The Auswine Forum

I was going through my cellar and looking at my favourite (recent) red vintage - 2002 - noticed that many of the wines were either 13% alcohol or as low as 12% and there is a finesse that might not appeal to the lovers of 15% South Australian ball breakers, but for lovers of Bordeaux, such alcohol levels are more the norm than the exception. Yes, Australia is a lot hotter (2002 was a rare exception), but Bordeaux had some seriously hot summers in the late 2000s, and you rarely see wines in excess of 14%. Does the climate in South Australia make it impossible to control alcohol levels? If that was the case 10 - 20 years ago, does that mean the world has changed that dramatically in such a short space of time? I opened a Max Lake Lake's Folly Cabernet (not Sth Aust, I know) 1994 last week and it was just 12.4% and after decanting and a little time breathing it was a beautifully subtle but still flavoursome wine.

Could we get a Top 10 of recent sub-13% alcohol cabernets that still offer outstanding flavour and character?

In Australia? You'll be lucky. Except ......

The 2011 Cullen Diana Madelaine is a sensational wine at 12.5%

Not Cab Sav, but got couple of Seville Estate's The Dr.Mahon 2010 Shiraz in cellar it's 12.7%....picked it up at Yarra Valley when I lived in Melbourne.

Cheers.

I cracked open a Redbox Reserve Cab Sauv earlier tonight and that's about 12.4% or something. Yarra Valley Cabernets may in general be a good source of lower alcohol levels ??

Waiters Friend wrote:In Australia? You'll be lucky. Except ......

The 2011 Cullen Diana Madelaine is a sensational wine at 12.5%

If it can be found for at least several $s than $100.

Off the top of my head, regular "low alcohol" makes include:

- Mount Mary Quintet
- Yarra Yering No. 1
- Hillcrest Cabs
- Yeringberg?

A shame that most/all of these are at the upper end of the price spectrum.

No idea about Sth Aust wines, but another vote for Yarra cabernet. As Tarija says - Hillcrest often at the 13% mark. The 2012 Village Cabernet (13.0%) is a bit cheaper than the rest of the list above - is supposed to be good but I doubt you'll find any left now.

I've had a couple of bottles of the Hillcrest 2004 Cabernet in the last 6 months, 12.4% or 12.7% from memory. It is in the lighter claret style, but with nice complexity, certainly a drink now proposition.

The other I've had recently was a 1991 Lake's Folly (12.0%), hanging in there on a slow decline I would wager. Much lighter than I expected (I didn't know the alc when I bought it), largely savoury flavours now but still with a whisper of fruit sweetness and a fine line of acid and tannin remaining. Peak drinking maybe 10 years ago based on this one bottle.

Mac Forbes makes a Cabernet blend called the Hugh which is usually 12-12.5%. I've never tried nor seen it.

Will

Mount Mary quintet is the classic example here.
John Middleton used to say the after taste of a wine should be more like water than a hot alcoholic burn.

Wynns John Riddochs of the very early 80s were under 13% and indeed some of the black labels were as well...that's before the RP juggernaut rolled into town and everyone thought 15.5%+ was the go.

Cheers
Craig.

[quote="phillisc"]Mount Mary quintet is the classic example here.
John Middleton used to say the after taste of a wine should be more like water than a hot alcoholic burn.


Here goes the generalisation again.!?!
Not all high alcohol wines have a hot alcoholic burn. There are heaps of high alcohol wines out there some over 16 % and are very well balanced and does not display any hot alcoholic burn.

ufo wrote:

phillisc wrote:Mount Mary quintet is the classic example here.
John Middleton used to say the after taste of a wine should be more like water than a hot alcoholic burn.


Here goes the generalisation again.!?!
Not all high alcohol wines have a hot alcoholic burn. There are heaps of high alcohol wines out there some over 16 % and are very well balanced and does not display any hot alcoholic burn.

I think more to do with the texture at the finish being more like water, as opposed to taste.

Not many wines today finish with that "hot alcoholic burn"...not even the cheapo jobs at a pub, however many of the high alcohol wines (or even wines that claim they're "14.5%") are definitely too viscous and blobby...maybe ok for 1 glass, but gets a bit much after that.

tarija wrote:

ufo wrote:

phillisc wrote:Mount Mary quintet is the classic example here.
John Middleton used to say the after taste of a wine should be more like water than a hot alcoholic burn.


Here goes the generalisation again.!?!
Not all high alcohol wines have a hot alcoholic burn. There are heaps of high alcohol wines out there some over 16 % and are very well balanced and does not display any hot alcoholic burn.

I think more to do with the texture at the finish being more like water, as opposed to taste.

Not many wines today finish with that "hot alcoholic burn"...not even the cheapo jobs at a pub, however many of the high alcohol wines (or even wines that claim they're "14.5%") are definitely too viscous and blobby...maybe ok for 1 glass, but gets a bit much after that.

Yes the inference is a texture like water sorry..got that one mixed up.

Sorry to upset you UFO old chap, but if you read the post, the position put forward is not exclusively mine.

I have plenty of Noons, Greenock Creek, some Chris Ringland, some Bowen Estate all at 16%+ or higher and if current legislation permits +/- 1.5% the Greenocks are closer to 18%.
And I love them all, the rich plush texture is fantastic when done well.

Clearly I don't drink off the same wine list or even at the same pub, but unfortunately I have had a great number of wines that put a vindaloo in the shade. Hot, unbalanced stewed fruit that belongs in a Fowler's Vacola preserving jar...not in a bottle. The burn makes me reach for a Boags.

Cheers
Craig

As a point of interest, the Grapemates crew had a staggeringly classy 1981 Hill Of Grace last night courtesy of Mr davevino. Labelled at 12.5% alcohol.

Those ageable, slightly lower alcohol wines can be quite distinguished. They just dial it back a bit and gain some real elegance.

Many of the old Wendourees used to have less the 13%......

tarija wrote:Off the top of my head, regular "low alcohol" makes include:

- Mount Mary Quintet
- Yarra Yering No. 1
- Hillcrest Cabs
- Yeringberg?

A shame that most/all of these are at the upper end of the price spectrum.

I think the Yarra Yering's are now more like 14%+... even the Pinot is 13.5% in 2012

Now, I now it's not under 13%, but it's damn close...

I can recommend Dalla Mia Finestra 2012 Cabernet. It comes in at 13.2%. I had never heard of it until earlier this year, but the (tiny) vineyard is located over the fence from Yerringberg. Also, at $22, damn good value. Gary Walsh very much enjoyed it (but I shall refrain posting any details here, as it comes from a subscription website). Handy Pinot too. Bruce is the owner, and a fine chap.

Simon

Sorry to bring up an old thread, but it really resonated with me.

Not a recent vintage, but am thoroughly enjoying a 95 (chateau) tahbilk cab sav.....12%
Sublime finesse , old leather, wood polish and earth. silky elegance with lengh that just lasts forever.
They just don't make them like this anymore.

Bests Old Clone Concongella Vineyard Pinot Noir 2011, worthwhile at $25, not sure about $40 - 12.5% alc.

damonpeyo wrote:Not Cab Sav, but got couple of Seville Estate's The Dr.Mahon 2010 Shiraz in cellar it's 12.7%....picked it up at Yarra Valley when I lived in Melbourne.

Cheers.

pretty good wine
dont open yet
i had one bottle and opened it a few months ago
too young

May as well include other reds in this thread as well.

Collector Wines Reserve Shiraz 2011 - 12.8%. 94+ Bennie points.
Tyrrell's Johnno's Block Shiraz 2011 - 12.5%, 2013 12.8%
Tyrrell's Vat 9 Shiraz 2011 - 12.9%

Rossco wrote:Sorry to bring up an old thread, but it really resonated with me.

Not a recent vintage, but am thoroughly enjoying a 95 (chateau) tahbilk cab sav.....12%
Sublime finesse , old leather, wood polish and earth. silky elegance with lengh that just lasts forever.
They just don't make them like this anymore.

I love their basic cab with 15 to 20 on them.

rens wrote:

Rossco wrote:Sorry to bring up an old thread, but it really resonated with me.

Not a recent vintage, but am thoroughly enjoying a 95 (chateau) tahbilk cab sav.....12%
Sublime finesse , old leather, wood polish and earth. silky elegance with lengh that just lasts forever.
They just don't make them like this anymore.

I love their basic cab with 15 to 20 on them.

Same here. Providing the cork holds up, aged tahbilk cabs are just
A sensation. Cant believe they were $12 when released back in the day.

Rossco wrote:

rens wrote:

Rossco wrote:Sorry to bring up an old thread, but it really resonated with me.

Not a recent vintage, but am thoroughly enjoying a 95 (chateau) tahbilk cab sav.....12%
Sublime finesse , old leather, wood polish and earth. silky elegance with lengh that just lasts forever.
They just don't make them like this anymore.

I love their basic cab with 15 to 20 on them.

Same here. Providing the cork holds up, aged tahbilk cabs are just
A sensation. Cant believe they were $12 when released back in the day.

What day was that, or do you mean, "back then"? - six less keystrokes. I had a couple of bottles of Tahbilk cab 1981 about 8-10 years ago that were very nice, all of the components still there, fruit hanging on, tannins and oak fully integrated, maintaining the structure of the wine. The offer then was a two-pack of it with a Shiraz 1986. I bought two packs, forget the cost but one of the latter was reported to me to be corked by family I gave it to. Tahbilk replaced it with a bottle of the same vintage which I shared with Allan and partner at Brent's restaurant in Brisbane some years ago.

Certainly alcohol levels were lower on average years ago. Had a wonderful old Mildara Cab blend a short while ago, here are some notes

81 Mildara Cabernet Merlot (75/25), 12mths in Fr oak
84 Montgomery Trophy winner
0g/l resid sugar, pH 3.5, 12.5% A/V
Bottom of neck, cork in v good nick
Brick red, pale rim, almost yellowish. Some mustiness which blew off, some sweet fruit, then beautiful cedar notes, soft fruit, some tobacco, an elegant style, probably typical of the era, still holding up. Obviously a good old bottle. V enjoyable.

daz wrote:

Rossco wrote:Cant believe they were $12 when released back in the day.

What day was that, or do you mean, "back then"? - six less keystrokes.

Was that statement really necessary? I would have expected to see more maturity and less snark from a regular.

I hope I am wrong, that you two know each other well personally and it is good natured ribbing, but if not then it just looks like you were irritable at the time and decided to take it out on somebody here.

Lack of snark is what drew me to Auswine and I am sure others are in the same boat.

Yep, that statement belongs on WineBerserkers, not Auswine.

Great thread!! I'm yet to hear a logical answer for why so many really old wines were well under 13% and have aged magnificently, yet these percentages seem so rare now. Achieving 'proper' grape ripeness seems to be the theme/excuse for modern high %, plus the Parker factor of course, but I'd love to know why 14-14.5% is now the norm for what seems like 90% of red wine in Australia, when most seriously good stuff from the 50's-80's was lower?

TiggerK wrote:Yep, that statement belongs on WineBerserkers, not Auswine.

Great thread!! I'm yet to hear a logical answer for why so many really old wines were well under 13% and have aged magnificently, yet these percentages seem so rare now. Achieving 'proper' grape ripeness seems to be the theme/excuse for modern high %, plus the Parker factor of course, but I'd love to know why 14-14.5% is now the norm for what seems like 90% of red wine in Australia, when most seriously good stuff from the 50's-80's was lower?

Global warming

I must say I really lean towards more moderate alcohol strengths and it is a struggle these days in Australian wines. One just has to soldier on

odyssey wrote:

daz wrote:

Rossco wrote:Cant believe they were $12 when released back in the day.

What day was that, or do you mean, "back then"? - six less keystrokes.

Was that statement really necessary? I would have expected to see more maturity and less snark from a regular.

I hope I am wrong, that you two know each other well personally and it is good natured ribbing, but if not then it just looks like you were irritable at the time and decided to take it out on somebody here.

Lack of snark is what drew me to Auswine and I am sure others are in the same boat.

I wasn't snarking, whatever that is. I just think, "back in the day" is a pointless, meaningless phrase that begs the question, "Which day? Yesterday?". Yes, it was good-natured, even jocular ribbing. Your response to it is more likely to be the "snarking" of which you espouse such dislike, is rather childish let alone immature.

Cheers

daz

daz wrote:
I wasn't snarking, whatever that is. I just think, "back in the day" begs the question, "Which day? Yesterday?" and is a pointless, meaningless phrase.

Really? You had no idea what the phrase meant?

There are plenty of phrases in the English language which are less than clear on their face but have entered the vernacular to the point where sardonic comments about their apparent lack of meaning are, well, meaningless. Other than to be mean.

maybs wrote:

daz wrote:
I wasn't snarking, whatever that is. I just think, "back in the day" begs the question, "Which day? Yesterday?" and is a pointless, meaningless phrase.

Really? You had no idea what the phrase meant?

There are plenty of phrases in the English language which are less than clear on their face but have entered the vernacular to the point where sardonic comments about their apparent lack of meaning are, well, meaningless. Other than to be mean.

Of course I know what the phrase is intended to convey but consider it fails to give perspective, especially without a time reference. Lack of meaning, meaningless, mean, you seem to enjoy using that word as a base for your own comments......

Cheers

daz

And if this were Berserkers, we would continue to argue and try to have the last word for about 5 more pages worth of total ego garbage. Luckily we are more civilised aren't we.

Having said that, and now ignoring it, it's a phrase. Most people understand what is meant by it, and don't pedantically try to pick it to bits.