The Auswine Forum

After a bunch of negative reports on the latest release of (2002) Dead Arm, I decided to sacrifice a bottle to see for myself what all the fuss was about. I opened the bottle not knowing what I would find, or if I would love it, or hate it, and for the record, I have loved some vintages and hated others.

To do the wine complete justice, I have tried it over a period of the best part of day and have made notes as I went.

First impression upon opening was a bouquet dominated by loads of dusty oak, mushroom, blackberries and a fairly prominent herbaceous undertone. The first sip indicates this wine is a veritable baby and I was committing the worst possible case of vininfanticide. All the components are there but they are not harmonious, to the contrary, the wine is disjointed and jarring. However, when examined closely they are all there in the right proportions and on the plus side, the finish is persistent.

Ninety minutes later coffee essence and an unusual scent that I had trouble positively identifying were the major factors. The unidentified scent seemed like it was “green oak.” On the palate, it was not as jarring as the first sip; it was OK but still very much a baby. Fine-rained dusty tannins, and ripe fruit provide coffee, chocolate, plum and blackberry flavours but there was an herbaceous streak with mint and menthol running through the palate.

After three hours, this wine is really starting to change. On the palate, the fruit is rich and intense with many of the previously mentioned flavours still in play but now there is a real spiciness to it too.

After six hours, the bouquet is dominated by floral violet notes, menthol and spice; itÂ’s very attractive and totally unlike the monster that reared its ugly head six hours ago. Tannins are very fine and grip the tongue like a vice, the acid is baby fresh and the fruit is up to the task but now, all the disjointed impression that was evident when first opened has disappeared and the components are more harmonious and in balance. Finish is very long. Spice, coffee essence, multiple berry flavours, plum and chocolate surfing the tasting buds on a (now much tamer and less aggressive, almost Cabernet like) herbaceous under bed with mint and menthol.

After eight hours, now this wine is really singing. The herbaceous streak has receded even further, almost disappearing and it is dominated by chocolate, coffee, spice and glorious rich plumy fruit that is full bodied and finishes with great intensity and persistence.

In summary, if those you canned the wine did so from a bottle that was freshly opened, I can understand why. By the same token, those that judged the wine alongside others in a big line up will also have been justifiably disappointed, especially without significant decant time because it would not show very well at this stage against other wines, which no doubt, would be more attractive and easier to drink in their youth. However, I am very happy I bought this wine and in time, think it will be wonderful. Current rating is Excellent *** for value with room for improvement as the wine matures around the turn of the decade.

As compared to the 2001?

Cool Ila wrote:As compared to the 2001?

Dead Arm 2001 Shiraz Nov 03

Impenetrable dark purple in colour, even the high poured torch I normally use when decanting couldnÂ’t cut a beam through this wine till the bottle was almost empty. Even after three hours there was a noticeable level of VA, nose clearing menthol, brooding dark fruit and an earthy mushroom aroma I could not identify. All this and the bouquet is still tight and unyielding.

This is a full bodied baby with mouth numbing drying tannins, youthful acid and enough deeply seated fruit to provide perfect balance and construction. The flavour profile is complex with cherry, plum, blackberry, chocolate and mint; the longer the wine was open the more the savoury aspects emerged. On the palate the wine fills the mouth and the flavour lingers after it has gone down for longer than it took me to type up this tasting note.

ItÂ’s not hot but getting close and this very complex blockbuster wine thatÂ’s tight and needs years to show its best should peak around 2008 and hold for years after that but I doubt it will go past 2015. No surprise it rated highly with Robert Parker, I rated it as Excellent (with room to improve as it matures) with *** for value.

Ric,

Much enjoyed reading your TN on the 02 Dead Arm. I canceled my order for 4 bot yesterday. I probably wouldnÂ’t have if I had read your TN first, but it is just as well, since it is close to the upper limit of my price range I would never be able to wait till the end of the decade. I have a case of the 01 in storage, and IÂ’ll try to keep it there at least until 2006.

Ric,

Which do you prefer?

Incidently both get "Excellent" and *** for value.

Cool Ila wrote:Ric,

Which do you prefer?

Incidently both get "Excellent" and *** for value.

Both are very good wines and I am happy to have both in the cellar but the 01 is the better wine.

TORB,

I admit that when hearing comments from others I was starting to worry about my taste buds as when I tried this wine at a tasting a couple of weeks back it had been decanted for about 6 hours and was at a perfect drinking temp. and I thought of it as a wine with great potential and really enjoyed it and have considered getting a few for the future.

Cheers
Popov

If I had some (which I do) I'd be talking it up too!

It is a great wine., It is the best ever!

PB

PB wrote:If I had some (which I do) I'd be talking it up too!

It is a great wine., It is the best ever!

PB

Have you been listing to Mr Salmon?

On the assumption that you haven't, and this is serious, which I hope it isn't; if its crap I will say its crap. I have no motivation to talk up any wine, let alone just because I have a six pack. If I thought it was not up to scratch and would not get better, or even didn't like it, I would sell it off, even if at a loss.

Life is to short to drink wine that is "talked up" or wine I don't enjoy.

In the spirit of yourself TORB, let me both apologise and point to the fact that I did put a huge grin at the end of my statement. I thought the grin would have been noticed.

I bought some. I have five bottles left. I drank one during last week, over two nights. I gave it a lot of air. From that single bottle at last, I feel like I know all there is to know about that wine. I don't think it is a bad wine, but I am still a little diappointed in it. I think it is unbalanced, and to the extent that I don't think it will ever really be so. It has got that mentholly burn to it that I do not associate with fine wine. It has also got a bloody great big left hook of tannin. I think that it is a wine that is meant to be drunk in 15 years time, not in fifteen days time. I would just be concerned that its mentholly burn may not look great with age on it either. If this sounds negative, I don't really mean it to be greatly so. I am not ready to auction it yet, but I will reassess in four or five years to see if it looks better. The reason I am prepared to hang in there and wait is that I am not anti tannin, and it does, once it has aired, have a boost of fruit that is impressive.

In time, it may even turn out to be the best vintage ever

PB.

Ric,
Glad to read your comments. Makes me feel better about the 4 doz I bought!

Thanks for the tasting note Ric.

I think there was a general concensus that all of the wines didn't really get the breathing time they deserved at the Black Tongues Super Shiraz tasting which could have been a big factor.

While the Gibson Aust Old Vine and the Summerfield Reserve that surrounded it were also genuine heavyweights, the finish showed up to be hotter, harsher and greener. The nose was typically rebellious at such a young stage and without enough air and time to clean it up, but the entry and mid-palate were very rich and attractive, and up with the best. That finish was the killer punch in that line-up though, and as you can gather the slightest flaw in that field meant disaster.

I was also wondering whether the surrounding wines at the d'Arenberg launch last month was a factor too. Tasting it between the 2000 Ironstone pressings and the 1997 Fortified Shiraz really seemed to hide any overly ripe, green and hot characters. After reading Aussie Johns notes from trying a bottle on its own I was wondering if I had been sucked in by this, but your observations have restored some confidence.

Cheers
Ian

Good on you Ric - good thinking to try it over an extended period like that.
The results were very illuminating.

regards
Chris

Hi PB,

No worries. Sometimes the humour on the Internet can get lost as it is a one dimensional medium. I did notice the smiley after the PB but as it was at the end, I was not sure about the intent.

I am reasonably sure in 5 years time you will think a lot more of it then you do now.

Cheers
Ric

Great note thanks. I look forward to trying one myself!

Ric,

Thanks for the well-researched note. I had the 2002 recently with friends, and have to admit to being a bit puzzled, and maybe even disappointed with it - but only for the moment. I believe it had been double-decanted either earlier in the day, or even the day before, but certainly had not seen the direct air time you gave it. My overall impression was something like yours - that all the components were there, but were far from coming together yet.

I'll go out on a limb, and say that I believe the 2002 has a chance to be a much better wine in 6-8 years time than the 2001. The 01 at this stage was simply one of the most explosive, forward powerhouses I've ever had - particularly notable because of the relative absence of that tar/licorice thing that many of the "big" shiraz rely on now. But I'm going to make sure my 2001s are drunk up before about 5 years. OTOH, I don't plan to open an 02 before 5 years. I'm predicting one of two things is going to come out of the bottle: something absolutely fantastic, or a wine that has completely fallen apart. I'm betting on the former.

Regards,
Alan

TORBÂ’s TN have restored my faith in the retailers who were praising the 02 Dead Arm. I guess only time will tell as to how it really compares vs. the 01, but at least now it does not seem like retailers that I consider reputable were trying to flog a dud. However, I canÂ’t help but noticing the momentum of the opinions on this wine. Last week after the BlackTonguesÂ’ TN came in, it seemed like no one in their right mind liked it; the only thing worse was a corked wine. But now that TORB has posted his TN, I believe I have yet to see a single dissenter.

Bob,

You make an interesting point and I think I may know the reason. There was a reasonable number of people saying how bad they thought the wine was and many of them were pretty vocal about it. Its possible that those who had tried the wine and thought it was OK were a bit daunted by the strength and conviction of the negative comments, so they shut up.

Had I written my TN in the first hour the wine was opened, especially if tasted along side other wines, it may may been scathing too. What my TN did was to show why the wine has been getting so many mixed reactions.

Torb,

4.21am !?!

Is there no rest for the wicked!!

Rory

TORB wrote:Bob,

You make an interesting point and I think I may know the reason. There was a reasonable number of people saying how bad they thought the wine was and many of them were pretty vocal about it. Its possible that those who had tried the wine and thought it was OK were a bit daunted by the strength and conviction of the negative comments, so they shut up.

Had I written my TN in the first hour the wine was opened, especially if tasted along side other wines, it may may been scathing too. What my TN did was to show why the wine has been getting so many mixed reactions.

Ric,
With the meticulous methodology of your tasting, I would think that most people are going to find it difficult to disagree without first having followed a similarly systematic tasting procedure. Still, I think the momentum of opinion is an interesting phenomenon. Might it not be partly attributable for the Ozwine bashing you have previously pointed out? Also, I wonder if there might be some predisposition of opinion (i.e., “if Parker likes it, then I don’t” or “if TORB likes it, then so do I”), albeit maybe only very slight and maybe only subconsciously. I myself rely very much on the opinions of others, especially since I buy most of my wine from a distance, unseen and untasted, and then leave much of it in storage for as long as year or two or even three after purchase. In the past I’ve found that most of Parker’s red wine and chardonnay recommendations have suited my tastes. After switching primarily to Oz wines, I checked out some of Halliday’s reviews and found him to be a bit more “oakaphobic” than myself. Although I sometimes have agreed with the TN in the Penguin guide, other times I found myself at complete odds with their opinions. I have read your TN with great interest and will be looking forward to more re wines I consider ordering.

Ric,

We knew your tongue is mightier than the sword but please do not drive up the demand.

Jeez Ric,

I must be jet lagged - When I saw the topic I thought you'd retasted the Kalleske shiraz. I just returned home to find that the Wine Spectator has awarded 88 big or little points (depending upon how you look at it) to the Kalleske. From 96 to 88 just for crossing the big pond - that should deaden anyone's arm!

Mike

I had this wine last night. Opened it at about five o'clock, slugged it into the decanter, then let it sit for a while. Drank some. Let it sit some more. I probbly looked at it over about five or six hours I guess. It changed through that time, but by the end of the night I still did not like it all that much. It is very tannic, and while it has got a lot of fruit, it is not very likeable fruit. I also did not like that menthol thing (though I never like menthol). I have the wine in front of me now, a day later, and it is a little bit better perhaps, but still not grea, with the menthol perhaps even more prominent. I will wait till it is sold out around the traps, then I am going to sell it. Life is too short.

Just one man's view. All views are of equal merit.

Mikey.

In a decanter for a good 6 hours; this is like a less famous Grange...will last for a long time, and possibly develop into something very special. Plenty of fruit weight, depth and length, it's very good indeed

Ok...who was that last post??

I had mine in a decanter for 7.5 hours approx. I was going to taste it after that, but I fell asleep. I woke up 7 hours later, tasted it, and it was no good mate. Mind you, it was morning by then, and I did not feel much like wine at that time. I think the wine peaked somewhere between when I fell asleep, and when I woke up, but I'm not sure. I am going to try another bottle.

g

Adam wrote:Ok...who was that last post??

That, admittedly, belongs to me...I didn't have time to qualify it at the time of posting, sorry The aroma and flavour profile don't of course exactly match, regionally, but the structure, depth and length is in the same league as a smaller vintage Grange, being of similar tight knit; this isn't jammy at all, but instead solid and 'stubborn', if you like. Of course as the Penfolds icon is never released so early, this isn't so much a valid comparison as a general impression of the Dead Arm.

In simple terms, "I like it"

Jakob