4/13/2024 - thalver wrote:

this cork was saturated and broke upon extraction. The wine didn't seem any the worse for it. Fairly accessible with a typical franc flavor profile, maybe a bit less green than most. Tannins a bit drying on the finish. After about 4 hours open, it was more friendly and in better balance.

4/10/2024 - thalver wrote:

drinking well, this bottle seemed a bit less 'big' than one a couple years ago. Well balanced, structure not intrusive, lingering finish. Better than the last bottle, but I don't get the sense there's a lot of upside.

4/3/2024 - thalver wrote:

One never knows what they'll see when they open a bottle of this. A couple have been 'wow' wines, one was dark tight and ungiving, and this one was somewhere in between. Not as light in color as the first bottle, nor as dark in color and fruit profile as one a couple years ago, this needed some coaxing for the nose to come forth, it was pleasant on the palate, but a bit reticent.

4/3/2024 - thalver wrote:

drinking well, nice balance, crisp , white flowers and medium finish. This might not have had the energy or been as distinctly Gruner as a bottle 3 1/2 years ago

4/3/2024 - thalver wrote:

This bottle seemed to show a bit less modern than prior bottles, which showed very Bordeaux but quite polished and a little big. This bottle showed fruit that didn't dominate , some more mature notes and tannins that were present but not dominant.

4/3/2024 - thalver wrote:

nicely balanced, with good cut and tannin, earthy and dark fruit notes. While a very nice wine, this seemed to be holding something back, so assuming this bottle had been properly stored and handled it may benefit from a year or few.

4/3/2024 - thalver wrote:

My spouse took a sip and immediately stated: "This is cooking wine, isn't it?" The wine had a scent and taste reminiscent of a light TCA infection, but sadly, the fruit that was there was not obscured by the off taste. There was some flaw with this bottle, but I'm not sure what it is. In fairness, after couple/few hours open, the off-taste did subside to reveal a mediocre wine resembling chardonnay. It did have decent acidic cut, and wasn't flabby. So there is that.

3/24/2024 - thalver wrote:

This wine is showing quiet well, and should go a bit longer. I'm not a fan of oxidative tastes in chardonnay, and this showed only the tiniest hint of that. Fairly aromatic, a bit fuller bodied than many Oregon chardonnays, but by no means big. Crisp with a medium finish. Not the depth of a good white burg, but built along similar lines.

3/24/2024 - thalver wrote:

Having had a really great showing for a 2014 Johan vineyard two years ago, I had high hopes similar age would have this wine drinking as well. No dice. Decanted and consumed over about 4 1/2 hours, the nose did open up a bit after about 2 hours and the structure came into a bit better balance at around 4. While certainly drinkable, this remained dark fruited, tight and lacking charm. Maybe time will help?

3/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

A still better showing than a couple years ago...no petrol, lemony acidity, white fruits and a lingering finish. I regret not buying more.

3/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

This bottle seemed to be dominated by its structure, there were mild cool climate syrah flavors of meat, blue fruit and savory notes that were lost in the acidity and still prominent tannin. For my tastes, I'll leave the remaining bottle sideways for a bit.

3/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

This wine seemed technically correct, with no discernible flaws. No brett, TCA or VA. the Nose, fruit, finish and overall balance were all acceptable if ho-hum Collectively the whole wasn't as great as the sum of its mediocre parts. On the bright side, I have one more open slot in the cellar.

3/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

Coravined then finished the following day. A bit round and full bodied for a pinot. A bit monolithic but a nice quaff.

3/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

Popped and poured. Initially, this showed a fair bit of pinot funk, probably from VA. After about 45 minutes the funk faded and the wine came out to play. It showed a fairly expressive nose from that point until polished off about 5 hours later. red fruited with more than adequate acidity and structure dominating the finish. This is pleasant now, but I suspect will be better in a couple years.

3/10/2024 - thalver wrote:

double decanted and poured after about half an hour. Wow. Nothing like a bottle a couple years ago, this had an expressive nose, and was forthcoming on the palate with red and dark fruits, earth and a bit of spice. Long, pleasant finish. After a couple hours, it tightened up a bit on the palate, but the nose continued to show. I think this should drink well for some time, but it's going to be hard to keep my grubby mitts off the remaining bottles. This after disappointing showings from 2017, 2018 and a 2019 from the same vintner. Lets hope those come around like this.

3/7/2024 - thalver wrote:

nice energy, still fruity but somewhat tamed down vis a vis a bottle a couple years ago....very nice quaff drinking well now, but should go longer. I think whether it will improve with more time sideways depends on what you seek.

3/7/2024 - thalver wrote:

good....pleasant...but not particularly exciting or memorable. More than adequate structure, a bit shy on the nose, medium-bodied, short finish. All that said, a very good to astounding value at the price paid.

3/6/2024 - thalver wrote:

I don't think I've ever seen a wine throw this much sediment, not even anything considerably older, so decanting is in order. This has come around a bit, still a bit big and clumsy but the finish was long, and it wasn't without some charm.

3/6/2024 - thalver wrote:

This was a much, much better showing than a bottle a couple years ago. While that seemed a bit tight, this was more open on the nose and palate, with a sense that it still has more to give. 91-92ish

2/29/2024 - thalver wrote:

Nicely balanced, with good acidic cut. More savory than fruity, with prominent pepper notes. For my tastes, the stems could stand to be better integrated....give it a few years for the next bottle.

2/26/2024 - thalver wrote:

This is drinking very well, and has matured without really fading as these wines sometimes do. Aromatically expressive from pop and pour, some fruit along with savory elements on the palate, lingering finish, enough tannin to provide structure, though it doesn't overwhelm it. This may have a number of years of good drinking ahead. The Originals bottling has been our favorite Stolpman syrah.....the price creep over the years, while justifiable, is lamentable.

2/25/2024 - thalver wrote:

Decanted and poured about 20 minutes later. Brutal. This was structured, un-giving and unpleasant. Corked and put back in the cellar. After about 45 minutes the wine remaining in the glass opened up, and on the following day was quite enjoyable and expressive on the nose and palate, if a bit "big" and dark fruited for a pinot. Time should help that. Upon initial pour: 85 pts. Next day: 91 pts

2/25/2024 - thalver wrote:

This was a very, very nice wine. It had a bit less of the bracing acidity I expected in a chablis, and was just a bit fuller/rounder than anticipated. In this case, that was by no means a demerit.

2/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

Decanted and poured...ruby colored with no notable bricking...initially, there was some nose and the wine was probably at its best over the first hour....followed for about 4 hours, during which time the tannins became increasingly drying and it showed less and less on the palate. I've enjoyed the Stangeland wines in the past, but I don't have a lot of hope for this bottling.

2/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

In a good early drinking window, a bit more time might help.

2/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

showing fine, decent nose, not too too grapey in that way the varietal can sometimes be. A couple more years sideways would probably help.

2/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

Drinking well, if young...a nice entry level pinot. For the price difference, it doesn't have the interest or depth of the slightly more expensive appelation wine.

2/18/2024 - thalver wrote:

a pleasing, lighter-bodied red....more the weight of a pinot noir than Cabernet Sauvignon.....fairly expressive nose, good balance, enough tannin to frame the wine, but the structure is not overwhelming. A pepper taste was present but not dominant. A nice "drink young' quaff.

2/10/2024 - thalver wrote:

drinking well, this benefits from a decant, becoming more aromatic, fuller bodied and longer with about 45 minutes of air

2/10/2024 - thalver wrote:

Popped and poured. Quite open and drinking well. This wine revealed a good nose from the start. Flavors were similar on the palate. Nice balance. Over a few hours open the tannins did become a bit more dominant.

2/5/2024 - thalver wrote:

This was a pleasant surprise, I've enjoyed Longplay wines but none have been this enticing on the nose...fairly light, it would be nearly translucent were it not so cloudy ...perhaps a bit fuller bodied than some wines from this vintner have been, but still fairly delicate and by no means 'big'....93-4 pts

2/5/2024 - thalver wrote:

This was a claret color with no browning at the edges, darker than I expected, particularly given the vintage. Drinking fine, a little young even, it was fairly expressive aromatically, still retaining plenty of tannin. It probably can go a good bit longer.

2/5/2024 - thalver wrote:

On this bottle, the cork was only saturated 2/3 the way up...drinking fine, fairly friendly for a loire cab franc with balanced structure, fruit and no green flavors

1/28/2024 - thalver wrote:

This was quite expressive on the nose, with a nice 'oily' mouthfeel

1/28/2024 - thalver wrote:

This was given a short decant and consumed over a few hours. Aromatically expressive from the start, rather full bodied with a medium to long finish. This bottle seemed to have years ahead of it. I'm beginning to think this vintners syrahs are immortal.

1/22/2024 - thalver wrote:

This is no where near the end of its road, and still has years ahead. This was smoother than a bottle a decade ago, though that one may have had more energy. Still fairly monolithic as the variety tends to be. For my tastes, better than when young, but slightly behind a bottle a decade ago.

1/19/2024 - thalver wrote:

Drinking very well on pop and poor. Expressive nose, not as grapey/young on the palate as I'd feared, but should do very well with a bit more time.

1/14/2024 - thalver wrote:

It's said the wine always has the last word. I'd found bottles of this in the past few years to be too austere and rather uninteresting. The last two bottles open have been more interesting in a difficult to pinpoint way. A bit more harmonious, smoother and perhaps a bit of fruit has re-emerged.

1/14/2024 - thalver wrote:

a better showing than a bottle a couple months ago, which was opened shortly after shipping. This wine is on the lighter/more delicate end of the spectrum, but did open up to be quite flavorful after about an hour open. It seemed to fall off a bit 4 hours after opening

12/31/2023 - thalver wrote:

This bottle had been a seeper, that may effect its profile. On this bottle, sweetness was much less than I expected of the wine, a hint of petrol, drinking well if a bit easy. The color didn't appear advanced.

12/31/2023 - thalver wrote:

this was a bit tight with bracing acidity, not a lot of charm. I get the sense there is good substance and depth there, but it needs time.

12/18/2023 - thalver wrote:

Drinking well, this bottle didn't quite have as expressive a nose as a bottle a couple/few years ago...smooth, pleasant, adequate structure. I don't see this improving from here

12/16/2023 - thalver wrote:

Glasses of 2021 Patricia Green Chehalem Mountain Vineyard (CMV), and 2021 Marine sedimentary(MS) were poured, the balance immediately corked and put in the fridge, then followed again the second night. I very rarely find wines to be as good the second night. In this case, they didn't fall off appreciably. On the first night, the Chehalem Mountain showed more nose on first pour, that of the other wine became more prominent after about an hour open. The CMV was a plenty fruity, but stopped short of it being in an overly grapey/cloying way. That should resolve with a couple years sideways. The MS took longer to open up, the nose came to fore for while before receding. It clearly shows greater complexity, even if one got the sense it was holding back. The tannins of the MS became much more prominent after an hour or so open. There is plenty there. Time should help. On the second night, the structure of the MS was a bit more dominant, and the CM was more open both aromatically and on the palate. In my view, the Marine Sedimentary is the better more complex wine, but the CM is the better drink for the next few years. Both seem like they might shut down, but I expect the Chehalem Mountain Vineyard to drink better in the early and mid term. The Marine Sedimenatry seems like it could benefit from 5 years sideways. Tellingly, the vintner chose to use a Diam 10 agglomerated cork on the CMV, and a Diam 30 on the Marine Sedimentary.

12/16/2023 - thalver wrote:

Glasses of 2021 Patricia Green Chehalem Mountain Vineyard (CMV), and 2021 Marine sedimentary(MS) were poured, the balance immediately corked and put in the fridge, then followed again the second night. I very rarely find wines to be as good the second night. In this case, they didn't fall off appreciably. On the first night, the Chehalem Mountain showed more nose on first pour, that of the other wine became more prominent after about an hour open. The CMV was a plenty fruity, but stopped short of it being in an overly grapey/cloying way. That should resolve with a couple years sideways. The MS took longer to open up, and clearly shows greater complexity, even if one got the sense it was holding back. The tannins of the MS became much more prominent after an hour or so open. There is plenty there. Time should help. On the second night, the structure of the MS was a bit more dominant, and the CM was more open both aromatically and on the palate. In my view, the Marine Sedimentary is the better more complex wine, but the CM is the better drink for the next few years. Both seem like they might shut down, but I expect the Chehalem Mountain Vineyard to drink better in the early and mid term. The Marine Sedimenatry seems like it could benefit from 5 years sideways. Interestingly, the vintner chose to use a Diam 10 agglomerated cork on the CMV, and a Diam 30 on the Marine Sedimentary.

12/16/2023 - thalver wrote:

The last of a number of bottles of this, and as pleasant as any. While it lacks the bright fruit and energy of the younger bottles, it has developed a nice nose, dark fruit and some forest floor on the palate, and largely resolved tannin, with just enough on the finish to give it some frame. The last bits after a few hours open were a bit drying. I think this is probably about as good as this wine is going to get. It should drink for some time, but seems like it may be a long slow fade.

12/10/2023 - thalver wrote:

To my tastes, Anrecht generally shows best early of the Selbach trio of this, Rotlay and Smith. Drinking well, not much aged flavor development, nor any petrol, but balanced, with stone fruits on the nose, and a perception of sweetness more akin to many modern Spatlese's

12/10/2023 - thalver wrote:

decanted for about 45 minutes then poured. At first it was a bit tight and took some coaxing to get much to show on the nose. After about another half an hour or so, it blossomed to best the other wines on the table.

12/10/2023 - thalver wrote:

decanted for 45 minutes then poured....nice nose from the start, which did fade over the coarse of a few hours....good balance, lingering finish. I get the sense this is just entering its window

12/10/2023 - thalver wrote:

Far and away the best Malbec I have had in some time. Decanted and poured, very aromatically expressive from the get-go...it opened up a bit over the couple hours it lasted. Good balance of fruit, acidity and tannin, nothing stuck out as obtrusive

12/10/2023 - thalver wrote:

This struck me as quite similar to a bottle a few years ago. It may have come across as just a bit more Bordeaux. While a bit modern, I didn't pick up any pruney notes. I see no reason to think it can't go, and improve a bit longer.