Thursday, 6 June 2013

Brightwell Vineyard, Crispin

On trying a rather eclectic mix of wines one evening, I came across Brightwell's Crispin. It's a blend of  two lesser-known grape varieties, Bacchus and Reichensteiner, which are generally described as producing soft, dry wines. Bacchus has recently come to the fore as it is grown across English vineyards, notably Camel Valley (who make a rather good sparkling wine).

Described by the Independent as having 'notes of spicy fruit and rosewater on the nose with bold barley sugar aspects on the palate', Crispin is reasonably well-regarded among the English wines. Whilst the the Independent was describing the Crispin favourably, I couldn't help but think that the rather strange collection of flavours rather clashed with one another. Spice, rose and barley sugar? Not exactly classic bedfellows... As a result, it was with interest but mild trepidation that I tasted it (blind, incidentally, along with several other wines).

Colour: Water. The tiniest hint of yellow informs us that this is, in fact, wine.

Nose: Hm. Not a fan. Considering I knew there would be Crispin in the tasting selection somewhere I was actively looking for wines with hints of rosewater and spice in the nose, but I immediately dismissed this. Fairly bland, with the slightest hint of lemon (rather like a large glass of water with a small wedge of lemon in it), it smelt to me to be a bland supermarket pint grigio.

Flavour: No rose. Hint of slightly over-sweet strawberry. Not nice. Insipid and acidic.

Body: None to speak of. Thin, acidic and sharp.

Finish: Disappointing. Short, with harshness and strawberry again.

Conclusion: When I found out that wine 4 was Crispin I was heartily disappointed - I had wanted to like this wine, or at least be interested by it enough to commend it to others. Sadly, I found it perfectly resembled the Great British Weather - drab, dreary, harsh and unpleasant. I may consider trying it again one day, but not any time soon, especially at the rather unreasonable price of around £10. Amazed Decanter gave it a bronze medal...

Points: Is there any use?

Tuesday, 7 May 2013

Moss Wood Chardonnay 2010

First things first. Apologies for the hideous gap between posts. I got rather caught up in other things and couldn't find time to drink wine, let alone review it! Right, enough of that. Wine:

I'm a fan of Moss Wood. I've reviewed their Pinot Noir here and gave it a high rating 89/90, praising its complexity and the interest it garners among drinkers. Having enjoyed it so much, I thought I'd give their Chardonnay a go - which also went in tune with my Chardonnay renaissance. I've read all sorts of lovely things about Moss Wood's Chardonnay but, being difficult and obstinate, I don't particularly like to take other people's opinions into account when I taste wine. As a result, my tastings often go against the consensus of what tastes like what.

This brings me onto an interesting point that I always remind people of before they taste wine - everything is subjective when it comes to wine. We all have our preferences and styles that we like more than others and its human nature to put an unconscious bias on things we like. This is why I taste things blind (especially given I have a slight conflict of interest here as Moss Wood sent me a very nice email complimenting me on my review of their Pinot Noir). Fortunately this was tasted blind, so the awful flattery that is about to follow is entirely sincere as it could have related to another Australian Chardonnay that I was trying that day (and I have witnesses to prove it!)

Nose: An opulent, heavy, rich Chardonnay nose. There's plenty of oak, but it is suitably restrained and doesn't dominate. This is a really full wine - there's honey, vanilla and a great big dollop of butterscotch. Citrus is fairly restrained on the nose and as a result this is a sweeter and rounder wine than some Chardonnays and eschews the sharp acidic nose that can condemn some bottles (cheap Burgundy being the prime offender here). Super buttery and almondy.

Palate: Again with the butterscotch but in comes some lemon to give a citrus zip to the affair. Vanilla is present and there's an interesting contrast of sweet and sour flavours - they're in perfect harmony and magnificently balanced. In terms of flavour this is a very full wine (as the nose would suggest) and shows that so-called 'Imperial Wine' (to be laid down... and forgotten about) now offers some serious style and ferociously good wine-making. Regardless of the great flavours in here, one word describes this best: balance. I was considering a ballerina in mid-pirouette analogy here but then calmed down a little and left it out.

Body: Acidity comes in at the back, courtesy of the lemon, and forcefully pushes this wine on and on! It's full-bodied and has high alcohol (not that it affects the wine).

Finish: Goes on and on and on and on. Extremely long and with a charming little progression: the sweet and sour contrast is played out in miniature with butter, citrus, honey, citrus coming along in turn and each fighting for their spot in the limelight. A real highlight to an excellent sip.

Conclusion: Is there really much more to say? A different wine to Ataraxia  (click on it for a review) in that Ataraxia was consciously focused on becoming Burgundian while Moss Wood is revelling in its modern intensity, but as good an example of Chardonnay's values as you'll find. It would be brilliant to try the two next to one another and, as they're both around £20 a bottle, what's stopping you?! Not sure on cellaring potential but I suspect a few years might improve things further still - perhaps someone could enlighten me here?

Points: 90+. Accomplished stuff.

Saturday, 13 April 2013

Au Bon Climat Santa Barbara County Chardonnay 2010

So, back to Santa Barbara County for an ABC Chardonnay. Much to my amusement, Au Bon Climat is regularly referred to as 'ABC' - ABC also being the acronym for those who drink 'anything but Chardonnay' (read my review of the magnificent Ataraxia Chardonnay for further discussion). I was mildly interested to see how I would enjoy this wine as I have had a very mixed bag of US Chardonnays in the past (Frog's Leap was lovely but heinously overpriced and there are many hideously watery, acidic and plain bottles out there).

So, clocking in at around £22 (£18 if on offer), I thought ABC would be worth a punt and an interesting option. I also rather like the bottle.

Nose: Very classic oaked Chardonnay - vanilla, honey and oak in abundance with an intriguing hint of lavender and apricot. Quite fresh with some apple and perhaps orange (?) coming through but at the same time delightfully 'creamy'.

Palate: Wow. There is a quite enormous palate of vanilla and honey. This is a real mouth-filler with apricot and lemon coming in in the middle and battling it out.There's also something a bit buttery about this fellow - perhaps a slight crunch of shortbread in there - with just a touch of salt. I wouldn't go so far as to say this is balanced, but there's a certain focus to the intensity. It's forceful, big and brash but at the same time curiously captivating in its slight subtleties.

Body: Full - but strangely it mellows off remarkably well and is (contrary to the description above) extremely moreish and drinkable.

Finish: Strong and long. It develops well and finishes with a rather interesting spot of peppery lemon and a good zing of acidity. Crumbs, this finish goes on and on. This is a really top-quality effort.

Conclusion: Not sure if the sheer honey/vanilla power of this will appease or irritate people who dislike Chardonnay. In one way it's quite enjoyable, but in the other it typifies the extreme nature of modern Chardonnays - they can be insipid and watery or they can be a blast of oak. Needless to say, this wine divided opinion at the tasting and it's quite easy to see why. I, however, like it. It mellows very nicely (once you get over the sheer quantity of honey and vanilla) and has a seemingly endless finish.

Points: 88. Would certainly drink it again - which is good as I have some in the cellar!

Friday, 29 March 2013

Sula Dindori Shiraz Reserve 2010

So here's something a little bit different. Sula, the Indian vineyard that boldly claims to be 'at the forefront of the Indian Wine revolution', was founded by Rajeev Samant in 1993 after leaving his job as an engineer in Silicon Valley. Dindori Reserve was launched in 2005 and shows the experimental edge and growing flair of Sula. Aged in new oak for 1 year.

While the phrase 'Indian Wine revolution' may seem a little vainglorious, I thought it would be an interesting wine to try. I had been recommended to try Indian wine before, but I was cautious as to how well it would travel. Given the distinctly different climates of England and  India I felt its merits may be lost (especially as I tried it in mid-Winter - which was actually a rather good thing, as you will see from the notes below).

Along with experimenting across established Indian varietals, Sula also produces a dessert wine (India's first), a Sauvignon Blanc and a Chenin Blanc (also firsts for India). While I suppose this could be termed a revolution in that it has never been done before in India, the fact that these are 'firsts' for India suggests to me that this is a revolution very much in its infancy. Still, with some fairly slick marketing projects, including luxury accommodation on the vineyard, Sula may well end up being as successful as its marketing suggests. They definitely need to change the labels though...

Colour: A rather opaque, cloudy red. A hint of purple.

Nose: Peppery, spicy (cinnamon) and jammy. All characteristic Shiraz tastes. Now comes the interesting part - salt and smoke combined with distinct notes of dried black tea. For those of you familiar with Lapsang Souchong tea, this is a remarkably comparable nose! My notes say in capitals 'TEA'! How interesting.

Palate: Really really smoky fruit. Plenty of oak. Molasses and cinnamon (perhaps burnt cinnamon?) come in with some spice in the middle, giving it a rather charmingly sweet toasty flavour. Lapsang comes through again in serious quantities. Interesting. Quite heavy but not oppressive.

Body: Quite acidic and reasonable tannic. Quite austere on the back. Reasonably smooth.

Finish: The austerity really punches in here. Again, I can't help but make comparisons with slightly over-brewed Lapsang tea. Very smoky, drying and slightly sweet. Not wholly unpleasant.

Conclusion: Classifying a wine like this is extraordinarily difficult (much to my amusement I originally typed 'tea' here - reflecting just how tea-like it was!). It's hard to tell if its well-made or hideously unbalanced. The smokiness is something I quite like (for a glass or two) but I think those of you who have more refined palates may find it oppressive. I liked the sweet spiciness in the middle of the palate but was rather less fond of the austere ending, which is rather too dry for my liking.

Points: 84. Give it a go. It's an extremely interesting wine and is a great conversation-starter, especially given its provenance. Balance is an issue, but perhaps that's what makes it exciting.

Saturday, 23 March 2013

Château Talbot, St Julien, 2001

As I tend to focus on New World wines, I felt it was time to go back to a classic Bordeaux.  Squashed between Pauillac and Margaux on the Left Bank, St Julien is known for producing consistently good and interesting wines. Château Talbot is a 5th Cru Classé and is produced in a very classic style. Some might say that it was designed for the Englishman as it ticks all the boxes for classic claret - the most important being that it is balanced and smooth.

A brief disclaimer is that I tasted this wine some time ago and so my notes are less complete and my memory less distinct. It was also tasted with food and not tasted blind, so I would suggest that this is probably a less objective tasting note than I normally give.

Colour: A fairly deep purple/red, but there was a slight tendency towards tawny on the edges.

Nose: Cedar is the dominant note, backed by tobacco and a dollop of blackberry. Rather less fruit than I had expected, but by no means absent.

Palate: The reverse of the above! The blackberries came first and in a decent enough level of intensity. These were followed by the tobacco with the cedar coming in at the end to clear the palate. This isn't hugely complex - it's simple and light - but it is very nicely balanced and extremely smooth. Very much an easy-drinker.

Body: Extremely soft and gentle. Very light on the body, but with a decent level of taste. It isn't insipid or dreary. Very balanced, with a hint of astringency to firm it up a bit.

Finish: A medium length which fades nicely but without great complexity. Could have done with a bit more of a finish, I feel.

Conclusion: This is exactly the sort of wine that is really difficult to grade. Its soft and subtle flavours mean that many will find it inaccessible or boring, especially if they were to drink it next to a fruit bomb. This strikes me as the sort of wine that is absolutely ideal for a relaxing evening with a book in front of a fire. It was excellent with food, but can it really become a talking point? Its very merits lie in the fact that it is balanced, light and smooth - not exactly 'Eureka' features. That being said, those who prefer a milder wine will adore this as the one thing it does have in spades is class.

Points: 88

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

Saturday, 2 March 2013

Moss Wood Pinot Noir 2009, Mornington Peninsula

A pal of mine has been telling me to try Mornington Peninsula Pinot Noir (he's Australian) for many months now and I have finally given in. After reading a series of excellent reviews for Moss Wood's wines, I felt the need to try a range of their wines (Chardonnay, Cab Sauv and Pinot Noir - obviously from different vineyards).

One thing that I like about Moss Wood (Jancis Robinson calls their Cab Sauv 'The Latour of the Margaret River) is their elegant label design. Another positive is that they haven't overpriced their other wines as a result of the Cabernet Sauvignon's success. The Pinot Noir is available from £17.50-25, depending on where you look and also on shipping, so whilst it is expensive, it is not prohibitively so.

This fellow was drunk at 2 sittings - one at 8 PM and the other at 00:30. Because of the huge differences between the original tasting and the re-taste I feel the need to separate the two:

Nose: At 8 PM the nose was, to me, perfect. It had a magnificent sense of balance and assuredness about it. There was certainly fruit present, but it was perfectly balanced with savoury notes and a lovely hint of pepper to clear the nose at the back. Strawberry, muted raspberry (i.e. no sourness) came in alongside cherry. There's a certain jamminess to it, but not the overpowering sickliness that will have deterred many from trying Australian and other New World Pinot Noirs. It is extremely restrained and refined - the mushroomy savouriness in the middle of the nose really adds to complexity and ensures this wine has 3 distinct areas.

Re-taste Nose: On the re-taste the nose has grown much more opulent, but rather more one-dimensional. There are positives and negatives to this. On the positive, it means that people who are looking for a fruitier wine will be satisfied, as there is a significantly juicier nose while the wine maintains a hint of sourness at the end to ensure the flavours remain at least partially balanced; on the negative, the loss of the savoury edge has removed a certain level of complexity and (dare I say it?) excitement for the taster.

Palate: Flavours as above. This is a smooth, supple, soft and ultra-balanced wine. The sweetness and savouriness offset one another perfectly and this is an exceptionally drinkable wine. It's light on the alcohol and the body is neither too heavy nor too jammy.

Re-taste Palate: On the re-taste the fruit and sourness are much much stronger than the savoury flavours. The wine is now better described as tasting of dried cranberry and strawberry: there's a touch of tartness to affairs and while the wine is still remarkably smooth, the savoury flavours have all but disappeared. There is, however, a decent 'oomph' of spice in there. Oakiness coming through.

Body: The body is extremely light, smooth and pleasant. Tannins are (as expected of a PN) very light.

Finish: The finish is short but nice. Little change between tastings - surprisingly the hint of pepper in the finish has survived to the later tasting. On the re-taste there is quite a hit of oak-spice that has lingered for some time now. Pretty punchy stuff.

Conclusion: I really really enjoyed the first tasting - this was a wine that showed that the New World can imitate Burgundy's finesse at an acceptable price point. Although the second tasting was completely different from the first, in the time I have been writing this review and re-tasting for a third time, it has begun to grow on me as something different, but by no means worse. It is a far more modern expression of pinot noir and it is nice to see that drinkers are offered an option. Drink the wine straight out of the bottle for a more restrained wine, or decant for 2 hours and enjoy a fruitier fellow. I'm not sure if this was deliberate but if it was, it is a stroke of genius! One cannot help but be impressed.

Points: 89/90. Really pleasant - the factor that pushed it to a /90 was that the wine changed so much after time out, offering diversity and complexity. Super wine and a fun one to drink. One of my readers - BB - will be able to confirm this phenomenon, should he wish to comment...