Wink Wine Bar
Tasted Sunday, January 10, 2010 by austinwinesalon with 1,210 views
The Austin Wine Salon began its certain explorations in September, 2008 on a Burgundy note. Many months and salons later we re-visited red Burgundy and pinot noir in a “lab setting” at the Wink wine bar on Sunday, January 10. Thirty people were organized into eight groups and drank and took notes on 9 flights of wine, including 8 new world pinot noir and 28 French burgundy wines. Each attendee tasted 12 of the 36 salon wines presented. The flights were organized into themes, as follow. We had a fine beef bourguignon courtesy of www. Alcoholian.com, charcuterie from Mons. Chafee and Mlle. Mandi, killer Keller brownies from Ms. Leslie, Blanc de Noir courtesy of cellar tracker Greg Pierce, and hospitality from the grand cru staff of Wink restaurant. Without further adieu, the wines, the flights:
A scattered look at perhaps a classic California terroir.
One winemaker, one style, and a diversity of vineyards and geology throughout the Willamette--a northwesterner's experience of Burgundy. These wines were purchased new from Ken Wright Cellars and have been in another cellar ever since.
Tasted by two groups, it was one group's favorite and the other's least favorite of four Ken Wright 1998 pinots. Very good for an eleven year old Oregon pinot, the first group opened the bottle and thought it resembled a good red bourgogne. It was lean, the most cherry of the '98 Ken Wrights tasted, and fresh, not big or complex. A good quaffing wine. An hour later the second group liked the wine a lot. It had added fruit, was more complex, and had medium tannins. One taster found a fruit explosion, and tastes of orange, blood orange, red fruits, pomegranate, "big red." cherry herring, cinnamon, and honeysuckle were found. All enjoyable wines, the 1998 Ken Wrights performed much better than the various Pisonis. And we think this Carter vineyard wine improves with some decanting or air.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
Was disjointed, some secondary fermentation perhaps, and didn't measure up to the other Ken Wrights for the same vintage, so we concluded the bottle was flawed. We substituted a 1998 Panther Creek Freedom Hill, which was not made by Ken Wright, but he had previously been the winemaker for Panther Creek, so an almost.......
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
In the eighties and early nineties Ken Wright made the Panther Creek wines and they were excellent, especially for their price range of $12-18, though by 1995 he was off and running at his own cellar. We thought this wine to be drinking at its optimum now, and was quite lovely. Had a fruit and barnyard nose, had good structure, and good acidity. It was spicy and herbaceous, with clove, nutmeg, rosemary, mushroom, "laphroaig peat," and slight tobacco flavors, along with pinot black fruit, cherry, plum, pomegranate and raspberry notes. A surprisingly rich wine.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
The seven tasters were all in accord on this wine. It is a mineral driven, earthy, meaty wine. A bit of a premier cru, with bacon fat, plum, rosemary, slate, clove, and "fireplace hearth." Plum and mineral notes rather than cherry, this wine shows off the variety of terroir in Oregon that Ken Wright celebrates in his dozen-plus vineyard wines. Dark and iron rich, with medium acid and medium to low tannins, and a good finish, this is a fun wine and has lots of nuance, and drank a bit like a Cote de Beaune.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
I remember 6-7 years ago drinking four different 1998 Shea vineyard wines on the bocce court, and this was clearly the most complex and interesting of the group (Beau Freres, Shea Cellars, and St. Innocent), though all were great values in an excellent year for Oregon pinot. This time we had two groups tasting Ken Wright 1998 wines, with one group, "the bottle openers," picking this as its favorite, and the other group, with the bottle opened for an hour, picking the wine as its least favorite. So apparently the Carter vineyards got better, and the Shea less with time on the bottle. The first group thought the wine was the most complex, was reminiscent of the early Oregon years (1985 Ponzi, Rex Hill, etc), and had violet and floral notes, bright cherry, and was the most feminine wine in our flight (spoken by a true female). The second group found it lighter, had some secondary fermentation, was tight and muted, and had some sweet red currant, strawberry, and spearmint notes. The wine was clearly diminishing after more than an hour of air. Drink up, and you might really enjoy the first fifteen minutes of the wine.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
From the new world to the old, quickly with chambolle musigny, perhaps the most appealing of burgundies.
Ten of our tasters and three groups tasting four classic chambolle musignys. The Dujac chambolle is recognized as a great value, hence the price continues to creep up. This is premier cru quality masquerading as a village wine. An average vintage, this 1997 was the favorite of one group, the least favorite of the other two groups, but all were complimentary. Resolved, balanced, and soft, the wine showed floral, rose-petal, and mineral notes. It had some blackberry, bell pepper, and green flavors, and had the least alcohol (13%) of our chambolles. The wine may have been a bit past its prime, and the 1997 Dujac Morey St. Denis tasted recently was richer. Still a lovely village wine which has doubled in price over the past years, and may even be a bargain.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
The least favorite of our four chambolles tasted, the Bertheau started with some funk, found some character, and after an hour became opaque, cloudy, and astringent. Overall it tasted green and mineral-driven. Not much fruit but some good structure, tasters found brussel sprouts, flowers, mint, sage, pomegranate, and a bit of cherry after the funk. It showed good structure for awhile, and then tailed off. Drink up.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
A substitute for a flawed Ghislaine-Barthot. It started off closed, as a 2002 should, and built its character and finished well, though it is definitely too young now. It has a lot of acid, is quite stem-y, and the fruit is hiding. The structure for a fine wine, with balance, roundness, and subtleties, is there. Some vanillin and pie cherry notes, and a long finish. Very Jadot in its use of stems, complexity, and age-worthiness. Tasters thought this wine needed more aging and would still be lovely in twenty years. Oh well.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
What a great vintage the 2002 is. Tasted with a 2002 Jadot Les Baudes, these wines will be very fine indeed in a few years. The favorite of a chambolle flight, the wine was dark, pretty, and powerful. Great structure, with tight and bright fruit, and some notes of vanilla, maple, and minerals. Potent, and will drink well in ten years, or decant and enjoy a very young fine wine with food, which it needs.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
These are the forgotten premier crus of Burgundy, and are such good values.
Rustic wine with a firm structure, this tastes like a farmer's burgundy, and you either like it or not. For some this had acetate, stewed vegetables, sour cabbage, medicinal flavors, and for others this was a classic style. The nose had some alcohol, the wine was light, had good acidity, and not much fruit. I had a 1988 of this recently and it drank well, though it was definitely old style burgundy and "rustic." So maybe this might improve with more time, but it was the least favorite of four Beaune premier crus.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
This wine took some time to develop. It initially was angular and hard, showed some astringency and high tannins, some pencil box aromas. In an hour it developed into a different animal, taking on a lot of aromatics and flavors. From hard, new world characteristics upon opening it developed into a classic jadot style, of resolved tannins, good acidity, a perfume nose, and much complexity. Flavors of chambord (liqueur), quince, coffee, there is a lot going on. A great value, but decant or let it breathe, and then enjoy.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
What a difference a year and a producer make (re the 1995 Albert Morot)!! This wine drank very well upon opening, a Drouhin hallmark in a demanding vintage. Initially the nose was barnyard and earthy, and added floral and cherry blossom notes--gorgeous, described by a veteran taster. Nice acidity and a soft mouth feel, the wine was medium-bodies and had sweet fruit and minerals on the palate--more form than function, a light, accessible, and sophisticated burgundy in a promising vintage.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
Such a value! A friendly and bright wine with a new world nose but an old world body. This wine is $30-40 if you can find it, and it is so drinkable. A candied fruit nose, with some coconut and butter popcorn, is followed by a lot of fruit and soft mouth-feel, a bit startling because there is also good structure. The most new world of the dozen beaunes drunk at this tasting, the Tollot-Beaut was simply well-crafted and a nice drink. It seemed ageworthy, with old world acidity somehow showing through the fruit syrup; one taster called it "unnatural" and another "slightly generic, but lovely." What a nice wine for a restaurant to carry--I recall that Willi's wine bar in Paris featured this wine a few years ago. Probably still does.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
Two of these wines were top quality; maybe someday the Cote de Beaune will add a grand cru or two from Pommard. These are better than many Cortons.
The least favorite of our Pommards, a classic but maybe not enough fruit to outlast the considerable tannins. A light, somewhat funky nose, the wine had a lot of leather notes, with some dried fruit compote, chestnut, rhubarb , currant, cinnamon, clove, and spice flavors. There was medium-high acidity, so the wine may improve with age and 1996 burgundies are notoriously young now. Wait and hope.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
A nice surprise. This well balanced wine had loads of complexity. A powerful nose with high acid and gripping tannins, the fruit was brilliant. Clove, anise, all-spice, and mushroom notes, with some earthiness and minerality also noted, there were lots of flavors: canola oil, fondue meat, pernot, blood, prune, black cherry, cranberry, stewed black cherry, raspberry, and plum, nicely balanced and interesting. Highly recommended and drinks well now.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
A favorite of the whole tasting, this wine was intriguing. This was almost grand cru quality, with great acidity, a pleasing nose, dried fruit and spices. Lots of flavor notes here: smoked pork fat, candied yams, caramel, cremini mushrooms, plum, raspberry, cherry, middle eastern spice, rose water, shaved truffle, wet cherry-flavored tobacco, et al. This intriguing wine had an excellent mouthfeel and drank well now.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
A salon-er insisted we drink an older Pommard, so we tossed out the '96 Drouhin Epenots and settled for a Rugiens, which was apropos. This was definitely a funky wine, with an off-putting nose, tartness and minerality on the palate, and some disjointedness. It drank its best when first opened, and those tasters found some pomegranate, rhubarb, game, mushroom, raspberry jam, and middle eastern spice flavors. As time went by the wine got funkier-- one taster said it was "grumpy." It might age some more, but this was our least favorite Pommard of the night, though classic and interesting.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
The Burgundy under-dog, classic pinot noir with more mineral than fruit, more nose than finish.
Ready to drink, a sweet balanced wine with good acid, fruit, and roundness. The wine was a light red with an orange rim, had a cherry nose which added aromas of citrus over thyme , and some burgundy funk. There was lots of fruit flavor, especially lush cherry, with many tasters impressed by the completeness and depth of the fruit. It had a mushroom, savory finish. A very fine Volnay indeed.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
Usually a very fine village wine striving for premier cru quality, this bottle might have been a little off. It had a sweet musty nose, with some sulphur notes; one taster described it as burning pencil. The fruit seemed muted and understated, though there was some backbone and good fruit to this wine. But how do you get to it? This Lafarge might be in a dumb phase, as I have had this wine before and thought it balanced and a great value. "Grandma's attic," as one taster described it......it might improve with age.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
A favorite of one group of tasters (the bottle-openers), the least favorite of another (the last to taste), so maybe the wine needs to be drunk soon after opening. The first group described the wine as garnet, with a slightly transparent rim, with a vanilla nose, caramel and thai basil flavors, with balanced acidity. The second tasters found the wine slightly bitter, with graphite notes and melon on the finish. They thought it might develop into a better wine. The last group thought it light and flat, but then they had been drinking lots of 2002 burgundy......
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
What a lovely young burgundy, and surprisingly accessible now. A ruby center, with a watery rim, with oak, vanilla, strong cherry, and some rose on the nose, the wine has a velvet-y front palate, sweet fruit and jasmine/toast flavor, some harsh tannin, and a dark cherry finish. The tasters were impressed with this wine: not great but a great value, and a wine to enjoy at a restaurant.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
Better than many mazis and latricieres chambertins--really. Most of the older wines in this flight and others were contributed by Dr. Glass.
Perspicacious wine-making, commented the owner of this bottle. Another mentioned a downward slope having once been great. Everyone enjoyed drinking the wine. For some it featured a stinky nose, was dark and cloudy, ruby port-like, and spent. A great damsel thought it tasted like a great dame, was fading but wonderful. Clearly it was not as good as the 1983 Leclerc Gevrey tasted next, and had little fruit while some good acidity. The nose evolved, there were some cumin and curry notes, it was a bit tart. One taster commented that it was the first Gevrey Chamblertin he didn't want to drink.. Apparently he wanted to look at and smell the perfume.....of this grand dame.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
"Right where it needs to be," he commented. I suppose in this flight and in his glass. This was a unanimous favorite. Clear and blood orange-ish, the Leclerc had toasted oak, fireplace, charcoal, and smoke notes; some thought this graphite or earthy. The wine had good acidity which kept it fresh and in balance. There was not much fruit but some chicken liver and mineral flavors also. Words like amazing and great resounded. A grand gentleman with his pencil box.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
This wine was the back-up wine for a flawed bottle of 1996 Faiveley Cazetiers. Not a bad substitute. Ruby and clear, the wine started with a floral, perfume nose and harsh tannins and eventually graduated to some good fruit. It was obviously a young wine looking for a brighter future, maybe in ten years said the senior adviser. A few thought the wine very delicious now, with dried hibiscus, iron, earth, "bloody minerality," and cherry notes. This wine got better as it opened up, but the wine clearly needs more cellaring.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
Some thought this wine too fruit forward and a bit hot; others thought it "gorgeous, a perfect expression of modern Burgundy." Still others thought it juicy and low acid, with no sense of terroir. Some of these comments are due to the vintage, 2003, which had record heat and lots of variation amongst producers. Some initial thoughts on this vintage were that producers were rewarded further down the slope (less dry), so that village and premier cru wines might fare better than the grand crus and hilltop vineyards. But many 2003 burgundies have developed much sooner and with moe complexity than anticipated, and many currently outshine the 2002's. That said, this 2003 Clos St. Jacques seems a quintessential 2003 premier cru: "oak, sweet cherry fruit, low acid, not much mid-palate, juicy plum, strawberry, an unctuous glycerin mouthfeel, soft and sweet tannins, balanced, needs food, not sophisticated or elegant, delicious fruit, a fine finish........." So this wine seems more expressive of the vintage than the vineyard. Grand youth.
Post a Comment / 1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
A great vintage requiring more time in the cellar, flight contributed by Dr. Collins.
In this flight of 2002's, a Grivot placed first and a Grivot placed last--this was the latter. This NSG Roncieres was a bit thin, with lots of acidity and tannins, not much fruit, and seemingly "not structured for the long haul." Some thought this wine was in a dumb phase, but others detected strawberry and raspberry fruit, white pepper, anise, pit fruit, cooked fruit, generic cola, and minerals. The wine never really opened up, and probably needs 8-10 years of long hauling.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
A musty nose when first poured, it soon blew off and had almost no bouquet. The wine had good structure and complexity, and lots of flavors: blueberry, minerals, grape stems (jadot!), ginseng, oaked cognac, covered fruit, leather, cinnamon, tanned saddle leather, shaved rhubarb, black cherry skin, licorice, dark bruised pear--we had a lot of accomplished cooks tasting this wine. This was balanced and approachable.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
Built for aging, the nose was a bit metallic, even fishy, and the wine initially had some alcohol and bitterness. As the wine breathed, flavors and complexity started to develop. Black cherry, blueberry, strawberry preserves, fig, soy, lilac and lavender, rose water, five-spice, and vanilla flavors were detected. A Roumier with a cru, and a bright future if kept in the cellar.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
A very pretty wine, everyone's favorite 2002 in this flight. A red fruit nose with some white pepper aromas, this was a full-bodied, sweet fruit, cote rotie-ish treat. Very fragrant and with good balance, flavor notes included dry pecan pie, brown prune, rosemary, pork belly, bourbon barrel, stewed strawberry (strawberries in stews during the winter in Austin?), rose petal, licorice, and repeated notes of lychee and white pepper. This was a complex, tasty, grand cru quality wine, drinking well right now.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
The older, generally the better.
Took us all to a very comfortable place. Probably the favorite wine of the tasting. Drank incredibly well, would be hard to believe it ever can taste better. Had a beautiful nose, lots of cranberry and sweet cherry deep fruit, light tannins, and a warm finish. Showed off the 1985 vintage and that on occasion Echezeaux can exceed Grands Echezeaux.
Post a Comment / 1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
Dirty cherry: the wine. This wine needs to be kept in the cellar quite a bit longer. It had lots of cherry notes and was chewy with a funky, earthy nose. A wine with a future, too young now. We found lots of cherry flavors, as well as figs, white pepper, toasty oak. The fruit seems unresolved. Last month the salon tasted a 2002 Newman Latricieres Chambertin and we thought a Newman wine six years older would drink quite well. We forgot that this is Bonnes Mares, a grand cru terroir requiring much more cellar time than chambertins. Oh well.....we won't be drinking the 2002 Newman Bonnes Mares for a decade.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
Very nice aromatics, smooth and elegant, classic grand cru Burgundy, but some glucose, strawberry sweet tarts on the palate. The nose was floral, dry roses, but fruit and flavor were lacking, with a bit of plum, leather, strawberry. This wine was surely better a few years ago, as the vintage might indicate. Though the midpalate was thin and the finish lacking, the wine was delicate, silky, and feminine, and enjoyed on its own, sans beef bourguignon and charcuterie.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
A nice nose but harsh tannins, a promise of fruit, some lovely structure, but an adolescent. The 2000 vintage is difficult to predict for grand crus: some have drunk well and some seem toned down and are unpredictable. We think this wine should improve in the cellar. It does not taste as well as the 1999 Grand Rue now, has harsh minerals and lacks fruit, but the nose is promising and we detected notes of spice, white pepper, vanilla extract. In a few years it should develop into a well-structured wine that is light on the fruit and features a fine nose and maybe some leather and mineral notes.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
© 2003-26 CellarTracker! LLC. All rights reserved. "CellarTracker!" is a trademark of CellarTracker! LLC. No part of this website may be used, reproduced or distributed without the prior written permission of CellarTracker! LLC.

1996 Ojai Pinot Noir Pisoni Vineyard
USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Lucia Highlands
Some carbonic maceraion/effervescence, light color, nice nose, mushrooms, earthy, some leather and cherry on the palate, but may be over the hill now. We were surprised at the quick finish, low tannins, and simplicity of the wine, as the producer usually is impressive. The wine was purchased new and cellared since, and the conclusion of six tasters was that the wine needs to be drunk up for whatever is left.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
2000 Patz & Hall Pinot Noir Pisoni Vineyard
USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Lucia Highlands
In this Pisoni flight the P&H drank as the most traditional California pinot. A bit flabby and not much depth, was a bit harsh. The nose was not pronounced but had dark cherry jam meets pencil box on the palate. Angular and not well-balanced, lacking finesse, not the best or worst of the flight, disappointing.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
1999 Arcadian Pinot Noir Pisoni Vineyard
USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Lucia Highlands
Our favorite wine of the Pisoni flight, a new world attempt at old world wine. Some vague sweetness on the nose, nice tannins, good structure, low acidity and not overpowering. This pisoni had a candied, baked cherry nose, some cherry, roasted coffee, and cola on the palate, some brightness and a decent finish. One taster likes new world wines to taste new world, but this was close to being a village chambolle or nuits st. george. Good wine-making here.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
2003 Dominion Tantara Pinot Noir Pisoni Vineyard
USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Lucia Highlands
The least favorite wine of four producer Pisonis, this wine tasted very medicinal and hot, with high alcohol. Notes included: the dentist office, cough syrup, pure alcohol, and is it fortified. A couple of tasters thought it resembled madeira, with some fig and prune notes under the high alcohol. When pisoni can go bad.....
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No