1/16/2017 - suthersm Likes this wine:

This was a solid muscadet that (I thought) rivaled the base pepiere. Terrific clarity of fruit and fantastic zip. The acidity was well integrated and I just found it really an enjoyable wine. My wife, for what it is worth, found it a bit tart, but I think that's the nature of the wine-- it had plenty of fruit to stand up to the acid.

1/16/2017 - suthersm Does not like this wine:

This, I did not enjoy. I've loved Joven Riojas in the past for their freshness. This wine had minimal acidity and came off as fairly heavy. The wine had a extracted feel to it and the flavors were of rubber and stewed fruit.

9/5/2016 - suthersm Likes this wine:

This, unsurprisingly, tastes better now than it did in 2010. Much more integrated. Seemingly straddles the line between ripe and lean -- surpasses my expectations for what I was told was a wine from "an average chateau and a less than stellar vintage." Minimal tannin left but good acidity. No rush on this wine. From 375.

10/28/2015 - suthersm wrote:

Wow this has become quite enjoyable over the past several months. Cranberry and forest floor on the nose. It's developed a bit more fruit than earlier and it's acidity has integrated well. I think while it is delicious right now, it will certainly improve over the next 6 to 12 months. This is a rebuy. Well done.

8/25/2015 - suthersm Likes this wine:

Yowza this is a great rose. Pale salmon in color. Incredible aromatics. Great flavor and balance. Seamless texture. Super refreshing. Fruit is well balanced by acidity. I'd drink this all day. And then I'd drink some more the next day.

8/25/2015 - suthersm Likes this wine:

Ooh I like this. Darker red than most roses I've had this year. Has a relative richness that is quite appealing. Well integrated and refreshing zip. One of the better roses of the year. A great choice if you are looking for a rose with a it more heft -- nothing overblown or overripe, just gooooood.

4/13/2015 - suthersm wrote:

Wonderful nose. Bright and vibrant. Has plenty of fruit but also some savory characteristics and well as some minerality or a granite quality. Quite seamless. There is a bit too much acidity for the fruit but the acidity is well integrated -- tart but not shrill. Far more enjoyable with food but I was left wishing for just a smidge more richness. Probably my fault, not the wines fault. This was far better than it was on release so more time is likely to improve this dramatically. I'd happily drink another glass of this but wouldn't buy another bottle.

3/8/2015 - suthersm Likes this wine:

This was terrific -- one of the better Rossos I've had. It was billed as a baby Brunello but I wouldn't describe it that way. Plenty of fruit without overt ripeness combined with some savory qualities. Well integrated acidity and negligible tannin. Remarkably light and translucent in color.

8/30/2013 - suthersm wrote:

Yikes. Didn't enjoy this. Big. Warm. Nondescript. A lack of zip lends an additional heaviness. I've liked prior vintages but did not enjoy this one.

8/30/2013 - suthersm wrote:

Lovely floral nose. Very pretty aromatics. Medium weight. Plenty of fruit here but the acidity and tannins are disjointed, a bit out of place. Definitely juicy, but not a joy to drink.

6/13/2013 - suthersm wrote:

Delicious and one of my favorite recent sauvignon blancs. Definitely a rounder style. Not steely or grassy. Almost like sauvignon blanc meets verdejo. Not too surprising based on where it's from. I went back to the store and bought more.

6/13/2013 - suthersm wrote:

I don't want to get too hyperbolic about a $15 rose of pinot noir from Germany, but this is just terrific. One of the best roses I've had in years. Medium weight with wonderful fruit that's balanced by a perfect amount of zip. Not sweet at all, not too tart, just right. My wife, who is an inveterate disliker of rose, loved it too.

6/13/2013 - suthersm wrote:

A pretty syrah, although it has a fairly heady nose. Enjoyable, but a bit nondescript. Definitely more of a berry/fruit profile than meat, iron, or earth.

6/13/2013 - suthersm wrote:

I've only had the 2007 to compare this to, but the 2010 was a bit thinner and had more prominent wood. Far less syrah-ness to it, but it was just a bit disjointed. I'd have a glass at a restaurant without complaint, but wouldn't buy another bottle.

12/2/2012 - suthersm wrote:

This was fine and easy to drink, but compared to the 2010 vintage, it was a disappointment. Lighter in body, less roundness, less complexity. The acidity and zip that was prominent in the 2010 was absent as well. Perhaps a weaker vintage? I'll pass on more until the next vintage arrives.

9/27/2012 - suthersm wrote:

Ooh good stuff for $11. One of the better $11 wines I've had. Impressive depth and complexity on the nose. A bit more concentration on the palate than most Chiantis I've had. Good mix of fruit, leather, and earth. Bright finish. Impressive value.

9/27/2012 - suthersm wrote:

Terrific. I don't have much experience with Mencia, but I really liked this. Although the wine has dark fruit up front, the midpalate is marked by a meaty quality. LWS guy described it as having some Northern Rhone qualities which is an apt description. Really good.

9/27/2012 - suthersm wrote:

Great wine. Wonderful balance and integration. Has some richness and roundness of fruit that is offset by a mineral, granite, flinty quality. Best godello I've had.

5/9/2012 - suthersm wrote:

This was a pretty rose. A combination of floral and berry on the nose. Light/medium bodied. Plenty of fruit but has fabulous integration and balance.

5/9/2012 - suthersm wrote:

Rounder, fuller rose. Ripe (not sweet) and lacking zip for my taste. A bit heavy in the mouth and a little boozy when it warms from fridge temp. Good example of the style, but I don't love the style.

1/10/2012 - suthersm wrote:

Really an enjoyable bottle. Cranberry, cherry, and earth on the nose. Medium bodied with great balance. Delicious.

12/18/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Whoa that is hot. Super Grenache nose but alchohol is pretty dominant. No mas.

12/4/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Just beautiful. Not a wow wine but rather impeccably balanced and seamless. Nose of lavender, pepper, and cassis. Rich fruit without over-ripeness. And man was it seamless. Really, really good.

12/4/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Silky and round with a nose of chocolate and earth. Didn't get a ton of bell pepper. Easy drinking but fairly nondescript. Hopelessly outclassed by the Russiz Superiore Collio Cab Franc.

12/2/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Great value white. Mostly viura. Citrus fruit on the nose and palate. Excellent zip on the finish.

11/29/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Cab Sav, Merlot, Syrah. The Syrah is really dominant on the nose and it contributes a roasted meat quality that I just didn't love. I have finally come to realize that I'm not a huge fan of supertuscans with Syrah. Nice acidity and well integrated tannins. Night 2 update: wow, this is much better tonight. The meaty quality is gone and this tastes Bordeaux-esque. Gooood.

11/27/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Mostly treixadura with godello, loureira, torrontes, albarino. It reminded me mostly of godellos I've had in the past. Not bad but not memorable. I wouldn't buy again.

11/27/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Man I loved the 2009 and am not as enthralled with the 2010. It's still good and a solid value but I miss the richness. Reading the notes, it seems like the 2010 may be more of the standard profile. I'll just wait for another warm year.

11/27/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Unlike any other Sauvignon blanc I've had. Incredible richness and concentrated tropical fruit notes. Yeah there's some minerality but mostly this is about the fruit. Almost has a soft sweetness. A little zip on the end keeps the roundness from becoming overwhelming.

11/15/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Excellent. When I've drank these early I've found them to be a bit disjointed and acidic but this is really well integrated now. Plenty of concentration and fruit. Really has a silky smoothness.

11/13/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Solid, rustic, weekday wine. Well made and got better over the course of the evening. Great fruit, but not overly ripe. Minimal tannin but well integrated acidity.

11/13/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Ooh this was great. I thought this had clear Pinot varietal characteristics. No doubt about it being from CA, but definitely Pinot. Bright berry fruit with a hint of earth. One of the better value pinots I've had of late.

11/13/2011 - suthersm wrote:

I had higher hopes for this wine and while it probably needs more time to integrate, it had a porty quality to it that I just didn't love. I got a bit of alchohol on the nose but it tasted pretty hot. Good mix of fruit and minerals/granite with some floral notes, but too disjointed to me to buy more.

11/4/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Wow. Good. Recommended by one of the guys at my LWS. Great balance and really well integrated. Gone in a flash. Wife loved it too. Delicious.

10/25/2011 - suthersm wrote:

I liked this and my wife loved it. Actually a little understated. Berry, graphite, and a mineral component that many have commented on. No tannin to speak of but great lift from the acidity. It didn't come across as hot or ripe. Great out of the bottle with minimal change over the course of the night. From prior experience with the Lytton Springs, there's no hurry with this.

10/25/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Loved the nose which was like a mineraly CdP. Similar on the palate. Actually much more integrated on night two which may bode well for short term cellaring. I'd buy more.

10/20/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Yeah, this is a little disjointed right now. Yeah, it's has a touch of heat. But, tonight it was perfect. Tasty mix of berry, leather, fruit, and iron. I'll save some for tomorrow night and see what that does, but I'm pretty happy right now.

10/20/2011 - suthersm wrote:

This took a while to come together and probably will continue to get better. The nose is spectacular -- cassis, a floral note, some tobacco, and a hint of oak. Right upon opening, I was surprised by the tartness of the wine. Quite a bit of acidity. Over the next hour the acidity integrated and left a really pretty wine. Dark, crunchy berry fruit with some earth and minerality. Fairly minimal tannin. At the end of the bottle the wine was really balanced. An understated cab that I think has the potential to improve.

10/14/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Ooh, I liked this. Great mix of tropical fruit, floral notes, and minerality. Great zip but the acid is fully integrated. One of the more enjoyable Italian whites I've had recently.

10/14/2011 - suthersm wrote:

A bit fleshier than the 2010 Collestefano Verdicchio I had recently. Significantly less acidity. It's also missing that wine's hint of herbs. Simpler wine but still enjoyable.

10/10/2011 - suthersm wrote:

This is solid. Nose reminds me a bit of a verdejo with more fruit. Quite aromatic. Terrific out of the fridge, but if you like them a bit more fleshy, I'd let it warm a bit. Richness without overt sweetness. Good lift. Just a little disjointed otherwise it would be out of this world.

10/10/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Interesting nose. Almost a poached pear type tropically mixed with vanilla and slate. Round mouthfeel with some richness that is cut by fabulous acidity. Doesn't come across as sweet at all. I think I detect some wood notes but I'm not sure what the wine saw. I have little experience with chenin blanc and it's possible that with more experience I would have liked this more. I don't think I would buy more, but it's quite possible I'll regret that down the road.

10/3/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Didn't love this wine. Quite unbalanced with oxidation taking the forefront. Not enough fruit and too much acidity. It seems that there was some wood on the wine which added some roundness, but mostly it tasted of a watered down sherry. I'm perfectly willing to admit that I am just not appreciative of the style, if that's the case.

10/4/2011 - suthersm wrote:

This was disappointing. Pleasant nose but on the palate, the wine was fairly monolithic and non-descript. Just kind of grapy, disjointed, and rough.

9/28/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Last bottle. Notes similar to last time but better integration of the structure. Delicious and drinking well now. I wish I had bought more.

6/22/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Great summer white. Quite an intriguing nose. Wonderful fruit with just the slightest effervescence. The small bubbles just add to the zip a bit. Refreshing and delicious. Will buy more.

6/22/2011 - suthersm wrote:

The nose has a component of ripe, maybe dried, currant fruit that is overshadowed a bit by oak and leather. On the palate, the wood is noticeable but integrated and the ripeness of the fruit comes to the forefront. Minimal tannin, but there is still some acidity that gives it a bit of freshness. A mature, riper styled wine, as billed by the local wine shop.

5/31/2011 - suthersm wrote:

So I liked this, but I think I was in the minority at the BBQ. First had it at a Naples-esque pizza place in SF and have to say it was pretty fabulous with the pizza. Picked up another bottle for a friends BBQ and liked it but it wasn't quite the same. Agree that there's more fruit on the nose than the palate, but that wasn't off-putting to me. Just a little lighter styled than the lambruscos I've had. Served cold it's a great fizzy alternative to beer, especially if you prefer reds.

5/31/2011 - suthersm wrote:

Solid wine. Upon opening I found a bit too much wood on the nose a palate, but the wine really smoothed out over the first 10-15 min. Nice ripeness of fruit mixed with some cocoa and herb notes. Minimal acidity. Tannins are soft but a bit prominent. I suspect this will harmonize over the next year or two.

4/15/2011 - suthersm wrote:

This is just such a joyful wine to drink. It just drinks great. It's not the type of wine you sit and ponder, but to call it simple doesn't do it justice. Good fruit, never overly sweet. Great balance and terrific lift. I know it's finished with a bottle cap and it only cost $12, but this wine brought me more happiness than many others costing much more.