Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - Sweaty saddle, new leather, sloeberries, some garrigue. Good tannic structure. But also something sweet (&sour?) and alcoholic that feels less interesting. Ok for now, hopefully more integrated in ten years. I believe it has more upside.
Edit: We opened it a good 3 hours before and decanted. By the time we were drinking it, most of the horse and leather was gone or at least pleasantly playing a minor chord, which I normally look forward to when drinking Musar. This time though I felt that the sweet&sour was a bit too much and felt it would do better waiting in the cellar. If I had tried this blind, I would have thought it was five years younger at least. I have so far preferred the 1988, the 2005, the 1995 and the 2009 (although the 2009 also needs a lot of time). But best not to make any too serious bets with this wine, I have learnt. There's a good texture and fine tannins so that bodes well for the future.
Ps my mom protested against this verdict and gave this two thumbs up! I am upping the score one point on sheer motherly authority.
Comment posted by GuillaumeC:
7/25/2017 5:14:00 PM - P&P? or did you let it breathe a while?
Comment posted by Omar Khayyam:
7/25/2017 11:50:00 PM - We opened it a 3 hours before and decanted. By the time we were drinking it, most of the horse and leather was gone or at least pleasantly playing a minor chord, which I normally look forward to when drinking Musar. This time though I felt that the sweet&sour was a bit too much and felt it would do better waiting in the cellar. If I had tried this blind, I would have thought it was five years younger at least. I have so far preferred the 1988, the 2005, the 1995 and the 2009 (although the 2009 also needs a lot of time). But best not to make any too serious bets with this wine, I have learnt. There's a good texture and fine tannins so that bodes well for the future.