Tasting Notes for winedupe

(37 notes on 37 wines)

1 - 37 of 37 Sort order
Red
2015 Veramonte Primus The Blend Colchagua Valley Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
3/24/2020 - winedupe Likes this wine:
85 points
I bought a bottle of this at Costco because the price was low, about $10, and this vintage was rated high by Wine Spectator. HOWEVER, the label on my bottle is different than the one shown (mine has a large gold "P" instead of the circular logo, and at the bottom it has "APALTA COLCHAGUA - CHILE. This causes me to think that there are several bottllings around this wine and the one sold by Costco might be different form the one reviewed by WS. I've seen these shenanigans before with another wine. Can anyone help here? Which version was rated by WS? Thanks!
In any case, the wine was not bad, 85, but not 90. Dark, fruity, but a bit astringent, maybe needs aging.
Red
12/23/2019 - winedupe wrote:
80 points
I can't remember why or where I bought a case of this, or how much I paid. It must have been recommended by a publication, otherwise I would not have bought it. 85% Sangiovese, 10% CS, 5 % Merlot. This wine is OK, but not great. Color is solid purple. Little nose, but maybe I'm coming down with a cold. Taste has the classic red cherry hint characteristic of Sangiovese (in my experience). The finish has a bit of hot estery bite that detracts from my enjoyment. Wine-searcher today claims to have it for $9.10. For that price, it is reasonable, but I would not pay much more than that.
Red
2015 Castello di Gabbiano Chianti Classico Chianti Classico DOCG Sangiovese Blend, Sangiovese (view label images)
12/1/2019 - winedupe wrote:
85 points
After seeing the Wine Spectator picking this in their "Top 100 of 2019", rating it at 92 and pricing at $14, I figured this is my type of wine. Despite 61,000 cases produced, very few local shops had this wine (NW Boston suburbs area), but I found the last 12 bottles at a local hole in the wall shop for $10.60, so I snapped up all 12. I have no idea what the storage conditions were (I believe that this wine has been on the market for about a year), although it was brought up "from the basement". I was generally disappointed, given the tout by WS. The wine has medium cherry fruit and tart acidity. Color is medium red. No strong negatives, just no strong positives. OK, but not great. I will not go looking for another case. San Felice Chianti Classico from the same vintage (2015) was much better.
Red
10/13/2019 - winedupe Likes this wine:
88 points
Agree totally with the previous reviewer. I have no idea where my bottle came from. A guest must have brought and it went under the radar. Classic smokey, woody Cabernet with solid fruit, dark purple. I would say this should last for 5 more years if well cellared. Wine searcher says $12.60. I would buy a case at that price if I could find it locally.
White
10/13/2019 - winedupe wrote:
88 points
I need a little help here. The label on my bottle doesn't look like the one pictured on this hit. Mine has a solid light blue label (which Matua has used for the last few years here in the US) on a clear bottle. And it doesn't say Organic. Look like a lot of different bottlings that all come up under "Matua Sauvignon Blanc Marlborough". Steve @ Cellartracker, can you please straighten out? Thanks!
Red
10/4/2019 - winedupe Likes this wine:
90 points
"Sangiovese, Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon". Sangiovese dominates. There is nothing to complain about in this wine. Mello, smooth, rich, fruity, good dense color. Damson plumb. I can't remember what I paid for it, so I can't comment on QPR. I'm glad I snagged a case a few years ago. Fully mature and ready to gulp. No idea how long it will age, but I'm a believer in screw caps, so I doubt oxidation will harm this in the foreseeable future.
Highly recommended!
1 person found this helpful Comment
White
6/13/2019 - winedupe Likes this wine:
88 points
Just compared this to the 2017. Same general features: tart, grapefruit, kiwi, generally good, but the 2018 is bit sweeter than 2017, which caused me to deduct 2 pts. I like the NZ SB to cause me to pucker a bit. Still a great value.
White
6/13/2019 - winedupe Likes this wine:
90 points
Classic NZ SB tart grapefruit, kiwi, not too sweet, great value. Great crowd pleaser for serving at large gatherings without breaking the bank. I bought 2 cases, which reflects my opinion.
Red
5/31/2019 - winedupe Likes this wine:
88 points
Bought a case last fall from Berman's, my local wine shop for $12/bottle, on the recommendation from the shop. i'm always hunting for good quality, interesting wines that are not outrageously expensive. Finally had a chance to try it tonight. Dark purple, good acidic tartness, grapey fruit, but not complex. At this stage, I rate it a good value. It certainly gives as much pleasure as some 2009 Cru Bourgeois Bordeaux that I paid $19 for about 8 years ago. Will let you know later how it ages.
Red
2009 Château du Périer Médoc Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
5/27/2019 - winedupe Likes this wine:
88 points
Bought a case a while ago based on the highly touted 2009 Bordeaux vintage, mainly to see what all the hype was about while no longer being willing to pay the exorbitant prices commanded for the "classified growths". A good, but not a great wine. Lots of estery fruit (cherry in particular), and a little bit sweet. Label stated 50% Merlot, 50% Cabernet Sauv, but could pass for 100% Merlot. Color still a dark purplish red. My memory tells me I paid about $17/bottle. In my constant hunting for enjoyable, inexpensive wine, I have recently found Portugese wines of about the same quality and style (fruity and clean with no major defect) but much less expensive, for example Casa Santos Lima Colossal Reserva 2015 for about $11 (different grapes of course).
i have no idea how to judge the age-worthiness of this wine (nor do I understand how anyone else can presume to know this aspect of a wine), but my instinct is that this 2009 is fully mature and is therefore ready to drink at this time.
White
1/13/2019 - winedupe wrote:
85 points
Yikes! My impression is completely different from many of the other reviewers. This is the oakiest, butteriest Chardonnay that I have had in recent memory. No honey, pineapple, berry, apple, etc. If you like butter (diacetyl) bombs, then this is for you. If you like French style Chardonnays (flinty, austere), then steer clear of this wine. Note that one reviewer noted "not too much oak", but another tasted "too much oak". Go figure.... I agree with the latter opinion.
White
1/10/2019 - winedupe Likes this wine:
92 points
This is not a typical CA Chardonnay with heavy oak and buttery flavors, but rather a flinty, tart, lemony wine, more reminiscent of a Burgundy Chardonnay. I liked it! I bicker with the commenter who said S-C was going "downhill".
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
1989 Château Meyney St. Estèphe Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
12/27/2018 - winedupe wrote:
92 points
Although the recommended drinking window has passed, I beg to differ. Drank 12/24/18 with steak and extended family, and without decantation. Color was still dark purple, taste was clearly mature but not yet over the proverbial hill. Concentrated, rich, not a single flaw. A tad of leather, but mostly classic Cabernet, which to me is not a grapey flavor, but in a universe of its own. My biochemical background tells me the flavor is mixture of esters between various alcohols (ethanol, isobutanol, isopentanol) and various organic acids (acetic, pyruvic). For a Cru Bourgeois Supérieur to be this good after 29 years is amazing. Meyney should be bumped up in the frumpy, stagnant French hierarchy.
2 people found this helpful Comments (1)
Red
12/20/2018 - winedupe wrote:
85 points
Disclosure: I do not drink many Tempranillos, so I did not know what to expect. I bought this because the blurb at the store said "WS 90", and it was $13.99, and I got a 20% discount for buying a mixed case. Seemed like a good deal. Popped and poured one glass. Color was medium-light purple. Nose was woody. Palate was quite tannic with sour cherries. Pumped remainder with Vacuvin, put in cool cellar, will try the "aged" sample tomorrow. Not a bad wine, but my sense is that it needs quite a bit more aging to mellow out a bit.
Red
6/22/2018 - winedupe wrote:
80 points
OK, but not great. No major flaws, but no enchanting features. I agree with all others that said "hot on the finish". Good color, good ethanol, good tannins, but not much aroma and not a lot of fruit considering "old vines". A little bit of ethyl acetate. Paid $14.
White
1/22/2018 - winedupe Likes this wine:
88 points
No major flaws. Classic SB grapefruit and grass. Not too sweet. Not quite enough fruit to get it into the 90's. I recommend if you can get it under $10.
Red
1/12/2018 - winedupe Does not like this wine:
70 points
I am usually a big fan of Argentine Malbecs. The blurb at my wine shop said something like "James Suckling 92", so I took the bait and bought at $18. This was really disappointing. The wine had an overwhelming bitterness, which is a huge defect in my opinion. The bitterness overshadowed any positive feature that this wine might have had. The Maipe Malbec Reserve from '09 and '12 at $13, and the "regular" Alamos Malbec from various years for $8- $12 have been far better.
Red
1/12/2018 - winedupe Likes this wine:
90 points
For full disclosure, I don't drink a lot of Pinot Noir, as the price/quality always seemed too high. I was pleasantly surprised by this one. Color was ruby red. I agree with earlier reviews mentioning earth and smoke. Also an attractive woody aspect. There is ample fruit too, but I can't equate it with any particular berry. Maybe a tiny bit of raspberry. The wine was not overly sweet, and had no sign of bitterness (many various recent wines I have tasted have been bitter, which is a huge turn off). I can't remember what I paid for this, but I plan to go back and look for more. I can't see how someone would rate this at 60, unless perhaps they are accustomed to drinking $600 Burgundies. I call on the reviewer who rated this at 60 to pipe back in and explain.
Red
1983 Château Lynch-Bages Pauillac Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
1/5/2018 - winedupe Likes this wine:
95 points
This was the first bottle of a long forgotten case bought as futures upon release for next to nothing by today's prices - I don't remember exactly, but around $200/case. Stored ~33 years in a passively cooled cellar in New England. I noticed that the recommended CT drinking window was 'til 2010, but that the more recent ratings (2017) have been mostly above the average of 91. I agree with the more recent ratings.
The cork was all but gone - lots of mold on the surface, and pushed into the bottle with only slight pressure from the screw, even though the fill was still into the neck. Managed to finesse the cork out with a couple of thin kabob scewers that had threads. Wine was still dark red, oddly very little sediment. No decant. Lots of barnyard Brett at first, which put off several at the table, but this fortunately left more for me to sample over time. The Brett evaporated in a while to reveal dark earthy mature cabernet, not really fruity, but complex and mystical and enjoyable - wood, mushrooms, umami, esters. Is it possible that my passive cellar is better at aging old Bordeaux than that of Jeff Leve ("85" "fading")?
Will be tasting this over the next few years, will pipe in again.
White
1/1/2018 - winedupe wrote:
80 points
OK but not great. Some butter, some oak, some chardonnay, but also a bit bitter. Sour is OK, tart is OK, if balanced with fruit and depth, but bitter is a flaw in my opinion.
White
11/21/2017 - winedupe wrote:
80 points
The Wine Spectator rated this 90, and it made their "TOP 100" list for 2017. I disagree. Although it is laudable that this wine can be bought for around $10, it is not that great. My bottle, while not awful, was too sweet for a NZ SB, and a bit bitter and weedy. And why did they bottle it in a clear bottle when it is axiomatic that light is bad for wine (and beer)? My memory tells me that many years ago, when Matua was about $6, and much better, the bottle was dark green. I'm glad I tried a bottle before diving in. I will not be going back for a case.
White
11/13/2017 - winedupe Does not like this wine:
75 points
This bottle was overly sweet and did not have the intense spicy, fruity flavors that I remember of Alsace Gewurtz's from the past. It reminded me a bit of the white candy Lifesavers from my childhood, which I believe were supposed to be pineapple flavored. Or maybe it was Topps bubble gum that came with baseball cards (back in 1959 at least). I believe the chemical is ethyl butyrate, methyl butyrate, or a mixture of the two.
This wine was similar to the Chateau Ste. Michelle 2015 Gewurtz from Washington, which was also not very good.
To add a general comment, I was first introduced to Alsace Gewurtz with the 1983 vintage. All brands were spectacular, with a unique rich, complex fruit flavor that I could not associate with any particular fruit. Most reviews likened the fruit to "lychee nuts", but I did not agree with that association. I have not found a Gewurtz from anywhere recently that comes close to those 1983s or has that unique fruit.
Red
7/4/2017 - winedupe Likes this wine:
85 points
Bought based on the WS 91 score, 3/$25 at Burlington (MA) Wine & Spirits. There was nothing terribly wrong with this wine. Dark purple, smooth, rich, fruity, but not much complexity (no oak, leather, tannin, smoke, or eucalyptus, the stuff you expect from "classy" west coast US cabs for which to push it over 90 points). Good with hamburgers from the grill, but probably not up to lamb chops. No idea as to longevity, but would guess it will be good for a few more years.
2 people found this helpful Comment
White
7/4/2017 - winedupe Does not like this wine:
70 points
I'm sorry to say that I disagree with most of the previous reviewers. Too sweet. Not enough tart acidity for a NZ Sauvignon Blanc. Not enough fruit. A bitter aftertaste. The woman at the BJ's wine shop who sold me on this wine assured me I would be back for more. No way. 2/$25 "on sale". Did I get a counterfeit bottle?
1 person found this helpful Comments (1)
Red
6/29/2017 - winedupe Does not like this wine:
70 points
I just discovered (unfortunately) a half case of this wine buried in the back of my cellar. I vaguely remember it being good when young, but it is now way over the proverbial hill. It tasted quite oxidized, even though the "cork" was plastic, and the fill was still almost to the cork (1/4 inch !). The color was still dark purple. I don't understand why this wine has aged so badly.
Red
1975 Château de Conques Médoc Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
3/4/2017 - winedupe wrote:
85 points
I was combing through my cellar to make space for new purchases and found a single bottle, and figured that it was probably well over the hill and needed to be consumed. My memory says I bought this at Cave Atlantique in Somerville, MA about 1984. They closed down many years ago, but I never had a bad bottle of wine from that store.
Fill was still to bottom of neck, about an inch below cork. I was pleasantly surprised. Still dark purple-brown. Some sediment. Tart (sour), not in an obnoxious way, but in an attractive way. Still substantial Cabernet fruit - doesn't taste like any grape I have eaten, but full of estery, fruity flavors.
Amazing that a Cru Bourgois would taste so good at 42 years old! My cellar is passively cooled, about 58 degrees in winter and 68 degrees in summer, with a slow change from season to season.
I doubt that this wine exists anywhere at retail, but I would love to hear anyone else chime in who has anything to say about this vineyard. Thanks!
Red
2/7/2017 - winedupe Likes this wine:
85 points
Just bought on sale at Marty's in Newton, MA for $7.99, to try it while watching the Superbowl. Advertised as 90 pts by Wine Enthusiast. Very tasty, rich, fruity, estery, smooth, but also very sweet - too sweet for my taste in a red wine. Thus the slightly depressed score. Color was medium purple, no idea how long it would cellar. I would say it is ready to drink immediately - it is five years old already.
White
7/5/2016 - winedupe Likes this wine:
88 points
I've been trolling and tasting for a case of good, but not expensive chardonnay. Many that I have tried from 2013 and 2014 have had a bitter aftertaste, for example the often recommended Bogle 2014 and Chateau Ste. Michelle 2013. The Frei was much better with some classic CA chardonnay buttery (or butterscotch as Jaguar noted) flavor, but not overwhelmingly so, and it did not have the bitter aftertaste. I bought one bottle to test and now intend to go back for a case as soon as I have time.
Red
10/14/2015 - winedupe wrote:
80 points
I'm amazed at the price range written in the previous notes: 6$ - $11 !!
I paid $10 "on sale" from "$13" at Cambridge Wine and Liquors, Cambridge, MA, a couple months ago.
I generally like Columbia Crest wines, especially their Grand Estates Chardonnay, so I tried this Cab. Lots of cab fruit and a touch of oak, but the wine is quite sweet. I find it odd that only one previous reviewer out of 45 mentioned sweetness. Although a little bit of sweet is compatible with many white wines, I like my cabs to be dry, which is why I gave such a low score. If it were the same wine, but dry, I would probably give it 90+. I wonder why CC did not ferment this to completion. I would like to see the stats on the residual sugar for this wine. Some wines print residual sugar on the label, but most don't.
Red
9/9/2015 - winedupe wrote:
85 points
This wine was completely different from earlier vintages (for example 2011) of the same label, and therefore was completely different from my expectations. I expected a clean, good, but not too erudite Argentinian Malbec. But this one was heavy on tar, smoke, leather, wood, more like a Washington cabernet. Reminds me a little bit of methyl ethyl ketone, a sweet smelling chemical used to denture lab ethanol. Not much fruit, as it was probably hidden by the above strong notes. Good acidity on the finish. I prefer more fruit. An alien would not guess that this wine was made from grapes. Quite interesting, unique, but not a style to my liking, which is why I give it 85. I will not be going back for a case, and suggest to try a bottle before backing up the proverbial truck.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
8/31/2015 - winedupe wrote:
80 points
Just opened the first bottle of a case bought a few years ago for $19/bottle. I'm jealous of the other reviewers who got it for $15!. I can no longer afford the classified growth Bordeaux, so I figured I'd try some of the lesser wines that were rated 89-90 by at least one of the professionals (I can't remember which one, but probably Parker).
No decantation done. Color is dark purple, leading me to hope that this would be a super-concentrated wine. I was a bit disappointed. Nothing terribly wrong with the wine, but not as concentrated as the color would lead you to believe, and a bit short on the finish (contradicting a previous reviewer who lauded a long finish!). I agree with the same previous reviewer that it tastes much more Cabernet than Merlot - that woody, non-grape-like flavor. I could never figure out whether this is barrel wood dominance or the nature of the Cabernet grape...
This baby might be better in couple more years. I'll let you know.
White
7/5/2015 - winedupe Likes this wine:
90 points
Most reviews of Gewürztraminers mention the flavor of Lychee nuts. I could never detect that in any of the many past Alsacian Gewurz's that I have had over the years. However, Bingo - this one has it for sure, which for me makes it different from all the others (for example Hugel, Zind Humbrecht) I have had. I prefer the non-Lychee Gewurz's (possibly because that is what I am used to), but I'll give this one a 90, as it was novel for me, and the nose had a mild and ironically pleasing barnyard plus Lychee whiff. The wine is sweet, so not recommended for those who insist upon dry whites.
This wine paired well with lamb tikka masala.
I can't comment on aging potential, as I have no idea how a snapshot can predict the future, and I have not been tracking through a case. This was my second of four bottles, and if my memory is accurate, today's was a bit richer and more complex than the previous bottle of a couple years ago. As such, it looks like uphill from here.
Altogether an interesting and pleasing wine. It has a screw cap, so no corking, leaking, or oxidation problems should plague this wine. I think I paid about $17 a few years ago. Bottom line: Lychee, pleasing barnyard, sweet, novel, good.
Red
6/26/2015 - winedupe wrote:
80 points
I need some help from all past and future reviewers on this wine. I bought a case for $11/bottle because the rack at the store had a blurb that said Wine Spectator rated it 90, and Top 100 for 2014. Of course, it is very unusual for a Top 100 to be available this long after the publication, and for $11, no less!
The label on my bottles does not look at all like the one shown in the picture on this link. My bottle has a yellowish-tan label that is smaller than the orange one shown, and nowhere does it say Tempranillo. My label is fairly simple and says :Rioja > Vina Cumbrero > Crianza > Estate Bottled > 2010. On the back it does say Bodegas Monticello, and imported by Marketing Global, Miami.
To add to the complication, I found an ad at an online wine shop (bottleshop.com), that is offering this wine, and the ad shows a picture of the label. It looks very similar to mine, except that it has the word Tempranillo written just above Cranzia. My label does NOT have Tempranillo written on it. THEN I found a second ad (hitimewine.net) that shows a label EXACTLY like mine.
This wine does not taste like a 90 pt wine. It is not very concentrated and has a bit of an oxidized "cardboard"-like flavor. And I doubt that this wine will hold up for six more years, as the notes here suggest. This makes me believe that I might have been duped into buying a wine or bottling that is different from the one rated by WS and rated by the others here. i have tried to find out if there were multiple bottlings, but to no avail. Can anyone please help me to clarify this? Did anyone else have a similar observation? Thanks !
1 person found this helpful Comments (1)
Red
1990 Château Haut-Marbuzet St. Estèphe Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
12/25/2014 - winedupe wrote:
92 points
I recently discovered a forgotten case of this buried in the back of my cellar (passively cooled cellar (58 degrees F in winter, 68 in summer, but changes slowly) since I took possession of futures in about 1993. Parker had recommended, and the price seemed reasonable compared to peers at the time. Wine was about 1/2 " below cork. Cork came out in one piece, albeit a bit soft, but no leakage. Poured through filter/ aerater and started drinking.
The professional prognosticators wrote that this wine should be consumed by 2005, but I found this bottle to be still in great shape, with concentrated fruit, very little browning. A bit of acidity, which helped to make it stand up to spicy food.
Red
12/25/2014 - winedupe Likes this wine:
96 points
Drank with Christmas turkey dinner with family and friends. Had been stored in my passively cooled cellar (58 degrees F in winter, 68 in summer, but changes slowly) since I took possession of futures in 1985. Parker had recommended, and the price was quite a bit below peers at the time. Wine was about 3/4 " below cork. Cork came out in one piece, albeit a bit soft. Wine had not leaked all the way through. Poured through filter/aerater, and started imbibing immediately. Wine was dark red, no noticeable browning. Smelled and tasted like blueberry and cherry preserves that my Mother used to make. Mellow, smooth, concentrated, very little to complain about. Hard to give an absolute number without having several other wines at the same time for comparison, but clearly more concentrated and not as acidic as the one other wine at the table, 1990 Haut Marbuzet.
I don't claim to be able to predict the ageability of wines, but this tasted young to me. Hard to believe it was 32 years old. As such, I imagine that it has some years of life remaining.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
12/25/2014 - winedupe Likes this wine:
92 points
I found one long-forgotten bottle from a former case while cleaning the mouse droppings out of my passively cooled, non-"ideal" basement cellar. The cork was soft, but came out in one piece. Wine had not leaked through. Wine level was about 3/4 inches below cork. Poured through sieve and aerater and started imbibing immediately. Wine was still dark red, no browning. Nose had plum preserves, ethanol, and traces of isopropanol (rubbing alcohol), and methyl ethyl ketone. For some, this is a flaw - "medicinal, nail polish remover", but for me, in trace amounts this is attractive. Taste was surprisingly young, fruity, alive. I was surprised and impressed that this bottle was still alive. Applied Vacuvin pump and had more the next day. Still pleasurable. I vaguely recall that I paid about $120 for a case of this in 1985. Wish I had more.
White
7/7/2014 - winedupe wrote:
80 points
I usually stick with California and Washington chardonnay, because one can usually get drinkable wines for $10-$12. A couple years ago I bought a case of the 2009 Vire-Clesse on the recommendation of Joel Bermann, my local wine merchant. I believe that I paid about $20/bottle on a discount. I recall that the first couple bottles (2011-2012, if my memory serves me correctly) were good, with the classic "austere" and "flinty" character that I believe to be hallmarks of chardonnay from Burgundy. However, the last couple bottles, consumed in 2014 have tasted oxidized. My recommendation is that if you have any of this in stock, drink it up.
1 - 37 of 37
  • Tasting Notes: 37 notes on 37 wines
© 2003-20 CellarTracker! LLC.

Report a Problem

Close