And I’ve been wanting to tell you about this tasting we attended last weekend.  To be honest, I can hardly believe that I’ve never been to a Champagne or sparkling wine tasting before - at least not that I can remember.  So when one of my favorite retailers told me he was hosting such a tasting in his wine shop last week, we decided we absolutely had to go.  And it was completely worthwhile.  I won’t tell you about prices on the wines as pricing can vary tremendously depending on your location, and honestly, his prices are among the best I’ve seen on Long Island, for many different products, so his pricing might not be a fair reflection of what you can find elsewhere.

We started out with a wine that I’ve had before - the Domaine de Moulin Gaillac NV - here’s one you’ve probably never had.  It’s creamy and delicious with fine bubbles, made from the Mauzac grape from the Gaillac region of South West France.  (After reading it’s from South West France, you probably can guess why I’ve had this wine a few times before - in fact, I opened this past Feast of the Seven Fishes on Christmas Eve with this wine.)    It has lemon, apple, and floral notes with a touch of sweetness.  And it’s inexpensive by anyone’s standards, for an offbeat sparkling wine.

Good grower Champagne at under $30?  Sign me up!

The other non-Champagne sparkling wine we had was the Raventos I Blanc de Nit 2010, from Spain, in fact from where they produce Cava.  It used to be classified as a Cava, comes from that region of Spain, and made with grapes such as Xarello and Macabeo that we usually see in Cava, but after issues with Spanish government regulations regarding classification of Cava, Raventos opted out of being classified as Cava, and since then, their sales have increased a great deal.  The wine is soft, clean, and a gorgeous very pale salmon color in the glass.  I liked it very much.

The next wine was the surprise of the night for me, as it’s the least expensive real Champagne I’ve ever tasted (at under $30) - the Duc de Romet Brut Prestige NV - it’s mostly Pinot Meunier actually (as opposed to mostly Pinot Noir and Chardonnay) - and it’s surprisingly sophisticated, elegant, and lovely and bright, with very fine bubbles, and characteristics of lemon zest, golden apple, earth, and mushroom (the latter being a result of the high percentage of Meunier).  I’d be hard pressed to find a better Champagne in this price range.

Next up was one of my favorites but not one of Peter’s favorites, even though we both found it to be satisfying and very complex.  It’s the Aubry Brut 1er Cru NV - and as strange as it may sound, for me it’s a very masculine Champagne in that it just smells like a man.  Here’s why - it’s got woody, musky, wild characteristics and notes of subtle incense and patchouli.  I love subtle suggestions like the characteristics of this wine, a Champagne that keeps me guessing and wondering.

The rest of the Champagnes seemed very traditional in style.  Next was the A. Margaine Brut 1er Cru NV, with lots of fruit, stone, herb, pear, and a creamy but very clean feel.  It’s exactly what we’d expect from a good grower Champagne (see?  All the Champagnes at the tasting were grower Champagnes, coming in at prices far lower than their counterparts at the large Champagne houses that compromise on quality for the sake of quantity - taste through some grower Champagnes, check out the prices, and there’s a pretty big and convincing case for buying grower Champagnes), and traditional is usually my favorite way to go in terms of sparkling wines and Champagnes.

I loved the penultimate wine - the Chartogne-Taillet Brut Rose 2009.  It’s a bright salmon colored rose, with notes of peach, orange peel, barely ripened red berries, and a clean feel - just amazing in appearance and on the nose and palate as well.  I don’t drink rose Champagne nearly often enough, I have no idea why, but this is a new favorite.

And we wrapped up with the Egly-Ouriet Brut 1er Cru “Les Vignes de Vrigny” NV - another stunning example of a reasonably priced grower Champagne, traditional to the core in style, with a slightly golden rim, a perfect balance of fruit and mineral, a clean but satisfying and delicious wine with wonderful texture and presence, and a fabulous way to end a Champagne tasting.

Guild of Sommeliers Master Class: Washington State

I love master classes hosted by the Guild of Sommeliers - they’re really informative and the opportunity to taste through plenty of wines from different regions is fantastic.

This time, I finally got to attend a class on American wines - from what might be my favorite major wine producing state (don’t judge me, fellow New Yorkers, please!) - Washington State.  I’ve tasted a bunch of Washington wines already and I like how they seem to reflect the natural characteristics of the grapes without much tampering and without the over-concentration that we see sometimes in the bigger style wines of California.  So when I learned that the Guild was offering a master class on Washington, I was all in.

I think when most people think of WA, they think of a cool, rainy place - now, I’ve never been to WA, but from what I hear, Seattle and the surrounding areas are just that - rain, clouds, cool temperatures of the Pacific Northwest.  But there’s a part of WA, farther east on the other side of the mountain range, where the climate is far more conducive to growing wine grapes, and while, comparatively speaking, the region is relatively young, there is still history in the area and significant experimenting is going on with regard to more esoteric grapes, or at least grapes that we might not have thought of when thinking of WA.  And after tasting through the lineup - 3 flights - I can assure you, it’s not all just Riesling, Syrah, Merlot, and Cabernet.  And it certainly is not all just Chateau Ste. Michelle.  And guess what else - it’s all a lot more affordable than its California counterparts, wines of equal quality at a fraction of the price.  Suffice it to say, I was very impressed - and as always, I learned a lot and enjoyed the lecture by MS Matt Stamp and MS Scott Carney.

I’m going to list the wines tasted and mention which were my favorites, and then I’ll tell you a bit more about them.

Flight 1
Long Shadows “Poet’s Leap” Riesling, Columbia Valley, 2013
W.T. Vintners Gruner Veltliner, Columbia Gorge, 2013
Amavi Cellars Semillon, Walla Walla Valley, 2012
Efeste “Feral” Sauvignon Blanc, Ancient Lakes, 2012 (favorite)
aMaurice “Sparrow Estate” Viognier, Walla Walla Valley 2013 (major favorite)
Analemma Wines “Oak Ridge” Pinot Noir, Columbia Gorge, 2011

Flight 2
Memaloose “Mistral Ranch” Syrah, Columbia Valley, 2011
Gramercy Cellars “Lagniappe” Syrah, Walla Walla Valley, 2011 (favorite)
Va Piano “Les Collines Black Label” Syrah, Walla Walla Valley, 2012 (major favorite)
Syncline Carignan-Grenache, Columbia Valley, 2012
Rotie Cellars “Southern Red,” Washington, 2011
Idilico Monastrell, Snipes Mountain, 2011 (major favorite)

Flight 3
Cor Cellars Cabernet Franc, Horse Heaven Hills, 2010
Fall Line “Red Willow Vineyard,” Yakima Valley, 2010 (favorite)
Leonetti Cellar Merlot, Walla Walla Valley, 2012 (major favorite)
Andrew Will “Champoux,” Horse Heaven Hills, 2010
Cadence “Ciel du Cheval,” Red Mountain, 2010
Col Solare Red Wine, Columbia Valley, 2001

So as you can see, the first flight was pretty much a variety of whites, most of which were not what I expected (in a good way!), plus a Pinot Noir.  The second flight was mostly Rhone grapes, and the third flight was mostly Bordeaux grapes.

Beginning with the whites - the Riesling was very good, and I know WA is well known for its Riesling.  It had plenty of weight to it, for a Riesling, with a lovely nose and a nice flavor, but for me, I prefer Rieslings a little lighter and this one seemed a little “hot” for a halb-trocken style.  Again, that’s just my style, but I felt there was a bit too much heat for a grape I prefer either on the sweeter side with an acidic follow up, or austere and lean with slightly higher alcohol once the sugar has been converted. I liked it but didn’t love it.  The Gruner was cool - clean, easy, uncomplicated, and not overly acidic.  (Please remember - yes, I’m a certified sommelier and a major wine geek, and while I like my cool climate wines best, I’m no “acid freak” in that I need these crazy amounts of acid coming at me from the wines - I want them to be fun and delicious while also being clean and lively, but I also realize that many American palates will be turned off by excessive acidity and so I’m more reasonable about acid - unlike many modern young sommeliers who take the acid overload like rays on a tanning bed.  Sorry, I seek balance - nothing should be overpowering, including [read: especially] acidity.)  The Semillon was also very good - kind of funky and geeky, especially on the palate, and slightly stinky on the nose, which I’m cool with.  The texture was on the luscious for a dry style Semillon, with an almost waxy feel and a hint of bitter nut toward the finish, and some “fume” as I like to call it - white smoke with some fuel characteristics.  I liked it.  And then there was Sauvignon Blanc.  Wow.  I loved it!  It’s more like a Bordeaux style Sauvignon (as opposed to New Zealand or Loire) in that it has a “main course” sort of capability - it can stand up to somewhat richer dishes.  With words like “substantial,” “love,” and “standout” written next to it in my notes, I was very impressed.  The acidity was bright, the balance was excellent, it’s very food friendly, and - as I like them - a quirky wine that I can identify with, showing garden weed notes, tart white fruit, cumquat, bitter citrus, lemon, crab apple, and dry soil - the unpredictable nature of this wine landed its name as first on the list of favorites of the day.  And then the Viognier came along, and I was blown away.  Another standout, with “wow” and some other words not fit for a proper wine blog written next to it to remind me how it made me feel, I was in love.  On the nose, there was no telltale sign that says “hi, I’m Viognier” at all, as most Northern Rhone examples would.  Instead, it had an air of mystery about it.  But on the palate, there it was - Viognier - gorgeous on the palate (as well as in the glass!), full, satisfying, borderline stunning, and voluptuous without being too big.  Showing notes of tropical and orchard fruit, white and yellow blossoms, and dry soil (with just a touch of Fruit Loops cereal on the nose), it was amazing, and full of personality and expression and uniqueness.  Unfortunately, I was underwhelmed a bit by the Pinot Noir - yes, it was sort of Old World style, with plenty of acidity, but perhaps too much tartness, green notes, brine, but otherwise not bad - a touch of bacon fat and smoked wood, cinnamon, barely ripened cherry.  Just not what I was hoping for after being completely enchanted by those whites.

Next up were Rhone grape based wines.  As you may know, WA Syrah has garnered quite a bit of attention in recent years.  Several of the wines in this flight were Syrah based, but there were some surprises as well.  We started off with the Memaloose “Mistral Ranch” which was nice and I liked it - it showed characteristics of raspberry jam/liqueur, dry soil, and lots of black pepper - clearly it’s mostly Syrah, with Counoise and Grenache.  It seemed to beg for some meat with it.  Next up was the Gramercy Cellars “Lagniappe” 100% Syrah, which I wrote next to it “wonderful,” and interestingly I called it a “standout in a subtle way” - in that it gently shows beautifully and makes a statement.  It’s very minerally and expressive with a cool characteristic (probably reflecting a cool vintage in 2011), both red and dark fruit, raspberry, plum, soft black pepper notes, chocolate, herbs, and flower petals, with a clean feel, fine tannin, and overall balance.  That one obviously made the favorites list.  And then a surprise - the next 100% Syrah, in my opinion, managed to outshine that last one.  The Va Piano “Les Collines Vineyard Black Label” - while seemingly ideal for the American palate who enjoys Syrah, I called this one a “standout with lots of presence” and made mention that food should be there alongside this wine.  It’s textured, with nice acidity and balance with the tannin.  It shows darker fruit, chocolate, dark herbs and spices, and purple blossoms - it’s delicious, rich, big, young, and dark.  Wonderful.  Next up was another surprise - usually I don’t connect well at all with Carignan based wines (for my own reasons, I just never really cared for them) - well anyway, the Syncline Carignan-Grenache was a pleasant change as it didn’t have that strange sweaty and rubbery smell.  Rather, it shows mostly red fruit with a touch of bell pepper, a lovely nose, and a clear red color.  I mentioned in my notes that it’s ready to be enjoyed now, and I also noted that it’s probably the first time that I was not offended by a Carignan based wine.  The next wine was a bit of a problem for me - the Rotie Cellars “Southern Red” had that thing that disturbs me on some southern French reds (usually from Languedoc actually) - a hot feel and too much “black” spice.  The rusticity of it I did enjoy as I like honest wines that show earthiness and I liked the finish that cooled off and showed smooth fruit and softer spices, but up front it was a little intense for me.  Finally, we wrapped up the second flight with the Idilico Monastrell, and I was in love.  I do enjoy a well made, properly executed Monastrell (I believe this winery’s maker is Spanish so it’s right to call it Monastrell, otherwise French would call it Mourvedre) - anyway, I included words such as “outrageous,” “harmonious,” “standout,” “wonderful,” and “love” - it shows wonderfully soft fruit notes (both red and dark), sage, thyme, other herbal notes, gorgeous floral notes of young blossoms, and a seemingly perfect balance.  For me, this Spanish-influenced wine was an ideal finish to the flight.

Finally we moved on to the Bordeaux grape third flight.  I liked this flight, but for some reason I was expecting more - so there were a couple of amazing wines in the flight, but the others didn’t impress me the way I thought they would - I’m suspicious that the wines needed more time, some age to them, and perhaps then they’d show far better, because they are from very reputable producers.  Forst was the Cor Cellars Cabernet Franc, made in a Loire style and very bright and tart with red fruit, but as green or peppery as some Loire examples though, but it seemed up tight for me.  Next up was the Fall Line “Red Willow Vineyard” which I enjoyed and called it “lovely,” “fun,” “happy,” and noted the characteristics of raspberry and strawberry preserves, fresh herbs, and dry soil, plenty of acidity but what seemed like just the right amount - very dry and clean, young, satisfying, overall delicious and nicely made.  Next was one of the best New World wines I’ve tasted in a very long time - the Leonetti Cellar Merlot.  Leonetti is considered by many to be among the better producers in WA, and after tasting and experiencing this wine, I concur wholeheartedly.  It’s a little on the pricey side, but as MS Stamp pointed out, imagine if the wine came from Napa, it would be several times the price.  It’s a very delicious and satisfying wine, dark in color with notes of rich, ripe cherry and chocolate, berry, jam, purple blossoms, and dry soil, with a slight sweetness to the fruit characteristics - suffice it to say, I loved this wine very much, which is saying a lot, considering I generally don’t go for the bigger ripe wines like that.  But it had such wonderful presence, expression, and fruit, it was hard to resist it.  Impossible, in fact.  I was then disappointed a bit by the next two wines.  We tasted the Andrew Will “Champoux” which seemed a bit too young to be experienced right now.  It’s got plenty of fruit, acid, and tannin, but oddly, while all seemed to have equal presence, instead of coexisting harmoniously, those components seemed to be in a fight with each other.  Maybe give it some time and see how they settle in together.  I had the same issue with the next wine, the Cadence Cellars “Ciel du Cheval,” in that the fruit, acid, and tannin seemed to be fighting and might just need some more time in the bottle.  The final wine of the class was meant to show whether the WA wines are ageworthy - now, as we know, just because one can age does not mean another can, but if this wine, the Col Solare Red Wine from 2001, is any indication, then age is no issue.  In fact, I think the wine, while showing gloriously at this time, could stand another five years at least.  The rim is beginning to turn a brickish hue, but the core is still dark and borderline opaque, telling us to open another bottle after some time has passed.  And in terms of tasting notes, it’s a rich wine with plenty of texture and reminiscent of an older Bordeaux, lovely, showing dark fruit mostly (but softening), smooth baking spices, dry herbs and flower petals and leaves, and stone.  Wonderful.

So I found some amazing wines in the lineup, I learned about terroir and climate and soil and even history of WA wine growing regions, and I enjoyed experiencing some fantastic New World wines, which is something of a rarity for me.  I have another master class coming up soon - Alto Adige in just two weeks, and I can’t wait!

2011 Quinta do Vale Meao + 2000 Zind-Humbrecht Clos Windsbuhl Gewurztraminer (from my food blog)

http://here-taste-this.blogspot.com/2014/05/veal-osso-buco-gremolata-best-wines.html

Research

I took my sommelier exam 3 years ago.  I’ve been pouring regular tastings for 2.5 years, and I’ve been a wine rep just over 2 years.  Lots of people I’ve met in the wine industry ask me how I know so much about wine, from classics to esoterics, regions, grapes, etc., particularly since they tell me I seem to know lots more than plenty of people who have been in the industry since before I was born.

I’m flattered by some compliments like these, but it’s made me think - how did I learn so much about wine in so short an amount of time?

I didn’t have to think long about it.  Research is my sort of thing.  Ever since I was pretty young, I’ve encouraged myself to research different topics, especially those of interest to me or things I felt I’d need to know.  And all through law school, research was how it was - find a word, research it, find another word in that definition, research it.  Read up on a case, research it, see more case references, research them.  And so on.

But wine research?  That’s the most fun kind of learning that there is.  Pour a glass, look at it, sniff it, taste it, feel it.  Repeat.

Repeat.

Repeat.

Sounds like fun?  It is!

Yes, it’s important to read up on wines and wine terms - different grapes, regions, producers, production methods, history, theory, philosophy - it helps us understand what’s in our glass.  But the real life experience of walking among the vines, tasting from a glass, especially blind tasting - that’s what gets us to our real conclusions, and consequently more questions, more to learn.  There’s always more to learn.  But most of what we learn comes from that glass, when we let the wine speak to us.  Terroir driven wines, the wines that are most expressive, especially in terms of soil and climate, can tell us the most about their vineyards.  And certain grapes make for a more expressive wine (don’t over-oak a Pinot Noir or give it excessive sunlight, and you’ve got a wine full of things to tell us!).  And the more we taste, the more we know what to look for when inquiring as to the wine’s identity.

I learned a fair amount of basic wine knowledge while I was in law school, as I didn’t want to admit it to myself at the time but I enjoyed wine research a lot more than I enjoyed case law.  Over the next couple of years, I’d do a lot more research, but most of it was on my own.  I’d read up on wines, and some nights I’d just watch episodes of Oz Clarke and James May in France or California.  And many evenings, I’d choose a bottle, go to the wine map, find the region so I’d start guessing what to expect from a wine grown in a particular part of the world, then I’d choose what to cook with it.  I’d read the label carefully (especially if it’s a German wine - the label can tell us quite a lot, if we know what to look for), and then pour myself a glass (or decant first), and begin observing, and writing it all down.  I’d make notes on color, rim, viscosity, aromas, intensity, flavors, finish, texture, balance, etc.  And then I’d pour my second glass, and as I observed how the wine began to change as it opened up, I’d begin cooking.  I’d make notes of what I cooked, what were my ingredients and methods used, and how they worked with the wine after tasting the wine and food together, making notes of how aromas and flavors worked together, and how textures either mirrored or countered each other, and what went right (or occasionally wrong), and oftentimes I’d even write down what time of the year it was, whether I was outdoors or indoors, and what music I was listening to at the time.  Everything mattered to me, and it still does.

That’s how I learned.

Now, sometimes I’ll “research” with someone else, family, friends, or most often my boyfriend, since he’s got so much experience in the wine industry but also knows how to approach it in a fun way, never too serious.  If I thought wine research was fun on my own, imagine how much fun I’m having now!

Something that disturbs me - too often I hear “wine experts” telling people that the right wine, or the best wine, is the one you like to drink.  So in other words, it’s ok to drink a Napa Cabernet with sushi, just because you like Napa Cabernet, or a Sancerre with a ribeye steak, just because you like Sancerre? Nonsense.  Do some basic research.  Figure out what you like, but I guarantee that you’ll like it even better if it’s paired correctly, or served at the right temperature, or with the right company.  For years, I had a policy that I would not drink any sparkling wines while alone.  I still stick to that, but now I’m not usually alone so it isn’t as much of an issue.  I won’t pour an Aglianico with oysters, and I won’t drink Muscadet with braised short ribs.  Why?  No, I’m not a wine snob, as some might want to call me.  Rather, I understand why one flavor or texture works with another, and also why a flavor or texture simply won’t worth with another.  You don’t just grab a bottle willy-nilly when preparing dinner.  You don’t drink chilled Provence rose by the fireplace at Christmas time, you don’t drink Sauternes at a barbecue, and you probably don’t drink Champagne after a funeral.  Why?  Because you took the time to learn what was the right wine for the right occasion, because you allowed yourself to connect with the wines and decided when you want them, and you experimented with different wines and foods, and decided for yourself what works and why.

No, you don’t just drink any old thing.  You took the time to do your homework, and it paid off.

Research usually does pay off.

Easter 2014

As usual, I’ll tell you what’s going on - it’s hard to choose what I want to listen to/watch, as there was the Papal canonization today, Turn is on, and the Yankee game is on - thank goodness for dvr!  And what wines tonight?  I opened 2 Portuguese wines, a Vinho Verde and a Douro red.  Fun evening for sure.

What I want to tell you about tonight is Easter dinner from last weekend.  I was so pleased with the food and wine selections and there was very little room for improvement.

The menu was appetizers - basket cheese, Swiss, prosciutto di Parma, orange peel stuffed olives, pizza grane, and chick peas.  Next course was pesto sauce on penne, which I topped with toasted pignoli and parmigiano reggiano.  And the main course was leg of lamb, roast potatoes, and stuffed tomatoes.  Dessert was flourless chocolate ancho chile cake with cinnamon whipped cream.  Delicious.

The wines were wonderful - I chose the Pierre Peters Brut Rose to open first - it’s a pink Champagne with a hint of bronze to the color, with notes of cranberry and lemon and mineral, and very bright, clean, lively acidity with a long finish, and a fine yet assertive texture.  Next up was the 2011 Pieropan La Rocca Soave (Veneto) - if you want to know how much I love this white from Italy, see my notes from the post on Gambero Rosso - it’s a lovely and smooth, satisfying wine with hints of citrus but mostly orchard fruit, delicate and floral, and clean but very textured.  I love this wine, and it’s everything I want to see and feel in a Soave.  The reds were fun - first up (and all were decanted) was the 2009 La Sirene de Giscours (Margaux) - just over half Cabernet Sauvignon, with ther est being Merlot, Cabernet Franc, and Petit Verdot - plenty of fruit as expected on a 2009, both dark and red fruit, black currant, plum, pencil shavings, and purple blossoms, with a smooth feel and just flat out delicious.  Next was the 2007 Far Niente Cabernet Sauvignon (Oakville, Napa) - it had softened quite a lot and opened up beautifully and showed characteristics of raspberry, chocolate, vanilla oak, bramble berry, and other dark fruits - what a delicious wine, and I’m not even a great lover of California wines in general, but this was a rock star in its own right, and I’ve been looking forward to tasting the 2007 Cabernet.  The order was correctly rounded out with the 2006 Haut Batailley (Pauillac) - soft, smooth, aromatic, balanced - dark fruit and red fruit, savory herbs, a touch of tobacco, flower petals, pencil shavings, just beautiful.  And we finished off with dessert and cappuccino and a glass of Ferrand Pineau des Charentes, luscious and sweet but balanced, perfect with dessert (but I can see some versatility there), with characteristics of candied orange, peach syrup, honey, white blossoms, and perfection at the end of dinner.

I’m thinking it might be a good idea to do individualized posts on the Here, Taste This! blog regarding recipes for pesto, leg of lamb, stuffed tomatoes, and flourless ancho chile cake.

1998 Beaucastel and Creating a Special Experience

I’m watching the Yankees/Red Sox game (and of course the Yankees are winning!) - and a white Cotes du Rhone was what I had tonight.  But right now I’m eating - believe it or not - Rainbow Nerds. It’s ok to go outside of the box sometimes, and while I don’t usually advocate eating candy out of a box, I’m making an exception, as my mom placed it strategically in my Easter basket last week.  (For the record, I’m not an advocate of shaking anything out of a box to eat it.  Just a peeve I guess.)

And I’m thinking about a wine I opened recently.

As you may remember, if you read my 30th birthday post about the lineup of 1983 wines that I opened back in November, there was a 1983 Beaucastel present, and showed perfectly on that evening.

A couple of weeks ago, we went to a BYOB bistro restaurant nearby, with lovely French dishes that are nicely executed.  We decided that BYOB should mean Bring Your Own Beaucastel that evening.  And I opted for the 1998, which I had blind tasted not too long ago.  Stunning, to say the very least.  Beaucastel is special for lots of reasons - partly because they use all 13 permitted Chateauneuf du Pape grapes, partly due to the larger percentage than normal of Mourvedre, and...well...it’s Beaucastel.  It’s rich in history.  It’s exquisite.

It’s no secret I prefer wines when they’re older, as long as they’re the kind that can age gracefully.  (Generally, it’s also no secret that I prefer nearly everything older, but that’s another story.  Or you could go back a while to I believe September 2012 and read about the Nebbiolo Man.)  But, as I said, it’s got to be the kind of thing, including wine, that can age gracefully and does in fact do so.  Beaucastel is one of those things.  Interestingly enough, I’ve never had a recent/current vintage of Beaucastel, so I’m just curious to experience it in its youth.  But I’d prefer to have it when it’s aged a while.  Anyway, it’s glorious when it’s aged properly - interestingly enough, the bottle actually threw off no sediment which I always find fascinating when an older red just doesn’t have any sediment or waste down the bottom of the bottle.  In terms of characteristics and appearance, the wine had a lovely dark red color with with a rust colored rim and was becoming more transparent.  The wine has become quite elegant and soft and clean, with notes of subtle red and dark fruit, plum, bramble berry, black pepper, savory herbs, dried flower petals, soft baking spices, a bit of tobacco, and stony mineral.  The wine still has plenty of energy, but everything has become balanced - acidity is in check, tannins are softened, and all flavors and aromas are present but none overpower the others.  And the finish is long and lovely.  Basically, it’s just the way we want it.

And for me, it’s a perfect evening.  Granted, I usually like to do the menu planning and cooking myself, but it’s fun to bring a great bottle to a very nice BYOB restaurant and enjoy ourselves for the evening.  And a wise friend and fellow wine professional likes to remind me that the situation often makes the wine experience even better - when I’m in a nice restaurant enjoying good food and conversation with someone I love - yes, the experience of a 1998 Beaucastel seems pretty perfect to me.  (And it helps that my very special someone is a seasoned wine industry professional who appreciates a wine like this, too, and being able to discuss the wine together makes it even more fun.)

My suggestion?  Try and find a great wine like that, something that you know you’ll enjoy, and open it with someone special.  You don’t have to choose a special occasion to open it - create a special occasion with the great bottle and the special person.  There’s no sense in opening a bottle like that alone.

Nebbiolo Revisited

A couple of years ago, I wrote a blog post about this thing we started calling, “The Nebbiolo Man” - it got quite a bit of attention, and whether it was for the right or the wrong reasons...well, anyway, it got some attention, and it was fun to write, because it reflected some of my own personal opinions, which has been the case on this blog for some time now - making parallels: wine and people.

And for good reason, I still believe in the Nebbiolo Man - the man who, in my opinion, is at his best when aged a bit, especially if he’s the kind who ages gracefully.  (Go ahead and read the blog post, it’s from I believe September 2012.)

When I speak of the aging qualities of Nebbiolo, I mean the way in which Nebbiolo based wines (particularly from Barolo and Barbaresco) generally possess the ability to age longer than many other wines.  But interestingly enough, in their youth, sometimes they’re a little awkward, and not particularly approachable - they seem off balance, they have a strange and sometimes less than pleasant texture (and in the old post I likened it to a kid who looks a little funny and has to grow into his features, but once he’s older, he’s quite the catch) - anyway, you get the idea - he gets older, and suddenly he’s got it all.  He’s Nebbiolo.

I’ve also had some Nebbiolo in styles like basic Langhe wines, where the wine is approachable when it’s younger, and it’s not intended for aging.

But something strange to me is when I experience a very young Barolo or Barbaresco - and I’ve enjoyed them in general, but considering I like things “older,” I still prefer older examples of the greatest Nebbiolo wines of Piemonte.  Sure, they can be delicious and pleasurable, but knowing what Nebbiolo wines are prized for generally, I love to watch them show off their aging capability and complexity in their age.

It’s sort of like watching a person who was greatly underestimated in his youth develop into quite a man - attractive, worldly, complex, experienced, and desirable.