Author Archives: Julian Coldrey

De Bortoli Windy Peak Pinot Noir Chardonnay NV

Posted on by
Reply

I’m still on my “anything but Champagne” quest and last night saw me consume the most inexpensive sparkling wine I’ve had in years. Nowadays, $A8 buys you about half a bottle of Seppelt Fleur de Lys or a whole 750ml of this number from De Bortoli. Now, the Windy Peak range has a reputation for reliable quality at an excellent price, and even the Pinot Noir has been known to be quite drinkable — no mean feat for around $A10. Sparkling wine, though, accelerates the challenge somewhat, as it’s rare, in my experience anyway, to find true quality and interest at the lowest levels of price.A lively, coarse mousse that gives way to not much bead at all, but a pretty, rose-tinted wine of good clarity. The nose hints at a broad flavor profile, and shows slightly chunky strawberry and citrus notes, alongside some yeasty complexity. It’s kind of obvious and lacking in freshness. The palate offers a mouth full of fruit flavour, again mostly strawberry and citrus, quite full for the style, slightly effervescent, and easy to drink. There’s a slight mustiness that leads me to suspect a mild to moderate level of cork taint, so it’s hard for me to say this bottle is representative. The wine went well with light food.Keeping in mind possible cork taint, this wine is easy and full flavoured, but a little uninteresting too. I’d like to taste a fresher bottle, to see if the overall profile of the wine gains freshness and edge, as this would contribute greatly to enjoyment. De Bortoli Price: $A8Closure: CorkDate tasted: March 2008

Mount Pleasant Philip Shiraz 2003

Posted on by
Reply

The 2005 Philip took me by (not entirely pleasant) surprise, its scale and style seeming bigger than the regular Philip and feeling a bit borderline to me in terms of balance. I thought I’d revisit the 2003 version, which I remember enjoying a lot on release, now that I’ve tried the newer wine a few times. I recall the 2003 being a rich wine, full of flavour, but identifiably regional too. The nose is quite dirty/dusty in the regional sense, with savoury red fruits weaving through the earthiness. It is ripe, yet balanced and with no hint of portiness. There’s a fair whack of vanilla too. On the palate, a rich entry that shows soft, concentrated fruit character and medium body. Flavour unfolds onto the middle palate with softness and grace, but things start to go awry a little, with rough, sappy, vanillan oak threatening to unbalance the wine’s flavour profile. The fruit, however, is excellent and full of character, with definite signs of aged complexity. A soft after palate and reasonable length round the wine off.I don’t remember so much oak on this wine; perhaps some bottle variation is happening here. In any case, I like this wine a great deal and might even prefer it to the 2005. Having said that, they are both excellent wines and amazingly good value for money, and the 2005 may be a more appropriate choice to accompany robust food flavours (it went well with some pizza we had the other night). The 2005 has the added advantage of being bottled under screwcap.McWilliams Mount PleasantPrice: $A15Closure: CorkDate tasted: March 2008

Mount Riley Savée 2007

Posted on by
Reply

I don’t recall having tasted a sparkling wine made from Kiwi Sauvignon Blanc grapes before, so it was with particular interest that I sampled this number.
A fresh, lively nose that strikes me as pretty but perhaps less explosive than many still wines made from the same grape. What’s interesting about the palate is that it shows very evident Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc character in the context of a highly atypical wine style. There’s the trademark grassy, passionfruity, capsicummy flavour profile, surrounded at entry and after palate by lively fizz. It’s an odd, unexpected combination that nevertheless shows great freshness and is certainly fun.
Whether it’s a style I prefer over the still version remains questionable. The winemaking does blunt the typical flavour profile a bit, which may please some people but, for me, may not satisfy the craving for utter vulgarity that usually strikes before I reach for a Marlborough Savvy. I think this would be a great wine to serve as an aperitif if you’re looking for a variation on the usual sparkling theme.
Mount RileyPrice: $A25Closure: CorkDate tasted: March 2008

Petaluma Croser 2005

Posted on by
Reply

People drink sparkling wine for all sorts of reasons, and it seems even those who don’t like wine will go for a glass of bubbly on occasion. Personally, I often enjoy sparkling wine as an aperitif; perhaps its most common use. Dinner the other evening saw a bottle of Croser opened as we awaited our entrées. A fairly aggressive mousse and persistent, fine bead. On the nose, sprightly aromas of cut apple and citrus, with a hint of baked good complexity. So far so good. In the mouth, it becomes evident how fruit-driven this wine is, and I guess whether you like it will depend on how you like your sparking wine. Round, full fruit flavours of apple and citrus occupy the wine’s entry and mid-palate, before structure starts to take over and slim the wine down towards the after palate. OK finish. I haven’t had Croser for a while, but remember it being a leaner wine in its youth. It’s certainly lively in the mouth, and very approachable, but without much complexity at the moment.For my taste, it’s a simple wine, lacking the sort of savoury excitement I enjoy in other sparklers. I’m not sure it worked terribly well as an aperitif either, given the fullness of its fruit profile. Drink this one with your food, not before it.PetalumaPrice: $A35Closure: CorkDate tasted: March 2008

Vasse Felix Classic Dry White 2007

Posted on by
Reply

You see this everywhere. It’s easy to find in pretty much any bottle shop fridge and turns up with alarming regularity at BBQs, Summer lunches, etc. Of course, that doesn’t mean it’s good or bad — it does, though, mean you’re probably going to have a glass or two of it sometime soon…
More than those from some other regions, Semillon/Sauvignon Blanc blends from the Margaret River can tread a fine line between fresh astringency and overbearing grassiness. They don’t usually suffer, though, from a personality deficit. So smelling and tasting this wine came as somewhat of a surprise. It’s pretty on the nose — ultra clean, a bit tropical, a bit herbal. But lacking in intensity and character.
The palate is all quite correct, with relatively soft acidity (for the style) that enters freshly and pushes lightly tropical fruit along with zip. There’s not much grass or herb here; it’s definitely an easygoing, unchallenging flavour profile. The biggest surprise for me is the lack of intensity of flavour. It tastes almost watery on the mid-palate, and this, combined with its flavour profile, turns the wine into a bit of a non-event. It’s just not especially interesting. For the price, I would expect more.
Vasse FelixPrice: A$18Closure: StelvinDate tasted: March 2008

Cumulus Climbing Chardonnay 2006

Posted on by
1

I’m not terribly familiar with wines from the Orange region in NSW, but there’s no time like the present to become acquainted with new friends. I picked up this bottle on the way home as accompaniment for chicken salad.The aroma of this wine reminds me in a strange way of moderately aged Hunter Semillon. It’s an intense yet subtle nose that wafts out of the glass slowly. A mix of white stone fruit (more stone than fruit) and some astringent greenness, a bit like honeydew without the sugar. There’s also a pleasingly offbeat nuttiness that reminds me of roasted pine nuts. Entry is quite powerful, with intense and slightly clingy fruit flavour coating the tongue from the tip onwards. Although it’s a lively, acidic wine, the emphasis is on forward cool-climate Chardonnay fruit and some nutty oak. Flavour is generous, yet it’s a focused wine that retains its shape through the palate. The after palate emphasises nutty, caramel oak as it moves to a decent finish. This won’t be to everyone’s taste, especially not those who favour a more worked, broad Chardonnay style. But for me, it’s a characterful wine that goes well with food or on its own. Good value. I should also mention the label, which is stylishly individual and always stands out in the retail lineup.Cumulus WinesPrice: $A18Closure: StelvinDate tasted: February 2008

Domaine Ninot Chaponnière Rully 2005

Posted on by
Reply

A village-level wine from Rully in the Côte Chalonnaise. This is another “value” Burgundy from a lesser appellation and, at $A25 a bottle, this wine sits within an increasingly crowded price bracket of local Pinot Noirs. A pretty, bright ruby colour, sparkling and clear. Initially, the nose smelled of spicy, toasty oak and not much else. With time, it settled into a more balanced expression of lifted red fruits, oak and some savouriness. Not terribly complex, and slightly New Worldy to my taste. The palate is marked by a notable astringence that comes across as a sourness of flavour profile. Entry is quite lively, with bright flavours and fresh acidity. Mid-palate is medium bodied and brings the wine’s sourness into full focus, although there are subtle tannins and enough intensity of fruit flavour to prevent the wine from being totally one-dimensional. There’s a slightly animal note in there, but overall no great complexity. A nice lift of flavour through the after palate lightens the flavour profile to a sappier, freshly fruited note, before a decent finish sees the wine off in some style.This isn’t a world-beater by any means, and there are probably (conventionally) better local Pinots for the price. But it’s well made and just different enough to keep things interesting. Again, how to put a price on difference?Domaine NinotPrice: $A25Closure: CorkDate tasted: February 2008

Domaine Anne et Hervé Sigaut Les Noirots 1er Cru Chambolle-Musigny 2005

Posted on by
Reply

Onwards with the Burgundy 2005 tastings, and here we have a 1er Cru wine from Chambolle-Musigny. A pretty ruby colour, slight haze. This wine’s aromas has proven elusive and changeable through my tasting experience. At first yeasty with strawberries and cream, then morphing to a raspberry liqueur sort of expression, finally (the morning after) ending up firmly in savoury territory, with mineral and sous-bois notes running underneath vanilla spice and delicate fruit. Although it is an expressive nose, it is complex and subtle and almost evasive. The palate has gone through an equally interesting evolution. Entry is striking, with acidity and sappy red fruits registering quickly on the palate. At first, the mid-palate was mouthfilling, light to medium bodied, with intense flavours and bright freshness. Over time, the wine has gained complexity and lost some of its hedonistic edge. Its flavour profile is quite savoury and intense, but delicate too. I love the acid structure of this wine, which provides a clearly delineated flow for each flavour component and which I can almost “visualise.” Good line through the after palate, with a finely drying finish of decent length. Although there’s a lot in this wine, it feels unresolved to me, as if it needs some time to make up its mind what it wants to be. I’ll allow my remaining bottles that luxury. Domaine Anne et Hervé SigautPrice: $A65Closure: CorkDate tasted: February 2008

Mount Pleasant Philip Shiraz 2005

Posted on by
Reply

What with all the Burgundies lately, I thought it might be amusingly ironic to taste what used to be known as Hunter Burgundy — made from Shiraz grapes, of course. Philip is usually a reliable choice in that it generally displays good typicité within the context of the vintage — no mean feat at this price point. 2005 being a good vintage in the Hunter for red wines, I was keen to try this one.And, I must admit, I was rather disappointed at first. Although Hunter character was present, the wine was swamped with a spirity, fortified edge that more or less obliterated any nuance of fruit character, and created an overblown, filling-yet-hollow mouthfeel of little textural interest. I had almost decided not to write it up, but left half the bottle to retaste the following day, just to be sure.It’s remarkably better after a good night’s airing. Although it hasn’t magically transformed into a different wine, it has a sense of balance that was not present on opening. Good Hunter savouriness alongside sweet yet subtle red fruits on the nose. There’s a bit of oak in there too; sweet but not overwhelming. The palate shows the most marked improvement, with a noticeable diminution in portiness, which has the effect of bringing the fruit into focus, and allowing the wine’s delicious, savoury tannins their proper place. It’s Hunter, but on a large scale: medium verging on full bodied, the alcohol still noticeable (though not all-consuming), denser flavours than one might expect. In the end, a good wine and excellent value. Despite the wine’s dimensions, it retains the elegance and softness of good Hunter Shiraz, so should please fans of the style.McWilliams Mount PleasantPrice: $A13Closure: StelvinDate tasted: February 208