10/4/2021 - The Drunken Cyclist Likes this wine:

Retail $72. 50% Pinot Noir, 50% Chardonnay. There is a lot to discuss here and I will start with “Bacigalupi” which has to be considered one of Sonoma County’s Grand Cru vineyards. Some of the best Russian River wines I have tried (particularly Chardonnays, it seems) have come from this vineyard. I think it is fairly safe to say that I have never heard of a sparkling wine that incorporates honey in the dosage (the sugar and wine that is added after disgorgement in order to achieve the desired tartness/sweetness). I am not sure what it adds here, but this is a particularly rich and layered wine. Plenty of fruit (wild strawberry and fresh cherry), a bit of minerality, and plenty of toasty, yeasty notes (three years on the lees). The palate is quite rich and nearly completely dry (3 g/l of honey added) with lovely fruit notes, a fervent sparkle, and a tartness that lingers for quite some time on the palate. Yowza. I thought I had U.S. sparkling wine pretty much figured out, but whoa, this is Outstanding.

www.thedrunkencyclist.com

12/26/2022 - Highlander wrote:

Had this side by side with the 85 Fonseca, Fonseca was much younger, in color and taste. This was much lighter in color and on the palate. . This Graham's is quite complex. I am a bit concerned about the color turning to a beautiful amber....how long will this last....perhaps 5 years, I am not sure, but it is excellent right now. Sweetness has evolved into many different layers of flavor. A bit of tobbacco, mildly sweet cherry and spices. I only decanted this for an hour or so and that was enough. T

2/26/2022 - JackCMac Likes this wine:

Amazing together with a rich vinous nose and fantastic mouth feel. Tannins are all now very mild with a almost sweet after taste that lingers. A tribute to Fred Brander and the Santa Ynez Valley for producing such a long lasting cabernet.

10/22/2017 - csimm wrote:

Williams Selyem: On the heels of having just enjoyed Williams Selyem's 2015 MacGregor Chardonnay, I was hoping the Pinot equivalent would be equally as interesting. Unfortunately, this was a fail on a number of fronts.

The MacGregor poured the color of a Zinfandel: deep crimson-purple. At first I was excited, as I was hoping this was WS attempting to ratchet up the intensity of their otherwise fairly reserved, tight, and lithe lineup of reds. The nose was full of ripe, dark fruit aromas, like a warm, extra ripe red/purple plum that had fallen off the tree, broken open, and been left in the sun.

The first sip was a derelict shadow punch of plum, prune, dark red raspberry, wet cedar, and breakfast blend tea. What WS would have you believe was opulence and density was really just a sloppy fat kid with food all over the front of his face. Muddled and heavy, with a mid-entry that literally felt like dead weight dragging across the palate. It was clumsy and weighty (and believe you me, I love a big domestic Pinot, but this had no sense of focus or frame). This was wonky to the degree that what flavors it did have were so muddled and punched down that they became indiscernible after a few seconds.

At first it seemed like the initial hit of fruit might actually be a rush of flavorful goodness. Not so. It was flavor for a half-second, then a soaked, wet blanket all the way through the "attack" (like the attack Iraq gave when swarmed by coalition forces in Desert Storm). Squishy and woeful.

I'm not even sure how one should score this...

4/15/2007 - Paul D wrote:

Pale garnet core, wide browning rim. Sweet, intense ripe red cherries on the nose, vanilla, very slight earthy vegetal edge. Very intense, slightly spicy red cherry on the palate too, vanilla. Quite full bodied and actually a little heavy and syrupy, particularly after the first glass. Some savoury complexity on the finish. No more than good.

2/13/2021 - cdebeau wrote:

A bit of a harsh finish

4/23/2009 - davergny wrote:

Way over the hill. Drank one glass and dumped the rest.