California Chardonnay Showdown - Blind
The Concept:
4 High-Scoring California Chardonnay's served Blindly to 4 guests. The guests knew that the theme was Chardonnay, but did not know which producers were included in the tasting. My hope was to identify the "true" quality of the wines without any hype, and whether or not they are worth the hefty pricetags.
Each guest was given a sheet to evaluate the wines. The evaluations included basic catagories like "Aroma" and "Color" but also allowed for a reevaluation as the wine developed at the 1 hour mark, and the 2 hour mark, and how if was affected by food, then a final "Final Assement" after the bottle was consumed, taking into account the evolution of the wine.
In the end, we did not attach point values, but we did arrange the wines in order according to our favorites.
The overall consensus was that the Diatom was least favorite one the table and the Kongsgaard and Peter Michael were contenders for 1st and 2nd place. I liked the Aubert a lot, but all three others rated it as their 3rd favorite.
*Another interesting note - this wines were sampled by a 5th person 24 hours later and he favored a completely different order! 1st Diatom, 2nd Kondsgaard and Aubert, and then 4th Peter Michael. So, apparently this is completely subjective. Who knew?!
My overall assessment is that the wines are not worth the heafty price tags. At under $100, the Aubert and Peter Michael are justifiable, but at secondary market prices, they are not. I'd prefer to drink Delhinger, Walter Hansel, or a handle of other producers at a fraction of the price and nearly the same level of quality.
Here are the wines in the overall order that they were prefered on Monday night:
Kongsgaard, Chardonnay "The Judge", Napa, 2005
RP: 98 points
Tanzer: 98 points
This was my 2nd favorite overall. It was incredibly intense, gorgeously perfumed with lemon oil and white flowers. It had a oily, rich, viscous palate feel, but with an awesome backbone of acidity. Oftentimes with that richness, it's tough to tease apart the nuances of the wine, not the case here. It was super-complex and even moreso with food. It showed a lot of brightness and also a real sense of place. It had mineral undertones and a certain uniqueness that one could probably identify if they tasted this wine frequently enough. I liked it a lot and think that it shows tremendous potential.
“The 2005 The Judge Chardonnay flirts with perfection. Incredibly intense flowery notes along with a liqueur of honeysuckle and crushed rocks complete with some tropical fruit, quince, orange, and pineapple characteristics. This intensely full, fresh, lively, gorgeous white benefits from 22 months aging in barrel, and bottling off the lees unfiltered.” Robert Parker, 98 points
“Good bright yellow. Brooding, mineral-driven aromas of peach, pungent stone, smoke and nuts. Extraordinarily dense and tactile in the mouth, with a distinctly saline character to the superconcentrated flavors of peach, lemon and liquid stone. Conveys a much sweeter impression today than the 2006 Judge but without any loss of vibrancy. Perhaps most impressive of all on the whiplash of a finish, which features palate-saturating peach and apricot fruit flavors and great tannic support. It's tempting to say that this monumental Chardonnay is Burgundian, but it would be hard to find a Burgundy with the sheer size to stand up to this. Kongsgaard advises drinking it between 2010 and 2016.” Stephen Tanzer, 98 points
Peter Michael, Chardonnay "Belle Cote", Sonoma, 2005
RP: 95 points
Tanzer: 93 points
This was everyone elses 2nd fav, but my 3rd fav, a very close 3rd. It was more restrained in style. Still flashy, but not as rich and opulent as some of the other wines. It smelled of lavish oak and vanilla. It had the most femininity and delicateness, in the best possible way. It lacked a little mid-palate focus. It then rebounded with a light, but beautifully lingering finish that sailed on. As I write these notes, it seems like a style that highly appeals to me, but that night it was overshadowed by the other wines.
“The Chardonnay Belle Cote is always a more exotic wine. There are 2,200 cases of the 2005 Chardonnay Belle Cote, a wine with undeniable notes of crushed stones, white peach, orange, nectarine, and quince. Medium to full-bodied, with zesty acidity, stunning minerality, and a firm structure, this is a gorgeous, French-styled Chardonnay that should drink nicely for up to a decade.” Robert Parker, 95 points
“Hazy pale gold. Explosively perfumed nose, with intense iodine and smoke notes accenting ripe orange and pear aromas. Remarkably concentrated citrus and mineral flavors are deepened by sweet butter, smoked meat and an exotic cherry pit note. Really stains the palate and finishes on a zesty citrus pith note, with outstanding persistence.” Stephen Tanzer, 93 points
Aubert, Chardonnay, Lauren Vineyard, Sonoma Coast, 2006
RP: 96 points
Tanzer: 92 points
WS: 93 points
I'm just a big fan of Aubert. Other felt this wine was disjointed and unbalanced. I thought it was particularly exotic with more tropical fruits like Guava and Passion fruit. It was definately unfiltered and murky which adds a lot of texture to the mouthfeel. The oak gave it a caramel and hazelnutty character and the acidity seemed to pulse across the palate. I loved the uniqueness of this wine and will continue to purchase my full allocation.
“The 2006 Chardonnay Lauren Vineyard is a brilliant effort. One has to admire Aubert’s ability to turn out something of this majesty in such a challenging year when so many Chardonnay and Pinot Noir vineyards were filled with botrytis. Lemon blossom, orange marmalade, and white currant aromas jump from the glass of this light straw-colored cuvee with a greenish hue (a characteristic that also appears in the Aubert 2007s). Beautiful notes of tropical fruits and crushed rocks are present in this gorgeously rich, full-bodied, well-focused Chardonnay. All the Aubert Chardonnays offer abundant power, vivid acidity, and dramatic, laser-like focus.” Robert Parker, 96 points
“Palish green-yellow. Intriguing aromas of white peach, green tea, pear, nectarine, spices and minerals. Dense and powerful, but the flavors of nectarine and minerals are kept fresh by a green-appley acidity and a minty nuance. I find this stony, flinty wine a bit youthfully musclebound today. The slightly dry-edged finish features good spicy lift and a suggestion of butterscotch.” Stephen Tanzer, 92 points
“Pure, complex fruit is shaded by mineral and light, cedary wood, yet the core fruit flavors of ripe white peach, apricot and subtle pear flavors make for an intriguing flavor profile. Needs time. Best from 2009 through 2014.” Wine Spectator, 93 points
Diatom, Chardonnay, Babcock Vineyard, Sta. Rita Hills, 2007
RP: 94 points
This wine basically got creamed by all the others. Interestingly, it was the favorite or our "lone taster" 24 hours later. On Monday, tasters commented on it being underripe (which I think is just in context to the other wines which are ultra-ripe). I found it to be very unique in flavor profile, but also superficial. The flavors were bubble gum, and red fruit, along with the standard green apple. It was very round on the palate, but also seemed tight still (note the 2007 vintage). Interestingly, no one identified the fact that there was no oak on the wine. It is fermented and aged in stainless, but goes through full malolactic and comes out awefully rich for a wine that doesn't have oak. It was a pretty poor showing for Diatom, but perhaps it could have been the wine of the night in a different line up.
“The 2007 Chardonnay Babcock is much more exotic, with ripe pineapple, pear, white currant, quince, and some subtle earthy, loamy soil undertones. The wine has fabulous fruit, sensational flavor penetration on the palate, but no sense of heaviness. Extraordinary precision gives this wine amazing vibrancy in spite of its formidable size. It is hard to know how these will age, but they seem incredibly pure and very long, although I would still opt for drinking them in their first 2-3 years of life.” Robert Parker, 94 points.
4 High-Scoring California Chardonnay's served Blindly to 4 guests. The guests knew that the theme was Chardonnay, but did not know which producers were included in the tasting. My hope was to identify the "true" quality of the wines without any hype, and whether or not they are worth the hefty pricetags.
Each guest was given a sheet to evaluate the wines. The evaluations included basic catagories like "Aroma" and "Color" but also allowed for a reevaluation as the wine developed at the 1 hour mark, and the 2 hour mark, and how if was affected by food, then a final "Final Assement" after the bottle was consumed, taking into account the evolution of the wine.
In the end, we did not attach point values, but we did arrange the wines in order according to our favorites.
The overall consensus was that the Diatom was least favorite one the table and the Kongsgaard and Peter Michael were contenders for 1st and 2nd place. I liked the Aubert a lot, but all three others rated it as their 3rd favorite.
*Another interesting note - this wines were sampled by a 5th person 24 hours later and he favored a completely different order! 1st Diatom, 2nd Kondsgaard and Aubert, and then 4th Peter Michael. So, apparently this is completely subjective. Who knew?!
My overall assessment is that the wines are not worth the heafty price tags. At under $100, the Aubert and Peter Michael are justifiable, but at secondary market prices, they are not. I'd prefer to drink Delhinger, Walter Hansel, or a handle of other producers at a fraction of the price and nearly the same level of quality.
Here are the wines in the overall order that they were prefered on Monday night:
Kongsgaard, Chardonnay "The Judge", Napa, 2005
RP: 98 points
Tanzer: 98 points
This was my 2nd favorite overall. It was incredibly intense, gorgeously perfumed with lemon oil and white flowers. It had a oily, rich, viscous palate feel, but with an awesome backbone of acidity. Oftentimes with that richness, it's tough to tease apart the nuances of the wine, not the case here. It was super-complex and even moreso with food. It showed a lot of brightness and also a real sense of place. It had mineral undertones and a certain uniqueness that one could probably identify if they tasted this wine frequently enough. I liked it a lot and think that it shows tremendous potential.
“The 2005 The Judge Chardonnay flirts with perfection. Incredibly intense flowery notes along with a liqueur of honeysuckle and crushed rocks complete with some tropical fruit, quince, orange, and pineapple characteristics. This intensely full, fresh, lively, gorgeous white benefits from 22 months aging in barrel, and bottling off the lees unfiltered.” Robert Parker, 98 points
“Good bright yellow. Brooding, mineral-driven aromas of peach, pungent stone, smoke and nuts. Extraordinarily dense and tactile in the mouth, with a distinctly saline character to the superconcentrated flavors of peach, lemon and liquid stone. Conveys a much sweeter impression today than the 2006 Judge but without any loss of vibrancy. Perhaps most impressive of all on the whiplash of a finish, which features palate-saturating peach and apricot fruit flavors and great tannic support. It's tempting to say that this monumental Chardonnay is Burgundian, but it would be hard to find a Burgundy with the sheer size to stand up to this. Kongsgaard advises drinking it between 2010 and 2016.” Stephen Tanzer, 98 points
Peter Michael, Chardonnay "Belle Cote", Sonoma, 2005
RP: 95 points
Tanzer: 93 points
This was everyone elses 2nd fav, but my 3rd fav, a very close 3rd. It was more restrained in style. Still flashy, but not as rich and opulent as some of the other wines. It smelled of lavish oak and vanilla. It had the most femininity and delicateness, in the best possible way. It lacked a little mid-palate focus. It then rebounded with a light, but beautifully lingering finish that sailed on. As I write these notes, it seems like a style that highly appeals to me, but that night it was overshadowed by the other wines.
“The Chardonnay Belle Cote is always a more exotic wine. There are 2,200 cases of the 2005 Chardonnay Belle Cote, a wine with undeniable notes of crushed stones, white peach, orange, nectarine, and quince. Medium to full-bodied, with zesty acidity, stunning minerality, and a firm structure, this is a gorgeous, French-styled Chardonnay that should drink nicely for up to a decade.” Robert Parker, 95 points
“Hazy pale gold. Explosively perfumed nose, with intense iodine and smoke notes accenting ripe orange and pear aromas. Remarkably concentrated citrus and mineral flavors are deepened by sweet butter, smoked meat and an exotic cherry pit note. Really stains the palate and finishes on a zesty citrus pith note, with outstanding persistence.” Stephen Tanzer, 93 points
Aubert, Chardonnay, Lauren Vineyard, Sonoma Coast, 2006
RP: 96 points
Tanzer: 92 points
WS: 93 points
I'm just a big fan of Aubert. Other felt this wine was disjointed and unbalanced. I thought it was particularly exotic with more tropical fruits like Guava and Passion fruit. It was definately unfiltered and murky which adds a lot of texture to the mouthfeel. The oak gave it a caramel and hazelnutty character and the acidity seemed to pulse across the palate. I loved the uniqueness of this wine and will continue to purchase my full allocation.
“The 2006 Chardonnay Lauren Vineyard is a brilliant effort. One has to admire Aubert’s ability to turn out something of this majesty in such a challenging year when so many Chardonnay and Pinot Noir vineyards were filled with botrytis. Lemon blossom, orange marmalade, and white currant aromas jump from the glass of this light straw-colored cuvee with a greenish hue (a characteristic that also appears in the Aubert 2007s). Beautiful notes of tropical fruits and crushed rocks are present in this gorgeously rich, full-bodied, well-focused Chardonnay. All the Aubert Chardonnays offer abundant power, vivid acidity, and dramatic, laser-like focus.” Robert Parker, 96 points
“Palish green-yellow. Intriguing aromas of white peach, green tea, pear, nectarine, spices and minerals. Dense and powerful, but the flavors of nectarine and minerals are kept fresh by a green-appley acidity and a minty nuance. I find this stony, flinty wine a bit youthfully musclebound today. The slightly dry-edged finish features good spicy lift and a suggestion of butterscotch.” Stephen Tanzer, 92 points
“Pure, complex fruit is shaded by mineral and light, cedary wood, yet the core fruit flavors of ripe white peach, apricot and subtle pear flavors make for an intriguing flavor profile. Needs time. Best from 2009 through 2014.” Wine Spectator, 93 points
Diatom, Chardonnay, Babcock Vineyard, Sta. Rita Hills, 2007
RP: 94 points
This wine basically got creamed by all the others. Interestingly, it was the favorite or our "lone taster" 24 hours later. On Monday, tasters commented on it being underripe (which I think is just in context to the other wines which are ultra-ripe). I found it to be very unique in flavor profile, but also superficial. The flavors were bubble gum, and red fruit, along with the standard green apple. It was very round on the palate, but also seemed tight still (note the 2007 vintage). Interestingly, no one identified the fact that there was no oak on the wine. It is fermented and aged in stainless, but goes through full malolactic and comes out awefully rich for a wine that doesn't have oak. It was a pretty poor showing for Diatom, but perhaps it could have been the wine of the night in a different line up.
“The 2007 Chardonnay Babcock is much more exotic, with ripe pineapple, pear, white currant, quince, and some subtle earthy, loamy soil undertones. The wine has fabulous fruit, sensational flavor penetration on the palate, but no sense of heaviness. Extraordinary precision gives this wine amazing vibrancy in spite of its formidable size. It is hard to know how these will age, but they seem incredibly pure and very long, although I would still opt for drinking them in their first 2-3 years of life.” Robert Parker, 94 points.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment