Again we met in a small round for verifying what age has done to some old Spanish reds. We had a small but fine selection of reds: a Rioja from 1981 and one from 1982 -both vintages were supposed to be the best in Rioja from 1975 to 2001, further a Rioja from 1975 which was an average vintage and as a contrast a 1994 Ribera Del Duero, which was a fine year there.



But first we refreshed ourselves with a 2005 Schloss Johannisberg Erstes Gewächs, or Silberlack as they traditionally name it. A Riesling with light straw yellow color, a rather light peach nose with mineral notes, a fresh palate with nice minerality, tangy acidity and good extract, which was still a bit astringent and might need some more time to maturity. It is a genuine representative of the rather tangy dry Rheingau style emphasizing minerality and herbs and being a bit lighter on the fruit - about 90 points.

Than our first red was the 1975 Olarra Gran Reserva from Bodega Olarra. Its Colour was still dark but with a lighter, slightly brownish rim. The nose had a clear age note which resembled a bit of cork at first. On the palate the wine had lots of fire and mushroom-like tone (or fake truffles if you’re benevolent) but also notes of cooked fruits and a nice sweetness. The structure of the wine was quite nice actually with a creamy texture. The finish was medium long, but with a beautiful sweetness characterizing many old Rioja. So it was still nicely drinkable, only that age tone disrupted a bit the pleasure - 84 points.


Second was a 1981 Faustino I Gran Reserva. We already tried the 1987 Faustino vintage at a former tasting where it didn’t appear very balanced, but now we expected quite something since 1981 is said to be a very good vintage. And we weren’t disappointed. It had a very dark, beautiful colour, quite youthful for a 27 year old wine. The nose was complex and evolved with time. It started with Mocha and berries, went on with liquorice and finished with some earthy paprika notes . On the palate it appeared very dense with a nice sweetness and very fine and even quite grippy tannins which gave the wine structure (Not the unpleasant, astringent kind of tannins). The aromas were at first more on the berry type of fruit but also with liquorice appearing later and an elegant paprika sweetness on a very long finish. This wine really left nothing to be desired: that is how aged wines should taste- 92 to 94 points in my opinion.



Then we had the 1982 Lagunilla Crianza from Rioja, which was also made in a superb vintage. It smelled nice of berries and a little peppery at the beginning, but with time a small age note came through and made it less appealing. The palate though was fine, less dense and concentrated than the last wine, which is normal considering that we compare a Crianza with a Gran Reserva. On the finish the wine had a nice, subtle malty sweetness. So it started as a well aged crianza worth 90 points for me but with the age tones that came up after a while I have to “downgrade” it to 85 points.



Finally, as a contrast bottle to the Riojas, I still had a bottle of the 1994 Marques de Velilla Reserva (which I already tasted here) from the Ribera Del Duero. 1994 was a good vintage at the shores of the Duero River and so I expected this bottle to be able to keep up with the 1981 and 1982 Riojas. Well, with 14 years of age in comparison to 27 years it was much younger than the Riojas, which could mean it’s an unfair comparison, but we’re not a committee giving away gold medals in the end (we have the right to be unfair :=)). And we also opened the bottle to experience the famous difference in style between the 2 regions! The Marques had the darkest color of all wines. The nose was rather closed at first but opened up later with scents of cooked plums and cinnamon. On the palate, the style difference was obvious: it was much more dense and powerful, appeared very concentrated and juicy with plum-like fruit in the mouth at the beginning. The fruit was structured by powder-like tannins which might still soften up a bit if the wine would lie in the cellar for some more years. But the wine evolved: nose and palate developed earthy and spice notes with cinnamon and cloves. The cherry on the cake was then a very long finish which also had a slight mint-like freshness- 92 to 94 points

So in the end the tasting was a classic duel between Rioja and Ribera Del Duero. 2 different styles that were both appealing, but the perfectly matured Rioja was a tad more balanced and round, and at the same time had concentration and complexity. So for this time I guess the Rioja slightly won, but it was a close match and in a few years the Marques might strike back!

Not much time to take pictures, everyone was already leaving Paradise at that point...

This really was like a walk through paradise. At the VDP Grosse Gewächse Tour I had the pleasure to attend, I was able to taste some of the most acclaimed Rieslings from Nahe Rheinhessen and Pfalz. Ok technically seen, Rheingau and Mosel which are also big compartments of Riesling Paradise were left out, but I have to admit that it would have been too many wines in the end, and I felt lucky enough with 42 top-estates that were represented.

So somehow it was also quite a bit of work. In the end I tasted through 75 wines in 3 hours and I didn’t know that white wines could dry your palate out until then (GG are barrel aged and therefore can also be a little astringent, especially when they’re so young). And even though I spat out (otherwise my ability to judge would have been biased heavily), I felt a little exhausted at the end. Unfortunately, although I had a quite good pace, I didn’t make it to the reds, and therefore I missed some of Germanys best Pinots like those from the Ahr for example. What a pity! But as I said, I felt lucky with my Rieslings, so let’s report about them!

Riesling is a grape which has the ability to transport terroir into the wineglass. So my goal at this tasting was more trying to discern the differences between regions and vineyards, rather than making a point ranking of 75 wines (which sounds idiotic anyway). In the end however, I realized that some regions have done better than others in 2006, which is of course linked to the weather situation some estates had to deal with during harvest. But this is only the more general view. Specifically seen, each region had its highlights which I’d like to point out.

The First section of Paradise I walked through was the Nahe region. Their Rieslings have been heavily acclaimed by critics these last months and it represents in a certain way the rising wine region of the moment. I can only confirm that. Most f the wines presented themselves very refined, with nice aromas, some a little more masculine with herbaceous and tobacco-like tones, some with a nice powerful kick and a beautiful length. There was something for every taste. Personally I really liked the Monziger Halenberg and Frühlingspläzchen of Emrich-Schönleber. Several layers of aromas, complexity, balance, energetic on the palate and great finish. I also liked the beautifully balanced Pittersberg from Kruger-Rumpf with a nice fruity extract caressing your palate. Of course producers like Schlossgut Diel, Dönnhof and Schäfer-Fröhlich also had very convincing wines, but as I said before I only wanted to point out a few.

In the Pfalz the estates are all awaiting a bombastic 2007 vintage. Meanwhile, despite a very difficult harvesting, the 2006 weren’t bad either. I liked the more feminine and elegant style of Fitz-Ritters GG Kanzel and Michelsberg (Bad Dürkheim), with finely perfumed noses and persistent minerality. The Mardelskopf from Pfeffingen-Fuhrmann-Eymael is a Pfalz Riesling with a very own personality which combines fruit notes with a peppery finish. Bürklin-Wolf as usual showed some well done Kalkofen, Ungeheuer and Pechstein, the last one being more emphasized on the complexity of the fruit aromas, but less powerful than many other GG at the tasting. I really liked Bassermann-Jordan for having a very balanced and elegant collection, and von Buhl for having more energy-loaded Rieslings. Paradiesgarten and Reiterpfad were 2 beautiful wines with Paradiesgarten showing a little more power and Reiterpfad revealing a superb aromatic length. As for their Pechstein, it appeared in a very different style than Bürklins’ with an emphasis on a powerful extract. Christmann of Gimmeldingen had the most explosive GG-collection of the Pfalz. A beautiful mix of Fruit, Minerality and Power, with especially the Königsbacher Idig to be pointed out which had a great flint stone nose and an energy-loaded palate. All in all Pfalz had a lot of nice bottles and a greater variety of styles but in my opinion appeared less radiant than Nahe and Rheinhessen in 2006.

But before I jump to Rheinhessen there is also a white wine from the Southern Pfalz I have to mention. Not a Riesling but a Weissburgunder (Pinot Blanc), the Schlangenpfiff from Weingut Münzberg in Landau. I am not a connoisseur of Pinot Blanc but this wine really impressed me with a dense and perfumed nose of Flintstone and herbs and a very clear fruit on the palate and a nice finish. Very sexy!
But let’s head to Rheinhessen now.

A region which has brought up sensationally good wines these last years and somehow never finishes impressing. One Estate particularly stood out there for me: Kühling-Gillot. They presented 3 superb Riesling. 2 of them, Pettenthal and Ölberg stem from the Roter Hang, a monumental steep vineyard on the Rhine with a red slate soil giving the wine a very racy herbaceous taste. Pettenthal is vibrant and explosive, a very masculine type of Riesling with herbs, tobacco, a complex body with several layers, dried fruits, minerality and a very long showdown. Ölberg is in a similar style, but still a little denser. These wines just blew me off my shoes. Great stuff! Also St.Antony had very nice GG from the Roter Hang, but in a slightly different style, more feminine with a nice clarity, less vehement and more filigree.

So these were the wines I wanted to point out. There was of course no wine among them which was not good; somehow it was like comparing a fleet of Ferraris and trying to pick the most beautiful. Not an easy task, believe me -and of course one which is a matter of personal taste. At the end of the day though, I have to ask myself which region I would prefer if I had to buy wines, or more radically, which bottle would I pick, if I could only buy one? And to answer that question, I think I’d pick one of Küling-Gillots GG, probably Pettenthal. I was just so impressed with the quality of the wines from an estate I hardly heard of before and this is just in line with the stunning development of the Roter Hang vineyards. All of the wines from this hill have a great terroir, and this is really a region I’d like to keep my eye on these next years.

So believe me, I’m very much looking forward for my next walk though paradise.

It was time again for a nice red wine evening. We didn’t have a real topic and gathered some random bottles of red wine from 1972 to 1997. Here are the notes:

1972 Gigondas, Henri de Villamont

We started with this old Gigondas. Luckily we had no problem with the cork. In the glass it had a nice although slightly blurry red colour. In the nose a little age note with cellar and mushroom. On the palate, lively acidity which probably kept this wine alive. Yet it still appeared balanced and was nicely drinkable but had a rather short finish.
83-85

1978 Marques de Caceres Reserva, Rioja

As a birthday vintage wine this was of course a special bottle for my twin brother Felix and Me. And luckily it was also a superb wine – clearly the best of all 5 for me. It had a beautifully, nearly brilliant red colour. In the nose it had intense marmalade-like notes of red berries. On the palate it appeared elegantly slim with a discrete acidity and very youthful berry fruit, followed by a very long finish. With time some delicious chocolate notes also showed up and made this wine a perfectly aged masterpiece which you would never guess a 1978 vintage at all.
92-93

1990 Casa de La Vina Cencibel Reserva, Valdepenas

A quick one: clear age notes mixed with glue and varnish. Still drinkable, but no real pleasure.

1991 Mas Muriel Reserva, Rioja

A bottle I got from Ebay. The colour was ok. The nose was a little blunt but without a trace of an age note. On the palate then balanced and round, but nothing special. This wine must have had better days
87-88

1997 Rutherford Ranch Merlot, Napa Valley

Now a complete change in region and style. The Napa Merlot had a typical dark red colour. The nose was powerful with herbs and spices. On the palate it appeared nearly too powerful with still very astringent tannins, but notes of herbs and spices also came through. With time and some air it opened up a bit and showed more complexity. All in all it still felt much too young and I guess it would need another 5 to 10 years.

Rioja is one of the most prestigious wine regions on this globe. No doubt about it. Luckily Oskar has a great affinity with spanish wines and also collected some nice specimens during the last years. We were all very curious how these old Riojas would come out, especially compared to other „old bottles“ tastings we had like the Burgundies’ for example.
I could do a quick profile of Rioja, but why should when the Winedoctor already has done such fine work on it.

1970 Campo Viejo Gran Reserva

Our starter-bottle was from the Campo Viejo Bodega on which I don’t have much info except its website. It had a brick-red colour with a brownish rim, high clarity with a few floating particles. The bouquet came sweetish with a berry touch and a slight marmelade impression. On the palate it left a very balanced and round impression with perfectly solved tannins. No signs of 37 years of age except a slight bitter note in the end which punctuated a very nice length. This wine came from a good vintage according to Mr Parker (90 points for the vintage) and was still very nice to drink, nevertheless we believer it has seen better days before.

1975 Imperial Gran Reserva C.V.N.E.

Imperial is a brand name from C.V.N.E. (Compania Vinicola del Norte D’Espana) which exists since the 1920’s and has a great reputation for bringing constantly great qualities. The Bodega is known for being a motor of innovation for the Rioja region; it has for example among the first bodegas to bottle its own wine and to build out ageing capacities of its cellar.
It had a very brilliant ruby-red robe with slightly brown sides. It had clearly a more intense colour than the first wine. Its nose was intensely perfumed with berries, without permitting us to identify a particular berry (we guessed bramble-berry though). On the palate it was sweet at first, than fruity with a slight eucalyptus freshness. Its length was enormous, most of all 5 wines, but here again a slight bitter note came through.

1978 Marques De Riscal

Marques De Riscal is a very well known brand/winery in Rioja, since they also belong to the pioneers in that region. This wine seems to be neither a Gran Reserva, nore a Reserva, thus we believe it is a simple crianza. Nevertheless 1978 is supposed to be one good year in Rioja.
It had a ruby red, slightly blunt colour with only a little brown on the side. In the nose some strawberry. On the palate then, it appeared balanced without any adstrigency, yet with a slightly sour touch of red fruits. The final then was average, in particular when comparing it to the last wine.

1982 Vina Berceo Reserva

1982 again a very good vintage for Rioja, delivered to us by this rather unknown bodega (at least to me, and the spanish website didn’t help me much either).
But let’s rather describe the wine itself. It had a rather light colour. The nose was full of berries and with time developped and had a nice peppery touch. On the palate, the berries appeared again accompanied by a complex interaction between vanilla and liqorice. It had a nice length with a certain eucalyptus freshness. The slight bitterness was also there; nervertheless this was in our opinion the most enjoyable of the 3 younger bottles.

1987 Faustino I Gran Reserva

Faustino is a very popular Rioja brand launched by the Bodega Faustino in 1960. The Faustino group is today the biggest wineyard owner in Rioja with 760 hectares and stocks over 12 million bottles of Reservas and Gran Reservas in ist ageing cellars.
1987 was an above-average year in Rioja (82 points according to Mr Parker) but not truly exceptional. The wine was dark in colour but not with full clarity. The nose had a certain eucalyptus freshness and slight berry fruit. On the palate the wine didn’t appear very harmonious and balanced. Acidity, fruit and tannins didn’t come together quite well and drew a nervous picture of a wine which has overpassed ist drinking phase.

This tasting was marked by the 2 oldest bottles in my opinion, and one could say it was a duell between the better vintage (1970 Campo Viejo) and the better name (Imperial), which in the end, we agreed has slightly been taken by the 1975 Imperial. Besides those 2 we were quite surprised by the Vina Berceo which had the most complexity of the 3 younger wines, maybe due to the fact it was the best vintage of all 5.
Something that irritated us a little was a bitter-note that came through in all 5 bottles in a more or less intense way. We tried to come up with reasons for it and guessed that the sweet impression on the tip of the palate, either coming from the oak or being an intrinsic attribute of the tempranillo grape, made this final bitternote - whereever it stems from- much more apparent. We then concluded that, despite the fact that these wines were all exceptionnaly well drinkable and in good shape (no cork fault), they have surpassed their ideal maturity and might have offered greater pleasure some time ago. This wasn’t so obvious to tell for the 2 old Gran Reserva, but most evident for the Faustino which made a quite unbalanced and nervous impression. When compared to the old Burgundies and Bordeaux tastings we already had I would say that, for this time the Riojas couldn’t overtake them, but I’m pretty optimistic that it will happen at a further tasting. Thank you Oskar for the fine supply and see you soon for the next episode.

It was time again! After some weeks without a “major” wine-event, it was the first sunrays that reminded us that a lot of time has passed since our last true blind-tasting session. Many nice ideas for tasting-setups have arisen in my head during these last weeks which made a choice difficult, but in the end it was the sun that decided whether we’ll have a red wine or a white wine theme. And this is one I wanted to do for a long time already: a tasting of Riesling variety wines. Riesling is a vast topic, especially here in Germany, but my goal was to assemble some Riesling diversity and thus the setup was as follows: 5 Riesling bottles from 2004 or 2005, with the majority being from Germany, 1 or 2 Foreign Rieslings’ might find its way into the round.
I knew already before that there would be some inequalities (compare a young Grand Cru with others for example will give a distorted verdict), some unfair or impossible comparisons, but I guess the goal here was more to try to guess the wine than to find a winner or something.

2005 Eroica, Ste-Michelle Vineyards feat. Dr.Loosen, Columbia Valley, Washington, USA

Our first bottle was already a foreigner coming from Washington State, although it was vinified with consultancy of Dr. Loosen, the Mosel’s famous winemaker. It had a light and pale but clear color. Its nose was sweet and exotic with pineapple, pear and banana, and a touch of honey. On the palate it also appeared sweet with exotic fruit, slight minerality and very few acidity; nevertheless it had a certain freshness and some “spritz”. The finish was nice and long with an extreme warm feel. Generally it was a very pleasing wine but for my palate lacking a bit of acidity. Did it say semi-dry somewhere on the label? Might have missed that?!

2005 Zeltinger Sonnenuhr Spätlese Trocken, Markus Molitor, Mosel

Same pale but clear robe. In the nose than it was at least a little “unconventional”: At first I thought it had a sulfur fault, some kind of dense smoky smell, but in the end I wasn’t really sure. Maybe it is just a really intense slate smell which might become a strong petrol note one day, which is typical for slate soil wines from the Mosel. Maybe there is one reader who knows better and could tell me? Anyway, underneath the nose was a racy mineralic palate, with some austere spiciness and a little Riesling typical peach. Its finish was long with a relatively strong bitter-note. Was this a faulty wine, a bad wine or just a way too young wine? No clue yet.
Note: tried it again a day later and it really develops into a racy peppery Riesling; interesting style I didn’t really know before.

2004 Hochheimer Hölle Spätlese Trocken, Franz Künstler, Hocheim, Rheingau

This wine had a light colored but brilliant robe; followed then by a very intense nose of caramel with butter mixed with exotic fruit notes; A nose I could smell forever. In the mouth it was pure and fruity with a metallic, iodic touch, further I had also a mineral touch and a present acidity which was slightly too high for the wine to appear perfectly balanced. All this followed by a long finish. A beautiful wine which is obviously 2 or 3 years too young and needs some time for the single components to find together and result in a perfectly balanced experience.

2005 Mardelskopf Grosses Gewächs, Herrenberg Ungstein, Weingut Pfeffingen, Pfalz

This wine also comes from a Grand Cru vineyard located in the Pfalz. Its color was a very light yellow but with a brilliant clarity. A sniff later we identified a very sweet and intense honey and peach nose. On the palate it developed medium fruit with herbs and a rather strong acidity, higher than the last wine. It concluded then with a long finish but here again prevails the feeling that the wine needs some more years to reach maturity.

2004 Herrenweg de Turckheim, Domaine Zind-Humbrecht, Alsace, France

This is the second “foreign” Riesling in this tasting. It stems from a relatively well known Alsacian Grand Cru vineyard. Alsace Riesling are known for a totally different Riesling style, much more fruity and perfumed. This wine indeed, had the darkest color of all 5 wines, which was an intense and brilliant gold. In the nose first of all we identified some obvious noble rot (botrytis) which gave a rich buttery touch, but also some fruity peaches and apricots and a peppery note. On the palate the same notes appeared but a very austere acidity takes over rapidly. Back to our old problem: at least 2 or 3 years to young to drink.

As a final word we can resume that all 5 wines were interesting wines and some definitely had their own style. Fate wanted though that most of them were young Grand Cru wines, which means that they are wines which need to mature and, depending on the Riesling style, one bottle might need 2 to 3 years, another might need 5 years and the third one ten years. The Alsacian wine for example, with its noble rot touch and high acidity would be a candidate for 10 years of ripening in my opinion. The Rheingau and Mosel bottles on the other hand might rather be ready in 2 or 3 years. Thus these 5 bottles weren’t made to compete against each other, but it was interesting to taste the different styles.
The most interesting style for me was definitely the Molitor Riesling with its racy peppery character I didn’t encounter before. The American Riesling was the bottle which most of the tasters preferred, and it was indeed a nice surprise, a good quality which none of us would have expected from an American Riesling. It also had its own style which reminded more an elegant semi-dry whine. My personal favorite though was the Künstler Hochheimer Hölle which has great potential in my opinion, but I guess I have a faible for Künstler wines anyway.

1985 was one of the big big years in Bordeaux. I was only 6 years old at the time, but I’m sure of it! Well, “officially”, opinions are a little diverging: some sources say it is an excellent vintage, other source just say it was finally better than announced in 85’. But what really counts in the end is our opinion ;-).We had 3 Grand Cru’s from the Médoc Area, 2 Pauillac’s and one St-Estephe (but adjacent to Pauillac, Chateau Cos Labory is jut 500 meters away from Lafite-Rothschild). Thus we can say it was a Pauillac-centered tasting of the ’85 vintage.
We started with the Baron Pichon-Longueville 1985 since a source said it would be the least best of the three. The Chateau which has a long lasting rivalry with its neighbour Pichon-Longueville-Comtesse-de-Lalande (the two are 2nd Grand Crus; a good description of Pichon-Baron can be found here) delivered very inconsistent qualities until the AXA insurance group bought it in 1987 and modernized it. Unfortunately our bottle was from the pre-modernization time so we tried to rely on the quality of the vintage to surprise us positively… But fate didn’t want us to unveil anything since our bottle was… corked! Nevertheless we tried to sniff behind the cork and believed the nose was rather not complex. On the palate the cork-taste wasn’t so strong and we had a rather simple balanced wine without much fruit. Tannins were soft but very astringent on the back of our tongues; not so impressive… But on the other hand I tried the same wine before (here, in German) and came to a much better conclusion. I guess you just shouldn’t try to judge a corked wine!
Our second wine was the 1985 Chateau Cos Labory from St-Estephe, a 5eme Grand Cru Classé. It had a very vivid red colour, which made the wine appear young. Its nose was dominated by blackcurrant and very fruity in an elegant way. On the palate it was again fruity and balanced, but lacked a bit of depth: it was hard to identify any secondary aroma. Here again it was astringent on the back of the palate which was a little conflictive with our first impression of a very balanced wine. All in all this wine had exactly what one would expect from a fair, well matured bottle of Bordeaux.
Our third wine was judged best by our sources. It was the 1985 Chateau Batailley from Pauillac, again a 5ème Grand Cru Classé. It is located on the Southern end of the Pauillac appellation not far from St-Julien’s appellation border. It had a beautiful colour and a nice powerful nose of blackcurrant and various other berries. On the palate it was splendid; it simply had more body, more depth than the other 2 wines. It was fruity and liquorice and an ink or tar-like tone appeared as secondary aroma. Finally, it had a great length where the flavours echoed on and on for a long time; truly a nice bottle (The Winedoctor has a small note on this wine too, here).
So thank you Oskar for the nice Bordeaux supply, next time it’s our turn!

After my little wine-break (finally 10 days instead of 20 :=)) we decided to attack those Burgundies again. Oskar had 3 bottles which were 3 different vintages from the Confréries des Tastevins, bottled by Ets Saint-Ferdinand in Mercurey. The labels didn’t tell us more, except for the vintages which were 1970, 1977 and 1983; so it was some kind of “Tastevin-Seventies-Verticale”. As a final bottle and some kind of contrast I added a 2003 Beaune 1er Cru Bottle from Dufouleur Père et Fils which I got in a wine shop here in Frankfurt for the occasion.
For the 3 oldtimers, the corks came out surprisingly well and didn’t smell bad, which reminded me of the last “old Burgundies” tasting where nearly all the old bottles were still impeccable.
So we started with the 1970 Confréries des Tastevins, Ets Ferdinand. The wine had a light red colour. Its nose had a little balsamic vinegar tone, but not much more. It didn’t open up much with time neither (rather had a “wet-cellar” smell then). On the palate it was balanced and fruity but without any specifiable aroma. We decided rapidly to try the 1977 vintage. This one appeared much more vivid, with more power and fruit. Its colour was much darker with ruby-red reflexes and the flow marks on the glass let us know that alcohol had remained in the bottle over the years. On the palate we immediately had warmth; probably the taste of the 1977 sun shining down on the Pinot Noir grapes. It had power, yet was balanced. Here again no precise fruit could be distinguished; I noticed a little earthy note though. It still had tannins, but having the size of atoms and feeling soft and silky, which is actually the optimum for an old wine. The length was very satisfying, but had a little acid tone coming with it. This was our favourite of the 3 old bottles, but here again, despite the fact that it was still good, still drinkable, we knew it had past its peak and was on the way down the aging curve for some time already.
The 1979 was again more like the 1970 one but much more acidic. This was the least favourite wine of the evening, and doesn’t need much more description.
The 2003 Beaune 1er Cru, Les Cent Vignes from Dufouleur which was our final bottle, was decanted for an hour already when we poured it in the glasses. It was of course completely different from the older burgundies which had lost most of their primary aromas already. This one was dark as ink nearly. Its nose was heavy of dark cherries and a hint of tar (Ok I admit I was the only one of us smelling tar there). On the palate it was fruity with a slight marmalade touch but not artificial at all. It was black cherries and blackberries with something more heavy- something ethereally heavy and elegant-like tar but without the pungent and venomous tone. Ok let’s just say it had a certain complexity :=). The tannins were also present, but this wine could very well been drunken young. The vendor at the wine shop told me that 2003 was a very good year in Burgundy, and after having tasted it I have no more doubts about that; I can well imagine that this wine will further develop over the next 10 years. But as the older wines of today have taught us, we shouldn’t let it age too long.

This past evening we made a blind tasting of German Chardonnays. Chardonnay isn’t of course a typical German variety; it is rather a Burgundian variety, very famous for its Chablis wines.
Since some years, several German winemakers planted Chardonnay and tried to surf on this internationally popular wave.
These last years also, my father and I tried one German Chardonnay and were very convinced. This made us curious of course if there are more such convincing “Chards” growing here. So we decided to organize some more samples and blind taste them in a nice round. Actually this was our first real blind tasting, honouring the name of this blog: a shame it came that late!
So here’s the plot: we had 5 bottles, 4 of them being German and one of them from Austria. 2 of the bottles I already knew. One of the bottles was my father’s favourite wine, but I filled it in another bottle so he couldn’t recognize it! (All of the bottles had their labels covered by a cooling sleeve). I asked everyone to give the wines a grade between 1 and 10 while tasting them.

Our first wine was a Franz Künstler 2005 Chardonnay from the Rheingau. We all liked it, and even more as it got warmer (I kind of overcooled all the bottles so that they all have the right temperature). It had a nice nose of citrus fruits, like grapefruit for example and for me it also had a slight almond/nutty aroma. On the palate it was again fruity, with citrus fruits. Oskar also noticed that it had a hint of honey. We agreed. Besides It had a complex minerality, as you would expect it from some good Riesling, and this one actually comes from a famous Riesling terroir, doesn’t it. It also had a somehow thick mouthfeel, indicating a nice extraction. At the same time, you could still taste the yeasts from its youth. Maybe it needs a half year to get more maturity and taste more precise. (By the Way, I have already tried several Künstler wines, check them out in the Rheingau section)

Our second wine was at first try really a shock. Much more dry and acid then the first wine and a slight wood tone (this was the only wine of the tasting matured in barrels) immerged our palates; our first impression was…”beurk, throw it away”, but good as we are, we gave it a second, a third and a fourth chance. Ok, as it warmed up, the 2005 Würtz Weinmann Chardonnay from Rheinhessen, got more aroma; some smell of lemon balm and herbs. But all in all it had a lot of acidity and wasn’t very balanced. It seemed to me as if the winemaker tried to copy the Chablis method, where Chardonnays in barrels yield very good results. Unfortunately this didn’t work out for Rheinhessen Chardonnay. This was definitely our least favourite wine of the tasting. Maybe we should give it a try on its own another day since it had a completely different style than the other 4 wines which were much more on the fruit. Anyway, I know for sure that Dirk Würtz makes some terribly good Rieslings which I can only recommend.

This third bottle then is my fathers preferred wine. Kind of his MVP wine, his babe etc… And I must admit I like it very much too. The 2005 Wageck-Pfaffman Chardonnay from the Pfalz region has a youthful fruitiness which floods your mouth with an instant happiness guarantee. Its nose is of course super-fruity too reminding English candy, the one in the metal box (you know which!?!). It has a thick body with hints of minerality and some crisp carbon-dioxide and a little yeast, revealing its youth. But these aromas don’t bother, I think they rather structure the wine and intensify its “happy feel”. As a slight critique we noticed that it has a slightly bitter finish and lacks a little complexity compared to our first wine, the Rheingau Chardonnay. Also we wonder how it would taste in half a year, when the youth-aromas diminish. We have the feeling that this wine is made to be drunken that young. Still, this was one of our preferred wine of the tasting. And for sure, The preferred choice wine of my father!

Our fourth wine, the 2005 Ludi Neiss Chardonnay comes from the same region than number 3 and also had a similar aroma. The slight difference was that it had a little late harvest touch, or to be more specific, a Riesling Spätlese touch. Its body had a little honey-like touch and even its finish was sweet. So this one has a point here compared to the previous Pfalz-Chardonnay. This one also has less yeast and appears a tick more mature. Difficult tot tell, which of these last two was better!

Our last wine, wasn’t a German one. As a matter of fact, I chose an Austrian Chardonnay (they speak some kind of German still) in order to realize ( or not) its similarities (varietal-wise) with its German fellows. Surprisingly (or not), this 2005 Chardonnay Sinner, from Prieler in the Burgenland region was quite similar to its 2 predecessors. It had a tick more acidity and the fruit was present but not as dominant as the 2 before. It was a much more round wine, very pleasant to drink. But it couldn’t top number 3 and 4. If I would be fair I would say it’s a draw between 3, 4 and 5, but I have the feeling that it was a tick behind them.

So as a final cut, what can we say? There wasn’t one winner in this tasting. Except for number 2, all the wines had a similar fruity style, and were very appealing. These had only slight differences. For me number 1, 3 and 4 were my choices, whereby number 4 I found was a nice discovery. My father liked 3 and 4 the most, but I guess number 3, his baby remains his number 1 all-time choice and he was quite happy that none of the competitors punched it off its foundation. As for Oskar, I guess, he also liked 1, 3 and 4 the most but I think that he had a slight faible for the first one with its hint of honey and slight complexity, am I right?
Of course we all agreed that number 2 is the loser of the evening!
As a whole, German Chardonnays are an interesting discovery, very different from its international fellows. I guess also, that for a lot of wine lovers it would be difficult to recognize them as Chardonnay if tasted blind.

I think we had this topic before, but aren’t there countless excellent wines in the Mediterranean regions to discover? The difference might be that this time I can at least come up with something like a link between all these wines.
The first two stem from the Douro river region in Portugal. The third one is a Spanish Ribera del Duero, the same river than the two before but on Spanish soil. Oscar (who brought the first 3 wines) thought it would be interesting to compare the styles of two neighbour regions. The fourth wine is a Greek Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot Cuvée called Biblia Xora, produced in the hills of Makedonia (North-Eastern Greece, no more link here : )). Finally I contributed a Southern French wine from Faugères in Languedoc.
Let’s get it on!

2002 Reserva Adamastor, Douro DOC, Portugal

This is the younger of the two Douro wines. It has a really beautiful, shiny cherry-red colour. Its nose is rather indefinable, more in the red berries direction though, but we couldn’t distinct any precise fruit. On the palate, I personally enjoyed the tannins which were still young but had a texture of very small and smooth particles. At the same time these tannins gave a very fresh feel when swallowing. The wine went through barrels of French oak, which gave it a very discreet wood flavour. Here again, the fruit was hardly definable, but after retrying the wine at the end, some Black Cherry and raspberry came through. All in all a pleasant drinking wine we thought, and went on.

2000 Reserva Campelo prestige, Douro, Portugal

This Douro wine is two years older than its fellow. The colour is a darker but still shiny red. Its bouquet has strangely a certain bluntness mixed with indefinable red fruit, as its fellow. Maybe it needs just some more time. On the palate, this wine seems more balanced, with less tannin than its younger colleague. Here the red fruit becomes more contour and remind red currants. Again French wood gives it a discrete support. Finally the wine has a medium length.
After re-tasting the wine a little later, its bouquet has opened, scenting more of forest and mushrooms, giving it a little Barolo touch and adding a slight complexity compared to its younger colleague. One could imagine it well with well seasoned meat dishes: a harmonious, yet powerful companion.

2001 Vina Pedrosa Reserva, Bodega Perez Pascuas, Ribera del Duero, Spain

This wine grows on the shores of the same river than the 2 Portuguese wines before. Nevertheless, the Ribera Del Duero region accounts for the most appreciated wines in Spain and has a worldwide reputation which is close to Medoc or St Emilion. So, it could surely be unfair to compare this bottle with the two precedents. But anyway, what is more interesting is to notice the technical differences between this first league wine and its uprising neighbour. Like comparing David and Goliath. Is Goliath powerful but gammy, conservative and dusty? And is David, dynamic vibrant and explosive?
In the glass first, its colour is an elegant, darker red. The nose has a powerful scent of Vanilla which undoubtedly stems from American Oak barrels (24 months says the label). This already differentiates it from its Portuguese neighbours who prefer to show pure grape expression (using more discrete French oak) rather than external perfume addition. Nevertheless we can smell juicy fruit under the Vanilla coat, reminding mixed wild berries. On the palate, the oak taste is persistent, but the fruit has enough power and claims dominance. After a while then, the cliché of a conservative and lame wine bursts, as other layers submerge and give the wine complexity, which detaches it irrevocably from its Portuguese fellows. Now, as we taste liquorice, herbs and the mixed berries become more distinct, the oak costume adds elegance and the tannins add power. The Tempranillo grape now shows off its qualities (The same variety is also blended in our Portuguese wines; there it is called Tinto Roriz). One could still argue that the wine has an artificial touch, but as the tannins indicate, it is still young and the strong oak might attenuate over the years. Maybe this is also the answer to our question: Ribera Del Duero wines are made to last, while Douro wines are mostly being drunk while still young (I’m not talking about Port wines here ;))

2004 Biblia Xora, Makedonia, Greece

So now we have a big 2500 km jump towards east heading to the hills of makedonia in North-eastern Greece. There, near the city of Kavala, Greek winemakers Evangelos Gerovassiliou and Vassilis Tsaktsarlis created their estate, in a region were high elevations and oceanic climate provide a longer vine growing period than in other greek regions. (more here).
This wine is a classic blend between Cabernet and Merlot. It has a nice dark red colour with purple reflections. We found it has a very aromatic nose reminding herbs, but also red berries and a little vanilla. Later we also identified a fresh scent, possibly a hint of eucalyptus. On the palate, we the fruit reappears, accompanied by a robust structure with medium-strong tannins. This wine again might have some ageing potential. It also has a smoky, meaty taste which makes you want to chew the wine. All in all a very pleasant and balanced wine, made in a classic style but with a little “Greek” edge to it.

2003 Réserve Maison Jaune, Domaine Alquier, Faugères, France

This is our last wine of the tasting. The Domaine Alquier (more info here) is one of the most reknown estates in Faugères besides Barral and Chateau de La Liquière. I don’t have exact information on the wine but I assume it’s a cuvee of Syrah, Grenache and Carignan. Knowing that southern French wine need some time to develop their full aroma, I decanted this one some hours before. It had a nice dark but somehow shiny colour. Its nose was very different from the other wines, a very exotic scent of passion fruit and or unripe berries (like a fruity acidity or an acid fruitiness). I nearly said it smelled like raspberries, but Oskar said I smell raspberries too often in every other bottle, so let’s say you might smell a hint of raspberries (After retasting the wine an hour later I also found it had a little black cherry in the nose). On the palate we unanimously assigned the wine a straightforward acidity level; which might mean the wine could benefit from a little more ageing. The fruits on our palate were the same vitamin loaded varieties we identified with our nose. The smooth tannins also added a little menthol-like freshness but at the same time indicated some ageing potential.

What’s our conclusion then? It was interesting to see the difference in styles between a top notch Ribera wine and its Portuguese Colleagues. Also, the jump to Greece and France, both with completely different grape varieties, wasn’t really consistent for a comparative tasting, but still showed us different but attractive styles. But actually there was still a common point between all these styles: they all had the typical warmth and strength of Southern wines.
So you still might want to know which wine was outstanding here? I guess the Ribera had the most complexity in the end, but with exception of the second Douro wine, all the wines would benefit from a little more time to age.

It is always an occasion for great discoveries when Oskar announces he will come by and bring some wine. This time it was even more the case since he brought 4 bottles of old vintage wine and my knowledge about old wine is very limited, so I had an opportunity to learn a lot.

Domaine les Veilles 1979, Saint Ferdinand, Côtes du Rhône

Once poured in a glass you can see light brown shades on the brim witnessing the age of the wine. Nevertheless this Côtes du Rhône is still young on the palate. You can still taste the fire and wildness of a southern French wine in terms of alcohol. On the other hand 27 years have made this wine a very burgundy stile round wine with little tannins and perfect balance. You can smell and taste red fruits but there is no fruit attribute or flavour which someone could distinct in particular except maybe a little earthy taste. A nice discovery!

Barolo Riserva 1984, Vini Pregiati Ferrero, Alba

One knows that Barolo is a wine which particularly needs a lot of aging time to reach their peak level (Especially true for the older ones; today a lot of Barolos are made to be drunken younger). So I was happy to come across this nice bottle. With 22 years of age it should be a at its best. The wine had a nice dark colour with light brown reflections on the side. It had a nice perfume at the beginning which somehow rapidly disappeared. On the palate it had a gentle licorice and condiment flavour and really soft tannins which felt like melting.
But I was still a little disappointed of the blunt or short nose… and went on with the next wine. Fortunately we tried all the wines again after an hour or so. And this Barolo went through an incredible metamorphosis! This time the nose wasn’t blunt but it was a true explosion of flavour, with a very intense mushroom and underwood smell which reminded autumn ( and went perfectly with the weather since it was rainy and cold in a late April day) and matched the idea I had of Barolo being an autumn wine which goes with venison dishes with strong sauces.
This wine was definitely my favourite of the tasting.

Roca I Mora Gran Reserva 1991, D.O. Tarragona

This 1991 Gran Reserva stayed 18 months in oak barrels, then it was kept another 30 months in the bodega before it was made available for customers. After that it stayed some 11 years in a private wine cellar. Maybe it was time to open this bottle and see how this old Spanish Senor compares to his European fellows.
The result is this wine could easily keep up. The nose was fruity and one could still smell very distinctly the wood. On the palate this wine tasted fruity again, mostly reminding red berries. The tannins were extremely soft and this wine just tasted yummy. It also had a great length. Here again the age didn’t do any harm to the wine but just smoothed out some edges.

Brunello di Montalcino 1995, Azienda Agrare Mastroianni

Our last wine of the tasting and at the same time our youngest with 11 years of age. This one still tasted really young. It had a high level of acidity and still lots of tannins. Nevertheless it had an interesting nose, fleshy or bacon and anise, but also cherries and red fruit. In the mouth it also had a little earthy taste as well as forest berries and a light mushroom flavour.
But this wine will profit of another decade in the cellar, the time it needs for the acidity level to fall and the tannins to soften.

This was really an interesting tasting with great discoveries. Thanks a lot, Oskar, I am sure you have some more nice surprises hidden in your cellar ;)