Last bottle, and this time I'll keep it short. Low alcohol, some residual sugar. Nose retains some cherry. So instead of tossing or using for cooking, drink it chilled as an aperitif wine, and it seems just fine and will be pleasantly enjoyable.
Wow, the reviews on this wine are all over the place, from love it to hate it. Usually when the spread is this great, there is a correlation between the scores and the total number of CT tasting notes of the person scoring the wine (for example, those who love it have contributed many tasting notes, those who hate it have contributed very few total CT tasting notes, or vice versa). For this particular wine, this does not appear to be the case. Some of those who contribute a lot love it and some who contribute a lot hate it. My own previous score (89) and number of tasting notes, appears to fall right about in the middle of the pack.
So, I am going to try something I've never done before. I'm going to taste it again but with a specific eye toward reacting to some of the posted notes.
So here goes:
First impressions relative to my own previous notes. Yech!!! When I tasted it previously I opened it as a dessert after a large meal, anticipating an over-ripe wine. Now I am tasting it on its own with no food. Definitely not a good way to drink this wine. In fact, I'm finding it outright unpleasant and am continuing only in the name of science! :). (But don't get me wrong - I'm not denying my previous experience - it was enjoyable consumed as dessert at the end of a meal).
Okay, so now on to what I set out to do, reacting to a few of the posted comments:
1. Sweet. Yes, and not just in terms of ripeness of the fruit. This wine clearly has residual sugar. I don't have a problem with that per se. (I love Spatburgunder from the rhiengau that has residual sugar). But the problem with this wine is that there isn't enough acidity to support the residual sugar when drunk on its own (maybe some of the acidity has also faded since the last tasting, since I seem to recall much more acidity).
2. Disjointed and spiky. I do remember this from my last experience. This seems to be less so now.
3. Elegant. No, sorry. Unusual, yes.
4. Flinty and mineral driven. I can't find this.
5. Crisp, acidic. I remember it as acidic But I think much of the acidity has now faded and is lacking.
6. Red berriers, rhubarb, guava. Yes, this seems spot on to me.
7. Kook aid, artificial flavor strawberries and jolly rancher. Yes, this also seems right to me. I think 6 and 7 are actually expressing similar characteristics, one expressed in negative terms and the other expressed in positive or neutral terms.
8. Thin. Yes, this is what surprised me on first tasting. I think it is thin on the fruit, with the viscosity coming from the residual sugar. But I didn't see this as necessarily bad when the wine was in balance, just very different.
So, my overall take away. I won't score it this time. If I did, it would be a much lower score joining those who scored in the 70's. But more importantly, I think the wine needs to be consumed in the right context. On its own, I find it undrinkable. Treated as a more alcoholic version of a rheingau spatlese spatburgunder, at the end of a meal or with bbq, it could be enjoyable again.
Actually, I changed my mind. It's more honest if I do score it since I think my overall assessment is that I was wrong with my previous score and agree with the low scorers (the loss of acidity since the previous tasting two years ago may also be contributing).
Professional reviews have copyrights and you can view them here for your personal use only as private content. To view pro reviews you must either subscribe to a pre-integrated publication or manually enter reviews below. Learn more.