Sometimes you just meet up with friends for a wine tasting without having a particular plan or theme. You just start with one bottle and pick the next one according to the moods, the appetites and desires of everyone. This was such a tasting:


The 2007 Deidesheimer Grosse Hohl GG by Mosbacher is a powerful Riesling. Vibrant and musculous, yet with enough fruit and a beautiful acidity to balance it. Nice presence and nice length. Able to compete within Germany’s Riesling top league.


2005 Spätburgunder M by Markus Schneider wasn’t a unanimous winner. Some found the nose was overload with wood and some other stringent tone. I found it to be a ripe cherry and earth nose with slight vanilla – typical Spätburgunder nose. The palate appeared full bodied with nice presence, soft tannins and a good length. It seems to be in its optimum drinking window right now. Can’t imagine a benefit of longer ageing.


2006 Dido Montsant was more on the fruit, with a nice dark colour and intense berries both in the nose and on the palate. Big on raspberries with lots of sweetness. Nice weight and smooth structure. Intense raspberry finish. Maybe some violet flavours also. Probably lacking a bit depth and appearing marmalade-like for many. Solid wine though.


2005 Coudoulet de Beaucastel Côtes du Rhône appeared nicely balanced with only some tannin remaining. Nice fruity nose with some raspberry, but maybe lacking a bit of personality you’d expect from a Rhône wine that age. Medium length.


2007 Blaufränkisch by Gernot Heinrich from Austria’s Burgenland was a unanimous winner and obviously a crowd pleaser. It’s a light bodied intensely fruity wine with cherries all over. A little complexity is added by subtle smoke and spice notes in the nose and on the palate. Probably an excellent summer red, a winner wine for barbeque parties.


Until now, all the wines we drunk were intended to be opened. But after we got into a discussion whether or not a wine older than 5 years is actually drinkable, I felt challenged to deliver proof. After opening a 1989 Barolo which had an obvious age note mixed to its typical wood scents I pulled the cork out of a 1985 Château Clarke from Listrac. I already had it before and thus knew it might be the right bottle. The colour was dark and only had a slight orange fading. The nose was a bit closed with a mix of cellar and slight fruit at the beginning but immensely improved over the next 2 hours reminding then blackberry and wet stones. On the palate a very dense and nicely concentrated wine with clearly no age note struck our palates. It showed fruit, but masculine flavours like peppery spice, leather, and a slight mint freshness dominated. Later the wine mellowed, became more ample and showed malt-like sweetness you just wanted to bite into. The length was really impressive for this smaller château. For me the wine of the evening.. 92 points.


2000 Chateau Chasse Spleen from Moulis was then a baby compared to Clarke. I also decanted it. First the nose showed inexpected ripe fruit notes like cooked plum, but on the palate its youth was evident. Coarse tannin only made a one dimensional wine seizable. Only after 1 or 2 hours the wine started to show its depth and potential. The nose showed more red fruits, a little paprika, some vanilla, but still a slight glue tone. On the palate then, more red fruit, some pepper, some herbs and leather showed up. The wine had many elements of a satisfying Bordeaux with aroma, power, concentration and lenght but the higher acidity and tannins only sent out one message: leave me in the cellar! I kept half of the bottle to further examine it on the next day. And then I got that cooked fruit-somehow-oxydised tone in the nose which is worrying me. An aged fruit note in the nose ans a too young of an appearance on the palate. What should I think now?

You and I know it; this blog calling itself a blind tasting blog recently generated far too many posts about food stalls and other dispensable topics digressing far away from the serious duty it bears to throw light on the successful and less successful outcomes of the art of winemaking. Yuck :=) … What I actually wanted to say is that it was really time again for a post justifying the name of this blog. And luckily it occurred that our friend Nick offered to host a blind tasting of Spanish red wines. There were 2 simple rules to follow: the bottles shouldn't stem from any of the 2 main wine regions (Rioja and Ribera) and they shouldn't be too old. No problem! Offer accepted! Naturally, as abiding by the official wine tasting protocol, all the bottles were properly covered and mixed before the tasting, thus allowing a fair comparison.



2002 Vietor y Leon Reserva, Valdepenas – Beautiful and brilliant colour. Nose is rather discrete, first only some hints of spice, later some plum fruit but never really getting intensive. Palate starts with light vanilla a.k.a. traces of barrel wood, goes on with cherry notes and is altogether medium weighted. Appears very light and balanced, nearly refreshing; acidity is on the lower end. Finish is better than average but not impressive. Nice light wine though that I could well imagine with a fish course. By the way, I would have never guessed it 7 years old; rather 3 - some 88-89 pts.



2005 Inurrieta Sur, Navarra - Very dark and brilliant colour. Nose first with Kirsch-Schnaps but also with animal like notes of leather; after some time developping a typical vanilla-impregnated Tempranillo nose – in a good way. The palate is middle-weighted, but still with slight astringency and a feel of alcohol burning in the finish. A touch of bitterness is also involved. The whole wine evolves though and gets more complex showing leather, spice, rosemary, and suddenly fruit sweetness takes a bit over, maybe a tad too much for my taste, but in the end most in our round enjoyed this wine and for 6,50 Euro one gets plenty of value. About 88-89 points also I’d say. A pretty well done cuvee of Garnacha, Graziano and Tempranillo actually.




2005 Sonorus Crianza, Navarra – This one shows off weirdly with a nose at first reminding wet cellar, then a little honey or clove added to it, thus remaining weird. The palate is impacted with some massive tannin, but with sweet fruit and spice hidden underneath. Quite short Finish. It evolved several times, remaining weird in each of its phases, and hardly showing potential. Hoping for the best I’d say that this cuvee of Tempranillo, Cabernet and Garnacha goes through a tuff phase. 82+.



2005 Enrique Mendoza Merlot, Alicante - Very dark colour; Beguiling etheroeus nose of creamy blackcurrant -somehow like crème de Cassis. In some way this instantly reminds me of a good Margaux nose; and a Margaux palate follows: middle weighted, slightly astringent still, but then with sweet blackberry and hints of liquorice. Maybe a bit too jam-like but it got rounder with time and more balanced; Still has some potential for development .When I discovered it was a Merlot, the similarity to the Margaux style suddenly made sense. Quite possible that this bottle could successfully infiltrate a Margaux tasting; and all in all quite an interesting wine considering its price of 12 Euro - 89-90+



1996 Palacio de Arganza, Villafranca del Bierzo – Dark Colour but getting lighter to the side indicating a higher age. Nose gives a second clue with a slight age note, but also shows some round blackberry fruit and hints of coffee. Appears a bit dusty but nevertheless round and balanced. Nice length. This wine definitely won’t get better than this anymore but also had better times before. 85



2005 Dominio Lasierpe Crianza, Navarra – Nearly black in colour. Rather discrete nose. The palate still has some astringency but with some nice fine grained tannins; it shows blackcurrant fruit and some spices. The finish is fair enough in length but shows some flavours of cooked fruit. This wine still needs some time but should be worth its 7,9 Euro. 83+. A much better choice though would be its aged brother the 2001 Reserva which I posted about here (in German): It’s a bit costier with 14 Euro but also plays in another league.



2005 Palacio Quemando Crianza Alvear, Robera del Guadiana, Extremadura – Even more nearly black in colour than the previous wine and with an elegant purple hue. Nose is quite intense, but also very ordinary with red fruit. Palate shows a higher than average acidity, a slight bitterness but also a fruit sweetness and a little vanilla stemming from the barrel ageing. This wine didn’t strike me at all to be honest, but on the other hand I think it might need a bit more ageing. 82+



2005 Anima Negra, Mallorca – Nearly black in colour but not that shiny. Very intensive nose of leather, gunpowder, musk, tar: a very manly mix someone said. Palate has slight astringency still, but then a superb structure with perfect balance between sweetness and acidity; here again aromas are very masculine with a slight bitter tone reminding bay leafs, then olives and herbs, some leather. There was a sweet fruit part in the wine, but flavors all came through as very masculine. And the finish blew all other wines away in length and intensity. Clearly this cuvee of several autochthon Majorcan varieties was a great wine with superb structure and a distinguished character; also it was my favorite of this tasting. 92-93



2004 Enrique Mendoza Pinot Noir – Very intense, nearly jam-like nose of raspberries and some vanilla. The palate shows high astringency and the same raspberry sweetness underneath, the acidity is quite vivid and weirdly has a bitter taste. The finish isn’t very long and picks up that bitterness. It was quite a surprise to find a Pinot Noir in this Spanish wine selection, never had on before, but it was one of the weaker wines in the end, maybe it could still improve with some time though. 83+



2004 Conde Valdemar Reserva, Rioja – One Rioja managed to infiltrate this tasting. Discrete nose of red fruit and some mint. On the palate a very round wine with red berries an some vanilla, quite ordinary actually, seems quite blunt beneath all those characters’ from the newer Spanish wine regions. It also had a very short finish. For 13 Euro I’d rather buy some other wine from this tasting. 82-83

Wow this was a one of a kind tasting involving lots of fun and interesting bottles; and there was a clear winner for me. The Anima Negra comes close to the league of great wines of this world, but on the other hand it’s also the highest in price for 30 Euro. Luckily though, this tasting also revealed some nice bargains such as the Inurrieta Sur which only costs 6,50 EUR and a more than interesting Merlot which I'd love to try again to confirm my Margaux theory. In a conclusive sentence I'd like to thank our friend Nick for the invitation and the delicious Chili con Carne he cooked for us.

In the very last minute I realized that I was about to miss the start of the Rheingau Gourmet Festival, a one week event comprising many mouth watering lunches, dinners and wine tastings all held in this epicurious region along the Rhine.

So I hurried to attend the Sunday wine tasting featuring some 30 VDP Rheingau estates as well as a dozen of Chianti and Barolo winemakers. The tasting was being held at mythical Eberbach Abbey, a huge ancient monastery which was also used as scenery for the movie “The Name of the Rose” with Sean Connery: could there be any more inspirational setting?

Whereas I skipped most Italian reds- those I tried just felt horribly bitter and adstringent- I spared no efforts in tasting each of the 2007 Rieslings; what an opportunity to get an overview of this excellent vintage in Germany.



And to be honest I was surprised that many estates only brought up some pretty average First Growths considering the quality of the vintage. But fortunately there were also wines to remember, some maybe for a lifetime. A handful of wines entered my imaginary list of favorites and 2 wines really fought hard in a final (imaginary :=)) showdown for the first place.

To make a long story short, the showdown that crystallized for me in this tasting, urged me to rush back and forth several times from the Leitz estate booth to the Künstler estate booth. The outcome then was a pretty close game, but I’m pretty sure that my favorite First Growth of the tasting was the Hochheimer Hölle by Künstler.

This Riesling made of more than 40 year old vines just has it all: spiciness, fruit, power, minerality, a nice acidity; and all those elements just are in perfect balance. On the other hand the Leitz Berg Rottland alte Reben Goldkapsel, also made from old vines (more than 60 years old) has the greater intensity: apricot underlined by masculine spices and a nearly crackling minerality, not to mention an infinite length. But in the end the Rottland appeared a bit overpowered, nearly too intensive for me. (I remember the 2005 without the GK being way more balanced). The Hölle appeared a little more balanced and elegant and would therefore be my choice for a wine able to please at any occasion. But don’t get me wrong: both are great wines. I just wanted to have a winner and therefore had to put myself in a situation where I must choose. This said there is another factor which usually plays a role in decision making, but which I didn’t take into consideration here: the price. The Rottland GK sells for incredible 65€; the Künstler for “only” 25€ (But keep in mind that there is also a Rottland without GK for 30€ and a Hölle GK for 40 €, but both weren’t offered at this tasting).

Now for my third place, there was another elegant appearance. One of my usual suspects actually: The Kiedricher Gräfenberg FG by Robert Weil. As always it showed an incredible clarity of taste with finely chiseled minerality. Will Weil ever produce a disappointing Gräfenberg? This vineyard just seems to be a warranty for good wines.



Finally I also stumbled on some FG’s offering quite good value for money. First of all the Oestricher Doosberg FG by Querbach for 15 € showing masculine spice, Riesling fruit with power and complexity while at the same time being nicely balanced. Secondly, the Hattenheimer Nussbrunnen FG by Balthasar Ress with a nearly similar style. The Erbacher Steinmorgen FG by Baron zu Knyphausen offers fresh minerality and juicy Riesling fruit for 17€. Interesting also, the Lorcher Pfaffenwies FG by Graf von Kanitz for 19,5 €; a very masculine Riesling with tobacco and herbs, but also with nice layers of peach fruit and a precise minerality.

Happy New Year to everyone and all the best wishes for 09! I hope you had at least such a good time as I had during the holidays. A big highlight at this time of the year are always Christmas dinners with the family . Besides the joy of being united, they're of course the perfect occasion for experimenting with fine foods - Always an enterprise with uncertain outcome! Fortunately we can also rely on wines to save the dinner - here are some of my favorites.



German Riesling Sekt instead of Champagne is a damn good option. This 2000 dry Sekt from Siben Erben in the Pfalz was fresh, with Riesling fruit yet dry and complex.



The 2000 Chasse-Spleen is still a rough diamond overload with tannins. The nose though is already to die for with fruit, mint freshness and lead. Many many years to go still...



Perfect with Foie Gras, this 2006 Robert Weil Spätlese with luscious fruitiness and the typical minerality of the Gräfenberg...



Even more interesting with Foie Gras, this 2001 Chardonnay Beerenauslese from Knipser. 12,5% alcohol still for a BA is quite surprising. It has a strong but beautiful acidity which gives it potential for many decades.



2006 Ölberg GG by Kühling Gillot represents one of Rheinhessens new flagship wines. It is indeed impressive with loads of power and massive tart herbs notes accompanying yellow fruit. Definetely not feminine in style. Sometimes though, the alcohol seems a little bit too high or let's say not well integrated. Still, a GG no one should miss to try.



Knipser is very famous for its red wines in Germany. This 2005 Himmelsrech is one of his Riesling GG from one very ripe year in the Pfalz in particular. With 3 years of age it didn't seem as fresh as I thought it would still be. But in the end it was just a little tone, not a massive age note. Otherwise lots of fruit still. Somehow Mosel-like in the mid-palate, reminding their typical slate aromas, someone said this smoky bitterness might come from old vines. Got to find out about that.

After many weeks we finally gathered again for a genuine blind tasting round. This means that we agreed on a topic - Spanish Reds from the nineties on - and then covered the labels. The big guessing fun game could begin.




Our first wine was at the same time the oldest of five bottles. We all guessed that. In fact it had a rather light red colour with a slight brown hue at the edges. The 1995 Medina Del Campo from Valcruzal was at best medium bodied. Its taste was quite round and balanced, but at the same time unexciting and a little blunt. Maybe some berry fruit on the palate, but then again nothing clearly identifable, also some earthy notes here and there. With time the body got a little more ample. Lenght was short to medium. I would rate it with 84 points.



Our second wine was obviously much younger; we could instantly tell frome the much darker colour. It was nearly black and had a brilliant shine. After having tried all 5 wines I guessed it a 2000 Ribeira Del Duero, and in fact (lucky me) it was a 2000 Gallery 101 Reserva from Torres de Anguix in Ribera. Its nose was first covered by the vanilla-like smell of American Oak barrels, leaving primary fruit notes undiscovered but later a sweet nose of berries (black currant) and a nougat/chocolate note found its way through the vanilla. On the palate it was medium to full bodied, revealing some fine grained but still adstringent tannins at first, but which mellowed down later. With a little time fruit aromas of black berries also appeared. Slight bitter notes then disappeared and left room for a delicious nut and nougat mixture, fading into sweet berries and vanilla. The length wasn't bad either. Quite a modern wine from the Duero, not to marmelade like though. 91 points.



Wine number 3 was again very light in colour, nearly reminding orange. We all guessed it a wine from the nineties again, which was right. Oscar even guessed the region right since he called it a Valdepenas. In fact it was a 1996 Don Miguel Alonso Tinto de Mesa from Valdepenas. Its nose was free from any barrel note, instead it was fruity, rather the strawberry kind of fruit - and had a earthy note and a certain kind of smokiness, maybe like smoked ham. On the palate, a (red) fruit basket with a rather pronouced acidity. Here again slightly earthy and smokey, medium weight on the palate. Quite nice to drink with a medium length. Again a nicely balanced wine like number one, but this time with slightly more complexity, without being a great wine though. 87-88 pts.



We didn't manage to guess right the fourth wine. We all saw that it was a younger one out of the 21st century. It was very dark, with pauillac-like purple hues. The nose showed off some vanilla again, not that strong though. On the palate it showed the fullest body of all 5 wines and instantly stroke with heavy adstrigency. Black berries, liquorice were hidden under the tannins. Later the wine mellowed out a little, and was a little easier to drink. Some cherry notes then appeared, and the wine gained a little in sweetness. The lenght was rather good. This 2005 Mas Torto Vinyes Veilles from Montsant still was a too young wine to drink and has potential to further develop over the next couple of years. 89++



Oskar quickly identified this fifth and last wine as a Ribera del Duero and also as his favorite of the tasting. In fact it had a very elegant colour of red bricks. The nose disclosed a balanced mix of liquorice and sweet berries. On the palate it was medium to full bodied without being overwhelming with power and tannins. In fact it was a truly elegant and sillky texture caressing your palate there. Later the fruit evolved and became more and more clear: it was very ripe blackberry we had in this wine. This 2000 Matarromera Crianza from Ribera Del Duero was in fact very well made, and we felt that it was really close to its peak at this point. Compared to the other Ribera (wine 2) this one was much more elegant whereas the other was more powerful and boisterous. At the same time it appeared clear and monolithic. I shouldnt forget to mention that terrific lenght this wine had. Instantly made you go for a next sip. 92-93 pts.

My brother Felix and I turned pretty old some days ago, so we thought it would be a nice occasion to check who’s ageing better: us, or the wines? Therefore we gathered some bottles from the golden year of our birth (Yes, in that year the world was finally gifted with us - lucky world ;=)).


The mean looking eagle has nothing to do with what you might think of...

Fort the start, after a quick sip of aged Riesling, we chose to stay in our birth-land, and even in our birth-region, the Rheingau, which is only 20 minutes away from Frankfurt (you guessed it, our birth-city). The Rheingau is a wine region foremost famous for its brilliant whites, but since we concentrated on reds, we had to look for this one vineyard which is known since ages for producing remarkable red wines. There are undoubtedly legends about the Assmansäuser Höllenberg and its ageing potential, exaggerations I thought, maybe a hype build on myths, and I actually expected this 1978 Spätlese from the Hessische Staatsweingüter to be a decent vinegar at best. But I was wrong. The colour though didn’t show up quite vivid; rather brownish red and blurry… hmm. But the nose then was quite interesting. It smelled a bit musty at the beginning, but elegantly musty with dried ham and forest notes and later developed into typically Pinot-like sweet strawberry and earthy notes. The palate was quite velvety and round with not much acidity left and the wine developed more and more into an intensive and dense fruit experience: strawberries forever and a quite sweet touch. The finish wasn’t so long, but the impression of sweetness, especially in comparison to the other wines lasted a bit. We checked again the label and realized that this wine probably was a non-dry Spätlese and thus the sweetness must have conserved the wine, and now helped to cover a more prominent age tone and other flaws. So was this cheating here? Howsoever, this was my favorite wine of the evening and quite a surprise to me. 92 pts.



After this quite successful experiment with a 30 year old German red, we went on to France, where the 1978 vintage reputedly was a blast in the Rhône region. “A vintage of a lifetime” as they say, and thus a must-have vintage for Châteauneuf and Rhône lovers, and of course also for 1978-born kids like my brother and me.
Our first Frenchie was a Jacques Selot 1978 Côtes du Tricastin, nothing particularly known or even famous, just a regular wine from 1978. Its colour was a bit less blurry than the Spätburgunder. The nose was a bit closed, but slight strawberry could be captured here and there. On the palate we could instantly sense the power of the vintage in this region, there was more structure, more alcohol, just more fire in this one. It was far from being a great wine, there wasn’t any complexity and even primary aromas can only be described as “red fruit”, but it showed pretty well how much substance and potential the vintage brought, even simple wines conserved well; we quickly thought of how some distinguished wines could have been made by talented winemakers in this vintage. The finish of this wine was rather short but had a nice malty sweetness, typical for some aged reds. 84 pts.



The first of 2 Châteauneufs who followed was from Piat Père & Fils. We expected an increase in quality with the CDP’s, and we instantly got a much darker and intensive colour with this one; maybe not very brilliant or shiny, but definitely dark. The bouquet was very restrained at the beginning with only slightest notes of red fruits and forest scents, but became much stronger with time and developed earthy notes and a nice liquorice touch. On the palate the wine appeared juicy and vigorous, showing off its conserved power. It has even kept some adstrigency giving it a little rustic edge, but which mellowed up with air. Otherwise there were red fruits and also a slight malty sweetness. The finish was rather medium long but not with an intensive aroma, rather with fire. What I didn’t like about this wine was its acidity, which hasn’t riped as elegantly. Nevertheless a solid 1978 CDP. 87 pts.



Last but not least, we had a CDP from an unknown producer or wine merchant named “Sommeliers des Papes”. Interestingly the label and also the cork seemed quite new; I assume that the bottles have been recently re-corked or that this wine lied in a barrel until recently. Here, the nose also started slowly, with sweet raspberries, then closed again completely, to reopen later on intensive cherry and strawberry notes. The palate still showed astringency, had a rather youthful appearance which seems a bit nervous and unbalanced sometimes. Nevertheless the primary aromas were quite intensive showing a blend of cherries and liquorice notes with herbs and a slight bitter touch appearing sometimes. All those flavors lasted through a medium long finish. This wine really did a nice job in staying young. 91-92

Our first conclusion to this tasting is that the 1978 Rhône wines did a pretty good job in staying young; especially reserves from Châteauneuf are still very interesting and can show complexity with still much fruit and power. 1978-born, that’s what you should look for! Our second conclusion though is that Felix and I at least stayed as young as those wines and actually much younger I guess: no blurry colour, no musty nose and no bitter tones yet. And maybe it even is due to the wine! “One sip a day keeps you young”, Happy birthday Bro!


Back in the days...

Domäne Mechtildshausen is a farm and restaurant estate not far from Wiesbaden and Mainz. I could resume its essence in a few words: they grow their own organic veggies, they raise their own Charolais beef and other animals, they serve all those fresh ingredients in their restaurant, and last but not least…they have a great wine list in this restaurant with emphasis on red Burgundies, but also lots of nice whites from Rheingau, Rheinhessen and Nahe. I can only recommend this place for its solid cuisine with deliciously fresh ingredients of high quality. But let’s get back to those nice wines.



First, the 2002 Leitz Berg Rottland Spätlese Trocken was beautiful. In fact, one day after having tried the 2005 Berg Rottland Alte Reben, we could experience a slightly more aged version from this vineyard. It had an elegant peach and honey nose; on the palate also slight honey but not reminding aged wines, also the herbal weight on the palate which is typical for this vineyard apparently. In comparison to the 2005, this one appears slimmer and a tad more elegant without letting miss this incredible vibrant energy which lies within it. Here again, the finish is exceptionally long. My conclusion is that Leitz wines do definitely have a great ageing potential, but are worth being tasted both young and aged. (95 pts)



Then for embracing the Côte de Boeuf we needed an elegant red. A 2001 Nuits-Saint-Georges 1er Cru Au Cras by Bruno Clavelier was our recommended candidate. It was an elegantly round Burgundy which started with a fruity nose developing towards earthy notes with some moss and underwoods scents after a while. The palate was on red fruits and quite round. A mid-weight body without any astringency but with a maybe a tad too much acidity, medium length. This was a nice red but lacking a bit of complexity and personality in order to impress. (87 pts)



Finally for dessert, we had a 1999 Pettental Riesling Auslese by Heyl zu Herrnsheim from Rheinhessen. Pettental is a vineyard in the Roter Hang next to Nierstein and is maybe one of the most singular and interesting vineyards in Germany right now, having generated some of the raciest and most thrilling Rieslings in the past decade; and improvements and surprises are still to be tasted each year. This Auslese showed a perfect Balance of acidity and sweetness. A voluptuous nose of exotic fruits like mangos, mixed with honey scents and some peach. The fruit was there on the palate also, but without being too sweet and counterbalanced by this very nice ripe acidity. This is the perfect Auslese, not one of those sticky and gluey sweet Rieslings which are clownishly plump and hurt your teeth. (92 pts)

We started with this very well made Rheingau Sekt Edition M by Stefan Breuer. Dry but still lots of Riesling fruit and a rather coarse but refreshing mousseux. More Sekt than Champagne in style. 86



Then a 2007 Monzinger Frühlingsplätzchen Spätlese Trocken: a very well known vineyard by the rather unknown Weber estate (at least to me).Fruity and juicy Nahe style with enough weight on the palate. This one was a little sweeter, but quite nice. 88



Nevertheless, the Austrian Loimer Terrassen Riesling still was another league. Weight on the palate, beautiful nose, fruity, nicely structured palate, ripe acidity yet a monolithic impression of balance and a beautiful length. 92



Unfortunately this Bürklin Wolf 2005 Altenburg PC was heavily corked, no luck again. Would have loved to try it.



We got back to the Nahe with Emrich Schönleber‘s 2006 Halenberg GG. Powerful and fruity. Lots of weight on the palate, seems a bit rougher than the Loimer, less elegant but at least as appealing. A young gun with another personality with some herbs here and there. 92



Finally we tried to save the best fort he end and it worked out. no cork! Leitz’ 2005 Berg Rottland Alte Reben trocken is a gigantic wine. It needs some time to build up, but then has it all. Peach and herbs nose, powerful attack on the palate with herbs and juicy fruit, then suddenly less weight but a tremendous finish which lasts forever. Develops in the glass to become more and more balanced, light and powerful at the same time. A true masterpiece. 95-97

After that parade of rather aged Italian reds, I thought it would be nice to drink something red again, but young and non-Italian, so I decanted a 2005 Chateau Boyd-Cantenac from Margaux, which I already had before and knew it would be a wine with lots of sex-appeal, rejuvenating our palates.



It came exactly as I remembered it, a deliciously fruity and yet complex wine, with a nice structure. The nose was intensive of blackcurrant, tar and graphite, the palate has a heavy fruity attack with a non-marmalade effect, the structure was of smooth silkiness, but a solid and yet velvety tannic structure and a well dosed acidity just make this wine a perfect assemblage. Not to forget a long and intensive finish. I like this wine more and more: 94-95+ points



Then we got back to the league of aged liquids. But actually no one guessed that this Rheingau Riesling was actually 44 years old. The 1964 Geisenheimer Kläuserweg Spätlese from the Rebhof Estate (I believe the estate doesn't exist anymore)was from one of the better vintages in Germany and thus had a long storing potential. And this assumption proved to be true. Its color was of intensive gold, its nose of honey. On the palate the balance was just perfect and it showed only the slightest age note. The finish was of great intensity and lasted quite a while. Always incredible how long-lasting Rieslings can be if the vintage was clement.



As a final point we needed a young and fresh Riesling from the Pfalz. The Deidesheimer Maushöle from Christmann did the job and showed up nice to say the least. Intensive nose, brilliant weight on the palate, with juicy fruit, a ripe acidity and just enough complexity; all elements very lively but somehow coming together in great balance again and again, and finally a nice refreshing and intensive finish. This is one of the best medium-priced 2007 Rieslings I’ve tried so far, and there were some good wines being made in 07. (90-92 points I would say) But now it was time to go to bed.

Finally a real blind tasting again. The last times we’ve been quite lax with our club’s rules I have to admit ;), but this evening all bottles were covered and then randomly numbered (and eventually re-mixed another time) so no bias was possible in our judgments. For this sum-up I kept the order of the tasting of course, just in case you wonder why vintages are so mixed up here. The theme was Tuscany, which includes of course the vast Chianti region, but also other famous appellation like Brunello di Montalcino for example. Generally the wines are made with the Sangiovese grape, but are most frequently combined in Cuvées with other varietals. Ok this should be enough theory! We were thirsty!



We started with a 1989 Castello di Ama. It had an elegant brilliant red color with a brownish rim revealing its advanced age. The nose started on a fine vanilla touch and red fruits, quite harmonious, and then developed into earthy notes with underwoods scents. On the palate it was quite round, but also with a “round” (overall) acidity (or should I call it slight sourness). It still had some fire, but also slight traces of astringency and a little bitterness in the finish which was rather medium long. All in all nice to drink still, was nice to see how it developed in the glass, gaining a little complexity, but then again it didn’t reach for the stars.



Second was a 1979 Vignale from Chianti. The color was more brownish, reminding Cognac, but of course a little more red. It was still brilliant and shiny though. The nose couldn’t hide its age, more than 20 years were evident here. Madeira, sweet earthiness, a slight cellar smell, a particular fruit wasn’t identifiable. On the palate the wine was much more pleasant, the sweetness came through, mixed with a little fruit, medium-weighted and balanced with no astringency at all, with a rather long and harmonious finish. Compared to the first wine this one deteriorated with time and got more and more blunt.



Next we had a 2002 Brunello Di Montalcino by Pi.Gi.Vi. This had an ink-dark color with purple reflections. The nose was intensive of fruit, showing blackcurrant and cherries. On the palate then came juicy fruit, cherries, some herbs, and a hint of sweetness that sometimes felt a little like Marzipan. Clearly a much much younger wine. It still had quit some astringency in the finish which was medium long, and also a slight bitterness, but was all in all a nice wine and for Many the wine of the evening actually. It still has some potential for development I guess.



Number 4 was a 1988 Pogio Afrati Rocca di Castagnoli. It was medium-dark in color, red but with a slight brown hue. The nose developed cherry scents of great finesse, after some opening time some underwood tones also appeared reminding a bit old Baroli. The palate developed dark fruits but also revealed slight spice notes. It was harmonious and balanced, and yet it had certain elements that stepped forward from time to time: sometimes you’d realize a little astringency giving some more grip, then suddenly a more generous acidity, sometimes also a slight sweetness. The wine was a player that had several small developments in the glass. The finish then was medium long and harmonious. One of my favourites.



Number 5, a 2003 Chianti Classico by Castello di Meleto, had cork. Damn!



Thankfully the following wine, a 2002 Chianti Classico by Castello di Fonterutoli didn’t have cork. It had a very dark color, nearly black with a purple hue. The nose was slightly ethylic, reminding liquor scents, but rather closed when it came to fruit. On the palate the wine started with a touch of sweetness coming from the alcohol of course, but then astringency strikes. It isn’t unbearably strong, but much stronger than in previous bottles and reveals that the wine isn’t ready for enjoyment yet. The finish is medium long. Maybe this is a long runner going through a closed phase, but the diffuse appearance calls for some pessimism.



A 1990 Chianti Classico by Castagnelli was our N°7, but it didn’t meet our expectations. Its colour had a tendency towards brown; its nose had an undeniable age tone. On the palate, there was some fruit left, but not much more. It was drinkable, but without real pleasure.

Ok this was it for Tuscany. So which was the wine of the evening? I heard many voices saying number 3 was their favorite, it was a young and full bodied wine with nice fruit, and clearly sexier than those old guys from the 70s and 80s. Personally I liked it too, but I appreciated also the first 2, especially how they developed in opposite directions in the glass, the first one starting weak and building up, the second starting strong, and deteriorating with time. But I think number 4 had most of my sympathies, such an elegant nose, round, harmonious with a little complexity despite its 20 years.

So I have to thank everyone for coming and for contributing such good wines. It was a real pleasure and I hope it wasn’t our last gathering ;)

(PS: Of course after such work, one needs wine for regenerating the nose and the palate, and so we went one with 3 other bottles. Those will be revealed in the next post )