Community Tasting Notes 20

• sfwinelover1 Likes this wine:

  February 2, 2023 - Second of two, and similar experience to what I recounted in my 9/22 TN. I reiterate: 1) this is fairly early in its drinking window and needs air for the oak, acidity and tannins (yes, tannins!) to come together harmoniously (again, it was better, to my palate on days 2 & 3 than day 1), and 2) I prefer this cooler—cellar temp or lower—to room temp, which, while it clips the flavor profile slightly, tamps down some of the prior notes, especially the oak. If I had more, I’d wait a year or two before opening, and I’m extending my drinking window by 3 years. I’m a bit more equivocal on future purchases. I think that this is comparable to Mount Eden, which is showing up on online sites and Costco for just a bit more than half the price. Even some of the (much) cheaper chards I’ve had in the past few months weren’t far behind, and this is a full step behind most of the Auberts at not much more $, at least if you’re on the list . . . :). 94-95 if scoring.

  Comment

• sfwinelover1 Likes this wine: 95 points

  September 2, 2022 - First of 2 ($79@) from large Napa cellarage operation #2. On the nose and palate, sweet apple and pear, giving way to nectarine and finishing with tangy citrus, oak, butter, white flowers and river rocks. Light to medium silvery gold, medium to full-bodied, medium to thick legs. Medium+ acidity, already well integrated, no heat. VG+ complexity, VG intensity, VG++ persistence. My first Sam Kaplan wine of any sort, reviews from several trusted CT friends got me interested in this label, as well as fondness for Auberts chards from this vineyard (agree with cs that this generally fleshier than the Aubert versions, which, for Aubert, are relatively lean). I gave this about 30 minutes of air before tasting, let come close to room temperature, then had my first glass maybe another 30 minutes later. This wine was already delicious on the initial taste, but Paul felt that it had baby fat to shed (I somewhat agreed). Beautiful creamy texture, which was kept from going over the top by the citric notes. I drank reds for a while but returned to this briefly with dinner, and although not an obvious food wine per se (I’d put its profile far more in Sonoma than Burgundy), it worked well with the seasoned, salty fare. I liked this even better night #2, and déclassé as it is to say, colder, so I think that this wine is, for my tastes, probably earlier than later in its tasting window. This is a slight laggard in the outstanding group of higher end chards I’ve been lucky to drink over the past 6 months or so, but that’s a great group, and this wine is solidly excellent, with perhaps some possibility of incremental improvement, in the near term, and if it lags the elite group by a bit, that’s ok, since it was the least expensive of the bunch. Look forward to my other bottle and will buy again. 94-95+

  1 person found this helpful Comment

• Acohen Likes this wine: 93 points

  March 2, 2022 - Great balance with apple, pear and fabulous mouthfeel

  Comment

• Acohen Likes this wine: 93 points

  October 1, 2021 - Great rich pear, apple and quince on the long finish

  Comment

• csimm wrote:

  September 10, 2021 - Definitely on the curve of its optimum drinking window; in a good place now and will likely be a wine to consume over the next year or so. A solid performance with an agreeable yellow citrus core and enough persistence to keep the energy and perception of acidity providing appropriate speed and tension. Overall this has become quite the friendly Chardonnay and makes for pleasurable consumption. Though it could certainly "last" longer than my near-term consumption projections might suggest, I personally want to hold on to its remaining freshness in a way that provides lively flavor now.

  1 person found this helpful Comment

Pro Reviews 1

Wine Definition

• Vintage 2016
• Type White
• Producer Maxem
• Varietal Chardonnay
• Designation n/a
• Vineyard UV Vineyard
• Country USA
• Region California
• SubRegion Sonoma County
• Appellation Sonoma Coast

Community Holdings

• Pending Delivery 3 (1%)
• In Cellars 139 (42%)
• Consumed 188 (57%)

Food Pairing

Who Likes This Wine

More About This Wine