2010 st. henri vs 2010 mt. edelstone

[limkeith]

Hey all, with all the hype about the st. Henri, is it worth paying that extra 30 plus bucks for the mt edelstone? Anybody tried both and can comment? Feedback much appreciated

[Redback]

I am a regular buyer of both of the wines and have both of the 2010 vintages. I have only tasted the '10 St Henri and I believe it is a wine that will go the long term. As a multi-regional blend, the St Henri is a very different wine to the single vineyard Mt Edelstone. Coming from an excellent vintage, you will not be disappointed in buying both of these wines.

[sjw_11]

Is that Mt Ed really only $100? I thought the RRP was pushing $130 these days and its much harder to find on discount vs the St Henri....

[limkeith]

So let's say I can get the mt edelstone at 100, it trumps the st Henri?

[sjw_11]

Depends on your budget, thats still $180 more for a six-pack and I still tend to max out around the $60-70/bottle level.

Both have long cellaring histories, established pedigree, and are well known brand names to impress any wine lover.
The St Henri has more cachet with people who arent wine "buffs" to the extent you might want to ultimately gift a bottle, impress a prospective in-law, schmooze a job promotion etc.

The Mt Ed has a bit more street cred with the "in crowd" and anything Henschke would be a default preference for me just because it is still an admirable family owned business with a real history and story to it versus Penfolds which has been (for all of my wine drinking life) produced by an ASX-listed wine factory of one name or another.

The St Henri is also a regional blend made to a "house style" (the 2010 is from Barossa Valley, McLaren Vale, Coonawarra, Adelaide Hills, Wrattonbully, Clare Valley). The Mt Ed is a single vineyard Eden Valley Shiraz.

According to Penfolds the flavour of the St Henri 2010 is best described as "A complex/kaleidoscopic flavour mosaic presides." Drink now to 2055. Both nose and palalate are described in terms best summarised as "turbo charged" (their words). By contrast, Henscke describes the Mt Ed as "elegant and focused". Both wines scored >96-97 pts from the relevant suite of critics.

So to summarise... different folks, different strokes.

PS as I suspected, the RRP of the Mt Ed is $139 if you buy direct from Henscke, Uncle Dan's has it $117 in 6's. So on a relative basis, if you can get it for just $100/bottle that is "cheap" versus the market price, to the extent that is a consideration for you.

[Mike Hawkins]

From my experience drinking various vintages of both labels side by side, the Mt Ed narrowly trumps St Henri in the 'great' vintages (save for the brett affected vintages of Mt Ed from late 90s early 00s). That said, I'm yet to taste the 2010s, but have bought both.

Mike

[phillisc]

In reference to my Langtons tasting post in Adelaide last month, the 2010 Mt Ed was the goods.

Yes the 2010 St Henri is an impressive wine, but if you were to ask me which is better...the Mt Ed at this stage is so far in front.
I noted it blew 2009 HOG into the weeds.
That said 2010 HOG will be something else.

I have seen the Mt Ed for around $100...let me guess Mike (NYC) its cheaper in your world.
I could be tempted to get some of these...and yes reinforces the position that second labels are often better than the premiums.

Cheers
Craig.

[limkeith]

Thanks all guys. Repairs to car and new tyres has set me back 1k. There goes the wines....

[ads_11]

Looking at the June purchase thread, the Mt Ed has been a popular buy. I picked up 3 at auction for a lot less the RRP