Best of the World Wine Night (ex-Italy) (The csimm_M Estate): As anyone who has even scanned my TNs or cellar knows, I’m a huge Larkmead/Petroski fan, or perhaps I should say, in the context of so many TNs, including for this wine, of his in the 20teens, defender. I find his wines to be, or perhaps have been, since the LM-Petroski connection ended a couple of years ago, consistently challenging, complex, and, in the best sense of the word, intellectual without ever being less than enjoyable. Although I have 2 ‘16 Larks in my collection (and per all the caviling about price, I paid $180@), this was my first time tasting this cuvee. All of this said, and subject to the proviso of the J. Daniel and others, I had this late in the tasting, and just the one taste. There were lots of black currants and some hard to pin down black berries and a lot of the usual notes, so well identified by CT friend msu, often found in knotted cabs of mocha, bitter chocolate, asphalt, scorched earth, etc. My warm and cuddly feelings about Messr. Petroski aside, I’ll pilfer the descriptor of CT friend, and host, csimm, about my higher priced bring to the last get together (an ‘18 Montrose; yeah, I know: what was I thinking?), that, on this night, this wine seemed kinda angry. It’s really hard to score now—and it’s interesting in writing this TN to read msu’s note of a couple-few years ago when he gave it a 97-98–because the potential seems massive, and more obvious than that Montrose’s, but the fact that this was once awesome and now isn’t that wine makes future prognostication all the more uncertain. Anyway, the potential makes me say I like this wine now, but the impenetrability makes me withhold a score (may I add, that this is all the more ironic from this super accessible vintage, which is generally drinking in a stellar way now?) and tell those holding to put their bottles with the full set of Remembrance of Things Past, in the original French, and tell this not to come out until such volumes have been thoroughly read and reported upon. Some of the wines that were really good on this night struggled relatively just because the competition was so great, but this wine, or at least this bottle, on this night, was struggling against itself, IMO.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
This wine is rich and pungent - not in a fruity, boozy, juicy sense, but in an intense, tannic, briar-patch kind of way that makes me think this 100% Cabernet is just a little pissed off at the moment (or, perhaps, forevermore). Although my hunch is that this is a phase, there's no doubt this wine currently lacks the integration and polish of five years ago (10/17 - 97 points). This wine is not fading away, but where exactly it's slouching (and on what timetable) - I dunno. Adolescence has its own timetable.
Dark purple in color and full in body, the wine offers aromas of cocoa powder, boysenberry seeds, graphite, and oregano. The flavors soften with a few hours of air, but they still seem prickly, with notes of blackberry, Turkish coffee, cocoa beans, and gravel, with a tannic and dense finish. 14.7% alcohol. In the soft and agreeable 2012 vintage, this is the smart a-- in the back of the class - I'm betting he'll turn out OK, but it won't be until 2025 or later. Decant three hours if drinking now. 94 at the moment.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
These wines flavors and aroma are truly an amazing experience. This was my first bottle andvwas very happily surprised. Full bodybwithba smooth and dense sensation. It is very enjoyable
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I absolutely loved this wine - rich, integrated, complex, and silky. At the same time, I - like many others - wish it cost less. So, this brings me to the two questions important in approaching this - or any - wine: (a) is it good? (b) is it worth it?
The first question - is it good? - is easy to answer. I think this wine is fantastic. Dark garnet in color, medium in body, nose of black cherry, charcoal, and baking spices. Layered and integrated tastes of rich fruit (boysenberry, blueberry pie), savory notes (dark chocolate, mocha), and lovely structure (gravel, rosemary), followed by a lift on the finish that is positively ethereal. 14.9% alcohol. I've never tasted a more compelling mid-palate: the core of this 100% Cabernet Sauvignon is concentrated yet gracious. This is the best wine I've tasted from Larkmead, slightly edging out the 2012 Solari. Drink now or in the next five years.
The second question - is it worth it? - is a harder one. If this were a $100 wine (a la the Bard), it would be a steal; I would camp out at the winery to buy it. At $300, it's not a rip-off, but it's somewhat over-priced, even by Napa standards. I think this has more character than the Hillside Select - a higher production wine that is close to $300 - but the Lark probably belongs in the same league as wines priced in the high $100s and low $200s (e.g., Memento Mori, Carter, Realm single vineyard). In short, I'd be fine with paying $225 for this, but $300 is a little too high. (It also feels too high because of how rapidly Larkmead raised prices over the past few years across the portfolio - decisions that were disappointing, though not disgusting, since wineries are businesses after all).
So, I think this is a 98-point wine based purely on what's in the bottle - yes, it's that good - but I docked it one point for the price. To state the obvious, price matters at some point, since us CellarTracker folk - unlike the professionals - have to pay our own way (though, unlike a huge percentage of the population, some fortunate few of us have the means to spend a ridiculous amount on wine - the question is only how much of ridiculous amount will we spend). All that said, to bring it back to the wine: I think this is as pure and beautiful an expression of Napa Cabernet as I've ever tasted.
The best part of my Larkmead tasting at the winery was that it ended up saving me quite a bit of money -- that I can re-deploy into much better and less expensive wines. Which is such a shame. I've been a client and wine club member since their 2002 vintage and agree with Parker's 100 point re-rating of the 2002 Solari. Fortunately, I still have verticals that will be had.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
2013 The Lark was the best of the lineup, but overrated in my estimation. A very good, well made Napa Cabernet that is too elegant, and cute, not a brute. Nice dark quality fruit, and tasty but no wow factor to for me. I did like this wine, but for three Benjamin's..... I don't think so. 93+ Points
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
12/26/2023 - BigBoy_Sonoma Likes this wine: 98 Points
Black fruit, cedar, spice, chocolate, cassis, currant, finishes smoky oak. A+
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/28/2023 - sfwinelover1 Likes this wine:
Best of the World Wine Night (ex-Italy) (The csimm_M Estate): As anyone who has even scanned my TNs or cellar knows, I’m a huge Larkmead/Petroski fan, or perhaps I should say, in the context of so many TNs, including for this wine, of his in the 20teens, defender. I find his wines to be, or perhaps have been, since the LM-Petroski connection ended a couple of years ago, consistently challenging, complex, and, in the best sense of the word, intellectual without ever being less than enjoyable. Although I have 2 ‘16 Larks in my collection (and per all the caviling about price, I paid $180@), this was my first time tasting this cuvee. All of this said, and subject to the proviso of the J. Daniel and others, I had this late in the tasting, and just the one taste. There were lots of black currants and some hard to pin down black berries and a lot of the usual notes, so well identified by CT friend msu, often found in knotted cabs of mocha, bitter chocolate, asphalt, scorched earth, etc. My warm and cuddly feelings about Messr. Petroski aside, I’ll pilfer the descriptor of CT friend, and host, csimm, about my higher priced bring to the last get together (an ‘18 Montrose; yeah, I know: what was I thinking?), that, on this night, this wine seemed kinda angry. It’s really hard to score now—and it’s interesting in writing this TN to read msu’s note of a couple-few years ago when he gave it a 97-98–because the potential seems massive, and more obvious than that Montrose’s, but the fact that this was once awesome and now isn’t that wine makes future prognostication all the more uncertain. Anyway, the potential makes me say I like this wine now, but the impenetrability makes me withhold a score (may I add, that this is all the more ironic from this super accessible vintage, which is generally drinking in a stellar way now?) and tell those holding to put their bottles with the full set of Remembrance of Things Past, in the original French, and tell this not to come out until such volumes have been thoroughly read and reported upon. Some of the wines that were really good on this night struggled relatively just because the competition was so great, but this wine, or at least this bottle, on this night, was struggling against itself, IMO.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/28/2023 - WineBurrowingWombat Likes this wine: 93 Points
Memorial Day Weekend, Day 2: The Great Gatsby: On the nose was a strong heat with dark red fruits with heavy, dark earth. I liked the earth scents here.
Flavors of intense black and red fruits, similar dark earth from the nose, still some heat though and black graphite.
Very rough but somewhat pleasurable. I might have problems..
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/12/2022 - msuwine wrote: 94 Points
This wine is rich and pungent - not in a fruity, boozy, juicy sense, but in an intense, tannic, briar-patch kind of way that makes me think this 100% Cabernet is just a little pissed off at the moment (or, perhaps, forevermore). Although my hunch is that this is a phase, there's no doubt this wine currently lacks the integration and polish of five years ago (10/17 - 97 points). This wine is not fading away, but where exactly it's slouching (and on what timetable) - I dunno. Adolescence has its own timetable.
Dark purple in color and full in body, the wine offers aromas of cocoa powder, boysenberry seeds, graphite, and oregano. The flavors soften with a few hours of air, but they still seem prickly, with notes of blackberry, Turkish coffee, cocoa beans, and gravel, with a tannic and dense finish. 14.7% alcohol. In the soft and agreeable 2012 vintage, this is the smart a-- in the back of the class - I'm betting he'll turn out OK, but it won't be until 2025 or later. Decant three hours if drinking now. 94 at the moment.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
1/22/2022 - Millennial Drinkers wrote: 92 Points
NFN - need some time to get those deeper layers.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
1/22/2022 - cab blends wrote: 92 Points
Heavy dark nose.
Some very light rubber with dark blue fruits on the nose.
Drank undecanted. This needs decanting next time.
Dark mid palate. Finish not yet smooth and integrated. Dark bark and minerality in the finish. Acidity but heavy body disguises and hides the acidity.
I am sure this could continue to improve significantly with age and I could imagine this getting to 95.
Good with a fatty big steak.
hL 2. Fd 4. Fi 4
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
1/14/2022 - cab blends wrote: 92 Points
Some light brown (garnet) edges starting.
Only the lightest hint of fruit and moderate tannins (6/10)
NS HL 3 FD3 AS 4
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
1/28/2021 - pkouchu wrote: 95 Points
blueberry, blackberries, tea, mocha, loamy earth, crushed gravel and tobacco
bigger and richer styled cab compared to their other ones, but retains the same style of structure and acid.
a great wine just slightly different build. I think i prefer the solari finesse though a little more
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
12/13/2020 - GranadaPedroAlarcon Likes this wine: 97 Points
These wines flavors and aroma are truly an amazing experience. This was my first bottle andvwas very happily surprised. Full bodybwithba smooth and dense sensation. It is very enjoyable
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/19/2020 - awitz78 Likes this wine: 94 Points
Fantastic but overpriced
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/22/2017 - msuwine wrote: 97 Points
I absolutely loved this wine - rich, integrated, complex, and silky. At the same time, I - like many others - wish it cost less. So, this brings me to the two questions important in approaching this - or any - wine: (a) is it good? (b) is it worth it?
The first question - is it good? - is easy to answer. I think this wine is fantastic. Dark garnet in color, medium in body, nose of black cherry, charcoal, and baking spices. Layered and integrated tastes of rich fruit (boysenberry, blueberry pie), savory notes (dark chocolate, mocha), and lovely structure (gravel, rosemary), followed by a lift on the finish that is positively ethereal. 14.9% alcohol. I've never tasted a more compelling mid-palate: the core of this 100% Cabernet Sauvignon is concentrated yet gracious. This is the best wine I've tasted from Larkmead, slightly edging out the 2012 Solari. Drink now or in the next five years.
The second question - is it worth it? - is a harder one. If this were a $100 wine (a la the Bard), it would be a steal; I would camp out at the winery to buy it. At $300, it's not a rip-off, but it's somewhat over-priced, even by Napa standards. I think this has more character than the Hillside Select - a higher production wine that is close to $300 - but the Lark probably belongs in the same league as wines priced in the high $100s and low $200s (e.g., Memento Mori, Carter, Realm single vineyard). In short, I'd be fine with paying $225 for this, but $300 is a little too high. (It also feels too high because of how rapidly Larkmead raised prices over the past few years across the portfolio - decisions that were disappointing, though not disgusting, since wineries are businesses after all).
So, I think this is a 98-point wine based purely on what's in the bottle - yes, it's that good - but I docked it one point for the price. To state the obvious, price matters at some point, since us CellarTracker folk - unlike the professionals - have to pay our own way (though, unlike a huge percentage of the population, some fortunate few of us have the means to spend a ridiculous amount on wine - the question is only how much of ridiculous amount will we spend). All that said, to bring it back to the wine: I think this is as pure and beautiful an expression of Napa Cabernet as I've ever tasted.
3 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comments (3)
11/21/2016 - #1Winelover wrote: 93 Points
The best part of my Larkmead tasting at the winery was that it ended up saving me quite a bit of money -- that I can re-deploy into much better and less expensive wines. Which is such a shame. I've been a client and wine club member since their 2002 vintage and agree with Parker's 100 point re-rating of the 2002 Solari. Fortunately, I still have verticals that will be had.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/24/2016 - Yack Man Likes this wine: 93 Points
2013 The Lark was the best of the lineup, but overrated in my estimation. A very good, well made Napa Cabernet that is too elegant, and cute, not a brute. Nice dark quality fruit, and tasty but no wow factor to for me. I did like this wine, but for three Benjamin's..... I don't think so. 93+ Points
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/26/2016 - BigBoy_Sonoma Likes this wine: 96 Points
red fruit, blueberries, cedar, cassis, minerality, spice, herbal notes, tea and big tannins very well balanced. A/A+
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment