This was acquired from Rare Wine Co earlier this year but had sat in Rekondo’s wine library, supposedly since or almost since release. The bottle was preserved extremely well with the foil perfectly intact. There was no sediment visibly showing (bottle was stood vertical before opening) with light shined underneath the neck. Unfortunately the cork immediately started moving into the bottle after the first few twists with my Ah So (this is my first wine opened this old) and I was able to pull about 2/3 of it before it the bottom portion broke away and remained in the neck. I pushed that portion into the bottle, and decanted with sieve to reveal a beautifully colored aged Rioja: it gave off a deep cherry and perfumed nose from the decanter right away. We drank within about 15 minutes of decanting, as not to put too much air on it and the first small pour showed an amazing, unique red coloring (the edges of the liquid looked almost orange in certain light). The nose in the glass had developed to notes of mushroom and strong leather with cola tasting on the finish. Virtually no tannins, all developed as to be expected, and an extremely delicate wine. As we got into the second glass much more of the deep fruit was showing through and the nose was creamier almost with a hint of banana, the finish was now something a bit more peppery. This wine did hold up really nicely with food (crusted Filet Mignon) but was much more enjoyable drinking on its own. A treat for sure!
2 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
There's a bit of that dirty old Rioja smell on the nose, followed by some hints of coffee. Any sort of fruit flavour here is very tertiary and dried out, but there are also occasional wisps of floral aromas too. The palate is pretty much a continuation of the nose, with some still-vibrant acidity, though this is mostly dominated by that old wine taste at this point. And as with most old Rioja, every fourth sip prompts an "is this corked?" question in my head.
A postscript: half the bottle was preserved under a Repour was far cleaner and brighter the next day. All the off flavours seemed to have dissipated. Accordingly, I raised the score by a tick. I shall endeavor to treat my remaining bottles with a more generous amount of air.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Old wood and beef bouillon notes. Medium-bodied, and there's a real elegance here, but it's also clearly tiring and the flavors and weight aren't well supported. Enjoyable, but not much more.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
The cork here was sketchy -- took a good five minutes of finesse with the Durand to get it out; it crumbled nonetheless but I only ended up with two or three small bits in the bottle so I consider that a victory. Despite the dead cork, this was a bottle alive and well. The nose shows a fair bit of funk, alongside an intense note of coffee and dried figs. The palate is fully resolved, with some fruity sweetness as well as earthy notes to boot. Probably just a bit past its prime (at least this bottle), with a metallic finish.
3 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Monday blinds (Chicago, IL): This got better and better with air, but I didn't think that this was the most convincing bottle of LdH. Savory and meaty, with a nice salinity on the palate. The nose is a bit muted, though some of the American oak starts to poke out with some more time. The palate's fruit is present, and lurks underneath all the earthy elements.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Enjoyed this bottle. Still some life. Rustic qualities, dirty raspberries, light spice and pepper notes. Little bit of earth. Palate is elegant and refined. Really enjoyable at this time but drink now.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Another Saturday at Chevalier...Mostly Blind (Chicago, IL): Open, decanted several hours before I tasted. Fully mature red cherry with spice hints, roasted meat, mushroom and leather. Slightly tired, moderate length. I was told this had mediocre fill level.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
A mid-shoulder fill and a mediocre cork that didn't hold under pressure. Despite that, some pretty leathery notes and red cherry fruit that evolved quite a bit over the 3 hours or so this was open, first picking up some coffee notes before turning towards more tawny, aged flavors, while never losing its acid-driven lift. More feminine styling. Certainly mature, and this bottle is fully resolved, but enjoyable and showing a lot of breeding.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
This has a more delicate nose than the 1952 Berberana Rioja that preceded this '61, with trace funk and just a whiff of dried cherry. On the palate, this shows drier tannin. This is the softest of the three Rioja on the table (the third being the '64 Berberana). I really like this. It features a warm and soft palate. This is like a warm velour blanket. Long, dark cherry finish with leather notes. Wow. As it airs, however, Bob calls this "flaccid" and says that "there is not much left here", but I love it. Very long. Warm, caressing finish and I'm back to the blanket metaphor. After about 2.5 hours, I agree with Bob and this loses some steam; loses richness and interest. Really nice for the first couple of hours, though. Lunch at Le Perigord.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Full bottle, crumbly cork, decanted and drunk over a couple of hours. So much better than the Sampling taste of this earlier in the week; this is a far better bottle. Slightly smokey, dusty nose with a touch of meat. Really quite full and round in the mouth. A touch of orange peel coming through on the nose and the acidity, initially less than the Conde pair, develops more too. Lovely old Rioja. No mention of hierachy here - neck says Crianza but label same style as the GR ones. ****
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Sampler pour. Mid garnet. Quite an oxidised nose, some sweet fruit and development. Good acidity on the attack. A bit of mocha complexity coming through on the nose. Quite light. Reasonable length. lacks mid-palate complexity. Decent enough but a tad faded. Not the greatest of examples I suspect. ***
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
The newish neck label over the capsule, which carried the bottle number, clearly specified "Vina Crianza." Yet the capsule itself was not original, and beneath were vestiges of a former hardened wax seal. The cork, which was not vintage branded, looked antique enough and pushed right down into the bottle at the first pressure of the corkscrew. All very strange. Inside the bottle, a more full-bodied wine than one expects from a Lopez crianza, not that 1961 is a typical vintage. The first aroma is of fishmarket, but this blows off to reveal just a bit of dark, brooding fruit. Good weight on the palate but no bloom. A well-stored specimen with a sounder cork would likely taste much fresher. Imported by Vieux Vins, so must have come from Rare Wine Co., though I can't remember for sure. Among the questions I forgot to ask at the winery is why so many bottles seem reconditioned or otherwise altered. Certainly nobody would bother faking a crianza, so what's up?
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
7/24/2021 - nuto5172 Likes this wine: 91 Points
This was acquired from Rare Wine Co earlier this year but had sat in Rekondo’s wine library, supposedly since or almost since release. The bottle was preserved extremely well with the foil perfectly intact. There was no sediment visibly showing (bottle was stood vertical before opening) with light shined underneath the neck. Unfortunately the cork immediately started moving into the bottle after the first few twists with my Ah So (this is my first wine opened this old) and I was able to pull about 2/3 of it before it the bottom portion broke away and remained in the neck. I pushed that portion into the bottle, and decanted with sieve to reveal a beautifully colored aged Rioja: it gave off a deep cherry and perfumed nose from the decanter right away. We drank within about 15 minutes of decanting, as not to put too much air on it and the first small pour showed an amazing, unique red coloring (the edges of the liquid looked almost orange in certain light). The nose in the glass had developed to notes of mushroom and strong leather with cola tasting on the finish. Virtually no tannins, all developed as to be expected, and an extremely delicate wine. As we got into the second glass much more of the deep fruit was showing through and the nose was creamier almost with a hint of banana, the finish was now something a bit more peppery. This wine did hold up really nicely with food (crusted Filet Mignon) but was much more enjoyable drinking on its own. A treat for sure!
2 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
2/4/2021 - acyso wrote: 90 Points
There's a bit of that dirty old Rioja smell on the nose, followed by some hints of coffee. Any sort of fruit flavour here is very tertiary and dried out, but there are also occasional wisps of floral aromas too. The palate is pretty much a continuation of the nose, with some still-vibrant acidity, though this is mostly dominated by that old wine taste at this point. And as with most old Rioja, every fourth sip prompts an "is this corked?" question in my head.
A postscript: half the bottle was preserved under a Repour was far cleaner and brighter the next day. All the off flavours seemed to have dissipated. Accordingly, I raised the score by a tick. I shall endeavor to treat my remaining bottles with a more generous amount of air.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
6/2/2018 - psmith wrote: 86 Points
Old wood and beef bouillon notes. Medium-bodied, and there's a real elegance here, but it's also clearly tiring and the flavors and weight aren't well supported. Enjoyable, but not much more.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
5/2/2018 - acyso wrote: 90 Points
The cork here was sketchy -- took a good five minutes of finesse with the Durand to get it out; it crumbled nonetheless but I only ended up with two or three small bits in the bottle so I consider that a victory. Despite the dead cork, this was a bottle alive and well. The nose shows a fair bit of funk, alongside an intense note of coffee and dried figs. The palate is fully resolved, with some fruity sweetness as well as earthy notes to boot. Probably just a bit past its prime (at least this bottle), with a metallic finish.
3 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
3/10/2018 - salil wrote:
Dead.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/10/2018 - acyso wrote: flawed
Indianapolis IV; 3/9/2018-3/11/2018 (Indianapolis, IN): Done in by a loose cork.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/5/2018 - acyso wrote: 88 Points
Monday blinds (Chicago, IL): This got better and better with air, but I didn't think that this was the most convincing bottle of LdH. Savory and meaty, with a nice salinity on the palate. The nose is a bit muted, though some of the American oak starts to poke out with some more time. The palate's fruit is present, and lurks underneath all the earthy elements.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/5/2017 - beezer6 wrote: 91 Points
Enjoyed this bottle. Still some life. Rustic qualities, dirty raspberries, light spice and pepper notes. Little bit of earth.
Palate is elegant and refined. Really enjoyable at this time but drink now.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
8/5/2017 - Burgundy Al wrote: 89 Points
Another Saturday at Chevalier...Mostly Blind (Chicago, IL): Open, decanted several hours before I tasted. Fully mature red cherry with spice hints, roasted meat, mushroom and leather. Slightly tired, moderate length. I was told this had mediocre fill level.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
8/5/2017 - psmith wrote: 90 Points
A mid-shoulder fill and a mediocre cork that didn't hold under pressure. Despite that, some pretty leathery notes and red cherry fruit that evolved quite a bit over the 3 hours or so this was open, first picking up some coffee notes before turning towards more tawny, aged flavors, while never losing its acid-driven lift. More feminine styling. Certainly mature, and this bottle is fully resolved, but enjoyable and showing a lot of breeding.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/16/2015 - Pknut wrote:
This has a more delicate nose than the 1952 Berberana Rioja that preceded this '61, with trace funk and just a whiff of dried cherry. On the palate, this shows drier tannin. This is the softest of the three Rioja on the table (the third being the '64 Berberana). I really like this. It features a warm and soft palate. This is like a warm velour blanket. Long, dark cherry finish with leather notes. Wow. As it airs, however, Bob calls this "flaccid" and says that "there is not much left here", but I love it. Very long. Warm, caressing finish and I'm back to the blanket metaphor. After about 2.5 hours, I agree with Bob and this loses some steam; loses richness and interest. Really nice for the first couple of hours, though.
Lunch at Le Perigord.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
1/14/2012 - SimonG wrote: 92 Points
Full bottle, crumbly cork, decanted and drunk over a couple of hours. So much better than the Sampling taste of this earlier in the week; this is a far better bottle. Slightly smokey, dusty nose with a touch of meat. Really quite full and round in the mouth. A touch of orange peel coming through on the nose and the acidity, initially less than the Conde pair, develops more too. Lovely old Rioja. No mention of hierachy here - neck says Crianza but label same style as the GR ones. ****
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/10/2012 - SimonG wrote: 87 Points
Sampler pour. Mid garnet. Quite an oxidised nose, some sweet fruit and development. Good acidity on the attack. A bit of mocha complexity coming through on the nose. Quite light. Reasonable length. lacks mid-palate complexity. Decent enough but a tad faded. Not the greatest of examples I suspect. ***
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/28/2010 - Vinomane wrote: 90 Points
The newish neck label over the capsule, which carried the bottle number, clearly specified "Vina Crianza." Yet the capsule itself was not original, and beneath were vestiges of a former hardened wax seal. The cork, which was not vintage branded, looked antique enough and pushed right down into the bottle at the first pressure of the corkscrew. All very strange. Inside the bottle, a more full-bodied wine than one expects from a Lopez crianza, not that 1961 is a typical vintage.
The first aroma is of fishmarket, but this blows off to reveal just a bit of dark, brooding fruit. Good weight on the palate but no bloom. A well-stored specimen with a sounder cork would likely taste much fresher. Imported by Vieux Vins, so must have come from Rare Wine Co., though I can't remember for sure. Among the questions I forgot to ask at the winery is why so many bottles seem reconditioned or otherwise altered. Certainly nobody would bother faking a crianza, so what's up?
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment