Regular readers will know my interest in South African wines seems never-ending and that I am fortunate enough to have a good supplier nearby, so I have an almost limitless stock of the things. I gave Warwick a go based on positive comments by various distinguished boozers (the boozerati, perhaps?) and on favourable reviews by characters such as John Platter who, love him or hate him, is seen by many as the Parker of South Africa. His list of the Top 100 South African wines consistently dominates the marketing of SA wine - although people often criticise it for only plumping for already-established wines, leaving smaller vineyards largely to themselves.
Another, more superficial reason for choosing Warwick Trilogy is that I rather like the name and the bottle shape. At £20-24 it's not overly expensive and something you can cheerfully share with some friends without worrying about the bank. Might do a post on how to run successful tastings/wine events sometime, as they're a rather good way of getting into wine.
Anyway - onto the wine. Decanted for 2 hours then re-tasted after 4.
Nose: Typical Bordeaux at first - pencil shavings, graphite and cedar with an almost earthy texture to the nose. Tobacco, pepper and dark chocolate coming in from time to time, with the chocolate starting to build its intensity. Dollop of cassis in there. Peculiarly it's a rather light nose, despite the strong-seeming flavours in there. Everything is quite soft and gentle and it took some teasing to get into it. The dark chocolate has developed into a hint of chili and has a bit of bite to it. On the re-taste the nose had become much more opulent and jammy, but there was still a hefty dose of pepper in there.
Palate: Largely as above, but without the pencil shavings. The coffee is more intense and the cassis is more noticeable, but not exactly prominent. On the re-taste it was noticeably jammier, but still suffered from the slightly harsh/sharp coffee and dark chocolate. I rather wish I'd been able to decant this for longer as I think it was going really exciting places.
Body: Remarkably it was medium-light. There's plenty of tannin but there's no mouth-coating blast sense to this and it's certainly not overpowering. Rather well poised I thought - a nice weight in harmony with the clear flavours. Nice and smooth (before the tannic hit).
Finish: Quite austere and drying. Not terribly long, either. Not unpleasant, but not exactly one to write home about.
Conclusion: A nice wine, but perhaps unremarkable in some respects? I like the chocolatey-ness (almost like eating cocoa nibs - the intensity and sharpness was very interesting) but at the same time I was hoping for just a touch more fruit. I mentioned my regret that I didn't leave this out for longer, and I suspect I would have been rewarded if I had. Essentially, it tastes rather like classic claret but a little bit more accessible (especially at this age). Definitely worth a try purely to see if the construction is something you like or don't. I will try it again one day.
Points: 85/6 (note to new readers - I prefer to use a slightly broader scale than the traditional 85-100 used by most 100 point markers. By way of explanation, 85/6 is a perfectly respectable wine. Not one I would rush to put in my cellar, but one I would happily buy and drink again.)
A collection of blind-tasted wine reviews which I hope will provide a helpful (and possibly interesting!) guide to choosing, buying, rating and tasting wine. All comments, criticism, discussion and thoughts are welcome!
Showing posts with label South Africa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label South Africa. Show all posts
Tuesday, 13 August 2013
Warwick Estate, Trilogy, 2009
Labels:
2008,
86,
austere,
cabernet franc,
cabernet sauvignon,
cassis,
coffee,
dark chocolate,
jammy,
John Platter,
merlot,
pencil shavings,
red,
sharp,
South Africa,
Top 100 Wines,
Trilogy,
Warwick
Monday, 18 March 2013
Welmoed Cabernet Sauvignon 2010, Stellenbosch
Time for something a little different. While I generally focus on mid-range wines, sometimes I come across a table wine that's so good it deserves an honourable mention. Welmoed is one of those wines. At a bargain-basement £7.50 (or £5 each if you buy 2+ from Majestic), it's a real blockbuster and a massive crowd-pleaser to boot. Simple enough to enjoy on with food, it also has a degree of interest that will please the thinker-drinkers among us.
As with many South African cabernet sauvignons, it has a meatiness and smoky spiciness that appeals and is something that people may not necessarily have tried, meaning they are often under-appreciated.
Nose: Peppery and savoury. There's definite hints of tabasco in there as the sharpness comes through. The pepper strengthens and is joined by chilli before too long. Quite intense. Touch of smoke to smooth the edges. Tobacco.
Palate: Heavy fruit, spice, chilli and cheese (?!). The red fruit is jammy and intense, and well supported by the smoke and cedary tobacco. Classic cigar-box cabernet sauvignon, here. A decent development of flavour within the palate, but not overly complex. Surprisingly pleasant served slightly chilled. I would certainly recommend brining one up from the cellar and drinking it straight away and seeing how it evolves as it begins to warm.
Body: Remarkably light body given the intensity and weight of the nose and palate. Could perhaps even be called delicate, at a push.
Finish: The spice remains strong while a dollop of sweetness comes through at the end to clear the palate and leave a pleasant after-taste.
Conclusion: At £5 you really cannot go wrong with this fellow. With a good range of flavours which provide both enjoyment and interest, it's a perfect wine for any red meat and would go particularly well with a lump of grilled, peppered steak. I have since bought a case, and would heartily recommend you do the same.
Points: 84
As with many South African cabernet sauvignons, it has a meatiness and smoky spiciness that appeals and is something that people may not necessarily have tried, meaning they are often under-appreciated.
Nose: Peppery and savoury. There's definite hints of tabasco in there as the sharpness comes through. The pepper strengthens and is joined by chilli before too long. Quite intense. Touch of smoke to smooth the edges. Tobacco.
Palate: Heavy fruit, spice, chilli and cheese (?!). The red fruit is jammy and intense, and well supported by the smoke and cedary tobacco. Classic cigar-box cabernet sauvignon, here. A decent development of flavour within the palate, but not overly complex. Surprisingly pleasant served slightly chilled. I would certainly recommend brining one up from the cellar and drinking it straight away and seeing how it evolves as it begins to warm.
Body: Remarkably light body given the intensity and weight of the nose and palate. Could perhaps even be called delicate, at a push.
Finish: The spice remains strong while a dollop of sweetness comes through at the end to clear the palate and leave a pleasant after-taste.
Conclusion: At £5 you really cannot go wrong with this fellow. With a good range of flavours which provide both enjoyment and interest, it's a perfect wine for any red meat and would go particularly well with a lump of grilled, peppered steak. I have since bought a case, and would heartily recommend you do the same.
Points: 84
Labels:
cabernet sauvignon,
chili,
chilli,
intense,
jammy,
pepper,
red,
smoke,
South Africa,
tabasco,
tobacco
Sunday, 24 February 2013
Morgenster 2004, Flagship Red
My new 'current favourite': whilst not actually called their 'flagship red', Morgenster 2004 is the second vintage of Morgenster Estate's flagship wine and is a classic example of South Africa's take on Bordeaux blends. With solid ageing potential, it is at the higher end of pricing but the 2004 is less costly (at around £30) than other vintages. Morgenster made it clear that they were not intending to make a 'showy' wine, but were rather looking for elegance, quality and balance.
While everyone loves a little bit of marketing and some gimmicks - after all, which winery isn't trying to make a supremely balanced and elegant Bordeaux-style red? - it's important to get through them. This is one of the advantages of tasting wines blind (I use some rather fun tasting sleeves which I shall post up in due course) as it allows the tasters to judge the wine itself, rather than the bottle, labelling, marketing and reputation. This was decanted for 2 hours before drinking and re-tasted at intervals of an hour.
Colour: Being reasonably old, the 2004 has begun to get a hint of tawny at the edges, although not enough for anyone to suggest that this was a seriously old wine.
Nose: Decent vanilla at first showing the oak coming through but then (surprisingly, given the age) a touch of green. Pepper, spices and red berries show the dominance of the Cabernet Sauvignon and there's a leathery edge to things. There's a good level of complexity in the nose and it's strong enough to allow most people to pick up the aromas whilst also showing off a good level of balance. The greenness faded after a further hour. Fruit began to emerge at the 2 hour mark and was more pronounced after 3 or 4 - which also saw the end of the savoury notes, which faded away to be replaced by a punchy dose of white pepper.
Palate: Somewhat muted on the first taste: a hint of vanilla and cedarwood with fruit tickling the back of the tongue. Slightly closed and grassy. After hour 3 this changed entirely. It was sweet and surprisingly light - a hint of astringency that faded away by the fourth hour - and the pepper and cedar remaining at the back end of things. There was a touch of earthiness. An extremely smooth-drinker that greatly impressed - perhaps the marketing isn't all rubbish? Elegance, balance and a distinctly Bordelais style. Nice.
Body: Thin at first, then opened up admirably after hour 3/4. Fairly high tannins and certainly a decent slog of alcohol in there.
Finish: Could be that of a top Bordeaux. All flavours in perfect symmetry with a clear direction and decent length. Supreme body and excellent balance.
Conclusion: Very nice wine - but it needed a LOT of decanting. I would have been hard-pressed to give it above 84 after the first two hours after decanting but it shot up to high 80s after 3 hours and touched 90 after that. If I were to serve it at a dinner I'd aim for serving it at the 3 hour mark, as its strength would be present for the early stages of the meal but then would soften off and become a much easier drinker as the evening progressed. One slightly sad point is that a search of Morgenster Estate's website comes up with 'account suspended' page. Whilst I hope this is only a technical problem, it may be worth buying a bottle or two while you still can.
Points: 90.
While everyone loves a little bit of marketing and some gimmicks - after all, which winery isn't trying to make a supremely balanced and elegant Bordeaux-style red? - it's important to get through them. This is one of the advantages of tasting wines blind (I use some rather fun tasting sleeves which I shall post up in due course) as it allows the tasters to judge the wine itself, rather than the bottle, labelling, marketing and reputation. This was decanted for 2 hours before drinking and re-tasted at intervals of an hour.
Colour: Being reasonably old, the 2004 has begun to get a hint of tawny at the edges, although not enough for anyone to suggest that this was a seriously old wine.
Nose: Decent vanilla at first showing the oak coming through but then (surprisingly, given the age) a touch of green. Pepper, spices and red berries show the dominance of the Cabernet Sauvignon and there's a leathery edge to things. There's a good level of complexity in the nose and it's strong enough to allow most people to pick up the aromas whilst also showing off a good level of balance. The greenness faded after a further hour. Fruit began to emerge at the 2 hour mark and was more pronounced after 3 or 4 - which also saw the end of the savoury notes, which faded away to be replaced by a punchy dose of white pepper.
Palate: Somewhat muted on the first taste: a hint of vanilla and cedarwood with fruit tickling the back of the tongue. Slightly closed and grassy. After hour 3 this changed entirely. It was sweet and surprisingly light - a hint of astringency that faded away by the fourth hour - and the pepper and cedar remaining at the back end of things. There was a touch of earthiness. An extremely smooth-drinker that greatly impressed - perhaps the marketing isn't all rubbish? Elegance, balance and a distinctly Bordelais style. Nice.
Body: Thin at first, then opened up admirably after hour 3/4. Fairly high tannins and certainly a decent slog of alcohol in there.
Finish: Could be that of a top Bordeaux. All flavours in perfect symmetry with a clear direction and decent length. Supreme body and excellent balance.
Conclusion: Very nice wine - but it needed a LOT of decanting. I would have been hard-pressed to give it above 84 after the first two hours after decanting but it shot up to high 80s after 3 hours and touched 90 after that. If I were to serve it at a dinner I'd aim for serving it at the 3 hour mark, as its strength would be present for the early stages of the meal but then would soften off and become a much easier drinker as the evening progressed. One slightly sad point is that a search of Morgenster Estate's website comes up with 'account suspended' page. Whilst I hope this is only a technical problem, it may be worth buying a bottle or two while you still can.
Points: 90.
Labels:
2004,
Bordeaux,
cabernet sauvignon,
cassis,
cedar,
leather,
oak,
pepper,
red,
South Africa,
spice,
Toastbongo,
vanilla
Sunday, 27 January 2013
Ataraxia Chardonnay 2009
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 LabourĂ©-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.
Labels:
ABC,
Ataraxia,
Burgundy,
chardonnay,
full,
honey,
Kevin Friend,
mineral,
peach,
South Africa,
Toastbongo,
vanilla,
white,
Wine
Glenelly Lady May 2008
Hello all, after a brief hiatus due to various work commitments, we're back to South Africa for this post. Glenelly is a South African vineyard with a rather intriguing 'twist'. It's owned by none other than Madame de Lencquesaing, the former owner of the exceptional 'super second' Chateau Pichon Longueville Comtesse de Lalande, who feels South Africa's soils, grapes and climate provide a perfect canvas for Bordeaux-style winemaking. If you have read one or two of my other posts, you'll know it's clear that I also subscribe to this opinion!
As Madame de Lencquesaing's first name is May, the name of this wine provides us with a fairly strong clue as to what to expect. A Bordelais statement in a New terroir, so certainly something different from the usual meaty smokiness that I love so much in South African Cabernet Sauvignon blends. If I remember correctly from the back of the bottle (now in the recycling somewhere in climes unknown), the statue on the front of the bottle is a very young version of Lady May herself! So, onto the wine - decanted for 2 hours and tasted again after 4.
Colour: I felt the need to include a colour section for this wine in particular (as I haven't bothered doing it for other wines so far) because it really is quite extraordinary. I removed the cork and there was almost no colour to it - a rather pale pink that I would associate with Burgundy rather than a heavy Cab Sauv - so I was extremely surprised when I poured out an almost black wine. It is incredibly deep and almost entirely opaque. Quite intriguing that it stained the cork so little. If someone knows how/why this is I would appreciate a comment about it!
Nose: Whoomph. There is an almost overpowering aroma of coffee. There is a hint of hay and barnyard aromas - a slight sourness that perhaps leads into some intensely dark chocolate. Fruit is not overly evident and was not overly evident on later tasting. This, I believe, is where the fact that the wine is so young has had its effect. That's not to say that the nose is closed, as it is certainly not, it is simply that it is currently slightly unbalanced and I look forward to seeing the effect of some time on the bottle (although 10 years may be too long to wait!). There's some real heat in this nose - reminiscent of chilli chocolate (Montezuma Chocolate make it and it's quite intriguing!). In sum: Coffee, hay, dark dark chocolate and some chilli and heat at the end.
Palate: At the first taste I noted massive coffee backed by 'solid' fruit - the fruit, however, was tight and restrained. This, I am sure, is the emphasis of Lady May's Bordelais heritage and a conscious move away from South African style to a more Old World effort. The bitterness of the coffee and dark chocolate definitely comes through near the end, but there isn't harshness to it, so it's not a negative point. On the later tasting (4 hours decanted) I got blackcurrant coming to the fore with the coffee moving to a supporting role (but a rather loud supporting role!). After 5 hours the coffee began to calm down a little, encouraging me to keep trying it.
Finish: As above, fading away into more savoury aromas. A hint of leather coming through (perhaps the evolved version of the slightly sour hay and barnyard aromas in the nose?), coffee and a touch of blackcurrant, but it's elusive.
Conclusion: It must be remembered that this is a VERY young wine and intended to be cellared for a good few years before drinking, so this review will most certainly be coloured by the fact that I am drinking this young. As a result, I find it extremely hard to give it a rating as I don't think it will be a fair analysis. I found this wine extremely interesting, but was it really a wine I would drink? I think that it's only fair to wait for at least another 2 years before drinking and ideally 5 or 10. Given all of the expertise that has gone into it, it's certainly an accomplished wine and it is certainly making a statement. I had a heated debate with a reviewer who referred to this as 'typically South African' that divided the room, but I stand by my view that this is a Bordelais wine residing in a South African terroir.
Points: Anything from 85-91.
I would love to hear if anyone else has tried this and what their feelings were! Next time I will do an overnight decant and see what it's like in the morning.
Labels:
cabernet sauvignon,
chocolate,
coffee,
full,
Glenelly,
hay,
Lady May,
leather,
red,
review,
savoury,
sour,
South Africa,
Toastbongo,
Wine
Saturday, 12 January 2013
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.
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.
Labels:
apricot,
Burgundy,
chardonnay,
honey,
lemon,
oak,
oaked,
peach,
South Africa,
Toastbongo,
white
Thursday, 10 January 2013
Kanonkop Paul Sauer 2009
As I have tantalisingly put Kanonkop's Paul Sauer 2009 as my current favourite wine, I feel it is only just that I should put up a review to accompany it. Kanonkop (meaning Canon's Hill - from which a warning shot that was fired to alert farmers to the arrival of traders at Cape Town) is regarded as one of South Africa's top wineries.
Kanonkop was inspired by a special offer that caught my eye and has since inspired a love of South African wine that I am yet to shake. Made in a distinctly Bordelais style with a blend of Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc and Merlot (giving it an edge of complexity over the single-grape Kanonkop Cabernet Sauvignon), Kanonkop is an excellent expression of what it is to be a 'proper' South African red.
Decanted for 3 hours before serving (at a later tasting I attempted 1.5, which was clearly too short), the colour was an rich, smoky red. Almost opaque, and interestingly a herald of things to come.
Nose: Kanonkop says 'I'm South African' all over the nose. It has the typical red fruit associated with a blend of this variety, but backed with the smokiness that is so classically South African. Coming in as top notes were blackberry, cherry, plum and some pepper. The more I sniffed, the more I felt the smoke was perhaps tending ever so slightly towards the phenolic aromas of a peated whisky. That is one I'll have to try to find again.
Palate: After 3 hours it was gloriously soft, smooth, fruity and rich. A decent oomph of spice kept it from being cloying and the smokiness gave it a lovely mouth-feel that was both complex and accessible. While I have listed a series of platitudes as regards red wine above, this wine should not be dismissed as basic - the layering and structure of the fruit, spice and smoke means it gives any palate a good run for its money.
Body: As mentioned above, this is an extremely smooth wine considering its full flavours. Tannins are remarkably soft, especially considering the youth of the wine.
Finish: Superb is the only word for it. Every constituent part softens and fades away in a subtle and yet somehow distinct order. It is medium-long and the structure holds perfectly throughout. Most excellent.
Conclusion: A really, really lovely wine. The sort of wine to kindle a love-affair. The quality of blending that one would expect of a Bordeaux combined with real flavour, passion and power. This is certainly one to have with a good braii on the beach (Cape Maclear, Malawi would be my ideal). It's potent and yet sufficiently subtle, complex and structured to stand up to any food without overwhelming it. But why would you bother trying to match it with food? This is magnificent on its own.
Points: 93.
I have since bought a case that will be sitting in my cellar for however long I can resist temptation. Expect to see updates as I check on the developments. It can be bought for around £25-30.
Kanonkop was inspired by a special offer that caught my eye and has since inspired a love of South African wine that I am yet to shake. Made in a distinctly Bordelais style with a blend of Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc and Merlot (giving it an edge of complexity over the single-grape Kanonkop Cabernet Sauvignon), Kanonkop is an excellent expression of what it is to be a 'proper' South African red.
Decanted for 3 hours before serving (at a later tasting I attempted 1.5, which was clearly too short), the colour was an rich, smoky red. Almost opaque, and interestingly a herald of things to come.
Nose: Kanonkop says 'I'm South African' all over the nose. It has the typical red fruit associated with a blend of this variety, but backed with the smokiness that is so classically South African. Coming in as top notes were blackberry, cherry, plum and some pepper. The more I sniffed, the more I felt the smoke was perhaps tending ever so slightly towards the phenolic aromas of a peated whisky. That is one I'll have to try to find again.
Palate: After 3 hours it was gloriously soft, smooth, fruity and rich. A decent oomph of spice kept it from being cloying and the smokiness gave it a lovely mouth-feel that was both complex and accessible. While I have listed a series of platitudes as regards red wine above, this wine should not be dismissed as basic - the layering and structure of the fruit, spice and smoke means it gives any palate a good run for its money.
Body: As mentioned above, this is an extremely smooth wine considering its full flavours. Tannins are remarkably soft, especially considering the youth of the wine.
Finish: Superb is the only word for it. Every constituent part softens and fades away in a subtle and yet somehow distinct order. It is medium-long and the structure holds perfectly throughout. Most excellent.
Conclusion: A really, really lovely wine. The sort of wine to kindle a love-affair. The quality of blending that one would expect of a Bordeaux combined with real flavour, passion and power. This is certainly one to have with a good braii on the beach (Cape Maclear, Malawi would be my ideal). It's potent and yet sufficiently subtle, complex and structured to stand up to any food without overwhelming it. But why would you bother trying to match it with food? This is magnificent on its own.
Points: 93.
I have since bought a case that will be sitting in my cellar for however long I can resist temptation. Expect to see updates as I check on the developments. It can be bought for around £25-30.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





