Ya Mo Have A Chardonnay

Ah, dear. Another California Chardonnay.

I'm kidding...after all, there is plenty of quality west coast Chard out there. Wines that can blow you away with their lovely integration of oak and fruit. Wines that can match that juicy lobster you've been salivating for, for what seems like days.

And Lauren's right about a few things: The Golden State is known for what seems like "safe" wines. But that's only the perception. To many, perception is reality, and the truth lies in the Chards that go for the jugular with their unabashed creaminess, often teeming with a sweetness nowhere to be found in the alter ego of Burgundy.

And so truly, 70s pop will throw down to the mom jeans. And so will the Cali Chard. I've got just one for you here, but hell, it's pretty fitting, considering the conversation:

Sonoma-Cutrer Russian River Ranches Chardonnay, Russian River Valley, Sonoma, California, 2006: 8.3

There's an awful lot to love about this wine, but there's plenty to get you bored.

For starters, it's not subtle. Sonoma-Cutrer is entirely a Chardonnay producer from Sonoma County, California. And they've inundated countless restaurants with this wine. And I see why it's went over so well. The creamy oak can't wait to get your pants off, and before you even get the juice in your mouth, you sense the butterball that's coming. Thankfully, there's some citrus vibes floating around.

And it holds true to form. No left-field shockers, no blemishes per se. There really is some enjoyable green apple, pear, and lemon notes. And the oak follows through, ever-present but thankfully not as dominant on the finish as I expected.

What stops this from being an exceptional wine is that there is no real complexity, no elegance, no verve.

But that's okay. It's simple in some ways, but the RRR has it's fans, and deservedly so. ($20-25)

-pairs with "Listen to the Music" by the Doobie Brothers.

-Justin

Climbing the Walls of Oak

We at Pitchfork Wine have never reviewed a California Chardonnay. Until now. I wouldn’t say it’s been neglected intentionally, it’s just not something that awakens the nerdy discourse of other wines we’ve explored. I mean, we also aren’t likely to emphatically analyze the latest Celine Dion in the drunken hours of the early morning. The overt oak-aging and malolactic fermentation that has become a hallmark of domestic Chardonnay, drinks like a schlocky Top 40 tune- aiming for middle-of-the-road acceptance, it forgoes any organic feeling in favor of soul-less melodrama. Sure, “Pour some sugar on me” gets the crowd going, but only because everyone knows the words and knows what to expect. But hey, being that Chardonnay is the most popular varietal in this country, can 50 million screaming fans be wrong?

Yes.

Of course I’m not being fair. Production does not always mean overproduction. Some flourishes and accompaniments can truly be a symphony for the taste buds, improving on the grape’s natural characteristics, rather than muddling them. There is something about California Chardonnay that does seem to evoke 1970s radio hits (in both the best and worst possible sense). You can’t lump Phil Spector and that Swedish guy behind Britney Spears’ hits into the same heap. Alas, my tasting notes on some recent sips (and their aural equivalents):

Hess Chardonnay, Monterrey, 2006: 8.4
Definitely some tropical fruit here, but it’s reigned in with an almost austere acidity. Light pineapple and guava flavors with a touch of minerality. There’s some oak, but not enough to dim the brightness. Best buy- to be enjoyed ice cold on a patio. ($10-13)
-pairs with: “Peg” by Steely Dan

Angeline Chardonnay, Russian River Valley 2006: 8.0
This is a wholly reasonable price to pay for a Russian River Chardonnay. Some vanilla, meyer lemon, and crème anglaise, with a decently dry finish. I found this one to be oaker than the Hess, but not overwhelming. Kind of linear, but pleasant. Angeline is the second label from Martin Ray. ($11-14)
-pairs with: “Silly Love Songs” by Wings

Martin Ray Chardonnay, Russian River Valley 2006: 8.2
Pineapple, kiwi, and assorted tropical flavors make this substantial wine seem food-friendly. It seemed a little brighter and more nuanced than the Angeline, but not significantly so to command the higher price. ($17-21)
-pairs with: “Tusk” by Fleetwood Mac

Hess Chardonnay, Napa Valley, Su’skol Vineyard 2006: 9.0
Proof that careful manipulation can yield gorgeous results- this wine spent just over a year in 30% new French oak with 30% malolactic fermentation. The creaminess that comes through in this cool-climate Chardonnay is that of a light, lemon curd. Somewhat floral and definitely acidic, it retains a Burgundian grace that is absent in many of its counterparts. ($21-26)
-pairs with: “Livin’ Thing” by Electric Light Orchestra

Saintsbury Brown Ranch Chardonnay, Carneros 2006: 9.2
Wow. This is by far the priciest of the bunch but unquestionably the best and most complex. Saintsbury prides themselves on Burgundian authenticity- this is made from Dijon clone 9596 and forms the basis for their basic Chardonnays. Lillies, green apple, pineapple nose with some distinct vanilla extract and pear on the palate. Harmonious oak and mineral balance with a long acidic finish. ($40-45)
-pairs with: “The Rain Song” by Led Zeppelin

- Lauren

That's one of those skills that I learned in my school...

Underwhelmed.

That's how I felt about a few whites I had from South America. There was a bright spot, but no one's reinventing the wheel here:

Norton Sauvignon Blanc, Mendoza, Argentina, 2006: 6.3

Sauvignon Blanc is continuously a disappointment if it says Argentina or Chile on the label. I don't know when they're going to start competing with New Zealand and California as far as the ol' quality/dollar ratio matters. The Norton felt a bit fat oddly. There was a little okay citrus, something like lemon. But then a whole lot of...nothing. But then my tongue was hit by just...oh...what is that? Ohhhh. Alcohol. Drinkable sure. But there's stuff out there that just destroys this SB for the money. ($9-11)

Los Vascos Sauvignon Blanc, Colchagua, Chile, 2007: 7.4

There's a name on this bottle that should probably catch the attention of a few people: Lafite-Rothschild. So one of the leading Bordelaise families has been hard at work in the land west of the Andes, trying to go for the under $20 price-point. This ain't a bad wine, I'll say. But it *is* average. The trick is to not even think about the incredibly diverse range of styles that Sauvignon Blanc imparts and creates, depending on where it's grown.

See, there's some well-balanced grapefruit, sea salt, and sourdough on the nose. And it's surely a friendly, fruity dry wine. And while it will never compare to the concentrated-citrus style of Marlborough, where the bottle practically sweats out lemon drops, Los Vascos' Sauvignon Blanc is a little more where the Chilean variety should be: easy, lively, balanced. ($12-15)

Dona Paula Chardonnay, Mendoza, Argentina, 2006: 7.7

Oaky and buttery. Like a newly-constructed teeter-totter after a good rain. Spice, green pear, and more oak. And then more. But actually, it's kind of enjoyable in it's own unabashedness. The finish was slightly unimpressive. I'd drink a glass of this once in a blue moon though. ($16-20).

-Justin

Sauvignon Blanc in the People's Republic

Finally, we returned to the glorious evenings of brown-bagged wines and late-night ballooned diatribes. One thing has nothing to do with the other, of course.

8 Sauvignon Blancs, this time around. And the results, as always were halfway expected and halfway a surprise.

First place: Forefathers Sauvignon Blanc, Marlborough, New Zealand, 2004 - 9.1



It's not a real shock that a New Zealand SB would show in first place. Sauvignon Blanc's from Hobbit Land end up being relatively overt with their fruit-profiles (generally grapefruit and/or lemon are prevalent). But this was certainly different than the everyday stuff.

The scent of petrol was obvious, with some graceful tropical fruit. A very well-balanced wine even perhaps some minerality to it on the finish. Great showing, and a bit shocking that a 2004 would steal the show. ($14-20)

Second place: Peter Franus Sauvignon Blanc, Carneros, California, 2007 - 8.5

Easily the best new typical new world we tasted. Gobs of stonefruit, pineapple, lemon peel and saltiness. And soundly elegant. ($17-23)

Third place: Spinyback Sauvignon Blanc, Nelson, New Zealand, 2006 - 8.0

2 out of 3 for the Bagginses. Although not from the famed SB region of Marlborough (but in nearby Nelson), the grapefruitey style was easy to see. Lauren said it smelled like "salty B.O and olives," but that it was also really tasty. Most people agreed. A definite crowd-pleasing middle-of-the-road style, truthfully. The nose admittedly is not for the playing-it-safe type. But seriously, salty B.O. and olives does make for an intriguing entry into a wine, especially when you find the body evolves into something with exciting and crisp fruit. ($11-16)

Fourth place: Le Celliers de la Pauline Sancerre, Eric Louis, Loire, France, 2006 - 7.8

It's certainly interesting that the best-showing Sancerre only received 4th. A lime and floral nose with a spattering of vanilla was the first impression, and green and salty in some ways (good ways). A medium-bodied, tangy entry. ($20-25)

Fifth place: Sauvignon de la Bargemone, Coteaux D'aix en Provence, France, 2005 - 7.7

A very nice surprise. A very soft style, with pleasant citrus and petrol. It certainly wasn't complex, but it was easy and fruity. There is also a bit of Grenache Blanc and Ugni Blanc thrown in for blending purposes. And it's not too often you see Sauvignon Blancs from Provence. Best buy of the night if you can find it. -- hint -- try Village Corner in Ann Arbor. ($5-9)

Sixth place: Franck Millet Sancerre, Loire, France, 2004 - 7.6

This was admittedly a disappointment. One usually expects better grace from Sancerre. There really should be no problem with a 2004 Sancerre tasting well 3 1/2 years after harvest. But the odd thing is it didn't taste old. If anything, it tasted young. The petrol/mineral was awfully fiery. There was some fruit and minerality that retained our interest, but there really was no exquisite complexities. Still good, but it may not have been opened at the right time. ($18-25)

Seventh place: Rock Rabbit Sauvignon Blanc, Central Coast, California, 2005 - 7.3

I'm kind of astonished this actually showed this well. An value-oriented '05 Sauvignon Blanc rarely stands a chance of showing some interesting fruit while still having some acidity. But this one did. Granted, I couldn't imagine this tasting good a year from now, but the point is it tasted fine a few days ago. And that's what counts. ($7-12)

Eighth place: Groth Sauvignon Blanc, Napa, California, 2007 - 7.2

What a freaking disappointment. Light fruit, light color. Short finish. I'd spend $8 on this no more. But Groth is not about to charge $8 for their Sauvignon Blanc. BOOOOOOOOOO. ($14-21)

But seriously, try to find the one from Provence. For the money, you can't really be disappointed on that. If you can't find it, keep in mind all of these were good wines. They weren't faulty and they weren't boring (well, maybe the Groth was).

The next giant tasting we'll be doing is the grandaddy of all summer wines: Rosés!

Until the next time, keep on drinkin'.

-Pitchfork Wine

The Case of Borsao Vs. Borsao

In the words of the immortal Joey Lawrence, "woah." Indeed it has been a busy and turbulent sabbatical from this here wine blog. Like Justin, I have also switched jobs twice (but only switched addresses thrice). I think I might be an adult now: I wake up early, workworkwork, come home, eat, play online scrabble, watch TV and go to bed. However, I'm making some in-roads in not being exhausted and boring. Evidence: seeking the answer to a question that has long weighed heavy on my mind, is Borsao Tres Picos really worth twice the price of Borsao Red?

Both wines are estate bottled by Bodgeas Borsao, which is in the Campo de Borja D.O. of Spain, located in the Aragon region slightly west of central Spain. Both are primarily made from Garnacha- the native Spanish grape that was brought to France, where it is known as Grenache, rising to popularity as the basis for many Rhone and Languedoc blends. Both are of the 2006 vintage and weigh in at 14% alcohol. I have long championed the basic Borsao Red as a pleasant, easy-drinkin', and affordable representation of this very likeable and versatile grape. I had yet to scale the Tres Picos, but chose to do so with the aforementioned sibling as my trusty sherpa.

Bodegas Borsao Red 2006: 7.0
This is a blend of 75% Garnacha and 25% Tempranillo. It possesses a deep ruby color and a very astringent, alcohol nose without much fruit, aside from a hint of blackberry. Undeniably smooth, the palate gave way to some strawberry, rhubarb, and bubblegum flavor, which lend to the possibility of carbonic maceration (a forced-fermentation most commonly practiced in young reds, such as Beaujolais Nouveau). The finish is light but lingering and slightly dry. As this wine opened up, there was more detectable fruit, but a loss of brightness as it quickly became thin. It's still a great quaffer for the price, but a simple pleasure- nothing more or less.

($7-11)

Bodegas Borsao Tres Picos 2006: 8.4
100% Garnacha, this one showed a darker plum color and a similarly tight nose. Oh, but on the palate, a much different flavor profile: darker fruits, such as boysenberry, and a lot of leather. Dense and meaty with a long lean finish. As this opened up, it seemed to take on a richer flavor and a greater complexity. Still pretty smooth and simple, it expressed more concentrated nuances that are likely the result of low yields (according the label, anyhow). This could possibly even be cellared for a couple years. Tres Picos also demonstrated the power of terroir- it had a very Spanish feel and most likely wouldn't be mistaken for a French Grenache. Or would it? Perhaps this shall be taken up at a future blind tasting.

($16-21)

While both wines were definitely enjoyable in their own right, I'd be more apt to revisit the Tres Picos. It didn't truly out-do the Borsao Red in complexity, but it did so in overall balance, grace, and richness. It's also quite versatile in it's ability to pair well with a variety of foods. However, if you're looking for a wine under $10 to throw back without nerdy analysis, the basic red blend will do you just fine.

In the meantime, keep your feet on the ground, and keep reaching for the wine!

-Lauren

Wines that probably go terribly with your Easter leftovers

Rumours of our deaths have been greatly exaggerated.

And well, there weren't really any rumours.

Since my last PW post, I've changed jobs twice, moved 5 times, and launched myself into conversations about things like mortgages. Jesus. Days of working through hangovers are through, it seems. But thankfully, I find myself with an employer who does make it very convenient for me to drink wine. And boy, do I.

Just not copious quantities.

And so here we are, trying to carve out some halfway non-stale nook for hyperbole. It may often be brief, or perhaps more like a fart in a car. Only you don't have to smell it.

I've got a list of wines, scribbled and folded onto a few pieces of paper, and it just seems like the appropriate time to start ego-tripping on some South American reds:

Bodegas Caro Amoncaya Malbec/Cabernet Sauvignon. 2006: 8.8
-Possibly my favorite of recent memory. A richly violet nose, deep dark berry, and some milky dark chocolate flavors. This is from the Argentina's Mendoza region (the largest wine region in the country), and the surprising great quality to this blend is that it doesn't seem to have this odd vegetal, dirty pepper undertone in any way. Quite often even from middle-of-the-pack Argentine wines, this unique note is kind of inescapable (though not always offensive/putrid - kind of like being Rick Rolled).

The body is not intense, but feels in no way forced - you could say feminine. And the earth on the finish shows very softly. I imagine this could age for a good 5-7 years, no problem.

($18-23)

Luigi Bosca Malbec Reserva, 2005: 8.1
-Malbec is essentially the flaghsip grape of Argentina. You'll see it grown increasingly in Chile, and also still in the old world of France (in Cahors most notably). This one turns out very nicely, with some depth and ease of expression. I got some definite black pepper on the nose, as well as heavy currant. It had weight, but wasn't obnoxious. And there were some deep blackberry and raspberry notes throughout.

($17-23)

Kaiken Ultra Cabernet Sauvignon, 2004: 7.9
-I was a bit perplexed by its balance, although it was definitely an enjoyable bottle. The oak and fruit on the nose seemed peculiar, no obvious dark fruit with South American earthiness. But it's mellow style, and soft red fruit made it more than palatable. Kind of got some cinnamon and oak spice in the "meat" of the wine. There's 10 percent Malbec blended into the wine.

($22-27)

Cono Sur Carmenere, 2008: 6.5
-Whoa there! Already a 2008 release? Wow. This obviously did not spend a lot of time in the cask/tank/bottle for shipping off. I mean think about it. When was this picked? I tasted this on March 13, and assuming it hit Michigan *that day*, it's not likely to think this to be picked later than February 15th or so. Think about it, that's the northern hemisphere's equivalent to August 15th. That's still summer.

So, with that being said, what we've got here is a Carmenere that's just fine. Okay fruit, light body, a tiny bit of earth. But this was absolutely nothing memorable. I'm willing to attribute this to some sort of bottle-shock, considering it's obviously recent arrival, but if it's disappointing a second time, I'm done with it.

Then again, the price isn't so bad.

Update: This was in fact a 2006. I think I might have been drinking while taking notes. Apologies.

($8-11)

Santa Ema Merlot Reserva, 2005: 8.6
-This was a bit unusual, compared to the others. The nose was gorgeous; Sweet oak, blackberry and even a little whiff of eucalyptus were in there. A big, well-done Merlot with some roundness and no unfortunate tannins.

Quite a great deal.

($12-16)

Montes Alpha Cabernet Sauvignon, 2005: 8.4
-This did not drink like many South American Cabernets I've come to know. That's not really a good thing or a bad thing per se, but either way this kind of feels like a Merlot. Round stylistically, there was some soft but bigger fruit, and even a kind of chocolately side to it, with some smoky oak (this does make me weary). But it had a balanced finish, and there's no real reason to complain if it tastes good.

($16-23)

So anyway, it's good to qualify a few hazy memories. You'll be seeing more of us, more of us drinking and writing. And writing. Drinking. More.

-Justin

Rebirth of the Cool...

We'll be back soon!

-Pitchfork Wine Crew