TN: first week in feb 05: Cape mentelle, Lindemans,Petaluma+
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:12 am
wines on return to Oz (1 week in February)
1991 Cape Mentelle CS: After a few average vintages in the late 80s this is a return to form : deep and opaque this wine is yet to reach its peak but is showing exactly the Margaret River characteristics that make it one of the big guns of the west with Moss Wood & Cullens - more complexity than almost any Coonawarra shows. Based on this bottle from my cellar, it will improve for another 2-4 years but it is hard to keep your hands off it now. No green characteristics at all but clearly MR fruit still primary flavours (berry and coffee) with considerable secondary complexity (some integrated wood and cigar box reminiscent of Bdx). It will probably hold after that for close to a decade- great return to form and makes me curious about the 2001 which I have not tasted....
1997 Petaluma riesling: nothing wrong with these wines (contrary to popular reports) but for what was a very good vintage for SA riesling it makes me question the point in ageing petaluma riesling which constantly drinks brilliantly young but underperforms with age next to leo Buring, Mitchell, Richmond Grove- even a perennial favourite Pewsey Vale. Yes, it shows good development with the citrus being replaced by mere traces of that, some lanolin and fair amounts of kerosene/petroleum - but I like that and am used to it. Somehow it lacks the touch of distinction you expect from the wine and the delicacy of touch with fruit demonstrated on the palate as a young wine has faded to merely average quality development with age. Drink over next 2 years - it is unlikely to improve further.
2004 Petaluma reisling: even by petaluma standards this is not for cellaring and does not compare favourably with the last 2 or 3 vintages 2001-3 inclusive - yet remains a delightful wine for consumption young and was enjoyed for that purpose.
1996 Petaluma chardonnay: nothing Burgundian about this wine but a very good aged SA style chardonnay at a price which was never going to break the bank, drinking at its peak now (assuming you like the style). Sure it lacks the complexity of Burgundy (or even Mt mary/Giaconda) but it is a really good dsiplay of fruit with aged toast and cheese characteristics and should be drunk for what it is. Even if you are a paid up member of the ABC (anything but chardonnay ) school you will get pleasure from this wine which shows what the Adelaide Hills are moving towards before “Tiers†(or was that tears when you parted with the additional money)
1983 Lindemans bin 6600 shiraz from Hunter River - labeled “Burgundy†in those days: 3 bottles all of which emerged as pristine and showed brilliantly - almost on a par with the magnums. This is a style which is clearly European in its savouriness (and after exposure to many sangiovese based wines recently it is easy to see similarities - albeit marked differences in the grape varieties, and also some similarity to Rhone favourites), yet the quality and reasonably light levels of alcohol produce stunning wine made to accompany food - as all wine should. The classic sweaty saddle nose is unmistakeable and the leather hints are present on th epalate without intruding - yet there is a purity of fruit there as well. The 2 bottles immediately preceding these 3 looked a little more tired and more leathery (from the same sixpack) but theses were just charming - easily the best since 1965. Oh Lindemans Hunter Valley - what have you wrought as the interim has yielded only a 1987 Steven of remotely the same level of quality and even the 1991s are not (and will not) ever come close to this level.
1994 Wynns CS for a quaffer this is showing its best stuff and is drinking very well assuming you enjoy some primary fruit. It is not as good as the 1991 but is the next best modern vintage for current drinking while we wait for the 1990, 1996, 1998 & 1999 to mature. This is exctly what Coonawarra can show: a well and truly sub-Aus$20 wine which matures for more than a decade to show Coonawarra terroir and real CS backbone
1998 Tollana TR222 CS: yep they rid us of the purely Eden valley element- it is untraceable in this wine but it is a pleasant quaffer if somewhat industrialised and can be drunk earlier than the 1996 which displays Eden valley fruit and character - hence far more interesting and appears longer lived
1998 Tollana TR 16 shiraz used not to be as good as the CS but in this case the Eden valley spice is detectable and makes it more interesting than its sibling CS - remarkably good value and it will be interesting to see if Southmount/Fostercorp or whatever honours its promise to return to the regional variety with the 2004 vintage
2000 Neudorf Pinot Noir: NZ with a cracking nose full of funk and brambles that screams quality it is very good on the front and mid-palates but loses its way on the backpalate unfortunately. Still it is a better version of PN than most villages wines and there are very few Oz PN that are worthy of comparison (Ok Giaconda and the good Bass Phillip stand out)
2003 Davisham Pinot Noir: cordial which may be gven to children if you wish to ruin their palates but really this is the sort of berry cordial that gives Antipodean PN a bad name
Picardy Pinot Noir: 2001, 2002: I have enormous respect for the Pannells who founded Moss Wood and are endeavouring to achieve and create wines of distinction and finesse at Pemberton. To date their most successful wines have been the Cabernet-merlots (with cab franc as well) while the least successful is the shiraz. The PN is weird: yes there is a nose of PN but the palate is more traditional shiraz (no not a huge balltearer Barossa) with plenty of tanins. It is still early days and the jury is out but the wines - while constituting a pleasant enough drink - do not qualify as either fish or fowl to my mind - and that detracts from the experience. At this stage I would not rate the PN as reasonable value - but it is an “interesting drink†and strikes me as a “watch this space†type.
2001 Voyager Estate Cabernet-merlot: one of the “rising stars†in the west for a few years it is a very good party wine now with sufficient smoothness form the merlot to enable pleasant consumption and the backbone and structure to improve in the short term. It is suffering from direct comparison with the Howard Park 2001 Leston which I consider a more complete wine at about the same price - while the Devil’s Lair at a higher price is in a different class altogether
1991 Cape Mentelle CS: After a few average vintages in the late 80s this is a return to form : deep and opaque this wine is yet to reach its peak but is showing exactly the Margaret River characteristics that make it one of the big guns of the west with Moss Wood & Cullens - more complexity than almost any Coonawarra shows. Based on this bottle from my cellar, it will improve for another 2-4 years but it is hard to keep your hands off it now. No green characteristics at all but clearly MR fruit still primary flavours (berry and coffee) with considerable secondary complexity (some integrated wood and cigar box reminiscent of Bdx). It will probably hold after that for close to a decade- great return to form and makes me curious about the 2001 which I have not tasted....
1997 Petaluma riesling: nothing wrong with these wines (contrary to popular reports) but for what was a very good vintage for SA riesling it makes me question the point in ageing petaluma riesling which constantly drinks brilliantly young but underperforms with age next to leo Buring, Mitchell, Richmond Grove- even a perennial favourite Pewsey Vale. Yes, it shows good development with the citrus being replaced by mere traces of that, some lanolin and fair amounts of kerosene/petroleum - but I like that and am used to it. Somehow it lacks the touch of distinction you expect from the wine and the delicacy of touch with fruit demonstrated on the palate as a young wine has faded to merely average quality development with age. Drink over next 2 years - it is unlikely to improve further.
2004 Petaluma reisling: even by petaluma standards this is not for cellaring and does not compare favourably with the last 2 or 3 vintages 2001-3 inclusive - yet remains a delightful wine for consumption young and was enjoyed for that purpose.
1996 Petaluma chardonnay: nothing Burgundian about this wine but a very good aged SA style chardonnay at a price which was never going to break the bank, drinking at its peak now (assuming you like the style). Sure it lacks the complexity of Burgundy (or even Mt mary/Giaconda) but it is a really good dsiplay of fruit with aged toast and cheese characteristics and should be drunk for what it is. Even if you are a paid up member of the ABC (anything but chardonnay ) school you will get pleasure from this wine which shows what the Adelaide Hills are moving towards before “Tiers†(or was that tears when you parted with the additional money)
1983 Lindemans bin 6600 shiraz from Hunter River - labeled “Burgundy†in those days: 3 bottles all of which emerged as pristine and showed brilliantly - almost on a par with the magnums. This is a style which is clearly European in its savouriness (and after exposure to many sangiovese based wines recently it is easy to see similarities - albeit marked differences in the grape varieties, and also some similarity to Rhone favourites), yet the quality and reasonably light levels of alcohol produce stunning wine made to accompany food - as all wine should. The classic sweaty saddle nose is unmistakeable and the leather hints are present on th epalate without intruding - yet there is a purity of fruit there as well. The 2 bottles immediately preceding these 3 looked a little more tired and more leathery (from the same sixpack) but theses were just charming - easily the best since 1965. Oh Lindemans Hunter Valley - what have you wrought as the interim has yielded only a 1987 Steven of remotely the same level of quality and even the 1991s are not (and will not) ever come close to this level.
1994 Wynns CS for a quaffer this is showing its best stuff and is drinking very well assuming you enjoy some primary fruit. It is not as good as the 1991 but is the next best modern vintage for current drinking while we wait for the 1990, 1996, 1998 & 1999 to mature. This is exctly what Coonawarra can show: a well and truly sub-Aus$20 wine which matures for more than a decade to show Coonawarra terroir and real CS backbone
1998 Tollana TR222 CS: yep they rid us of the purely Eden valley element- it is untraceable in this wine but it is a pleasant quaffer if somewhat industrialised and can be drunk earlier than the 1996 which displays Eden valley fruit and character - hence far more interesting and appears longer lived
1998 Tollana TR 16 shiraz used not to be as good as the CS but in this case the Eden valley spice is detectable and makes it more interesting than its sibling CS - remarkably good value and it will be interesting to see if Southmount/Fostercorp or whatever honours its promise to return to the regional variety with the 2004 vintage
2000 Neudorf Pinot Noir: NZ with a cracking nose full of funk and brambles that screams quality it is very good on the front and mid-palates but loses its way on the backpalate unfortunately. Still it is a better version of PN than most villages wines and there are very few Oz PN that are worthy of comparison (Ok Giaconda and the good Bass Phillip stand out)
2003 Davisham Pinot Noir: cordial which may be gven to children if you wish to ruin their palates but really this is the sort of berry cordial that gives Antipodean PN a bad name
Picardy Pinot Noir: 2001, 2002: I have enormous respect for the Pannells who founded Moss Wood and are endeavouring to achieve and create wines of distinction and finesse at Pemberton. To date their most successful wines have been the Cabernet-merlots (with cab franc as well) while the least successful is the shiraz. The PN is weird: yes there is a nose of PN but the palate is more traditional shiraz (no not a huge balltearer Barossa) with plenty of tanins. It is still early days and the jury is out but the wines - while constituting a pleasant enough drink - do not qualify as either fish or fowl to my mind - and that detracts from the experience. At this stage I would not rate the PN as reasonable value - but it is an “interesting drink†and strikes me as a “watch this space†type.
2001 Voyager Estate Cabernet-merlot: one of the “rising stars†in the west for a few years it is a very good party wine now with sufficient smoothness form the merlot to enable pleasant consumption and the backbone and structure to improve in the short term. It is suffering from direct comparison with the Howard Park 2001 Leston which I consider a more complete wine at about the same price - while the Devil’s Lair at a higher price is in a different class altogether