This wine and the Thomas Kiss from 2010 are, taken together, a case study in Hunter Shiraz’s current stylistic dilemma. A region with such history must surely think twice before shedding its legacy but, at the same time, even the best wines aren’t static, nor does the context in which they exist stop evolving.

The one thing that emerges most clearly from the glass is Hunter fruit in its turned earth, red berried glory. There’s a rustic suppleness to the character of this region’s reds that consistently engages me and which I find delicious. Good detail and even a hint of savouriness fill out the aroma profile, as does some subtle, seemingly old, vanilla and spice oak.

The palate is defined by its textural acid and medium body. Entry is sprightly and flavoursome, leading to a middle palate that is bright with red fruit and crunchy berry skins. There’s a slight simplicity to the fruit that may be a function of youth – certainly, this has the structure to build for some time in bottle and I suspect the best is yet to come. In terms of flavour profile, this is significantly more savoury than the Kiss, a fact that is quite evident in side-by-side tasting. There’s good flow of flavour through the after palate, although the finish pulls up a little quickly for my liking.

Whether it’s a better wine than the Thomas is perhaps the most interesting question to ask, and on that matter I’m not sure. On the one hand, its style is more to my taste. But we shouldn’t be so unsophisticated as to regard our personal preferences as the sole factor in deciding an object’s worth, and in many respects I believe the Kiss wine is better: better fruit, more complexity, more innovative treatment in the winery, greater daring. It’s the difference between attraction and admiration, I suppose, and it would be a sad world in which we were forced to choose just one or the other. For what it’s worth, and as an advocate of tradition in these matters, I find myself gravitating towards the Kiss after an hour or so of tasting. Go figure.

Tulloch Wines
Price: $A50
Closure: Stelvin
Source: Sample

A showdown of sorts this evening between two range-topping Hunter Shirazes from 2010. First up is Andrew Thomas’s Kiss Shiraz.

I recently tasted the Motel Block from this vintage and there’s a definite family resemblance here. The same fullness of flavour, slightly buried regionality of fruit character, slickness of presentation. But everything here is dialled up to 11. This is, make no mistake, the flagship of the range, and there are lashings of oak and ramped up fruit density to remind one of the fact.

The nose is purple-fruited and basically a wall of aroma with, despite its dimensions, plenty of detail and nuance. Oak is certainly a feature, and comes across as a mélange of coffee, vanilla and bubblegum notes. The palate is verging on full bodied and, as with the nose, piles on intense flavour. Flow through the mouth is well-controlled and has a slickness to it that, while impressive, seems a bit polished, as if some of the more interesting rough edges may have been sanded off at some point. I especially admire how the flavour profile is so integrated even at this wine’s very young age. It makes the wine approachable now, even though I’d be setting aside a stash to come together more and build some complexity, as well as shed some of the boisterous intensity of its youth. A thread of slightly raw tannins through the finish isn’t especially distracting and, for me, adds some welcome savouriness to the flavour profile.

This is a beautifully made wine with a very clear stylistic statement to make. Perhaps because it comes so close to reaching its big goals, this raises more questions for me than did the Motel Block around what Hunter Shiraz ought to taste like. To be sure, this is leagues away from the sort of rustic, acid-driven wines that are still cherished by some producers and punters and which, one might argue, are somewhat of a ball and chain on the region’s profile. For drinkers, like me, who love the older style, this certainly throws down the gauntlet. Would I prefer to drink it over less well made wines that take a more traditional approach? Perhaps not. At the same time, I want smart winemakers to keep challenging our ideas around regional style. These things need to evolve, and wines like this are capable of keeping the Hunter alive.

Thomas Wines
Price: $A60
Closure: Stelvin
Source: Sample

My first taste of this wine came after a flight of Chardonnay and Pinot Noir wines; it was a complete shock to my palate, so I set it aside for later tasting. I’m so glad I did, because it’s full of interest and delicacy, very little of which I was able to discern at the earlier tasting.

The aromas has firm base notes but what is really impressive is a high toned, floral aroma that wafts above juicy berries and aromatic vanilla oak. Those white, honeysuckle flowers lead the aroma through a range of turned earth notes that, more than any other element, mark this as a product of the Hunter. When I first smelled this wine, each strand felt somewhat separated, but some air and swirling has brought the aromas together quite well, such that there’s now a coherent flow from top to bottom. This a rich, energetic wine to smell.

I thought it might be a little overwhelming, but this is a surprisingly elegant wine, taking the fullness of flavour hinted at on the nose and translating that to an almost serene expression of Hunter Shiraz on the palate. Although its flavours are regional, this wine has little of the rusticity that some Hunters can show. Instead, it shows a poise and sophistication in the way it unfolds in the mouth, sweeping savoury red berries, spice and earth along in one big glossy package. Intensity is significant, as is tannic structure through the after palate.

This is just a really really good wine, and I can’t see too many lovers of this region’s Shiraz turning away from it. To be sure, a contemporary expression of the style, but no less interesting for it.

Thomas Wines
Price: $A50
Closure: Stelvin
Source: Gift