Tuesday – 14th September 2004 - Penfolds Red Wine Clinic
1983 Penfolds Grange: Now the greatest Grange I have tasted, although I have yet to taste the 1971Â… and this bottle was stored in a cupboard for nearly 20 years!
Powerful. Still with intense primary liqueur fruit dominant but with savoury complex adding tremendously to the wine. The great part was the amazingly powerful and supple structure. Great mouthcoating tannins, a quality of tannin of which there can never be enough, and what I expect of all great wines but rarely receive. What I expect of 1st Growth Bordeaux.
A bit more mindblowing power on the back palate and this would be Ultimate. At the moment, this is rated Outstanding/Ultimate.
The telephone conversation about this wine I had with my father after I tasting it was quite interesting. He mentioned that the vintage was very difficult and at the time there were doubts whether a decent Grange could be produced. Apparently the wine was fiercely tannic and there were massive doubts whether it would ever come into balance. He mentioned that the wine was nearly indrinkable the first two times he had it back in the 1980s. Now people compare this wine to the great 1971. It makes you think about what to look for in a young wine for it to be great with time. I rate this wine as the second greatest Australian red wine I have tasted, behind the 1965 Lindemans HRB Bin 3110. I thank the Penfolds winemaker, Andrew Baldwin, for his generous pouring!
1997 Penfolds Grange: Better than expectations received from reading reviews. Maybe a few holes at the moment but it should come together. Lovely ripe structure. A very good $80 wine. Rated Excellent/Outstanding and will get better with time.
2004 Penfolds Koonunga Hill SSB: Broad but good acidity. A little grass and asparagus adding complexity. Agreeable/Recommended.
2003 Penfolds Reserve Bill Eden Valley Riesling: Similar profile to the above. More butter and lime. Clumsy florals. Agreeable/Recommended.
2003 Penfolds Thomas Hyland Chardonnay: Broad, butterscotch, melon. Lacks mid-back palate. Some length. Agreeable.
2000 Reserve Bin 00A Chardonnay: the Penfolds sales rep would not believe me that it was corked. Why do they employee these people?
2002 Penfolds Koonunga Hill Merlot: Simple. Agreeable.
2002 Penfolds Thomas Hyland Cabernet Sauvignon – Chalky tannins like a 407 without the fruit to back it up. Nice mintiness. Needs a bit of time, maybe, but never better than Agreeable.
2001 Penfolds Thomas Hyland Shiraz: A bit more balance and life than the Cabernet above but nothing it in it to recommended. Agreeable.
2001 Penfolds Bin 28 Shiraz: Some complexityÂ… finally! Nice spice and controlled oak on ripe Barossa fruit. Well integrated tannins. Still a bit boring though. Agreeable/Recommended.
2001 Penfolds Bin 407 Cabernet Sauvignon: A lovely surprise. I usually do not enoy the 407 on release. Actually, I usually do not enjoy 407 at all. Lovely ripe Cabernet fruit controlled by integrated savouriness. Tannins do not stick out as expected but create a long, harmonious finish. Rated Highly Recommended.
Adair
TVS: 1983 Penfolds Grange plus other Penfolds wines
-
Grant Dodd
- Posts: 135
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 2:50 pm
- Location: Queensland
- Contact:
Adair,
Interesting that you should bring up the 71 Grange. I was chatting to someone over the weekend who was a judge at the Royal Sydney show when it was first exhibited. Our discussion revolved around wine faults and just how much of a particular fault is tolerable before it gets marked down in judging. ( I asked the question in regard to the 2000 Seppelt St Peters which we had just tasted) He bought up the 71 Grange, saying that it was highly volatile in its youth, and quite controversially, two judges gave it 19/20 and one 13/20. The low scoring judge couldn't be swayed,saying that the fault over-rided the other quality aspects of the wine,and a mini stand off evolved. Eventually the chairman,a devout non interventionist, did an unusual thing and gave the wine gold despite the lack of consensus. Here we are today and I guess those that championed it have been proved right,as it is still considered one of the greatest wines we have produced. I'd love to try it to see what has happened to the VA, and to sate my curiosity about how Grange ages after 20+ years.
Nice notes,thanks for posting them.
Cheers
GD
Interesting that you should bring up the 71 Grange. I was chatting to someone over the weekend who was a judge at the Royal Sydney show when it was first exhibited. Our discussion revolved around wine faults and just how much of a particular fault is tolerable before it gets marked down in judging. ( I asked the question in regard to the 2000 Seppelt St Peters which we had just tasted) He bought up the 71 Grange, saying that it was highly volatile in its youth, and quite controversially, two judges gave it 19/20 and one 13/20. The low scoring judge couldn't be swayed,saying that the fault over-rided the other quality aspects of the wine,and a mini stand off evolved. Eventually the chairman,a devout non interventionist, did an unusual thing and gave the wine gold despite the lack of consensus. Here we are today and I guess those that championed it have been proved right,as it is still considered one of the greatest wines we have produced. I'd love to try it to see what has happened to the VA, and to sate my curiosity about how Grange ages after 20+ years.
Nice notes,thanks for posting them.
Cheers
GD
Grant,
The story (VA in the 71) is recounted in Hooke's biography of Schubert. Off the top of my head I can't remember the people involved (the 13/20 guy was Brian Barry, perhaps? - or was it Jim? - I'll check).
Interestingly, that book is the only place I've seen names actually attributed to all those Grange insults which are quoted every time the history is related. Don't know why people are so coy about identities - it was 40 years ago, and practically everyone is dead. Besides, it's scarcely a matter of national security or anything...
Adair, agree on the 83 (except perhaps the back palate). Had it a couple of times - staggering wine. Did you check the alcohol by any chance? Scarcely 13%, I rather suspect...
cheers,
Graeme
The story (VA in the 71) is recounted in Hooke's biography of Schubert. Off the top of my head I can't remember the people involved (the 13/20 guy was Brian Barry, perhaps? - or was it Jim? - I'll check).
Interestingly, that book is the only place I've seen names actually attributed to all those Grange insults which are quoted every time the history is related. Don't know why people are so coy about identities - it was 40 years ago, and practically everyone is dead. Besides, it's scarcely a matter of national security or anything...
Adair, agree on the 83 (except perhaps the back palate). Had it a couple of times - staggering wine. Did you check the alcohol by any chance? Scarcely 13%, I rather suspect...
cheers,
Graeme
Graeme,GraemeG wrote:Adair, agree on the 83 (except perhaps the back palate). Had it a couple of times - staggering wine. Did you check the alcohol by any chance? Scarcely 13%, I rather suspect...
cheers,
Graeme
The 1983 Grange is 13.3% alcohol.
With regard to the back palate, please note that this was my reason for not classifying it in the same league as the greatest wines on this Earth! Also, it may have been a result of its cellaring. Even more considerable is the fact that the wine was tasted straight from the bottle, given no decanting or time to breathe.
Kind regards,
Adair
-
Grant Dodd
- Posts: 135
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 2:50 pm
- Location: Queensland
- Contact:
Graeme,
I havn't read the Schubert biography, must have look sometime. The judge wasn't Brian Barry,Jim someone rings a bell though.
Interesting how style arguments continually crop up over time. It seems to me that the debate over Grange then seems scarily similar to the present stand-off over the super-charged wines inspired by the Parker following. I'm not sure that our reflections over the long term will be quite as positive in regard to the latter.
The point that I didn't quite make that was the crux of the VA/style issue was that the judge I spoke with concluded that a fault like that has to be assessed in regard to the balance of the wine. If it doesn't detract from the overall impression,if the quality of the wine shines through despite it, then the wine must be marked accordingly.
The issue of brett in Bordeaux springs to mind. Many of the classed growths have brett character,but not to the point where it dominates the palate. It's a fine line to tread,and harder to assess as well.
Cheers
I havn't read the Schubert biography, must have look sometime. The judge wasn't Brian Barry,Jim someone rings a bell though.
Interesting how style arguments continually crop up over time. It seems to me that the debate over Grange then seems scarily similar to the present stand-off over the super-charged wines inspired by the Parker following. I'm not sure that our reflections over the long term will be quite as positive in regard to the latter.
The point that I didn't quite make that was the crux of the VA/style issue was that the judge I spoke with concluded that a fault like that has to be assessed in regard to the balance of the wine. If it doesn't detract from the overall impression,if the quality of the wine shines through despite it, then the wine must be marked accordingly.
The issue of brett in Bordeaux springs to mind. Many of the classed growths have brett character,but not to the point where it dominates the palate. It's a fine line to tread,and harder to assess as well.
Cheers
Grant Dodd wrote: Interesting how style arguments continually crop up over time. It seems to me that the debate over Grange then seems scarily similar to the present stand-off over the super-charged wines inspired by the Parker following. I'm not sure that our reflections over the long term will be quite as positive in regard to the latter.
The big difference is that the earlier situation was other (wine-making) professionals 'disparaging' the work of a contemporary, whereas today's consists of winemakers making a style in accordance with the views of a man who's never made wine in his life, as far as I know.
The point that I didn't quite make that was the crux of the VA/style issue was that the judge I spoke with concluded that a fault like that has to be assessed in regard to the balance of the wine. If it doesn't detract from the overall impression,if the quality of the wine shines through despite it, then the wine must be marked accordingly.
Presumably this grows from the chairman's original directions. The Grange situation in the early 70s proved that even back then there was conflict between the historical role of the shows being aimed at essentially technical issues, vs the inclination to award a wine for being great irrespective of 'flaws' - even if they contribute significantly to its 'greatness'. How they rationalised all this when they used to put a bottle of Claret or Burgundy on the table to establish the benchmark 'style' is beyond me. Especially when you read of the same wine winning both the 'Calret' and 'Burgundy' classes at various shows!
cheers,
Graeme
Adair,
The 1983 is an exceptional wine but somewhat atypical of the Grange style.
1983 was a year of bushfire in SA and the vines were very stressed with low yields.
THe wine is nothing like the 1971 - and indeed the 83 is markedly different from virtually all Granges. The 1971 is the apotheosis of Grange as a style (to which the 86, 90 & 98 aspire on maturity), but the 83 is a "one -off" as different in its way as the famous bin blends (60A, 620 etc).
Don't know whether you noticed it but there is almost a suggestion of stewed stone fruit in a savoury concentrated fashion in the 83 - wonderful one-off but it has NOT prepared you for the 71.
Enjoy the opportunity and savour the memories...
fred
The 1983 is an exceptional wine but somewhat atypical of the Grange style.
1983 was a year of bushfire in SA and the vines were very stressed with low yields.
THe wine is nothing like the 1971 - and indeed the 83 is markedly different from virtually all Granges. The 1971 is the apotheosis of Grange as a style (to which the 86, 90 & 98 aspire on maturity), but the 83 is a "one -off" as different in its way as the famous bin blends (60A, 620 etc).
Don't know whether you noticed it but there is almost a suggestion of stewed stone fruit in a savoury concentrated fashion in the 83 - wonderful one-off but it has NOT prepared you for the 71.
Enjoy the opportunity and savour the memories...
fred
-
Prester John
[quote="Grant Dodd"]Adair,
( I asked the question in regard to the 2000 Seppelt St Peters which we had just tasted)
Grant,
What was your opinion of the 2000 St. Peters? I'm contempleting purchasing some shortly. If it is in the same league as the 1999 vintage, I will proceed to do so.
I would appreciate any comments.
PJ.
( I asked the question in regard to the 2000 Seppelt St Peters which we had just tasted)
Grant,
What was your opinion of the 2000 St. Peters? I'm contempleting purchasing some shortly. If it is in the same league as the 1999 vintage, I will proceed to do so.
I would appreciate any comments.
PJ.
-
Grant Dodd
- Posts: 135
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 2:50 pm
- Location: Queensland
- Contact:
Prester,
I have big question marks over the 2000 St Peters. I would suggest that you buy a bottle and try for yourself though, but here are my thoughts....
I've tried the wine on 5 separate occasions. The first, at the Seppelt roadshow, was a great wine. Full fruited,excellent intensity and unmistakable quality. The second time though, I was blown away by the intensity of brett character evident in the wine. Having thought it to be a poor bottle, I tried another that my drinking companion had as a sample. It was the same. Some weeks later I acquired another bottle and this was more bretty than the last two. Intense bandages and horse.
Last weekend I visited the said wine judge and took another bottle along with me to try to get some perspective on the issue. After a first taste, he said that the brett effected the middle and back palate, leaving a slight metallic edge to the finish. Two hours later, we looked at it again, and all he said was, "It really smells,doesn't it". This bottle was no where near as bad as some of the others,either.
There are a lot of different reviews of the wine. Many people who have excellent palates have tasted it and not found it to be bretty. My theory is that the brett multiplies in warm environments, hence the fact that most of the negative vibes have come from people in QLD. However,a wine with brett is a wine with brett , and chances are it will show up more dramatically in other areas with time. We shall see.
I'm currently doing a bit of an experiment. I've got two more bottles, one of which is in the cellar at 16 degrees, and the other which is sitting on the kitchen table. In a week or so I'm going to open both and see if there is any difference. Its not that hot up here yet, around 25 degrees, but I'll let you know what comes up.
Anyway,I'd encourage you to have a look yourself and draw conclusions that way. I've put a fair bit of thought into it and this is my considered opinion.
Cheers
GD
I have big question marks over the 2000 St Peters. I would suggest that you buy a bottle and try for yourself though, but here are my thoughts....
I've tried the wine on 5 separate occasions. The first, at the Seppelt roadshow, was a great wine. Full fruited,excellent intensity and unmistakable quality. The second time though, I was blown away by the intensity of brett character evident in the wine. Having thought it to be a poor bottle, I tried another that my drinking companion had as a sample. It was the same. Some weeks later I acquired another bottle and this was more bretty than the last two. Intense bandages and horse.
Last weekend I visited the said wine judge and took another bottle along with me to try to get some perspective on the issue. After a first taste, he said that the brett effected the middle and back palate, leaving a slight metallic edge to the finish. Two hours later, we looked at it again, and all he said was, "It really smells,doesn't it". This bottle was no where near as bad as some of the others,either.
There are a lot of different reviews of the wine. Many people who have excellent palates have tasted it and not found it to be bretty. My theory is that the brett multiplies in warm environments, hence the fact that most of the negative vibes have come from people in QLD. However,a wine with brett is a wine with brett , and chances are it will show up more dramatically in other areas with time. We shall see.
I'm currently doing a bit of an experiment. I've got two more bottles, one of which is in the cellar at 16 degrees, and the other which is sitting on the kitchen table. In a week or so I'm going to open both and see if there is any difference. Its not that hot up here yet, around 25 degrees, but I'll let you know what comes up.
Anyway,I'd encourage you to have a look yourself and draw conclusions that way. I've put a fair bit of thought into it and this is my considered opinion.
Cheers
GD
-
Prester John
2001 Bins
2001 Penfolds Bin 28 Shiraz: Some complexity… finally! Nice spice and controlled oak on ripe Barossa fruit. Well integrated tannins. Still a bit boring though. Agreeable/Recommended.
2001 Penfolds Bin 407 Cabernet Sauvignon: A lovely surprise. I usually do not enoy the 407 on release. Actually, I usually do not enjoy 407 at all. Lovely ripe Cabernet fruit controlled by integrated savouriness. Tannins do not stick out as expected but create a long, harmonious finish. Rated Highly Recommended.
Agree with you on the Bin 407 - I got to try the 2001 Bins 128, 28 and 407 again (the 389 was sold out), and my impressions were almost identical to that back in April. It's still the pick of the three for me.
http://www.auswine.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1447
Southcorp seem to be making a real promotion push here - Seppelt, Penfolds and now Rosemount tastings three of the last five weeks, without many new releases since six months ago.
Cheers
Ian
Forget about goodness and mercy, they're gone.
Just as a by-the-way...
I understand (anonymous sources!) that there will be no further migration 'up the chain' of Penfolds wines (or Wynns reds if it comes to that) of screwcaps closures - on wines for retail sale - until a longer history of aging is available...
Suspect this will co-incide with much reduction in my Southcorp purchases, unless an extraordinary vintage arrives...!
cheers,
Graeme
I understand (anonymous sources!) that there will be no further migration 'up the chain' of Penfolds wines (or Wynns reds if it comes to that) of screwcaps closures - on wines for retail sale - until a longer history of aging is available...
Suspect this will co-incide with much reduction in my Southcorp purchases, unless an extraordinary vintage arrives...!
cheers,
Graeme
-
bacchaebabe
- Posts: 1222
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 5:04 pm
- Location: Sydney
-
Gary W
2000 St Peters
I have now tasted this wine 4 times from 4 sources. Every wine has been consistent. Nice wine and like the '85 (shows DMS - truffly sweet blackcurrant). Medium bodied and quite fine. You could mistake it for an Eden Valley shiraz perhaps? Quite unlike the last few vintages anyway. 91 Points (if you like the style). I had it served blind to me in a cleanskin last friday night. Took the first sip and said it was 00 St Peters. The wine is that distinctive. No brett in any of my bottles.
GW
I have now tasted this wine 4 times from 4 sources. Every wine has been consistent. Nice wine and like the '85 (shows DMS - truffly sweet blackcurrant). Medium bodied and quite fine. You could mistake it for an Eden Valley shiraz perhaps? Quite unlike the last few vintages anyway. 91 Points (if you like the style). I had it served blind to me in a cleanskin last friday night. Took the first sip and said it was 00 St Peters. The wine is that distinctive. No brett in any of my bottles.
GW
-
Aussie Johns
IMO, the 83 Grange will be amongst the best three of all-time in 20 years, but it is still not really ready to drink yet.
Here is my take on Grange:
Greatest vintages
1955
1963 (IMO)
1983
1986
Best current drinking(not including above)
1976
1989
Most under-rated
1972
1983
1989
Most over-rated
1990
1998
[/b]Most bottle variation
1962
1971
1990....could there be fakes of this out there??
Greatest decade for Grange
60's, followed by the 80's
Worst decade for Grange
70's, followed by the 90's
Here is my take on Grange:
Greatest vintages
1955
1963 (IMO)
1983
1986
Best current drinking(not including above)
1976
1989
Most under-rated
1972
1983
1989
Most over-rated
1990
1998
[/b]Most bottle variation
1962
1971
1990....could there be fakes of this out there??
Greatest decade for Grange
60's, followed by the 80's
Worst decade for Grange
70's, followed by the 90's
-
Baby Chickpea
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:17 pm
Aussie Johns wrote:IMO, the 83 Grange will be amongst the best three of all-time in 20 years, but it is still not really ready to drink yet.
Here is my take on Grange:
Greatest vintages
1955
1963 (IMO)
1983
1986
Best current drinking(not including above)
1976
1989
Most under-rated
1972
1983
1989
Most over-rated
1990
1998
[/b]Most bottle variation
1962
1971
1990....could there be fakes of this out there??
Greatest decade for Grange
60's, followed by the 80's
Worst decade for Grange
70's, followed by the 90's
In the most under-rated category i would include the 66 and 78 but take out the 72. Just my 2c.
Danny
The voyage of discovery lies not in finding new landscapes but in having new eyes. We must never be afraid to go too far, for success lies just beyond - Marcel Proust
The voyage of discovery lies not in finding new landscapes but in having new eyes. We must never be afraid to go too far, for success lies just beyond - Marcel Proust
Most Over-rated Grange
Most over-rated
1990
1998
Most bottle variation
1962
1971
1990....could there be fakes of this out there??
In regard to the variable quality of the 1990 and 1998 vintages, could this have something to do with the number of bottles being continually flogged on the auction market? It seems to be a common thread that an eagerly awaited vintage is snapped up by profiteers who don't have decent cellaring facilities, and no concern of the drinking condition of the wine because they will never actually drink it.
I remember a while ago there was a discussion about the variable quality of the 1990 Lindemans 150th Anniversary magnums being mainly due to bad storage and continual re-selling. It's probably no surprise that the average auction price has now dropped due to this bad reputation. It will be interesting to see if there are any similar corrections in future for Grange too.
Cheers
Ian
Forget about goodness and mercy, they're gone.
-
Baby Chickpea
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:17 pm
Re: Most Over-rated Grange
n4sir wrote:...I remember a while ago there was a discussion about the variable quality of the 1990 Lindemans 150th Anniversary magnums being mainly due to bad storage and continual re-selling. It's probably no surprise that the average auction price has now dropped due to this bad reputation. It will be interesting to see if there are any similar corrections in future for Grange too.
Cheers
Ian
Well, my magnums of the Lindemans are already ullaging despite perferct cellaring and bought on release. Until Lindemans get their act togther, I may boycott their wines. I still have nighmares of all the crappy wines in the 1980s, notably the trio of St george, Pyrus and Limestone that were stuffed becuase of clearly inferior corks!
Danny
The voyage of discovery lies not in finding new landscapes but in having new eyes. We must never be afraid to go too far, for success lies just beyond - Marcel Proust
The voyage of discovery lies not in finding new landscapes but in having new eyes. We must never be afraid to go too far, for success lies just beyond - Marcel Proust