4/7/2024 - Robert R. wrote:

Drank with some friends at home with a steak dinner (and a CA cab that was mediocre.) This was a very good bottle. No detailed notes given the revelry. But, decanted an hour. Lots of tannin still present. Needs air and food. Flavor profile was on point. No rush. Try again in a few years. Yummy.

3/23/2024 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Very good. Short decant in part because I mangled the cork. Red berries, strawberry, spice, moderate acid and tannin. A little stemminess, which was fine. Tasty and fleshed out from front end to back end. We drank it all in one sitting. A nice, middle of the road-styled pinot and in a good spot right now.

3/10/2024 - Robert R. wrote:

Flawed. Brett. Down the drain.

3/2/2024 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

3 hour decant. Had alongside some other wines at dinner so not too focused on it. But pretty good. Brick/garnet color. Nose a bit reticent relative to what hit the palate. Sour cherry, leather, plenty of acidity, tannins still grippy. Nice food wine. Think it can go awhile longer so no rush for next bottle. Enjoyed it, particularly after recent BdM fails.

3/2/2024 - Robert R. wrote:

Decanted about 3 hours. Busy dinner so did not take detailed notes. About what I’d expect from a relatively young Larkmead. Nice nose. Blue fruits, crème de cassis, tannins integrating nicely. Full from front to back end of palate. It was a bit too sweet for my liking. I say give it some years to even out and develop additional flavors.

2/10/2024 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

A very fine wine. Decanted an hour (should have been more patient). Great nose. Full, smooth, well integrated, complex flavor profile. About as good as it gets in my experience from CA Bordeaux styled wines. Just a real pleasure. High marks.

2/8/2024 - Robert R. wrote:

Decanted for an hour or so. Consumed over two nights. Technically fine but boring. Mostly plum/prune, earth and caramel on the back end. Tannin still there and right amount of acid. Needs food. I see no reason to hold. Altogether a ho-hum experience.

1/27/2024 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped, let sit a few hours, consumed over two nights. Improved with time/air. Nice nose, better palate. Red berries, spices, earth. Tannin still prevalent. Good finish. Agree with a few other comments that the mid palate was relatively weak. All in all, a very good Rhys outing that was a pleasure to drink. Try again in a few years.

1/15/2024 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Consumed over two days. Pretty good stuff. Nose not as expressive as I would have expected. On the palate plummy fruits, florals, and some iodine and meat. Fairly well integrated but a bit tannic. Fruity and new world but not a jammy bomb. Solid effort.

1/13/2024 - Robert R. wrote:

I’m struggling with BdM. Bottle variation seems relatively high. Two recently corked wines from other producers now this. Good news: Not corked. Bad news: Little to no fruit, and the front and mid ranges were muted. Palate dominated by tannin on the back end. Cherries? Barely. Tobacco? Maybe a little. Nose? Ho hum at best. Wood? Yep. Was not interesting nor pleasurable.

1/13/2024 - Robert R. wrote:

Corked

1/7/2024 - Robert R. wrote:

Corked

12/1/2023 - Robert R. wrote:

Consumed over two evenings. Typically my favorite Carlisle zin, but not this time. Looking at some notes my experience aligns with QUILLER. Thought it was flat, a little bitter/overripe on the back end, and just not very interesting. So, disappointed but will take another swing.

12/25/2022 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Short decant before Xmas dinner featuring ribeye roast. My first 2005. Very good. A big/ger wine, maybe just a touch hot, but a lot going on (in a good way) and a pleasure to drink. No rush, however. Happily try again in a few years.

12/31/2022 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

A very nice Montafi, which generally is my favorite zin from Carlisle. Ready to drink. Good on the nose and tasty in the mouth. Full of flavor, but not over the top. Well balanced. Good pairing with pork ribs. No more details, too busy yelling at the UM/TCU game (ugh).

12/11/2022 - Robert R. wrote:

It was OK but I was disappointed by the ho-hum nose and the distinct lack of fruit on the palate. Bottle was in good shape and nothing off. Looked at some other notes before writing this. Lots of praise. Maybe just me? Saw a note from 3/29/2021 from VLGJEFF. I'm in that camp: not flabby, not necessarily tired, but lacking. (To give Rhys some praise, had an Alesia Halcon Syrah a few weeks ago that was yummy.)

1/1/2021 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

PnP and paired w/ homemade pork ribs. Most enjoyable red wine we drank over the holiday season (to include a favorite: '96 Ridge Monte Bello). All the necessary varietal parts are there and are well integrated, with plenty of fruit. Delicious. Do not know how much more evolution to expect, but is singing now.

11/1/2020 - Robert R. wrote:

Corked. Darn it.

5/26/2020 - Robert R. wrote:

Really nice wine that can drink well now but don’t be in a rush. Popped...and poured not too long thereafter. Improved throughout a red meat dinner (should have given it a decant.) Pleasant nose of darker fruits. Blue/black fruits on the palate, touch of oak, cassis, a hair sweet, plenty of tannic zip, full from front end to back end. Think it needs more time to develop secondary or tertiary flavors. Looking forward to taking another swing in a handful of years.

5/16/2020 - Robert R. wrote:

PnP. Down the hatch with veal chops. Good bottle. Blue fruits, some foresty notes, lean and bright. Definitely cool climate syrah. Not too sophisticated but on point and ready to drink.

4/26/2020 - Robert R. wrote:

Boring and disappointing. Half the bottle went down the drain. Still a lot of backbone, but fruit was faded, dull and non descript. Secondary flavors? Not so much. Properly cellared since purchased on release. Not sure this tasted like Sangiovese. Will give next Bottles a bit more time. Maybe. Sorry for the segue, but not nearly as good as the 2001 Mondavi Reserve Cab we drank last weekend.

7/15/2016 - Robert R. wrote:

Disappointing. Popped and poured, and drank over two days. Fruit largely missing both on the nose and on the palate. Plenty of acid/grip and some earthy notes, but that's about it. Not sure if I'm off, the bottle was off, or if the product simply was so-so at best.

4/17/2016 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Good, not great. Was not able to focus on this wine intently, but: blue fruit dominant with red fruit on the nose and palate, some spice, good backbone, moderate acidity, fair finish. Seemed a bit bigger and darker than I anticipated. Probably more room to mature. Popped and poured and a fine complement to a chicken dinner.

4/1/2016 - Robert R. wrote:

P&P and paired with steak. Dark color, with pronounced black fruits on the nose. Red and black fruits on the palate, with cedar/oak and a touch of bell pepper. Tannins fairly well integrated, and a reasonable amount of acid. Smooth, easy drinker. Seems well-made, but little complexity and not a lot of varietal distinctiveness. So-so for the $, not exciting, and does not appear to have changed much since previous bottle 1-2 years ago.

1/25/2016 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped and poured. Really nice, medium-bodied, food friendly pinot. On the nose, cherries, rhubarb, and some earthy notes. Same on the palate, with plenty of acidity and a bit of stemminess. Well integrated. Very drinkable at present; will revisit in another year or so.

12/20/2015 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Decanted 2-3 hours. Immediate reaction: both my wife and I thought it tasted like a really nice, new world cab. Nice nose of dark and red fruits, dark and red fruits on the palate, some earth/leather, and a hint of butterscotch on the finish. Well-structured and well-rounded, with tannins resolving nicely. Plenty of life ahead. Not sure about marks for typicity, but a tasty wine.

7/19/2015 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Did not pay as much attention to this wine as I would have liked, but....Decanted about an hour and consumed with a fatty ribeye. A rich nose with a lot of chocolate and dark fruits. Consistent from start to finish (front to back), with a long finish: well integrated, standard dark fruits/leather/and some minerals, not overly new world but not exactly old world, smooth. A very good, well-crafted wine, (but not an exceptional one) with room to age/improve. Will be happy to drink again, perhaps in 3-5 years.

3/16/2015 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

P&P, and paired with salmon. Clear and medium garnet in color. Nice nose of red fruits and spice, and maybe a hint of cola. On the palate bright red fruits (mostly cherry and cranberry), spice, earth and a little green/stemmy. Moderate to high acidity, integrating well, and definitely room to mature. A very pleasant, food friendly wine that should improve with time.

3/15/2015 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped and poured about an hour later. Moderate bricking. Nice aroma of blue and some red fruits, leather, and cedar. Tannins completely resolved; primary fruit still nicely evident; some cedar or cigar box, and a little graphite; smooth, balanced, and well-integrated. Probably has years of more life, but not sure it will improve much. A really good, "moderate styled", aged California cabernet that tasted great with a simple steak.

3/9/2015 - Robert R. wrote:

Popped and poured. Fruity nose with some chocolate. Big, fruity wine on the palate: dark fruits, cassis, a bit of vanilla/oak, and some underlying graphite and maybe olive notes. Tannins are integrated and acid is noticeable. Seems well-made and well-balanced, but not very interesting and too big for most dishes.

3/2/2015 - Robert R. wrote:

Decanted an hour or two, and paired with veal marsala. Dusty garnet color; bit of bricking. Fairly bright and acidic, with cherry, leather, earth, and a bit of raisin/prune. Fruit is muted, particularly mid-palate. Tannins are resolving, but still have a way to go. Food friendly, but wish the fruit was less faded or more pronounced. May gain some complexity with more age, but not very optimistic.

1/19/2015 - Robert R. wrote:

Similar to some other recent posters, this bottle underperformed (and I typically think of Dunn wines as tasty, reliable performers). Notes of dark fruit, cedar, some earth, and a hint of menthol; however, fairly one dimensional, fruit was dull, and there was a funky old wood/wet newspaper thing that, while not overpowering, was a detractor. Tannins were well integrated, acid seemed middle of the road. Old and tired, or an off bottle? Nonetheless, I polished off the bottle with a steak.

11/30/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped and poured. Lemon, apple, straw, and minerals. A few tropical notes later in the evening. Good dollop of acidity, nicely integrated, and good finish. Not too austere and not too rich; nice middle-of-the-road style.

11/26/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Consistent with note from 3/2/14. Might score it a touch higher.

11/16/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Decanted a couple of hours before drinking. Dark fruits and some meat on the nose. Dark berries, meat, bramble and some pepper on the palate. Tannins well integrated. Fairly round, integrated, and slightly soft. Alcohol not readily noticeable. Paired fine with a zippy lamb stew; certainly could have overpowered a more subtle dish. Well-crafted, bigger wine. Pretty tasty.

10/6/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped, poured, and paired with grilled lamb. Nose of red to dark fruits, rocks, and a touch of black olive. Dark purple in color, but not heavy on the palate. Again, red and dark fruits on the palate, some earth and savory elements, and a good amount of acid. Tannins appear well integrated. Would like to see some more secondary flavor development. Moderate finish. Nice wine with room to grow.

9/29/2014 - Robert R. wrote:

Popped, poured and consumed over two evenings. Big wine. Dark fruits and some vanilla on the nose; a touch raisiny. On the palate, dark fruits, a little heat, and some salinity/minerality on the back end. Fairly well integrated and a long finish. Not for the shy; a good cocktail wine. Given the price point, maybe a better buy than some of the other "rock star" syrahs of this style from the Central Coast.

5/4/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped and poured. Red fruits and florals on the the nose. On the palate, mostly red fruits, some spice, some earth, a green note or two, and a little cola on the back end. A good dose of acid. Good structure and nicely balanced. A very pleasant wine.

4/8/2014 - Robert R. wrote:

Popped and poured. Very quaffable, but not special. On the nose some red and dark berries, touch of spice and some florals. Found the palate pedestrian-plus: cranberry and a bit of candy, spice and earth. Acidity is fine and food friendly. Thought the mid-to back end was a little weak.

3/30/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped, poured, and paired with pork with a pluot sauce. Light garnet in color. Bottle was a little cold when opened, so nose was muted, but some red berry and spice. On the palate cherry, raspberry, touch of rhubarb, maybe a bit of strawberry, and spice. Nice acidity. Good length on the finish. Well balanced and lively. Kept getting better as bottle warmed. WesMar is a personal favorite and a great QPR.

3/23/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped and poured. Pleasant, full nose of darker fruits/berries and a little spice. Full and plush on the palate, with mostly dark and some red berries, some bramble, and just a touch of booze. Good acidity, pretty well balanced, and overall another nice wine from Carlisle. (Montafi Ranch usually is my favorite of the zin line-up.) Paired with burgers.

3/9/2014 - Robert R. wrote:

Popped and let sit for an hour or so. Purple/garnet in color. Nose mostly of blue fruits, chocolate, some earth, and alcohol. On the palate, plum and dark cherry, earth, and chocolate. Oak was obvious, and a bit too hot. Medium+ body and moderate acid. Moderate finish. Was hoping it would be a little more interesting; might be in a few more years.

3/2/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped and poured. Consumed over two days. Darker garnet color. Moderate (-) nose of red and black berries, some spice and earth (muted compared to what hit the palate). On the palate: cranberry, darker raspberry, some spice, touch of cola, and some earth. Moderate acid. Fine finish. Medium-bodied, middle-of-the-road style.

2/24/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped and poured. Light gold color and a little cloudy. Reticent nose and muted flavors at first, but much improved after some air and allowing the wine to warm a bit. Minerals, a bit of citrus, some tropical flavors (maybe passion fruit, kiwi, and a hint of banana), and some wood. Nicely balanced and food friendly (based on another poster's notes, paired with salmon and leek pasta....nice.) Medium bodied, good wine. Will give my other bottle a few more years to see where it goes.

2/22/2014 - Robert R. wrote:

Decanted about 2 hours. Paired with tri tip. Very modest nose of blueberry, some meat, a little tar, and alcohol. Big, in-your-face, taste profile mostly of blueberry and some dark fruits, kirsch, vanilla, and alcohol. Moderate tannins. Long finish. Not necessarily out of balance, but so bold it's hard to pin it down. Call me crazy, but I just don't get much of the hype and big scores often surrounding this wine. That said, for a cocktail wine, nice enough, but not a great food wine.

2/7/2014 - Robert R. Likes this wine:

Popped and poured. Consumed over 2 days, first night with a home made pizza featuring eggplant. Mixed nose of mostly red fruits, some cola, and a bit of darker fruit. Color a bit cloudy. Bright red fruits on the palate, some mushroom/earth, and fair amount of acidity. Caramel note on the back end. Nice enough finish with a little bite. Good stuff. Have (almost) always found AF wines solid.

1/19/2014 - Robert R. wrote:

Decanted about 6 hours and consumed with an aged ribeye. Pleasant, run of the mill CA cab nose. Fairly simple, fruit forward profile: dark fruits, vanilla, maybe some cedar and a touch of something green, and certainly oak (no surprise). Medium bodied, medium finish. Tannins very present, yet smooth enough. Room to age. Received as a gift; not a producer I seek out.

1/18/2014 - Robert R. wrote:

Decanted 6+ hours. Muted nose. Not much bricking. Good acidity. Tannins still obvious. Dark fruits, but not so much cherry. Long finish. Oak quite visible (too much for my taste). Fairly simple flavor profile and not fully balanced or integrated. On the whole, not bad, but nothing special and a bit disappointing. Would not deliberately seek it out again, but would be curious if it improves with some more age.