8/23/2009 - DocSkinner wrote:

nicely crisp, biscuit dominated, but not in a bad way. very nice yeast character. Hints of marzipan, lemon, pineapple. Overall tasted very young. Had with cheese plate appetizers, but begged to be served with a full meal (but not quite the marinated tritip BBQ that was coming). A beautiful with food bubbly.

6/30/2008 - DocSkinner wrote:

needs another year or two, but wonderful now.

3/14/2008 - DocSkinner wrote:

Need to change your vintage - According to Ridge, this wine was only made 1 year - 2003!

3/6/2008 - DocSkinner wrote:

Not generally a white fan, especially in this range. this was a really nice refreshing drinking wine, enjoyed by all at the gathering. Nice acid fruit balance, not overwhelming, but not too subtle. had with a mizithra and pasta dish, and matched beautifully.

3/6/2008 - DocSkinner wrote:

really nice for a table red, nice balance of fruit &mineral, tannins and acids. Nothing striking stood out, but hat was both on the good and bad side. Avery enjoyable red, especially for this price range.

3/1/2008 - DocSkinner wrote:

Dry, tannic, acidic, lacks depth, character. Lacks fruit, even for a french wine. Would make a great beef bourguignon, but find a nicer wine (particular for the price) to enjoy with the meal! Nice cooking wine, but not for teh price

3/1/2008 - DocSkinner wrote:

Very dry - lacks depth, character, and finish. an okay 'with food' (like braised lamb shanks/short ribs) or something different to have out for a general party, or a great dry red cooking wine.

3/1/2008 - DocSkinner wrote:

an okay, fruity California Petite. Lacks character and depth. A step up from 2buck, but not by much, and only has a slightly different flavor profile and doesn't show off the petite sirah capabilities.

3/1/2008 - DocSkinner wrote:

decent Bordeaux, low fruit even for a French wine.

2/22/2008 - DocSkinner wrote:

good, if not spectacular. Seemed a little lost between styles, and lacked complexity, but was nice drinking.

12/24/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

From a magnum.
Very nice balanced pinot. Very easy drinking alone or with food, good flavor and nose without any one factor overpowering. Nice wildberry and blossom nose with a hint of woody herb, Added plum, black cherry and a slight strawberry on the palate. Carried nicely across entire palate, with a nice, if a little short, finish. acids and tannins balanced, but on the low side. that with just a hint of brown on the edge. If magnums do age a little longer, would seem the 750 are probably prime right now, while teh magnum might have another year or so let in the cellar.

12/24/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Have tried a few rose champagnes, and haven't like them much - Thiswas an exception - a very nice wine, drinkable alone, but went excellent with food.

12/20/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Absolutely scrumptious pinot. From the other tasting notes, it seems that the extra year or so in the cellar added just a notch up.

Wonderful blueberry/raspberry nose with a hint of strawberry and earth. Fruit was wonderful and full pinot expanding to fill the mouth instead of exploding in a fruit bomb as in so many California pinots. Well balance acids and smooth but light tannins that carried the fruit across the whole palate, with a nice long finished touched witha little wood, mineral, and anise and a hint of red pepper.

acids, fruits and tannins alll still clearly present and well balanced, although the tannin level does suggest honoring the by 2009 window, if you can wait that long - fabulous right now!

a definite "wish I woulda..."

12/16/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Consistent over two separate bottles. tasted first ~2 months ago, and wanted to wait and try it again. Regretfully this one appears consistent.

overly fruit forward, typical of that California "bomb me with fruit up front" style that has become so popular, although more appropriate for inexpensive mass produced wines. But then why should Gallo and Bruno get all that market.

Dark sour cherry bomb at the front that then leaves a mostly flat (blank? unremarkable?) mid palate of cherry turning more sour than cherry with a hint of red pepper, finishes with a sour peppery cherry note. High acidity, little in way of tannins, but those present very chewy.

Reminds me of a Pinot version of 2 buck chuck. Okay if that is what you were expecting, but this was a definite do not buy again.

12/5/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Just amazing as usual, 5 years old and still tasting very young and well balanced, an amazing finish.

11/21/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

amazing. was worried it might be a little to old, but it is perfect right now. wish I had more bottles left

8/14/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Tasted at vineyard. Wasn't impressed when first released, but it had improved considerably with the extra bottle time. Nice and full bodied, carried well across teh entire palate, nice long finish. Probably could have used a little decanting, but still very nice for the price point.

7/27/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Past prime, and a little vinegary. Such is old wine!

6/29/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Very nice - needs soem time. Good dark fruits, hints of red fruit, and nice black & white pepper character. Nose a bit understated for what the wine was - came off very hot and peppery, with out a lot of fruit.

6/19/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Fantastic Zin - excellent fruit balanced acrossed the palate, acids and tannins incredibly well balanced, luscious mouth feel,excellent spice character carrying in to a nice long finish.

5/8/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

A very nice tempranillo - Still young, but drinking strong with some good breathing time. Drank on an outing, so only got to breath in the bottle for a hour or so. Great fruiut/acididty/tannin balance. Probably should have just waited and gave it more aging time.

4/27/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Very nice as described by others - nice dark berry characters, good mouth feel. A little tight at opening, but opened up wonderfully with an hour or two. Would have went higher but just an undertone of agustura bitters that while not making the wine unpleasant, was just that odd little background hint of something annoying that kept if from being being as pleasurable as the wine could be.

May have been a hint of taint, but not quite teh right character. and only bought 1 bottle on a lark, so no second tasting.

4/12/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Very nice, still pleasant fruit, decent acidity and tannins. Cork came out a little too easily, but no oxidation. A very nice older cab.Nothing exceptional, but just a nice older cab. and for the price, a great bargain...

4/12/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

debating 95... Simply beautiful and luscious in teh mouth. Bright and strong nose of dark berry, hint of leather, cardiman right at the end? Nice dark berrry fading into an exceptionally long strawberry/blackberry finsih. Great mouth feel. Crisp acidity, velvety tanins that perfectly complement and accent the fruit. Not sure about longevity, but is beautiful right now with an hours decanting. Been a member for 2 years now, and this is by far his finest. I like most of his wines (88-91 on my scale), and they are exceptional for their price point, but this is by far a leap above. Think Rosenblum Hendrys or lyons, but with a slightly lighter, less spicy character.

as for the other comment - everything is not cabernet. Everything should not be Cabernet (a bit boring that way, don't you think?). If I want a cab, I will have one. On pure quality and enjoyment of drinking, I have never found a cab at this price I liked this much. If you can get past that other grapes have amazing qualities, and can find a friend that has this - beg, borrow, or steal! Wish I would have made teh tasting - I definitely would have picked up more! now that I have written this after teh last sip, the finish is just now fading away completely. Okay - yes, I am a 'finsih' guy. But they gotta have a mid palate too!

3/16/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

cork was starting to breakdown, but wine was still very nice. Nice old cab, nothing spectacular, but great price for the age/quality combination.

3/13/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Okay wine - nothing spectacular - but when you pay this amount....

kinda sad that "californias first Petite" can only be referenced to who made it, not quality.

3/13/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Very nice needs a little more bottle time, but probably not too much!

3/13/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Back to luscious wine of 2002. Let the last bottle set a year.

2/20/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Read some of the reviews and wondered if it was the same wine. I even found myself agree with Suckling! (for the most part) Maybe some of these otheres were poor storage pre-sale? or hot weather shipped at some point? Anyway:

Decanted for about 1-2 hours. I would say more medium bodied, with a nice full mouth feel, instead of a full bodied. Nice medium red, just a hint of brown at the edges. Plum and Berry aromas were there, pleasantly aged berry and chocolate flavors, well balanced across my palate, with a nice, pleasing longish finish. My wife tends to favor the younger style, fruit forward wines, and she still found this a very nice bottle for her palate. Like others, for what I paid, wish I would have bought more! Wonderful drinking compared to other currently available $30 bottles.

2/8/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Am hoping this was a flawed bottle. Tasted wonderful at the release, but now has an overwhelming red pepper to the nose and a a distinct and predominant cayenne pepper taste. What was behind these was nice, but it was hard to get past the pepper. although 1 of teh tatseters found it appealing and picked it #2 out of 5. that was its only non-5th place vote however.

1/17/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Can only hope that I am just catching it in its dormant/shutdown phase. Decanted for over an hour, but still just a decent if innocous wine, missing a midpalate.

1/16/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

good enough for the price - not much else to really to say...

1/16/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Nice - but still maybe closed down? Opened up a little after 3-4 hours of decanting, but still dominated by acids and tannins. give teh other bottle a few years.

1/7/2007 - DocSkinner wrote:

Nice enough, if nondescript. Pleasant, lighter body, nice fruit a little fruit forward but not overly, but little spice. Similar to what I would expect from a syrah/pinot blend. Nothing off, but just not a lot there, especially for a syrah.

12/22/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

Very nice - still plenty of tannins and acids, neded a few hours to open up, definitely can use more years in teh cellar.

12/12/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

amazing wine. Still very young and tight, but very drinkable now, especially with the right food, but is only going to get better. Nice dark fruit, just starting to open, bright and strong but incredibly balanced acidity and tannins. let the rest set for another 2 years.

11/15/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

Beautiful Syrah - incredible lush mouth feel, nice berry without being over fruity. Should definitely have bought more.

11/14/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

Tasted at release party. Tasted both the standard livermore valley and the home ranch Cabernets. Standard was a nice Cabernet, but like affordable cabs, it disappears to my mid palate. The Home Ranch on teh other hand was nice and expressive across the palate, with nice acidity and tannins. Drinkable now, especially witha little decanting, and should age for a reasonable time quite well.

11/14/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

Tasted at the release. This is a huge merlot - Has great fruit and acidity balance, balanced across the palate, butl loaded with tannins, nice tannins, but tons of them! definitely needs a year or two at least in teh bottle or some lengthy decanting.

10/26/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

Great California pinot, especially as it isn't that overly light, overly fruit forward california pinot. Nice graphite character balanced with very pleasing moderate fruit, acidicity and tannins.

10/26/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

still wonderful, still sumptious, evocative, caresses the palate with sensual tension (terms Munch might approve of?)

10/26/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

what to say - lovely. nicely sweet character, not too sweet, nice acidity and balance, went perfectly with the incredibly moist and rich carrot cake my wife had found for my birthday. Complemented well, while helping cut teh some of teh richness of teh cake.

10/26/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

a little more bottle aging did this wine wonders. Had the first bottle after the birth of my daughter - Josephine - how often do you get a cuvee named for your first born? Just had teh second bottle now 20 months later. still nicely crisp, but the fruit was now slightly more evident and elegant, still subtle, but a much nicer fruit character.

Makes me wonder yet again abiout teh whole bottle aging of champagnes issue. if I ever get teh funds, may have to get a larger quantity and experiment.

10/26/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

very nice - I can seee the overly raisiny comment many say about this, but a little breathing time in the glass quickly brought this aspect back down to a pleasant level, more a slight molasses and dark caramel. Do not use teh silly little apertif glasses with this one! A nice small real port gall, or just a smaller reddish style glass will let it breath and not concentrate the raisin character. A very nice change up from a Harvey's, with a much deeper and more complex character. But I do prefer the sweeter sherries over the dry sherries, and like vinsanto as well, so it may just be my tastes. .

10/9/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

just a fabulous chardonnay for my palate - a little minerally, nicely balanced fruit and acidity, just a nice touch of oak, and hint of butteriness. great mouthfeel. Very nice finish. This is the limited unfiltered version - and far tastier than the regular release that is filtered.

9/16/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

Luscious. wondeful fruit, balanced across the palate, luscious mouth feel. Nice tannin level - not sure how long to guess on remaining bottles. (post hoc notes)

7/16/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

very nice pinot, but more in the Oregon veinnice fruit, but with a good distinct mineral character. a little short on th finish, or would have rated higher

7/16/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

Very nice, well balanced cab.

7/16/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

exceptional - and right at peak - not sure it has any time left. fruit is still exceptional, with just a hint of tartness that used to be there. tannins are tamed, and hasn't started to slip yet.

5/9/2006 - DocSkinner wrote:

A very nice wine at this price point. Got teh raspberry nose, a little earth, nicely balanced for my palate, a little hot at first, but after sitting for abit seemed a little 'cooler'. Great real food wine - had with a nice dry rubbed roast done on the grill.