Waiheke Island Wines

[jafa]

Having collected and drunk srl's for a few years the thought of them being brett loaded is concerning. Must say that in modest quantities I've found brett not unattractive on occassions.
Had a look at Geoff Kelly webpages, past readings suggest he's no brett fan, but only the 2005 larose covered. Remembered Bob Campbell had done a vertical. You can view here: http://www.bobswinereviews.com/blog/a-decade-of-stonyridge-larose
Proves nothing, one mention of "forest floor", but the b word missing from TN's.
Hope you got a bad bottle, rather than I've got a cellar with brett soaked larose.
jafa

[Bick]

... rather than I've got a cellar with brett soaked larose.

I shouldn't worry too much, jafa. The 02 was one of the weaker vintages in our recent line-up funnily enough. I can't honestly remember if there was a hint of brett in the 02, as it was overshadowed by so many better vintages and that's fogged my memory a bit. I do clearly recall many other vintages though - 89, 94, 96, 99, 03, 04, 05, 07 and they were clean as a whistle, so your cellar should be in good order. 02 just isn't a great SRL vintage perhaps. Strange (and a shame) it showed quite so badly for Dave; the vagueries of wine, eh?

[DaveB]

Trust me to choose a crap vintage

I'll try and source another vintage from your list when I'm in Auckland next Saturday night.

[SueNZ]

...I'm pretty tolerant of brett but these were way over the top. .... I reckon I've drunk enough bretty wines to know where my tolerance level lies and the '02 Larose smelt like a horse with a bandaid on its back eating a plum in a chicken coop....4 winemakers, 2 wine importers and myself purchased it along with a '02 Ch Angelus to try against each other and all were in agreeance that the Larose was pretty dire and faulty.....and Craig if brett is the new buzz-word in NZ you guys really are 10 years behind Oz

I didn't get any Brett in the 2002 that I tasted with the others in May and I am known as a bit of a Brettonamyces nazi. In fact I described the wine we tasted in May as having 'purity' of Cabernet fruit. From my notes I used words for the 00 and 03 that implied I picked up Brett in these wines without actually saying so, but not in the 2002.
But anyone who knows anything about Brettonamyces knows that post bottling spoilage can occur, and as these wines are unfined and unfiltered - and with cork closures - one bottle may be different to the next.
So I don't doubt at all it could well have been in the sample you tasted. What a shame.

Cheers,
Sue

[orpheus]

Very nice four days in Waiheke.....staying in a big 7 bedroom waterfront villa in Oneroa.

Best coffee was at Lure in Oneroa....food at Mudbrick and Stonyridge was excellent......super pizza's at Stephano's in Surfdale......even got a feed of pipis at Little Oneroa and cooked them on the BBQ at the beach.....

I still think Stonyridge is one of the most over-rated producers in NZ....had a few Larose and they were either bretty as all buggery or lean and thin....2008 should be more like $90 at cellar door instead of the $220 they are asking for.

Spent the morning with Bronwyn and Duncan the winemaker for Man'o'war....amazingly beautiful contour planted vineyards in a fantastic setting next to the ocean....had a bit of a vineyard tour and then a tasting of the range at the winery....a new winery and cellar door is just about to be built in Man'O'War bay. Super wines....excellent whites , Bordeaux blends and Syrah.

Off to the South Island for 5 days now before heading back to Auckland for a day then back to the Barossa.

Just had a bottle of 1998 Larose at Sails in Auckland. Very disappointing. Possibly a bad bottle, or perhaps simply didn't have the legs. My own impression was of a well-structured, well integrated wine with a nose which revealed only French oak, and a dull palate, which appeared to be mildly oxidised, and suffering from under-ripe fruit.

I asked the somelier to taste it and give his opinion. Essentially, he agreed. He said that there was great bottle variation in the Larose, and that this was a poor example. It was excessively minerally and the fruit was "drying".

Personally, I'll stick with oxidised and under-ripe.

[SueNZ]

Just had a bottle of 1998 Larose at Sails in Auckland. Very disappointing. Possibly a bad bottle, or perhaps simply didn't have the legs. My own impression was of a well-structured, well integrated wine with a nose which revealed only French oak, and a dull palate, which appeared to be mildly oxidised, and suffering from under-ripe fruit.

I asked the somelier to taste it and give his opinion. Essentially, he agreed. He said that there was great bottle variation in the Larose, and that this was a poor example. It was excessively minerally and the fruit was "drying".

Personally, I'll stick with oxidised and under-ripe.

We didn't put the 1998 in the our big Larose vertical last May. Deemed to be a lesser vintage and because we had more vintages than people, other vintages were preferred. The 1998 was purposely omitted. Under-ripe would be right.
Did the somelier offer a refund?

[orpheus]

No refund was offered. At the end of the meal, I paid the bill but then spoke to the manager and told him my observations of the wine and that the somelier had agreed that it was not a good bottle.

Incredibly, his response was to offer to sell me a bottle of Larose from a different vintage for $100.

Eventually, he offered to refund $100,and I accepted. THe wine had cost $285.

[Craig(NZ)]

use the $100 refund to get some counselling. Anyone that spends $285 on a 98 Larose needs it

But seriously 98 is one of the poorest larose vintages and when it is put beside hawkes Bay of the same year it certainly got panned big time on release.

I dont think anyone that attended our Larose vertical last year would consider Larose a pretender. Well over half of the vintages we tried would be among the greatest NZ bdx blends I have ever tried.

As for brett, I thought i detected some in the '00 which is unusual as I hadn't on previous tries (nearer release). Nothing wrong with the rest of them except the '91 was a bit unusual from memory.

94,96,99,04,05 and 07 all very yum. I am yet to try the 08 but hear it is also a classic vintage. 09 also on paper should be very good.

[Craig(NZ)]

and Craig if brett is the new buzz-word in NZ you guys really are 10 years behind Oz

we could well be, seems flavour of the month here at the mo. I hope we aren't 10 years behind moving on to the next fad. I can't attend any tasting here without the word being spurted from some fools mouth

[orpheus]

use the $100 refund to get some counselling. Anyone that spends $285 on a 98 Larose needs it

But seriously 98 is one of the poorest larose vintages and when it is put beside hawkes Bay of the same year it certainly got panned big time on release.

I dont think anyone that attended our Larose vertical last year would consider Larose a pretender. Well over half of the vintages we tried would be among the greatest NZ bdx blends I have ever tried.

As for brett, I thought i detected some in the '00 which is unusual as I hadn't on previous tries (nearer release). Nothing wrong with the rest of them except the '91 was a bit unusual from memory.

94,96,99,04,05 and 07 all very yum. I am yet to try the 08 but hear it is also a classic vintage. 09 also on paper should be very good.

Craig, I live in Australia having moved from NZ when I was 18, (I'm 44) and relied on the wine waiter to suggest a vintage (they had others). I do not claim to be familiar with good and bad vintages. The somelier suggested that vintage, out of 5 on the wine list. You are also no doubt aware of the mark-ups applied in restaurants. So I don't think I will use it for counselling, but it has put me off Larose .

Also, perhaps others have felt qualified to call Larose a pretender, but I didn't. I simply told you about my experience of a particular bottle of a particular vintage. I am here tasting wines based on my limited knowledge of NZ wine and when I am at an expensive restaurant, I rely on a mixture of my own knowledge and the knowledge of the somelier.

On the bright side, as I said in another post, I considered the 2002 Craggy Range Le Sol syrah a magnificent wine, and every bit the equal (and rather similar to) a top chateauneuf du pape from a great vintage.

[Craig(NZ)]

The somelier suggested that vintage, out of 5 on the wine list.

The somelier was a retard then

I considered the 2002 Craggy Range Le Sol syrah a magnificent wine

Agree its a sensational wine

I am here tasting wines based on my limited knowledge of NZ wine and when I am at an expensive restaurant

Oh yes we have all done this. No one can be an 'expert' on every wine in the world. I bought the 95 Howard Park based on all the hype around the 94 when in Australia over 10 years ago. What a stupid mocve that was!. Happens to all of us, but its always worth a laugh and a dig when it happens to someone else

Also, perhaps others have felt qualified to call Larose a pretender, but I didn't.

Don't get me wrong i wasn't pointing at you. In New Zealand tall poppy knocking is a national sport. I have heard a number of people say its 'over rated' which is their right. Ive tried nearly every vintage ever made and had the odd average bottle, but they have been well outweighed by the many stunners. Not a fan of the price, but i am a fan of the wine

[SueNZ]

The somelier suggested that vintage, out of 5 on the wine list.

Orpheus, That is a real shame the sommelier suggested that vintage out of 5 on the list - if it had been a Hawkes Bay wine - yes. But Auckland / Waiheke Is is a long way north of Hawkes Bay and the weather patterns are quite different and where one region may be experiencing a drought, another may not be.

I looked up the Sails website to see what the other vintages were but I cannot access a wine list.
Interestingly the Sails website say this ....
"Sails Restaurant is one of the few remaining restaurants in New Zealand to employ specific wine waiters or Sommeliers.
These professional Sommeliers have an extensive knowledge of wine, especially New Zealand. They are happy to guide guests through the more than 150 wines on offer and help select the ideal wine to match the food.
Even wine connoisseurs will find this addition to service enhances their dining experience."

I agree with you, Orpheus, when you are dining at a restaurant like that, and paying that much for the wine and they make those claims, you have to put some trust in the sommelier, pity he didn't know the vintages. I think you should go back to them for a further refund.

It is a shame it has put you off Larose, but while it can be an exceptional wine - from a good vintage with good storage thereafter, there are others wine around at a fraction of the price that offer equally pleasurable drinking. It always pays to remember the phrase, there are no great wine, only great bottles.

Anyway you think that was bad. I heard the story of some people who bought a bottle of 2002 DRC La Tache at a wine store sale, only to open it on Xmas Day to find it was completely stuffed. About $1500 worth of wine down the drain.