10/11/2020 - jpasmore wrote:

fine

10/11/2020 - jpasmore wrote:

good

10/11/2020 - jpasmore wrote:

good

1/3/2016 - jpasmore wrote:

Good solid wine though perhaps a little expensive for what it is. I would purchase again. Popped and poured and the wine is a welcome change from US Pinot -- not overpowering in any way, clean and kind of elegant.

12/30/2014 - jpasmore wrote:

Solid bottle. Many other choices in this price range that can deliver at this level, but wasn't disappointed. Light French-style pinot as opposed to California (generally). Would buy again.

11/7/2014 - jpasmore wrote:

Solid bottle and well worth the price -- was looking for the 2011 Mercurey which sold out and went with this -- was not disappointed, though prefer the Mercurey still given the choice.

6/24/2014 - jpasmore wrote:

This wine has been described as young and I guess that's accurate but I don't think age will mellow the power. It's a bit too rich -- it's good bottle if you like that profile and generally people would like it with a rich meal, but it just overpowers many foods. If you're looking for a big wine, this is a big crowd pleaser. I received this as a gift.

12/14/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

This is a little thin, though given the cost it is a better Burgundy than most anything I have had at this price point; compared to a Faiveley Mercury which is $10-$12 more per bottle, this is, in my opinion, a harder, more tannic wine with more subtle flavor.

That said, if you don't want to spend $30 or $40 for a good every day wine this is a great choice. It is well made and has a real Burgundy nose and palette especially compared to US Pinot at this price which is generally over-extracted airport worthy dreck. Given some air this is very easy to drink and should satisfy your Burgundy fix when you don't want to pop something more crafted.

12/14/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

A little thin, doesn't help that we drank a pretty rich cab just prior to popping this. Would try again.

9/4/2013 - jpasmore Likes this wine:

Very good bottle of wine -- lots of Syrah character. Would buy more if I can find more...

8/31/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

Buy the 2010 if you can. The 2009 is fine, but the '10 has more fruit, better nose, and is just more enjoyable -- think I've had 4 bottles of the 2010 and they've been very good. Don't think the 2009 is going to get much better w/ time -- it is what it is.

7/5/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

Very good wine, though not transcendent -- drank without food which doesn't always help - would definitely buy again. Doesn't disappoint as long as you're expecting very good.

7/5/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

Good summer wine - richer flavor than most Roses -- solid choice

6/8/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

Pretty good wine and will buy some more. Good day to day Burgundy which won't disappoint mist drinkers in a casual setting; fine dining you may want to take it up a notch but definitely a good choice - just the right amount of fruit, very approachable, delivers a European Pinot experience which is kind of why I buy Burgundy as opposed to New World; which is fine too, but this isn't that.

6/8/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

Am not a big Rosé drinker at all, but this is certainly a good highly drinkable wine; not really sure what a great Rosé would be as it seems like a casual type of iteration - good wine, pretty robust flavor, not sweet or bitter..

5/31/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

This is a bottle that makes me question the seller, in this case Chambers Street Wine. And the in-store recommendation. It's just not very good, and while it is inexpensive, personally would rather pay more for something that delivers some positive experience.

5/22/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

is not bad, just not that good. okay. very flavorful and rich, suppose with the right food is good, for me ok.

4/27/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

Very good if a bit sweet. Seemed a bit New World which was unexpected but was still enjoyable.

4/19/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

Good bottle and good value.

4/2/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

Sweet, jammy, fruit forward, pick your preferred reference...easy to drink. If you have a gathering or some group I would say this is a crowd-pleaser (assuming you there are no French wine lovers in the crowd) and in that regard does better than the point score.

3/30/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

I little hot; waiter brought to table in decanter and probably could have used some time. I personally enjoyed, but the Cab-focused crew at the table felt the alcohol was a little high. Really jammy and flavorful as one might expect, though for me just a bit more than expected. Have had a couple Kilikanoon & Clarendon's that were more balanced though equally rich -- was expecting something more along those lines...liked it but don't see where I'd buy again soon...had with a steak (good one)

3/28/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

This is a good bottle of wine -- better than most anything you'd find at this price point. The retail price -- for me I bought a half bottle at the bar with a quick appetizer at Tribeca Grill. So I paid quite a bit more. Given that, I'm a little biased.

This is more like a Syrah from France than from Australia; though it has a good bit of fruit. It tastes like it's from California. So that's it -- good bottle, good value at retail.

3/24/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

This is a keeper in the search for an everyday Burgundy. Gives up ample fruit (not too much) along with good balance and great price.

3/20/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

This is a tart and tight bottle of wine. It doesn't give up the fruit that you may want if that's your palate, but if you're looking for that special thing that Burgundy delivers and don't want to make the investment, this might get you there.
It's not big or fruity -- it's an angular wine that is not going to do it for someone looking for a Cab or Syrah. And it's not going to replace a great Burgundy, but at its price point it delivers about just as the CT average rating says it does. Not for every wine drinker, but for me it works.

3/1/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

use a little air, a little light but good. It's refined and tasteful certainly not muscular - nice bottle of wine that won't knock socks off but is good; has class.

2/5/2013 - jpasmore wrote:

Good bottle of California Cabernet -- doesn't disappoint, but nothing unexpected. Had at restaurant thus the price.

2/2/2013 - jpasmore Likes this wine:

Good bottle of wine and will buy more. Needed a little air but opened up. Had at a Scottsdale restaurant, Bourbon Steak (Michael Mina) and this is Rajat Parr's wine.

11/26/2012 - jpasmore wrote:

I would skip this -- much better ways to spend/enjoy $20

6/29/2012 - jpasmore wrote:

Had few bottles -- uneven experience but this was good.

4/29/2012 - jpasmore wrote:

This is a good bottle of Bourgogne. It's just not as good as the bottle I had at the Crosby Hotel last week. Opened yesterday and drank across both days (no decant) and bottle performs about the same. Bottle at Crosby Hotel was giving up more fruit, but even with less it's a pretty taut example of Bourgogne.

Good Pinot color, see-through purple, definitely not American Pinot on the nose which simply means you can smell the minerality and it's light, a bit tart, smell more fuit than it delivers.

If you like French Pinot at $20ish this is a good choice. Have additional bottles, hope one delivers on the fruit just a bit more.

4/27/2012 - jpasmore wrote:

Good drinking wine -- takes a while to open up. Good fruit, a little light, very pleasant to drink.

4/15/2012 - jpasmore wrote:

Has a cherry red color. A light berry nose and good full flavor that tends to the acidic. A very good wine for the price.

4/1/2012 - jpasmore wrote:

Good and easy to drink. Has own style to it, where many American Pinot's seem formulaic this has a variation on the American theme that is a welcome change of pace. Opened up quickly, but did need some time. Drank at NY restaurant LURE and ordered a couple bottles for home. Lots of good Pinot in this same range, though lots of not-so-good as well. With air, a good choice. More restrained than many others and that's a plus, but just like most people like BIG CAB's not sure most people would appreciate the restraint. So depends on who you're drinking with, buying for, etc. -- don't get me wrong is pretty accessible, but if you're drinking Belle Glos this is going to seem restrained, if not....

4/1/2012 - jpasmore wrote:

Could easily be 90 depending on what you like. Really good, maybe a bit too accessible for some, hides nothing, good fruit, bit sweet, very approachable crowd pleaser kind of wine with enough of a distinctive taste and style that you know some thought went into the making of. I am ordering a couple of more bottles.

3/12/2012 - jpasmore wrote:

Had I looked at the label and seen the 14.5% alcohol I would have gone to Plan B. I was looking for a relatively inexpensive wine that I could drink on an any-day type of basis. So far, no luck. Will see if it opens up over the next few hours. (a bit of the alcohol blows off so took to 85 from 83 but wouldn't drink this everyday - it's not bad - but can find better or maybe am partial to Napa Oak, there is very little Oak here which makes it taste different than much of what I drink - could improve with decant but popped/poured). I see Jay Miller writing for Robert Parker gave the wine a 90 -- so is a matter of taste. Think my taste is more fruit forward than this can deliver.

1/15/2012 - jpasmore wrote:

A bit thin and fruit is missing a bit, but perhaps that's the style. Definitely brings you to its country, but just missing something that would usually show up with a little air.

12/30/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Good -- have had better Copain or maybe my tastes have changed drinking rich-tasting American Pinot. A little too light and restrained.

12/30/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Not impressive. Given that we drink Beaujolais because it's supposed to be a bit over-the-top fruit forward and mouthful this is pretty opposite. Light, not much fruit, little nose -- not impressed.

5/9/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

The wine needs more air than pop/pour at dinner might allow. Good value on the wine list at Bourbon Steak, and pretty good wine though not a wine I would add at home. And based on that I would say it falls off my personal scale. It's tart and has some good pinot traits, but a little light on fruit, and little heavy on damp/earth and short on the finish. That said, based on price this was bringing up the south end of the wine list and that was a heavy factor AND they were out of the 1/2 bottles of Frédéric Magnien, so backed into this.

5/1/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Good wine. Took a long time to open up, and even then was light for me, could be that was the intention. There are some really nice aspects to the wine, good balance, a little tart cranberry, hint of something sweeter, easy to drink, fresh -- for the price I would expect more.

4/29/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Good - faded on day two, but would buy again. Very quaffable and easy to drink, smooth with light fruit and lighter tannin and enough acid to keep it together.

4/16/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Had at Blue Ribbon in New York and bought a couple of Half Bottles (all I can find) from Le Du and these are just as good, though I'm sure the positive memory helps somehow. I understand that the Camille Giraud business has changed hands in the last decade with the Colgin folks. The wine is good pinot, maybe expensive for what it delivers overall, but solid and reliable Pinot with a little less fruit than most of what I've tasted from the West Coast. Good acidity makes this better with food than stand-alone; but good wine and will be adding more -- even of the half's.

4/6/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Good Pinot from Argyle.

4/6/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Wow, the only other rating is a 70. This is definitely not the worst wine I've ever had (which is what I would imagine a 70 would be) -- but it's painful having purchased of all places at a hotel ($$). You can certainly skip the purchase and you will never miss this -- it's thin, it doesn't have much personality, no sense of place, tastes young (is), little fruit, nose is light and not bad actually but no real redeeming qualities in the bottle other than it's not aggressively bad, it's just not good.

4/1/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Decanting for only a hour so far, but fruit is hidden in a barnyard with just a hint of familiar Pinot flavor. Will update -- starting at 85-86.

3/30/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Very good bottle of wine -- what you expect from a good Shiraz -- lots of fruit (not in a bad way), good structure, great nose, smooth and leaves you wanting more. Very rich, smoky and not too heavy.

3/28/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Needs some time - had overwhelming funk day one, like over-the-top plum, but rounded out with air. -- revision -- this started off as a 87 -- but after a days worth of air much, much better so should have decanted -- but really what you expect from Pinot - very good WITH AIR, was like an 85 on opening

3/20/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Really pretty good especially for the price. A little young -- definitely benefits from decanting.

2/19/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

saw the other reviews -- maybe I have the odd bottle -- not a 90+ point bottle for sure -- label is showing 14% alcohol and that is the primary impact on nose upon opening -- so could open up. Would definitely agree with other post/review of "rubbery" finish, though don't see how that reinforces a 90+ rating. I have been drinking a good bit of Gigondas over past few months and this would be at the bottom of list. Will give it a few hours. Could be my bottle...

1/27/2011 - jpasmore wrote:

Early, a little tannic, pretty good all the same and definitely tastes well made, but for pure enjoyment and something delicious can do better at the moment -- probably could have used a couple hours of decanting to blow off a bit of the alcohol that masks the flavor of the wine.