Wine For Normal People Radio : Episode 021 The Grape Mini-Series: Pinot Noir

And the grape mini-series continues! This time, it's the "heartbreak grape." The popular red du jour, Pinot Noir! If you love Pinot, this episode is for you! We talked about the different styles of Pinot Noir from all over the world, and helped point out the differences in Pinot styles.

Show Notes:

• Shout-outs - Fun comments on the Facebook page, Wine for Normal People Blog, and on Twitter
• How to pick the perfect Pinot Noir when shopping for wine
• Different flavor profiles/styles of Pinot Noir
• Popular regions that grow Pinot Noir:
  • Europe: Burgundy, Germany (where it's called Spätburgunder), Champagne (typically blush/rosé sparkling wine from this region)
  • California: Carneros (Napa & Sonoma), Russian River Valley (Sonoma), Central Coast
  • New Zealand
  • Oregon
    
  • Australia

Click here or download the 'cast below...

Wine For Normal People Radio : Episode 021 The Grape Miniseries: Pinot Noir

Send us questions, comments, and some love on Twitter @NormalWine

Drop a comment below

Dig the podcast? Please review us on iTunes and we'll give you a shout out!

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Readmore »»

Riffault's Raudonas

It's always good to have friends over who are into natural wine as you can open bottles that might freak others out. Nevertheless I confess we opened Sébastian Riffault's 2008 Raudonas Sancerre last night with some trepidation. As I've mentioned before before some of his wines teeter on the edge of undrinkability but his reds clearly less so than his whites.

This was just amazing. A sensuous silky-textured pinot noir that you'd be ecstatic to come across in Burgundy. Every mouthful was a thrill. We drank it with a delicate dish of chicken in white wine with summer vegetables - carrots, turnips, broad beans and peas - with a swirl of cream stirred in at the end (into the casserole, not the wine, obviously ... )

Doug Wregg of Les Caves de Pyrène says in one of his newsletters that Raudonas is Lithuanian for ruddy which sounds wildly improbable but who am I to naysay him? Only Doug could dig that kind of stuff out. About 20-22€ in France so about £25 here I'd guess. I'll confirm once I've got Caves to confirm the price.

* Actually it's £22.44 - still not exactly cheap but worth every penny. Readmore »»

A Reliable Pinot Noir For A Great Price: Oyster Bay From Marlborough, NZ

There are some wine regions that are like good friends. They're consistent, amazing, make you smile, and never let you down. For me, New Zealand fits the bill. This small country produces some of the finest Sauvignon Blanc on the planet (as discussed in the podcast), and for the money, the most consistently solid quality Pinot Noir around.

If you drink wine from New Zealand, most likely you've noticed that most of it (50% of all wine, to be precise) comes from a place called Marlborough. New Zealand is a country made up of 2 main islands -- inventively named the North Island and the South Island (I'll let you figure out why). Marlborough is on the northern tip of the South Island and it has proven to have a picture-perfect climate for certain grapes.

Marlborough has two main valleys -- the Wairau Valley and the Awatere Valley -- and each have different characteristics. The Wairau is where most of the premium wine grapes are grown, with good reason. It's got the grape magic formula in it's pocket: long, sunshine-filled days, cool nights, and a dry fall for harvest time. Why is this magic? Because long days mean the grapes ripen well but cool nights mean they can build acidity and not get overripe. This is such the key to what makes New Zealand wines so unique -- they are fruity, yet have amazing acidity and moderate alcohol. The Awatere is hotter and more suited for warm climate grapes. Each area has enormous variation in soil types, and producers blend grapes from different vineyards with different soils to achieve complexity and layered flavors in the wines.

New Zealand has built quite a reputation for Sauvignon Blanc, but you may not know that it makes some real kick ass Pinot Noir too. If you read the blog, you know that I'm not shy about saying Pinot is frequently mishandled, allowed to get too ripe, and is made in a style that is over the top and that I think is just plain wrong for the grape. But on the South Island this pain-to-grow grape flourishes. Here it's fruity but still has acidity. It's earthy, but not thin. It's a style in the vein of Burgundy, but all its own.

Central Otago, on the South Island, makes some of the most amazing Pinot Noir I've had outside of Burgundy but it can be expensive and hard to get. The Pinots from Marlborough, where most of the larger producers of Sauvignon Blanc are situated, are far more affordable, accessible, and, although a little lighter, are still delicious.

I buy Oyster Bay's wines all time, both in Sauv Blanc and in Pinot Noir because it's a great value and is so reliable. I like that the winery has been around for 20 years, which is kind of old for wine companies in Lord of the Rings country, where new producers seem to pop up every day.

Given my penchant for chugging the stuff, I should have reviewed it earlier, but I guess it's never too late:

The Wine: Oyster Bay Pinot Noir (there is an actual Oyster Bay in Marlborough, BTW)
Where It's From: Marlborough, New Zealand
The Grapes: 100% Pinot Noir
Alcohol: 13.5%
Vintage: 2010
Price: $12.99

Color: A beautiful deep rose color in the center with a bright pink, watery edge. A little darker than I'd expect from Pinot, but the rim was the right color for me so I held hope that it wouldn't be overripe (a lot of times when the producers allow the grapes to get too ripe you get dark skins, so the wine is super dark from the juice being in contact with the skin). The legs were not too gloppy -- 13.5% alcohol is right on the border for me in terms of being a little too much so I was concerned this would be off balance, but I reserved judgment.

Smell: And this is why I love New Zealand Pinot Noir. There was a rich red berry smell -- like raspberry and strawberry parfait -- with a musky spice note to it. I thought of a campfire when I smelled the wine. It smelled earthy and like dried dirt, but with a note of sandalwood or Indian-type spice. A really outstanding blend of earth, fruit, and spice that's hard to find in a wine at this price!

Taste: Yum. It tasted just like it smelled -- red berries and exotic spices. The French oak, which contributes that spice flavor, made the fruit taste better, rather than overpowering it. The tannins and acid were in balance -- very medium and didn't overtake the wine by drying out my mouth/making it water too much. My only criticism: the wine was a little hot on the back of my throat from the alcohol. Again, 13.5% is right on the fringe of being a little too high (except in very rich, fruit wines like Zinfandel or Cabernet 14% is kind of my threshold for alcohol) and although it didn't ruin the wine or throw it off balance, I would have preferred that the burn wasn't there.

Pairing: We had this with a ginger sesame rubbed grilled chicken breast and it was a great pairing. The spice and fruit went well with the ginger -- everything tasted warm and spicy-sweet. I think it would be great with an Asian stir-fry that was ginger-heavy too, although this is a great Pinot to have with grilled salmon, pork, and roast turkey. Super versatile.

Drink or Down the Sink?: Drink! I love this wine. What a value for the price and so reliable that it's a standby for me when I want a good Pinot that's widely available. Go for it...and while you're at it, pick up the Sauvignon Blanc too! Can't go wrong for $12 or $13!!!

I love your comments! Please let me know your thoughts below!
Readmore »»

An Oregon Redemption: Willamette Valley Vineyards Tualatin Estate Pinot Noir

Man, I'm excited to write this post. I've had a kind of lame ass run of Oregon Pinot Noir lately. I was even beginning to doubt that my excitement around the region and its fabulous Goldilocks nature of being somewhere between the minerality, barnyard, and crazy spice of a Burgundy, and the ridiculous fruitiness of many California Pinots was completely unfounded.

The good news is that I was wrong. The bad news: I guess now is the time that I call my own bluff. I'm a firm believer/espouser of the notion that you don't have to spend more than $20 to get great wine...but I think with this experience (which is a replica of a few I've had lately), I've confirmed that's decidedly not the case with most Pinot Noir. Unlike most other grapes where you can get good deals, with Pinot you've gotta spend the cash to get the quality. And in Oregon this is certainly the case.

It makes sense from a business standpoint. I mean, this grape, which I've touted in podcasts and posts as the most pain in the butt grape to grow and the one that requires Herculean effort to tame, master, and create good wine, makes mediocre, watery, nothing-doing ick when it's mass produced. The plain fact is that it just costs a lot of money to maintain vineyards of Pinot and to make wine out of a grape that is so high maintenance and those costs get passed on in the price of the wine.

This begs the question: Why is Pinot more of a pain? Well, for starters, we're not the only ones that love Pinot -- birds, pests, fungus, and Mother Nature in the form of hail, wind, and rain adore removing every last vestige of amazing grapes from their vines. When you lose a bunch of your crop and when, to begin with, the grape requires cooler climates and specific soils and sites, and mutates like it had a personality disorder, this makes it a problem child in the grape kingdom. Pinot isn't a hearty grape like Syrah -- if you're planning to grow this grape, you better be ready for some serious hand-holding and potential heartbreak if the weather doesn't cooperate with you. It's a bit of a fool's folly to grow this stuff (but if it works it's awesome).

So I give serious credit to those making a go of it in the Willamette Valley (will-AM-it) of Oregon. This is as good a place to tame Pinot as any. It's 150 miles long and 60 miles wide (pretty huge) and it's sandwiched between the Oregon Coastal Range and the Cascade Mountains, making it cool but warm enough to ripen grapes. The wet winters, and warm, dry summers and the virtual lack of rain in the growing season fatten chances for the growers that they can provide a very nice, accommodating environment for the picky Pinot....at least so says the 200+ wineries there, including some French producers who came looking for sites similar to Burgundy and found the Willamette to be closest to home.

If you aren't familiar with Oregon, it's a great region for Pinot Noir but it's super new in the wine world. The Willamette Valley became a place for wine only after 1965, when four dudes who graduated from UC Davis, which has an awesome program for winemakers and wine farmers (viticulturists) decided to move to the Valley and plant Pinot Noir. David Lett of Eyrie Vineyards, Dick Erath of Erath and Charles Coury of the Charles Coury Winery and Dick Ponzi of Ponzi Vineyards took a risk and it paid off. Others followed.

One of those was Jim Bernau, who set up Willamette Valley Vineyards in 1983. Concentrating mainly on Pinot Noir, WVV grew. Today it's one of Oregon's bigger and more commercial wineries, producing a little over 121,000 cases in 2009 (according to their annual report). This isn't just some small boutique winery -- it's a relatively big business.

And big businesses have a PR and marketing effort. A few months ago they sent me 4 bottles of wine (there's my full disclosure -- the stuff was free, but that doesn't mean I'm going to lie about it!). I've reviewed the Pinot Gris (it was ok). Then I tried their $20 whole cluster fermented Pinot Noir and really disliked it. It tasted like alcoholic cherry juice and reminded me of Beaujolais Nouveau -- totally a powder puff wine with nothing of interest to me. The tannins were lame, the acid weak and it was just too simple and boring for me. Another discouraging Pinot at the affordable end of Willamette Valley choices. So with that experience, I had a lot of trepidation about trying the other Pinot that was sent, the Willamette Valley Vineyards Tualatin Estate Vineyard Willamette Valley Pinot Noir.

I was not convinced that this was going to be dramatically better. Thankfully I was wrong. The wine was more than double the price and it's from a much smaller vineyard that has complex soils and a bunch of different clones of Pinot Noir that each add a little nuance to the recipe. Whereas I'd avoid the affordable Willamette Valley Vineyards Whole Cluster Fermented Pinot and drink a Cosmo instead, I could drink this wine all day long -- it was extraordinarily delicious.

Here are the deets:

The Wine: Willamette Valley Vineyards Tualatin Estate Pinot Noir
Where It's From: Willamette Valley, Oregon
The Grapes: 100% Pinot Noir
Vintage: 2007
Price: $45.00

Color: Pale ruby red -- the color I think Pinot should be (not dark -- that screams out that the grape has either been blended with something else OR that it's been hanging on a vine WAY too long and won't taste like the grape rather like Welsh's grape juice). It was a slight concern that the wine had a ton of bubbles in it -- that usually happens when the winemaker juices up the wine with CO2 to keep it fresh. That's ok in a German Riesling, not the best in a Pinot.

Smell: Really complex -- the smells kept coming and coming with each little sniff. I was encouraged. Typical Pinot can smell like tart cherries, dried cranberry, and wet rocks or minerals. Check. Check. Check. There was an unripe raspberry and a blood orange smell (like a grapefruit and an orange mated) that was unique and yummy. The earthy/mineral smell also reminded me of a rocky beach in the summer -- like hot rocks. There was a floral essence going on too. All super delicious and nothing like the overwhelming cherry juice smell of the lower tier of this wine. This was a different league.

Taste: Tart cherry at first with mouthwatering acid and a hit of alcohol (my only criticism of the wine -- it's a little hot and high in alcohol at 13.4%). Then the wine completely mellows in your mouth --it was like cinnamon toast, rhubarb pie, or berry cobbler with a crumb topping. There was clove on the finish too. The texture of the wine was amazing -- the tannins were super mild (just a little mouth drying) and the acid balanced the fruit and baking spice flavor amazingly well. Everything was balanced. Yum.

Food: You need an medium weight food -- like pork, lamb, swordfish, or certain types of mushrooms, beets, or earthy veggies-- but the rubber is going to hit the road on this pairing when you some sort of savory spice or herb sauce or rub goes on the food. The wine's already tasty profile will only be enhanced by the savory herbs or spice (I think the best option would be with starchy potatoes or some other earthy vegetables, which would combine to make those clove and fruit pie flavors into an earthy, fruity, spicy sea of deliciousness). We had it with hard cheese -- Parmesan. It was unbelievable with that too.

Drink or Down the Sink?: Drink. There were only about 325 cases of this wine made, so it may be hard to get, but it's worth trying (order online or ask your wine shop to order it for you if you're interested). I'm thoroughly impressed with this wine...but on the other hand I have such a hard time reconciling that it's so drastically different from the lower tier.

So I return to my original discovery -- in Pinot, I think you get what you pay for. And you've got to pay to get the good stuff.

Please let me know what you think! Leave your questions and comments below, or join the conversation on the Wine For Normal People Facebook page.

Readmore »»

Frank Family and Tres Sabores: Two Highs at the High...

I'm pretty lucky. Not in the Irish sense, but practically speaking. As a blogger and wine educator, I get to go to a lot of amazing wine events and try a ton of wines so I can share my opinions with you (although, as you probably know by now, that's not always a good thing for the wineries!). With that said, I hate sounding like a total ingrate and ass when I am critical of events I attend...but I gotta tell the truth.

So when I say that the biggest wine event that my current city, Atlanta, has -- the High Museum Wine Auction, which took place last week -- was a big snoozer for me, I hope you don't think I'm a jerk.

The annual auction is for an amazing organization and our best fine arts institution, so it's no knock on the cause. It's one of the highest grossing wine auctions in the US and each year they assemble a big assortment of very expensive, high-end wines for people to try and buy. But after three years of attending, I've noticed that the selection is the same year after year and fewer than 10% of the wine there is from outside of the US. For an adventuresome wine lover, hell, just even for someone who isn't particularly fond of high alcohol, very fruity, oaky, lower acid wines, this spells trouble. It's not a terribly interesting proposition to taste dozens of wines so similar and flavorful, and it's one that can make your mouth really tired after a while from tannin and too much fruit flavor building up on your cheeks.

At all wine events, you've got to have a strategy to tackle them. I always try first to survey the landscape and then figure out what I want to try. You can't taste it all (although I think some of the people there were attempting to do so, with bad results), and I'm all about discovering something new so I picked wineries that are well reputed but whose wines I haven't tried. I stayed away from those that I knew and have pretty good access to (either because they make wines under $20, which I can afford and get or because I see them on the shelf and know they're there if I want to spend more).

So this time I went to about 8 tables and am only going to tell you, in depth, about two of them. The rest were just blah to me. Not to be too bitchy, but I'll call a few out...for example, Ovid -- which showcased two wines (at $95 and $175 respectively) was just over the top. You couldn't possibly drink them with food -- they were food! Hawkes Winery, out of Sonoma, had a good Chardonnay, but their Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon didn't have the interesting, multi-faceted flavors I want from those wines.

Although loved and lauded by so many, I thought Cliff Lede's wines were just meh. Although it smelled good, the Sauvignon Blanc's alcohol was so high that, for me, it burned my mouth and made the grapefruit and grass flavors taste like they'd be wrapped in sandpaper. Give me New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc any day over this one! Their $60 Stag's Leap District Cabernet Sauvignon had so much sweet oak and overwhelming blackcurrant, black plum, and blackberry fruit that it was a little much to take. That with the mouth-drying tannins had me scrambling for a few glasses of water and crackers so I could taste wines afterward. The Cab wasn't bad, but it was a little over the top.

So when I finally happened across Frank Family Vineyards, which I'd heard so much about but had never tried, and the wines of Tres Sabores, which I've seen so many times but had, (I'm now embarrassed to say) passed over, I was relieved and excited to have some good things to tell you about. I tried 7 wines, so below are shorter reviews but if you have questions on them post on the comments and I can elaborate.

First up for review, Frank Family Vineyards. Housed in the third oldest winery in Napa, way up north in Calistoga (which is where the fabled Chateau Montelena, another very old winery and a favorite of mine, is located), Frank Family makes sparkling and regular wine. I have to insert my snarky comment about how this Winery, like most in Napa, has the rich-former-executive-loves-wine-and-buys-winery pedigree, since Rich Frank is a former big-time Disney exec who earned bank in the corporate world before turning his big fortune in for a small one in wine (always the case for those of you considering buying a winery). But I'll hand it to the guy -- he's got the right talent on the job. Each wine was pretty spectacular and I'll be visiting them the next time I'm in Napa, for sure. Here's the lineup:

2008 Frank Family Chardonnay, $32.50
Color: From the looks of this wine, I was already liking it. Rather than a rich golden yellow that's typical of Napa Chardonnay because it's so ripe it has no acidity and has so much oak you're picking splinters out of your gums, this was the color of a bale of hay -- a medium straw color.

Smell: It smelled delicious -- like jasmine and gardenia flowers and the like a ripe bosc pear (the brown ones -- my favorite) and a golden delicious apple (sweet and a little tart at the same time). I didn't smell much oak -- maybe a little vanilla, even though the wine was aged in 100% new oak barrels, which should make the it ultra-vanillay and like licking a tree.

Taste: The taste was in line with a Chardonnay from the cooler southern area of Napa: Carneros, which is where the grapes for this originate. Pineapple and pear flavors with some sweet vanilla oak weren't overwhelming, because they were offset by the taste of savory herbs sauteed in butter and then a big hit of mouthwatering acid.

Drink or down the sink? Drink. I really loved this wine. Totally balanced, even for someone like me, who doesn't really like oak on her Chardonnay! I could have this with a cheese plate and be a happy girl.


2009 Frank Family Reserve Pinot Noir, $57.50
Color: I wasn't too encouraged by the very dark color of this Pinot. As I've mentioned in my posts on Burgundy, I'm a pretty firm believer that Pinot shouldn't be dark plum colored. It's a thin skinned grape and in its natural state generally light on color, so the hue kind of made me think it was going to be a heavy style of Pinot that I'm not crazy about.

Smell: Smelled like a typical Pinot Noir from the Carneros region -- plum, dried cherry, with a little earthy/minerally note.

Taste: Sour cherry with a touch of exotic spice (like chai tea) from the oak. The wine had pretty high acid and alcohol but it was just squeaky clean -- no earth, very crisp cherry flavors.

Drink or down the sink? Drink. This was good, but not great. Definitely the weakest of all the wines I tasted in their line, which is funny because it was also the most expensive (see price doesn't always dictate quality!)


2008 Frank Family Zinfandel, $36.75
This wine is 16% Petit Sirah and 84% Zinfandel (remember that the law in the US only requires that 75% of the grape be in the bottle for it to be labeled as such). I think the heavy, bold Petit Sirah added a real kick to the Zinfandel.
Color: This was super dark -- maroon and purple-y. Lots of color hopefully would mean lots of flavor, which is a plus in a Zin.

Smell: The backbone of black raspberries and ripe purple plums was overlaid with serious Indian spices -- like sandalwood and cardamom (Chai tea again). It was also kind of floral, like dried roses. It was unusual for a Zin, which is usually peppery, fruity, and less exotic.

Taste: Some prune flavor and then bold, mouth-drying tannins -- it was more textural than ripe and juicy than I would normally expect, which is definitely from the very tannic Petit Sirah addition. It also had a hot burn from the 14.9% alcohol (pretty high).

Drink or Down the Sink? Drink. This was a stunner. It was so ballsy and brazen -- just what I want out of a blend of two American grapes! There's nothing like an unabashed, full-flavored red every now and then and this fits that bill.


2006 Frank Family Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon, $45
Color: This was DARK. Blood red and so heavy in color that the legs on the sides of the glass were stained red. I expected lots of flavor.

Smell: The wine wasn't too fruity but more like dried flowers, cinnamon, and sauteed thyme and other cooking herbs. Totally interesting for a Cab.

Taste: Super tannic with a short finish and very stingy on the fruit -- like it was there but was a lot of flavor hiding behind the tannin...

Drink or Down the Sink? Need another category, which is HOLD. This wine is not ready to drink quite yet. It needs to chill out in a major way for a few years. When big, tannic wines like Cabernet are served too young they just don't live up to their potential. This wine will be amazing in another 2 years or so. All the elements are there to make it so, but right now -- not ready.

________________________________________________________________________
With my support of organic farming and admiration of female winemakers, I'm a little embarrassed that I haven't had the wines of Tres Sabores before. I've passed the sign for their winery when in Napa and never knew about the gems I'd find in the turnoff. I was fortunate enough to have an acquaintance point me in the direction of Julie Johnson, owner and winemaker, who was right next to Cliff Lede. Julie's unbelievably warm, open character...which, in my skeptical New Yorker way, I at first thought may be a screen for the fact that her wines weren't great...was an instant plus but more importantly, her wines really kicked ass.

This graduate of Columbia School of Nursing found a second career in wine and her caretaking skills translated to the vine and the land. These wines were surprising, innovative, and all around delicious. They're in pretty wide distribution, so you can actually get them, and the ones I tried were all less than $35, well worth the money! Here are quickie reviews of the three I sampled:

2009 Tres Sabores Sauvignon Blanc, $22
Color: Julie told me that the wine was fermented 2/3 in stainless steel and 1/3 in 4 year old, nearly flavorless barrels. With no oak and growing in a cooler climate, the wine was so pale it was almost colorless.

Smell: This was nice and subtle. It had some grapefruit and gardenia, but was so light and airy. A very different style of Sauvignon Blanc and atypical of Napa, which I was happy about. I'm not at all an advocate of putting Sauvignon Blanc in an oak barrel, which is common here and was happy to see someone letting the grape express itself.

Taste: Just like it smelled except with great acidity. I could have mistaken this for a very light style New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc. The grapes grow on a cool, Northeast facing slope, which spares them from too much sun and preserves acidity -- just what Sauv Blanc calls for.

Drink or Down the Sink? Drink. I'm not generally a Napa Sauvignon Blanc fan, but I loved the delicacy of this wine. Perfect for spring and simply delicious!


2008 Tres Sabores, Rutherford Estate Zinfandel, $35
In a place known for Cabernet Sauvignon, Rutherford (people usually talk about how the wines have a dusty, earthy flavor that's unique), I'm impressed that they'd give up the land to Zin, which they can less money for. But it's a good call in this case -- Zin apparently likes the unique soil of this area as much as Cabernet!

Color: Like a bowl of dried roses! It was a dark rose color -- so pretty and appetizing!

Smell: A subtle plum and cinnamon note with a hit of violets and dark-colored flowers. I loved that it wasn't overpowering, and that I couldn't smell alcohol (which feels like my nasal cilia are burning), which I often find with Zinfandel.

Taste: Fruit, black pepper, and cinnamon spice were wrapped in a creamy vanilla texture. The black cherry and plum were rich and jammy. Again, I loved that the alcohol was in check -- it didn't burn the sides of my mouth. There was great mouth-drying tannins and mouthwatering acid but nothing stuck out. It hung around in my mouth for a long time and that was just fine by me! The wine was very harmonious and just great for sipping.

Drink or Down the Sink? I love Zinfandel, but I've been a little disappointed lately with many that I've tried. I expect a bold style wine made out of this grape, which is so authentically California. This is one of the best Zins I've had in a year or more. Definitely my favorite of Tres Sabores, and a new fave in the world of Zins. Go Julie!


2008 ¿Porqué No? Red Blend, Napa Valley $25
Literally, ¿Porqué no? means 'why not?' in Spanish, but Julie explained that it also translates to an amorphous concept that challenges you to use your imagination. And that's what she did! This wine is like a good chef throwing something together. It's mainly Zinfandel (50%+) with Cabernet Sauvignon (about 30%), Petit Sirah, and Petit Verdot thrown in. The fruit is from Napa, Sonoma, and Lake Counties and it's a very interesting, if totally unorthodox, mix (Zin and Petit Sirah are common partners and Cab and Petit Verdot go together, but the double date isn't something you usually see).

Color: With the grapes blended in above, all thick skinned and robust, you better believe that this wine was super dark. I expected big, bold flavor -- dark color usually means big taste.

Smell: It wasn't too different from the Zinfandel -- plums, black cherry, and cinnamon spice were the leaders. There was a hint of some sort of thyme or tarragon too -- very cool

Taste: Immediately I thought of Christmas! It tasted piney or like one of those Christmas shops that smells like cinnamon sticks and balsam. This was rich, flavorful with fruit and nutmeg/cinnamon notes and super balanced. There was just a little bit of mouth-drying tannin, but it was easy drinking.

Drink or Down the Sink? Drink. Although given the choice between this and the Zin, I'd pick the Zin, I really liked this wine. It's interesting, creative, and pretty cool. There's a balance between the bold fruit and the pine forest flavors that was very cool. A great wine and one to try for sure.
________________________________________________________________
So that's a wrap on this year's auction. I'll go next year (if they let me after this post!) but unless they expand the floor to a more international set of wines, I expect the results will be similar -- a 25% success rate for stuff I can tell you about. But hey, it's better than nothing! If you've tried these wines, let me know what you think! Readmore »»

Burgundy in Action: Greatest Hits from A Louis Latour Tasting

As a follow up to the post on Burgundy from earlier this week, I'm going to put that opus to use and talk about some stellar examples from the area and what the wines from three of the more prestigious places -- Chablis, the Côte de Beaune, and the Côte de Nuits -- actually taste like. I'll reference that post, but I'm not going to go into detail on the region -- this is a straight-up wine evaluation (I encourage you to read the other post because it's what you need to know about Burgundy to understand and appreciate these wines. Am I like a nagging mother now? Probably. Sorry.).

I recently had the rare and wonderful opportunity to attend a tasting of the 2009 vintage of some of Louis Latour's amazing vineyards, courtesy of Empire Distributors here in Atlanta.

Louis Latour is the oldest continuously family run wine merchant/producer in Burgundy -- it's on its 10th generation of family ownership. The Latours got their start as grape farmers in the 17th century and after a century and a half of straight-up growing and small time production, the Latours became negociants, compiling the best grapes from various farmers to make, age, and sell top red and white Burgundy. It took them another century before they started their own label, Louis Latour, launched in 1985.

It's no secret that even though I sometimes drink and review wines from big producers, I'm not a giant fan of the big dogs. But as cited in the Primer, you've got to go with negociants that you can trust and in the world of available, accessible, and solid quality, Latour ranks with the best. Generally speaking, you can rely on the Domaine (akin to Chateau in Bordeaux) to turn out a great product.

This is the second tasting of Latour's wines that I've attended. Both times, I've been blown away by their whites (Chardonnay) and how beautifully they show the terroir that I associate with Burgundy. This time around there were some that were lights-out amazing, and some that were just solid, but not one in the bunch that I disliked.

With the reds (Pinot Noir), it's a little more complicated . Maybe it's because these wines are like little babies and haven't developed their full personalities yet (they are all 2009) or maybe they are altered slightly for the American palate (something I suspect happens often from European larger producers), but all except the top tier lacked the earthy, spicy, minerally complexity that I expect from Burgundy. My notes on the reds say over and over again, "too clean," which could be a plus for some but for me, not so much.

One other note before I get to it: I had to remind myself that these are wine infants! Most Burgundies -- red and white -- are meant to be aged a minimum of about 5 years and up to 30 to 50 in some cases, so for the wines of the Côte d'Or, this was more like the IOWA tests in elementary school (do they still have those?) -- a test of longer term potential. But just like those tests, I think some of these were smarter than others...

Ok, so with that said, there are a ton of wines, so let's start with Chablis (all 100% Chardonnay) from Simonnet-Febvre, which is owned by Latour but run in a very hands-off manner, which makes sense given that they've been making wine quite successfully on their own since 1840.

Wine 1: 2009 Simonnet-Febvre Chablis
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: About $16.00
Typical Chablis is: Dry, super-acidic, with a little citrus and green apple fruit and a steel-like flavor.

Color: Almost a white or platinum color, this wine was pale, just as it should be coming from a cool climate like Chablis. The lighter color also tipped me off that there was no oak aging on this wine, for which I was thankful (a debate rages in Chablis about the use of oak -- traditional producers are completely against it because it takes away from the mineral-acid quality of the wine. I'm against it too...drink something else if you don't like the damn fine acidity!).

Smell: To my nose, this was a perfect Chablis. No fruit -- just a whiff of chalk, wet rocks near a waterfall, and a little bit of saltiness (like salt water smell. All of this makes sense since the soil type is chalky and you can smell the terroir in the wine). For a Chablis at this price, this wine was hitting on all cylinders in terms of what I want and expect.

Taste: Just like it smelled but with some bonuses. The wine was mouth-watering -- like sucking on a lemon -- from all the acidity. It was metallic (think of licking a butter knife) and minerally but so clean and pure in flavor. This all may sound very horrible and harsh, but layered on top of all the textures were jasmine and gardenia aromas that softened up the wine and made it so damn delicious.

Drink or Down the Sink?: Probably going to be my house wine all summer, so DRINK! I will say that this wine is not for your porch but for your cheese plate. What an amazing food wine -- especially for buttery scallops or white fish, and creamy cheeses. For the price, this is a huge thumbs up for those of us who love acidic, minerally wines.


Wine 2: 2009 Chablis Premier Cru "Vaillons"
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: About $27
Typical Premier Cru Chablis is: Heavier than standard Chablis -- with more fruit flavor and mineral components. They can age for longer and be a little more complex in flavors.

Color: This wine was a little darker than the basic Chablis. It makes sense -- for 10 to 12 months the wine sits on the dead yeast cells that converted the sugars into alcohol (during fermentation). As they decompose, they lend a little color to the wine (and some nutty flavors too! I know it sounds disgusting but this is a good thing, so go with it.).

Smell: This was like the basic Chablis, but on steroids. Lemon, lime, and jasmine flowers jumped out of the glass. The wine was like a lightly scented bouquet of white flowers. And there was a little hint of saltiness or oysters right out of the net hanging around too (that's, again, from the chalky soil type). Great contrast and combo of all this stuff. I had high hopes for the taste.

Taste: Tart, green apples, a little unripe pear flavor, and a jasmine smell/flavor were so delicious against the contrast of super-high acid, a strong mineral/wet rock thing, and a salt-water like taste (although the wine wasn't salty so you have to kind of stretch your imagination).

Drink or Down the Sink?: This wine is absolutely beautiful. Vaillons has a soil profile similar to many of the highest tier Grand Cru vineyards of Chablis, and it makes a wine about as unreal. Much fuller and softer than the basic Chablis, this wine would probably be more suitable for sipping than the first one, but its acidity and mineral profile still make it ideal for food. This was my favorite of the three Chablis I had. Awesome and totally typical of what Chablis should taste like, in my opinion.

Wine 3: 2008 Chablis Grand Cru, Les Clos
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: About $60 (it's a Grand Cru and they're in limited quantity, hence the price!)
Typical Chablis Les Clos Grand Cru is: The fattest and most luscious of all the Grand Cru Vineyards, this one is usually rich with fruit but still has a good mineral character.

Color: This wine was more similar in color to the basic Chablis than the Vaillons -- very pale and almost platinum -- which is kind of deceiving given that the wine sat on the dead yeast cells (called sur lie, by the way) AND 50% of it was fermented in oak barrels for over a year. Those processes tend to darken up a wine, as would an extra year of age, which this one has over the Premier Cru. But not here. Sight is the most deceiving of the senses in wine, so I've discovered!

Smell: This wine had less of the typical traits I associate with Chablis -- the mineral, salty, chalky, and citrus notes. It smelled like an Asian pear (which I call a papple because I think it's a cross between a pear and an apple...or at least that's what it looks and tastes like!) and there was a good dose of oak on the nose too, which I think overshadowed the more delicate stuff that I love so much. Wines from Les Clos are supposed to be the most aromatic and heavy of all the Chablis Grand Cru, which I think would be great if not for the use of wood here. I really am a hater on oak for Chablis -- it rained on my smell parade here and disguised all the stuff I like.

Taste: Although I still preferred the Vaillons (I guess I'm a cheaper date), I didn't dislike the wine. It certainly had the caramel, toasty, oaky, vanilla-y flavor that you'd expect from being popped in an oak barrel, but there was still an acid and mineral component to the taste that balanced things out. The fruit was hard to find here, but there were some apple and pear notes.

Drink or Down the Sink?: This is a great wine, and certainly not something to pour down the sink, but I have to admit that I was really disappointed. The thing that I treasure in Chablis is the citrus fruit and the tense acidity of the wine. It's kind of like a thrill ride for your mouth. Using oak on grapes that I'm sure would have made an awesome wine without it really marred the flavors. The oak was an unwelcome distraction from the real star of the show -- the fruit. I say leave the oak to the wines we're about to talk about from the Côte de Beaune -- that's where wood is a good friend to fruit!
_______________________________________________________________________

As a quick aside, all the wines that follow are from the excellent 2009 vintage. Mother Nature was kind to Burgundy so these wines all started off with the best advantages in life. They will get better with age, so I'll reiterate that I tried to review them with the elementary school teacher hat on and let you know who made the gifted and talented program.

White Wines From the Côte de Beaune
So I tried 7 whites from the Côte de Beaune and I don't want to go into detail on every single one. I'll review four in quick format and then elaborate on the three stunners.

Quickie Review #1: 2009 Louis Latour, Beaune Blanc (100% Chardonnay, Around $28) Even with a year in a barrel and a secondary, malolactic fermentation to make the wine creamy, it was light straw in color. I loved the floral nose -- gardenia, jasmine, begonia -- nice spring floral bouquet and a good hit of oaky vanilla that made the wine feminine and soft. Although the wine had some mineral notes, which I'd expect from a Burgundy and a touch of nice apricot fruit, it's finished was like a bad break-up -- they just never called again and you've got no choice but to forget them. White Burgundy tends to hang out a little longer in your mouth and keep on giving more yumminess, not so here. Needless to say, not as elegant as I'd hoped. For the aroma and acid it's still a good wine...just not the best when you compare it to the others.

Quickie Review #2: 2009 Louis Latour, Meursault Premier Cru "Chateau de Blagny" (100% Chardonnay, Around $60) Meursault is the closest style to the fat, oaky California Chardonnay that are typical of Sonoma and Napa. It's still a far cry from all but a few producers (Chateau Montelena being the first that comes to mind, hence why they won the Judgment of Paris in 1976). With riper fruit than the wine above and full oak aging, the wine is a lot darker in color -- almost a yellow. The smell was pretty fab -- there was a salt, mineral, and smoky combo (there's that terroir again) that offset the baked caramel apple notes (from fruit and oak) wafting out of the glass. It tasted like it smelled -- a caramel apple with some sea salt on it! There was great acid, and it stuck around in my mouth for a long time, making it water for ages. A great wine -- it was soft and creamy but still acidic. Definitely would have been even better with food.

Quickie Review #3: 2009 Louis Latour Puligny-Montrachet Premier Cru "Les Truffieres" (100% Chardonnay, About $65) This vineyard was apparently once a truffle bed, hence the name Les Truffieres...talk about soaking in a specific kind of terroir! At this young age, the wine is super light in color, and I thought it was kind of stinky -- salt water is ok, the kind of fishy/old truffle-y smell I detected, a little less good. There was some jasmine flower in the smell too, but I was tentative in popping this in mouth, to be frank. I'm all for terroir stink, but this was a little much. Thankfully, it tasted way better than it smelled. The wine was super delicate -- just a light green apple flavor with some jasmine, and solid, mouth-watering acid. I have a strong suspicion that this wine needs about 5 more years in the bottle before its ready to drink. It was cracked open before it's time -- those stinky scents are going to mellow into something more elegant with time and those lighter flavors will get bolder and more pronounced. I'd like to try this again in a few years, when I bet it will be an outstanding example of how terroir influences flavor.

Quickie Review #4: 2009 Louis Latour Puligny-Montrachet "Sous le Puits" (100% Chardonnay, About $60) A very lovely wine -- light in color and, again, like pretty white flowers -- maybe more like spring bulb flowers (freesia and hyacinth if you know what those are). There was a very light oak note to it -- nothing too bold. Amazing acidity balanced out the rich caramel apple and vanilla oak flavors. Another wine I think could stand about 5 years in the bottle to develop from a light, delicate wine to something with more serious flavors. Amazing what a little aging can do -- it will add weight and more intense, interesting aromas and flavors.

And now my top three whites:

Wine #5: Louis Latour, Chassagne-Montrachet Premier Cru, "les Caillerets"
Where It's From: The town of Chassagne-Montrachet in the Côte de Beaune
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: Around $60
A Typical Premier Cru from the les Caillerets vineyard in Chassagne-Montrachet is: Floral, creamy, spicy, and nutty with a good balance of oak and fruit, and always a hit of acid to keep the wine lively.

Color: No big surprises: it's a young wine and it was a light golden color.

Smell: Like some of the other wines, this had the green apple and caramel smells but there was a pronounced waterfall-running-on-rocks smell on this one and then some very subtle citrus and almost metallic smells that got my interest.

Taste: Just a little bit of green apple and then a full array of mineral, chalk, and wet rock-like flavors. But this wasn't like Chablis, which is sharp, this had a fuller, softer feel to it -- it was creamy, with a really great balance of oak. Perfect example of terroir from this vineyard in Chassagne-Montrachet, which churns out wines that are minerally yet fruity and full.

Drink or Down the Sink?: Like the others, it could stand some time to develop in the bottle, but this wine is insanely good, even now. It was so well balanced between acid and fruit, minerals and creaminess that I just couldn't get enough. I would love to have this with a meal. What a wine. I'm a huge fan of Chassagne-Montrachet (even the $25 bottle of the stuff is great, BTW) and this is just about as typical and delicious as they come!


Wine #6: Louis Latour Bâtard-Montrachet Grand Cru
Where It's From: Between the villages of Puligny-Montrachet and Chassagne-Montrachet in the Côte de Beaune
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: $200+
Typical Batard Montrachet is: Full-bodied, rich, with a nut and honey character. Very creamy and toasty.

Color: A pale yellow color -- a little richer than the previous wines, but still light.

Smell: The white flowers and apple were here, but with riper fruits like peach and pear thrown in. What made this a standout was the nutty, honeyed notes that were kind of in the background of the wine. It was totally intoxicating. I could smell this all day long. The salty mineral earth was prevalent and delicious, and once again, spot on for what I would expect a white Burgundy to smell like. These are never fruit bombs, but always a delicate balance of rocks and fruit (again, terroir is KING!).

Taste: Similar to how it smelled, but even better. Adding to the apples and honey, was a vanilla bean spiciness. There was a slight, really pleasant bite of acid but the wine was still silky and creamy. Totally complex and beautiful.

Drink or Down the Sink?: This is such an expensive wine and is worth every penny. AMAZING. The wine is subtle but bold, spicy yet gentle all at the same time. This is a serious show stopper -- not because it's bursting with flavor, but because it's just so representative of where its from and is intense without being obtuse and obvious with flavors. Subtlety is important in a white, and this wine has mastered it!

Wine #7: Louis Latour Corton-Charlemagne, Grand Cru
Where It's From: The town of Aloxe-Corton in the Côte de Beaune
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: About $95
Typical Corton-Charlemagne is: Buttery, fruity, and honeyed with vanilla notes and a good hit of acid and minerals.

Color: A little darker straw color than the previous wines, but still light. These are all so young!

Smell: Totally different from the previous wines, this was much more herbal. There was a tarragon or maybe even green pepper note to the wine that was really pleasant and not overwhelming. Baked bread or a croissant came to mind and the oak was kickin' big time -- vanilla and caramel stood up and said hello to my nose! A lot to smell and really interesting.

Taste: You could really taste the earth here -- minerals with fresh cut green herbs made this so fresh, but then the spicy oak character gave the wine a real richness that was full and warm in my mouth. There was great acid, but the wine was creamy and mouth-coating. It stayed around for ages -- LONG finish.

Drink or Down the Sink?: This is an unreal wine. So different from the Batard Montrachet in that it was richer and fuller and more herbal, and so great. Latour's home base is in the town of Aloxe-Corton and they own a big portion of this vineyard. I think is probably the greatest of their wines and definitely one of the best white Burgundies out there. Latour is such a master of whites and this wine is proof positive of that. Worth it.

____________________________________________________________

The Reds... As I said before, I had to judge potential in these wines. But I've had Latour's reds before and as I said previously, all but the top tier usually don't work for me.

I started with both the 2009 Pommard and the Beaune Premier Cru "les Vignes Franches," both from the Côte de Beaune. They had beautiful cherry, raspberry, and strawberry smells and a huge aroma of spicy and almost a sandalwood/Indian spice quality but the taste left so much to be desired in both. They lack a sense of place -- the terroir -- that I love in a red Burgundy. Some earthiness, some idea that the grapes grew in the land is the secret sauce of red Burgundy and what makes it so amazing and different from Pinot grown elsewhere.

I don't know if Latour cleans up these wines for the American palate (we don't tend to like dirty wines here, let's face it) or if this is just their style, but for my $60 I want a Burgundy that has the aromas these had but with a silky, yet earthy character that is totally distinctive. I've had Pinot from Sonoma that I think is more Burgundian in style than these!

So that's for those wines...but, oh the top tier. The two Grand Cru wines that I tried were unbelievable examples of what Burgundy has to offer. They were on different ends of the spectrum and each pinnacles of Pinot. I can't imagine what they'll be with 10 years of cellaring...something great for sure.

Wine 1: 2009 Louis Latour Chambertin Cuvee Hertiers Latour, Grand Cru
Where It's From: The town of Gevry-Chambertin in the Côte de Nuits
The Grape: 100% Pinot Noir
Price: About $190
Typical Chambertin is: Full, rich, and earthy with a balance of spice and fruit and a texture like liquid velvet.

Color: This is what I think Pinot Noir should look like. A light, pale ruby color with just a little bit of brick/brown-red. Pinot is not, in my opinion, meant to be a dark, deep color. That's just not the grape's style and soaking it in a cold water vat to make it look dark (called a cold soak or aqueous soak) is just for the beauty pageant...something I think Pinot can win without the fancy color.

Smell: Ah, finally. This is the wine that I was expecting out of a red Burgundy tasting. Forget the glycerin, clean flavors of the wines I mentioned above -- THIS is Burgundy in my opinion. A little raspberry and maraschino cherry but then this very pronounced smell of soil and minerals. I've never been to the Chambertin vineyard, but I bet it smells exactly like this wine. I felt like I was smelling the limestone in this glass and the chalk topsoil. For me, this is what Burgundy is all about -- terroir. I was so excited to taste this.

Taste: "What a pretty wine," exclaimed my brilliant friend and fellow wine dork, MO'C, who works with Empire. SPOT ON!!! With just a little over a year in bottle (and Chambertin can age for decades so this is an infant!), this wine already had all the components it's going to need to evolve into a wine paradise in about 10 years. The raspberry and earth were strong, but there was this insane sweet spice like chai tea, and a vanilla bean component that made this wine delicious. The acid was there, but not overwhelming and the wine stuck around in my mouth for a few minutes.

Drink or Down the Sink?: Not a chance this is going down the sink. That said, if I had a bottle, I'd be storing it for a long time. It's wonderful now, but it is going to be so much better in years to come, that I'd delay for the joy of drinking it in the future. It's like the difference between eating a pear that's almost ripe and one that is awesome and is so dripping with juice that you need to eat it over the sink. I'd go for the latter any day, even if it meant waiting!

Wine #2: Louis Latour Chateau Corton Grancey Grand Cru
Where It's From: The town of Aloxe-Corton in the Côte de Beaune
The Grape: 100% Pinot Noir
Price: About $100
Typical Corton Grand Cru is: Red and black fruit abound but when this wine is bottled, it's usually known to be a little tannic and rustic tasting. With age it develops softer flavors and textures.

Color: A much deeper color than the Chambertin above, this was the darkest wine of the day, but still what I would consider the 'right' color for Pinot Noir. It was ruby red, but still transparent in the glass. Very pretty.

Smell: Much lighter in aroma than the Chambertin, this wine was delicate and so lovely. It was like roses and light cinnamon spice with a little bit of earth thrown in. Another one I think has the perfect components to be a kick-ass wine with some time in the bottle.

Taste: This surprised me! What it lacked in aroma, it made up for on the palate. According to the Latour web site, this wine is only made in years when the grapes hit perfect ripeness. Clearly, 2009 was that year. This had a cooked berry or warm, baked berry cobbler taste that was savory and delicious. There was a sweet nutmeg flavor too. It was a mouthfull, but the acidity was still great to balance out the fruit. It would be awesome with food.

Drink or Down the Sink?: I'm going to say the same here that I said for the Chambertin, although I think this wine may be ready to drink a little sooner than the other. Still, with a few years to hang out, mellow, and meld together, in about 8 years this wine will be a complete knockout -- especially if you like more ripe fruit flavors and less earth in your Pinot.


_____________________________________________________________________

So that's the Latour/Burgundy round up. I hope at least some of it gives you an idea of how terroir expresses itself in the wines and how differently the wines of Burgundy can taste, even if they are from vineyards that are within miles of one another!

The real lesson: keep buying and trying...within the two main grapes, variety is the name of the game here! Readmore »»