Medium pale to medium ruby with only slight signs of age - nice bright cherry, cherry pie nose, bright fruity palate, cherry pie, raspberries, but very dry, even a bit tannic - nice wine, has held up very well, although I'm not sure it has gained a lot of complexity over the yrs.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Clear very pale garnet, with slight rim browning. Soil, toasted oak, black plum. Very low acids, medium too low tannins. Blackberry. Medium to short slightly tannic finish
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
So, Greenblanket is still pissed about the smoke but, damnit, there's some beautiful Anderson Valley fruit showing through the taint. Too bad the fires ruined otherwise good wine and too bad this wine was sold with no mention of the potential for smoke taint.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Here we go again; smoke or no smoke? One of the only things that Greenblanket knows for sure is that his impressionable mind is more of a factor in wine tasting that his leaden palate. This time he thinks it's more of a textural thing that seems to mask or dull tastes and aromas that seem to be partially hidden. Almost like tasting after smoking a cigar. Greenblanket should never have paid for this wine.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
I was looking for smoke and didn't find any. However, there was spritz initially and the wine seemed stripped. A fine drinkable wine, but nothing really desirable. Good in comparison to the overall wine world, but definitely not up to Anthill standards. Expensive at this quality level. Glad this was my only bottle. However, this was better than my expectations based on discussions I've seen.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Tasted this blind and at first thought it had brett, then realized it was smoke taint. Comes across as bandaids on the nose and greasy bacon fat in the midpalate. Third bad bottle of the case. Starting to look like expensive cooking wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Great color analysis distinct pinot nose. Little harsh on the initial palate. Tannins will soften but still tight. Even smoothed out will not improve past what it is now. Decent enough but pass.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Not as bad as I expected. A little smokiness on the nose but that could have been because I was looking for it. On the palate, nice ripe fruit, good mouthfeel and good acidity. However the finish is where it fell well short. Very clipped and with a burnt aftertaste.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Very light, translucent ruby color. Cherries, underbrush, scorched earth, baking spices, raspberries, and some charred oak on the very nice nose. Medium body with soft tannins and very nice acidity. The red fruit, spices and earthiness quickly grab hold of the palate. A bit of cranberry and a slight herbal note add nice complexity. Nice length on the finish with the juicy fruit and spice slowly adding a bit of oak and the herbal note. This is my third bottle I have not experienced any of the "smoke taint" that others note, to me it's more like a nice toasted oak element this adds depth. I really like this wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
No notes taken at tasting. Decanted 1 hr. Look: Great purple/red '08 color. Nose: Red and black cherries, soft spice, forest floor, lt. cranberry, very lt. vanilla. Body: 2.5% milk. Taste: Very smooth cherry, good tannins, nice spice, cranberry, musk. Actually this kept getting Better over the span of 2 hrs. Finish: Around 45-60 seconds.
Summary: WOW! Certainly decant 1-2 hrs. I would enjoy on it's own ideally. Amazing how it kept getting better. Started off a 91 pt and wrapped up 93 pts. While I love my Sta. Rita Hills Brewer-Cliftons, this is my top taste for Anderson Valley. I'll be seeking out more of these (and more Anthills - the rare times one comes across them).
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Quite nice this time around and Greenblanket is sure that if this was served to him blind that he would never detect out of place smokiness. Just what you would expect from a well made appellation level wine - pretty red fruit with some tart notes, very light spiciness and a pleasant earthy soil thing going on.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Orange peel, cherries and a toasty note on the nose. Medium mouthfeel and noticeable acidity. I sort of think I detect a smokiness which is likely oak but given the year possible fire smoke. Nice wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Fifth of six bottles, and this one was clearly showing a dirty aroma. All past bottles were perfectly clean and free of any foul smokiness...this bottle was not.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I have to believe that my bottle is impacted by smoke taint. I knew of the issues but my wife didn't. I poured and didn't let on and she almost immediately said "Something's wrong with this wine. It's like I'm trying to smell the wine in a smoky bar." I have to agree - there was something off on both the nose and the palate. Even two days later, I pulled the cork on what remained and my first thought was someone has the wood started for a barbecue.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Dull ruby. Creamy, red fruited nose with a distinct earthy side. No smoke that I can detect on the nose. Thin and a bit abrasive on the finish. There is some good fruit here but overall it is disjointed and doesn't provide a ton of pleasure. Not bad, but not a favorite. Will wait awhile on other bottles to see what happens. (85)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Creosote firewood thruout. Still Messy and very murky almost a year later but NOT fizzy in mouth like the last bubbly bottle. Cosistantly poor showing 2nd time. 1 more bottle Im saving for 2016, give it a last hurrah. the second half will cook with tonight.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Light, ruby color. The red-fruited nose is a little shy with some earthiness underneath. On the palate, there is lovely cherry fruit and an interesting spicy note mixed with a touch of minerals. This is light-bodied, but not thin, with lively acidity and a touch of tannin. There is a slight hole in the midpalate, but the finish is solid. Overall, I find myself more attracted to this type of wine - bright fruit, lively acidity, and very little oak influence.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Slight smoke taint. kinda funky and somewhat astringent. More earth driven. I get the feeling that the smoke is crushing the fruit. Looking forward to their other bottlings. 86 points
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
A nice, lighter ruby color. Cherries, raspberries, toasty oak, and a slight herbal note on the nose. No smoke taint at all. Medium body with soft, ripe tannins and very nice acidity. Juicy red fruit on the palate with some baking spices kicking in on the nice finish. This is a delicious, young pinot. Perhaps there is some bottle variation in reguard to smoke taint, but I'm 2 for 2 with good bottles.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
For those keeping score: faint hints of campfire at first, but it seemed to fade away leaving behind a really nice bottle of pinot. In fact, two hours after opening I can't find a hint of it, and I'm looking for it. Nothing mind blowing here, but I like the style of this (and of anthill in general)... elegant red fruits with a nice sense of flavor impact followed by a nice streak of acidity keeping everything dancing on the palate and tying it all together. Yeah, I like this wine. Still a buyer of these wines for sure.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
P&P as soon as Fedex delivered and tasted again 12 hrs later using Riedel PN glass with wine at 55 degrees. Tasting notes essentially unchanged both tastings. Bright red; initial nose sl green and stemmy followed by red cherry and subtle floral, rose? scents. Less smoke than in many other producers "normal" vintages using heavy char barrels; red cherry,raspberry flavor on a medium body, nice acidity, balanced; simple, fast finish, soft tannins. I expect there will be bottle variation, but if half of the case turns out as good as this it will be a big QPR given the prices this is getting on the secondary market now.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
There was smoke on this and, while it was different from the smoked meat often detected on a good wine - this was more like the smell of a burned down house - it was not too unpleasant and it seemed to blow off by day two. Underneath was a nice sour cherry pinot noir with mouth watering acidity and a fine structure. Overall, we quite enjoyed it
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Second of the two bottles I bought. With the first bottle, I didn't pick up any smoke on the nose initially (a bit more on the nose after awhile), and just a bit on the palate. This time the peaty smokiness is much more evident on the nose, and the palate is a murky, muddled mess, with a simply overwhelming smokiness bordering on ashtray (as one poster aptly put it). I've never licked an ashtray, but I imagine it would taste like this bottle. Have to put it down as flawed. Too bad, I'm generally very impressed with AF wines.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Had a small pour; tried hard but couldn't detect smoke on the nose of this small sample anyway. The palate was what I expected, a bit tart with cranberry and rhubarb flavors and cool climate in style. Decent, and not marred by smoke on the palate, at least for the one gulp I had. Fine but lacks excitement. 87-88+. Overall, the profile tends toward what I like so I look forward to trying single-vineyard bottlings and other vintages of this.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I've been tracking CT's tasting notes regarding the smoke taint issue with this wine, and have been wanting to try my lone bottle (parted with the rest) to assess for myself. Pop and pour. This bottle's bouquet seems unaffected, at least for my senses, but the taint is serious in the palate, the finish especially. Ashtray. It seems especially marked on the finish, the tail end of the finish, and lingers, like it's woven into the tannins and structure of the wine itself. I worked very hard to keep any expectations out of this, and my tongue still feels furred and burnt (I'm not a smoker). Too bad AHF released this, I love their wines. A classy pinot otherwise, but this is one of the very few bottles I've ever poured down the sink. Not a 'flawed bottle,' but it's a flawed wine IMHO. (I'd be interested in a poll of smokers vs non-smokers who detect vs don't detect smoke in this wine.)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Nice concentrated red fruit and a silky mouthfeel. Distinct aroma of smoke and ash, which tends to diminish with time. May be a bit too smoky for some, but not for others like me.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Opened, poured a glass for my friend who remarked a minute later, "What is this? It's great, I love the subtle smokiness throughout." Sums up my thoughts pretty well--some smoke is there, but it's an acceptable trait of the wine. Enjoyable cranberry, silky dark cherries, a hint of dried raspberry all intermix with a slightly gamey, smokey vein. Impressive mouthfeel and good length on the finish.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Very pleasant and lighter style pinot. Had beautiful color and a nose with light cherry and some spice. Flavor was filled with red fruit and really went well with peking duck.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Gave it a 30 minute decant. Nose wasn't smoky, but a bit restrained. The color is cranberry looking. It looks light. The taste showed no ill effects of fire. This continually opened up and showed some minerals and spice, gaining complexity towards the last glass.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
P&P-nose initially giving off a faint burnt rubber smell that quickly blew off. There's a little bacon fat aroma that could be linked to smoke, but no other discernable evidence. Otherwise nose is cherry, flat cola, some red currant. Palate is smooth with cherry and mild tobacco notes. Tannins are reserved and mouthfeel is fairly round and silky. Very drinkable but I expected a bit more complexity and structure.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Consistent with the trend of recent tastings on this controversial bottle, I thought this wine showed well. Opened for an hour before pouring. Fairly deep in color, with a nose of florals, spice, bacon fat, and a touch of high toned red fruit. The primary floral and spice element carried through to the palate, which was big and rich - thanks to the Abbey Harris and Demuth fruit declassified into this bottle. Bright red cherry came through on the finish after a bit of time. I could have used a little more brightness in this, as for me, it was a bit sappy. Yes, I did get a charred/peaty characteristic in this wine (both on the nose and the palate), but it did not bother me.....actually blended in nicely with the big flavors. I see no need to hold on to these.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Call my palate dumb, but no intrusive smoke taint here. Just a nice, elegant style Pinot Noir with red cherry, cranberry and a little bit of spice. Considering the last Pinot Noir I drank, 2005 Aubert UV, was at the total opposite of the spectrum than this one, I was very happy with the lower alcohol, more finesse and lighter style. There was definitely nothing in the wine that was off-putting.
I enjoyed it with some smoked salmon, pea and cream pasta.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Nice, well balanced pinot. Everything I like, a bit on the red fruited side some cranberry a touch of cake spice, but overall a bit on the light and elegant side. Nothing pointy at all and while I didn't go looking for the smoke, I did not notice more than a touch. Worked well with the grass fed buffalo tenderloin.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
And here begins my contribution to the great 2008 Anthill Farms smoke debate: It's in there... but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have identified it as "smoke" if it wasn't the only thing going through my head when I tasted this. It's not a bad wine at all... the pedigree of the declassified juice is apparent: beautiful nose; very light, delicate and balanced in the mouth but with a big flavor impact. Quite a nice finish too, but there on the back of the palate... what is that funny taste? Is that smoke (or campfire, or whatever you want to call it)? Yup. I applaud the guys at Anthill for declassifying some of their upper end bottlings into this generic bottling and being upfront about it all. I plan on leaving my remaining bottles in the cellar for a while, the balance should carry this a long way.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Yes, you can smell and taste a bit of campfire in the wine, but with about 30 min of air, it dissipates and the elegant fruit and structure comes through. It is not a profound wine, and if even a hint of smoke is a dealbreaker, then you will not like this wine. That being said, it is well-balanced, refreshing, with bright fruit and crisp acidity and it paired beautifully with crispy roast chicken.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Brought my third and final bottle to a neighbor's for s'mores over the fire pit. Figured that if there was smoke taint then it would "pair" nicely. As with the other two bottles, we did not detect any "taint" per se but maybe a subtle smokey aspect to the palate. The best of the three bottles and I have like them all. Let the debate on this wine continue.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I had not tasted this until tonight. That said, I have been following the CT notes on this one (given the troubles of the vintage) and there appears to be a lot of bottle variation. I believe I got one of the good ones here. The smoke was noticeable on the nose (but not offensive) and the mid-palate seemed a bit hollow, but a good Pinot given the difficulties of the vintage and the price.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I'm firmly in the like it camp. Soft smokiness on the nose and the palate, but not tainted. More like you'd get from a well toasted barrel. Nice light body with pleasing red fruit and minerals. Juicy acidity.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Utterly undrinkable. Like swallowing the contents of an ashtray. As one of the reviewers mentioned, this wine should probably not have been released. I like Anthill Farms wines very much, but I am frankly surprised that the winery's management did not consider the value of protecting the long-term equity of their brand and business more carefully by selling a product that is clearly damaging to the winery's reputation.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
sort of red Burgundy out of California, has enough acid to match the earthy red cherry, smoke and red currant, good intensity on the finish, a few hours later and a floral fragrance shines through with a bright berry palate, some earthiness, pretty yummy with king salmon fillet
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
If you cannot detect the smoke taint in this one, it's because it's obscured by the crack you're smoking. No subtle hints of "smoked meats" or "toast" or other BS...this is straight from the ashtray to the bottle, albeit with nice varietal character on the side. With 2 hours of air time, the good side of the wine opens up, but the smoke will not go away, and probably won't with age. Serve it to your friends who smoke; maybe they won't notice, but this verges on undrinkable.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Probably should not have been released. I knew of the smoke taint before buying and opening, and was looking at this as a learning experience. I did not tell my wife about any of this as I wanted her unblemished opinion. After two glasses, she said: "I don't usually say this about wines that you buy, but I really don't like this at all." I asked her to describe what she didn't like and she nailed it. Charred, smokey, bitter and really lacking in fruit.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Frankly, initially I didn't pick up any smoky character on the nose and maybe just a slight bit on the palate (a kind of charred quality), though it did seem to evolve on the nose slightly after an hour or so, but almost more like peat (which Josh Raynolds noted) and Christmas spice. Still, it has nice red fruit, and the expected charm and elegance of an Anthill pinot, but it was certainly better in the first hour after opening. Drink sooner rather than later.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Not as good as the first bottle I had earlier this year. The trademark "brightness" and crisp AH acidity seem to be missing. Deep, dark cranberry fruit with bacon fat. Not bad, but just not what I have come to know and expect from AH.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Nose leads with a bit of ashy meatiness--think charred grilled meats. Not terribly dominant, but noticeable. Soft red fruits exist beneath that & blend to toss in a touch of loamy character. Palate has good mouthfeel--enjoyable, palpable texture without being dense--and leads with that hint of charriness that I perceive as highlighting a nice acidity on the back end. Dark red fruits (cherry, raspberry, cranberry) carry through the finish.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Don't really get how people can't detect smoke taint on this one. This is my third go with this one and honestly it is almost undrinkable. Very, very disappointing.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
My second bottle of this, and shockingly different than the first. Where the smoke was a subtle background note the first go-round, this was overwhelmed by the smoke taint. There was actually something mildly pleasant about it that reminded me of South Africa, particularly the Pinot Noirs and Pinotages (a sort of over-the-top bacon fat meets smoke quality), but there was very little beyond smoke other than a subtle bit of red fruit. I don't know how smoke taint fares with age, but it would be my advice to drink these on the young side based on my experience here.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Popped and poured. I didn't discern any obvious smoke taint. This was really a lovely wine. Bright red fruits, nice gripping acidity with a clean finish. Not over ripe with a medium alcohol content, it was very enjoyable.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Tastes almost like an aged gamay from Northeast France. Alternates in the mouth between smoked savory and sweet tastes especially when you swish it, i.e. between a meaty-gamey taste (think light prosciutto (some said bacon below) on thin sourdough) and a dessert tart taste (think plum-cherry, only barely sweet). Finishes with a citrus/plum, wood, and light gameyness. Fascinating pinot, worth a spin, a bit pricey for the experience.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Popped and poured, then drank over about 3 hours. As far as smoke taint goes, the only thing that showed up to me was a background note of bacon fat/smoked meat that, while uncharacteristic of their typical AV Pinots, didn't particularly bother me. Beautiful nose of fresh earth and classic AV red apple skin. The palate is rather full and rich, though it still maintains a mineral, gripping texture. The red apple flavors really dominate here, along with strawberry, earth, and a touch of bacon. Long finish of red apple and more of the bacon/smoked meat character (the finish contains the most overt "smoky" character, though even here it's not overwhelming). On the whole, this is a wonderful appellation Pinot that speaks loudly of Anderson Valley. It also speaks clearly of the difficult '08 vintage, and how the talented guys behind Anthill Farms managed to craft a beautiful, transparent wine despite the obstacles it presented.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Opened and poured, this bottle showed improvement over previous encounters with this wine. This bottle still shows the smoke issue which causes some astringency on the palate and a clipped finish; however, for this bottle the smoke taint stays more or less in the background and the fruit characteristics of the wine take more of a leading roll.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
With this wine I think that palate variation is more critical than bottle variation. I think there is little doubt that the fires have influenced the wine but, after serving blind to a group of six, each taster had a different opinion as to whether it detracted from the wine. My opinion is that it does not.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
A lighter pinkish purple in the glass with a very clear rim. Nose of cherries, but once tasted, you first feel nice strong acidity but with a long finish punctuated with woody/earthy notes that turn into darker fruit. An excellent CA Pinot for the price.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
On the bright side, I didn't get any smokey, burnt elements... on the other hand, this was because I didn't get anything else. I was really working to get at the flavor components, but this was only slightly more flavorful than mineral water. Some slight tart cherry flavors with airing, but this was either shut down or excessively filtered. Seems like a lot of bottle variation on this wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Messy, murky and frothing at the edges, sounded like cereal (smack, crackle & pop), but not fizzy in mouth, so declined the Malo theory. Perhaps an off bottle. Did like initial nose of tart berries.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Decanted 3+ hours. Subtle nose of floral, cherry and spice with some cola. Starts very light on the palate but builds nicely to tart cherry and finishes with fine tannins and a hint of smoke. Nice finesse and balance.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Very light color with a purple hue rim of light extraction. On the nose loads of very pretty, floral, bright red cherry and raspberry... some new barrique spice notes. On the palate the wine has high acidity, a very pretty and light yet full midpalate that transitions into a low to moderate tannin finish... low ETOH. Great balance with the wine showing excellent balance between the hard and soft elements of the wine and the oak using being appropriate to the fruit intensity, average length, good intensity, average complexity. Wonderful finesse, especially considering its New World origing, a very fine texture, good expression of place. This is a really pretty wine that exibits no smoke taint to me... what it lacks in complexity and depth is more than made up for in beautiful texture... very good QPR... shows how good Cali pinot can be texturally if the winemakers would just back off the extraction and ripeness a bit... will hold well over the next few years...
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Bright on the nose, no real notice of smoke or campfire in this bottle on the nose and even the mid-palate but do get a slight hint of smoke on the finish particularly after a minute or so on the exhale. But not to the point that it is really affecting me enjoying the wine, I think decanting helped. Still a solid $35 bottle of wine. My came home later that evening after work and asked her to try the wine and tell me what she smelled and taster, she had no previous knowledge of the fires nor did she hear about it or had any idea what took place in Anderson Valley in 2008, the first thing out of her mouth was she tasted smoke. No hesitation and it wasn't a completely negative comment, still liked the wine but did notice smoke and ash.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Opened and poured, this wine unfortunately appears to show signs of smoke taint with an astringent ashtray element on the bouquet and palate. Unfortunately these elements overshadow the underlying elegance and beauty of this wine. Based on the tasting notes of other CellarTracker memebers, there appears to be a degree of bottle variation regarding the smoke taint issue. This bottle shows it in a more obvious, detrimental way that at times makes the wine tough to consume.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Getting some smoky campfire (which I must admit for me isn't really a turn off) but not to an overwhelming extent. This pinot is in a richer, riper style but you can still see your fingers through it (which is nice!). Has opened up nicely over the course of a 4.5 hour decant and the campfire does dissipate a bit. A fair amount of acid on this and not much in the way of tannins. Definitely see the astringency on the finish that previous reviewers have mentioned.
On the whole a decent bottle. Fairs pretty well with grilled tuna steaks. Despite holding up through the decant, this was nice enough as a pop and pour and didn't evolve too much. No need to hold this, drink over the next few years. 87-88
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
After openning I gave the glass to my wife, who doesn't drink wine, and ask her what she smelled. She said ashes. I had to agree. With a previous bottle I didn't detect anything on the nose but the finish was clipped and bitter. This one was almost the oppisite. Nose was all wet campfire, but the palate was not all that bad. Rest of the bottle consumed on day 2 was just reversed. Nose was better with no campfire, but the finish was short, bitter and chemical. Go figure.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Sure I was tipped off on the "taint," so I got the same impression as many others. On day 1, definite campfire on the nose, with the occasional more offensive wisp of wet ashtray. This was mostly gone by day 2 and 3, but this wine, while certainly drinkable, was nowhere near the class of the '07 single vineyards. Seemed like a hollow shell of the better AF wines, with lower acidity, darker fruit, and a somewhat diluted midpalate. The finish was short and marred by bitterness. A cool science experiment but I'm happy I only bought 2. I have better expectations for the Peters and Comptche but won't be testing that hypothesis any time soon.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Dominated by such an intense aromatic smoky, meaty character that I guessed a lighter Syrah immediately when this was served blind. Really lovely stuff, combining bright red fruits, bacon fat and smoky notes in a package that's very elegant and precise with nice acidity and length. Didn't find this particularly Pinot Noir-like - but the end result here is still really nice.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Unless there's some bottle variation I don't know how you can't pick up the smoke on this. I am a big fan of Anthill and opened this with an open mind and was hoping some of the other notes that showed smoke taint were more or less just imaginery. When first opened the showed lots of campfire so into the decanter it went for an hour. Poured the first glass and the campfire aromas didn't seem as strong, but were still there. On the palate there is lovely red fruits that on there own would make this a typical Anthill pinot, but the smoke reappears on the finish and is quite distracting. I drank 3 glasses over a 3 hour period which with the hour in the decanter gave this 4 full hours of air and if nothing else the campfire palate got worst. I now will always know what smoke tainted wine is like ( a learning experience to say the least).
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Ok, maybe I'm imagining it, but I definitely taste a smokiness and, to be honest, I just can't get passed it. Without foreknowledge of the fires, etc., perhaps I would have called this gamey or reminiscent of beef jerky, but it really doesn't work for me in this instance.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Drank at Pinehurst dinner. No formal notes. I thought this was a wonderful bright Pinot with multiple layers of fruit and complexity. No smoke taint issues with this bottle.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
There's no doubt this shows smoke taint, especially the nose. It's really not enjoyable to drink...will leave the rest for tomorrow to see where it goes. Much, much better the next day. Well balanced, straighforward pinot with bright red fruits. Pretty good.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Just took a whiff and a taste out of the decanter. Absolutely clear, bright rose color. No smoke on the nose or palate yet. Initial taste was tight with some acidity but will check back in after aeration in 1.5 hours. Young fruit of strawberry and cherry but the finish wss short and almost a chemical/acetone bite. My least favorite AF tp date.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Opened at 55deg F. Poured off half into a half-bottle for Day 2 drinking. The rest was left to warm up and aerate for ~1 hour. There are some deep aromas of ripe bing cherries and damp peat that are accompanied by some notes of smoky peat. Reduction or smoke? I'm leaning towards the latter, but I'm not sure. In the mouth there is an immediate, velvety rush of ripe cherries and plums, that are juicy. This is quickly followed by a light, chalky layer of tannins which mostly disappears after a few seconds but there is a lingering grip that persists through the tart finish which for me ends a little bitter. Possible smoke issues aside, the finish was a tad disappointing for me. Edit: With extra air time and more sipping, the smoky elements and bitterness are not (as) noticeable and the bottle ends up being a relatively simple but pleasant and sappy pinot.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Ripped into this one as it came off the UPS truck and it's much different than last year's version; it's darker, more saturated and better defined overall. The palate features red fruits and a nice sense of soil and earth. However, while I am withholding judgment for a day or two, I am concerned about hints of damp, morning after campfire on the nose and palate.
Day two report: No sign of smoke - just beautiful raspberry and cherry fruit with spice and earth accents.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
8/10/2017 - winot Likes this wine: 89 Points
Medium pale to medium ruby with only slight signs of age - nice bright cherry, cherry pie nose, bright fruity palate, cherry pie, raspberries, but very dry, even a bit tannic - nice wine, has held up very well, although I'm not sure it has gained a lot of complexity over the yrs.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/9/2014 - CJM Likes this wine: 89 Points
Clear very pale garnet, with slight rim browning. Soil, toasted oak, black plum. Very low acids, medium too low tannins. Blackberry. Medium to short slightly tannic finish
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/20/2014 - Tudz Drkl wrote: 90 Points
A very good wine and an excellent value. Nice spicy cherry fruit on the palate with excellent acidity providing a great backbone for the profile.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/6/2014 - jimkay21 wrote: 91 Points
No smoke. Fine drink with cherry nose and sharp red fruit palate
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/11/2014 - theharve wrote: 92 Points
last bottle, too bad. nive pinot.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/30/2013 - subir wrote: 91 Points
Beautiful balance of bouquet and body. Cherry and charm. Light to medium body.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/20/2013 - greenblanket Does not like this wine:
So, Greenblanket is still pissed about the smoke but, damnit, there's some beautiful Anderson Valley fruit showing through the taint. Too bad the fires ruined otherwise good wine and too bad this wine was sold with no mention of the potential for smoke taint.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/14/2013 - greenblanket Does not like this wine:
Here we go again; smoke or no smoke? One of the only things that Greenblanket knows for sure is that his impressionable mind is more of a factor in wine tasting that his leaden palate. This time he thinks it's more of a textural thing that seems to mask or dull tastes and aromas that seem to be partially hidden. Almost like tasting after smoking a cigar. Greenblanket should never have paid for this wine.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
11/10/2012 - CS_pikes wrote: 84 Points
I was looking for smoke and didn't find any. However, there was spritz initially and the wine seemed stripped. A fine drinkable wine, but nothing really desirable. Good in comparison to the overall wine world, but definitely not up to Anthill standards. Expensive at this quality level. Glad this was my only bottle. However, this was better than my expectations based on discussions I've seen.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/12/2012 - rdsboca wrote: flawed
NO it did not get better. Smoke and acid. Major fail.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/5/2012 - meatman wrote: 87 Points
Didn't find any smokiness this time. Very pleasent overall with the only flaw being a clipped and slightly bitter finish.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/4/2011 - SJ wrote: 85 Points
Tasted this blind and at first thought it had brett, then realized it was smoke taint. Comes across as bandaids on the nose and greasy bacon fat in the midpalate. Third bad bottle of the case. Starting to look like expensive cooking wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/10/2011 - NTR wrote: 87 Points
Great color analysis distinct pinot nose. Little harsh on the initial palate. Tannins will soften but still tight. Even smoothed out will not improve past what it is now. Decent enough but pass.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/16/2011 - meatman wrote: 86 Points
Not as bad as I expected. A little smokiness on the nose but that could have been because I was looking for it. On the palate, nice ripe fruit, good mouthfeel and good acidity. However the finish is where it fell well short. Very clipped and with a burnt aftertaste.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/22/2011 - cbbrown3 wrote: 91 Points
Very light, translucent ruby color. Cherries, underbrush, scorched earth, baking spices, raspberries, and some charred oak on the very nice nose. Medium body with soft tannins and very nice acidity. The red fruit, spices and earthiness quickly grab hold of the palate. A bit of cranberry and a slight herbal note add nice complexity. Nice length on the finish with the juicy fruit and spice slowly adding a bit of oak and the herbal note. This is my third bottle I have not experienced any of the "smoke taint" that others note, to me it's more like a nice toasted oak element this adds depth. I really like this wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/19/2011 - CarpeVinoDiem wrote: 93 Points
No notes taken at tasting.
Decanted 1 hr.
Look: Great purple/red '08 color.
Nose: Red and black cherries, soft spice, forest floor, lt. cranberry, very lt. vanilla.
Body: 2.5% milk.
Taste: Very smooth cherry, good tannins, nice spice, cranberry, musk.
Actually this kept getting Better over the span of 2 hrs.
Finish: Around 45-60 seconds.
Summary: WOW! Certainly decant 1-2 hrs. I would enjoy on it's own ideally. Amazing how it kept getting better.
Started off a 91 pt and wrapped up 93 pts. While I love my Sta. Rita Hills Brewer-Cliftons, this is my top taste for Anderson Valley.
I'll be seeking out more of these (and more Anthills - the rare times one comes across them).
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/27/2011 - greenblanket wrote:
Quite nice this time around and Greenblanket is sure that if this was served to him blind that he would never detect out of place smokiness. Just what you would expect from a well made appellation level wine - pretty red fruit with some tart notes, very light spiciness and a pleasant earthy soil thing going on.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/7/2011 - dfeiner wrote: 89 Points
Orange peel, cherries and a toasty note on the nose. Medium mouthfeel and noticeable acidity. I sort of think I detect a smokiness which is likely oak but given the year possible fire smoke. Nice wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/1/2011 - herberto wrote: 89 Points
Smoke, yes. Very smoky. But also nice juicy little pinot.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/12/2011 - incident wrote: flawed
Fifth of six bottles, and this one was clearly showing a dirty aroma. All past bottles were perfectly clean and free of any foul smokiness...this bottle was not.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/9/2011 - ejca wrote:
was pretty good
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/9/2011 - lolo66 wrote:
My 1st bottle of smoke taint. Super strong. Had to dump 1st glass. Vacuum sealed to try tomorrow.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/4/2011 - pjhr wrote: 89 Points
Best of the 3 bottles. Smoke taint is still present, but a bit softer.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/21/2011 - mkmast wrote: 85 Points
I have to believe that my bottle is impacted by smoke taint. I knew of the issues but my wife didn't. I poured and didn't let on and she almost immediately said "Something's wrong with this wine. It's like I'm trying to smell the wine in a smoky bar." I have to agree - there was something off on both the nose and the palate. Even two days later, I pulled the cork on what remained and my first thought was someone has the wood started for a barbecue.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/20/2011 - dbkitc wrote: 85 Points
Dull ruby. Creamy, red fruited nose with a distinct earthy side. No smoke that I can detect on the nose. Thin and a bit abrasive on the finish. There is some good fruit here but overall it is disjointed and doesn't provide a ton of pleasure. Not bad, but not a favorite. Will wait awhile on other bottles to see what happens. (85)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/28/2011 - CruConnexion wrote:
Nice! Great acidity & earthiness; dusty cherries, forest floor.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/15/2011 - MDV wrote: 78 Points
Creosote firewood thruout.
Still Messy and very murky almost a year later but NOT fizzy in mouth like the last bubbly bottle.
Cosistantly poor showing 2nd time.
1 more bottle Im saving for 2016, give it a last hurrah.
the second half will cook with tonight.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/29/2011 - Meerlust wrote: 89 Points
Light, ruby color. The red-fruited nose is a little shy with some earthiness underneath. On the palate, there is lovely cherry fruit and an interesting spicy note mixed with a touch of minerals. This is light-bodied, but not thin, with lively acidity and a touch of tannin. There is a slight hole in the midpalate, but the finish is solid. Overall, I find myself more attracted to this type of wine - bright fruit, lively acidity, and very little oak influence.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/21/2011 - Sakas wrote: flawed
Slight smoke taint. kinda funky and somewhat astringent. More earth driven. I get the feeling that the smoke is crushing the fruit. Looking forward to their other bottlings. 86 points
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/13/2011 - cbbrown3 wrote: 91 Points
A nice, lighter ruby color. Cherries, raspberries, toasty oak, and a slight herbal note on the nose. No smoke taint at all. Medium body with soft, ripe tannins and very nice acidity. Juicy red fruit on the palate with some baking spices kicking in on the nice finish. This is a delicious, young pinot. Perhaps there is some bottle variation in reguard to smoke taint, but I'm 2 for 2 with good bottles.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/13/2011 - kleinahoe wrote: 91 Points
Silky, a little light on the fruit
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/12/2011 - kthornton78 wrote: 87 Points
the smoke is much less evident than in my previous bottle. still there, although not overt BBQ. definitely distracts from the fruit.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/22/2011 - gzim wrote:
a bit lean, red berry, think cranberry, and definite smoke, this bottle was effected.
I think this wine should not have been released -
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/21/2011 - Chris Newport wrote:
For those keeping score: faint hints of campfire at first, but it seemed to fade away leaving behind a really nice bottle of pinot. In fact, two hours after opening I can't find a hint of it, and I'm looking for it. Nothing mind blowing here, but I like the style of this (and of anthill in general)... elegant red fruits with a nice sense of flavor impact followed by a nice streak of acidity keeping everything dancing on the palate and tying it all together. Yeah, I like this wine. Still a buyer of these wines for sure.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/11/2011 - xtrmjoe wrote: 87 Points
My system (nose mouth finish) ///, good effort given the vintage difficulty
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/8/2011 - zinnut wrote:
I don't get the smoke at all. Not a particularly great wine but I see nothing wrong here.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/6/2011 - vinojones wrote: 88 Points
P&P as soon as Fedex delivered and tasted again 12 hrs later using Riedel PN glass with wine at 55 degrees. Tasting notes essentially unchanged both tastings.
Bright red; initial nose sl green and stemmy followed by red cherry and subtle floral, rose? scents. Less smoke than in many other producers "normal" vintages using heavy char barrels; red cherry,raspberry flavor on a medium body, nice acidity, balanced; simple, fast finish, soft tannins.
I expect there will be bottle variation, but if half of the case turns out as good as this it will be a big QPR given the prices this is getting on the secondary market now.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/3/2011 - Tudz Drkl wrote: 88 Points
There was smoke on this and, while it was different from the smoked meat often detected on a good wine - this was more like the smell of a burned down house - it was not too unpleasant and it seemed to blow off by day two. Underneath was a nice sour cherry pinot noir with mouth watering acidity and a fine structure. Overall, we quite enjoyed it
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/8/2010 - pjhr wrote: 86 Points
Excellent structure but let down by smoke taint!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/24/2010 - xwine wrote: flawed
Second of the two bottles I bought. With the first bottle, I didn't pick up any smoke on the nose initially (a bit more on the nose after awhile), and just a bit on the palate. This time the peaty smokiness is much more evident on the nose, and the palate is a murky, muddled mess, with a simply overwhelming smokiness bordering on ashtray (as one poster aptly put it). I've never licked an ashtray, but I imagine it would taste like this bottle. Have to put it down as flawed. Too bad, I'm generally very impressed with AF wines.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/22/2010 - amateurwino wrote: 88 Points
Had a small pour; tried hard but couldn't detect smoke on the nose of this small sample anyway. The palate was what I expected, a bit tart with cranberry and rhubarb flavors and cool climate in style. Decent, and not marred by smoke on the palate, at least for the one gulp I had. Fine but lacks excitement. 87-88+. Overall, the profile tends toward what I like so I look forward to trying single-vineyard bottlings and other vintages of this.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/16/2010 - sawira wrote:
I've been tracking CT's tasting notes regarding the smoke taint issue with this wine, and have been wanting to try my lone bottle (parted with the rest) to assess for myself. Pop and pour. This bottle's bouquet seems unaffected, at least for my senses, but the taint is serious in the palate, the finish especially. Ashtray. It seems especially marked on the finish, the tail end of the finish, and lingers, like it's woven into the tannins and structure of the wine itself. I worked very hard to keep any expectations out of this, and my tongue still feels furred and burnt (I'm not a smoker). Too bad AHF released this, I love their wines. A classy pinot otherwise, but this is one of the very few bottles I've ever poured down the sink. Not a 'flawed bottle,' but it's a flawed wine IMHO. (I'd be interested in a poll of smokers vs non-smokers who detect vs don't detect smoke in this wine.)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/11/2010 - cseanb1 wrote: 80 Points
Opened and Decanted 2.5 hours. Little Pinot character makes it through the taste of the smoke. Certainly disappointing.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/30/2010 - JAT wrote: 90 Points
Nice concentrated red fruit and a silky mouthfeel. Distinct aroma of smoke and ash, which tends to diminish with time. May be a bit too smoky for some, but not for others like me.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/29/2010 - herberto wrote: 89 Points
Smoke? Maybe. Definitely something unusual. But still a really nice, earthy little Pinot, with good acidity and character. Loire sensibilities.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/24/2010 - cobbpa Likes this wine: 87 Points
Opened, poured a glass for my friend who remarked a minute later, "What is this? It's great, I love the subtle smokiness throughout." Sums up my thoughts pretty well--some smoke is there, but it's an acceptable trait of the wine. Enjoyable cranberry, silky dark cherries, a hint of dried raspberry all intermix with a slightly gamey, smokey vein. Impressive mouthfeel and good length on the finish.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/21/2010 - jbposell wrote: flawed
Yuck. Bought a half case for a party only to find terrible smoke taint. Don't buy this unless you like your pinots like you like your beef jerky.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/16/2010 - Acohen wrote: 89 Points
opened nicely with spice, cherry and red fruit
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/23/2010 - Acohen wrote: 90 Points
Very pleasant and lighter style pinot. Had beautiful color and a nose with light cherry and some spice. Flavor was filled with red fruit and really went well with peking duck.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/19/2010 - lolo66 wrote: 91 Points
Gave it a 30 minute decant. Nose wasn't smoky, but a bit restrained. The color is cranberry looking. It looks light. The taste showed no ill effects of fire. This continually opened up and showed some minerals and spice, gaining complexity towards the last glass.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/17/2010 - chadrich wrote: 88 Points
P&P-nose initially giving off a faint burnt rubber smell that quickly blew off. There's a little bacon fat aroma that could be linked to smoke, but no other discernable evidence. Otherwise nose is cherry, flat cola, some red currant. Palate is smooth with cherry and mild tobacco notes. Tannins are reserved and mouthfeel is fairly round and silky. Very drinkable but I expected a bit more complexity and structure.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/13/2010 - Wine'in Brian wrote: 88 Points
Consistent with the trend of recent tastings on this controversial bottle, I thought this wine showed well. Opened for an hour before pouring. Fairly deep in color, with a nose of florals, spice, bacon fat, and a touch of high toned red fruit. The primary floral and spice element carried through to the palate, which was big and rich - thanks to the Abbey Harris and Demuth fruit declassified into this bottle. Bright red cherry came through on the finish after a bit of time. I could have used a little more brightness in this, as for me, it was a bit sappy. Yes, I did get a charred/peaty characteristic in this wine (both on the nose and the palate), but it did not bother me.....actually blended in nicely with the big flavors. I see no need to hold on to these.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/1/2010 - Jay A wrote: 90 Points
Call my palate dumb, but no intrusive smoke taint here. Just a nice, elegant style Pinot Noir with red cherry, cranberry and a little bit of spice. Considering the last Pinot Noir I drank, 2005 Aubert UV, was at the total opposite of the spectrum than this one, I was very happy with the lower alcohol, more finesse and lighter style. There was definitely nothing in the wine that was off-putting.
I enjoyed it with some smoked salmon, pea and cream pasta.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/1/2010 - gzim wrote: 88 Points
Nice, well balanced pinot. Everything I like, a bit on the red fruited side some cranberry a touch of cake spice, but overall a bit on the light and elegant side. Nothing pointy at all and while I didn't go looking for the smoke, I did not notice more than a touch. Worked well with the grass fed buffalo tenderloin.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/30/2010 - Chris Newport wrote:
And here begins my contribution to the great 2008 Anthill Farms smoke debate: It's in there... but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have identified it as "smoke" if it wasn't the only thing going through my head when I tasted this. It's not a bad wine at all... the pedigree of the declassified juice is apparent: beautiful nose; very light, delicate and balanced in the mouth but with a big flavor impact. Quite a nice finish too, but there on the back of the palate... what is that funny taste? Is that smoke (or campfire, or whatever you want to call it)? Yup. I applaud the guys at Anthill for declassifying some of their upper end bottlings into this generic bottling and being upfront about it all. I plan on leaving my remaining bottles in the cellar for a while, the balance should carry this a long way.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/30/2010 - sdatl wrote: 89 Points
Yes, you can smell and taste a bit of campfire in the wine, but with about 30 min of air, it dissipates and the elegant fruit and structure comes through. It is not a profound wine, and if even a hint of smoke is a dealbreaker, then you will not like this wine. That being said, it is well-balanced, refreshing, with bright fruit and crisp acidity and it paired beautifully with crispy roast chicken.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/28/2010 - curtispomeroy wrote: 89 Points
Brought my third and final bottle to a neighbor's for s'mores over the fire pit. Figured that if there was smoke taint then it would "pair" nicely. As with the other two bottles, we did not detect any "taint" per se but maybe a subtle smokey aspect to the palate. The best of the three bottles and I have like them all. Let the debate on this wine continue.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/21/2010 - B Paul wrote: 88 Points
I had not tasted this until tonight. That said, I have been following the CT notes on this one (given the troubles of the vintage) and there appears to be a lot of bottle variation. I believe I got one of the good ones here. The smoke was noticeable on the nose (but not offensive) and the mid-palate seemed a bit hollow, but a good Pinot given the difficulties of the vintage and the price.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/21/2010 - cbbrown3 wrote: 90 Points
I'm firmly in the like it camp. Soft smokiness on the nose and the palate, but not tainted. More like you'd get from a well toasted barrel. Nice light body with pleasing red fruit and minerals. Juicy acidity.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/16/2010 - ZeGerman wrote:
Utterly undrinkable. Like swallowing the contents of an ashtray. As one of the reviewers mentioned, this wine should probably not have been released. I like Anthill Farms wines very much, but I am frankly surprised that the winery's management did not consider the value of protecting the long-term equity of their brand and business more carefully by selling a product that is clearly damaging to the winery's reputation.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/16/2010 - pjhr wrote: 88 Points
Definitely let down my smoke taint, but was pleasantly surprised how enjoyable it was after a couple of hours of air.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/5/2010 - whits wrote: 86 Points
sort of red Burgundy out of California, has enough acid to match the earthy red cherry, smoke and red currant, good intensity on the finish, a few hours later and a floral fragrance shines through with a bright berry palate, some earthiness, pretty yummy with king salmon fillet
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/4/2010 - swillpower wrote:
If you cannot detect the smoke taint in this one, it's because it's obscured by the crack you're smoking. No subtle hints of "smoked meats" or "toast" or other BS...this is straight from the ashtray to the bottle, albeit with nice varietal character on the side. With 2 hours of air time, the good side of the wine opens up, but the smoke will not go away, and probably won't with age. Serve it to your friends who smoke; maybe they won't notice, but this verges on undrinkable.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/3/2010 - curtispomeroy wrote: 88 Points
Served at a hot Night Out block party and I think it performed quite well. Did not detect any noticeable smoke taint.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/12/2010 - JimmyV wrote:
Probably should not have been released. I knew of the smoke taint before buying and opening, and was looking at this as a learning experience. I did not tell my wife about any of this as I wanted her unblemished opinion. After two glasses, she said: "I don't usually say this about wines that you buy, but I really don't like this at all." I asked her to describe what she didn't like and she nailed it. Charred, smokey, bitter and really lacking in fruit.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/11/2010 - xwine wrote:
Frankly, initially I didn't pick up any smoky character on the nose and maybe just a slight bit on the palate (a kind of charred quality), though it did seem to evolve on the nose slightly after an hour or so, but almost more like peat (which Josh Raynolds noted) and Christmas spice. Still, it has nice red fruit, and the expected charm and elegance of an Anthill pinot, but it was certainly better in the first hour after opening. Drink sooner rather than later.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/3/2010 - Brsed wrote: 88 Points
Not as good as the first bottle I had earlier this year. The trademark "brightness" and crisp AH acidity seem to be missing. Deep, dark cranberry fruit with bacon fat. Not bad, but just not what I have come to know and expect from AH.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/2/2010 - cobbpa Likes this wine: 86 Points
Nose leads with a bit of ashy meatiness--think charred grilled meats. Not terribly dominant, but noticeable. Soft red fruits exist beneath that & blend to toss in a touch of loamy character. Palate has good mouthfeel--enjoyable, palpable texture without being dense--and leads with that hint of charriness that I perceive as highlighting a nice acidity on the back end. Dark red fruits (cherry, raspberry, cranberry) carry through the finish.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/2/2010 - 31051 wrote:
Don't really get how people can't detect smoke taint on this one. This is my third go with this one and honestly it is almost undrinkable. Very, very disappointing.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/30/2010 - cporter wrote:
My second bottle of this, and shockingly different than the first. Where the smoke was a subtle background note the first go-round, this was overwhelmed by the smoke taint. There was actually something mildly pleasant about it that reminded me of South Africa, particularly the Pinot Noirs and Pinotages (a sort of over-the-top bacon fat meets smoke quality), but there was very little beyond smoke other than a subtle bit of red fruit. I don't know how smoke taint fares with age, but it would be my advice to drink these on the young side based on my experience here.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/13/2010 - Snookboy wrote: 89 Points
Popped and poured. I didn't discern any obvious smoke taint. This was really a lovely wine. Bright red fruits, nice gripping acidity with a clean finish. Not over ripe with a medium alcohol content, it was very enjoyable.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/12/2010 - dynowine wrote: 90 Points
Tastes almost like an aged gamay from Northeast France. Alternates in the mouth between smoked savory and sweet tastes especially when you swish it, i.e. between a meaty-gamey taste (think light prosciutto (some said bacon below) on thin sourdough) and a dessert tart taste (think plum-cherry, only barely sweet). Finishes with a citrus/plum, wood, and light gameyness. Fascinating pinot, worth a spin, a bit pricey for the experience.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/5/2010 - sdatl wrote: 89 Points
Dark, but not over-ripe, with crisp acidity, bright and dark fruit, and a clean finish; there is a hint of smokiness, but I think it adds to the wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/31/2010 - cporter wrote:
Popped and poured, then drank over about 3 hours. As far as smoke taint goes, the only thing that showed up to me was a background note of bacon fat/smoked meat that, while uncharacteristic of their typical AV Pinots, didn't particularly bother me. Beautiful nose of fresh earth and classic AV red apple skin. The palate is rather full and rich, though it still maintains a mineral, gripping texture. The red apple flavors really dominate here, along with strawberry, earth, and a touch of bacon. Long finish of red apple and more of the bacon/smoked meat character (the finish contains the most overt "smoky" character, though even here it's not overwhelming). On the whole, this is a wonderful appellation Pinot that speaks loudly of Anderson Valley. It also speaks clearly of the difficult '08 vintage, and how the talented guys behind Anthill Farms managed to craft a beautiful, transparent wine despite the obstacles it presented.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/24/2010 - sehill wrote:
Opened and poured, this bottle showed improvement over previous encounters with this wine. This bottle still shows the smoke issue which causes some astringency on the palate and a clipped finish; however, for this bottle the smoke taint stays more or less in the background and the fruit characteristics of the wine take more of a leading roll.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/23/2010 - curtispomeroy wrote:
With this wine I think that palate variation is more critical than bottle variation. I think there is little doubt that the fires have influenced the wine but, after serving blind to a group of six, each taster had a different opinion as to whether it detracted from the wine. My opinion is that it does not.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/18/2010 - Troy McHenry Likes this wine: 91 Points
A lighter pinkish purple in the glass with a very clear rim. Nose of cherries, but once tasted, you first feel nice strong acidity but with a long finish punctuated with woody/earthy notes that turn into darker fruit. An excellent CA Pinot for the price.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/17/2010 - winelover1 wrote: 89 Points
Smooth, ripe cherry and a typical Oregon bouquet..earthy.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/16/2010 - mdefreitas wrote: 80 Points
On the bright side, I didn't get any smokey, burnt elements... on the other hand, this was because I didn't get anything else. I was really working to get at the flavor components, but this was only slightly more flavorful than mineral water. Some slight tart cherry flavors with airing, but this was either shut down or excessively filtered. Seems like a lot of bottle variation on this wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/10/2010 - MDV wrote: 82 Points
Messy, murky and frothing at the edges, sounded like cereal (smack, crackle & pop), but not fizzy in mouth, so declined the Malo theory. Perhaps an off bottle. Did like initial nose of tart berries.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/8/2010 - jdbcolumbus wrote: 89 Points
Decanted 3+ hours. Subtle nose of floral, cherry and spice with some cola. Starts very light on the palate but builds nicely to tart cherry and finishes with fine tannins and a hint of smoke. Nice finesse and balance.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/7/2010 - markjanes wrote: 88 Points
Very light color with a purple hue rim of light extraction. On the nose loads of very pretty, floral, bright red cherry and raspberry... some new barrique spice notes. On the palate the wine has high acidity, a very pretty and light yet full midpalate that transitions into a low to moderate tannin finish... low ETOH. Great balance with the wine showing excellent balance between the hard and soft elements of the wine and the oak using being appropriate to the fruit intensity, average length, good intensity, average complexity. Wonderful finesse, especially considering its New World origing, a very fine texture, good expression of place. This is a really pretty wine that exibits no smoke taint to me... what it lacks in complexity and depth is more than made up for in beautiful texture... very good QPR... shows how good Cali pinot can be texturally if the winemakers would just back off the extraction and ripeness a bit... will hold well over the next few years...
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/5/2010 - Jadiii wrote: 87 Points
Bright on the nose, no real notice of smoke or campfire in this bottle on the nose and even the mid-palate but do get a slight hint of smoke on the finish particularly after a minute or so on the exhale. But not to the point that it is really affecting me enjoying the wine, I think decanting helped. Still a solid $35 bottle of wine. My came home later that evening after work and asked her to try the wine and tell me what she smelled and taster, she had no previous knowledge of the fires nor did she hear about it or had any idea what took place in Anderson Valley in 2008, the first thing out of her mouth was she tasted smoke. No hesitation and it wasn't a completely negative comment, still liked the wine but did notice smoke and ash.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/4/2010 - jraider wrote:
Popped and poured. Consumed over two nights. Fresh and delicious wtih bright red fruits and only 13.2% ABV. No sign of smoke taint.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/1/2010 - sehill wrote:
Opened and poured, this wine unfortunately appears to show signs of smoke taint with an astringent ashtray element on the bouquet and palate. Unfortunately these elements overshadow the underlying elegance and beauty of this wine. Based on the tasting notes of other CellarTracker memebers, there appears to be a degree of bottle variation regarding the smoke taint issue. This bottle shows it in a more obvious, detrimental way that at times makes the wine tough to consume.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/1/2010 - Sakas wrote: 88 Points
Getting some smoky campfire (which I must admit for me isn't really a turn off) but not to an overwhelming extent. This pinot is in a richer, riper style but you can still see your fingers through it (which is nice!). Has opened up nicely over the course of a 4.5 hour decant and the campfire does dissipate a bit. A fair amount of acid on this and not much in the way of tannins. Definitely see the astringency on the finish that previous reviewers have mentioned.
On the whole a decent bottle. Fairs pretty well with grilled tuna steaks. Despite holding up through the decant, this was nice enough as a pop and pour and didn't evolve too much. No need to hold this, drink over the next few years. 87-88
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/1/2010 - Dale B. wrote:
After openning I gave the glass to my wife, who doesn't drink wine, and ask her what she smelled. She said ashes. I had to agree. With a previous bottle I didn't detect anything on the nose but the finish was clipped and bitter. This one was almost the oppisite. Nose was all wet campfire, but the palate was not all that bad. Rest of the bottle consumed on day 2 was just reversed. Nose was better with no campfire, but the finish was short, bitter and chemical. Go figure.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/28/2010 - GrapeScott wrote: 85 Points
Sure I was tipped off on the "taint," so I got the same impression as many others. On day 1, definite campfire on the nose, with the occasional more offensive wisp of wet ashtray. This was mostly gone by day 2 and 3, but this wine, while certainly drinkable, was nowhere near the class of the '07 single vineyards. Seemed like a hollow shell of the better AF wines, with lower acidity, darker fruit, and a somewhat diluted midpalate. The finish was short and marred by bitterness. A cool science experiment but I'm happy I only bought 2. I have better expectations for the Peters and Comptche but won't be testing that hypothesis any time soon.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/15/2010 - salil wrote: 89 Points
Dominated by such an intense aromatic smoky, meaty character that I guessed a lighter Syrah immediately when this was served blind. Really lovely stuff, combining bright red fruits, bacon fat and smoky notes in a package that's very elegant and precise with nice acidity and length. Didn't find this particularly Pinot Noir-like - but the end result here is still really nice.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/15/2010 - glaze3 wrote:
Unless there's some bottle variation I don't know how you can't pick up the smoke on this. I am a big fan of Anthill and opened this with an open mind and was hoping some of the other notes that showed smoke taint were more or less just imaginery. When first opened the showed lots of campfire so into the decanter it went for an hour. Poured the first glass and the campfire aromas didn't seem as strong, but were still there. On the palate there is lovely red fruits that on there own would make this a typical Anthill pinot, but the smoke reappears on the finish and is quite distracting. I drank 3 glasses over a 3 hour period which with the hour in the decanter gave this 4 full hours of air and if nothing else the campfire palate got worst. I now will always know what smoke tainted wine is like ( a learning experience to say the least).
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/12/2010 - TomTom wrote:
Ok, maybe I'm imagining it, but I definitely taste a smokiness and, to be honest, I just can't get passed it. Without foreknowledge of the fires, etc., perhaps I would have called this gamey or reminiscent of beef jerky, but it really doesn't work for me in this instance.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/10/2010 - BobS wrote: 88 Points
Early on I got some of the smoke everyone else missed. Later I used an aerator which removed most of the smoke taste.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/10/2010 - Brsed wrote: 91 Points
Drank at Pinehurst dinner. No formal notes. I thought this was a wonderful bright Pinot with multiple layers of fruit and complexity. No smoke taint issues with this bottle.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/9/2010 - T-Mac wrote: 88 Points
There's no doubt this shows smoke taint, especially the nose. It's really not enjoyable to drink...will leave the rest for tomorrow to see where it goes. Much, much better the next day. Well balanced, straighforward pinot with bright red fruits. Pretty good.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/9/2010 - rdsboca wrote: 85 Points
Just took a whiff and a taste out of the decanter. Absolutely clear, bright rose color. No smoke on the nose or palate yet. Initial taste was tight with some acidity but will check back in after aeration in 1.5 hours. Young fruit of strawberry and cherry but the finish wss short and almost a chemical/acetone bite. My least favorite AF tp date.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/8/2010 - jakuda wrote:
Opened at 55deg F. Poured off half into a half-bottle for Day 2 drinking. The rest was left to warm up and aerate for ~1 hour. There are some deep aromas of ripe bing cherries and damp peat that are accompanied by some notes of smoky peat. Reduction or smoke? I'm leaning towards the latter, but I'm not sure. In the mouth there is an immediate, velvety rush of ripe cherries and plums, that are juicy. This is quickly followed by a light, chalky layer of tannins which mostly disappears after a few seconds but there is a lingering grip that persists through the tart finish which for me ends a little bitter. Possible smoke issues aside, the finish was a tad disappointing for me.
Edit: With extra air time and more sipping, the smoky elements and bitterness are not (as) noticeable and the bottle ends up being a relatively simple but pleasant and sappy pinot.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/7/2010 - Acohen wrote: 90 Points
Nice red fruit with spice and sense of earthiness. Lots going on and quite nice with lamb chops
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/1/2010 - greenblanket wrote:
Ripped into this one as it came off the UPS truck and it's much different than last year's version; it's darker, more saturated and better defined overall. The palate features red fruits and a nice sense of soil and earth. However, while I am withholding judgment for a day or two, I am concerned about hints of damp, morning after campfire on the nose and palate.
Day two report: No sign of smoke - just beautiful raspberry and cherry fruit with spice and earth accents.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/31/2010 - herberto wrote: 91 Points
This is a very nice, earthy pinot with real soil character. Refreshingly understated. Lacks the bracing acidity of AF's great single vineyard pinots.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment