Basically Chetillons before there was Chetillons, or at least, that's what the label would indicate. The nose on this is just alive with tons of chardonnay acidity and freshness. It's bright, layered, and with just nascent secondary characteristics. One of the freshest and best-integrated 1996 champagnes that I can remember. The acidity is so prominent, but it never becomes the only focal point.

From what I remember about this wine, it needed a lot of air, and I missed the chance to revisit it later in the evening. In any case, this was pretty much as I remember it being -- immensely chalky and quite monolithic in its acidity and minerality, but somehow this wasn't too heavy. To my palate, this could have used a little more fruit and roundness, but there was certainly enough extract elsewhere to make up for it.

LC10. For reasons, mostly of stubbornness, I continue to notate all my Beguines notes as the NV, even though the lot number is clearly displayed. Anyway, this hasn't aged too well for my palate. What I remember being and powerful and dense wine seems to have thinned out quite a bit. There's mostly just acid here. Where's all the other stuff? Pretty disappointing, to be honest.

It has been a very long while since I've crossed paths with a bottle of this. The nose here is incredibly reductive, with just a slight hint of volatility (I was told there was more earlier but it fortunately had blown off). The palate is driven fully by acidity, with some bright yellow fruit as well. Indeed, there's even some reduction on the palate too. Though this wine strikes me as something cast from the hipster mold, it's certainly very much still to my taste.

A hugely disappointing showing of a PYCM. If served blind, I'd easily put this in California (but probably from a decent producer). Way too fat, rich, and oaky. Where's the 2014 cut? Tons of flint and reduction, and air seemed to make all the bad elements even worse. Chardonnay should be the knife that cuts the butter, not the butter. Sad.

I'm not sure what to make of this wine. It's supposed to be demi-sec but really the perception here is that the wine is fully dry. Oh well, that's ok, I'm fine with dry chenin (it's not riesling after all). There's a really nice earthiness on the nose and palate here, with a beautiful perfumed honey quality as well. It's a very delicate wine and at this point almost bone-dry on the palate. Despite the linear acidity, there's a roundness in texture here that's probably what's left of the sugar.

A good wine, but fairly weak for a Corton-Charlemagne. There are some fruit components that I can't quite place here that feel a little atypical for a chardonnay. It's not a prominent feature, but it is something a little off about it. The real weakness in this wine is on the midpalate, which thins out immediately into a very short finish. Frankly, this doesn't have grand cru stature at all. As far as the natural winemaking goes, this doesn't seem to have any off flavours or aromas (apart from the slightly mysterious fruit).

Served double blind. I was thoroughly convinced this was a volcanic Italian wine; it seemed to have the black fruit and the sulphuric reduction that I've found in so many of them. But it was the hint of green that was drawing me away from that. Fairly ripe, but fully restrained, with a generous amount of earth to balance out that fruit. Very, very nice.

When I initially opened this, I was quite disappointed, as I thought this didn't show very much. Air certainly helped. The nose was gorgeous, with beautiful red fruit and florals, and just the right amount of earthy funk in the background. The palate seems a little coarse from the tannins (they are super young), and the fruit is still quite primary, believe it or not. In fact, the secondary characteristics are taking a backseat here. As far as Clos Vougeot goes (it's one of the dirtiest-tasting vineyards to me), I found this to be an outstanding and mercifully clean example.

I think Cavallotto has entered the pantheon of the few Piedmont producers whose wines I genuinely enjoy (I've been thinking about this lately, and truth be told, the list isn't that large). This was a bottle that was singing. Ripe, yes, but balanced. Sweet fruit, moderate tannins, and good acidity. It's young, but it's also approachable. There's no harshness or coarseness, no pretense or polish, but just a straightforward honest Barolo.

Some at the table were less enthused about this wine than I was, and while I enjoyed it, I didn't think it lived up to what it could be (but there has always been innuendo that Giuseppe Mascarello isn't as good a producer as everyone thinks). In any case, I thought this showed a little ornery and tight, with a dense black-fruited profile that I suppose is quite characteristic of 1996. It's coiled and not giving much, and the palate isn't as forward as some of the other nebbiolos tonight. It's clearly a black-fruited beast, but somehow in my mind, I was expecting something a little more delicate and red-fruited.

Sandrone is one of those producers who actually manages to make a decent modernist nebbiolo. It's svelte, silky, luscious, and extravagant, with this dense black fruit and an almost slight vanilla/cherry thing covering it. A hint of sweet and spice on the palate, and that silkiness carries everything through to the finish. And although I quite like the wines, it's something that I never really find myself craving. This isn't so much an intellectual wine than it is a hedonistic, pleasurable one, and I personally prefer to have a little more to think over.

Like Marcarini, Brovia is one of those classic Piedmont producers which I just don't get. This wine had everything I could want -- a nice red fruit profile, hints of earth and florals, decent acidity -- but it just doesn't excite me at all. It's a good wine, well made, but it seems to lack something to electrify it. I'll note, as well, that this is an incredibly structured wine, and quite tight, and it's possible I was on the receiving end of a really grumpy wine. I'd age my bottles more if I had any.

Yeah, baby, that's the stuff. The nose here is the most important and best thing about this wine. Drinking it is truly secondary. There's a slight hint of that natural mousiness, but once you get past that, it's that Allemand perfume with its black fruits and spice and hints of meat and smoke all wrapped up in an incredibly potent package. The palate is pretty textbook Allemand as well but it doesn't seem to have the same elevated lift that the nose has. I left a little in my glass over the dinner, and did notice some stinkiness towards the end.

Could it be? My first Levet that doesn't smell like a barn? Nope, there was still a little of that on the back end of the nose, but at least this bottle was far more perfumed and showed more spice and earth qualities than outright funk. The palate isn't too convincing though; good acidity and some fruit, but it feels like it's getting a little tired. Drink up, while there's still some flesh on the bones.

I'm not sure if this was the best showing of this wine (or if it was typical, even). It's got a nice red fruit profile, which to me, was surprisingly light for what this wine was. The palate has a touch of raisiny sweetness, but then it just whacks you across the head with a weird wave of green acidity. Seemed a little out of place. I'm not sure what really happened here, but I also can't pick out a specific flaw either...

Apparently this was a better wine when it was opened than when I got to it relatively later in the evening. To me, this was just all closed up and shut down, with a bit of black fruit and a real generous dose of earth. Quite tannic and structural, but besides that, not much. Also, I wrote pretty much the exact same note on this wine last year. Huh.

A very generous and open wine, with loads of sweet black cherry and a touch of vanilla on the palate. It's a dense and powerful wine and the acidity is on the low side, but at the same time, this doesn't feel too heavy. A great value if you're looking for the style.

I just want to say that I love the label. I can hear He-Man saying "By the power of Greyskull..." Anyway, this is a pretty good Napa cabernet. It's certainly got a fair share of herbaceousness here: menthol, green pepper, all that sort of stuff. The palate is quite classic as well, with good black fruit, a hint of dustiness, and fully resolved tannins. This is in its prime (much like that hunky guy on the label).

Served double blind. The nose on this seems to indicate that this was co-fermented with some sort of dead animal. Couldn't really get past that, but the palate did seem to be a bit nicer than the nose. Some black fruit and earth. No idea what this was or where it came from, just that it was made by some hipster. No resemblance to the Rioja I know.

#26-01, 6.5% abv. Amber colour. It's thick. It doesn't make a sound when you pour it. The nose is incredible, with tons of spice, raisins, and caramel. It's so rich there are almost Sauternes notes here. But to me, this seems more like a BA or TBA than an Eiswein -- it doesn't have that racy acidity and lean cut. Based on the dark colour, I'm guessing that there was botrytis involved here, which makes this quite an odd one. It's super sweet, but there's acid hidden under the thick waves of goo. It's not quite enough to keep the explosion of sugar in check, alas.