TN: 1990 Penfolds Magill vs. 1991 Michael Shiraz

[Baby Chickpea]

1990 Penfolds Magill Estate Shiraz
Mid red colour, developing some brown tinges. Much lighter than the Michael. Nose is broader and less focussed. Medium bodied and elegant. Some spice, cherry and sweet plums. Needed 30 minutes to flourish. Palate is initially restrained and elegant. Good length and has better harmony, balance and oak/tannin integration at present than Michael. After one hour it moved ahead of the Michael with its sweet spicy fruit palate. Will last no doubt but is there any point? Very Good 17.5 / 20

1991 Wynns Michael Shiraz
Deep red with excellent clarity and far more youthful than the Magill. The bouquet is powerful charcoal oak and sweet cherries predominate. Impressive but full-bodied. The palate is tight, with assorted berries, plums, spice and dollops of charry oak and grainy tannins. Not as integrated as the Magill but I preferred this when both bottles were first opened. But it didnÂ’t really develop any further over two hours, while the Magill transformed. Far more intense too. But will it ever come together? I think it will given the abundant primary fruit encasing the tough duopoly of oak and tannin. Needs time: 3 years at least. Very Good 17.0 /20

[simm]

Interesting comparison. Will let you know when I finally get into a bottle of the Michael 82. Hopefully within the month.

regards,
simm

[Guest]

I thought that the first Michael (excl 1955) was made in 1990. Simm, am I missing something ?!!

[simm]

I thought that the first Michael (excl 1955) was made in 1990. Simm, am I missing something ?!!

Sorry about that, getting mixed up with JR too mcuh time in front of the monitor. bzzzzzzt...

It is a bottle of the John Riddoch 82 that will hopefully be tasted before the end of the month.

As for missing something, it's not for me to say

Apologies to all,