Huge difference from the 2004 bottling. This is ripe, deeply and darkly fruited with obvious oak influence, without any of the finesse or savory aspects of the 2004. Might this be better with time? Perhaps. All of this is in keeping with the characters of these two vintages, of course; I just greatly prefer 2004, especially right now.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
First bottle of a case.Deepest red,decanted withsome sediment. leather,spice,mint and chocolate on the nose. Damsons and fruit and long lingering aftertaste (mint?). Will keep but lovely now
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
1/19/2012 - Chomsky wrote:
Huge difference from the 2004 bottling. This is ripe, deeply and darkly fruited with obvious oak influence, without any of the finesse or savory aspects of the 2004. Might this be better with time? Perhaps. All of this is in keeping with the characters of these two vintages, of course; I just greatly prefer 2004, especially right now.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/22/2011 - Silverswimmer wrote: 88 Points
First bottle of a case.Deepest red,decanted withsome sediment. leather,spice,mint and chocolate on the nose. Damsons and fruit and long lingering aftertaste (mint?).
Will keep but lovely now
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/25/2010 - rmodak wrote: 85 Points
Very candied with pixie stick nose, roses, cherry and soft mouthfeel. Not bad, but not what I was expecting.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment