12/27/2011 - houtx wrote:

Mellowed from last time I popped a cork on this vintage (July 2010), but still some great veggies. They are more in the background now, and so the whole thing is now wonderfully integrated. I have one more of these left, and look forward to opening it sometime in 2013.

9/28/2011 - houtx wrote:

Drink up now! This is on its last legs.

8/23/2011 - houtx wrote:

Very light color. Almost like a dark rose. Tart cherry and cola notes on the nose. Some brick. Puckeringly dry and tart. Long dry finish that is more of the same. Okay for the money.

12/8/2010 - houtx wrote:

Heavily oaked american style Bordeaux. I guess it's okay. It needs a good deal of airtime to dial down some of the more intrusive oak and vanilla elements. Okay price for what it is, but not my style.

11/22/2010 - houtx wrote:

Could smell toasted wood from a couple feet away. Big heat aromas. Spice, not much fruit on the nose. Shockingly thin mouthfeel, with little more than alcohol heat. Let it sit and it mellows into a strawberry, raspberry syrup with plenty of heat to keep it from becoming a goop. Some smokey goodness remains and after a half hour thus becomes a nice wine.

11/20/2010 - houtx wrote:

Red spicy fruit. Cinnamon. Big heat. Very good.

11/16/2010 - houtx wrote:

Yikes. For nine bucks a steal.

11/11/2010 - houtx wrote:

Strawberry and heat smell. Some cinnamon. A little wood, but not smokey barrels, but a springtime forest, perhaps. Similar flavors with a smooth mouthfeel. No tannins. People say they'd like to lay this down for a while, but it tastes good to me now. Alcohol content is high.
Good overall.

11/10/2010 - houtx wrote:

Excellent tropical fruit and a bit of creaminess, which was unexpected but welcome. I'm going to let the next one sit around for a while too.

10/6/2010 - houtx wrote:

Don't let this warm up; don't let it decant; serve it at cellar temperature. It'll be rich with thick red fruit and supporting tannins. It will approach a target box wine if you let it get too much air, but keep it a bit cool and before too much burns off and this is an astoundingly good wine.

8/10/2010 - houtx wrote:

Pretty much the same impressions as BG3034. I'd say that it is a great QPR if you like slightly over extracted, heavily oaked california cabs. I think it manages to balance itself out better than some of the other tasters here, but i like my wines a little bit more restrained.
Note that all these impressions are from a newly opened bottle with some aeration. It could change with a heavy decanting, and this has some of the hints of a wine that doesn't taste as good after it has been sitting around for a while.

7/17/2010 - houtx wrote:

Hugely vegetal. More stem and vine than you will get in most any other wine. Hints of cinnamon, little fruit. Little more than fresh veggies. Some wines can give you rotten veggies , which can be interesting. This is just straight up grape stem, bell pepper, carrot trimmings. Interesting. Impressive, if a bit unique.

5/23/2010 - houtx wrote:

Great Italian red. Dry clay, some solid bite on the back end.

5/20/2010 - houtx wrote:

First night it's okay, a bit dry a skunky, with thin flavors and colors. With a bit of a chill, it can pass as a table wine, but don't pay too much attention to it.

5/15/2010 - houtx wrote:

Very good. Big and bold like oh-so-many california cabs, with ample oak, but more restrained and less violent.

4/25/2010 - houtx wrote:

Nose reminds me of target wines in a box. Hollow cola and grape must. Flavor profile and mouthfeel are below my expectations, but it's pleasant and not offensive.

4/25/2010 - houtx wrote:

Accidentally bought this again. Nothing has changed.

3/27/2010 - houtx wrote:

Fruity mess. Hint of leather, and some structure, but not really. It's pleasant, and will please many, but doesn't need to be a wine, could .

3/20/2010 - houtx wrote:

Yep. Still smells like rotting peppers. Interesting, and will definitely seem off to many people. I find it interesting. The mouthfeel and taste is much more inline with a standard red, but wow, the aroma is worth the bottle's price.

3/18/2010 - houtx wrote:

Not nearly as much fruit this time, likely because I let it warm up a bit. Still unoffensive, if a bit simple. A great value and very reliable.

3/7/2010 - houtx wrote:

A tad dark at first, but not surprisingly, it's a cherry red, clear and unclouded. Nose has the normal red fruity strawberry twizzler, but good red brick, no oak. Taste is borderline fruit bomb, but dry, so it's not like candy. This wine will offend no one. It isn't a highly tannic disaster until it's 10 years old, and it isn't a gobs of fruit and sugar mess today. Very good wine, great value.

I haven't let it sit out, but I'm going to guess that time doesn't help this. Don't let it decant. A spin through the vinturi, perhaps, but don't come back two hours later and expect to find much.

3/5/2010 - houtx wrote:

Dark red, purple fringes. Take a whiff, and it's a modestly fruity, strawberry, effort, with some wood chips. Give it a swirl and bury your nose in the glass and wet, woody strawberry/cherriness just drips, seriously drips, from the top of your nose to the bottom. I'm not usually a big fruit fan, but this is so concentrated, jammy and indulgent that I'm in love. Maintains the woodiness when tasted, and much of the fruit does go away. Dancingly light tannins and a short finish, but pleasant. It's all about the nose on this one.

I really panned a bottle of this a while ago, noting that I had let it decant for a while. Given the above, don't let it decant!

2/28/2010 - houtx wrote:

Thick and viscous, but cleaner than many california wines. Big dark fruit and enough wood to keep it all together. Really like this. Doesn't need much decanting.

2/28/2010 - houtx wrote:

Great big "meh." Nose and taste of a wine well past it's prime. Definite butter, apple and straw notes. But too much overripe fruit and flab. It was pleasant enough, but there are much better wines from this vineyard.

2/27/2010 - houtx wrote:

Over the top floral and citrus notes. Could have been drier, but enough spice and acidity to hold up. Good stuff overall.

2/17/2010 - houtx wrote:

Very lush nose. Velvety smooth with jammy blueberries and rose petals. As can happen with such a profile, an element of cough syrup, but as much as some others. Taste is a complete 180. Weird, really. Little fruit. Chemically and harsh. Some tannins without any structure. Hot, sour, grape juice. Longish finish, but I wish it would end.

2/13/2010 - houtx wrote:

Decanted for an hour and a half, which may explain:
Nose is nice and rich, with some oaky fruit, overly ripe strawberries, very candied unless you swirl, and then you can pick up something other than simple fruit. Mouthfeel is silky smooth. Flavor profile borders on strawberry candy. There is no structure, it's liquid candy. Not for me at all. I can only hope that if you don't decant it as much, you are able to "benefit" from the higher alcohol and tannin contribution typically associated with pop n pours.

2/10/2010 - houtx wrote:

Big and bold nose. Huge fruit. Woody but bright. Let it decant, and the wood goes away, and the brightness fades into a more mellow, jammy fruit. Color is lipstick red, with some maroon, but clear and clean looking. Good acidity, and a wonderful finish. Leaves the mouth full of strawberry, dried apple, no cream, nothing weird. Very good.

2/8/2010 - houtx wrote:

Not sure if this really should have been sold for $10. It's not spectacular, mind you (a bit flat taste profile, though there are hints of sour cherry, some actual minerality, etc.), but usually you cannot find anything like this from France, in the US, at this price.

2/6/2010 - houtx wrote:

True, it's flabby. Overly ripe tropical fruits, no minerality. It doesn't deserve anything beyond average, but it's a perfectly drinkable wine at a easy price.

1/31/2010 - houtx wrote:

Dark red and purple. Smoked wood and big red strawberry/raspberry fruit on the nose, but the wood overpowers all. Very new world. Tannic mouthfeel, oaky. Many out there will love this. Not for me. Good 84.

1/26/2010 - houtx wrote:

Very grassy and harshly vegetal. Powerful aromas of dried unsweetened cranberries and hints of mint, but a flavor profile that can be vanishingly light. Average overall. For the price, acceptable.

1/23/2010 - houtx wrote:

Cheap cabs are too often over extracted messes. You can tell when you pour it, this will not hit both sides of your mouth with oaky tannins that ruin the rest of it. Just enough wood to compliment (the admittedly weak) fruit. Definite cola/stone aromas and flavors. For those curious, there are elements of a Becker Vineyards Texas Hill Country terroir. Don't let it air, though. It rapidly turns into something tasting like a wet saxophone reed mixed in a blender with yard clippings. Averaging 85 for the initial taste, and 70 for the rest. Rounding up because I feel generous.

1/23/2010 - houtx wrote:

Pale color, with ample translucence. Delicate aromas. May be getting some type of perception cross over, but I think of a fragile glass figurine. Weird, I know. Good stuff overall. Hints of brick, some sour fruit, and clean all the way.

1/20/2010 - houtx wrote:

Classic sangiovese nose, with at times a minerality that I rarely find on reds. Dry, but solid cranberry/strawberry fruit notes. Good mouthfeel, and a bit simple taste, with the nose notes carrying over. A sweeter finish than I sometimes can get with a sangiovese, with milder tannins than can sometimes mar a good dry wine. Very good to excellent.

1/7/2010 - houtx wrote:

Nose quickly changes as it airs. Initially a jammy, fruity, sweet wine. Within a few minutes, more restrained, dry, aroma, almost like a spoiled diet cherry cola. Definite sour cherry, but with a chemical note. Mouthfeel is smooth, but dry, with cherry and a hint of earth. High end of good overall.

1/5/2010 - houtx wrote:

Initially, the nose is of rotten vegetables. I thought at first burnt flowers, but the floral element rapidly degraded to rank decay and burning. Think salad that has been in the fridge too long. Very vegetal. Maybe a hint of raspberry jam, but only slightly, like the aforementioned salad had a raspberry vinaigrette on it. Maybe an old, burnt salad with raspberry dressing.
As time passes, more straight up vegetables, green bell peppers, celery, but still a hint of rotten.
Was afraid to try it, frankly, and upon tasting, it isn't a champ at all. Good feel. Dry like I like em. Nothing complex, but interesting. I had to limit the air entering my mouth though to avoid the flavors associated with the nose before it aired out, which is a first for me. Give it some air, and this thing really mellows out. Leather blackberries, woody.
With the funky smell and boring taste on the negative side, and the shear uniqueness to the positive, this is average, but very very unique. Worth a shot for the price. Be sure to try a few sips with your nose plugged.

1/3/2010 - houtx wrote:

Dry nose. Dry taste. Not terribly complex, but you can't find a good dry red at this price point in many places. More rounded flavor profile than a Chianti, and there is a hint of fruit wandering around in the background.

1/1/2010 - houtx wrote:

On the nose, a bit of that cheapo shiraz sweetness, but candied red raspberries and second fiddle strawberries everywhere. A great color, with smallish purple hints at the edges. Mouthfeel is smooth, with some acidic kick. Bland finish, but a good wine, and usually at a great price.

1/1/2010 - houtx wrote:

With appropriate chill, loads of minerality, a bit of spice and fruit. Very good.

11/22/2009 - houtx wrote:

Good color. Dry aroma, when combined with the knowledge that this is a 12.5% abv, is odd. A tad bit funky on the nose, with a smooth slate element. Thin mouthfeel, but smooth. Very simple taste profile, but distinct; candied raspberries, a bit of dirt, and that wet stone sensation. Reminds me a bit of some low end Texas wines. In off-regions (those not typically known for wine), the low and high end wines can be really disappointing to me, and this falls into that category. It was worth the try, but a flat, simple set of flavors, leave me unwilling to try this one again. Not a buy at $9, and certainly not at twice the price.

11/21/2009 - houtx wrote:

Good color. Musty upon opening, but that blows off fast. As the wine opens up, it moves quickly from an earthy, dry sangio, to an overly sugared, grape cola disaster typical of some terrible california wines.

11/15/2009 - houtx wrote:

Great googly moogly this thing has some wood notes in both the aroma and taste. Smoky, oaky and dense. Very vegetal. Dark red, bordering on black in the glass. I paid less than $14 for this?

There are $50 cabs with this much smoke and wood, but at this price point and with this varietal, I think it actually works.

11/10/2009 - houtx wrote:

Very dry. Bright strawberry/cranberry, some licorice. Tannic. Needs a bit more rs for heft, but a very well made old world wine.

11/8/2009 - houtx wrote:

Very interesting upon opening, but settles into a more shiraz-y profile after some air. Woody nose, with elements of cinnamon, granite, and cherry. Similar flavor profile, and very nice in general. The heat gets in the way, and the finish is a tad bitter, but a good effort. Above average, and for $10 at the supermarket, great deal.

11/7/2009 - houtx wrote:

Upon popping, this seems like an excellent wine. Nice dry sangio background with a punch of newworld fruit. Letting it decant for a while though and it completely fell apart. A funkified, fortified, poorly made taste. Sour cherries, but elements of green stem. Typical texas taste profile, but all of the bad, little of the good. There's a chance this is over the hill and wasn't designed to last this long. I can only hope. Below average overall.

10/26/2009 - houtx wrote:

Light red color. Hot, sour nose with little sweet fruit but plenty of sour strawberries and cranberry. Very thin around the glass. Similarly thin mouthfeel and tastes. A bit of red brick, but a bright taste with a bit of tail end tannins. Resembles an Italian red more than anything made in this country. For those who like a good sangiovese, this can be a good alternative. It's an average to above average wine to me, which for something that costs less than $3.50 is AMAZING. Traditional fans of "big cali reds" are going to hate this. For those that like to tease out a little subtlety now and then, this is a good wine regardless of price. For the price, it's a great buy.

10/24/2009 - houtx wrote:

Very, very candied. Pleasant enough, but nothing special. High grape cola / cough syrup levels. If you like sweet, smooth, approachable wines, this will be right up your alley. It lacks anything to distinguish it from cheaper wines from cali.

10/13/2009 - houtx wrote:

Wonderful woody nose that evokes images of a dusty basement. Blueberry, charred wood with hints of cherry, with heat as well are evident from the aromas. Upon tasting, and here's where I've had problems with big california wines like this, it just falls apart. Nothing but a puckering mess with no fruit beyond a hint of strawberry before the tannins clamp my cheeks together and I can't taste anything but a hot finish. I hope other enjoy this more than I.

10/10/2009 - houtx wrote:

Very nice. Creamy texture due to the high residual sugar, but with plenty of fruit. Delicate and smooth.