Tasting Notes for thalver

(1,197 notes on 676 wines)

1 - 50 of 1,197 Sort order
Red
3/30/2020 - thalver wrote:
This was a good showing for this wine...pleasant nose....good balance with adequate structure, lingering if subtle finish. For my tastes, this is probably drinking better than the 2005 at this juncture
2 people found this helpful Comment
Red
3/27/2020 - thalver wrote:
popped and poured and followed over several hours. This struck me as tight. very tight. Some coaxing bought the nose to the fore. Nice mouthfeel. Appears to need time
Red
3/27/2020 - thalver wrote:
meh...it might as well have been a supermarket wine
Red
3/17/2020 - thalver wrote:
For my tastes, this seems a better showing than a bottle of this about 5 years ago . A bit more aromatically expressive, and may have put on a tad bit of weight. In a good spot, and I see no reason not to expect it to do fine with additional mid term cellaring
White - Sparkling
3/17/2020 - thalver wrote:
92 points
This bottle was purchased in December 2008, and properly cellared since purchase. I had feared maybe this had been too long for the wine, but it was quite a pleasant surprise. Doughy/yeasty as one would expect, only the slightest oxidative notes....delicious and served blind, I would have assumed it was Champagne, not California 92-93 pts
2 people found this helpful Comments (1)
Red
3/17/2020 - thalver wrote:
2017 Terragina Abbassi vineyard
Red
3/11/2020 - thalver wrote:
This bottle was a pleasant surprise. It was very cloudy and sort of leaned heavily toward burnt umber in color. Sweetness has subsided. Wow, what a nose. I imagine that chemically something is going on with this, but whatever it is, give me more. Complex, damp decaying leaves, forest floor and still some fruit and enough acidity for structure. No brett. This showed much, much better than a 2008 Summa Old vines a year ago, which had simply faded into something meh. Sometimes, aging wine produces unexpected results good and bad. In the case of this bottle, very good.
Red
3/4/2020 - thalver wrote:
I approached this with some trepidation after a couple poor experiences with this vintage of the wine in the past. This bottle was everything one could have expected and more. No evidence of secondary fermentation. On opening, there was some hint of metallic brett, but it quickly blew off (or was simply the mourvedre showing itself) Expressive nose. Nice balance with enough acidity and tannin to provide some cut. 92-93 ish
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
3/1/2020 - thalver wrote:
Medium ruby, some slight browning at the rim. From pop and pour it was fairly aromatically expressive...sort of medium to medium/light in body and 'size' as Oregon pinots go. some earth, no discernable brett/funk in this bottle...acidity more than tannin provides the structure and dominates the finish. Nice little bottle of wine. 91-ish
Red
3/1/2020 - thalver wrote:
For my tastes this is drinking very well. Big, but neither huge nor hot and blowsy as some aged Aussie shiraz wines from this period can be. flavorful, with resolved tannins, but enough acidity and structure to provide balance. I can't see this getting better, but maybe....92-93-ish
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
2/28/2020 - thalver wrote:
Drinking fine....monolithic in the manner of the variety.....not horribly tannic but ample structure..could go a few years longer certainly but I don't see this developing the complexity a 2002 of the same wine showed a few years back
White - Sparkling
2/27/2020 - thalver wrote:
drinking well....a bit fuller mouthfeel than the crisp, quite dry finish would portend. Nose opened up after about 45 minutes open.
Red
2/27/2020 - thalver wrote:
nice...big but not overly so...descent nose with some black cherry, more fruity than savory...tannins not obtrusive...probably a mid term wine, I dont see this developing/changing in that time, but it's fine as is. I think most would enjoy this wine, and would buy more at the discounted price given the opportunity, 90-92ish
White
2/22/2020 - thalver wrote:
90 points
double decanted and run through a Vinturi aerator: This bottle showed a bit better than one a couple months ago....similarly crisp, no discernible oak in this bottle...short-ish finish...but a pleasant quaff....9o+ pts
Red
2/22/2020 - thalver wrote:
For my tastes, perhaps not quite as evolved as I'd hoped...there was some bottle boquet, but the nose took a bit of coaxing......drinking well, by no means as hot and pruney as many CDPs of the vintage....I see no reason to think this can't go a bit longer.
Red
2/16/2020 - thalver wrote:
Purchased from Premier cru back when Unlike some the basic borgogne I acquired from that vendor, this wasn't obviously cooked, but something was amiss. A healthy dose of brett on the nose and palate. Metallic finish.
White
2/15/2020 - thalver wrote:
I thought this showed quite well. More like a white burgundy of like age (sans premox) than a typical CA chardonnay. Pale straw color. What oak may be there remains in the background, a bit of butterscotch on the first tastes, ample acidity and cut which seemed to intensify after a few hours open. Short-ish finish. I see no reason to rush into drinking these.
White - Off-dry
2/15/2020 - thalver wrote:
the cork failed upon extraction, there is some chance this had gotten a bit of extra oxygen exposure prior to opening. Quite dark in color, a deep golden, more akin to a 25 year old Sauternes than a riesling of this age. Still quite sweet, not a lot of cut. Finish was quite short.
Red
2/7/2020 - thalver wrote:
Double-Decanted and poured. This was a much better showing for this wine than a bottle just over a year ago, which seemed tight and closed. This bottle provided a nose that didn't need to be coaxed from the glass, evolving cabernet flavors with a mingling of earth and fruit, and possibly hints of cigar box. Sufficient structure to suggest it should drink well for some time. Previous bottle 89ish. This bottle 91+ish
Red
2/5/2020 - thalver wrote:
Another very good showing for this wine. This time it suffered a bit in comparison to a 2002 Gevrey-Chambertin premier cru which showed more depth. Drinks well, and should go longer
Red
2/5/2020 - thalver wrote:
This bottle showed at least as well as a previous bottle some months ago. This one may have had just a bit more depth on the palate and the tannins were less drying. Open for about 3 hours, corked and returned to the cellar. About 4 hours later, it had pretty much fallen apart
Red
2/2/2020 - thalver wrote:
This is why we age wine...savory flavors have emerged undergirded by some lingering fruit. The first bottle or two of this was a bit shy. The last one promising, and this all one could expect of the wine. There are enough tannins to provide structure without being particularly drying. This my hold for the mid-term, but it's hard to see it getting much better. 92ish
Red
2005 Reignac Bordeaux Supérieur Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
1/24/2020 - thalver wrote:
flawed
very lightly corked, but corked nonetheless
Red
1/19/2020 - thalver wrote:
This is continuing to drink well, it's less hot and pruney, and drinking better, than many of the higher-rated CDP's of the same vintage. I see no reason this won't be fine for some time, though this was the last of mine.
3 people found this helpful Comment
Red
1/14/2020 - thalver wrote:
This seemed a bit bigger than other Longplay pinot's I've had in the past. In this case,that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Quite a nice nose. Drinking well. Nice balance. I see no reason it shouldnt age for the midterm if so inclined.
Red
2001 Château Sociando-Mallet Haut-Médoc Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
1/14/2020 - thalver wrote:
This has come around remarkably vis a vis a bottle just over 5 years ago. That one was unbearably green. This one had more evolved Bordeaux flavors including some cigar box, but only enough green to come to the fore and disappear in counterpoint to the other flavors. This is in a good spot now. It will probably hold for some time. It's difficult to see it getting much better.
2 people found this helpful Comment
Red
1/14/2020 - thalver wrote:
Popped and poured. This had , and continued to have a really nice nose from the get-go.....savory, some olive and brush notes dominated fruit. The tannins came in and out of balance over the coarse of the evening, at times drying and at other times a good counterpoint to the flavors
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
1/9/2020 - thalver wrote:
What a delicious little bottle of wine. light ruby, fairly light in body, but not shy in flavor. Vinturi-ed then poured. From the get-go, the wine had a very expressive boquet that didn't abate over the three hours open. On the palate, it was quite pure without the funk I've sometimes gotten with this producers wines. 92, maybe 93ish
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
1/6/2020 - thalver wrote:
My understanding is this is the same wine as Corinthian Cabernet of the same vintage. This is ready to drink and in a good spot. As call cabs go, it is more to the middleweight end of the spectrum (or light middleweight) by no means ponderous, and with some elegance. Tannins and fruit in good balance.
Red
12/31/2019 - thalver wrote:
Drinking well, some development of flavors, though to my surprise, not quite as aromatically expressive as the bigger/higher alcohol 2009 Kick Ranch bottling was a year ago.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
12/14/2019 - thalver wrote:
92 points
This was a very pleasant surprise, particularly given the close-out price paid. Very aromatically expressive from pop and pour. Great balance, there is structure with acidity and some tannin, nicely countered by fruit and earth flavors. Fairly long finish. I think this is probably more a short to intermediate term wine for the next few years, and not one to lay away for another decade. It doesn't need it. 91-92
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
12/12/2019 - thalver wrote:
A pleasant quaff.....it has developed some bottle bouquet and seems. Sufficient structure for balance, but probably not enough for more than short to mid-term cellaring
Red
12/8/2019 - thalver wrote:
drinking well on a pop and pour. aromatically expressive, blue fruits and some savory characteristics...very nice balance. The tannins came to the fore after being open 3 or 4 hours.
White
12/8/2019 - thalver wrote:
crisp, by no means a buttery, flabby Ca chardonnay. It did become more expressive as it got some air (and warmer) Some white fruits and flora on the nose, a bit of vanilla (presumably from oak, but it was not too oaky-tasting)...ample acidity. Oak might peak out a bit on the finish. Overall the wine seemed tight and reticent. 88-89ish
Red
12/1/2019 - thalver wrote:
This is quite a nice wine.....not overly big, but still flavorful and with a nice full mouth-feel. Perhaps at a bit of a 'tweener stage between fruity and savory and not quite really being either. Enough acidity and tannin to provide the structure to go longer
Red
2005 Viader Proprietary Red Napa Valley Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
11/29/2019 - thalver wrote:
nice bottle boquet, might lack the energy of years past, but seems like it's no where near falling apart
Red
2005 Château Barde-Haut St. Émilion Grand Cru Red Bordeaux Blend (view label images)
11/29/2019 - thalver wrote:
flawed
Corked: horrribly so. If there is any bright spot, it let others at the dinner table see what a terrible TCA infestatution looks like.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
11/28/2019 - thalver wrote:
This bottle showed better bottle bouquet / more aromatically expressive than a bottle a year and a half ago. Blue fruits, some emerging savory characteristics. Drinking well, but no rush to drink up.
White - Off-dry
11/28/2019 - thalver wrote:
open opening, deep gold trending orange, such that I was concerned it was going to be oxidized. Drinking well, with mature flavors and a good bit of petrol. Perhaps a bit further along than one expects at 13. I'll try to drink my remaining bottles within the next 5 years
Red
11/27/2019 - thalver wrote:
It's interesting how different people's view of the same wine varies. To my taste, this seemed like a wine with big fruit that had faded somewhat, but not evolved much over time. Quite aromatically expressive on pop and pour. Very napa cab in flavor profile. Just a bit of heat. I didn't find much in the devlopment of tertiary flavors. I found more complexity in a 2010 regular Ramey cab bottling some time back.
Red
11/18/2019 - thalver wrote:
Drinking fine. Structure is certainly there (acidity and some tannin) but is by no means mouth-searing. decent balance, not a lot of tertiary flavor development. I think a bit of time might help this wine. I don't see it as one to go decades more.
Red
11/18/2019 - thalver wrote:
There was something off about this bottle, and I can't quite put my finger on it. If it was TCA, it was at a very, very low level. The first glass was coravin-ed and not finished. Opened and consumed over two days a week later. At no time did it show better than barely palatable I've really enjoyed this wine over the years and have been through quite a lot of it.
White - Off-dry
11/15/2019 - thalver wrote:
A still better showing than a bottle a year ago...while still sweet, that sweetness have faded into balance with the lemony acidity,complex melange of difficult-to-identify flavors and the tinniest hint of petrol
Red
11/14/2019 - thalver wrote:
Popped and poured. It was apparent from the get-go that this sees stems/whole clusters in its fermentation. After about an hour it did come together to be a fairly nice drink. A bit of time might help the stemminess integrate further.
1 person found this helpful Comment
Red
11/8/2019 - thalver wrote:
93 points
Wow. Just Wow. Sometimes one opens the right bottle at the right ime. Opened about 20 minutes prior to pouring, the nose lept out of the glass. This is one of those wines one could sniff all night long. It may have subsided somewhat after a couple hours of being open. Perfect balance with fruit and some spice. Nice cut. I have liked Vincent pinots, though sometimes they have shown awfully shy and tight. None has had this much age. This is by no means a big wine, but had big flavor. 93isb
Red
11/6/2019 - thalver wrote:
This is why we cellar wine. Aromatically expressive, savory, with a lingering finish and enough structure to provide cut. A couple previous bottles seemed as though they were starting to dry out and lose the energy it had a year or two ago. Not so with this bottle. This one could have gone a long while longer. 93-ish pts
1 person found this helpful Comments (1)
Red
11/6/2019 - thalver wrote:
Opened after a promising but corked bottle of same. This remained tight and never showed much.
Red
11/6/2019 - thalver wrote:
flawed
Popped and poured. Initial aromas and taste promised one of those bottles that far exceeds expectations and is special in its way. Then less so, such that by the 4th sip it was apparent it was slightly CORKED. As with TCA, slightly turned into more with each swallow..down the drain
Red
2016 Halcon Vineyards Esquisto Yorkville Highlands Red Rhone Blend (view label images)
11/2/2019 - thalver wrote:
a bit tight, but swirling coaxed out a bit more of a nose. The whole cluster fermentation is apparent. I think with some time, into a more coherent whole.
Red
10/28/2019 - thalver wrote:
Pleasant..this had a little less bottle boquet than I'd anticipated at this age..smooth on the palate, nor much cut, but enough acidity to make it stand up. It may have had more energy a few years ago. 88-89ish
1 - 50 of 1,197
More results
  • Tasting Notes: 1,197 notes on 676 wines
© 2003-20 CellarTracker! LLC.

Report a Problem

Close