Peregrine Pinot Noir 2010, Central Otago

Wandering round through different styles of wine is always fun. I tasted Peregrine at an Old and New World tasting of Pinot Noir, highlighting the differences between the two styles, with the general rule being that Old World PNs tend to be more savoury and New World PNs tend to be fruitier.

Nose: There's a slightly musty nose here. Perhaps a hint of mushroom or tobacco coming in to slightly overpower a hint of fresh cherry. Oddly enough, there's a touch of cedarwood and then some pepper near the end. This is a much more savoury Pinot Noir than I was expecting - on first impression I had this down as a Burgundy, and a good one at that.

Palate: I'm afraid to say it was rather bitter. There was none of the rich fruit backed by spice that I was expecting. There's cherry, but it tastes like unripe cherry - it's sharp and yet musty at the same time. Pepper is present throughout but there's an unpleasant chalkiness to the wine. While I have since read reviews saying this flavour was an example of good minerality, to me it wasn't minerality in the classic sense - it was chalky and mouth-drying, and added little to the wine. Perhaps if I'm being optimistic I might be able to find some raspberry, but I'm not entirely sure that I actually tasted it or if it was simply wishful thinking looking for something to like.

Body: Surprisingly for a Pinot Noir this felt remarkably tannic. The sharp furriness coming from the musty unripe cherry added to this sensation and made for a not very pleasant drink.

Finish: Almost no finish. This was extremely short and very one-dimensional.

Conclusion: When the cover was taken off I was deeply disappointed to find a wine so highly regarded had disappointed me so much. At £25, it's not cheap either. Perhaps I ought to have left it open for longer, but even after 2 hours I don't recall noting any positive changes. My only note from the later tasting is 'The nose is the only redeeming factor'. What a shame

Points: 70. Not a fan. I shall have to re-taste to confirm this opinion at some point, but when there are so many better Kiwi Pinot Noirs out there, why waste the time and money on this? The vastly superior Kota Lime Rock (which I will review in due course) blasted this out of the water for a perfect mix of savouriness and fruitiness.

Ataraxia Chardonnay 2009

Chardonnay is a much-maligned grape in my view. What particularly peeves me is when someone declares that they are an 'ABC' man or woman. What, I ask, does that mean? Oh, comes the glib response, it means 'anything but Chardonnay'. In order to emphasise a point one day I bought an extremely nice bottle of Meursault (I'll review it one day) to a well-known ABC acquaintance, who proceeded to wax lyrical about the wine's plump stone fruit, smooth edges and excellent zing of minerality. Needless to say, they were most distressed to find that they had been drinking Chardonnay - confirming my view that ABCers are only against Chardonnay because someone else told them to be, rather than based on their own experience.

Anecdotes aside, I have been trying a series of more accessibly-priced Chardonnay from around the world and I stumbled across Ataraxia in September. Ataraxia means tranquillity - a freedom from preoccupation (rather suitable, as it freed several ABCers from their preoccupation with saying ABC). Before I am accused of being intelligent enough to speak Greek, this is helpfully provided on the back of the bottle!

Kevin Friend, the winemaker at Ataraxia (who also have a Sauvignon Blanc and a red, which I can't remember) has made a conscious effort to make Ataraxia a Burgundian-style Chardonnay and has been greatly praised for his excellent work at Hamilton Russell, a particularly fantastic South African vineyard. So, onwards we proceed:

Colour: I tend to think that the colour of the wine is more relevant for whites than reds, as there are only so many ways of saying 'ruby' or 'garnet'. This is a rather appealing rich straw colour, continuing all the way to the edges.

Nose: There is a significant amount of vanilla, confirming the presence of oak (on research, they use 34% new oak and 66% old oak barrels). Along with the vanilla there's a lovely dollop of honey and an almost caramelised smell - perhaps maple syrup? This is a buttery, soft, smooth nose and yet has some real power behind it. Rather strangely there is a slight almost imperceptible hint of chocolate and perhaps some salt as well. I must see if I can confirm that over some more bottles.

Palate: The best bit. After a stellar nose we get everything a person could want with a top Chardonnay: punchy stone fruit is immediately present, smoothed off with vanilla and honey. Indeed, in time the honey becomes even more distinct and the wine becomes exceptionally smooth - almost like drinking a good bit of Highland whisky*. This is really full of flavour and cleans itself off with a dash of minerality and lemon at the end. Accomplished stuff here and clearly marking itself against Burgundy's finest.

Body: This is a heavy and 'thick' Chardonnay. Whilst tasting like some of Burgundy's charmers, it definitely has New World 'oomph'. It's full-bodied with high alcohol but retains its exceptional smoothness.

Finish: Medium to long on the finish. It develops a little, but the majority of the finish comes from a gradual receding of the flavours with yet more honey-vanilla sweetness.

Conclusion: Really really interesting wine. One to try next to a top minerally Burgundy (I think it would be great to try next to a Meursault, but remember that you get what you pay for with Meursault, and should really be aiming for £30+, although Labouré-Roi is an acceptable alternative at £20 or so from Waitrose). It ticks every box and has no unpleasantness about it. Having read my notes through a couple of times, I have now decided to buy a case, as this will certainly improve for several years in the cellar.

Points: 93. At £20 a bottle with excellent cellaring potential, what are you waiting for?

*As a side note on whisky, Highland Park 12 is my 'basic expression' tipple of choice. Lovely honey and vanilla aromas that are reminiscent of this! Extremely smooth. In fact, I shall post a review of that next.

Saint Clair Pioneer's Block 14: 'Doctor's Creek'

I mentioned in my first review that I love Saint Clair as a vinyard. In many ways Saint Clair was the first wine that I really thought about and one that got me hooked on the idea of Pinot Noir and the versatility of grapes in general. Matt Thomson has won a host of awards, including the prestigious for his work at Saint Clair and the Pioneer Block series always deliver - even their Gewürztraminer was excellent, and I am no fan of Gewürztraminer.

I tried PB 15 (as it was in its previous iteration) at approximately this time last year and have since tried several of Saint Clair's Pinot Noirs. The current vintage is 2011's Doctor's Creek, or PB 14 for short. I have now tried it on 4 occasions, 3 of which were tastings, and I feel that I'm on to a real winner with it. I would describe it as an excellent example of  how a New World beast can be tamed.

Nose: SC PB 14 has a lovely intense nose of all the great parts of Pinot Noir - it's a jammy raspberry blast with a hint of mushroom earthiness to back it up. Nutmeg dances around the aroma to give it a hint of depth. An almost ferric hint slips in there somewhere, but is elusive if you look for it. As with Pioneer Block 3, intensity is the buzzword regarding Saint Clair's wines, but don't imagine that it is just intensity. There's also great complexity and this is not a wine to be dismissed as a New World 'fruit bomb'.

Palate: Sweet with the slight sourness that characterises top Pinot Noir. The fruit is held in place and structured with this, combined with pepper and spice backing up the juiciness. This is most certainly not Burgundy - it's juicy and fruity and lacks the savoury 'barnyard' gaminess of top Burgundy, but has much to interest nevertheless. In time (approx 1.5 hours) the spice becomes more pronounced - becoming more Burgundian. Interesting. Excellent.

Body: As an inexperienced taster, this is somewhat hard to describe. In terms of flavour, this is a full-bodied mouth-filling wine but it isn't heavy in the slightest. It is in fact exceptionally smooth, suggesting it's light of body. Whatever the correct description is, it's lovely.

Finish: Is that a hint of menthol, clearing my palate for another glass? Only one way to find out...

Conclusion: With cellaring potential of 5 years from vintage (i.e. up to 2016) it is well worth buying a case or two. It is an easy-going crowd pleaser and will never fail to impress. Serve with slow-cooked paprika chicken or prawns with squid-ink linguine (contact me for a recipe if you want). I have a photo of it somewhere that I should upload... 

Points: Excellent. 91, especially after a little time exposed to the air.

Jean-Louis Chavy Puligny-Montrachet 2010

Puligny-Montrachet is one of the most interesting and exciting of the Burgundian white wine regions, often clocking in with enormous price tags and subtlety, minerality and class to match them. This was my nod to 'classic' Chardonnay in my tasting set and while not at the sort of price point that is really needed to express the region, at £25 it was by no means a budget bottle of wine.

Montrachet is located in the Côte de Beaune subregion of Burgundy, just south of the incredibly famous town of Meursault (N.B. if you want to try Meursault, please resist the chance to buy a £15 bottle. It is one of those wines that you have to pay more for, sadly, but is often worth the extra pennies). If you get the chance it is a particularly nice part of the world to visit - Beaune containing some of Burgundy's most famous vinyards along with some exceptionally pretty towns.

Anyway, on to the wine. Tasted blind on the same evening as the Eikendal (and others), this was the most expensive wine of the evening (not that we knew as they were all wrapped!).

Nose: This can be said to characterise Burgundian Chardonnay - it was fresh, citrussy and acidic, but with an almost buttery balance to it. This was the first clue about the oak in this wine, which slightly damped the minerality but (in my view) gave the wine an interesting extra dimension. 

Palate: As with the Eikendal this was perhaps a touch sugary but in time it improved greatly. Citrus came through and the palate began to 'fill out' with more flavours, including light vanilla from the oak. There is certainly minerality here and the fruit is in pleasant harmony with the other flavours.

Finish: The finish was perhaps a touch compact, but I have nothing negative to say about it. The wine simply faded away pleasantly and left no bitter after-taste or lingering acidity. It led easily into the next glass!

Conclusion: A very pleasant wine in terms of its harmony, but was it really worth £25? The oak played a part in making the balance of the wine, but as one of my co-tasters commented, it made it somewhat difficult to separate it from a fairly ordinary New World oaked Chardonnay. While I had failed to follow my own advice (steer clear of 'cheap' white Burgundy), I thought that this would be worth a go considering other positive reviews from elsewhere. As far as I'm concerned it was a wine that I would very much like to drink with friends over dinner, but £25 could be put to much better use elsewhere - even the traditionally heavily overpriced American wines did better (Au Bon Climat - to be reviewed shortly).

Points: It's hard to rate this one considering my knowledge of the price. When I tasted it blind I gave it a 7/10 - which I suppose equates to somewhere around 87 on the 100-point scale. Pleasant, but don't get too excited. 

Eikendal Chardonnay 2010/11

I have recently decided that Chardonnay is a much-maligned grape and so have attempted to taste a broad range of Chardonnays from both the Old and New World. The latest in this set of tasting (the others will be posted at some point), was the South African Eikendal 2010/11, which cost around £12.

Eikendal Chardonnay is Eikendal's flagship white wine, according to their website, and is oaked for 7 months before bottling, so I was expecting a certain amount of intensity, although not so much as one might expect from an Aussie oak-monster of a Chardonnay. My thoughts at the time of tasting are as follows:

Nose: Surprisingly, given the oak, this was a light-smelling Chardonnay than many others I have tried. It was grassy and perhaps a little minerally with distinct notes of green apple and lemon coming through. After some time a hint of toasty oak began to emerge. The citrus was, however, the clearest of the identifiable aromas.

Palate: My first impression was 'smoky sweet'. It was pleasantly tasty with a decent level of stone fruit (peach, perhaps some apricot) with a little dollop of honey coming in at the back. After a few sips, however, it began to taste a little light and overly sugary. Perhaps even insipid. My standard tasting measure is around 50-75mls, so for a wine to become cloying after such a short period (admittedly without food) is not an entirely positive sign.

Body: The body remained remarkably light for an oaked Chardonnay throughout and altogether not what I was expecting. Perhaps there was too much focus on attempting to achieve a Burgundian minerality when making this wine and less was thought about how this would affect the wine's structure.

Finish: Longer that I would have thought given the lack of body and pleasant. More citrus, especially lemon, with a slightly grassy tang.

Conclusion: Clearly an ambitious attempt to make a Burgundian-style wine in South Africa, but did it really work? Well, it was a perfectly nice wine to begin with and showed some potential for development, but the slightly sugary taste meant that I was unable to say with certainty whether or not I liked it. I feel that with some well-chosen food matched with it (grilled fish or any white meat) or perhaps another year or so in the cellar this could have been a thoroughly decent wine.

Points: 84. Pleasant enough but there wasn't quite enough depth to make me want to drink this again. The citrus made me feel that this was in fact a Sauvignon Blanc in disguise.