Sipping trip to Alsace and Bordeaux
April 30, 2009 by Sheila Whittaker · 4 Comments
“Alsace has the best white wines in the world — full stop,” Master of Wine James Cluer tells our Wine and Spirit Education Trust (WSET) Level 3 class.
To prove this, he started us with a Pinot Gris face-off. The grape goes by Pinot Grigio in Italy and the styles of wine from the two regions are very different.
First we tried the 2007 Pinot Grigio from Santa Margherita from Valdadige, Italy ($20). It’s not a very intense wine, but you’re able to get some citrus, pear, green apple and maybe a mineral note. A dry wine with fairly high acidity, I’d like to try it with a chicken caesar salad on a summer afternoon.
The Italian PG got blown out of the water by the Alsatian. In our second glass was a 2004 Grand Cru Steinert Pinot Gris from Pfaffenheim from Alsace, France ($32). It was off-dry with just enough acid to make you salivate. Since it has a few years in the bottle, it had more developing notes on the nose: purfume, baked apple, and honey in addition to the citrus notes.
Overall, the Pfaffenheim was more intense, had more richness, was better balanced and delivered a long finish. Love that ripe fruit!
In addition to Pinot Gris, Alsace is known for growing Riesling, Gewurztraminer and Muscat (and to a lesser extent, Sylvaner). Our next stop on the Alsatian oenological tour was a delicious 2002 Pierre Sparr Grand Cru Altenbourg Riesling ($40).
I love Riesling. This one, having aged for seven years, had that wonderful petrol/mineral/honey/nutty thing going on. It was dry (not all Rieslings are sweet!) with lots of acidity (which Riesling is also known for) and was beautifully balanced.
Cluer called Alsatian producer Zind Humbrecht one of the top 100 best wine producers in the world. We tried its 2004 Turckheim Gewurztraminer ($70). Gewurz is a highly aromatic wine, and this one definitely smelled like it was going to pack a punch! There was lots of exotic fruit, baked apple, spice, flowers, mineral — lots of descriptors means a complex wine. It was off-dry with medium acid and fat, rich flavours came through on the palate. Our only complaint was that the alcohol was a bit high and threw the wine slightly off balance.
All Aboard for Bordeaux
Our first Bordeaulais challenge was to taste the Cru Bourgeois Médoc (a higher classification) versus a AC Bordeaux supérieur (although superior, it’s a lesser classification. Supérieur in Bordeaux wines means it has a higher level of alcohol).
The first wine we tried was pretty crisp, and in later discussion Cluer pointed to unripe grapes as the culprit. It burned a bit hot with alcohol and wasn’t altogether well balanced. There were a few layers of aroma and flavour: black fruit, sweet spice, licorice … but there was a definite sharpness to it.
This was Chateau d’Argadens Bordeaux 2005 ($21.99), the AC Bordeaux supérieur. “It’s not good — is it, really?” Cluer rhetorically asked the class. But he guaranteed it was the best wine on the store’s shelf at this price point (despite it being crap). Lesson? Don’t buy Bordeaux unless you have deep pockets. This wine was thin, acidic and you could find a lot of easier drinking alternatives around the world for your $20.
We compared it to a 2000 Chateau Maurac Cru Bourgeois, Haut Médoc (in Bordeaux) ($34.80). The extra 13 bucks bought us smoother, more harmonious tannins and a complex wine. After sitting for nine years in the bottle, this wine was taking on aromas and flavours of developing reds: forest floor, mushroom, earth, tobacco, and leather, in addition to some black fruit notes.
“Anything but a Napa Valley fruit bomb,” Cluer laughed. This wine is hovering around its drinking peak, but since there’s still some fruit left it will likely hold on and drink well for another four or five years.
Left Bank Vs Right Bank
When you’re in Bordeaux, you’ll hear these terms tossed around all the time. Left bank means all the wineries to the left (West) of the Gironde river. Right bank refers to the ones on the other side, further from the Atlantic ocean. The left uses more Cabernet Sauvignon in their red blends, while the right favours Merlot. The choices have to do with the soil conditions, because the two grapes have different needs.
We started on the right bank with a 1998 Chateau Grant Pontet Grand Cru, from Saint Emilion ($70). After 11 years, this wine is gorgeous. Smooth tannins and plummy, earthy, leathery, spicy notes. Give me some beef with this one!
We crossed the river to Chateau Kirwan, a third growth from Margaux ($99). 2005 was a benchmark year in Bordeaux, but it’s still pretty early to be drinking it. Bordeaux wines are made for the patient consumer. The tannins were still pretty tight, but over the next 10-20, even 30 years this wine will come into its own. The aromas are elegant — no “jerk your head back I’m an Australian Shiraz” brashness here.
Gimme some Suga
Both Alsace and Bordeaux are known for sweet wines, and I have to admit I’m a fan. If only they weren’t so expensive…
Domaine Ostertag Grand Cru Muenchberg, Alsace 2004 ($100). A stewed apricot, honeysuckle, minerally delight! Made with Riesling, this wine has enough acidity to balance the sweetness. We thought it could be a bit sweeter on the finish, as it was a bit dry, but overall excellent quality. But still a hundred bucks!
Sauternes isn’t for everyone, the grapes here are encouraged to be infected with ‘noble’ rot. That’s right: rotton grapes make this very expensive, sweet wine. But I like it. We tried Chateau Filhot Grand Cru Sauternes 1999 ($36.48, 375 ml). There are tropical fruit notes, tinned pineapple perhaps and the noble rot gives hints of nail varnish or glue that some people take a while to warm to. Don’t knock it til you’ve tried it!
Is France worth the wait?
The thing about Bordeaulais wine is that they are made in a different style than New World wines. You’re not getting that ready-to-drink, fruit-forward, big hitting wine that can be delivered from California, Australia or Argentina. These wines are elegant and most need a long time on the shelf before they drink at their best. And most of the ones worth drinking are expensive. But if you have the time and money, you can be rewarded with some really special wines.
Wine Making Magic
April 18, 2009 by Sheila Whittaker · Leave a Comment
In week two of wine snob class, our teacher James Cluer, Master of Wine, had us tasting in pairs to compare and contrast how wine-making techniques could change the final outcome of a wine.
A lot of wine glory is now being given to the grape growers and a common expression is ‘wine is made in the vineyard.’ But winemakers can still make bad wine from good grapes — all it takes is a few bad decisions.
Aromatic Allure
Our first blind taste of the night was slightly effervescent wine with some honey, apricot, tropical fruit, and a floral perfume on the nose. With a sip, we discovered it was medium sweet with medium acidity and low alcohol. The tropical fruits and honey characters were present on the palate, along with some stewed apple. It reminded me of Asti, but I thought that it wasn’t quite bubbly enough for this to be right.
Once revealed, I found out that I had been right to peg it as an Asti! It was a Batasiolo Moscato D’Asti 2007 ($22) — a frizzante (wine snob translation: lightly sparkling). I was thinking of Asti Spumante, which is made in the same region (south of the town of Asti in Piedmont, Italy), but is a fully sparkling wine. They’re both made from the aromatic Moscato Bianco grape.
Wine snob bonus fact: my Brazilian friend, who loves sweet white wines, tells me that in Portuguese, espumante translates to foamy — makes sense! Spumante is usually translated from Italian as sparkling.
What I especially love about Asti? It’s the perfect breakfast wine. Moscato D’Asti is about 5.5 per cent alcohol, and Asti Spumante only rings in at 7 per cent! Since they’re both medium sweet wines, they are a great pair with waffles, fruit and whip cream — or Summerland Sweets fruit syrup. And yes, I’ve tried it. You should too!
Wine #2 of the aromatic face off had a bit more colour and more legs (higher alcohol!). Mineral, citrus, perfume, roses, even petrol — it seemed like everyone in class was getting something different on the nose of this one. It was slightly off-dry with medium acid and high alcohol. I was able to hold this wine in my mouth for a long time, enjoying the smooth spice, apricot, grapefruit, lemon and mineral characters. There was a slight tartness on the finish, but overall I thought it was a pretty palate-friendly white.
My fellow wine snobs did not agree. This wine took a beating from the class and they firmly turned up their well-heeled noses at it. It was Caymus Conundrum 2007, an aromatic white blend from California that goes for $30.
Cluer joked that the conundrum winemakers had was wondering what to do with all the bin ends of Muscat, Gewürztraminer, Riesling and others. The solution? Throw them all together in this blend and market it really, really well. I’m sure 88 points from Wine Spectator didn’t hurt popularity, either.
My Conundrum? Wondering how to jot down the details without being spotted by my classmates!
No Oaking Around
A big decision when making wine is the use of oak. It adds different flavours (vanilla, butter, toastiness, spice) but it doesn’t necessarily preserve the fresh, fruitiness of a wine. We were tasked to find the oak in our next two whites.
The first wine had some fresh citrus, mineral and a buttery hint on the nose. Cluer noted “freshly sawed logs.” The fruit was more intense on the palate: we tasted melon, ripe pear and peach, in addition to the citrus. There was also butterscotch, a mineral quality, maybe even some petrol, and a grassy note. There was a slight burn on the finish.
The butter, sawed logs and butterscotch pointed to oak, and this was indeed the oaked wine — and our first taste from the Okanagan Valley! It was Road 13 Jackpot Chardonnay 2007 ($35). It is ready to drink now or in the next year or two, but it’s not going to improve with time as the slightly hot alcohol makes it unbalanced, Cluer said.
The second wine had such a strange smell. It took me a while to put my finger on it, but I decided it reminded me of cauliflower water. You know when you boil cauliflower then pour out the water and the steam rises up to your face? That smell. Others described it as grassy, green pepper, green bean or tinned asparagus (but who the heck eats tinned asparagus? Eww!).
Once you tip this one, it gets a bit more rewarding. There’s high acid which gives a nice crisp mouthful. There were more citrus, passionfruit, grassy, and vegetal flavours. Preserving those fresh flavours is what stainless steel does best. This was Jackson Estates Sauvignon Blanc 2007 from Marlborough, NZ ($25). It’s an area famous for these fresh, vegetal Sauv Blancs that pair well with summer salads.
Forgive me Father, for I have Zinned…
Same country (USA), same region (California), same grape (Zinfandel) but what different resulting wines! One winemaker decided to go with a rosé wine, while the other made a fairly full-bodied red.
As the rosé, we tried Sutter Home White Zinfandel 2007 ($8.99), and all got our wine snob chuckles. There are around three or four million cases of this stuff pumped out of Sutter Home every year and that is far too common for connoisseurs, darling. The wine is pale salmon pink, off dry, has little acid and light body, with low alcohol (9.5%). Cluer told us that this is wine “for drinking yesterday.” There’s some strawberry and candy sweetness that makes it pleasant, but there’s not too much going on. Sweet, pink, strawberry candy? Let the underage drinking begin!
Cluer explained that White Zinfandel is a winemakers’ trick to make their red Zin more intense. They scoop off some of the wine after it’s only been in contact with the skins for a day or two. This becomes rosé. The remaining wine benefits from having less liquid competition for the tannins and colour that are taken from the skins, seeds and stalks. The resulting reds are more powerful.
The ballsier Zin was Cline Zinfandel 2006 ($20). Young and ruby with purple glints, it whiffed of sweet, ripe black cherry, oak and licorice. It’s a dry wine with medium acid and tannins. The body and alcohol level are a bit more than medium, but not quite full. Wood, black fruit, sweet spice and a medicinal component come out when you taste it, and there was a fairly long finish. We concluded that the grapes had a good level of ripeness and this was a quality wine that should be consumed now or in the next couple years.
Wine snob bonus fact: Cluer told us that you can often pick out a Zin in a blind tasting because it is “dry with residual sugar.” Now all you have to do is figure out what residual sugar in a red wine tastes like and you’ll be impressing all your coworkers at the next office party.
Commitment Issues
Another decision winemakers need to make is whether they intend their wine to be for long-term aging or immediate consumption. To make this point, Cluer poured us reds from Beaujolais and Bordeaux.
Beaujolais is made from the Gamay grape and the resulting wines are ruby-hued and fairly thin. DuBoeuf Beaujolais Villages 2007 ($16.49), despite it’s beefy name, was no exception. There was some red licorice, sweet cherry, banana and strawberry on the nose — fun! But on the palate we just got simple red fruit and found it a bit sour.
In Cluer’s words, “there was no mid-palate richness required for age.” He added that “the winemaker wants you to drink this tonight so that you can run back and buy more tomorrow.” It wasn’t very popular with the class, so I don’t know if any of us will be doing that.
Next we tried some Chateau La Vieille Cure 2001 from Fronsac, Bordeaux ($56). This appellation is on the left bank of Bordeaux, which is known for Cabernet Sauvignon-driven blends. However, wine snobs in class were of the opinion that this tasted more right bank, the side of the river known for Merlot-driven blends. I don’t call us wine snobs for nothing!
The wine was already showing some age with a brick-coloured rim. The bouquet was developed, everyone in class was able to contribute something new: black current, black cherry, plum, earth, leather, spice, vanilla, tobacco, licorice — and that was just on the nose! “Lots of people smell lots of things. Conclusion? Complexity,” Cluer said.
It was dry with lots of points in the acid, body and tannin departments. The tannins were soft with some grip on the roof of your mouth. Cluer reckoned this wine has the potential to age further, that it’s a good value at $56 and that it would be a dream with roast beef or steak frites. My mouth is watering with the memories!
Ciao Italia!
We moved from France to Northern Italy with our next match up. Same main grape (Corvina) in the blend, same region (Veneto), but a wine-making decision produced two very different wines.
First we tried Masi Bonacosta Valpolicella 2007 ($16.99), a youthful wine with simple red fruit on the nose, maybe some licorice and cedar, and a sour cherry mouthful. Between the astringent tannins and the short, sour finish, I was reaching for the spit cup pretty quickly with this one. If I had a cheesy pizza margarita to pair with it, I think I’d enjoy it much more.
Take those same Corvina grapes, dry them on straw mats until they raisinate and what a difference in the wine! I was glad we tasted Salvalai Amarone 2003 ($59.97) near the end of class, because I did not want to spit out this powerful wine. By drying out the grapes and getting rid of the water, the flavours become so intense and concentrated. We’re talking chocolate, sweet spices, raisins, cherries, tobacco, dried fruit, black currents, raspberries — the esoteric list of wine-snob descriptors goes on!
It’s high alcohol at 15 per cent, but it’s not hot. The tannins are smooth, silky and fine. A beautifully balanced wine worthy of decanting, it would pair well with stews, osso buco or veal. Cluer’s words? “That’s dynamite. Phenomenal wine!”
A Sweet Finish
As a lovely prize for making it through another three hours of wine class, we were poured a glass of Taylor Fladgate 20-year-old Tawny Port ($68.50). Taylor Fladgate is one of the top producers in Portugal and makes reliably good port. The caramel, nutty, toffee, dried fruit and marmelade characters in this sweet, fortified wine were such a treat.
Is Wine Really Made in the Vineyard?
There is no doubt that you can not make good wine from bad grapes. Good vineyard management and careful selection of fruit is absolutely necessary to produce top quality vino. But I think the point was made clear during this class that the winemaker still has a lot to do with the final product.
BC Wine Market to Crash?
April 9, 2009 by Sheila Whittaker · 2 Comments
The beat-up economy is not bypassing the wine industry in BC. An article in the Vancouver Sun today announced that premium wine prices are starting to drop. Some winemakers are slashing prices just to pique your interest in their wines.
Can they afford to do this? In some cases, by lowering prices by 25 per cent, the winery will only be breaking even after all the work that went into each bottle. However, in other wineries, they might be able to afford to drop prices significantly and still make a profit.
John Schreiner, a journalist who is no stranger to the BC wine scene, wrote about this topic in September 2007 — long before the markets fell into the crapper. He gave some good reasons why BC wine prices are climbing, such as the rising prices of grapes and vineyard land in the Okanagan. But another reason on his list was the ‘because we can’ attitude of some winemakers. They set the price as high as they think they can get. If they’re able to sell wine for high prices, then it’s worth asking that much. I hope we’ll see some of these in-demand labels drop their prices in time for spring and summer Okanagan wine tours!
In a recent article in the Globe and Mail, Alexandra Gill touched on the topic of whether BC wines are able to compete on a global market. She quoted Heidi Noble, winemaker and co-owner of JoieFarm Wines saying “B.C. is not good value. Is regional pride and loyal support going to be enough to get the industry through these hard economic times?”
Of course, this set Noble into a spin. I received an email she sent out to her entire contact list before I’d had time to crack open the Globe. She explained how the quote was taken totally out of context. In the email, she points out that “the Okanagan Valley is amongst the most, if not the most, expensive, of all wine producing regions in the world. Three major factors contribute to this situation, the extremely high costs of land, labour & equipment.”
The government has made some steps to lower the price for winemaking. Baby steps. It dropped the barrel tariff on importing oak for use in winemaking. This will save wine makers an entire $30 per French barrel! Considering French oak barrels cost around $1,200, this is truly a drop in the bucket (or barrel as the case may be). This is all happening at the same time as the BC government is jacking up taxes on spirits (not wine and beer) by about 4.5 per cent per bottle, effective April 1, 2009.
But wine is certainly not excluded from government taxes. Mark Hicken, a Vancouver lawyer, recently complained in the Vancouver Sun about the incredible mark up that international wine faces — up to 132 per cent. His website, Free The Wine, encourages consumers to get involved and gives tips about how you can cut down on the tax you pay on BC and international wine.
All of these arguments about quality and price do carry a similar theme: when budgets are stretched, people will continue to drink, but they’ll be caring more about the price tag than the country of origin.
What do you think? Leave me a comment.
Of Quality and Price
April 6, 2009 by Sheila Whittaker · 1 Comment
Opinions about wine are subjective — people smell and taste things differently and enjoy different things. It’s important to find a wine that you enjoy, no matter what others may say or write about it.
That said, as an evaluator of wines (which I am studying to become), it is critical to be accurate about the quality of a wine. One needs to be able to tell the plonk from the prize and support those opinions with logical reasons.
For Day One of my latest wine snob class — Wine and Spirit Education Trust (WSET) Level 3 Advanced Certificate in Wine and Spirits — our teacher, Master of Wine (MW) James Cluer, chose wine in pairs and had them face off against each other. Same type of wine, but different price points. We were set to the task of tasting the wines blind and asked to identify which was which.
If you have $400 burning a hole in your pocket, run out to your nearest specialty wine shop or signature liquor store and pick up these eight bottles. Put your own wine snob palate to the test! (If not, you can read on and find out how we did in class).
If all else fails, keep in mind what Cluer told our class: “the longer you’re inclined to keep it in your mouth, the better it is.” Words to live by.
Bout One: Bubble Trouble
We were poured two glasses of bubbly and told that one was an expensive Champagne. The other was, well, not.
I got my nose right in there and gave them both a good whiff. I thought the aroma had some green apple, citrus and mineral notes. I thought that mystery wine #1 came in pretty medium in many of the things we’re taught to taste for, such as intensity of aroma, acidity, alcohol and finish.
Mystery wine #2 seemed to me to have a much yeastier and more bready nose. It was more intense to me and since Champagne is known for the yeasty notes, I pegged this one as the expensive bottle.
Nope! It was actually the other way around. Cluer did make me feel a bit better by telling a story about one time when he chose a glass of Henkell Trocken (which goes for about $15 in BC Liquor Stores) over a glass of Champagne worth hundreds of dollars in a blind tasting.
The first drink had been from Larmandier-Bernier. It is Blanc de Blancs Premier Cru (wine snob translation: first growth, top rated bubble made from Chardonnay), from the Champagne region of France and cost $93. The MW told us that it had an “elegant nose” with developing flavours of baked apple, biscuit, yeastiness and nuttiness. It had delicate and smooth, soft, creamy bubbles and a toasty taste. I took another sip and used my imagination…
But I was jotting down the details of the Dienhard Sekt (German for sparkling wine). ‘Lila’ from Germany only cost $13.49! Although I was told it was not as developed or ‘nutty’ as the Champagne, and it had a shorter, courser finish, I liked it better. It is a brut (dry) wine, but in your mouth it actually tasted sweeter than after you spit it out (or swallowed, as the case may be). Could it just be my palate sticking up for my meager chequing account?
Bout Two: Who needs a Riesling to drink?
In this blind tasting match up, mystery wine #1 was a pale, lemon green colour. A swirl around the glass showed that it had fast moving legs. Don’t get too excited guys, that means the wine didn’t stick to the sides of the glass very much, so you can guess the alcohol content is relatively low. There was a slight sweetness to the aroma, like fruit salad. There was also some citrus and Granny Smith apple in there.
A taste of #1 proved it to be dry with medium acidity, light to medium body, low alcohol and a short finish that left a fairly tart edginess with you. There was citrus, grapefruit even, and a mineral quality to the wine.
Mystery wine #2 had less of a green hue. The nose was pronounced with developing aromas including gasoline, mango, citrus, apple and a yeastiness. Once in the mouth it was medium sweet with high acid and medium body. It was a beautifully balanced wine with a long finish. Totally explosive with flavour, but still a light wine. I concluded this must be the pricier wine.
This time, I chose correctly and #2 was the higher-priced wine. The Riesling was the 2003 Selbach Oster Zeltinger Sonnenuhr – Spatlese from Mosel, Germany. It goes for $41. The contender turned out to be 2006 Dr Thanisch Classic, also from Mosel, Germany ($23). Would I pay nearly double for the heightened experience of the Selbach Oster? If I could afford it, absolutely. Spatlese are late harvest grapes and since they’re picked later they have more time to ripen and the flavours become a lot more intense.
Quality Rieslings are one of the few white wines capable of aging. This 2003 bottle could handle 10 years in the cellar, we were told.
Bout Three: Burgundy Bargains
White Burgundy (also known as Chardonnay) was the next to pour out. The first wine had some pear, apple, lemon rind and mineral on the nose. Some of my classmates also threw out stone fruit, hazelnut and a chalky character (we are all wine snobs, you know). Once you tip this one it was fairly tart on the palate and the fruit character was a medium intensity, but fairly simple.
By comparison, the second wine was very smooth on the palate and the flavours were pronounced. It had secondary characteristics of yeast, toast and butter in addition to the lemon and pear fruity notes. It was elegant and complex. I thought this must be the one for deep pockets.
Was it ever! $105 deep! Bouchard Pere Puligny Montrachet Les Folatieres – Premier Cru was the second wine we had tried. Quality French Chards are in the cellar-able club. Cluer told us that this one would just get fatter, richer and better with age.
The “cheap” wine was a 2006 Louis Jadot Saint Veran that goes for a mere $26. Both wines are from the town of Beaune in the Côte d’Or.
Bout Four: Bordeaux Beat Down
Bordeaux reds are usually a blend of Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Cabernet Franc. There are a few other grapes allowed to be grown in that region, but top houses keep to what is best known and best grown.
When these two Bordeaux were side-by-side, you could see the difference immediately in the glass. The first one was ruby-hued, but there was some dilution of the colour. The second one had a deeper core and the rim was starting to turn a bit of a brick-ish colour. When reds start to lighten like that, it’s often a sign of age. I was leaning towards #2 already.
#1 had a simple, red fruit smell. There was a bit of black current, cedar, and maybe some black pepper spiciness, but that might have been a stretch. In contrast, #2 had more ripeness and layers of aroma: blackberry, raspberry, black current, cedar, spice, leather, chocolate and an earthiness to it.
In the mouth, #1 had pretty abrasive tannins which made it a bitter sip. #2′s tannins were soft and smooth and accompanied with lovely flavours of plum, vanilla, sweet spices, coffee and chocolate. It was really well balanced and I didn’t want to spit it out!
The second wine was, indeed, the pricier wine. For $60 you could try the 2004 Le Jardin de Petit Villages, from the town of Pomerol in Bordeaux, France. This wine was actually made exclusively from Merlot, which is unique for an area famous for blends. For Bordeaux on the cheap, try a widely available 2005 Mouton Cadet for $16.
Is it Worth it to Pay More?
I’m going to take a leap and guess that we can’t afford to pay $105 each time we want to crack open a bottle of Chardonnay. There are some perfectly good Chards out there in far lower price brackets that will do just fine with your week night dinner or afternoon on the patio. But if you want to celebrate, it’s nice to be able to appreciate and recognize just how special some wines can be.
Tasting wines paired this way was an interesting learning experience. I learned that if you want a cheap date with me, you’d better break out the bubbly! Still wines seem to be where my wine snob palate shines.
