The Auswine Forum

2006 Greenock Creek Apricot Block Shiraz - This is the first Greenock Creek Apricot Block Shiraz I have tried. I have a few other bottles but thought I would try this one first. I enjoyed this wine. Wine was 18.5% which was massive. The nose was wonderful, but unmistakable whiffs of kero (which wasn't surprising given the high alcs). I should have left this to air for a few hours before trying it. Upon tasting however, no hint at all of the alcohol. Very smooth, very flavoursome. And the finish was longer than I expected, considering 2006 was a poor vintage.

Can't wait to try and 2008. I have another 2006, but I would it air for at least a day before I tried it.

2006 was a very good vintage in the Barossa as far as I'm aware.

Thanks for the note. Are you going to give the last 2006 some more bottle age or is it good to go for you?

Cheers, Travis.

I think its quite drinkable at the moment. It could do with some more time, but still definitely drinkable. As I said in my notes, I would probably leave it to air for a considerable time before I gave it a nudge again. I drank it too soon after I opened it. Who knows. Maybe some of the kero would have blown off, but at 18.5%, I can't see that happening.
I should have said in my notes that there were other releases of the Apricot Block that were probably better and received higher reviews. But I still enjoyed it.

I am in the process of trying to acquire some of the other vintages to gather a better understanding of where the wines are at so I can do a full review.

Redwine&Rum wrote:And the finish was longer than I expected, considering 2006 was a poor vintage.

What makes you think that? 2006 was a great vintage for the Barossa. Not as good as say 2002 or 2010, but still in my top 5 vintages of the 2000's.

Thanks Redwine&Rum!

Had some minor surgery this week. To celebrate my survival, a few oldies that I purchased to fill out a case:

1984 Krondorf Cabernet Sauvignon Cabernet Franc.
2 Golds, 12 Silvers and 12 Bronze medals back when they were more than a marketing gimmick. I did not know much about the Krondorf Winery until reading the back label and seeing Grant Burge's name on the back. I hoped I had stumbled across something nice from a good wine maker in his younger days. The Cab Franc came from Langhorne Creek and the Cabernet Sauvignon from Coonawarra and McLaren Vale. The thing I love about these oldies is the alcohol levels-12.0%. Once the top of the capsule was removed I could see there was a pin size drop of dried wine at the edge of the cork. I took off the remainder of the capsule and the cork was stained all the way to the top for 365 degrees. The Ah-so managed to get about 1cm down the side of the cork and then pushed it into the bottle. It however had a grip on the cork that allowed me to pull it back to its original position. So I tried the two conventional corkscrews a the same time, and it managed to extract the cork out whole. It was absolutely saturated. Straight into the glass and its avery light red colour now, with a sizeable clear rim, and some browning. Initial bottle stink gave way in 5 minutes to some plummy fruit with cigar box and cedar on the nose. The palate mirrors the nose with lovely herbasious qualities, hints of mint, espresso and chocolate. The tannins left a while ago, but the acidity which is still in check, props the backend up nicely to give a lingering finish. This is not mind blowing stuff, but a great little wine that has stood up well given it's 30 years in bottle.

1995 Leeuwin Prelude Margaret River Cabernet Sauvignon.
No bling on this one. The entry level Cab with a good cork and a lot of bricking, slightly dull red colour. Currents, peppers, vanilla and that dusty 'Margaret Riverness'. The Palate has ceded, black currents, peppers and vanilla. The tannins are still there in support of a lengthy finish. There's a slight hole in the mid, but it is still a nice example of aged Margaret river Cabernet.

The more I have Cabernet, the more I extend out the minimum drinking window. These things seem to last for ever.....

deleted

deleted

Went ahead an opened a 2010 St Henri. Couldn't help myself. Well. Decanted nearly two hours. Drunk over a further 3 hours. Improved most of that time, maybe held steady last hour. Dark purple, mystical almost in colour. Rich, dizzying nose of oak, spice and dark floral aromas. Opulent flavours of black fruit, new oak and spice. Well balanced and lovely structure. Dry and tannic. Many many years of quality ahead. A delight to drink. Only upside from here. I can see where the hype came from, especially at the price, though obviously 100/100 is a bit ridiculous. I won't lie, even at the prices wish I had purchases another dozen. Seems a bit wrong to taste a wine that is clearly way too young and just enjoy it so much.

maybs wrote:Rich, dizzying nose of oak, spice and dark floral aromas. Opulent flavours of black fruit, new oak and spice.

From memory I though St Henri was only aged in well used large barrels. This was the clear differentiation point from Grange that only used new oak. Has the style changed to use of new oak? Similar question with the Bin 389 that many years ago was aged in old Grange barrels, hence the "Poor Man's Grange" nickname.

Carl

catchnrelease wrote:I actually completely understand corkage and have no problem with it (as long as it's reasonable, I'd say $5 per bottle on your average restaurant is fair, maybe $10 for high end restaurants at the most). Given the establishment is losing so much money on drinks, a place where they usually make the best money, charging a bit to be able to bring wine in is completely fair if you ask me.

Having said that, not gonna complain about it being free either.

Frankly I am happy paying $15-20 a bottle BYO in good restaurants if it allows me to drink my own wine. I was lucky enough to get invited to Rockpool Bar and Grill recently. Fantastic wine list but many of the bottles I have cellared such as early Clonakilla and older Bordeaux etc were $200,$300 or more. On that basis, $15 or even $20 is a steal compared to buying aged wine from a decent list.

Mark

You are right, St Henri is aged in old oak. Tasted new to me!

rooman wrote:

catchnrelease wrote:I actually completely understand corkage and have no problem with it (as long as it's reasonable, I'd say $5 per bottle on your average restaurant is fair, maybe $10 for high end restaurants at the most). Given the establishment is losing so much money on drinks, a place where they usually make the best money, charging a bit to be able to bring wine in is completely fair if you ask me.

Having said that, not gonna complain about it being free either.

Frankly I am happy paying $15-20 a bottle BYO in good restaurants if it allows me to drink my own wine. I was lucky enough to get invited to Rockpool Bar and Grill recently. Fantastic wine list but many of the bottles I have cellared such as early Clonakilla and older Bordeaux etc were $200,$300 or more. On that basis, $15 or even $20 is a steal compared to buying aged wine from a decent list.

Mark

I regularly pay circa $50 in London and NY - it still works out much better value than paying list prices

Mike Hawkins wrote:

rooman wrote:

catchnrelease wrote:I actually completely understand corkage and have no problem with it (as long as it's reasonable, I'd say $5 per bottle on your average restaurant is fair, maybe $10 for high end restaurants at the most). Given the establishment is losing so much money on drinks, a place where they usually make the best money, charging a bit to be able to bring wine in is completely fair if you ask me.

Having said that, not gonna complain about it being free either.

Frankly I am happy paying $15-20 a bottle BYO in good restaurants if it allows me to drink my own wine. I was lucky enough to get invited to Rockpool Bar and Grill recently. Fantastic wine list but many of the bottles I have cellared such as early Clonakilla and older Bordeaux etc were $200,$300 or more. On that basis, $15 or even $20 is a steal compared to buying aged wine from a decent list.

Mark

I regularly pay circa $50 in London and NY - it still works out much better value than paying list prices

Absolutely. Plus you get to drink what you want, not what a sommelier (no doubt quite good) wants you to drink

A few friends over for dinner on Saturday night so we got through

2003 Petersons Back Block Shiraz - Very Hunter, very good
2003 Glenguin Stonybroke Shiraz Tannat The Tannat added an extra depth to the Shiraz - This had a lot more grunt than the Petersons. Very very good
2003 Penfolds 389- Was ok for the vintage but actually seemed to fade pretty quickly. Would drink up if you have some
2001 Brokenwood Wade Block - This was spectacular, still an underlayer of Mclaren Vale fruit but a massive brooding whack of licorice to keep you coming back. A massive finish on it as well. No heat or pronounced tannin. Easily WOTN

Finished off dinner with

1980 Yalumba Kingston Town Vintage Port Cork was a pain and broke away but absolutely no seepage in the cork either. After giving it a proper strain this too was liquid gold. A very solid brown but no sign of change of colour on the rim. Lucky another 4 bottles of this and certainly in no rush to open another.

I agree maybs. Its amazing how many times sommeliers play the 'you need to try something new card'. Why would I want to do that when I have an excellent, aged, well stored, known quantity with me. I'll 'try something new' at a free tasting instead.

Mike Hawkins wrote:I agree maybs. Its amazing how many times sommeliers play the 'you need to try something new card'. Why would I want to do that when I have an excellent, aged, well stored, known quantity with me. I'll 'try something new' at a free tasting instead.

The worst argument I have ever had with a sommelier was a few years back at Marque. I was considering having the degustation menu with matching wines. Anyhow I asked the sommelier what the wines given there are some wines I can't stand ie kiwi sav blanc. Amazingly he refused to tell me what would served. I got so pissed off I nearly left the restaurant. Eventually he agreed to tell me and sure enough there were kiwi sav blancs padding out the matching wines.

Navazos PX Gran Solera
Tasting Note: Yummo!! (hope the notes are not too technical)

rooman wrote:

Mike Hawkins wrote:I agree maybs. Its amazing how many times sommeliers play the 'you need to try something new card'. Why would I want to do that when I have an excellent, aged, well stored, known quantity with me. I'll 'try something new' at a free tasting instead.

The worst argument I have ever had with a sommelier was a few years back at Marque. I was considering having the degustation menu with matching wines. Anyhow I asked the sommelier what the wines given there are some wines I can't stand ie kiwi sav blanc. Amazingly he refused to tell me what would served. I got so pissed off I nearly left the restaurant. Eventually he agreed to tell me and sure enough there were kiwi sav blancs padding out the matching wines.

That is weird..that is just poor customer service.

That said, last time I was at Marque the pairing was pretty good..I don't think I've ever seen more than one NZ SB in a matching wine set though..By far the best pairing was at Sepia...really well thought out pairing and I could see where the Sommelier was going with each wine and how they were matching texture as well..it was really quite smart. I don't even think the wines were all that expensive either but all well thought out, all showing nicely...

I don't mind trying something different...Of course bringing your own (when possible) is always great..but I don't mind trying things when it looks like real thought has gone into the list and sometimes you find some nice gems that way...Worst case you try something different which to me is always a good thing...

2003 Petaluma Coonawarra Cabernet Merlot OK, average. Not as good as the '98 and '99 vintages. Pity the lovely bouquet aromas didn't match the taste, little flat after 2 hours decant, the cork was in mint condition, bugger all staining. Surprised to discover later on after drinking it with french cheeses that the 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 vintages of this wine were released prior to the 2003, which was held back.

dave vino wrote:Navazos PX Gran Solera
Tasting Note: Yummo!! (hope the notes are not too technical)

Love it... looks good. I do have a soft spot for PX... hmm maybe I will take a cheap flight to Spain sometime soon?

2009 Knappstein Riesling Ackland Vineyard

Aromas of lemon, lime, melon, honey and rose petal.
Very intense palate of lime with low acidity.
Not enough zing and dryness for my personal taste. A little too sweet and the lime really
dominated across the board (reminded me a little of the ol' Bickfords lime cordial).
I think with the right food this wine would work well, but on its own it's perhaps a little to sweet and sugary.

Had a 2011 Tim Gramp Riesling the other day which was much dryer with a nice acid/zesty profile.
At a third of the price, I'll be going back for more Tim Gramp.