The Auswine Forum

I always like to gain peoples opinions/preferences on this most debated subject.
So which one do you prefer? You know if you were stuck on a deserted island.....

96 for me

ross

ross67 wrote:I always like to gain peoples opinions/preferences on this most debated subject.
So which one do you prefer? You know if you were stuck on a deserted island.....

96 for me

ross

for what? champagne, australia, france, cabernet, shiraz?..etc
c

Oh sorry, i should have been more specific
Australian red wine

ross

Christo wrote:

ross67 wrote:I always like to gain peoples opinions/preferences on this most debated subject.
So which one do you prefer? You know if you were stuck on a deserted island.....

96 for me

ross

for what? champagne, australia, france, cabernet, shiraz?..etc
c

Well common guys, it's pretty much '96 for all those including Barolos isn't it???

Monghead.

Monghead - agreed with the exception of right bank Bordeaux

Hi Ross

To stick to your original theme, i.e. Australian red wines from the 1996 and 1998 red wine vintages, it's hard to generalise because both vintages produced excellent individual wines.

I only started to get into collecting/cellaring wines in 2001 so have more 1998s than 1996s. I'm not into auctions so only buy from reliable retailers and from cellar doors. The notable wines I've tried from both vintages have all been of differing styles to it's impossible for me to pick one over the other. The 96s of note have been Penfolds St Henri and Seppelt Dorrien, the 98s Penfolds Bin 707 and Peter Lehmann Stonewell, all excellent wines in their style though probably drunk too young - still have a bottle of each though. Also had a Turkey Flat 98 12-18 months ago but it was a bit too oaky or corky (not TCA) for me.

The general opinion though seems, as does yours, to favour 96 over 98.

As to the desert island scenario, I guess I'd want to have my only bottle of Grange there with me - it's a 96 - and is the single most expensive bottle of wine I'll ever buy/have bought.

Cheers

daz

G'day

Without registering a vote (an I haven't) I'd have to say it will be a points decision for me. I have (and have already drunk) some fabulous 96s, and am in a similar situation with 98s. I'm hard pressed to call one over the other.

I know there has been discussion about the much-hyped 98 vintage, and a heap of wines not living up to their hype in hindsight. That's OK, most vintages have a degree of this. Regardless, for me 96 = 98 in terms of quality. 2002 is the next one for me (although 1999 has turned out to be much better than expected, and rivalling 1998).

1999 (regardless of the quality) also gives me (has given me) opportunity to pull out a night's worth of 10 year old wines.

Cheers

Allan

Yup 96 for me. Too many 98s have crumpled whilst 96s are shining.

years ago people on this forum used to lay into me when i suggested 96 was a superior long term vintage to 98 in aussie.

seems the truth is now surfacing

As for the much debated NZ 98 vintage. Cabernet blends are doing the business aging very slowly. Most merlot blends now fading with a couple of exceptions

It's still too early to tell for many wines. I haven't even thought about opening my '98s of St Hugo, St Gerge, Limestone Ridge, St Henri or 389 and even the Wynn's Black Label is still improving.

Like Daryl, I set up my 'proper' cellar in 2001, so I do have more 98s than 96s. Wish I had more to do a thorough comparison.

Just because it's a big country and dreams stay with you...

98 Hunter
98 Yarra Valley
98 Grampians
96 Coonawarra (although neck and neck really with 98)
96 or 98 McLaren Vale - even
96 Barossa
96 Margaret River
98 Gt Southern
96 or 98 Clare - not fussed.
etc
GW

Craig(NZ) wrote: As for the much debated NZ 98 vintage. Cabernet blends are doing the business aging very slowly. Most merlot blends now fading with a couple of exceptions

Craig

I was sorting out the cellar in the weekend and came across a Lombardi 98 Merlot Cab from HB. From what you have written above, it would appear I should open it now. Unfortunately I only have 1 so I am keen to try it as close to its peak as possible. I cracked open a 96 Tom last year and it was a waste. It was still years away from being at its peak.

I am also interested in what happend to Lombardi. I can't find anything on the web about them. Do you know their history?

Cheers
Mark

Craig

I was sorting out the cellar in the weekend and came across a Lombardi 98 Merlot Cab from HB. From what you have written above, it would appear I should open it now. Unfortunately I only have 1 so I am keen to try it as close to its peak as possible. I cracked open a 96 Tom last year and it was a waste. It was still years away from being at its peak.

I am also interested in what happend to Lombardi. I can't find anything on the web about them. Do you know their history?

Lombardi is now agonna and Black Barn I think is its 'replacement'. They were near te mata estate. don't quote me on this as its about as 2nd hand as you can get but I think the vines provided the early Te Mata reds with fruit.

I bought the 98 Lombardi Merlot Cab too (was a top value wine on release) and drank mine many years ago. Id expect it would be past its best but give it a lash - it was a more forward styled creamy wine - definitely not built like Tom. Wouldnt keep it any longer. Drink up

C

Craig(NZ) wrote:

Craig

I was sorting out the cellar in the weekend and came across a Lombardi 98 Merlot Cab from HB. From what you have written above, it would appear I should open it now. Unfortunately I only have 1 so I am keen to try it as close to its peak as possible. I cracked open a 96 Tom last year and it was a waste. It was still years away from being at its peak.

I am also interested in what happend to Lombardi. I can't find anything on the web about them. Do you know their history?

Lombardi is now agonna and Black Barn I think is its 'replacement'. They were near te mata estate. don't quote me on this as its about as 2nd hand as you can get but I think the vines provided the early Te Mata reds with fruit.

I bought the 98 Lombardi Merlot Cab too (was a top value wine on release) and drank mine many years ago. Id expect it would be past its best but give it a lash - it was a more forward styled creamy wine - definitely not built like Tom. Wouldnt keep it any longer. Drink up

C

Thanks, I will let you know how it goes. It has been well cellared since I got it at around 14-15C so hopefully it should still be holding up.

To continue Gary's theme, I'll be the lover's voice that fires the mountain side. And I agree with his thoughts in the main.

I prefer SA cabs from 98 and SA shiraz from 96. As it wasn't possible to vote that way I took 96 in a coin toss.

Mike

96 for SA perhaps but 98 was better all over.

cheers

Carl

Interesting result after one day.....i would have thought it would have been a much closer result??

1996 for me.

Recent vintages - can't see 2002 rivalling it for me ... great Clare and some almost great but marginally overripe Barossa, but choose carefully. Like McLaren Vale 2002 a lot.

2004 the next great off the rank for me ... Pennies in form, Special Bins, check, Rockford BP, lots of top Barossa, Coonawarra, Henschke, Balnaves Tally, good stuff from Grampians e.g. Langhi Ghiran, Seppelt, Bests. Good structure and made to last but not as welcoming as say 2005 and lacks the welcoming style that made 1998 popular.

I'm still buying 1996 (to drink soon) and 2004 (drink later!)

Agree totally Jay. 96 for me all the way, Margaret River, Barossa and Coonawarra (my favourite regions) all turned out a treat from my experience with them.

04 is easily comparable with so many great wines turning out (actually still buying lots from that vintage). From all of the above regions 04 has been a blinder.

Partagas wrote:Agree totally Jay.

Naturally .

Aren't we all so blinded by the next seductive / slinky vintage that we miss the great ones? 1996 went under the radar somewhat and similarly everyone is hedging on 2004-05-06 ... but for me 2004 is the clear winner.

I always think that Penfolds Special Bins are a good indication (last ones 1990, 1996, 2004) as they are Cab predominant (so Cab will be good) but are only made when Grange quality is not compromised (so Shiraz must be bl**dy good also).

I always think that Penfolds Special Bins are a good indication (last ones 1990, 1996, 2004)

yip agree, the release of special premium wines is an indicator. find this with hawkes bay; years where there is esk terraces made is a good vintage

04 vs 05 in aussie...saltrams mamre shiraz is a indicator for barossa for me. clearly the 04 a super deep dark brooding wine. 05 a bit more red, a bit obvious with the alc, a bit clumsy. 04 for me

Craig(NZ) wrote:

Craig

I was sorting out the cellar in the weekend and came across a Lombardi 98 Merlot Cab from HB. From what you have written above, it would appear I should open it now. Unfortunately I only have 1 so I am keen to try it as close to its peak as possible. I cracked open a 96 Tom last year and it was a waste. It was still years away from being at its peak.

I am also interested in what happend to Lombardi. I can't find anything on the web about them. Do you know their history?

Lombardi is now agonna and Black Barn I think is its 'replacement'. They were near te mata estate. don't quote me on this as its about as 2nd hand as you can get but I think the vines provided the early Te Mata reds with fruit.

I bought the 98 Lombardi Merlot Cab too (was a top value wine on release) and drank mine many years ago. Id expect it would be past its best but give it a lash - it was a more forward styled creamy wine - definitely not built like Tom. Wouldnt keep it any longer. Drink up

C

Finally opened the Lombardi last night. There is something strangely sad about opening the last bottle of a forgotten vineyard. As I slowly opened the bottle, I am sure I heard a lone bugler playing Taps in the distance for all the fallen vineyards that now only exists in the hearts of various wine nuts around the world. The wine was superb. Right up there with great kiwi reds I have tried. Medium to dense red brick colour. Floral bouquet with a hint of raspberry. Good length with secondary flavours now starting to come through, soft but firm tannins on a fulsome mid palate. Red berry fruit drying just a touch but with a lovely savory gamey finish. Sadly now all gone.

Maybe we really need to look at some of the lesser wines from each manufacturers portfolio as well, to determine the true greatness of the vintage.
eg Penfolds 2004 portfolio had very good - to exceptional wines from the lowest to the highest in that year, whereas 2005 and 2006 vintages are lacking greatly at the lower end, only the top end wines seem good or better. Maybe this is the clue to true great vintages... What do others think?

Jay60A wrote:I always think that Penfolds Special Bins are a good indication (last ones 1990, 1996, 2004) as they are Cab predominant (so Cab will be good) but are only made when Grange quality is not compromised (so Shiraz must be bl**dy good also).

John #11 wrote:Maybe we really need to look at some of the lesser wines from each manufacturers portfolio as well, to determine the true greatness of the vintage.
eg Penfolds 2004 portfolio had very good - to exceptional wines from the lowest to the highest in that year, whereas 2005 and 2006 vintages are lacking greatly at the lower end, only the top end wines seem good or better. Maybe this is the clue to true great vintages... What do others think?

I agree with both of these points - the key to a really great vintage is when the top (or additional 'special' release wines) are made, and at the same time the wines at the bottom level (far from being compromised) still exceed expectations.

Wines like the Schild Estate Barossa Shiraz, Kilikanoon Killerman's Run, Mamre Brook, Grant Burge Miamba & Filsell, St Hallett Faith are examples that do genuinely over-achieve in top vintages. As an aside, remember back when the Orlando Trilogy Red, Jacobs Creek Reserve & Hardy's Tintara Cellars were released in 1998 and the quality was exceptional for the price - none have come remotely close since then...

Cheers,
Ian

96/98 Both great , we have been Blessed with such good volume of 98 , Its shows no sign of rareness at all .Can you believe you can still get a 98 wynns Michael shiraz for 50 bucks a bottle plus fees at auction Spoilt we are i think maybe rare one day but not for a while ..................I have just started the task of drinking them and boy they are good $8 to $500 they are all good so far

Regards Dazza

dazza1968 wrote:96/98 Both great , we have been Blessed with such good volume of 98 , Its shows no sign of rareness at all .Can you believe you can still get a 98 wynns Michael shiraz for 50 bucks a bottle plus fees at auction Spoilt we are i think maybe rare one day but not for a while ..................I have just started the task of drinking them and boy they are good $8 to $500 they are all good so far

Regards Dazza

Sorry, I beg to differ dazza. They are not all great. Rather disappointing '98s that come to mind are:

- Balmoral
- Vicar
- Dead Arm
- Brand's Stentiford
- Eileen Hardy
- Fox creek reserve

Hmmm.... They all seem to be Shirazes

A coincidence? Must have another little think...

Monghead,

Its not '98 thing' with those labels. IMO, most of those labels have produced duds every year. They look good at release and then go progressively downhill... I liked the 90, 91 and 96 Eileen Hardy but other than those, can't think of a stand-out among your list.

Mike

although im in the 96 camp, i liked the 98 dead arm

Mike Hawkins wrote:Monghead,

Its not '98 thing' with those labels. IMO, most of those labels have produced duds every year. They look good at release and then go progressively downhill... I liked the 90, 91 and 96 Eileen Hardy but other than those, can't think of a stand-out among your list.

Mike

Yeah, good point. I guess that's the reason I haven't looked at these labels for years when buying for the cellar.

Monghead.

monghead wrote:

dazza1968 wrote:96/98 Both great , we have been Blessed with such good volume of 98 , Its shows no sign of rareness at all .Can you believe you can still get a 98 wynns Michael shiraz for 50 bucks a bottle plus fees at auction Spoilt we are i think maybe rare one day but not for a while ..................I have just started the task of drinking them and boy they are good $8 to $500 they are all good so far

Regards Dazza

Sorry, I beg to differ dazza. They are not all great. Rather disappointing '98s that come to mind are:

- Balmoral
- Vicar
- Dead Arm
- Brand's Stentiford
- Eileen Hardy
- Fox creek reserve

Hmmm.... They all seem to be Shirazes

A coincidence? Must have another little think...

Same could be said for the 96's if you take a look i.e vicar 96 has lost all its fruit and was finished that was the last bottle 2 weeks ago , And the 98 Balmoral nearly took out WOTN at a tasting Recently ,2 different bottles from to different cellars and yes variation was evident ! , Have you done any close up comparisons i.e we had a limestone ridge sh/cab and the trevor jones shiraz 96/98 and the 98's killed the 96's IMHO along with a dozen others. More fruit was the big difference as for your list i could go thru my notes on 96's and trash the odd wine for not delivering .............Maybe you should stick to cabernet Monghead ? also note that your list is aselection of which i have maybe 8 bottles total in my cellar Personally i bought wines from 98 like wynns jr,michael,black label ,st henri ,389,Rockford shiraz,yalumba signature, grange,rwt,

This is what makes wine fantastic its all opinions really

Regards Dazza