Eye transparent ruby with dark shadows, fast tears. Nose unexpectedly herbal, with dark dried juniper berry and and dried tomato in oil. Herbal on the palate as well, a bit of sour cherry and tomato next to the juniper berry. Medium minus body and considerable acidity which is a little bit towards a simply sour side lacking in magic, although this improved by day 3. Still very good qpr, but not exactly my thing, reminded me of some of the Saint-Émilion I tried before and wasn't so thrilled by. Probably seriously too young at this point, could be headed higher, particularly considering the improvement by day 3 mentioned above. Will try to leave my other bottle until at least 2020 to test this before I ever buy this again. Right now an 87 - 88.

Just like the bottle of the TN from August 25th, 2017, with less of an alcoholic tilt: strong pepper on the nose and pencil/graphite, chalk and pepper on the palate over unripe, unsugared cooked strawberry and a few dark forest berries.
This was my 18th bottle of this wine, the 14th of this vintage and, among those, the 4th I opened this year alone, and so I can reasonably judge this to be an extremely reliable product. I finished it over 3 out of 7 days, having put a vacuum stopper on with roughly 40% left in the bottle after day 2, and day 7 saw hardly any deterioration. Solid quality that makes me slightly exaggerate the 89 to an honorific 90 this time. So my sense of urgency to finish this vintage has evaporated, nevertheless I plan to empty my remaining 5 bottles by 2019.
Candidate for winner in flight 1 (“Under 10 €”) in this tasting story.

But you have to like that pencil/graphite. I assume the ratings below 87 are by people who don't.

[This TN is part of my perpetual test series of supermarket wines]. It is therefore somewhat eccentric to, but still loosely within this ongoing tasting story. Essence: good unpretentious cheap and even organic party wine among lowbrow, undemanding folk. For that purpose excellent. Screw cap.

Am dritten Tag deutlich besser als an den ersten beiden. Ich hatte Spaß im Wert von vielleicht 87-88, aber 86 dürfte objektiver sein. Relativ zu angemessener Verwendung (s.u.) und für 4,99 € sehr gut und für mich einer der besten billigen Supermarktweine überhaupt bisher, noch dazu „biologisch“. D.h. auf der Suche nach sowas würde ich den nehmen. Was folgt ist die Beurteilung nach den ersten beidenTagen:

Glas: durchsichtiges rubinrot mit dunklen Schatten. Auf der Nase etwas Leder, Eukalyptus, leichte Johannisbeere und etwas schwarzer Pfeffer (insofern für den Preis beachtliche Sortentypizität), leicht Bonbon-artig. Am Gaumen so eine rote DIN A 4 Frucht, etwas Wacholder und etwas süßlich aber doch technisch trocken im Abgang. Tannine sehr reduziert. Simpel, etwas wässrig, charakterarm und kurz in der Länge, so dass man auf der Suche nach Befriedigung immer weiterschlürfen muss.

Das klingt jetzt schlechter, als ich ihn finde, denn ich zahlte ja nur knapp 5 € (viel mehr dürfte er aber auch nicht kosten) und finde, er würde sich auf einer oenologisch anspruchslosen Studentenparty oder zur Pizza im Zuge der Verführung von Minderjährigen stark positiv von dem abheben, was wir alle bei solchen Gelegenheiten sonst immer so gewohnt waren. Das bringt der "like" zum Ausdruck.

Danke an "Hanz" (-> Jahrgang 2015) für den Tipp.

Great TN by Oh Dae-su on Sept. 21 2015 on the 2006.

Vintage written on neck banderole.

Eye: Crimson to ruby to garnet, very dark shadows to transparent depending on how much is left in the glass. Rather swift legs, medium minus body.

Nose: Blackcurrant, black pepper, raspberry and some cooked strawberry with a touch of nicotine, leather and smell of horses. If you call that barnyard, it would have to be a rather clean one, but there is a touch of animal, at least mainly on day 1.

Palate: Good tannins pervading singing fruit of sweet cherry and blackberry, a noticeable barnyard and iodine note mid-palate and on the roof of the moth, something salty in the length, amazingly complex. That iodine element reminded me remotely of drinking a cup of ayahuasca, ahem, but that aspect was practically gone on day 3. Good structure and somewhat eccentric, great qpr !

One of the more interesting ones in my contest. Yet it is also not exactly a simple pleaser or an everyday wine. That eccentricity would otherwise perhaps be considered a flaw and has potential for off putting over-use. But I will try to make sure my cellar has a case or two.

Personal enjoyment across four days: 91 -> 90 -> 88 -> 87, so let’s make that an 88.

Eye brilliant garnet to ruby, dark shadows to transparent depending on how much is left in the glass. Medium to swift legs, medium to medium minus body.
Beautiful herbal nose of strawberry, cedar, cigar box and a bit black pepper, but all these elegant, unobtrusive and one inseparable whole.
Sweet dark cherry palate, wonderfully balanced with a slightly bitter, salty and even remotely soapy aspect to it, but not to its detriment, particularly in the length.

A subjective 91 on day 1, an 88, perhaps, on day 3.

Good quality for the price ! A definite re-buy.

In light of my previous bottles I wasn’t originally going to include this in my re-buy contest and merely wished this last bottle good riddance but it turned out to be pure delight ! It seems to me that the ridiculous price (under 5 € for me !) owes to quality of individual bottles being unreliable and of great variability. Alternatively, or also, maybe this is just how long it took this wine to be ready. But the upshot is that in contrast to my previous resolution I think I will re-buy a case of some cheap Apulian Primitivo, for instance from Cantine San Marzano, for intermittent, unassuming purposes.
Deep garnet color with deep black shadows. Fast legs, low viscosity. Nose of black currant, blackberry, black pepper and mushroom. Palate of blackberry jam and black currant, fruit induced sweetness in good balance against acidity and plenty of tannins. A fruit bomb, yes, but not so bad.

Observed across 4 out of 5 days. Like before: dried plum, juniper, coffee powder, ground black pepper, the nicotine note has largely integrated. That is a wonderful 91 + nose. The soapy and cardboard twist to the palate has also improved and may actually become an asset over time, but at this point it still doesn't quite match the nose. Pushed the drinking window to 2022, next bottle set for 2020. Good value at present price levels.

Brilliant ruby with deep dark shadows, low viscosity. Red fruit, juniper berry, cherry. Needs aggressive decanting or waiting for day 2, otherwise a bit watery and simple. This way it turns slightly chalky and acidic, but quite pleasant with a cherry, juniper berry, pine needles and a generic red fruit palate. May be too young, but as it is not too much depth in here. Right now perhaps an 86 at PnP and an 88 from day 2 onwards. Shouldn’t touch my next bottle until at least 2020.

Consumed across 4 out of 6 days without the slightest deterioration. Medium - viscosity. On day 1 a good chunk of pleasant and spicy barnyard nose of this one which really came together by day 4 (which was day 2 of consumption) and easily made for a 92 +, juniper berry, pepper and mushroom nose. Palate as usual, cowberry, a little juniper, roughly a 91, one of the best bottles so far. There seems to be a beginning softening from age, delicious ! This product be a re-buy, looking forward to trying the available vintage.

I wasn’t going to rate this wine anymore as it is now decadent. But if, being decadent, it exceeds its standard performance, I see no reason not to. Similarly, I wasn’t going to drop a note for every single bottle anymore. But following the recommendations by PSPatrick I gave this one a 70 minute double decant for the first time, and what a revelation !

Observed across 4 out of 5 days. A beautifully decadent barnyard, pissoir and raspberry nose with some burnt scent. Wonderful raspberry, molasses and caramel palate ! That was day 1. From day 2 onwards the “stinkiness” was better integrated, the raspberry gradually transitioned to strawberry and it was otherwise as the last bottle, only even more beautiful ! Easily a 91.

Not sure if this is ready yet. Yes, there are some common themes with the 2010 (the only other vintage of this I know), such as the cowberry, but it's more watery and in a seemingly unripe, sour phase, despite an hour of decanting on day 1. Expect lots of acidity and but less magic and complexity than in the 2010. I plan to take another look at it next year.

Not sure if my fond memories of the 2005 Bodegas Viña Vilano Ribera del Duero Premium are due to that one's higher quality or to lack of experience back then, probably a little of both, but this was somewhat of a disappointment. It's a decent wine, no doubt, but would seem to fit more convincingly in the "Under 10 €" category (flight 1 of this tasting story). At 12-13 € it seems overpriced. The basic tasting notes of that superior version above still sound appropriate for this rather jammy yet dry wine which is why I won't repeat here. But you have to subtract the enthusiasm because it's really rather simple and devoid of magic. Probably way too young. Still, I'll likely pass on this producer for a while.
P.S.: The above was my assessment of the wine as solist. Just had a pizza with it which raises its value as a food wine to an 88.

Observed over 4 out of 5 days. This bottle was entirely enjoyable and making it easy for me to recommend this wine, especially since it is also bio-organic apparently. Maybe it’s starting to come into its own. Modifying my previous note, I would now speak of darker cooked forest berry jam, dried plum. High extract but not unduly sweetish. “Juniper” was stronger in this bottle. The considerable, drying tannins balance off the fruit well, did not this time degenerate into a cardboard note and allow me to assume a certain longevity. Hence I would speculate that it will probably be really good two to three years down the road, and I extended my drinking window until 2023, but only because I have just 3 bottles left, and if you have more I think you could extend it further.

This product be a re-buy candidate. On the other hand, its taste trajectory, including the alcoholic slant, is pretty similar to the cheaper 2010 Guigal CdR, so I am not entirely convinced yet.

At 15% abv certain to put you to sleep and not exactly recommended for driving home afterwards.

Can’t believe the very modest ratings here, but I do admit that this is very young and that I love the tannic grip. Really velvety on the tongue. At 14,5% pretty powerful.
I don’t agree with either cherry or strawberry, this is clearly raspberry, and hence there is a common theme with Pinot Noir here. Some pleasant vanilla in there too. Excellent TN by Powlin below me. Having recently tasted my way through a couple of examples of nebbiolo, I shall call this a very good effort for the price ! Out for Nebbiolo, I would buy again any time. Then again, given my German sources for Spätburgunder/Pinot Noir which satisfies a very similar craving at a better qpr, I can’t quite see the real need to insist on nebbiolo.

Day 1: 89, day 2: 91, day 3: 89, day 4: 88 .

Glass transparent ruby with the tiniest tinge of violet, and dark shadows, medium viscosity.

Very nice nose ! Black pepper, a bit of coffee powder before pine needles and cooked unripe strawberry and blackberry.

Palate of cooked strawberry, molasses, chocolate and sour cherry. Chicory bitter and dry in the length – very good typicity.

Drier, a little lighter and less extracted than I remember the 2009. Since it all really came together on day 3, I conclude that this is still young and will improve for another 1-3 years, which is why I will assume potential for a 90+.

Day 1: 88, day 2: 89, day 3: 89 - 90.

Transparent ruby with black shadows, medium viscosity. Nose of intense ripe strawberry with some dried juniper berry, mint and a bit of mushroom. Bright palate of red and dark cherry – extremely fruit dominated, almost a bit confectionary, but that considerably improved by day 3 (then a 91 !). I am assuming it’s a bit too young and should be better perhaps 2-3 years down the road, since the fruity sourness initially stuck out a bit loudly. Even now it’s a 90 though.

Observed across 4 days. Somewhat underrated here, methinks.

Brilliant ruby with dark shadows, quick legs.

Excellent nose of fresh blackcurrant and unripe strawberry, rose petals and fresh ground coffee powder, licorice and eukalyptus: 92.

Good drying tannins, tart dark cherry, licorice and blackberries, beautifully dry and very fruity (as opposed to sweet !). Good with food. Palate initially not quite as complex as the nose promises - which improved by day 3: 90.

At first I couldn’t follow the recommendation to drink up as I got the impression that tannins haven’t really resolved and complexified yet although they definitely integrated well by day 3. But as the bottle emptied, the sediment seemed to have concentrated in the lower third of the bottle, so do drink up unless you don’t mind that.

Observed across 3 out of 6 days (vacuum stopper). Stood tall and strong until the last day. Transparent garnet to ruby with dark shadows. Fast legs. Yes, raspberry jam or compote on the nose, good one, leather/licorice and a faint citrus and floral lift. Palate very earthy/mouldy complex embedding of juniper and unripe to half ripe forest berries on a bitter-acidic chicory base line. That came together more on day 2, making the impression sweeter than on day 1, well balanced against the bitter-acidic aspect. Rather dense concentration of various taste aspects that take long on the palate to unwind, not a simple quaffer for beginners. Also probably still young. I would assume this to take another couple of years to make explicit all that is implicit in here and to make the experience of the follow-up days available right after opening.

30 minute double decant on day 1. Cloudy garnet, opaque with extract. Nose of dried juniper berries stewed strawberry with some black pepper and cigar box. Chalky palate of unripe dark forest berry and strawberry with lots of acidity and a great black pepper and tannic length in which the fruit and he typical Blaufränkisch bitterness reverberates.

Warning: I also tasted another vintage, I believe it was 2012 or even the 2013, and it wasn't quite on this 2011 level if I remember right.

This is getting a bit darker, a particularly enjoyable bottle ! Cooked strawberry and coffee powder on the nose, cooked strawberry, dark cherry, chocolate and licorice on the palate, but nevertheless dry. Long !

In contrast to the last bottle, however, it didn't appreciate over the 3 days but started out strong and descended a little towards the end. Will therefore use up my 2 remaining bottles until 2019.
Day 1: 91, day2: 90, day 3: 89.

Eye deep ruby with a touch of garnet, still slightly transparent with deep shadows, slow tears.

Nose somewhat herbal, with dark forest berries, dried juniper berry, dried tomato, cooked strawberry and some pepper.

On the palate with a nice and pleasant balance between extract, dried strawberry fruit (if that’s a thing), tomato, rosewater and mild acidity. Chalky and grainy, very reminiscent of the Guigal CdR style prior to 2012, with a notch up from it. Price has now started to rise into a zone where I wouldn’t buy again though, as long as there is precisely that Guigal CdR.

Started out as a 90/91 and seemed to deteriorate into an 89 by day 3. Shouldn’t be too young, but will try again by 2019. For now it’s an 89.

Tasted across 4 days.
Deep but brilliant ruby with dark shadows, ever so slightly fading rim, swift legs.
Nose with beautiful equipoise of cassis, cooked strawberry, cigar box and fir tree.
Palate juniper, blackberry and some strawberry with a certain salinity and herbal notes in there, nicely balanced. Very good ! I got this at a now long gone offer for under 10 € and have to withhold the tears at the thought I didn’t know nor had the cellar space to buy two cases of this immediately.
Day 1: 93, day 2: 92
Days 3 and 4: 90, with some increase in sediment. So probably at this age one should consume the bottle by day 2.

My first bottle since spring of 2014, and what a development !
Glass somewhat soupy ruby, medium body. Very expressive nose of cooked strawberry, tomato and dill. Palate cooked strawberry, tomato, some burnt caramel and somewhat nutty sweetness, therefore slightly port like. And then there’s that certain chicory note which could be mistaken as deterioration, but I think the overly oaky and vanilla veil seems to have lifted, indicative of a wide open drinking window, and thereby released what was always underneath that cover, as is more obvious in this expression. Enjoy !
They say it’s modern in style and too sweet. Beyond traditionalist aspirations, however, it’s a marvelous wine on its own terms, somewhat maverick and I love it. I am not going to rate it down just because it’s a star: 91 - 92. Deal with it.

Unripe strawberry, tomato and a little gooseberry. Nice beefy bacon note on both nose and palate around all the slightly green and acidic veggies. A complex and obstinate beauty. PnP and then by day 3 a coffee note showed up on the nose and integrated the bacon nose. So I assume that as of now, it would still benefit from decanting and probably a bit more bottle maturation. By day 4 it went more towards wet cardboard.
How I gave my last bottle of this a 93 on February 26th, 2015, is hard to recall, but I guess it’s the bold eccentricity which I always cheer for - a factor that can become neglectable by the second bottle but is still what brings this up to a 90 - 91 instead of an 89. As for the qpr, I would now prefer the Condado de Haza.

Day 1 of this was right up my alley (I was going to give it a 93 !), and the only serious criticism then would have been concerned with the label design. But it seemed to tank a little by day 2 - a pity.
Deep transparent ruby if it wasn’t for the deep shadows. Slightly fading rim. Medium + viscosity.
Nose of strawberry jam and freshly dug up mushroom interspersed with some pine needles, leather and vanilla.
Palate of cooked strawberry, caramel, chicory and a little juniper with an excellent balance of sweet and bitter. A tad too sweet maybe for this style, because once you’re doing it this way, you might as well go for the Marqués de Murrieta which to me seems similar, but is cheaper, hence has a better qpr.
A real pleaser. If you don’t watch it, you’ll just keep guzzling.

Observed over 3 out of 4 days with no deterioration to the last sip. Majestic transparent ruby with black shadows. Rim fading only slightly. Legs pretty swift. Nose of strawberry, juniper berry, mushroom soil, leather, reserved coffee powder and nobly discreet vanilla. Palate (and this is the convincing part to me) of a lifted singing red and black forest berry fruit perfectly balanced against the acidity and the drying tannins to produce a single complex “forest floor” taste, bathing in, again, that nobly discreet vanilla. That palate really took off on the last day, so I assume this has a lot of future in it and would be almost a waste to consume now. Clean, straight and clear are keywords, and one needs to be reminded that “complex” has nothing to do with “complicated”. The many has become one. As it is a 92-93, but it should ascend a little further.

On the other hand I get not so much less enjoyment from wines a little cheaper. So to me a wine like this makes sense only if you have a really good cellar to mature it well beyond this.

Consumed over 4 out of 5 days. On the first day seemed a little pedestrian after the Viña Tondonia Reserva: liquorish, sweet extraction monster. As usual, it came into its own by day 2 and the alcohol was well integrated then. On day 5 it had integrated into a very convincing depth with blackberry dominating. TN just like last time. Drink half a glass on day one and leave the rest until later,you will be rewarded. I expanded optimal window to 2020.

Decanted for 50 minutes on day 1 and consumed across 6 consecutive days. Ruby glass almost opaque with extract. Nose of cassis, cowberry and a hint of cigar box. Starting with day 2 I noticed pencil and black pepper, by day 4 a confectionary cooked strawberry compote. Palate pretty jammy and chalky, blackberry, on later days blueberry and a remote valerian, some burnt caramel, graphite, certainly rather sweetish. As a matter of comparison, on days 1 – 3 it reminded me a little of the 2010 Guigal CdR, with a little better balance, and on days 5 and 6 of the Sessantanni Primitivo, but retaining the chalky and graphite aspect of the first days. Anywhere from good to pretty good, a definite pleaser, but over 20 € for it seems a little too much in my book. Guess I should stick to my old world.
90 on days 1 and 2,
92 on days 5 and 6.
More of a dessert solist than a food wine, much like the mentioned Sessantanni Primitivo.

See my note from December 25th, 2016. Time to drink up. 2 bottles left, G_d willing, I'll destroy them before the year's over.