2/15/2024 - DWStyle Likes this wine:

Full disclosure: I some how purchased a 5 ltr. of this wine.
Have 4 750’s to figure out when the 5 liter will be ready to drink!🍷.
This bottle was glacially slow to open! Around 3.5 hrs it showed up. This makes me think the 5 ltr will need some serious decanting.
After 4-5 hours of decant it t started getting richer and a more voluptuous mouth feel. Tannins seem to be more pronounced at this stage. Giving me the idea that it can age for another 7 to 10 years in the large format.
The wine is easily accessible now . Though slow opening.
Needs food.
Drinking well now , hopefully better in the future. 94

2/12/2024 - El_Dougo Likes this wine:

Very impressive house wine. Vibrant salmon pink in glass. Nose of strawberry and raspberry. Med + flavor intensity follows the nose. Effervescent bubbles and high acidity. I def plan to buy more.

2/9/2024 - sid_loves_wine Likes this wine:

This is the 6th wine I've rated 97 on CT, my highest score so far (basically perfect) out of around 1,300 different wines. Of those 6, it's also the 3rd CA Pinot Noir, and the 2nd from the Sonoma Coast (and I generally consider QPR in my scores, too.) For me, this was absolutely divine- not only a stunning wine, but *incredibly* well-priced, even though it's not cheap. The sheer precision, balance, expressivity, and complexity are all awe-inspiring, and being able to purchase it for special occasions at ~$75 (sometimes less) is the icing on the cake.

This is my third time trying this cuvee- The previous vintages were also absolutely gorgeous, but this was on another level. It felt more expressive and more complete, without losing any sense of nuance. The 2016 was similar but just a little more shy, at the time, while the 2017 was a bit less balanced with the stems poking out above the fruit. I've read that '21 was a great vintage for CA Pinot.

Tasting this was mesmerizing- just incredibly delightful from beginning to end. It was shimmering and pure with ultra-aromatic strawberry shortcake, pomegranate, hibiscus, black tea, conifer, and some bright, slightly savory spices, maybe closest to cumin and star anise. The stems are so incredibly well-integrated here, lending tiny notes of earthy nuance without ever getting in the way of the crystalline pink fruit. I was shocked when I realized it was still 100% whole cluster, which was a little more obvious in previous vintages. Tannins are completely melted, so it's just a gentle weight on the palate with zero sensation of chalkiness, and it's super energetic/vibrant without ever feeling tart. In terms of both quality and QPR, I can't think of any way for this to be a better bottle. It could age, and I'd be interested to try one with a few years in the cellar, but it definitely doesn't need it, and I think the ultra fresh fruit is part of the appeal. I'm not sure why I haven't tried their other wines yet, but I think it's time.

12/31/2023 - brasstab Likes this wine:

I've always liked Insignia fine but never loved it. I know that sounds boujee and pretty insufferable, and for that I apologize. But this bottle was off the charts -- dark fruit, chocolate and bright acid. Everything I want in a wine to pair with food. Liked it better than the '15 Sassicaia I drank next to it. I know! I know!

12/29/2023 - Cailles wrote:

Sadly, this bottle was corked. But the potency of this vintage was still pretty obvious. A fantastic year for DP and despite the cork taint on the nose, the material underneath was so good that I’ve had a second glass.

1/13/2024 - fcxj wrote:

Blockbuster off of the bat. Aromatics quite ripe. Lean late pick not gunflint. Palate also rich and broad. Let’s see how this natures. Probably prefer tighter this stage. (8385/18362)

1/1/2024 - galewskj wrote:

Drank a small pour at a tasting. This wine completely exceeded my expectation. It had the elegance, power and lift that matched 2006 Piper cuvee rare that was also at this tasting. This is a big step up from their regular NV brut which I also adore.

1/9/2024 - nschmidt Likes this wine:

Served to ladies visiting my wife and they loved it. To be honest I drank most of it after they left. Delicious and ready to go.

12/31/2023 - El_Dougo Does not like this wine:

Maybe on the nose but not on the palate. Lacks structure; med acidity at best, med- flavor intensity. Weak pairing for food.

11/10/2021 - Cailles wrote:

Bordeaux 2011 - 10 Years On - 30 Reds: All tasted blind, not decanted. A few observations: 1) As expected, it's a mediocre vintage with many wines lacking depth and mid palate weight of great vintages. My average score for the reds was 91.3 pts vs group scores at more recent horizontals for 2010 (93.0), 2000 (92.7) and 2009 (93.9). 2) I expected more green/unripe notes and drying tannins but that is not the case (hence the solid 91.3 average). Most wines showed well-made (with only 6 out of 30 reds rated below 90 pts). 3) Left bank (average 91.8 pts) clearly trumps right bank (90.6) thanks to more mid palate substance. 4) Virtually no wine showed a) over extracted and already dying and b) with far too much ripeness. Both 2009/2010 (and 2015/2018) have several wines with these problem. 5) Most wines are in a good drinking window. Although not yet with tertiary complexity, the structure has softened and the wines are open (even without extended decanting). 6) Unfortunately (due to price), the best reds were Le Pin (97+ pts), Margaux (96), Petrus (96) and Mouton (95). 7) Good vintage for Sauternes it seems (we tasted only two) with a surprising Giraud (96 pts) beating a too sweet Yquem (93).

TN: Medium expressive but a bit astringent with lots of minerality and smoke dominating any fruit that might be there on the nose. Much better on the palate which shines bright with superb freshness, fine tannins, harmonious fruit profile consisting mostly of fresh, cool dark and blue fruit. More minerality but not much more other nuances detectable at this stage (Latour usually needs lots of time and probably would have shown better with a proper decant). Today and in this form the wine was not complex enough, not as deep as the Mouton (rated 95 pts) in the next glass but overall quit good. Still, I like the fresh style, the aristocratic feel and would order this off a restaurant list. 92 to 93 pts.

6/24/2023 - El_Dougo Likes this wine:

Bought at wine fair for QPR and did not disappoint. In fact this was a rather unique wine although I’m not sure I would have even realized it was a burgundy. After a quick splash decant the medium nose yielded sour cherry, earth and some barnyard funk (pyrazines?). Interesting. Medium tannins, medium acidity, med to med+ flavor intensity. Well balanced although lacking in length. This is probably more of a young drinking wine than one to cellar, and with the QPR it is not difficult to do!

12/3/2023 - Orange Tsian wrote:

No.03533/15136

醒酒1小时30分钟。入杯便能闻到略带野性且颇为深沉的香气，大量的黑樱桃、黑李子、黑莓之类的黑果盘踞嗅觉中央，随着杯中继续醒酒，慢慢会从果味的外周出现通透的树莓、覆盆子和山楂之类的红果味，果味浓郁，伴随着紫罗兰、玫瑰花瓣、干玫瑰和些许松露味，铺展中上扬飘散，底部还有些红茶、甜香料和香根草。口感中结构颇大，单宁多而平铺，较为坚固有力，相比起香气，口感中的果味偏“红”，质感上佳，有着向内汇聚的深度和聚拢意味，收尾略带野性和林地气息，美中不足的是收尾处不够紧致。95/100

11/23/2023 - El_Dougo Likes this wine:

Magnum, decanted 2 hours, thanksgiving dinner.
Bold, high acid, ripe tannins, long finish, young and fruit forward. Blackberry, plum, high alcohol. Will hold minimum 5 yrs for another bottle, but pennaly 10+ years to balance out.

11/5/2023 - Jyri Tynkkynen Likes this wine:

Bordeaux 2010 Vintage Horizontal Tasting (at home with dear friends)

This tasting was a total shock for me – in the most pleasant way. How can (relatively) young Grand Cru Bordeaux taste so drinkable?! Wow!!!

The wines were decanted four hours prior, yet they were still evolving in the glass.

Château Tronquoy-Lalande, Saint-Estèphe 93 p.
Nose: Dark berries, a mixture of tertiary aromas (eg. hint of lacquer), tobacco.
Palate: Mid fullbodied, long, succulant, dark berries, sweet fruits, a bit leather, silky tannins.
50% Cabernet Sauvignon, 40% Merlot, 10% Petit Verdot

Château Pontet-Canet, Pauillac 95 p.
Nose: Cassis (jam), layers of tertiary aromas, smokey vanilla, velvety leather.
Palate: Rather fullbodies, very long, succulant, fruity, dark berries, some cherry, leather, elegant “dusty” tannins.
65% Cabernet Sauvignon, 30% Merlot, 4% Cabernet Franc, 1% Petit Verdot

Château Gloria, Saint-Julien 93 p.
Nose: Mouth watering, succulant, red berries, tertiary aromas, smoked toffee.
Palate: Initially strong attack, rather fullbodied, fruity, long, prunes.
(63% Cabernet Sauvignon, 26% Merlot, 6% Cabernet Franc, 5% Petit Verdot)

Château Gruaud Larose, Saint-Julien 92 p.
Nose: Initially (pleasant) hint of barnyard and ripe red berries, later jammed red berries and hint of cherry, tertiary aromas (eg. dry flower potpourri and hint of lacquer), pencil/cedar wood.
Palate: Mid fullbodied, fruity, prunes, (dried) fruits, silky tannins, rather long.
(66% Cabernet Sauvignon, 28% Merlot, 6% Petit Verdot)

6/13/2023 - ChristoBretts Likes this wine:

Opened, let breath in bottle for few hours, poured a glass, recorked bottle and refrigerated for 48 hours. First day, decent nose of blackberry and a touch of anise, on the palate, black fruit, a little tar, medium acidity, medium intensity, medium pleasure. After 48 hours in the refrigerator, let come to cool room temperature, it developed quite a bit in 48 hours, now with creosote, earth and minerals on the nose and palate, medium acidity, medium tannin, integrated oak oak. The oak has integrated a lot since I last tried this about a year ago. Developing nicely. I suspect this will be very nice at the 10 year mark. I don't understand high ratings at this stage.

10/30/2023 - WineDuq Likes this wine:

Strangest experience with this wine. Opened it, deemed it unflawed, poured into a decanter to breathe for 2 hours. First glass had no nose, very little flavor, dry and tart. I thought maybe it was ever so slightly corked. Came back to it 2 hours later and now the nose exploded with sweet floral notes, oak, blackberries. Very nice California cabernet with no overblown oak or extraction. Very enjoyable. Thankfully I didn't pour it down the drain at the 2-hour mark.

4/3/2022 - Cailles wrote:

10x 100 Pts with the Wine Advocate Team: This wine will need more years to come together, get even rounder and add teritary complexity. But it is indeed a spectacular Sangiovese with the purity, precision, freshness and elegance as highlights. An understandable call by Larner when Sangiovese is the universe the wine is judged in. On a global level I don‘t see the triple digits. This quite classically shaped Sangiovese is all what Biondi Santi is also aspiring or said to be, yet this Flaccianello beat all Biondi Santi Riservas we had in a tasting an hour later handily (see separate tasting story). 94/95 pts

TN: Rather backward nose with minerality, smoke, dark fresh fruit. Gets a touch more open with time. Inviting. On the palate this is more open with fine red berries mixed with fresh blue and darker berries, even some flowers, lots of crushed rocks, earthy minerality, smoke. The structure is impressive with round, velvety tannins, a lightness and elegance which are great, fine, round, high acidity, great balance, long finish. This is very nice and round.

Decanting: This was sitting in the glass for some at least 30-45 minutes, so it good a good amount of decanting which seemed more or less fine. But still better wait a few years.

10/22/2023 - El_Dougo Likes this wine:

Very good Riesling from Mosel and unlike most Kabinetts that I’ve tasted (rounder and longer in finish), perhaps on account of its age.
Medium lemon in glass. Complex nose of lemon, orange peel, orange creamsicle, honey, touch of kerosene.
Palate was is very round. Med body, med+ to high acidity, med+ length. An off-dry sweetness at just the right level to avoid any cloying (not even close). Wish I could purchase this wine for the cellar they appear to be long gone. Drink now or continue to hold if you have them (or sell them to me!).

9/29/2023 - El_Dougo Likes this wine:

Horizontal tasting: Dominus 2016 vs. Insignia 2016

Initial p&p:
Dominus
Ruby with slight purplish tinge. Med+ intensity. Zero sediment.
Very secondary driven: oak, dark chocolate overtones with some black plum and blackberry, briefly turning vegetal and green pepper as the oxygen works its way into the glass. Can’t say the 14.5% alc is all the noticeable. Good sign.
Super tight on palate although you can sense a finish behind it. Can’t wait till it opens.

Insignia:
Ruby with ever so slight garnet haze to it. Deep intensity.
Primary fruit driven driven: super juicy black plum, black cherry. More floral, like a right bank Bordeaux although no merlot here.
Same alc of 14.5%
Similar tightly wound palate. Medium body
Med to med+ FI

Dominus with meal
Med+ acidity, ripe, polished tannins integrating well into the wine. Long finish. Perfectly balanced, worth the wait.
Med+ to pronounced flavor intensity. A greater complexity.

In the end Dominus displayed many more layers. After the meal at the the 5 hour mark the the green bell pepper worked it’s way into the wine to move very much to the background with plum, blackberry, blueberry, toast all sharing the spotlight. It took on a sweet effect. I’m going to go out on a limb here and say the Dominus appears to me to be the more classic of the two where as the Insignia is the more modern version of what we’ve come to expect from Napa. Powerful.

The Insignia was more linear in development, frankly little change over the course of the evening. Insignia after meal got more extracted. Probably the biggest change was that the alcohol continues to stick out more, ultimately giving it an off balanced effect.

The evening was full of surprises:
First, I was fully prepared to prefer Dominus and was shocked that I actually preferred Insignia right off the bat (so too did my father in law although my wife preferred Dominus from the start).
Second it wasn’t until well after I had thrown in the towel and pronounced the Insignia as the WOTN, after the 5 hour mark, that the Dominus quietly kicked it into the next gear and effectively surpassed Insignia. New layers of fruit unfurled and this time totally integrated in a way that each smell evoked something new and different. Nothing stood out by itself and instead everything perfectly balanced and integrated.

Both are elite wines and so we’re splitting hairs here. If you want to get up and go then I suppose Insignia might be for you. But if you want to take your time (5+ hours in a large decanter, that is) and you relish the challenge with a restrained classic then it’s Dominus for you. But to be clear you can’t go wrong with either and the only reason I sound discerning or particular about either is because I had the wonderful opportunity to compare both in one setting.

The best element of the night was the horizontal tasting of two impressively strong Napa wines. There is something about relative comparisons, for me, that takes it to the next level. I don’t yet have the experience or insight to comprehend a wine in absolute terms but comparing and contrasting allows me to a consider the wine form different vantages and angles that brings allows for a significantly sharper focus.

Insignia
Bottled in January 2019, the 2016 Insignia is a blend of 84% Cabernet Sauvignon, 10% Petit Verdot, 3% Cabernet Franc and 1% Malbec, aged for 24 months in 100% new French oak barrels.

Dominus
Cabernet Sauvignon: 84%, Cabernet Franc: 8%, Petit Verdot: 8%
Aged 22 months in 40% new barrels
Cases Produced: 5500

4/29/2022 - forceberry wrote:

A blend of Cabernet Sauvignon (71%), Syrah (6%), Tannat (5%), Merlot (4%), Cabernet Franc (3%), Petit Verdot (3%), Malbec (2%), Pinot Noir (2%) and "rares" including Nebbiolo, Barbera, Dolcetto, Montepulciano, Amigne, Arenie (?), Areni Noir, Bastardo, Sousón, Saperavi, Tchkaveri, Tchekavesi (?), Brancellão, Carménère, Abouriou and Plavac Mali (total 4%). Fermented and macerated for at least 20 days in stainless steel tanks, aged for 12-15 months in oak barrels ranging from new to 7 years old. 13,5% alcohol.

Very deep, dark and almost fully opaque black cherry color with a youthful blueish hue. The nose feels markedly youthful, fruit-forward and quite primary with aromas of red licorice, some lactic notes of blackcurrant yogurt, a little bit of cherry-driven red fruit, light candied primary fruit nuances of raspberry marmalade, a hint of blackberry jam and a touch of savory wood spice. The wine is youthful and primary but also enjoyably robust on the palate with a medium-to-moderately full body and intense, dry flavors of blueberries, some primary candied notes of raspberry jellies, a little bit of blackcurrant marmalade, light sour cherry nuances, a hint of leathery funk and a lactic touch of blackcurrant yogurt. The overall feel is quite tightly-knit and rather structured, thanks to both the high acidity and the firm, moderately grippy tannins. The finish is long, dry and moderately tannic with an intense aftertaste of ripe blueberries and blackcurrant marmalade, some fresh cherry tones, a little bit of inky character, light sweet notes of candied primary fruit, a hint of leathery funk and a touch of savory wood spice.

A nice but also still super-young and noticeably primary vintage of Mas de Daumas Gassac that is all about aging potential, not immediate drinkability. This is just too primary now and you really can't get the hang of how this wine will taste in a few years - now you can just pick up candied fermentation esters and those unintegrated lactic notes of MLF that make the wine taste more like blackcurrant-flavored yogurt than Cabernet. However, based on the level of intensity and concentration, the overall dry taste and the impressive, rather tightly-knit structure, it seems obvious this wine is a great vintage that is built to age. My score is reflective of how it performs now, but I have no doubts the wine will get a lot higher scores as it loses its candied primary notes of lactic MLF qualities. At approx. 29€, this is going to be superb value - I just need to be very patient with my remaining bottles.

10/19/2023 - sfwinelover1 Likes this wine:

Fourth bottle of 6, and the best so far. Off the pour, oak, tannins, acidity and a boozy note existing fractiously with the fruit and secondary notes, but in a couple of hours, all but the boozy note had balanced, and by the end of night 1, that was mostly integrated, too. Vivid cassis, dark cherries and berries framed by loam, tobacco, dark chocolate, anise and a touch of forest floor. Held well on night #2, but lost a step on night #3. I’ve been drinking this half case side by side with a case of the ‘10. The ‘10 was clearly the better for my palate until the past year, when it faded, and this surpassed the last couple of bottles of that. I’m not sure where this is in its evolution—the past several writers are all of the place from past prime to more than a decade of life left—but I suspect it’s at or close to peak, a good choice to consume now with air, but likely to have at least a couple-few years left at this point, perhaps incrementally better (the quick fade of the ‘10 makes me profess drinking window prognostications with less than 100% certainty). Similar qualitatively, though characteristically totally different, than the recent Col D’Orcia (that was a tremendous food wine, this good with food but probably better on its own), but at 3x the price, hard not to love our Tuscan friends. 93+ if scoring

7/9/2023 - eoinhharkins Likes this wine:

Showed incredibly well tonight , an array of citrus, matured honey and some spices on the nose, elegant and generous mouthfeel , with high acidity well integrated RS, lots of fruits, and an a finish with a mix of tartness and tropical fruit

10/17/2023 - El_Dougo Likes this wine:

I’m thrilled to finally have a good Montelena. Magnum bottle, Morton’s Hong Kong, New York strip. I’ve had many CM’s over the many years, and while I haven’t documented all of them I’ve never been truly satisfied. This storied vineyard has always left a little wanting. Perhaps it was the night, or the bottle, or the pairing, but we finally found it.

Blackberry, cassis, vanilla, cedar, cherry, earth, and perhaps some blueberry. Still very fruit forward perhaps on account of the magnum bottle. Very ruby in glass. Medium plus acidity, mied+ plus length, full body, seemed plenty of alcohol there although I didn’t check the label, med+ flavor intensity. Very good wine. Only criticism might be complexity lacking (if we’re looking for some criticism).

I don’t pretend this is the greatest of Napa blends. 91 to 92 points. The point for me is this was THE Montelena that I’ve been looking for.

10/13/2023 - El_Dougo wrote:

30% - 50% new oak over 12-14 months.

No rating as bottle appeared to be slightly oxidized.

Pale ruby in glass with a slight garnet rim showing some age.

Nose very closed, palate lacking fresh fruit. Likely oxidized.

10/18/2023 - Motz wrote:

Tasted over two days, alongside the same vintage Domaine de Chevalier.

Seductive floral and red fruit and berry-driven perfume, with dark berry, berry liqueur, summer potpourri, and 'sweet' herb (mint, wintergreen) top notes. So gorgeous! So Margaux!

Mind-bending textures, plush, rich, and expansive. Precise Cabernet Sauvignon-driven elements provide a stalwart core. Petit Verdot adds purple berry flavors and depth. Medium plus acid and medium tannin, balanced oak treatment. The alcohol, listed at 14.5, could be lower.

Everything points to a medium plus maturation curve. The challenge will be keeping one's hands off bottles over the long haul...as the wine sirens continuously and vociferously beckon. Bottles should reach maturity after 2035. Ridiculous QPR! 94-95.

9/10/2023 - El_Dougo Likes this wine:

Deep Garnet glass, to extent that I thought the wine had turned. Instead it was powerful and closed down straight out of the bottle.
Poured from the bottle to find heavy layers of black cherry, earth, iron, and leather. Initially very masculine and brutish. Such an intensity after 14 years in the bottle!

An hour of decanting hints at a softer side behind the curtain. Black turns a red.
Med to med+ acidity, med+ stalky tannins, high Alc.

Left half the bottle under pump in the fridge for 5 days and still in good shape, although I will call out it had a very linear development across the week with no further complexity developing. As the fruit is waning off now, the high acidity and tannins becomes more apparent.

Conclusion is good wine made from a tough vintage that has aged admirably. Drink now with a hearty meal and enjoy.

7/27/2023 - macaujames Likes this wine:

94/95. Profound. Has lovely aromas of blueberries, blackberries, leather, sandstone, mint and clove hints. The best silky Tondonia ever. Its layered medium bodied palate has a taffetas texture, impressive depth and lightly cloved blue, black and red fruits and great freshly fruited length . I have ordered half a case. 13%.This is my Château Petrus. Can be drunk with pleasure PnP but improves with 7-8 hrs aeration with the blue fruits coming out. Improves on day 2. Lay down 10-25 years easily. This Pinotes a little.

7/25/2023 - oldwines Likes this wine:

My first time trying wine from this producer, grandchildren of Robert Mondavi, I believe. Limpid lemon yellow color. Fairly complex nose that is not very floral at all but more herbal with mixed citrus, distinct wet stones and peach pit. Palate has moderate acidity that is still fairly zippy with a more distinctly lemon and pear fruit profile. Finish has a slightly creamy note and somewhat chewy texture. I liked it a lot but can’t say I loved it. It may need a little cellar time but probably not a lot.

7/22/2023 - askoje wrote:

Medium light orange-brick red.
Dark cherries, hazel, tea leaves, smoky, menthol and just plain awesome Barbaresco nose.
Beautiful wine, so lively and fresh acidity, but at the same time starting to show developed notes. Outstanding Barbaresco

7/12/2023 - thesternowl wrote:

Opened about two hours prior to service and allowed to breathe. Two bottles were opened tonight from the same cellar and both corks showed some saturation but only through the first 1/3. No formal notes. The 1999 Flaccianello pours a youthful ruby color with a slightly garnet rim and some signs of sediment though nothing I would describe as unusual. This is an absolutely delightful Flaccianello that I would still describe as “developing”. A mix of red and dark fruits with dried herbs, black tea, espresso, leathe and dried earth. The tannins are still firm and the acid is zippy yet everything is in perfect balance and well integrated. This was paired with a deconstructed BLT highlighting the produce from local area farms and salmon rillettes with turnips, fennel and orange. I don’t have a lot of experience with Flaccianello (or Fontodi for that matter) but this is a wonderful representation of Chianti Classico (although not designated such) and if the two bottles opened tonight are representative, this vintage has a lot left in the tank! Drink now with a little air to stretch its legs and over the next 10-15 years, no cap.

7/3/2023 - El_Dougo Likes this wine:

Lovely medium almost deep lemon color, like sunburnt straw. Restrained notes of lemon citrus, wet stone, vanilla and blossom, faint pineapple and some garden herbs. Possibly some honey although this is clearly a young wine.
Palate is dry, med + acidity, med alcohol, medium body, with a flavor intensity. Ultimately plateaued into an oaky salinity and grapefruit reminiscent of Chablis.
This wine should ideally be laid down for some time, as I plan to do with the other 2.
90 points now although optimistic for the future.

5/20/2023 - thesternowl wrote:

Popped and poured; enjoyed over three days. “Les Lys” is a lieu-dit that technically falls within the Vaillons 1er Cru. It’s known for producing wines with a fresher, zippier style than most other 1er’s due to its northeastern exposure. The 2010 “Les Lys” by Daniel-Etienne Defaix is exemplary. It pours a bright golden color with a silvery rim; no signs of particles or gas. Medium viscosity. On the nose, the wine is intense. Developing (still!), with all of the citrus fruits: redolent of ripe lemon, lime, and tangerines mixed with some pineapple, wildflowers, minerals and some brioche. On the palate, the wine is dry with medium(+?) tannins and medium+ acid. Confirming the notes on the nose loads of limestone minerals. Leesy with a very long, oily finish. The notes were consistent over the three days the bottle was enjoyed however, it gained some weight and power over that time. It also started to show more oxidative notes: candied nuts and marmalade. This is stupidly good. Drink now and over the next ten+ years, easy. It has the stuffing and the acid to go the distance and age gracefully.

6/2/2023 - mcktuck wrote:

Had this after having the Vaillons a few days ago. Prefer the les Lys, but in general, haven't been as impressed with the '10 Defaixs as some other vintages. These seem technically correct, but lacking in freshness/excitement. It's all minerality and structure at this stage. This bottle did improve with a little bit of air, so will give my remainder an extra couple of years.

3/27/2023 - AGELVIS wrote:

Splash decant, Deep dark, very ruby magenta color (little sign of age). Blackberry, fig, red licorice, anise, wool, green pepper, and subtle baker’s chocolate. Smooth, dry palate, with fine acidity. Firm, full, satiny, lower intensity tannins on the medium long finish.

This is a surprisingly traditional Bordeaux (not at all Napa-leaning). It’s perfectly nice and is better with food. I’ve got one more bottle that I won’t decant, to see if that helps. Overall, this was a disappointment due to the high price I paid.

This bottle was not flawed in any way, it was properly stored (at 58F), and was served slightly chilled (~ 68F). I want to make sure the comments I’ll likely get are not about “obvious” wine novice things). The elements I’ve noted above jive with the much higher reviews here in CT. My palate is certainly not inclined toward traditional earthy Bordeaux, so that certainly plays a role, but this is simply not a special bottle. It will not improve with age ( for my palate).

I really like this community and don’t want to trouble anyone, BUT I suspect there’s some sub-conscious score inflation due to price (assuming we all paid more than $200 for our bottles [or more than $100 for a split]). If my palate has inadvertently lowered the “true score”, we could compromise and say this is a 93 - 94 pointer (meeting in the middle). I absolutely know what good wine tastes like (from all over the world) and this is simply a very normal (nothing exceptional), albeit well made, wine from this region.

6/9/2023 - El_Dougo wrote:

Slow ox at an outdoor bbq. Not very memorable but judging by reviews it was clearly the wrong environment to taste this beauty. No rating looking forward to trying again.

6/8/2023 - El_Dougo wrote:

Slow ox in bottle at recommendation of somm which I think was mistake. Definitely Nebbiolo on nose and palate, this young, fruity wine requires air. Med- body, hints of a complexity yet to reveal itself. Happy to try it, equally happy to have various riservas quietly aging in the cellar. Perhaps revisit in some years.

6/3/2023 - Zweder wrote:

Very ripe dark berries and a lot of garrigue in the bouquet as well as on the palate. A firm amount of sweetness, ok acidity and tannin. The 16% ABV is a bit disturbing.

3/16/2023 - chatters wrote:

United Cellars Grand Cru Pinot Noir tasting (The four seasons hotel, the rocks, sydney): Slight sour smelling red fruits, leathery notes, Autumn berries and a touch of Brettanomyces; quite funky. Juicy, Bretty, gamey, slightly sour red fruit, chalky tannins are drying. Nah.

3/17/2023 - El_Dougo Does not like this wine:

I feel terrible even writing this note… But I didn’t like this wine. Massive menthol to the extent I was picking up nail polish. No decant but slow ox in the glass.
It was the end of a long night of wine and good (post-Barolo) and so maybe my palate was just tired I will certainly keep an open mind and try again in the future

5/14/2023 - prccap Likes this wine:

$200 for $100 juice. This wine was much better in the early 2000s and at a more appropriate cost. At todays prices this wine is a major disappointment

4/13/2023 - Decanting Queen Likes this wine:

A celebratory bottle with some friends and it was just right for the occasion. Crisp and acidic but a beautiful open nose of brioche and lemon and fruit, the palate is nicely acidic and bright with citrus and green apples. This vintage may not be everyone’s favorite but it is certainly accessible and nice for drinking now. The 2012 may be better but I feel like they need much more time.

4/11/2023 - sid_loves_wine Likes this wine:

Similar to my last note, a beautiful and super-reliable wine that shows both richness and freshness, easy to love and not without complexity.

A mix of black and red fruit this time, surprisingly high-toned plum and black cherry with baking spices, maybe a bit of sage and lavender, and a really interesting, subtle kind of sanguine note, almost like red meat, which I've found in previous vintages too. Really excellent energy here with well-integrated acidity lifting up the palate, and leaving plenty of room for that spiced rich fruit inherent in good Malbec, with lots of blackberry, plum, and something between vanilla and cinnamon on the finish. The oak is there but the fruit definitely takes center stage, and the tannins are nicely structured and beautifully soft.

It was even more expressive and engaging than last time I tried it, so I've bumped my score to 94. Insane value at $15, still really great for $20. For entry level malbec, nearly impossible to beat.

4/8/2023 - Kdad Does not like this wine:

Give it an hour decant to get any taste of fruit. Dull, oaky and dry upon opening. Could not believe this was a wine from Realm.

4/6/2023 - NickA Likes this wine:

Bought a small glass of this, despite its youth, as I've been buying Vernay red and white for a few years now... but haven't tried any of the reds yet! Fortunately, this is excellent already. Violet and blackberry notes dominate, supported by soy and charcoal. The tannins were dense but sleek, and beautifully integrated into the fruit, and the finish was long, fruity and moreish. This is a really stylish wine.

3/30/2023 - acyso wrote:

Olive Garden Party (Cristal vertical) (Chicago, IL): This needed a good amount of air to start strutting its stuff. Right on the pop and pour, this was diffuse, lean, and lacking weight. Nice acidity with pronounced creaminess and an extraordinarily fine bead, which honestly I didn't like because it made this feel like an unracked still wine. Definitely not convincing at the get-go, this was much better when we revisited it later in the evening, where the acidity had pulled everything tighter.

4/7/2023 - El_Dougo Likes this wine:

This was a wow wine! I’ve had the number 2 Shiraz - also impressive - jumped on this bottle deep in the cellar of a wine bar in the advise of a friend.
Pop and pour for med nose of muted black fruit and plums. Palate, in the other hand, was sublime with loads of black cherries, red plums, vanilla, and a very slight leafy character that adds to the overall effect.
So very silky with 13% alcohol and totally integrated tannins this is one of the most elegant cabs we’ve had. Drinks almost like an aged Brunello.
Very surprised at less limited favorable reviews here. Maybe the limited nose dissuades tasters (the nose is a lot less effusive than palate which is unusual these days) or more likely the Ausies who drink this more regularly are not on CT. I suggest seeking this out and you will not be disappointed. Drink now!
WSET:
Nose med. tertiary characters of baked currant and cherry reflect age.
Palate dry, acidity med+, tannins med and well integrated, body med. Med+ flavor intensity of black cherry, plum, vanilla, oak.
Med finish. This is a very good wine. Drink now at peak but should hold for some time.

11/24/2022 - forceberry wrote:

A blend of Tempranillo (70%), Garnacha (20%), Mazuelo (5%) and Graciano (5%), the grapes sourced from the Tondonia vineyard. Fermented spontaneously in old and very large oak fermenters, aged for 8 years in barrels, bottled unfiltered and then aged for a further 12 years in bottles before release in 2021. 13% alcohol, 1,5 g/l residual sugar and 6,1 g/l acidity.

Luminous, quite translucent and medium-deep cherry-red color; surprisingly youthful for its age and doesn't seem to be as evolved as the 2001 Tondonia Reserva that was tasted alongside. The nose feels fine-tuned and somewhat restrained - moderately less expressive than the 2001 Reserva - with attractive aromas of fresh dark berries and crunchy cranberries, some savory old leather notes, a little bit of tar and tobacco, light sweeter notes of wizened black cherries, a hint of meat consommé and a faint touch of smoke. The wine feels dry, fine-tuned and slightly restrained on the palate yet otherwise quite similar to the 2001 Reserva with a medium body and bright, dry flavors of dark-toned berries, some meaty notes of game and savory umami, a little bit of gravelly minerality, light leathery notes, a hint of tobacco and a faint reductive hint of something rubbery. The wine is wonderfully high in acidity, whereas the rather resolved tannic structure is on the rather gentle side. The finish is dry, somewhat grippy and a bit austere with a long, fine-tuned aftertaste of tart lingonberry and cranberry, some sweeter, dark-toned plummy flavors, a little bit of gravelly minerality, light sanguine notes of iron, a hint of sour cherry bitterness and a touch of meaty umami.

A lovely, fine-tuned Rioja Gran Reserva that is still way too young for its own good. Unlike the 1995 vintage, this wasn't as surprisingly light and pale in appearance, but still quite a bit on the light side - and remarkably youthful for its age. The wine was not only seemingly younger than the 2001 Tondonia Reserva, but also somewhat less expressive and more understated in character. However, it really didn't feel like this was showing any less intensity - it felt more like that 2001 Reserva had opened up and was already on a moderately developed phase, whereas this 2001 Gran Reserva was still in an awkward, slightly shut phase, requiring a lot more bottle age (based on my experience with these Gran Reservas from 1970's, 1960's and 1920's - they age at a glacial pace). In this tasting 2001 Reserva seemed a more impressive wine out of these two wines, but it also felt like the aging potential with the Reserva bottling was a bit limited, whereas this Gran Reserva will keep on evolving and improving for decades more. It will take some time before this Gran Reserva becomes more impressive and expressive than the Reserva bottling, but I have no doubts this Gran Reserva will become the greater wine of these two in the longer run. Still - I must say I really don't understand the price level of this wine (150-190€) anymore. This is a great wine, but not THAT great.

3/8/2023 - Decanting Queen Likes this wine:

I have enjoyed the vintage and Bdb of this producer, but this was my first NV brut. Amazing QPR here in EU, I am not sure I could find it under 50 at home. Drinks well above its price point a really nice champagne with flavors and aromas of citrus and brioche that just jump out of the glass.

3/31/2023 - Seth Rosenberg wrote:

This has been open about a day. Reductive with salty popcorn, cumin, toasty, wood, matchstick. Definitely a ton of salty buttered popcorn. a bit of lemon and green apple. Palate is more of the salty buttered popcorn, lemon, spice and a bit spicy, green apple, toast, wood - its got good grip and fills the mouth well but something about the mouthfeel and taste bothers me a bit - I guess it just feels like the CA Chard experience - I want to say generic but I'm not sure that's it. The palate feels a bit monolithic and overdone. The wine tightens up into the finish and is more pure - with the salty popcorn and cumin for sure but also the lemon and green apple have a pure sweet note. Nose - 4.5-5/6, Palate - 4.5/6, Finish - 5/6, Je ne Sais Quoi - 0.5/2 =14.5-15/20.

It's got more to it than the Martin Woods Koosha I had recently but pales in comparison to the 19 Goodfellow Richard's Cuvee from a while back. I don't drink a lot of domestic Chard and although this is pretty good, I can see why. With tax and ship from the Ridge wine club this clocks in at over $80 - not a good deal at all.

3/24/2023 - El_Dougo wrote:

This was a ripping wine that leaves much to talk about and a lot to unpack. It certainly has something for everyone although I may take a contrarian view in my final assessment. Normally I think I prefer the Napa cabs over Bordeaux probably because of riper tannins and higher acidity in many cases, although it is the Napa blends that I prefer the most so go figure. I also experience that young Napa’s is a far more approachable often times than young Bordeaux’s.
What strikes me most about this wine is how powerful and yet how approachable it is at the same time. The ripe, round tannins are simply luscious on the palate but how much staying power it has is my first question. Tannins is this ripe make me question the longevity (perhaps unfairly?). The very high alcohol level at 15.5% is my next area of concern. Because of it, I did not find the wine remotely balanced at this time although perhaps time will allow the alcohol to integrate and mellow. However, how intact will the tannins be by the time that happens?
After a two hour decant this wine disappeared quickly between a 3 1/2 of us and I think that’s the point. This wine is ready to go now and in fact is a good choice in a restaurant that only offers relatively new vintages to choose from. But how long this might age only time will tell. I have my doubts. Happy for thoughts!