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?