Tasting Notes for jsimmons

(187 notes on 169 wines)

1 - 50 of 187 Sort order
Red
2/29/2012 - jsimmons wrote:
90 points
Finally popped another bottle of this stuff to celebrate the leap year (2008...get it?). It's not quite as bright or minerally as I remember, but still an incredible, well-refined Pinot. I'm not really sure how much aging it can withstand from here, though (and it may already be on the down-swing), so I'll be drinking - and enjoying - my remaining bottles in the next couple years or so.
1 person found this helpful Comments (1)
Red
2/19/2012 - jsimmons wrote:
87 points
Really coming into its own. Didn't take full notes, but the acidity has definitely gone down from the last bottle (nearly 16 months ago!). Still a tremendous Pinot for the price, though I think we've seen the last of it on Woot!.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
2/18/2012 - jsimmons wrote:
flawed
As much fizz as a bottle of Perrier. After some work with the Vacu-Vin, it turned out to be a perfectly serviceable Vin de Pays, but still wasn't really worth the effort. Alas.
Red
7/27/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
86 points
An interesting specimen for its provenance, but not particularly interesting. A well-made Pinot in an earthy, essentially Old-World style, but not very complex and nowhere near as good as most lower-end Burgundies in the same price range. After the first glass it simply got rather boring.
White - Off-dry
7/28/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
A well-made, very off-dry Spatlese, but rather undistinguished. Good bracing acidity, but still a little slick on the palate, and not particularly complex. May have gotten a bit touched by the heat in transit, though, as the capsule was a bit sticky; hence, no score.
Red
6/30/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
Not terrible.
White
6/12/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
Not a terrible light white (especially for the price), but quite a bit softer than I was expecting. The RS is only noticeable when by itself and at a little warmer than optimal temperature, but acidity is distinctly lacking whether with food or without, particularly for being a third each of Riesling and Sauvignon Blanc. It's not really complex or flavorful either - not that one should expect anything magical from a $10 summer white, but nonetheless, it just seemed rather flat and uninteresting. Again, not terrible, but I vastly prefer the Rhino.
White
6/7/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
84 points
Starting to lose its stuffing a bit. Drink up.
Red
5/21/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
flawed
Another bottle with spritz. Such a disappointment, as the first two (before the spritz showed up) were pretty good...and I've still got three left.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
5/8/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
A well-made Napa Cab, but nothing special. A little lighter in body than the norm, with a good balance of fruit and earthiness, a significant vegetal component, and appropriate levels of alcohol and acidity. Not explosive or earth-shattering, though, just sort of...Napa Cab. While typically that would be a great thing for something in this price range, as someone else noted, for an '05, it's a little disappointing.
Red
5/6/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
86 points
Getting a little thin in its old age. Still some life left, but definitely on the downslope.
Red
4/28/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
83 points
Not sure what Galloni was on about, but this is painfully mundane. It's not flawed or appalling, but it has that "cheap wine" chemical slickness to it and nothing really Italian about it at all. There's not much discernible varietal character to speak of, either, but I suppose it's closer to Merlot than, say, Cabernet or Sangiovese. On the second day it got a little bit better, the chemical cheapness subsiding a bit, but was still horribly undistinguished. Based on the score, I was hoping this could be a standby daily drinker, but I'm glad I only got the one bottle instead of going in blind. I won't be ordering more.
Red
4/27/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
87 points
Extremely firm, and as others have mentioned, needs some time to straighten itself out. There seems to be plenty of fruit here, or at least the potential of it, but right now it's crushed beneath oak, a dry herbaceousness, and lots of tannin. There's good acidity, a little sweetness from alcohol, and an odd chocolate cake flavor on the finish. The nose, though, hints at a much purer future of cherry and cassis, which, in a year or two, should make this a really terrific specimen.
Red
4/27/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
flawed
Corked and/or cooked. Stewed, musty, gross. Alas.
Rosé
4/26/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
88 points
My first rosé of spring, and this provides a pitch-perfect transition from the reds of winter. Darker and heftier than your usual rosé, this doesn't present a whole lot on the nose - maybe a bit of strawberry and nettles. On the palate, it's got a mouth-coating heaviness to it, but retains a lightness of flavor and hint of sweetness typical of good rosés. Some cherry, melon, orange zest, a bit of distinctly grenache-derived pepper. There's a hint of minerality, though not in the amount others apparently found, and the finish just sort of...dies. The thickness makes it a little tough to quaff in quantity, too, unless it's kept ice-cold throughout. Overall, though, a solid effort, and I think Tanzer just about hit it on the nose.
Red
4/23/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
84 points
A fairly typical Old World Languedoc in presentation, but without any real flair and a bit of an emptiness on the finish. Balanced and not bad, but not worth the price.
Red
4/21/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
81 points
Very mundane, uninteresting, and didn't get better after opening up. A very New World, typically Argentinean profile - Cabernet with a little pyrazine greenness and spice, but nothing explosive or mind-shattering at all, and certainly not enough to justify the price tag. It didn't get any better by the second day either, just crapping out and becoming even more mundane. It's well-made enough for the style - acidity and tannins are in balance, but I've had $8 bottles on par with this. I actually poured out the remaining half of a decanter because I was so bored with it, and I almost never pour out wine. Incredibly disappointing.
Red
4/8/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
91 points
The last note nailed it - this is very subdued, yet powerful and incredibly elegant. On the nose, it's very concentrated and rather hard to place - very dry, dusty, some brambly fruit, maybe a little beef blood. On the palate, incredibly balanced, leading with black fruit, lots of blackberry and blueberry, moving into a midpalate braced with surprising acidity for a Grenache-based wine, some more savory flavors of coffee and blood, with a long finish of integrated tannins and spice. There's even a little minerality and smokiness hiding in there. On the other hand, as tightly wound as it is, it never really seems to reach its full explosive potential. I wish I'd kept some in the decanter for day two to see if it opens up a bit more, but it's just too good to not finish the bottle tonight!
Red
4/4/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
Not terrible (and I'm not a huge Zinfandel fan, so perhaps I'm just not as easily wowed), but not impressive or really interesting at all. Just your basic, run-of-the-mill Zin. Well-made, as all Peter's wines are, but nothing special.
1 person found this helpful Comment
White - Sweet/Dessert
2/22/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
88 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 5 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, medium intensity, lemon. Nose: clean, light intensity, stone fruits - peach, apricot, citrus - lemon, lime, a hint of minerality. Palate: sweet, medium acidity, full body, candied citrus, stone fruit, tropical fruit, pineapple, medium-long finish. Conclusion: good-very good.
White - Sweet/Dessert
2008 Château Sahuc lès Tour Sauternes Sémillon-Sauvignon Blanc Blend (view label images)
2/22/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
83 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 5 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale intensity, lemon. Nose: clean, light intensity, distinct botrytis mustiness, peach, lemon, tangerine. Palate: sweet, medium acidity, medium body, candied fruit, citrus, medium length/finish. Conclusion: acceptable (not bad, but a bit lazy and unimpressive for a Sauternes).
Red - Fortified
2/22/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 5 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale intensity, tawny (duh). Nose: clean, medium intensity, cherry, burnt caramel, woodiness, nuttiness. Palate: medium sweetness, low-medium acidity, low tannin (from oak), medium body (from residual sugar), candied fruit, raisins, candied nuts, caramel, brown sugar, medium-plus length/finish. Conclusion: acceptable-good (not terrific, but not bad).
Red - Fortified
2/22/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
84 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 5 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, medium, ruby. Nose: clean, light-medium intensity, dark black fruits - blackberry, black raspberry, cassis, some oak. Palate: medium sweetness, medium acidity, light-medium body, low tannin, black fruit, some cinnamon, short-medium finish. Conclusion: acceptable (not bad, but not very complex and a little too cloying).
1 person found this helpful Comment
White - Fortified
2/22/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
86 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 5 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, medium intensity, amber. Nose: clean, medium intensity, nuttiness, caramel, butterscotch. Palate: dry, low-medium acidity, medium body, roasted nuts, salt, maple syrup, caramel, woodiness, medium-plus length/finish. Conclusion: good (again, another solid expression of the style).
White - Fortified
2/22/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
87 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 5 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale intensity, lemon. Nose: clean, medium-plus intensity, salt (primary component), hazelnut. Palate: dry, very low acidity, low tannin, light body, salt, nuttiness - hazelnut, almonds, woodiness, medium-plus finish (very salty). Conclusion: good (solid expression of the style).
Red
2/15/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 4 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, medium intensity, ruby. Nose: clean, medium intensity, bright black fruit, vanilla. Palate: dry, medium acidity, medium tannin, full body (very slick-feeling), very juicy fruit - sour cherry, blackberry, sweet vanilla, medium length/finish. Conclusion: acceptable (a slightly-better-than-average, decently-balanced Argentina Malbec).
Red
2/15/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 4 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, medium intensity, ruby. Nose: clean, medium intensity, concentrated dried fruits - raisin, dates, plum, red pepper/capsicum, bell pepper, well-integrated oak, smoke, beef jerky. Palate: dry, medium acidity, full body, medium-high tannin, red fruits: plum, sour cherry, prune, pepper, smoke, very meaty, beefy aspect, short length/finish (and a little slick). Conclusion: good (the finish was really the only disappointing part).
White
2/15/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
77 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 4 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale-medium intensity, lemon. Nose: clean, medium intensity, peach, lemon, heavy oak - vanilla and smoke. Palate: dry, medium acidity, light-medium body, lemon, lime, sweet peaches, more heavy oak - woodiness, smoke, some petrol and salinity, medium length/finish (primarily salinity). Conclusion: poor-acceptable (not really sure why they decided to put Torrontes in oak, but it didn't really work out for me).
White
2/15/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
84 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 4 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale, lemon. Nose: clean, medium intensity, lemon, lime, pear, stony minerality. Palate: dry, medium-high acidity, light-medium body, pear, nuttiness (very slight from the mild oak treatment), a bit or minerality, short-medium finish. Conclusion: good (a little flabby, but with decent minerality).
Red
2/15/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
84 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 4 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, medium intensity, ruby. Nose: clean, light-medium intensity, very smoky. Palate: dry, medium-high acidity, light-medium tannin, medium body, cherry (somewhat muted), general red fruit, a burnt, bitter woodiness, toast. Conclusion: acceptable (a typical New Zealand Pinot, with the typical New Zealand burnt flavors).
Red
2/15/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
82 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 4 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, medium intensity, ruby. Nose: clean, medium-plus intensity, dried blackcurrant, blueberry, nutmeg, mint, coffee/mocha, charred oak, vanilla. Palate: dry, low-medium acidity, medium-high tannin, medium-plus body, cassis, black cherry, some secondary characteristics but they're all muddled together, short length/finish. Conclusion: acceptable (not particularly interesting, but probably needed some decanting).
Red
2/15/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 4 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale-medium intensity, ruby. Nose: clean, light-medium intensity, cherry, strawberry, oak (primary aspect), rose, black pepper, rubber, very meaty. Palate: dry, medium acidity, low-medium tannin, medium-full body (primarily heat from alcohol), plum, black pepper (substantial), animal fat, bacon, and a thyme or eucalyptus herbaceousness, short length/finish (just a lingering spiciness). Conclusion: acceptable (for its style; I'm not personally a huge fan).
White - Sparkling
2/15/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
86 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 4 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale intensity, lemon. Nose: clean, medium-plus intensity, grapefruit, peach, apricot, orange blossom. Palate: medium sweetness, low acidity, medium body, orange, peach, melon (all seemed very candied-fruit-like), orange blossom, short length/finish (mostly just a lingering, nondescript sweetness). Conclusion: acceptable-good (a basic, inoffensive Moscato).
White - Sparkling
N.V. Gruet Winery Brut New Mexico Champagne Blend (view label images)
2/15/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 4 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale-medium intensity, lemon. Nose: clean, light-medium intensity, green apple, yeasty (almost overripe), biscuit. Palate: dry, medium acidity, light body, green apple, lime, cloves, toast, biscuit, yeast, medium length/finish. Conclusion: acceptable-good (a basic, inoffensive, methode champenoise dry sparkling wine).
Red
3/19/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
91 points
A really terrific, well-made specimen. I didn't take full notes, but can say with confidence that this is the first wine I've ever actually tasted a distinct "black tea" component. The unique dustiness, integrated tannins, unshakable balance, and perfect mouthfeel on this wine were really tremendous as well. I'd rate it even higher, but unfortunately, I was a tad disappointed - based on the previous notes and GV's review, I expected this wine to absolutely explode with flavor, and while it was certainly complex, it seems tightly wound and just a bit empty in places (maybe not empty, but closed) - the next bottle will definitely get a rigorous aeration treatment. Overall, though, really, really good stuff.
Red
3/17/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
flawed
Just opened two bottles of this stuff, and both had a bit of a spritz and maybe a little VA. Refermentation, or did I just get an unlucky couple of bottles?
Red
3/5/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
Very, very young. Took ages of decanting to open up just a little, and seems a tad empty on the midpalate. Tons of fruit, low acidity, and a chalkiness throughout. I'd give it another three years or more before even touching this bad boy.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
2/20/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
90 points
I'm not typically a huge fan of Grenache-heavy blends, but this one (75%) is very impressive. Very dark in the glass, and with quite a bit of sediment floating around, a good decant will open up its powerful nose of lots of juicy, dark fruit (big cherry scent, as others have noted), a bit of spice (hard to place, but sort of a dry bark/forest floor thing), and just a bit of heat. On the palate, it's got a surprising acidity, a ton of dark fruit (but more brambly and drier than it seemed from the nose), a midpalate driven more by black pepper and a herbaceous note, a subtle hint of flinty minerality, and a stoutly tannic finish (with that black pepper taste lingering on the tongue). An all-around solid Rhone blend. Definitely needs food to show its stuff, though.
White - Sweet/Dessert
1986 Château Filhot Sauternes Sémillon-Sauvignon Blanc Blend (view label images)
2/19/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
Was one of the last wines of the night, so didn't take full notes or score, but this is a classic Sauternes from a good year which hits all the right notes and finishes strong. Getting a little thin, though; probably near the end of its life. Drink up.
Spirits
2/17/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
89 points
Pretty good, but I prefer the regular (80-proof) 10-year. This doesn't seem any more concentrated or powerful. The last couple drams had an odd, very-non-Laphroaig-like sweetness to them.
Red
2/14/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
90 points
Terrific stuff. Restrained, acidic, and balanced, yet fruity, earthy, and full. A truly well-made Syrah.
Red
2/12/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
83 points
A basic, thoroughly undistinguished Chilean Cab. Not awful, but not worth much more than the $9 I paid for it.
Red
2/11/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
90 points
As others have noted, much better than the 1996. Left the bottle open for a couple hours at home while we were out to dinner. Still a vibrant ruby, with only the slightest hint of bricking on the rim. The nose is delicate and very dusty, with classic aged Cab notes of graphite, dried blackberry, and violet. Still very youthful on the palate, with a great backbone of acidity, integrated tannins, and a still-substantial helping of black fruits. There aren't a whole lot of secondary notes to speak of in the midpalate, though. Solid throughout, and finishes with just a hint of menthol, which reminded me almost of an old Rioja. The finish is a bit short, and it is a bit one-dimensional for something so old (perhaps starting to show a bit of laziness in its age). Best to drink soon.
White - Sweet/Dessert
2/10/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
90 points
Even two months after opening the bottle, this is still going strong. "Apricot syrup" basically describes the look, smell, taste, and mouthfeel of this wine. The residual sugar is substantial (as advertised, well above a Sauternes or any other botrytized wine I've tried), lending a significant body and slight cloying sensation, but there's a bracing acidity behind all of it, keeping the wine appropriately balanced and presentable. Really great stuff, a steal at the Woot price, and I'm interested to see how it develops over the coming years.
2 people found this helpful Comments (1)
Red
2/10/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
85 points
Similar to my previous note - interesting, with some very neat and unique aspects, and incredibly balanced. Still a little weak on the finish, though, and it seems like to be getting just a bit thin and lazy in its "old age" (there's a significant deposit of sediment in the bottom of my last glass as well). Drink up.
Red
2/8/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
flawed
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 3 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, medium intensity, ruby. Nose: unclean, musty, clearly heavily corked.
White
2/8/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
83 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 3 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale intensity, lemon. Nose: clean, light-medium intensity, fruit: tropical, citrus (general, undistinguished), other: saline. Palate: dry, medium acidity, light-medium body, tropical fruit (light), saline, light-medium finish. Conclusion: acceptable (no flaws, but lazy for the style).
Red
2008 Coltibuono Chianti Classico RS Chianti Classico DOCG Sangiovese Blend, Sangiovese (view label images)
2/8/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
flawed
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 3 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale-medium intensity (very pale rim), ruby. Nose: unclean, overpowering volatile acidity/vinegar. Clearly flawed.
Red
2/8/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
86 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 3 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, medium intensity, ruby. Nose: clean, light intensity, fruit: red fruit (a little sour) - cherry, cranberry, bell pepper, oak, other: dustiness (not oak or minerality). Palate: dry, medium-high acidity, low-medium tannin, light-medium body, red fruit (very sour), oak (integrated), short-medium finish (primarily tannic). Conclusion: good (but not particularly distinctive).
White - Off-dry
2/8/2011 - jsimmons wrote:
90 points
WSET Intermediate Course, Session 3 Tastings (Washington Wine Academy, Arlington, VA): Appearance: clear, pale intensity, lemon. Nose: clean, medium intensity, fruit: lemon, lime, apricot, other: minerality - petrol (subdued), slate. Palate: off-dry, medium-plus acidity, full body (from RS), fruit: ripe peaches, apricots, citrus, some minerality, long length/finish. Conclusion: very good-excellent (perfect balance, outstanding finish).
1 - 50 of 187
More results
  • Tasting Notes: 187 notes on 169 wines
© 2003-19 CellarTracker! LLC.

Report a Problem

Close