Tasting Notes for tarheel17

(1,743 notes on 1,454 wines)

1 - 50 of 1,743 Sort order
Red
2/13/2019 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
88 points
Nose: herbal, earthy but definitely not bretty - earthy in the similar-to-soil sense. Not overtly fruity by any means.
Palate: it is silky in texture, and yet earth-filled as promised by the aroma. The fruit feels young and unripe, perhaps it will bloom later? Tannins are strong though not overpowering, and are in the right place...I’m just not feeling the fruit. Overall it’s ok. I’m not wowed. Would love to be proved wrong down the line, but I’m not investing in additional bottles to find out.
White - Sparkling
I see why this was on discount, definitely showing signs of age. Dark in color, with bruised apple and biscuit. Full body, though rather abrupt finish. I like this style and am happy with the purchase, but it’s not going to please a palate searching for high acid/piercing minerality champagne.
Red
2/8/2019 - tarheel17 wrote:
Bleh. Earthy, muted, no real character. No obvious flaws, just rather insipid and tres boring.
White
1/5/2019 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
91 points
Nose: stone fruit, lemon rind. Not a generous aroma, rather quiet.
Palate: heavy on the tongue but not the least bit sweet. Lemon oil, barest hint of hazelnut. Super long finish, it’s like it never ends. Serious and seriously good wine.
Rosé - Sparkling
12/28/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
92 points
Juicy fruit, humming acidity. Really excellent rose.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
2014 Pepperjack Barossa Red Cabernet-Shiraz Blend, Red Blend (view label images)
12/20/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
I was pleasantly surprised, it's been a long time since I enjoyed an Australian wine. Tasty, without being fruit-bomby. I'd buy again as a party wine.
White - Sparkling
as before, this is complete and delicious. Great buy at $30.
Red
12/19/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
84 points
Lackluster, without joy or crunchy juiciness that I look for in cru bojo. Insipid, it somehow grew on me over the evening, which may have had much to do with the low alcohol content. However, if people are buying this for $13, it’s a good deal because it is clearly not manufactured or adulterated grape juice for the masses. My bottle was closer to $19. A pass at that point, since rockstar stuff is only $1-2 away.
Red
A little dirtier and less precise than other vintages. Still excellent value, as always.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
10/27/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
Chris’ least favorite of the Kutch wines, it’s more serious and savory. I liked it fine.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
10/25/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
Good value, and lasted 4 days in the fridge admirably.
White - Sparkling
Good intensity. Bright, but not sharp. Good value.
Red
10/19/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
86 points
Ok for $24. Did not stand out. A bit flat and metallic, but not flawed.
Red
10/2/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
88 points
nose: cherry, graphite, the definition of cru beaujolais
palate: lithe with red fruit, it has a charcoal undertone to add interest. I would say its duskier, more flinty and a little less defined than my personal favorite superstar Ambassadess Brouilly cuvee, but a very nice effort. I would definitely buy again.
White
10/1/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
Very impressive. Tasty fruit, complete acid, sensual body. Too distracted for better notes, so I’ll just have to buy another bottle and do my due diligence. $35 is a bargain.
White - Sparkling
9/30/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
89 points
Surprisingly good. Everything else we purchased from this particular store disappointed, but this Champagne was deliciously crisp, with fall apple crunch and yeasty tone. Long length too.
Red
as before, this was rich and complete. I think at peak, but I guess I'll never know since it was my last 2009. In anywise, it was delicious.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
8/29/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
92 points
It's time to order again...so here I am opening up old Cayuse to justify another purchase. I would like to quote Chris, for posterity, who said "we should buy more of this" after he took his first sip. And since the actual stemware is still packed and we are drinking out of jelly jars, that is saying something.
*sigh* Champagne tastes...guess I'll reload.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
7/22/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
93 points
I was impressed. Nice cool mouthfeel, not too oaky, fruit was subdued but not hidden or tired. A lovely bottle.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
7/10/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
88 points
nose: plum, red fruits, it seemed well into middle age with a touch of obvious alcohol
palate: neither as refined nor as lively as the Kutch Savoy 2011 tasted earlier this week. The palate was soft and full, but the flavors were muted and while tasty, not particularly delicious. Some chalky cranberry and a lingering finish of old raspberry jam. While nowhere near old age, I wouldn't say this wine has a whole lot of evolution ahead of it. I'm glad I drank it now, in other words, instead of carting it across the country in a month.
White - Sparkling
7/8/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
87 points
didn't think this was anything special. There's no way I would have guessed 2008 vintage, either. Felt like a basic NV on the lighter, more lemony edge of the spectrum.
Red
7/7/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
93 points
Perfection! Lithe and lovely and truly delicious . Bottle was empty before we knew it.
1 person found this helpful Comment
White - Sparkling
Happy Father's Day!
This has the rich, biscuit-like persona of Veuve without the sweetness, which I expect is what they are going for. The mouthfeel is full, then tapers to a lemonade tinge that lingers long enough to impress.
I enjoyed the richness and complexity, though I'm not convinced it couldn't have benefitted from a higher dosage. For the money ($85), I'm not going to purchase more, though I consider it an interesting, informative experience. Also, I'm feeling "extra old" these days so I appreciate a label that speaks to me so frankly.
3 people found this helpful Comment
White
5/23/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
87 points
I was quite happy with this. Simple, yes. Sweet, yes (I mean, it is Vouvray). But seriously, it was $16. You really can't find wine this drinkable for under $20 very often. A good buy. Serve it to Aunt Mildred and get her to toss that Sutter Home crap already.
Red
5/15/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
earthy, funky, French. The darker side of Beaujolais. Quite well-composed. I prefer the crunchier, juicer variety, but this is well done.
Red
Ready to drink. Plummy, rich and mature. I will be drinking this sooner rather than later.
1 person found this helpful Comments (2)
Red
I love, love, love the Ambassades cuvee and I buy it every year. For a geeky experiment, I shoved 3 bottles of the 2009 in the back of the cellar after purchase, unearthing them just last month in an offsite-storage shuffle.

Since I usually drink the wine within 12 months of purchase, my notes are really just in comparison to what I usually taste.
This 9 year old wine is darker, less "crunchy" (which is a wine term I only ever use to describe new Beaujolais, and I can't be certain but I think I got the word from Keith Levenberg or, god forbid, John Rimmerman) and less energetic than when drunk closer to release. It also feels a touch heavier and is just a tad less bracing in its attack. However, it hasn't much changed and I think the moral of the story is that you can drink right after release or cellar this stuff for a decade and it will still perform admirably.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Rosé - Sparkling
4/28/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
86 points
nose: red fruit, red hard candy
palate: interesting, metal and dust accentuated by sour lemon and plum. The finish is dirty but in a fruity way. Not terrible. Also not something I would buy again. An experimental cuvee, I assume.
Chris summed it up: "not a refreshing delight"
White - Sparkling
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): I know it's not cool to be a fan of VC in the Champagne snobbery world, but I am. It's good stuff. I put it into the blind tasting to see how it would perform and, whaddya know, I liked it. Go figure. It tasted familiar, warm and comforting like an old friend and clearly, unmistakably Champagne. It was paired against an Under the Wire sparkler from CA and the differences were acute, though both were very good. It was also the last pair tasted so...my notes aren't too in depth. Guess I'll have to re-do this another time.
5 people found this helpful Comments (1)
Rosé - Sparkling
4/21/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
91 points
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): I tasted this blind in a lineup of CA sparklers and Champagnes and I'm happy to report that I was able to identify it as the best CA sparkler, but clearly not champagne. Yay me.
My notes indicate it was the most interesting of the wines on the table, with metal and caramel on both nose and palat. It was super interesting, very tasty, yet definitely not Champagne.
It was paired against Veuve Cliquot NV and held its own. Which is good, because they are basically the same shelf price. I'm happy to keep supporting UTW fo sho.
1 person found this helpful Comment
White - Sparkling
4/21/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
89 points
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): Tasted blind, I thought this was the Louis Roederer. It was up against a low-performing Carneros curve (ala Tattinger), which made it seem tastier. My notes say it was smoothly put together with more restrained and elegant fruit than the sparkler alongside. Obviously Champagne.
White - Sparkling
4/21/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
80 points
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): I wasn't impressed with this (it was my least favorite of the tasting). It was obviously california fluff, though some minerals were apparent. Mostly sweet peach plus metal sensations, the finish was "odd" according to my notes. It was tasted blind against the Moet & Chandon NV, and was clearly the lesser wine and the non-champagne.
White - Sparkling
4/21/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
86 points
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): At first I thought this might be flawed, as it's nose was a bit dusty and cork-y smelling, but that mostly blew off after a few minutes. However, the nose was not particularly appetizing even then. It was tasted next to a CA sparkler (Iron Horse) that was tropical on the nose and palate, so the Lamoreaux's mineral component was pronounced. My notes say the finish was "botched". It was OK. I was able to guess that this was the "budget" champagne in the blind tasting.
White - Sparkling
2013 Iron Horse Vineyards Classic Vintage Brut Green Valley of Russian River Valley Champagne Blend (view label images)
4/21/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
87 points
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): nose was weirdly tropical and a bit fainter than other wines int eh tasting. The palate was lemon and lilikoi blended into a fine mousse. I found the finish a bit watery but overall good presentation. It was up against the weakest champagne of the bunch (Lamoreaux), which may have colored the notes.
This was Chris' favorite sparkler of the tasting.
White - Sparkling
4/21/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
95 points
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): SO AMAZING.
I mean, I know Vilmart is amazing, this was no surprise. It blew away all the other wines (4 NV champs, 5 CA sparklers) at the table. It was miles ahead of them to all tasters which included many neophytes, but also some well-traveled palates, which is just confirmation of how wonderful Vilmart's wines truly are.
My notes read: pineapple nose, totally delicious, therefore obviously Vilmart.
3 people found this helpful Comment
White - Sparkling
4/21/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
84 points
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): This had a funky nose, bruised yellow fruit, some toast to give it fullness, but was wackily out of alignment. I wasn't too impressed. True, it was tasted (blind) alongside a Vilmart 2008, so it really didn't have a chance, poor little Schramsberg. But still, it didn't do well.
White - Sparkling
4/21/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
86 points
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): tasted alongside (blind) what turned out to be Louis Roederer Brut. It was overly sweet and a little wonky. Not too bad, some tropical essence. Paled in comparison to the real deal.
2 people found this helpful Comment
White - Sparkling
4/21/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
89 points
Champagnes vs CA Sparklers (My house): This is definitely champagne, smooth, rich and complete. Excellent finish. My guess was Veuve Cliquot given the richness (which was accentuated by it's pair of Roederer Estate) but obviously that was wrong.
White
3/24/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
88 points
A little more skunk and a little less fruity goodness than the Truffiere we opened last week. Ok.
White
3/14/2018 - tarheel17 Likes this wine:
91 points
This was quite impressive. Taut, clean, yet very fruity with depth and deliciousness. Lip-smacking good, but in a refined, classy way.
Red
3/5/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
I wasn’t overwhelmingly impressed with this. Seemed somewhat deep and a tad rustic. Complicated, but missing a wow factor for me. Worth $72? Maybe for some. On the fence about buying more of this vineyard.
White
3/5/2018 - tarheel17 wrote:
90 points
Quite lovely, linear and delicate fruit. Great purchase.
Red
This bottle settled midway between the two prior. A nice enough quaff, but not exceptional. Drink now.
Red
I've been looking for a cab under $30 and everything I taste is junk, so I figured I'd try Kalinda. So happy I did. The structure is unmistakeable, with ripe tannin and juicy red fruit and, thank goodness, the acidity necessary to complement. It does slack off a bit mid palate, but that's being nitpicky. Yes, very young, but also very delicious. I'll buy more to drink young because I like it, but maybe I"ll keep one around just to see what happens in 5 years too.
White - Sparkling
THIS is what I hope and dream of when I open prestige champagne. And so young! Terrific stuff. (It was NYE so I don't have better notes than that, too busy saying goodbye to 2017!)
2 people found this helpful Comments (2)
Red
12/26/2017 - tarheel17 wrote:
flawed
My bottle didn't taste anything like these notes. Flawed somehow. Maybe corked? I'm horribly insensitive to TCA, so I can't say for sure. But there was something off.
White - Sparkling
Excellent but not in the least bit ready. Chris really enjoyed. I thought it showed great promise, but it was not even a 10th of what it could be in 10 years. Note to self: HANDS OFF, LADY! Try again in 2027.
1 person found this helpful Comment
1 - 50 of 1,743
More results
  • Tasting Notes: 1,743 notes on 1,454 wines
© 2003-19 CellarTracker! LLC.

Report a Problem

Close