Château Chauvin 2005

Another Costco purchase. I have no prior familiarity with this estate.

The nose is quite heady, with pungent brambles, some dust, brown spice and oak resin. There’s a thickness to the aroma profile that, while communicating a sense of generosity, also masks detail and makes the wine smell a bit monolithic. There’s also a slight suggestion of meat and band-aid.

The palate validates all these impressions. It’s bold and liquerous, entry and mid palate full of juicy, dark berry fruit. Thankfully, it’s not an overly sweet flavour profile, and there are attractive hints of savouriness right along the line. The oak, while very prominent, also helps the wine stay on the right side of fruit sweet. Through the after palate, tannins begin to appear, adding texture and variation, but arguably going beyond where they ought in terms of dryness.

A very drinkable wine, perhaps more so with food, but not great.

Château Chauvin
Price: £27
Closure: Cork
Source: Retail

Château de Sours Bordeaux Rosé 2010

I’m trying to do my bit for the rosé cause, but a string of disappointing wines last week left me with little of interest to write up. Thank goodness for this, then.

Made from Merlot and Cabernet Franc, this wine’s aroma is all about freshness, which is a satisfying (if conventional) way to approach the style. The leafy side of these varieties dominates, along with a crisper, edgier dose of red capsicum (from the Franc, perhaps). I think I smell some black pepper too, speaking more to the sharpness of the aroma profile than any pungency or spice. There’s a lack of depth and layering, but it’s so bright and fresh, it’s easy to forgive such simplicity.

At first I thought there too much sugar on the palate; after a few tastes, I’m now finding it quite well balanced. Certainly I’ve tasted much sweeter rosés, and the residual sugar here is more than balanced by firm acid and a flavour profile that, like the aroma, emphasises fresh vegetation more than deep fruit. Sizzling capsicum, unfolding ferns, a hint of tomato bush; underneath it all, just enough light red berries to make me smile. The palate seems more complex than the nose, with an added layer or two, all well integrated and lively.

A delicious, drinkable style of some character. Fully priced, though.

Château de Sours
Price: $A28
Closure: Stelvin
Source: Sample

Château de Sours Réserve de Sours Sparkling Rosé NV

I’m not sure how active the market is for French sparklers at this price point; certainly, I don’t remember ever setting out to purchase a sparking wine from Bordeaux made from Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot. And yet here we are.

What’s really nice about this wine is that it’s defiantly different in aroma and flavour profile from Champagne and its many imitators. There’s no mistaking the Cabernet at its heart; the aroma shows characteristic leafy overtones and a cool, red fruited core. It’s savoury at heart, though lacking the sorts of complexities that are par for the course in even moderately good Champagne. This is quite a different beast, simpler and fresher-smelling. The defining characteristic of the palate is its relatively soft acidity, something that one can’t take for granted in local sparklers at this price point.

Entry is immediate and fresh, again with leafy Cabernet notes dominating the flavour profile at first. Light, crisp berry juice glides over the middle palate with ease, if not intensity. It’s fairly light on the spritz as these things go; what there is contributes to a lively mouthfeel that is only one or two steps removed from a bright Riesling. A nice, fresh, leafy finish.

One of the more different sparkling wines I’ve had of late; certainly, I prefer this to some of the aromatic white sparkling wines that are becoming more common. There’s something jarring about a recognisably Cabernet rosé sparkling – I like it.

Château de Sours
Price: $A28
Closure: Cork
Source: Sample

Château de Bellevue Lussac St-Emilion 2005

Ah, coincidence. It’s been an interesting month: my partner was up in the Bay Area a couple of weeks back and availed himself of one of their May specials: a half-case of Bordeaux wine at a reduced price. This week, the New York Times published an excellent article quoting Paul Grieco of Hearth – a restaurant in New York City where I’ll hopefully be drinking myself into a stupor this coming Sunday – as being “sad” that no one’s come into the restaurant and asked for a glass of Bordeaux. I get that: I own barely any Bordeaux – heck – with this recent purchase I have nearly eight bottles, I think – and generally never think to buy any. Why? Well, the price thing, yeah, but also because I’ve never had one that, you know, really transported me. The ones I’ve had have inspired no personal connection, no rhapsodic waxing, nothing. Worse yet, I’ve been watching all ten hours of Mondovino (the TV series, not the movie) this week and have cringed repeatedly at the huge châteaux and their tacky yet expensive eyeglass-wearing marketing directors, etc. etc. etc.So. Here’s a bottle of not-quite-so-young Bordeaux. Kermit Lynch imported it; it’s thirty bucks or so, apparently. What’s it like?First off, the nose isn’t at all what I was expecting. It’s lush: full, rich, darkly scented, redolent of cassis and smoked tea. There’s just a bit of black cured olives, wet clay, and rich, savory meat that reminds me of Korean barbecued ribs. It’s wonderfully complex, to be short.My first thought upon tasting it, however, was “this isn’t fully ripe.” There are definite green, herbaceous notes here that seem surprising and slightly unpleasant, especially for someone used to California, Washington, South Africa: instead of delivering a wine as rich as the smell, you instead are presented with a distinctly mean, narrow flavor profile that’s disappointing at first. The trick, however, is to stick with it: suddenly, you find yourself flashing back to taste descriptors learned in college that you never use for your home state: lead pencil, cigar box, minerality, all of those things. Most of all, though, I taste a kind of slate-y stoniness; the wine is narrow in the mouth but upon closer reflection decidedly taut, beautiful in the same way that mannish women are: you sense a tension of beauty rooted in restraint. Yes, this could have wound up in Napa territory, all plushness, sweet tannins, cloying chocolate-plum perfume: instead, it’s been artfully arrested in a way that those qualities inherent to Merlot are arrested, paradoxically making them more compelling.Tannins are noticeably present, of course, yet perfectly correct; they’re currently working beautifully with a meat pie from the South African bakery down the road. Based on the rich fruit and good acidity, I’d reckon that I opened this bottle too soon: if I were you, I’d hold this back for another decade.To sum up: yes, my generation do not drink Bordeaux… yet. The trick is I think to work through the initial disappointment of encountering a wine almost, but not quite, familiar as the stuff of Pahlmeyer and Thelema; you need to sit with this one for some time and listen carefully. The story it tells is all the more beautiful for speaking so softly. Château de Bellevue
Price: $28
Closure: Cork
Source: Retail

Château Carignan Premières Côtes de Bordeaux Prima 2005

Initially, my impression is of a dark, sweet, rich wine with some maturity to it. There’s a bit more dirt and a little bit of barnyard with some aeration, but overall the impression is of a good quality French wine, pretty much the sort of thing you’d be served at the France Pavilion at EPCOT: pretty bottle, hints of what is more typically French, and yet not altogether different than a California wine at first.I had to be patient with this wine: it took quite some time before it opened up enough to be enjoyable. At first, it seemed to be an awkward mix of outsize acidity with nothing more than sweet red fruit and barnyard; however, after half an hour, it displayed some lovely notes of cocoa and sweet, toasty oak. Even so, the wine seems to be overly ambitious to me: yes, there’s fruit weight, ripeness, oak, money here… and yet it just doesn’t hang together. Instead of charm, minerality, and any semblance of terroir, all I get here is, well, California style merlot with a bit more barnyard than usual. The tannins are still kinda huge at this state, the acidity doesn’t seem to mesh well with the wine, and overall it’s tough going and not especially pleasurable, especially not at this (discounted) price.There are, as they say, better options. I’ve seen Northstar merlot from Washington state discounted to the $20 level recently, and that wine is in my opinion a much more successful attempt at Pahlmeyer (or what have you) than this wine is.Château Carignan
Price: $20
Closure: Cork
Source: Retail

Château Rocher-Calon Montagne-Saint-Émilion 2006

I’m in the teeming metropolis of Morgan Hill, California at the moment on another business trip. This is pretty countryside just a ways south of San José; the Besson vineyard that gave us the inestimable Clos de Gilroy grenache is nearby. Thinking I’d drink locally, I headed to the local Trader Joe’s – the Aldi-owned cheap-gourmet grocery store – and intended to buy a bottle of something local. However, what they had was mostly stuff from Napa and Sonoma, and the French wines were keenly priced by comparison – I didn’t want to put $25 worth of alcohol on an expense report – so I wound up with the second most expensive Bordeaux that they had. (Interestingly, the most expensive French still wine was a $20 Ch.-de-Pape.)How is it? Very good indeed. It looks young, all majestic purple and vibrancy. The nose, such as I can make it out given the, ahem, inadequate stemware at the Courtyard Inn, is very soft, with hints of red berries and spice. The entry of the wine onto the palate is all lightfooted elegance, but before you have a chance to notice it firm-footed tannins come sneaking in, which broadens the wine out into a fairly impressive heft. Rich, ripe primary fruit is offset by tannins and smoky, spicy notes presumably from barrels; this is (let’s be straight here) very impressive given its price, and a good introduction to what decent French claret tastes like.The finish lingers, tannins gradually overcoming the supple fruit, until all that’s left is a memory of a distant wildfire. All in all, probably the best wine I’ve drunk at this price point in some time, and probably what the Wayne Gretzsky meritage from the other night wants to be when it grows up.Château Rocher-Calon
Price: $13
Closure: Cork

Château le Crock 1996

No doubt many have remarked that French wine labels often lose something in translation. This wine, a Cru Bourgeois from Saint-Estèphe, suffers more acutely than most from this phenomenon, especially in an Australian context. What’s in the bottle, thankfully, is anything but a crock.

Classic nose of varietal fruit (perhaps a little DMS-y, but not unpleasantly so), dusty leaf and cigar box. It’s clean and rings as clear as a bell in terms of its definition. Although still quite youthful, there’s just enough complexity and hints of tertiary development to draw you in and sniff more deeply each time.

The palate confirms this wine’s substance. I’m not sure what pleases me most on entry, the textured, fresh acidity or the fact that flavour fills out immediately the wine strikes the tongue. From this point, there’s no great crescendo or exaggerated dimension of line. No, this wine is about measured elegance and quietly spoken confidence. Medium bodied, the palate shows a firm yet gentle progression of flavours through the middle palate. More blackcurrant, cigar box, and hints of spicy cedar oak. Acidity injects some sourness, to me delicious, into this flavour profile. Flavours are very well integrated and the wine tastes more of a single, multi-dimensional note than separate strands. The after palate shows some lift, which helps the flavours to come into sharp focus just before things conclude in a long, slightly sweet finish. Tannins are soft and totally integrated — one isn’t prompted to consider them as a separate element.

Very moreish, this one. The only point of contention for me is the fruit character, which is perhaps slightly simple on the nose and teeters on the edge of being “too clean.” Taken as a whole, though, there’s plenty of complexity and interest on the palate, and it’s hard to argue with such a classically structured wine. Lovely.

Château le Crock
Price: $NA
Closure: Cork
Date tasted: September 2008

Château Moulin Riche 1996

This is the second wine of Chateau Léoville Poyferré and, without wanting to spoil the fun, is bloody good. I’m on to my second glass now, and the aroma profile keeps refining its silhouette, shifting from one version of itself to the next.

It opened a bit stinky, perhaps seaweedy, with wisps of cedar and other complexities coiling around each other. After a while, the stink has blown off, leaving pencil shavings and berry fruit elegance behind. It’s all highly sniffable, and remarkably complete purely in terms of its aroma. The palate doesn’t disappoint, as it carries forward many threads from the nose while adding significant textural interest. Smooth and subtle on entry, the wine builds flavour towards the mid-palate, which is medium bodied at most. There’s more blackcurrant and cedar here, perhaps a hint of leathery bottle age too but no more than a hint. If it never quite realises the degree of intensity one might have expected (or desired), there’s delightful compensation in the integrated, luxurious tannins that creep up from behind and delicately claw their way on to the tongue. Decent, fruit-driven finish with a suggestion of tertiary sweetness (which I’m a sucker for).

An excellent, balanced wine that’s all about style.

Château Moulin Riche
Price: $NA
Closure: Cork
Date tasted: September 2008

Château Saint-Georges 2002

This is a Merlot-dominant (60%) blend that also includes some Cabernet Sauvignon (20%) and Cabernet Franc (20%). 2002 isn’t considered an especially stellar vintage for Merlot in Bordeaux, although some consider the vintage generally underrated, producing less fruit forward but classically styled wines. This wine is from the