The Auswine Forum

I rarely do TNs but this wine is a stunner for my palate, more Grange like than the 2002 Grange I had last week. I've drunk my way through almost a six pack in ten days, greed I know but wine this good only happens along occasionally so pig out I say!

Dark as a black whole in space and quite dense. The nose is all about black fruits, plums & blackberry, licorice hints, a touch of violets, beautifully handled oak. The palate has a lovely silky glycerin feel, powerful and voluminous but in a textured way, flavours are complex, blackcurranty raspberry plummy, oak well balanced, a touch of menthol, oh there's lots going on here. Finishes with lovely fine grained tannin and a finish that goes on and on.

Everyone knows I'm not a fan of the corporates but very well done "Jacob's Creek" !

Top drop, but it seems that only you and I enjoy this one?

I'm in for a 3rd positive vote, happy to have a 6-pack in my cellar, but I think it'll stay there a whole lot longer than Steve's. On first taste late last year I initially found the mocha oak at bit confronting, but the fruit breathed up pretty quickly and it has great balance.

I think JO liked it too...

I'm not often tempted by >$20 wines these days but this one might have the reviews to win me over. BUT GW 94/100 - alcohol (15%) shows on the finish. CM 93/100 downpointed from 96/100 due to mint/menthol characters (palate preference). Not that I have major objections to a mere presence of those characters in a wine.

Gold Medal - 2007 Sydney International Wine Show
Gold Medal - 2006 Royal Hobart Wine Show

A truly exceptional Barossa shiraz whose superlative expression of vibrant fruit integrates tightly with excellent oak and fine, bony tannins. Its violet-like perfume of cassis, plums and raspberries is unusually floral and heady, revealing superbly measured walnut and cedar-like oak. Long, fine and elegant, it offers classic Barossa intensity and spiciness, with cloves, cinnamon and white pepper highlighting its lingering core of pristine fruit. Finishing long and savoury, it’s an essay in intensity, balance and harmony. (Barossa Valley, not yet released, 19.4/97, drink 2022-2032) Jeremy Oliver, OnWine

Hi Steve

I can not think of a better wine in recent tastings.
And the best thing, every bottle has been top class.

Cheers Martin

I've had this wine three times in the past six weeks and can only agree with previous posters, this is exceptionally good wine and an absolute bargain around the $40 mark.

Those who haven't tried it should grab a bottle and see for themselves, too good to miss.

Had this tonite, and all i can say is a wine like this is converting me to the 'darkside', Complex, dark fruits, great oak in the background, just enough mint to give xtra balance but not over the top, WOW, its best still to come in a couple of years...

Cheers
Simmo

Had this last night - though now Jacobs Creek Centenary Hill Shiraz. A blockbuster of a wine with 15% alcohol, but stunning nevertheless. Lots of minty notes - so how do you define this as Barossa if you didn't know it was from 2002?

Was at a tasting with Philip Laffer (currently in NZ) hosting it. He said the price dropped with the rebranding to Jacobs Creek and he would be working on getting the price back up to where it should be for a wine of this stature and quality. It certainly is a bargain at $40, that's for sure.

Phil Laffer and the marketers/bean-counters should talk more often about Phil's aspirations...

The 2003 vintage of this was recently being "specialled" by one arm of the Woolies liquor empire for $33pb in a 6-pack, with a bonus Limited Release Shiraz-Cabernet ($40) and a pair of Riedel vinum Chianti glasses. I managed to get the 2002 instead of the 2003, figure it cost me about $18 a bottle after the (useful for a change) bonuses.

Actually I think the price dropped with the release of the (much derided) 98, before the re-branding.

I've been holding off getting this wine as I wasn't sure what it would be like. Been disappointed with some of the "upper" Orlando wines recently. Will pick up a few this weekend (will check to see if Gavin has any online as I'm just about to place an order)

Also managed to pick up the six pack special RB spoke about. Although advertised as only the 2003, they were more than happy to give the 2002 instead.

Only problem now ... I only have 2 Riedel Chanti glasses to go with my 4 O Series ... better buy another two me thinks!

I will let them sleep for 6-12 months before trying the first one

Red Bigot wrote:I'm in for a 3rd positive vote, happy to have a 6-pack in my cellar, but I think it'll stay there a whole lot longer than Steve's. On first taste late last year I initially found the mocha oak at bit confronting, but the fruit breathed up pretty quickly and it has great balance.

I think JO liked it too...

My RBCM note tells me it needs another 10 years.

M.

I only buy <$20 wines in twos these days and more often than not go by their reviews/recommendations. Like the couples of St Henri 02 and Cullen DM 04, these two will just languish in one of the little wine fridges for some years.

So I hope all your positive comments prove, in time, to be correct.

Why not try it one day as a special occasion wine?

That's what I plan to do with one of my 6 pack.

Alex F wrote:Why not try it one day as a special occasion wine?

That's what I plan to do with one of my 6 pack.

I will! After about three years more.

Filled out the case with more Merger 04 and Quartage 05, some Jim Barry Watervale 06 and a lone bottle of Coldstream Hills chard 06 (to share with a friend). All of these others <$20.

daz

Hmm...

I'm not sure about this wine. I'm sure it's very good, but right now I'm tasting too many vanilla coffee characteristics and confectionery (I'm probably not using the right descriptors, I'm sure there are other accepted terms for what I'm describing). I used to like this aspect to wine, it was a novelty, but I've encountered it too many times in high end wines and it tends to homogenise the wines. Ive encountered it with the 04 centenary hill, 05 Dalwhinnie shiraz, 05 Amon-ra. I was completely put off the characteristic by the vanilla coffee explosion of the 04 Woodstock 'the stocks'. Can anyone shed light on to what I'm tasting (ie, is it the oak treatment, and does it take time to integrate)? Does it just come down to personal preference?

Andrew

aj_syrah wrote:Hmm...

I'm not sure about this wine. I'm sure it's very good, but right now I'm tasting too many vanilla coffee characteristics and confectionery (I'm probably not using the right descriptors, I'm sure there are other accepted terms for what I'm describing). I used to like this aspect to wine, it was a novelty, but I've encountered it too many times in high end wines and it tends to homogenise the wines. Ive encountered it with the 04 centenary hill, 05 Dalwhinnie shiraz, 05 Amon-ra. I was completely put off the characteristic by the vanilla coffee explosion of the 04 Woodstock 'the stocks'. Can anyone shed light on to what I'm tasting (ie, is it the oak treatment, and does it take time to integrate)? Does it just come down to personal preference?

Andrew

Andrew, the 02 Centenary Hill has a lot of mocha/coffe aromas and flavours on first opening, but the fruit opens up and the coffee recedes after an hour or so.

Vanilla/coffee aromas and flavours are mostly from the oak treatment and it takes some experience to judge whether the fruit is up to the oak challenge for some wines that show prominent mocha / coffee characters when young. I find that if a good decant and 1-2 hours breathing shows the fruit coming up and the coffee receding (as in the 02 CH) and everything else is in balance then the wine will mature well and the fruit and oak will integrate nicely.

I haven't tried the 05 Dalwhinnie Shiraz yet (although I've bought a 6-pack, do nearly every year) but with age the oak is almost never a problem with Dalwhinnie shiraz.

I'm also often a fan of The Stocks and don't find the oak at all overdone on the 04, I found it a lovely balanced wine after only a short time in a big glass. The last one of these I thought was over-oaked was the 94, but I hadn't bought since the 98 (I think it jumped from $30 to $40 after that) until I tried the 2004. Must be time I tried a 96 again, only a few left, on the plateau now.

It sounds like you are becoming intolerant of coffee and vanillan oak flavours in young reds, others (like TORB) are intolerant of charry characters from the higher-toasted oak barrels, but most of those that he rejects for this character don't offend me at all (at least for the charry character).

And yes, it comes down to personal preferences. If your impressions of these wines don't improve after an hour or two in the decanter, then you should probably avoid buying these wines and be wary where tasting notes mention vanilla/mocha/coffee as a feature.

Good reply Brian. I'm contininuing to churn through my stocks of the 2002 Centenary, need to restock soon or I won't have any for the long haul!

Had a bottle of this last night.

A shocker- 78pts.

Caramello Koala on a base of Smirnoff Vodka. The oak was sickening.

Must have been faulty!

I tried a bottle. Amazing how much the nose reminds me of vintage port. Mint, licorice, and I think someone mentioned violets already. Layers and layers of flavour accross the palate. I was expecting it to have more power, but what I got was a seamless, elegant, balanced wine. The finish built in the glass. The alcohol only showed when it hit my head. Oak is present at times, other times the fruit comes up trumps. Excellent excellent wine.

JamieBahrain wrote:Had a bottle of this last night.

A shocker- 78pts.

Caramello Koala on a base of Smirnoff Vodka. The oak was sickening.

Must have been faulty!

Thanks RB,

It seems that i am committing infanticide by opening reds too young. I am also drinking young reds that I should be decanting. The coffee + vanilla aspect is probably just something that i don't like, but in small doses it can be ok (for example, the 04 Rockford basket press had a hint of vanilla, but it didn't mask the greatness of the wine). Coffee really gets to me, as i don't like coffee, and perhaps the 04 woodstock 'stocks' bottle i had was unrepresentative (I had a bottle of heathcote estate once that tasted like sap, but other bottles of that vintage were nice, and i love the '03). A wine that i left out of my comments was the heartland directors cut - no coffee whatsoever, but hugely vanilla. Enjoyable - but to the extent that an ice-cream shaker milo is enjoyable. It hid any definition.

Also, I've heard people express a preference re French/American oak. Is this Mocha latte characteristic specific to one of these oaks, and if not, what is the critical difference re French/American oak?

regards,

Andrew

aj_syrah wrote:Also, I've heard people express a preference re French/American oak. Is this Mocha latte characteristic specific to one of these oaks, and if not, what is the critical difference re French/American oak?

regards,

Andrew

Andrew, that's a good question, but I'm not sure I'm the best person to answer, I mildly embarrassed my self at the Judges and Stewards dinner after the Natioanl Wine Show last year by remarking on the prominent (ie at that stage grossly overpowering, clashed with any food) American oak on the Wolf Blass Platinum Label Shiraz 2004 that was one of show samples being given "in-depth assessment" at the dinner. Unfortunately Chris Hatcher (Judge and Chief Winemaker for Blass et al) was at the table I was passing the bottle to and remarked quite sternly that it was only French oak used in that wine.

So, there are so many variables, the forest source, the seasoning of the wood, the cooper and toasting level, the particular wine and the type(s) of oak used, time in barrel, etc that all form the final impression. Good french oak, used judicuously seems to give a more harmonious or "finer" expression of textures and flavours, with vanilla, spices and cedar/pencil shavings with coffee/mocha muted or not as noticeable. French oak has a reputation for being more sensitive to shiraz from cooler climates ansd the only oak to use for good cabernet fruit. Except for the likes of John Glaetzer, whose John's Blend Cabernet spends up to 3 years in American oak.

American oak can be of coarser grain than than french oak and seems to have a less subtle effect, especially of not properly seasoned or coopered. Quite a few people get a "dill" or "dill pickle" from wines matured in american oak and there can also be formic acid (crushed ants) character. Others seem to be able to pick a "sappy" character, especially if they get a clue that shaved barrels have been used. And I nearly forgot, overt coconutty characters are nearly always associated with american oak.

I suspect may people would have difficulty picking french and american oak as the maturation vessels where the American oak is properly seasoned, from a top class cooper and used sensitively by a winemaker who knows how much oak the fruit needs in a particular vintage.

Centenary Hill is matured in American oak.

Thanks Brian,

That was a great answer, I much appreciate it. I'm in the position of a young novice, with a thirst not just for wine, but for knowledge about wine.

Some follow-up questions - What is meant by 'seasoning' and 'cooper'? Also, in terms of toasting, what effects does this impart on the wine (e.g. why is it done?, is it a standard thing, or is it selective based on the characteristics of the intended wine?)

I think i'll start a new thread about wine education for a novice, e.g wine classes, benefits of. learning about faults, that sort of thing.

Cheers Andrew

aj_syrah wrote:I think i'll start a new thread about wine education for a novice, e.g wine classes, benefits of. learning about faults, that sort of thing.
Cheers Andrew

Andrew you seem to have palate awareness and have already started another thread. It's all a matter of finding wines you like and developing an awareness of their potential.

I'm not so good at the latter. Had some Thorne Clarke Shotfire Ridge Shiraz 04 Sunday night. It wasn't decanted nor breathed, seemed to be a bit skanky, maybe even a bit corked but I persevered with it as it seemed to improve a bit with time in the glass. Left the remains in the fridge and lo and behold, a day later, it was a much improved wine. The skank had gone, the wine was very much a fruity but oaky Barossa shiraz. The remaining bottles I have of Quartage 05 will be decanted for a couple of hours.

Learning about wine is a never-ending experience.

aj_syrah wrote:
Some follow-up questions - What is meant by 'seasoning' and 'cooper'? Also, in terms of toasting, what effects does this impart on the wine (e.g. why is it done?, is it a standard thing, or is it selective based on the characteristics of the intended wine?)

"Seasoning" is where the oak staves (or the planks the staves are shaped from) are dried slowly, in a kiln or usually in stacks in the open air. The trick is to get rid of any green sappy characters without warping or splitting the oak as it dries. If you ever go to Yalumba winery and take a tour you may see the stacks of Missouri oak out the back of their coopering shed, destined for smaller barrels (octaves) for maturing the Octavius shiraz. They usually season the wood for about 5 years I think and you may be able to see the barrel-making process if you go their at the right time. The following is a picture of some of the piles of planks at Yalumba.


A "cooper" is someone who makes and/or maintains barrels. Many barrels are imported made-up from France or elsewhere, many are also made in Australia from imported oak planks. Different coopers have reputations based on their ability to procure good oak and make barrels with reliable characteristics that suit different styles of wines. Oak with fine, close grain is reputed to produce better results than oak with coarser, open grain. As well as France and the USA, good oak is also being sourced from Eastern Europe. German oak is usually too pungent to be used much for wine casks, although I still see it mentioned occasionally.

Toasting is one of the stages of barrel-making and the winemaker can specify a level of toasting that he thinks suits the style of wine he wants to use the barrels for, most seem to go for medium-toast these days, high-toast can lead to excessive charry characters in the wine. I'm not sure of all the reasons for toasting, there is probably a surface preparation as well as flavour reason for doing it, as well as drying the barrel again after the steam-bending process.

If Ric ever finishes the final chapter of the September 2006 Tour Diary (he says 'real soon now') there will be a segment on the barrel-making facility at Yalumba.

If you have a thirst for wine knowledge, get a copy of "The Oxford Companion to Wine" edited by Jancis Robinson, third edition out now, I got mine from Amazon, a lot cheaper than in Oz, especially if you buy some other books to make the most of freight charges.

Daryl Douglas wrote:The skank had gone, the wine was very much a fruity but oaky Barossa shiraz.

I wasn't aware Paris Hilton was briefly back in town again!

Sorry Daryl, I just had to say it

JamieBahrain wrote:Had a bottle of this last night.

A shocker- 78pts.

Caramello Koala on a base of Smirnoff Vodka. The oak was sickening.

Must have been faulty!

Had another bottle last night. Nothing like the caramello koala so obviously a bad bottle.

Not a bad wine.

Thanks RB,

another very comprehensive answer that has improved my wine knowledge immensely. I am indebted in gratitude. If i may indulge further, you speak of fine grain vis course grain oak. Is that ever used as a descriptor, and does it bear any relation to fine grained tannins. If not, what are fine grain tannins, compaired to tannins of a worser grain? Also, with regards to 'seasoning' as being aimed at removing greenish characteristics, is their any correlation between that and green tannins? I guess the question is, is there any relationship between oak and tannins?

Cheers,

Andrew.

aj_syrah wrote:Thanks RB,

another very comprehensive answer that has improved my wine knowledge immensely. I am indebted in gratitude. If i may indulge further, you speak of fine grain vis course grain oak. Is that ever used as a descriptor, and does it bear any relation to fine grained tannins. If not, what are fine grain tannins, compaired to tannins of a worser grain? Also, with regards to 'seasoning' as being aimed at removing greenish characteristics, is their any correlation between that and green tannins? I guess the question is, is there any relationship between oak and tannins?

Cheers,

Andrew.

You really are testing me aren't you?

Fine, coarse, powdery, gritty, chunky, grainy, drying, green, ripe, bitter, smooth, woody are some of the descriptors for tannins. I don't know if there is any big connection between fine/coarse grained wood and the equivalent tannins, I suspect not as although some tannins come from oak, most of the tannin in wine comes from the grape skins and seeds and also the stems. New oak imparts more tannin tha older oak. Tannin structure is more affected by the winemaking techniques such as cold soak, whole-bunch fermentation, plunging, time on skins before pressing etc. (Not to mention added tannins).

Incidently, if you want to experience the ultimate astringent tannin experience, see if you can find a banana flower, we came across this in Thailand last year, the sliced core of the flower is used in some soups/dishes, a small amount instantly dries the palate and puckers your face most comically.

I believe you can get a hard, sappy, slightly green character from poorly seasoned oak, but again most green characters come from improperly ripened grapes.

That probably raises a whole bunch of other questions, get the book I mentioned previously (there is a whole small-print page on tannin) or maybe some of the winemakers could jump in and help out here.