12/27/2011 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Hot and tannic with some fruit, but was all over the place. If this is a decent wine it needs a few more years to even out, but there are far too many good ones out there to waste time on a wine that may come around in the future. Especially when the winery is charging a $10 premium (per bottle) to buy from the winery. Sorry, pass!

12/27/2011 - 60secondfinish wrote:

This 2007 cabernet is one of the best I have tasted in Napa in the last 2+ years. Unlike similar priced wines from other name wineries this cabernet was not overly tannic and dry. The fruit is there in spades with a candied cherry aroma that will knock your socks off. There is a bit of wood and pepper to compliment the fruitiness of this wine as well that brings great balance. If you are a fan of Napa cabernets and have had a hard time finding a truly outstanding bottle from 2007 that is $50 or less look no further. This wine is only available at the winery and the $25 version currently available at retailers does not do this justice. The 2007 Black Stallion Winery cabernet is 100% worth the $25 premium vs. the retail cabernet. Also, for my taste is was as good or even better than the bottles of Bucephalus they pour that run $150 a bottle.

1/6/2011 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Enjoyed at a friends house over the Christmas holiday. Decanted 1 hr and I was struck by how young the wine still seemed to be. There was the usual orange edge of an older wine, but none of the plum or porty components I was expecting. Struck me as very spry with great fruit and resolved tannins. This wine probably has another 5 good years before it hits it's peak.

9/2/2010 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Really impressed with this Pine Ridge Wine. Tasted at the winery as part of the Cabs tasting and it was far and away the best wine. As a matter of fact, their 2006 Oakville was my favorite 06' I tasted during my trip. The fruit is big without being huge, with a classic Oakville profile of dark candied cherry, cassis and a little Earth. The tannins on this guy are really tight, but this wine has more than enough acidity to age for 10 years so that the tannins can resolve themselves. This is a blockbuster in the making like a lot of Dunn wines that require at least 5-10 years to come down to earth. I bought 6 bottles to enjoy over the next few years with a really marbled piece of steak. Loved it, 6 in the cellar.

9/15/2010 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted at the winery -- without decanting the wine was in almost perfect balance from the beginning. Very refined with just the right amount of richness to make this a reserve. Beautiful nose of classic Napa Cab including: cherry, cassis, oak, white pepper and tobacco. This wine has enough structure and tannin to possibly age for another 10 years, but I just didn't get the impression it is a 20 year wine. The taste was wonderful with a medium fruit forward profile. This wine has presence and potential for a 95+ score from me in the future if it keeps developing. For $90 this is not an everyday drinking wine, but for special occasions you WILL not be disappointed.

9/15/2010 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted at the winery. Does not hold up compared to the 2004 and 2005. 2006 was a great year, but the estate Cab is just as good for half the price. What I remember of the reserve was an overly shy Napa Cab, that seems to have been picked early and is a little shy. I remember reading that some vintners picked their 2006 grapes earlier than they should have and some let them hang a little longer, hence the some great 2006's and some very average ones. I would guess Reynold's picked their grapes too early.

9/15/2010 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted in Napa and was very confusing. Really acidic and "hot" from the alcohol. I don't know if this wine is still completely closed down or they over oaked it, but there is something very off with this 2007. The fruit is completely overwhelmed by the acid and heat and needs at least another 1-3 years to open enough to get an accurate picture of what the wine is going to be. It's either a bust or a blockbuster in sheep's clothing.

9/15/2010 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted in Napa and was not impressed. The fruit is decent and the structure sound, but at $75 a bottle I would expect more of both. The tannin still has a few years until it is fully integrated (call it 2-3 years) and then maybe this wine would be worth the price. There are so many great 2006 wines to drink and this is not one of them. One of the few 2006's I did not buy.

9/15/2010 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted at the winery. A very nice cab that has come together, but still shows some tannins on the back end. The fruit is in full force and the wine should hit it's peak in the next 1-3 years.

5/6/2010 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Come on people you know you like it . . .

For $5 you can't get anything better and to be frank it's better than some $30 bottles I have had in the past few years. Info on the Gypsy is as mysterious as the people it derives its name from. You know it's a wine made from the cast off; auction grapes the Napa producers won't put in their own bottles, but who really cares? Some bottles will be better than others and sometimes a bottle will completely surprise you by blowing your expectations away. I have had a 75 point bottle and a 90 point bottle out of the same case.

The wine almost always is a little sweet and once and a while so overripe you will just put it down the drain. There are no tannins to speak of and the wine is generally a one dimensional table wine designed to get you drunk and look sophisticated doing it. For $60 a case it is a decent everyday drinker for someone who just does not have the budget for a $200+ case of the good stuff. But again, who cares? Buy it in bulk and enjoy with friends during your Spring/Summer parties. Cheers winos!

5/6/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

A fantastic wine. Last year highlands re-released the 2001 for $90 a bottle and I was lucky enough to purchase it at auction for $20. At $90 a bottle this wine would have been worth it...

The 2001 is a testament to fine wine making by experienced wine professionals. Not only was the 2001 vintage one of the best in history, but this bottle of highlands was one of the best 2001's I have ever consumed. The best word to describe this bottle is "finesse" because every part of the experience was so smooth and refined. I decanted the wine for an hour and drank with a friend over a three hour period. Bright fruit and oak on the nose from beginning to end. Depth and finesse in the glass with a classic aged mountain fruit profile of blackberry, cherry, herb, with the slightest amount of earth and plum. The edge has browned to a red orange tint identifying this as an early maturing bottling. I had three bottles and I drank them within a 6 month period because this wine if definitely at its peak. I highly doubt there is room for improvement, unless you enjoy an aged wine with much less fruit and more plum.

6/30/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Reserve my rear end. Thin, light with no body. A nose of glycerin, strawberry and wood, that didn't smell of oak in anyway. Cheap bulk grapes probably purchased outside of Napa and bottled in Napa so they can put it on the label. If I was a winemaker I would be embarrassed to put my name on this wine and call it a reserve! Marketing at its worst! Avoid like the plague, unless you like $8 wine at a $25 price.

6/30/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I was really impressed with the 2004 Jordan Alexander Valley Cab. This was not decanted, but drank wonderfully right out of the bottle. It continued to open throughout the evening and was surprisingly complex. On the nose there was some dark and some light red fruit, pepper, green pepper and oak. The wine drank so well and contains smooth tannin that has enough bulk to allow this bottling to age for at least 10 more years. This is one of, if not the best, Sonoma County cabs I have had in a VERY long time. So much different than Napa, but in a good way. It is a salt of the earth type of wine vs. big extracted fruit with huge tannin and a bouquet that will fill a room. And even at $40 if all of the 2004's drink this well it is a great value. I like it some much I am going to buy a case.

6/15/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted blind with 21 other california cabs. My winner of the night (placed 3rd overall, 40 participants) for it's dark blue and red fruit, beautiful balance and wonderful finish. At $36 a great cab in a sea of ever more expensive bottles engineered for cellar aging.

6/15/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted blind against 21 other California cabs. Placed second in the tasting with over 40 people taking part. At $16 this was the clear QPR winning by a mile. Very fruit forward and great out of the bottle. Not age worthy, but a great drinking wine at that price.

6/11/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Decant for 24 hours

Once decanted the Jester has a wonderful boutique of raspberry, cherry and spice. It is very tannic with lots of spice. Bottle aging for several more years may help. This is no GAM, but for $16 if you like Shiraz this is a wonderful choice.

12/17/2006 - 60secondfinish wrote:

This was the best bottle of Champagne I have ever had. The 1996 La Grande Dame was near perfect. Beautiful golden straw color with tiny bubble. On the nose I remember candied green apple and toast. So so smooth and delicious with perfect acidity. The only reason why I did not give this a perfect rating is because it is so young. I could tell this has some development to do. I will revisit as many times as possible until either the wine dies or I do...cheers!

6/9/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted at the vineyard -- what a beautiful Merlot! Huge dusty fruit up front with almost perfect balance throughout. Almost more Cabernet like than Merlot, which was really surprising. What made it different was it's refinement and grace. I could see myself enjoying MERLOT on a regular basis if not for the $75 price tag, which is really steep. I got the feeling since Luna does not grow their own Merlot the cost was passed on, plus some. Very happy I had a chance to taste, but I will have to pass for now.

6/9/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted at the winery -- without decanting the wine was in almost perfect balance from the beginning. Very refined with just the right amount of richness to make this a reserve. Beautiful nose of classic Napa Cab including: cherry, cassis, oak, white pepper and tobacco. This wine has enough structure and tannin to possibly age for another 10 years, but I just didn't get the impression it is a 20 year wine. The taste was wonderful with a medium fruit forward profile. This wine has presence and potential for a 95+ score from me in the future if it keeps developing. For $90 this is not an everyday drinking wine, but for special occasions you WILL not be disappointed. 6 bottles are now proudly mine.

6/9/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Tasted at the winery -- without decanting the wine was in almost perfect balance from the beginning. Very refined with just the right amount of richness to make this a reserve. Beautiful nose of classic Napa Cab including: cherry, cassis, oak, white pepper and tobacco. This wine has enough structure and tannin to possibly age for another 10 years, but I just didn't get the impression it is a 20 year wine. The taste was wonderful with a medium fruit forward profile. This wine has presence and potential for a 95+ score from me in the future if it keeps developing. For $90 this is not an everyday drinking wine, but for special occasions you WILL not be disappointed. 6 bottles are now proudly mine.

6/9/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Decanting this wine is a requirement. If you pop & pour you will be disappointed.

I have to temper my review because I wanted this wine to be excellent. The QPR is good, not great. For a Sonoma Cab it is up there with Stonestreet etc. A restrained nose of red and dark blue fruit with a touch of pepper and oak. A little barnyard also took time to blow off. After 30-45 minutes in the decanter the wine was very smooth with very light tannin. After about 2 hours I was surprised by some heat and the wine started to get heavier. I want to say I tasted dark caramel or even molasses towards the end of the night. This is a different wine for sure. Not typical, but then maybe it is made to be different. I think over time I will come to respect the Sbragia clan for being different, but right now it's just okay for me.

6/3/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I have heard for year that Silver Oak is overrated and not worth the money -- my impression is much different.

My bottle of 2001 Alexander Valley was wonderful. Left to decant for a merely 30 minutes the wine exhibited wonderful finesse. The nose of raspberry and cassis was wonderful. Yes there was oak, but it did not overwhelm the wine at all. On the palate with tannin was almost perfect with the slightest bit of dryness after about a 15-20 second finish. This wine is drinking very well right now and if you have them I would start drinking them over the next couple of years.

Worth the money? That is such a loaded question. If you enjoy the wine like I did, then of course it is worth the money. If you don't you will probably feel like I did when I drank my first bottle of 2000 Harlan Maiden and be turned off for a long time. Those who love Silver Oak LOVE it and those who don't will spend their money elsewhere.

6/3/2009 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I have had a much different experience with this wine than it seems others have. This is the third bottle I have enjoyed and all three have been very good. A well designed Napa Cab with good fruit and well integrated tannins. It won't blow your socks off, but it is much better than some bottles for twice the cost. Napa wines are my favorite and this does the region justice, especially considering the price point many Napa Cabs currently inhabit. It is a good "pop & pour" wine that really does not require decanting. I do not believe it is built to age for more than 5 years before it loses too much of its fruit. Great to smell if you love Napa Cabs, but very simple on the palate. Enjoy with a steak or meaty pasta.

5/8/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Not built to age this long. This was probably at it's peak 10 years ago.

11/21/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

What an enjoyable bottle of wine! If you have read any of my other reviews I am usually a California Cab lover, but this bottle of wine has won me over. Not a complex wine, but very nice to drink. Lots of ripe red fruit on the nose, oak, herb and a slight bit of coffee. The oak is more noticeable when drinking and the acid is a little high. The tannins were integrated very well for a young wine, but were a little dry. For a 2006 it is ready to drink, which I think is the point of an $8.99 bottle of wine

11/7/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Popped and decanted for two hours before tasting. Wonderful smells of classic cab fruit and hints of herb and mint. The wine never fully developed during the evening. It felt restrained the entire night and I was just waiting for it to come alive. I don't know if it is the vintage or Harlan is playing their usual game where you need to decant for 24 full hours. For the price there are many other wines that are much better.

10/25/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Almost perfect in every way . . .

The 1998 Gemstone blew me away. 78% Cab, 13% Cab Franc, 7% Merlot and 2% Petite Verdot = 100% pure enjoyment in wine. With 14.1% alcohol this wine is no fruit bomb and not too light either. The blend outlined above worked in perfect harmony creating a truly amazing wine A light red fruit nose that gave me the feeling of silk chiffon because it was oh so delicate. Also, a bit of earth and herb was present in the palate with the red fruit with the slightest amount of oak...barely there. It showed its age with a slightly orange/brown edge in the decanter. The tannins were perfect and sweet with no dryness at all. Perfect weight and balance all night, this wine hummed along until the bottle was gone. I wish I had 10 more bottles. Drink now if you have them!

10/25/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I agree with Dubliner that this wine needs air, but don't give it too much because on the second day it is shut down. Also, it is really important to let any good bottle of wine breath if you want to be able to enjoy its true character fully.

The 1999 J. Daniel is great after an hour of decanting. Very fruit forward on the nose with cassis, cherry and raspberry. I have not been able to research the blend, but there is lots of Cab and a touch of Merlot that adds a earthy element to the wine. I also added "hot & spicy" to my notes and "lots of oak." This is the first bottle of Lail that I can remember that had a hot oaky element, that I was not expecting. This did not turn me off because I love oaky wines, but there was definitely a Silver Oak vibe going on.

Not my favorite Lail ever produced, but very good. I did not give it a 90+ score because even though this bottle is almost 10 years old the tannins are still very dry, which is not a usual character of my Lail wines. Also, it completely shut down when I went to retaste this morning. I am going to let it sit for another 5-6 hours to see if it comes back.

10/20/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Excellent! Truly an underappreciated vineyard, but the Eloge deserves awards. One of the best Bordeaux blends I have had outside of France and right on par with the likes of Gemstone & Lail. Fruit, earth, spice and herbs on the nose with perfectly integrated tannins. This wine had a 30-45 second finish, which was intoxicating. What makes this wine so great is that it does not require 10 or 15 years of aging and is wonderful right now and should holds its character for another 5 years before it starts to mellow out.

7/15/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

An extremely enjoyable Napa Cab. I enjoyed this wine with a choice rib eye and a potato. I'm noticing a food trend when I drink Napa Cabs. . .

Popped and poured while I prepared my meal to find the wine pretty closed down. Not surprising, since I pulled it from my cellar only a few hours before. However, it was very enjoyable once it started to open and the classic Napa profile emerged. A bit spicy, but great fruit on the nose and palate, once the spice blew off. Very well integrated tannins as well. This one would be great several years from now if stored correctly, however it is a great drinking wine today.

My St. Helena Cabs or some of my favorites because they are so robust without being fruit bombs. Anomaly has some very tough competition, but they have managed to produce an excellent semi-cult wine for under $80 a bottle, which is saying a lot in today's Napa market.

10/20/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

A classic Napa Cab, but a little light on it's feet. I opened and decanted for an hour to help it breath. Perfectly integrated tannis for a young wine, which made it very drinkable. It was lighter than I had expected, considering the 2003 was much more robust. At $75 a bottle I would need to drink another 2004 to say this vintage is too light for me in order to reccomend "go for the 2003."

9/24/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I had always scoffed at the Sonoma producers who chided Napa for the fruit bombs that they produced because I never thought that it was a fair description of the wine. However, the 2006 Mitolo GAM is a fruit bomb of epic proportions from of all places Australia! This wine is huge and almost too sweet/fruity for me, which means it needs another 2-5 years in the cellar before it is ready for my palate. When it calms down it could be worthy of a 95+.

9/13/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Open and decanted while I grilled choice ribeye to accompany.

VERY IMPORTANT NOTE: This bottle needs to be decanted for 12-24 hours otherwise you will most certainly not enjoy its full glory.

I was very disappointed when I poured my first glass after decanting for about 30 minutes. I sipped while I ate, but it was SUPER closed, very acidic and light on the palate. I went to bed disappointed.

The next evening I poured to taste and was so thrilled to find that the wine had completely opened up. I was thrilled to find lots of fruit, herbs, earth, oak and vanilla. Tannins were a little dry, but overall the second day brought this wine from a 75 to a 91. I truly enjoyed it and wish I had saved the steak for the second day. If you buy the 2003 let it sit another 5-10 years if you have a case or let it sit 12-24 hours. Not a pop and pour wine.

6/20/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Initially out of the bottle there was a small amount of dark fruit, which was quickly replaced by raisin, prune and syrup. I thought the bottle was flawed, so I let it sit. - No score

Hour 1:
I have decanted this bottle for over and hour and the raisin, prune and syrup are starting to blow off to be replaced by light red fruit. The flawed elements are not completely gone, but in another hour and they may be. The tannins are completely integrated making for a very smooth wine from start to finish. I wish there was more acidity and I think the Merlot element is more dominant than the Cabernet. - 83

Hour 2:
I am happy to say that after 2 hours in the decanter the raisin and prune nose is is gone and it has turned into a very Rhone like blend. The Cabernet and Merlot are working well together to create a nice mature tasting wine with, black pepper, cassis, raspberry, minerals and earth. This is a classic example of why decanting is so important with older wines. I could have written this one off out of the bottle and I am glad I did not. - 88

Hour 3:
Starting to shut back down. Drink now if you have it.

6/19/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Decanted 1 hour and 20 minutes. Out of the bottle lots of fruit in the decanter. Later it had shut down and my tasting notes indicated a nose of light fruit, currant, white pepper, herbs and light oak. In the palate the wine was very light with cherry, raspberry, light pepper, earth, currant with light oak. Classic Napa. The finish is a little dry, which I enjoy. The color is medium crimson with a slightly orange edge due to age. 85 points

2 hours in the fruit is coming back big time, much more developed than the first glass an hour and 20 minutes out of the bottle. The dry finish has all but disappeared replaced with a 15-20 second smooth fruit, pepper, currant and oak finish. Delicate. 88-90 points.

3 hours in and this wine is singing, much more developed than the 1997 Shafer I enjoyed a month or so ago (note: Shafer was consumed over 1.5 hrs total). Very surprising, wow! The fruit is very forward, even the slightest bit sweet due to the 13.9% alcohol. A choice Rib-Eye was a great compliment. The wine cut right through the fat, perfect. Wonderful wine for a non-reserve 11 year old cab. The way it shut down and came back makes me think this wine has another 5 good years left, at least. Much more than I expected, cheers! - 93 points

5/29/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I have always looked forward to trying a 1997 Shafer, but never could justify the 1997 Hillside Select price of $400+. The 1997 Shafer was decanted for less than an hour, but enjoyed with four others for about an hour. When first poured and swirled the aroma was not very forthcoming. I do not know if it need more time to open up, but it just seemed muted for a Napa cab. I noticed a light cherry/strawberry smell followed by oak and coffee. It was a very good wine. Not extraordinary, but very good. One of the best I have had and if I sound less than impressed considering it is one of the best I have had there is a reason. . . See my review of the 2001 Lail J. Daniel Cuvee that we drank after the Shafer.

At $90 a bottle I do not think the 1997 Shafer is worth the price of admission. I was happy to have been lucky enough to enjoy a bottle with dear friends, but I would pass next time.

5/29/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I know this is my second review of this wine in less than a year, but I truly felt compelled to share my most recent experience with this vintage. This 2001 J. Daniel was consumed on a very special night following a 1997 Shafer Cab, not hillside select. I have always looked forward to trying a 1997 Shafer, but never could justify the 1997 Hillside Select price of $400+. The 1997 Shafer was excellent, but the Lail completely outshined it in every way. The entire table of 5 agreed the Lail was a much more enjoyable wine. We all took into consideration that the Shafer was a much older vintage and it would be interesting to have tried it 4-5 years ago.

We decanted the Lail for about an hour while we enjoyed the Shafer and by the time the Sommelier poured me the tasting glass it had opened up and was singing. Immediately the aroma of dark red fruit (raspberries and cherry) fills your nostrils. I swirled three times to fully take in the beautiful aroma and finally tasted. Smooth as the Shafer with multiple layers of distinct flavors greeted me during this tasting. Fruit upfront, followed by very light chocolate, mocha, and herbs. The amount and intensity of the alcohol was perfect for this wine at the current age and brought the fruit to the forefront. The tannins were almost perfectly integrated with just the slightest amount of dryness on the tongue after a 30-40 second finish.

I rated this wine a 97 because this bottle deserved it. Bravo to whoever stored this wine in the past because it was perfectly preserved. For less than $100 I truly do not think there is a better bottle available on the open market. The 2001 is much better than the 2000. I am still sitting on several 99’s and 95’s which I will drink soon and review as well. To close, this wine is also 100% Cabernet grapes, which is rare for this label. Other vintages that are blends will be much different in structure and taste. Bravo to the 2001.

4/1/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

A very nice bottle. Much better than I expected with a fruit forward profile. This was a very enjoyable wine with a ribeye and complimented the steaks very well. HOWEVER, the wine did not last into the second day. I was very disappointed that the structure did not hold, but my rating is based off of the first night and I will hold to it. I will be buying more if I can find it for $40 a bottle like last time.

4/1/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I bought this bottle on a whim from winecommune.com because of good reviews on the net. I stored it in my wine cellar for the last 3 months before I decided to open it. The wine itself was not as dark as many cabs from 2001, but exhibited a wonderful nose as soon as it hit the glass. My wife commented on how great it smelled from across the room, so I knew this was going to be a good bottle. I poured a small sample into my glasses, swirled, smelled and tasted. Wonderfully light cherry and blackberry fruit flavors hit my pallet immediately, followed by the light toasted oak, then back to dark fruit. It was a rollercoaster in my mouth. I was worried that it was so light, but it really performed. I am currently sourcing more bottles of the 2001 because this wine is going to be long lived and I want more! By 10 years of age this cab should be singing and I want to be part of the concert.

An important note:
There are many people who say that expensive wines, $40 and up, are not worth the money because there are so many cheap bottles around that are just as good. I beg to differ. There is no $15-$20 bottle of wine that measures up to the $50+ bottles from small privately owned vineyards like Anakota. These grapes are sorted and hand picked to find the best grapes available. The mass produced $10-$15 bottles do not received this amount of attention to detail. I am not being a snob because I can taste the difference between Anakota, Lail, Harlan and Gemstone vs. Groth, Robert Mondavi and the like. Support the smaller private vineyards and you will be rewarded with superior wine. It may cost more, but it is worth it to me.

2/1/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I pulled this bottle directly from my cellar and opened to find some seepage after I cut the foil. I was worried when I also noticed crystals on the end of the cork after opening, but I was so excited once I poured a small amount into my glass. It has a wonderful nose of dark fruit, blueberry, minerals and earth. The Merlot is really coming through early (70% Cabernet & 30% Merlot). Much more Pomeral like than the 2001 I had in December, which is 100% Cabernet. Robert Parker said this was one of the best efforts of the vintage and I have to agree. I have several more bottles and will enjoy them over the next 2-5 years, if I can practice self control. I love Lail and their J. Daniel Cuvee and I highly recommend any vintage.

1/23/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

Barn on the nose with a tiny bit of red fruit. It blew off after 20-30 minutes and had a strong methanol smell to it. Tasted of spiced fruit and Alcohol. A cheap cab and I would not buy more personally, but better than others I have tried.

1/23/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I do not have a very deep history with Petite Sirah, but my impression was very good. This wine had a very fruit forward nose and was very light and smooth on my palate with consistent flavors from the nose. A very delicate wine, that I enjoyed very much and at $10 a bottle a great BBQ or party wine with friends.

1/18/2008 - 60secondfinish wrote:

I opened this bottle 2 days before the holidays and decanted for 1 hour. This is truly one of the best Cali Cabs I have ever experienced. I was luck to find it at auction for half the list price and oh so wish I had 10 more bottles. Sadly I only have one left, but they are available on the internet.
The nose was sweet and fruity and my wife noticed it filled the kitchen with its perfume. The taste was so pleasing because it had at least three levels of flavor. It started with cab flavors of dark fruit, cassis and a hint of strawberries, then transitioned to a smokey oak and earth and finished with a transition back to smooth sweet chewy tannins. I tried to count the finish, but I lost count at 30 because I had to have another taste. Such an enjoyable wine from a very small vineyard, which routinely only produces 400-500 cases of this cuvee per season.