9/30/2023 - zhearr wrote:

ripe and fresh at once. Pure and honest, savory and chewy. Lots of drinking pleasure for $12

9/30/2023 - zhearr wrote:

a black cardamom bitterness and pungency really throws me off, good quality for the price otherwise

9/2/2023 - zhearr Does not like this wine:

traditional method and according to website at least 18 months of aging (for $10??). Somewhat sweet and drinks a bit too rustic. Not a fan

12/8/2021 - zhearr wrote:

fresh, floral, some candy-like aromas. Good quality but there are better values that are actually traditional method.

11/4/2021 - zhearr wrote:

Aromatic and fleshy. Intense and concentrated yellow fruit but great acidity. Made me think of Rhone blends and some Chenin Blanc. Lots of quality wine for under $15

10/11/2021 - zhearr wrote:

not lacking acidity but fruit still has this dark, to me almost heavy core. Quality comparable to Clos de la Roilette I had recently, but almost twice as expensive

1/25/2021 - zhearr wrote:

juicy and floral, cooler climate grenache for days

7/26/2020 - zhearr wrote:

full bodied almost oily, also drinks older to me. Maybe entry-level in their lineup but ripeness and concentration is already kind of crazy

7/26/2020 - zhearr wrote:

ripeness and concentration on a feather light frame, searing tension, flinty minerality, everything that's magical about mosel

6/26/2020 - zhearr wrote:

Disgorged 12/19. Consistent dry and elegant house style. A little more evolved / yeasty than previous vintages from memory. Can do much worse with an entry level sparkler

6/26/2020 - zhearr wrote:

The deepest golden that could pass for a rose, and it's all Chardonnay? Pretty remarkable complexity for a $15 sparkler. Still felt like it's made and built first and foremost like a still wine.

6/19/2020 - zhearr wrote:

floral and fresh, light-mid weight with underlying strength. To me their estate white and rose edges this out slightly, better displays the volcanic terroir and extract

6/11/2020 - zhearr wrote:

Exactly what the name says, cool and fresh, light and lighthearted. The residual sugar and acidity can remind me of a feinherb Riesling. Crazy drinkable, but plenty of quality wine here.

5/28/2020 - zhearr wrote:

a sea of dried apricot. Wish for more elegance and nuance

5/27/2020 - zhearr wrote:

so expressive and flavorful, fresh and round at the same time. Easily likeable

5/19/2020 - zhearr wrote:

not too memorable for me, wish for more freshness

5/16/2020 - zhearr wrote:

a benchmark for me. Stunning depth, concentration and elegance, consistent from bottles / bottle agings young and old. Not easy to defend the value of Champagne as a category, but for $33 this is unmatched, a whole new caliber.

5/10/2020 - zhearr wrote:

disgorged 05/19. A little too bubbly on day 1 and lacks concentration and depth, which magically both improved on 2nd day to my palate. Proper and classic but not the best value

4/23/2020 - zhearr wrote:

searing acid like riesling but less flowery - the fruit is citric but weighty, even cooked. Great value, should be a fun waiting game

4/23/2020 - zhearr wrote:

good complexity on the nose, plenty acid to support the classic profile, but kept doubting if the grapes were unripe, leaving the job outside the vineyard much harder

4/13/2020 - zhearr wrote:

approachable in the usual fruity floral way, but beautifully elegant, carries so much extract for $13.

4/13/2020 - zhearr wrote:

dense, more honeyed than their regular Bianco from memory, but not as much of a step-up as i hoped for

4/13/2020 - zhearr wrote:

Super tight, can't wait for this to unwind. Serious entry/estate level bottling.

4/13/2020 - zhearr wrote:

sub $15 and Charmat method but eerily replicates that yeasty developed notes from actual Champagne. Not so much in matching the depth and refinement, but drinks so fun and interesting to me

2/19/2020 - zhearr wrote:

juicy, savory, beautifully light/medium weight. Genuine and transparent. Hard to find a better red for $12

2/19/2020 - zhearr wrote:

aromatic and light, not memorable

2/5/2020 - zhearr wrote:

i like the understated and elegant style. Cereal, fruit, vanilla, saltiness, tiniest hint of smoke. But drinks thin against more quality drams. Not unlike a watered down Classic Laddie

2/5/2020 - zhearr wrote:

young but punchy and impactful. Sweet and malty. Oak comes through in the tannic and peppery finish

2/3/2020 - zhearr wrote:

serious new world sparkling wine effort. Dense, flavorful, elegant. In a sense young, adding transparency to the genuine quality.

1/23/2020 - zhearr wrote:

light body, zero makeup, refreshing and surprisingly complete (savoriness, fruit, spices...). Wish for a little more texture.

1/23/2020 - zhearr wrote:

Won't guess Gran Reserva for this, but the complexity and density here backs up the youthfulness impressively. Briny, earthy, dry and refreshing, a bit austere. Textbook and one of the best Cava I've had with a basic/non-reserva sticker. Wish I can find more information like dosage and vine age.

4/20: new bottle, bland and disappointing. But did have to follow up a Champagne this time.

1/5/2020 - zhearr wrote:

second all the comments about the strong sulfide notes opening up. Didn't get that on the palate but still wished i had a decanter. Looking past that this is just a really delicious medium-weight red, crunchy and earthy, beautifully textured.

1/2/2020 - zhearr wrote:

not unexpectedly austere and dry, but surprised by the lack of flavor. Practically no fruit, all root vegetable, minerality and botanicals. The 2013s from memory can benefit from more aging, but i'm less hopeful here. Hard to overlook the blandness.

12/29/2019 - zhearr wrote:

half bottle no disgorgement date. Deepest yellow i've seen from a Champagne. Unmistakable robust style, seriously mature and evolved. First whiff immediately reminded me of Valdespino's Inocente, and connections on palate is not hard to pick out also. There's still this austerity that's almost a split personality to the maturity, wish it's better integrated.

9/6/2019 - zhearr wrote:

fresh, lifted and easygoing. Nose has this candy-floral-greenish component that's so familiar but just can't figure it out. Maybe not the best value at $18.

9/6/2019 - zhearr wrote:

Don't understand why I can get this in US for $14 when in Spain i often see it close to 20 euro. Vinous and developed in true Gran Reserva style, a rarity in the sub $15 sparking wine category. Plenty sense of place that you'd hesitate to guess Champagne. May need more acidity to lift things up.

8/30/2019 - zhearr wrote:

dark and salty, dense and very impactful.

8/25/2019 - zhearr wrote:

Palomino Fino from Jerez that's unfortified but aged under flor. For $12 this is pushing the concentration and complexity you can expect from a table white. Not unlike a fino or manzanilla, but still not too be missed.

8/25/2019 - zhearr Likes this wine:

as remembered an all-around reliable entry level sparkler. Nose not immediately yeasty or developed, but the fruit and savoriness came together on the palate surprisingly elegantly. Dry and proper.

8/13/2019 - zhearr wrote:

textured, tense and deep. Maybe a more Burgundian expression of Pinot Gris. Felt criminal to have gotten this for $14.

6/26/2019 - zhearr wrote:

perfectly pitched. Passion fruit on nose and palate but as mineral as it's fruity. Light to medium weight. Focused and substantial. Hard to beat the value at $13. 89-90

6/14/2019 - zhearr wrote:

Deep color almost brown for a fino. Refreshing, briny, savory and nutty. Remind me of really mature Champagne. In a way lean but flavor and concentration are all packed to the brim. As good as wine value can get. 92

6/1/2019 - zhearr wrote:

true to where it comes from. Slightly briny. Probably a step-up from Freixenet Cordon Negro, but not a standout value in its category (Juve Y Camps's vintage Gran Reserva can be found for 3 dollars more).

6/1/2019 - zhearr wrote:

open, aromatic, mid-weight and beautifully composed. Some greenness that's attractive and refreshing. 89

5/28/2019 - zhearr wrote:

like a cross between Riesling and Loureiro? Steely but with floral and fruity playfulness. 88+

4/15/2019 - zhearr wrote:

fruity and not memorable

4/15/2019 - zhearr wrote:

dry and fresh, but drinks a little watered-down for me. Wishes for more flavor and depth.

4/15/2019 - zhearr wrote:

more pronounced acidity than pretty much all new-world sparkling wines i had before, and nose is heavy on autolytic character. Depth on palate may fall short compared to better old world values, but didn't disappoint as my first Oregon sparkling wine.

4/15/2019 - zhearr wrote:

more body and weight than their traditional blend from memory. Pretty respectable complexity for $15. 89-90

4/15/2019 - zhearr wrote:

classic Champagne, energetic and at a good place between fruit and yeast. 90-91