Community Tasting Note

• csimm wrote: 85 points

  June 25, 2018 - The optimist would say this wine is “in a transition phase,” “still integrating,” “of a particular style,” or “a unique representation of the terroir.”
  
  The pessimist would say that wonky stewed plums and vodka aren’t the best flavor profile for any wine at any time.
  
  ...take a wild guess which lane I’m in...

  2 people found this helpful 3,304 views

16 Comments

• JLuch1 commented:

  6/27/18, 8:24 PM - Well, since you asked, I’ma go with “a unique representation of the terroir.”

• csimm commented:

  6/27/18, 8:56 PM - Precisely!.....
  
  ...or... NOT that at all...
  
  I was sooooo bummed out with this wine. Dammit all!

• JLuch1 commented:

  6/27/18, 9:59 PM - Yea, that is unfortunate and always a bummer. The 2012 vintage has had the most let downs for me so far in post 2007 Napa. And I wouldn’t say they were bad, but I was just hoping for more and they just never got there. Perhaps my expectations are skewed from all the great wines coming out of Napa out of the 13, 14, 15 and 16 vintages.

• csimm commented:

  6/28/18, 5:56 AM - I totally agree. At the time, 2012 was supposed to be this “Goldilocks vintage,” lauded as some beacon of Heavenly light that rescued everyone from the dismal 2011 vintage. And then 13/14/15/16 came along. Some 2012s are sexy and well crafted. Others are “meh” and kinda wonky, and show the rebound effect illustrative of some winemakers’ obvious paranoia about repeating the 2011 vintage, instead seemingly overcompensating in 2012. Then RP anointed 2013 the best vintage of all time... and so it goes.

• JLuch1 commented:

  6/28/18, 7:36 AM - Agreed, I have enjoyed some 2012's that Melka has produced that were very good (namely Fairchild and QTR). I had looked up the vintage chart from RP before I posted my last comment. Surprisingly he has the 2012 vintage (96E) rated above the 2014's (93R) and one point behind the 2015's (97E). Further, he has both the 12 and 15 vintage to be accessible early. I have found the 15's I have tried to be wound up pretty tight, reminds me more of the 13 vintage in that respect (and I guess also the balance between fruit/earth/minerality). Especially compared to the bodacious and fruity 14's, which for me have been drinking very well right out of the gate.
  
  Ultimately, I suppose it comes down to personal preference anyway.....

• csimm commented:

  6/28/18, 8:22 AM - Yeah, trying to hone in on the ever-moving target of optimum drinking windows is tough...each bottle of wine behaves differently at different times for different people. CellarTracker can certainly be helpful in that respect. Subjectivity aside, the 14s definitely seem to be the easiest drinkers out of the past few vintages. Some are a little simple and “fruity”/round/plush when compared to the complexity and intensity of many 13/15/16s.
  
  For me, 2013s are still the most wound up in general. But again, it depends on the wine. I like the 15 vintage quite a bit so far. 16 seems to be somewhat of a hybrid of 14/15, with decent 14-like accessibility so far, but similar concentration to 15. Who knows when things may eventually “shut down” though (whatever that actually means).

• JLuch1 commented:

  6/28/18, 2:44 PM - I think that is reasonable on the 2013's. I have been actively avoiding pulling those from my cellar since I did not have a lot to begin with. I have been grabbing the 2015's in the secondary market to the extent I can. I was fortunate enough to get on the Mike Smith mailing lists for the 16 go around (Carter and Quivet specifically) and nabbed up some OG and La Verdad, so I am hoping those shape up nicely and on par with 13/15. Will aim to grab some 16 LPV on the Quivet also, based on your glowing review, seems like a great QPR.
  
  Fingers crossed.

• csimm commented:

  6/28/18, 3:08 PM - In tasting through the 2016 Carter lineup, I can say you shouldn’t be disappointed with either the OG or Verdad. They are great! And that ‘16 Quivet LPV.... awesome!

• JLuch1 commented:

  6/28/18, 5:12 PM - I have to say, based on your notes on the Quivet LPV, seems like you prefer that slightly over the Verdad for 2016. Is that a fair assessment? I wonder mainly because the Quivet is at a better price point.
  
  I also purchased less of the Verdad vs OG in anticipation of scooping up some Quivet LPV.

• csimm commented:

  6/28/18, 5:49 PM - Quivet LPV vs. Carter Verdad in 2016 would be a great side-by-side to do. I’ll have to do that... along with Bam. Both Verdad and Quivet are great. It’s fair to say that the Quivet certainly has a sex appeal about it that stands out. The Verdad might win in the complexity department, and will likely lap the Quivet at some point over time, but the Quivet is very unctuous and super giving. Both are worthy of having. Add the QPR aspect to the Quivet, and it’s certainly a wine worth paying attention to.

• JLuch1 commented:

  6/28/18, 6:54 PM - I look forward to trying them both, but unfortunately I doubt it will be side by side. I am curious to see what my allocation will look like on the Quivet LPV.
  
  I was surprised a bit on the Carter in that I had access to buy during the first round of the release. I had it marked on the calendar and got right in for the OG and Verdad. Not sure how they normally do things or if it is tied at all to my other Mike Smith purchases, but I’ll take it.
  
  A side note, more in line with our vintage discussion from earlier. I’ve been nursing a 16 round pond over the last three days via a simple recork. Definitely best on day 3 without question. I don’t recall being able to do so with the 14s.

• csimm commented:

  6/29/18, 6:08 AM - Mike does allocations with Myriad and Quivet labels. Mark Carter doesn’t do formal allocations and is pretty much first come, first served. He emails out the date and it’s off to the races.
  
  Interesting on Round Pond...a wine built for lying down I suppose. I’m pretty sure Myriad’s version will be more accessible earlier on.

• JLuch1 commented:

  6/29/18, 7:46 AM - It is hard to tell what the intention was on the Round Pond. Mainly because the bottle I consumed was a private label in a collaboration between Round Pond Estate and my local liquor store. The juice is from the Rutherford estate and somewhere in between their estate and reserve cab. I think the general rule on the private label wine that my buddy brings in, tends to spend a couple months less in barrel versus what the estate churns out (which I believe in the case of Round Pond, is 18 months 60/40), just to change up the flavor profile and blend a bit.
  
  Probably why I was surprised on the day 3 performance. Blackberry and black cherry on the entry transitioning to cocoa powder and what I would call twizzlers, towards the finish. Aromatics were also best on day 3. I was expecting it to be DOA when I pulled the cork that evening. The previous two days were ok, wine was just a lot more linear.

• csimm commented:

  6/29/18, 10:13 AM - Well it sounds like a wine with potential and some solid years ahead of it. I typically won’t drink Mike’s wines past 7 years from vintage, just because I like the freshness and intensity his wines bring in their youth. Some Carter wines can still be good 8-10 years in. I think his Round Pond will be more of an early drinker (we shall see).

• JLuch1 commented:

  6/29/18, 10:27 AM - I appreciate the perspective on the drinking length for the Carters and all the other feedback. I had been wondering a bit about their ideal maturation. I guess the vintage dictates that a bit also.
  
  I am running in to that problem for one of my favorite wines to date (14 Barnett Rattlesnake). I had initially wanted to forget about them for a while, but I feel like they will loose some of that hedonistic purple and dark fruit profile I really enjoy about them. I may have to rethink my strategy.

• csimm commented:

  6/29/18, 10:49 AM - Ya as soon as I think I have a strategy figured out for a particular wine, it changes on me! Ha! Oh well, such is the plight of wine consumption!

Add a Comment