Tasting Notes: Kestrel 2004 Estate Sangiovese

I bought a bottle of Kestrel Estate Sangiovese as a Christmas gift for my wife, who loves Italian varietals. We opened it last night. I wasn’t expecting much, for two reasons: I’m not a fan of sangiovese, and the last time we tasted in Yakima, my memory of Kestrel was tainted by the really pungent barnyard flavors of the wines at the adjacent wineries.

Sangiovese is an earthy wine to begin with (at least in the treatments I’ve experienced lately - see this prior post for an example: http://wordonwine.wordpress.com/2007/03/07/maryhill-2004-sangiovese/). The Yakima tasting trip from last year left a lingering memory, and while I don’t think Kestrel’s wines were as earthy as the others being poured next door, I think I’ve still associated them with that barnyard flavor that I’m not a big fan of.

The Kestrel Estate Sangiovese turned out to drink very much like a Bordeaux varietal. The tannins were well developed. It had a gentle fruit-forward flavor. It drinks almost like a merlot. The main thing that reminded me I was drinking a sangiovese was the slightly peppery overtones of the finish.

All in all, a great wine. I believe it was towards the lower end of the $20-$30 range, which makes it a good deal as well.

Otis Kenyon 2005 Merlot

It’s been high time for me to take a break from the steady progression of red blends, so I decided to open a bottle of Otis Kenyon’s newly released merlot.

Great wine. It is everything a merlot should be. It has nice fruit to it - cherry and currant (which I guess is kind of like saying it tastes like grape - go figure). The fruit’s balanced with just the right amount of bitterness. The tannins are a little rough, but not overwhelming. The finish has overtones of oak, pencil shavings and a licorice or anise finish.

This is a really well put together wine. Thanks to the movie “Sideways,” there’s sort of a stigma to liking merlot, but the reality is that it’s an excellent grape with plenty of nuance to it, when it’s put in the right hands. Otis Kenyon has done a great job of capturing a lot of its potential in this wine.

Maryhill 2004 Proprietor’s Reserve Serendipity

I’m starting to re-think my plan of continuing my recent theme of blended red wines, because everything is suffering in comparison to the Nicholas Cole GraEagle.

I really liked the Matchless Red when I tried it on its own back in October, but tasting it after drinking the Nicholas Cole made me a much harsher critic of it than I would have been a month ago (and really than I should be now). The latest victim is the Maryhill 2004 Proprietor’s Reserve Serendipity, a blend of 30% merlot, 29% cab sauv, 29% malbec and 12% cab franc.

The most interesting thing about this wine is that it forced me to take back what I said before about malbec not standing on its own in a blend. The malbec dominates this wine from start to finish.

When I first tried a malbec, I was taken aback by the nose, which was meaty and stewy. I didn’t expect to like the wine, but was pleasantly surprised by the subtle flavors. It’s been a few months since I had that bottle (courtesy of a Terra Blanca wine club shipment), so I don’t remember precisely what it tasted like, but I remember really enjoying it and expecting to see malbec catch on the same way syrah did a few years back as the new “it” varietal.

The Serendipity has the same nose as that bottle of malbec, but what surprised me was that it tasted more or less like it smelled. It’s got a slightly rasiny quality about it that dissolves into something like wet leather. I’d almost compare it to a bret wine, but the effect isn’t that severe. The finish has a lingering chalky flavor to it, which again I associate with how it was pressed.

It’s a really good wine, but like the Matchless Red, it can’t stand up next to the GraEagle. The Serendipity is a much earthier wine. The fruit that you’d expect from the merlot never materializes. The cab franc fails to impart the peppery flavor you’d expect, and the cab sauv - it seems like its normal tobacco overtones just wind up accentuating the malbec, which is what takes center stage. This is the type of wine that would appeal to somebody who likes a wine with a hint of barnyard and leather.

If I had it to do over again, I would have drunk this wine first, then proceeded to the Matchless Red and then had the GraEagle. That would have made the positive qualities of each stand out and complement the previous wine, a progression from earthier to fruitier, from less subtle to more.

As is, it’s like the March Madness of wine, and the GraEagle is mowing down every opponent in its bracket. I might have to switch to a varietal after this.

Otis Kenyon 2005 Matchless Red

I had this great idea of contrasting the Otis Kenyon Matchless Red with the Nicholas Cole GraEagle I wrote about in my last post. They’re both red blends. They’re both roughly the same price. But after that, I’m not sure it’s fair to put them in the same category.

Otis Kenyon is a brand-new winery south of town in Walla Walla. Otis Kenyon is named after a relative of the winery owners, but the story behind the relative is not your usual run-of-the-mill “I named my wine after my grandfather” tale. Read it here.

Unfortunately, I don’t know exactly what grapes went into the Matchless Red. It’s probably your usual suspects - a lot of cab sauv, some merlot, etc.; but I just don’t know. The Otis Kenyon website doesn’t detail the varietals. Neither does the bottle. That’s kind of odd.

I thought I rememberd the wine as being fairly chalky and smoky from the first time I drank it. I was going to compare that to the way the GraEagle brings out the flavor of the fruit. After a second tasting, I don’t know if that’s entirely fair to the Matchless Red. It has plenty of fruit flavor, mostly plum, though it’s still somewhat understated versus the flavors of the GraEagle. It does have a chalky quality to it after the initial, subtle fruit. There’s a slightly smoky hint to its finish, which is otherwise fairly acidic.

From time to time, I like a wine that’s a little over-produced - tannins a little rough, a little too much time in dark-toasted oak. It’s easy to connect those flavors to the soil or to the barrel. People sometimes like to think that wines from Red Mountain taste like the volcanic soil the grapes grow in, and I tend to think it’s more because of how the wine is treated than where the fruit is grown. In the case of Otis Kenyon, its vineyards are in rocky alluvial soil, and it’s easy to make the leap from the chalky flavor to the big rough stones that are uprooted when the vineyard rows are dug.

At our local wine shop, the Matchless Red retails for $26; the GraEagle, for $27. Forced to choose, I’d go with the GraEagle. It’s a steal. I’m happy, though, that Otis Kenyon, despite being so new, has already shown up locally. I think their first release shows a lot of promise. I especially enjoyed their merlot. I’ll post tasting notes when we open one of the bottles of it.

Nicholas Cole 2004 GraEagle RedWing

Last night, we opened a bottle of GraEagle RedWing from Nicholas Cole Cellars. The GraEagle is 49% cabernet sauvignon, 39% cabernet franc and 12% merlot. We first tried it at Taste of Walla Walla, but this was the first time we’d had a chance to drink it on its own.

Drinking it by itself confirmed what I thought when I tried it at the Taste - this is an outstanding wine. Even at the Taste, where my taste buds suffered a non-stop onslaught of wine after wine, the GraEagle stood out (even more than Nicholas Cole’s higher-end blend, Camille). I like the change of pace from the other red blends I’ve had lately, most of which have included grenache, petit verdot, malbec and other obscure varietals. I think the subtle flavors of a grape like malbec get lost in a blend.

That’s definitely not the case with the cabernet franc in the GraEagle. After an initial burst of fruit (mostly cherry), the wine has a nice spice to it - lots of pepper influence from the cab franc. The pepper mellows out into a long tobacco finish. It’s almost like each varietal takes over from the last in succession - fruit from the merlot, spice from the cab franc and finally, the reserved and more earthy flavors of the cab sauv. The wine is neither very acidic nor very tannic, which makes it very easy to drink (although it could stand to be slightly more tannic - it had a weaker mouthfeel than I would have expected).

A review of the wine in Wine Press Northwest says that the fruit came from a series of high-end vineyards - Klipsun, Champoux - even DuBrul - but the label and the website are mute on the subject. With the balanced acidity, it’s easy to believe that someone took a great deal of care with the fruit. Likewise, at pressing, you have to imagine that the winemaker was extremely judicious, given the gentle tannins.

I have not seen this wine for sale almost anywhere. Less than 2,000 cases were produced. We were lucky enough to stumble upon it at Bennett’s Bistro on Mercer Island for $29. It’s a little spendy, but worth it. This is easily one of the best wines I’ve had in several months.

Tasting Notes: Willakenzie Estates

In our trip to the Willamette Valley earlier this year, we drove up to Willakenzie Estates before they’d opened for the day and had to turn around to head elsewhere. After hitting Penner Ash, the 6th stop on what seemed like a never ending tour of pinot noir, we decided to skip Willakenzie.

Yesterday, I found out that was a big mistake. Willakenzie’s winemaker was tasting at McCarthy Schiering, and I had a chance to try five of their pinot noirs. Willakenzie is very self-consciously modeled in Burgundian style, but I can’t criticize them too much for trying to imitate the French - they are French. The owners are French, and the winemaker who was pouring was Thibaud Mandet. From the brochures they had, it looks like the winery itself is impressive - a park-like estate with vineyard blocks tucked in between forest groves.

Here are some notes on the wines:

• The first was an entry-level pinot (I believe it was the Pinot Noir Willamette Valley) that Mandet said was meant to be “approachable.” It was relatively inexpensive (for Willamette Valley anyway) - $22.50, but I found it unremarkable. The delicate fuit flavors of pinot noir hadn’t been fully developed, and I also found it fairly acidic.
• In the middle were two wines at $33.00 that I really enjoyed, one slightly more than the other. The first was the Aliette, named for Thibaud’s grandmother. As we stepped up to this one, the fruit became more pronounced. It’s still a very delicate wine - it’s not the bombastic fruit I’m used to with Washington wines. You really have to let this one sit on your tongue for a long time to get all of the flavor it has to offer. The Aliette, though, was perhaps a bit too polite for me - the Pierre Leon (named for his grandfather) had slightly stronger fruit and a little bit more of a tannic sting. We bought a bottle of each of these and drank the Pierre Leon the same day. I still have a hard time getting used to pinot - even the Pierre Leon is fairly watery in consistency and ruby in color, versus the dark purple, heavily structured Bourdeaux varietals I’m used to. It has a slightly citrusy nose. But the longer you let it sit on the tongue, the more flavor comes out, and it has a long finish with a cherry aftertaste. I would definitely buy it again.
• The best was by far the Pinot Noir Triple Black Slopes. The Triple Black Slopes are apparently the steepest part of the vineyard, rising at a 45 degree angle. I had only a small taste, so it’s hard to provide detailed tasting notes (I’m going to have to start carrying a notepad everywhere I go), but it was incredible. It was more tannic again and had earthier and more spicy flavors to complement the delicate fruit of the pinot noir. The price was the big obstacle - $55. I’m sure it’s a fair price - harvesting on terrain that steep can’t be easy - but still more than I want to spend on a single bottle.

All in all, I was really impressed. When we toured the Willamette Valley, the wines started to run together after a while. Most fell into a broad category of more or less textbook pinot, with one exception to the excessively light and watery side (Erath) and one exception to the excessively tannic and dark side (Archery Summit, which seemed like it was trying to treat a Burgundy varietal like a Bourdeaux-style wine). Willakenzie manages to preserve all the fruit highlights of pinot while giving it more structure, while not going overboard. Happily, we’ll have a chance to correct our previous oversight soon and visit the winery. We’re headed down to Portland next weekend for a spring release at my current favorite winery.

Piedmont Barbera

I was at dinner the other night for work (board of directors), at a restaurant with a great selection of Washington wines (I’d scoped it out online ahead of time and had some favorites picked out, including the DeLille D2, on offer for just $78 - not bad for a restaurant).

Unfortunately, I took my eye off the ball when a couple of people conspired to select a wine, and they chose a Piedmont barbera. It was yet another reminder that I’m not crazy about Italian varietals. It was earthy and leathery.

It’s too bad. In Rome a couple of years ago, my wife and I came across a neighborhood wine shop that sold an excellent nebbiolo that was by far the best wine we had during the whole trip. Mostly, we were drinking house wines in restaurants, and they were watery, food wines. The nebbiolo, by contrast, was a deep purple and nicely tannic.

We remembered the bottle (”Aleisa” was stamped in the side) and always went looking for it in wine shops. Occasionally, we bought what we thought was the same wine, only to be disappointed when it turned out slightly differently.

The barbera, sadly, came in the same bottle; but unlike its distant cousin, it was nothing to get excited about. And so I find myself wondering if I will ever find an Italian varietal I can get excited about. They’re certainly gaining popularity among local winemakers. I’m seeing more barbera’s these days, and it can only be a matter of time before someone starts growing nebbiolo, in part just because it’s hard to grow well.

After we finished the barbera, I was able to sneak in an order for a bottle of 2003 Abeja Cabernet Sauvignon. It was everything the barbera wasn’t - dark, refined, balanced. Washington wine simply cannot be beat - if you know what to look for!

Tasting Notes: Isenhower Cellars 2003 River Beauty Syrah

Isenhower Cellars is a sentimental favorite around our house. We met the Isenhower’s when they had first opened their winery and were doing tastings out of the old train depot in downtown Walla Walla. Denise and Brett Isenhower are really nice people and really good winemakers. At the time, they were waiting for the next big freeze to hit Walla Walla so they could start planting vines. We became some of the earliest people to sign up for their wine club.

The next two times we visited the winery, they had their own facility south of town. It’s simple, but very nice. And the wine has only gotten better with the passing years. My favorite is the Wild Alfalfa, a smoky, syrupy syrah. They also produce an excellent cabernet sauvignon.

Tonight, though, I opened the River Beauty, and it’s nothing like the Wild Alfalfa. In fact, it’s a very unusual syrah. Instead of smoke and pepper, what you get is rich fruit. I guess you’d say it tastes like cassis, but I’d rather call a spade a spade - it smells and tastes like a grape. It’s not obnoxiosuly fruity, nor is it sweet - it has a long chalky finish and a slight pucker - but it is one of the most fruit forward syrah’s I think I’ve ever tasted.

Taste of Walla Walla

The Taste of Walla Walla proved to be a really difficult format for tasting wine.

It was an exercise in excess, with what seemed like every winery in Walla Walla taking part - among the 50 wineries represented, the only notable absence I can think of was Cayuse.  The event was short - just two hours. The venue was crowded. At times, the areas that were set up for tasting at the Tower Club on the 76th floor of the Columbia Tower were packed, shoulder to shoulder.  It was a cattle call - a total stampede to get to the wines. I also can’t figure out why they held it on a Monday, starting at 5:00. They had only cheese and bread (both of which ran out within the first 45 minutes), meaning most everyone was tasting on an empty stomach.

As a result, all pretenses I might have had of actually remembering what each wine tasted like went straight out the window after maybe 15 minutes. Despite that, a few wines and impressions stood out:

• Even with my palate completely deadened, the Nicholas Cole Graeagle blend was very distinctive and different - in a good way.
• The Woodward Canyon Old Vines Cabernet Sauvignon was excellent. I often see it at McCarthy Schiering, but haven’t bought it, I think because of the label (which is a sad statement on judging a bottle by its cover). [I later found out it retails for around $72, which may be another reason I haven't bought it.]
• I enjoyed the Seven Hills Ciel du Cheval blend. It had a broader spectrum of flavors than the similarly named wine by Cadence that I tried last week.
• After tasting at Abeja’s table (where the wine was as incredible as always), we visited A Maurice, a relatively new winery. A Maurice (amicably) hired away Abeja’s assistant winemaker, Ned, to be their head winemaker. I was impressed with the red blend they were pouring, and I’m excited that Ned’s going to be their winemaker - we had a tasting appointment at Abeja last summer, and he was the one who showed us around. Nice guy, great winemaker - it will be interesting to see what A Maurice produces over the next few years.
• I had been hoping to try the Tamarack Cellars DuBrul that I have in my cellar, since I don’t want to open the bottle just yet. Unfortunately, he didn’t have any to pour. No surprise - it was very limited in quantity. He was pouring the Cabernet Franc, which I similarly don’t want to open yet, but my palate was too dulled to taste it.
• I only tried one wine at Yellow Hawk Cellars - a sangiovese. Yellow Hawk specializes in Italian varietals. Tasting the sangiovese re-confirmed my reaction to Maryhill’s sangiovese - I don’t care for this grape, no matter how well the wine is made. The basic flavor of this wine was the same as the Maryhill. Not undrinkable, but not my thing.

I may post more notes later, but all in all, this isn’t an event I’d be likely to attend again. It’s just too much. It doesn’t help that it came directly on the heels of the Northwest Cask Beer Festival, which I was still somewhat recovering from when this event rolled around. I’d rather invest the four or five hours, drive out to Walla Walla and be able to taste at my leisure than feel like I have to try 20-30 wines in quick succession.

Maryhill 2004 Sangiovese

Sangiovese, in my opinion, is a funny grape. It has a varietal character so different from any of the other grapes in the vitis vinifera family that it takes a very different kind of drinker to enjoy a single-varietal wine made from it. Among Maryhill’s various wines, the sangiovese is a complete departure.

When I think of Maryhill, I think of lush cab sauv and zinfandel. The winery does both really well. Both are your prototypical northwest wine - fruit forward, tannic, rich.

The sangiovese, by contrast, is relatively pale. It has fairly little structure and almost no fruit. I’d compare its flavor to meat, like a pot roast or a roast beef. I’d also say it has a barnyard flavor, as if it were contaminated with brett. (If you want a rundown on brett contamination, this article provides an incredibly in-depth discussiom on the subject - http://www.wineanorak.com/brettanomyces.htm.) I don’t think brett is the issue, though - I think it’s just the flavor of the grape itself - I’d describe most chianti’s the same way, but in lesser magnitude due to the blending.

Maryhill is a great winery. I belong to their wine club, and almost everything they produce is incredible. They’ve recently released a Winemaker’s Blend which is extremely good and very reasonable in price (part of a general trend by all Washington winemakers to do a generic red blend that can be priced in the $10-$15 range).

The sangiovese, in my opinion, is their sole misstep.