2/19/2022 - PIntag wrote:

14.2% abv. Recent auction purchase.
Intense and structured mountain Cabernet. Expansive aromatics, almost perfumed, on the nose. Deep, dark, brambly mountain Cab fruit is forward on the palate and continues for a long finish with some tannin and hard-edged tones. This is drinking well now, but this should be a 20-year wine and should develop in a positive way for the next few years at least. Really enjoyed this with, and after, dinner. Bottle didn't last the evening between my wife and I. Fortunately, I have another bottle.

8/26/2022 - PIntag wrote:

13% abv. Recent auction purchase. Bottled in Rutherford?
As others have noted, this has proper Provence Rose character in aroma and flavor. However, I found this to be rather heavy-bodied and ponderous. Was kind of a chore to drink more than a glass. I was kind of expecting something crisp, light and refreshing - this wasn't that. Drinks more like a serious red than a summer sipper rose; I don't think it succeeds very well in that role either. Just a weird rose experience. Not terrible - even somewhat enjoyable - just not what one expects.

4/23/2023 - ocwineo Does not like this wine:

Mediocre wine with light tannins-wine is fading fast-disappointing

8/16/2023 - PIntag wrote:

Ordered two bottles with dinner at Jaleo in Washington, D.C.
Classic Rioja, starting with a burst of toasty American Oak on the nose and the attack on the palate. Mid-palate is more savory and herbal than fruity, and is deep and pleasing. A great match to the panoply of tapas dishes that we ordered. I really enjoyed these bottles though overt American Oak is not really in my normal wheelhouse - high quality Rioja is an exception. Should improve for many years as the oak integrates, though it is in a good drinking window right now, if you can appreciate the oak treatment.

7/23/2023 - PIntag wrote:

My brother brought this to our blind zinfandel family tasting.
15.8% abv.
Double blind, all Zinfandel tasting, 6 bottles.
Ok now, what do we have here - immediate thick, syrup, jammy fruit. Cloying, sweet, and unstructured, no noticeable acidity. This especially stuck out being after the uber acid-heavy, lean 2014 Sky Vineyard Zin the immediately preceded this bottle. I don't know, I know this is a Mike Smith wine of Maybach and Rivers Marie fame, and I hate to beat on a family-run winery, but this is an abomination, especially at this price point. My only other experience with Scarlett wines was a few years ago with the 2006 Scarlett Rutherford Cabernet Sauvignon, and my note for that is pretty consistent with this, so it seems that is the house style. I guess a lot of people like this style, but it was not a hit in our tasting, as only one person (not a wine geek) seemed to enjoy this. I guess that is the target audience, but what non-wine geeks pay $40+ for a bottle of Zinfandel?
In any case, if scoring, I would not even be near 80 with this.

6/25/2023 - PIntag wrote:

Just what one might expect from a Cab Franc crafted by Larry - that is, a balanced, flavorful, pure expression of the grape. Just a hint of Cab Franc pyrazine, as this is ripe, but not so much so that it ripens out the CF character. Very pleasing and easy to drink, but also enough complexity to contemplate as you sip without food. Also went very well with prime rib roast, bacon wrapped jalapenos, and grilled veggies. Really enjoyed this.

5/13/2023 - PIntag wrote:

Family Blind Pinot Noir Tasting (The homestead): From a family blind tasting, Pinot from anywhere - guess origin, vintage, price.

Wine #2 of 8.

This was my 1st contribution to the tasting. This showed some sulfur stink on the nose after opening, but that blew off quickly. My sister identified this as having some age, and indeed, the nose exhibited some "sweaty sock" and earthy tones. The palate seemed lively though the acidity was only medium, with the earthy-dominant flavors taking the lead. Good complexity and interesting, but what kept this from being exceptional was the weak concentration on the palate. Kind of a weird combination of good depth, but weak concentration of flavor, if that makes sense. Not bad, but just lacking that extra something. Didn't really capture the hearts of anyone at the tasting, myself included. Maybe this is just past prime and on the downhill slide, or perhaps this bottle was slightly off. Tried this the next evening (after vacuum sealing overnight) and it was pretty much the same.

2/28/2020 - Rick 4 Wine Likes this wine:

Big Napa juice bomb with fairly brutish cooperage. Fruit seems extracted but shy of jammy. I don’t get Diamond mountain terroir out of it, but I’m not familiar with the vineyard site. Please don’t take my comments above as effacing; this is a style and for the $$ this is well done. It’s not elegant. It’s a brash in your face Napa cab; but even on that score it’s a bit brutish. I also don’t understand the name. Why “Coho”? I know the coho salmon from Monterrey and the OP, but why Coho in a landlocked mountain fruit winery?

3/5/2023 - PIntag wrote:

Better than the last bottle, so - was drinking pretty darn well! Past prime drinking window for sure, but still enjoyable and interesting. Drinks more like a light red than a typical dry provencal-style rose. If scoring, 88 - 90.

12/17/2022 - JuliannaDHS wrote:

Massive amounts of funk and a touch of frizzante. I felt sorry for the drain.

11/19/2019 - PIntag wrote:

14.8% abv. Recent auction purchase.
Lovely ripe cabernet aromatics. On the palate, rich and ripe but not to the level of having liqueur characteristics. Silky mouthfeel with good focus and good acidity. Dense and concentrated, but does not hang with the most powerful Napa cabernets (a good thing in my book). Did not get any overt oak, so it must be fully integrated at this point. Not the most complex, and a touch of heat, but I'm extremely happy to have picked 6 of these up at auction for the paltry sum of $19/bottle (including BP!). Can't believe that nobody was bidding against me on this lot, as newer vintages of this go for $160/btl!

9/12/2022 - Dominic Roy wrote:

Nose: Blackberry. Cassis. Dried fruits. Vanilla. Medium intensity.

Palate: Strawberry. Blackberry. Medium plus tannins. Medium plus acidity. Medium body. Medium minus finish.

Good! Drink now to 2024.

3/26/2010 - PIntag wrote:

Cork soaked only 1/5th up but broke when removal was attempted. Not sure of the provenance of this bottle - my dad had it the entire time but it was uncellared in a garage for several years. In any case, this was completely gone. Smelled somewhat port-like, but there was no fruit and very little secondary flavor at all. Nothing horribly offensive, but nothing to enjoy either.

5/27/2022 - PIntag wrote:

Another good bottle. Oak influence a little too prominent at this stage for my palate - perhaps more time will integrate it better. Plenty of fruit to help cover it pretty well.

4/22/2022 - North Willis Likes this wine:

This bottle has me thinking the wine needs more cellar time to develop and for its components to marry. More complex that last bottle drank six months ago; showing higher acidic notes with primary fruit aspects receding a bit into the background. Definitely hold - I agree with PINTAG assessment.

2/14/2022 - PIntag wrote:

Opened this to pair with my wife's amazing salmon filet and spinach ravioli. The pairing was Ok, but I was left disappointed for the most part. First, there is some brett influence here that I'm not a fan of - not too much, but noticeable. Second, there is a slightly elevated amount of VA - also not a fan. Third, it seemed to not really have evolved in a good way -- it just didn't have the freshness that it had in its youth that I liked so much. Still, it was moderately enjoyable paired with the Salmon, just not as good as I had hoped. Maybe the bottle was slightly off. In any case, if I was scoring this bottle, it would be 88 - 89.

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.

2/18/2022 - PIntag wrote:

14.6% abv. Recent auction purchase.
Rich and ripe with impressive depth of fruit at this age. I never tasted this in its youth, but I'd say this must be holding up nicely as it is drinking really well for an almost 20-year-old WV Pinot. Yes, it is not a crisp, light Pinot for sure, but I think it has some OR character even though it does come across as RRV as a previous post noted. Still, I did not have high hopes for this bottle and it definitely exceeded my expectation. OR Pinot purists may not like this wine much, as it does toe the line with stewed fruit character. Not my favorite style as well, but I still managed to find a lot of interest and enjoyment with it. Held up on the second day as well (after vacuum sealing it overnight). ARTHROVINE's suggest to hold another 5 years (in a 2015 note) was a good one I think. LEARNINGANDENJOYINGWINE's 2009 note suggesting to drink up was definitely off the mark. If scoring, I'd put this in the 89 - 91 range, but it's hard putting a number to the experience, given the age.

10/27/2015 - arthrovine wrote:

Popn poured followed over 5 hours. 1/2 bottle corked and tried next day with little variation

Striking youthful red/purple color with no meniscus. Youthful aromatics with fresh red and blue fruit. Palate was also fresh exuberant fruit even a bit of glycerine. Slight cola. Mild secondary flavors. Finished medium length with some heat. Correct for the hot 2003 vintage. Definitely not porty or gloppy, just exuberant. Blinded, I would have guessed California..RRV.

Good for a tough vintage and the fruit has held up. I would hold for another 5 years to see how this 12 year old matures?

3/25/2009 - learningandenjoying wrote:

Opens nicely in glass. Starting to reach end of cellar time, slight oxidation; recommend drinking any 2003 stock now. Still elegant, smooth, excellent fruit, seems a little acidic on a medium-long finish.

4/19/2021 - PIntag wrote:

14.0% abv. 1st of 3 bottles from recent auction purchase.
Not going to go crazy over this like SID_LOVES_WINE, but I found this to be drinking very well, and his/her note is a very good writeup. On the pop 'n pour, I thought this to be a little too tart, but after an hour or so this settled down and became more integrated, showing a nice mix of savory, iron, blood, and fruit in the flavor profile in a nicely balanced frame. It was even better on the second evening. In its prime drinking window right now and should hold for many more years, as this has the fruit and structure to handle long aging.

10/30/2021 - PIntag wrote:

13.5% abv. Recent auction purchase.
Interesting Napa Cab. There's a little bit of a roasted note that points to the hot vintage, but it's not too bad. Seems kind of tight and wound up still, even on the second evening (stoppered overnight). Acid was pretty high and stuck out a bit. Not the most attractive flavor profile but an interesting drink for the $22 I paid for it.

11/15/2020 - Klugi Wine wrote:

I’m starting to get old, find more and more wines I don’t remember where I bought them. Luckily this lovely Napa CabSauv is still in good shape (good cellar;-)). Bouquet of some cassis and eucalyptus, one could have almost placed it into Barossa Valley. Quite powerful but balanced in itself this was an enjoyable Burger Wine and graciously aged.

9/9/2021 - PIntag wrote:

14.6% abv.
I can see what EBERT's note below is saying, but I enjoyed it with a bratwurst and pasta meal. Acidity stuck out a bit and there was not much depth of flavor, even with the last glass after several hours being open. Flavor profile was interesting, with some earthy notes and a little bitter herbal hint, but was not entirely attractive. Still, this went well with the food and we ended up draining the bottle with dinner and a glass afterward.

6/4/2021 - PIntag wrote:

14.1% abv.
A more prominent oak signature than I prefer, but this was a complex and interesting Cali Pinot. Not jammy at all, but not shy either. I preferred the 2015 Occidental SWK Vineyard (from a few weeks ago) by a pretty large margin, but this was still very good.

4/13/2021 - PIntag wrote:

A little funk (brett?) with this bottle. Not too much to dump it, but just enough to limit enjoyment a bit.

9/1/2014 - Loren Sonkin wrote:

A Labor of Love (and wine and beer) (Our home): I was told this was corked. I don't think so, so I assume it was just quite dusty when opened. By the time I got to it, it was nice. The nose is very dusty (Rutherford?) with cherries and some heavy use of oak. It does have a great texture. The palate also shows some oak but also some nice cherries. A lot of oak/heat on the finish. Some will love this wine more than I. For me, it just is over oaked. It is s till a very good wine, but perhaps it might have been even better. I doubt the fruit outlasts the oak.

12/5/2020 - PIntag wrote:

14.2% abv. 1st of 2 bottles from recent auction purchase.
Very impressed by this bottle. Medium-body, good depth, great pure flavor profile (i.e. not too much oak), perfect amount of balancing acidity - not the most complex, but very pleasing and great for complementing many different dishes. Loved this and glad to have picked off a few more bottles from WineBid in the last lot from the recent dump.

8/23/2020 - PIntag wrote:

14.0% abv.
Nice, restrained, medium-bodied Coonawarra Cabernet. As with most Coonawarra Cabernets that I've tried to date (not that many, really), this is not an Aussie fruit bomb at all and is, in fact, pretty lightweight compared to the typical Napa offering. I like this style and found this wine to be quite satisfying. Good depth of flavor and nicely balanced, with decent acidity. Interesting flavor profile as well, but perhaps in under-ripe region for fans of larger-scaled cabernet. If scoring, 88-90.

9/5/2020 - PIntag wrote:

13.0% abv.
Started out funky and reduced (practically undrinkable) so I let this sit overnight in the fridge. This helped get rid of the funkiness, but this was not very pleasant, with coarse tannins and mouth feel and some bitter notes. Maybe this bottle is drying out and leaving tannin. Not sure about the previous poster declaring no wood to be a "modern" style - I'm under the impression that Bordeaux "modern" style is what Michel Rolland is doing in St. Emilion, with 200% new oak and micro-oxygenation, not concrete egg fermentation (or is this maybe post-modern style?) . In any case, given the previous recent notes, I've got to think this is an advanced or flawed bottle.

9/6/2020 - PIntag wrote:

13.8% abv.
Big style WV pinot, with plenty of supporting oak and plenty of fruit. Tastes more CA than OR to me. I know a lot of people like this style and the previous notes support it, but I find the oak (plenty of char here) to be too prominent and the fruit hidden and not bright enough. I think this has the fruit and structure to age for a while and let the oak integrate, at which point I will enjoy this more, but for now, this is too young and oaky for my palate. I wouldn't touch another one for at least 3 or 4 years.

8/3/2020 - PIntag wrote:

Auction purchase in 2018.
Had been hearing a lot of buzz with Rhys and was excited to pick this bottle up for $41 all in at auction. My expectations were pretty high and I have to say that my expectations were at least met, if not exceeded. This did start out a bit disjointed, but it didn't take long for this to come into focus as it got more air. So much to like about this; great SCM flavor profile, good depth, great mouthfeel, nicely balanced, and a good amount of complexity. Went very well with cheese and spinach ravioli, to boot.

8/30/2020 - PIntag wrote:

14.9% abv.
Very good young Cabernet. Definitely fruit forward with obvious high-end oak treatment. Lush, ripe, and polished with little evident structure. A drink now type of Cabernet, but this should integrate better in a year or two and hold for several more at least. Does not have the structure to age too long, though.

5/30/2020 - PIntag wrote:

14.0% abv.
This is stellar Bien Nacido Pinot - lots of Santa Maria Valley fruit and flavor, but plenty of acidity (nicely balanced) and light on its feet. Has a structured, unresolved feel to it, ten years in. In a great spot right now for drinking, but this still seems like development will further benefit this. It'll go another 5 years easy and probably 5 more after that. I had a Dolin 2013 BN Pinot recently and, while that had a similar flavor profile, it was heavy and ponderous and just not very enjoyable. This bottle, for me, hangs with the best of California Pinot.

6/16/2019 - TomH wrote:

Really hard to fathom at this price point; while it's not the last word in complexity or length, it has an absolutely cheery personality and totally pure fruit profile backed by a whisper of tannins and the perfect amount of acid to tie it together. Try to find another Merlot at this price point that isn't flabby, overtly sweet, lacking acid, or just generally poor. If I were a restaurateur, I'd purchase this by the pallet -- it's food friendly as hell and I'd have a hard time believing anyone who says they don't like it.

7/3/2018 - PIntag wrote:

Did not try this in it's youth (picked up at WineX recently), but this is still a big, jammy, oaky, fruit bomb of a wine. I can't imagine that this has lost any fruit - it is thick, sweet, and syrupy with a good dose of oak char. The good news is that has not fallen apart, and if you liked this when it was young, you'll probably like this now.

7/30/2019 - PIntag wrote:

13.5% abv. Screwcap.
Solid, well-made Cab. Still youthful with good structure. A little vanilla and cocoa, but really, not too much oak influence, as the currant fruit is at the forefront. One might find this slightly jammy, but I didn't find it to be a problem. This still has years ahead of it and should improve with more bottle age. A very high quality Cabernet for the price.

2/11/2019 - PIntag wrote:

Picked this up at WineX recently ($20), hoping for a good aged Burg experience.
While this was certainly drinkable with decent balance, weight, and mouthfeel, it was clearly pretty tired and really did not offer much pleasure. Was just OK for me. Not much on the nose and there was a little rubber smell and taste that hung around for a while but blew off eventually.

1/10/2019 - Amerique wrote:

Rich, delicious dark red fruit, thick and chewy texture, earthy flavors, excellent finish, ample finish, very good wine but not Carlisle's best vineyard site, still reminiscent of Lytton Springs Zin

12/25/2018 - Saxman1984 wrote:

Not sure it warrants the high ratings it had received in the press. However, it is an enjoyable Chianti, though I prefer Felsina or Isole E Olena as my everyday Chianti. Lately, I have been disappointed with the wine rating system, especially those wines rated 95 or higher.

11/16/2018 - PIntag wrote:

13.0% abv. Recent WineBid purchase.
Cork in surprisingly good shape (especially after seeing the previous note describing it as "disintegrated"), as it came out in one easy piece and was barely stained a few millimeters up.
In any case, the nose was pretty reticent but showed some earthy and yes, graphite as noted below. Not particularly attractive, but interesting.
On the palate, this had nice, silky mouthfeel but the fruit was really faded. Acidity was lacking a bit as well which left this seeming a bit flat and over-the-hill. Not bad at all, but not super enjoyable. An interesting look into a well-made domestic Pinot that is not ageworthy. Not sure what factors into this, inferior fruit; young vines; wine-making technique? Some of each?
Edit: Also, virtually no sediment at all. Not really scoring this since it is obviously well past peak, but would be 85-86 if I was.

10/11/2018 - td1836 wrote:

Delicious harmony of dark fruits, spices, restrained oak, and medium plus weight. Tannins are not overpowering, and this was really good right after opening.

However, this was noticeably not as good on day two. More disjointed, with a bitter note on the finish that wasn’t there on the first day. Day 1 this is a 93; on day 2 only 90-91.

7/20/2018 - PIntag wrote:

First try of a Grange for me. Pop 'n pour and decanted for sediment. Huge nose with kind of a caramel/brown sugar aroma. On the palate, less dense and more elegant than I expected - definitely not a wine for impressing Napa Cab lovers - more in my wheelhouse, though I found this to be a little monolithic and one-note. Still some tannic bite. Enough acidity to keep it balanced. Did not seem to have much distinctive Syrah character. Oak also a little too prominent for my palate. This was indeed very good, but a bit disappointing given high expectations. I think there are dozens of $40 Cali Syrahs that I would enjoy more than this (e.g. any number of Carlisle bottlings), though the aromatics were fantastic. Grateful for the chance to try this anyway.

5/26/2018 - PIntag wrote:

Bretty and sherried. Possibly heat damaged?

2/21/2018 - mseeber Likes this wine:

Paired with a slow cooker beef stew with smoked paprika. At $25 this is an easy buy for a weeknight wine or a special occasion. Comfort wine for comfort food.

1/27/2018 - PIntag wrote:

My last of 14 bottles. This bottle is well into its downhill slide. Tasted like very woody, very aged wine. Still some enjoyment, but I was wishing I had opened something more enjoyable while I was drinking this.

9/7/2017 - Wine Ratings Likes this wine:

Serious Gamay in need of serious time! The Cru level quality was evident with this bottle, down to the stout tannic structure that should allow it to live on for many years to come. Let it, I’d say; though suitably tasty now, the return will be much greater down the road (and at $26, could prove to be a QPR steal). Strawberry, red currant, and sour cherry mixed with sage and thyme like wild fruit in a meadow (complete with hints of dried flowers). Black pepper and licorice provided tangy spice, while earth, charcoal, and wood showed the wine’s deeper side. Graphite and smoked peat developed with time, as did subtle oak characteristics; sweet spice and cedar forest combined on the finish. I should qualify that the majority of these notes were apparent only after a decant – one I’d highly recommend for a bottle drinking so young and tight-lipped. Quality Cru Beaujolais can give Pinot offerings from more famous northern neighbours a real run for their money at a fraction of the price. I’m putting a bottle of this to rest for a bit, and I suggest you do the same!

8/23/2016 - PIntag wrote:

Sweet and candied fruit, overt oak char. I really hate this style of Pinot.

9/16/2017 - PIntag wrote:

The post from ANONYMOUSCOWARD below pretty much captures my thoughts on this wine. Plenty of correct, ripe, new world fruit. Good depth, good balance, a little minty menthol. Maybe a touch jammy. Solid. No "wow" factor, but still a very good Cabernet.

Edit: forgot to mention that the aromatics were very strong and enjoyable. And what I mean by the "no wow factor" is that this is not slathered in oak, which is a good thing in my book.

7/7/2017 - PIntag wrote:

Heavy, heavy nail polish on the nose and palate. Undrinkable. Shame.