Finding a Pinot Noir

I used to drink mostly Burgundy and a little Oregon, but all that I really drink anymore is Baden, Pfalz, Rheingau or Ahr Spätburgunder. Philipp Kuhn, Nelles, Minges, Bergdolt, Heger, König and Salwey are some of my favorite values. Calera, Eyrie, Bethel Heights, and Evesham Wood always impressed me stateside.

Cheers,
Bill

[Jenise]

Evesham Wood always impressed me stateside.

Cheers,
Bill

The best under $20 (retail) pinot I've ever had came from Evesham Wood, just a year or two ago. But 1000% in the opposite direction of Martinelli, so not a wine I'd reccomend to Ron.

One of the best things about wines, is that you (and I know I do) can love a $100 bottle and also appreciate a $5.99 special!

[Jenise]

One of the best things about wines, is that you (and I know I do) can love a $100 bottle and also appreciate a $5.99 special!

Oh sure. But, if your comment was directed at my last comment, my thinking the Evesham Wood would not appeal to you had nothing to do with price but rather, if the fat, saturated Martinelli style is your favorite kind of pinot, then the Evesham would probably be one you'd find "thin" where, to my tastes, it's delicate and that's a good thing.

To me, Pinot Noir's can be one of the more complex wines, if not how made, what you like and what you drink. I've had so many thin, watery Pinot's that almost make you ashame that they have the name Noir in it.

What I want is a Pinot that has character.. Its never going to be big, its never going to be full, but it should be elegant and possess a good deal of finesse. My old wine teacher used to tell me
that Chateau Margaux was the Queen of the Bordeaux, soft, elegant, probably from the larger amount of Merlot grape. And he also taught me that a good Pinot Noir should share some of those exact qualities. Be ladylike in style and appeal, but also satisfy the man drinking the wine

I wish I knew a lot more about Pinot's, but my experience has been limited to what I've tasted and what I have liked.

Thinking about this....
Do I want a Fat big Ole Lady Pinot Noir tipping the scales at 300lbs or
Do I want an Elegant Lady who has kept up everything that should be kept up

(PS: Apologies in advance to any of the ladies, my comments were not meant to be sexist, just some phrases I have used talking about wines)

[Jenise]

There's a lot of insipid pinot noir out there to be sure!

I used to drink mostly Burgundy and a little Oregon, but all that I really drink anymore is Baden, Pfalz, Rheingau or Ahr Spätburgunder. Philipp Kuhn, Nelles, Minges, Bergdolt, Heger, König and Salwey are some of my favorite values. Calera, Eyrie, Bethel Heights, and Evesham Wood always impressed me stateside.

Cheers,
Bill

I forgot to mention in my post above that some very respectable PN is being made in Switzerland, particularly in the Valais and, in tiny quantities, in German speaking cantons. I have not yet come across one as outstanding as their best Syrah or their best from their native varieties like Cornalin and Humagne but they are well worth trying if you happen to be in Switzerland. Hardly any Swiss wines get exported and the Swiss prefer it that way. That is a pity because the overall standard seems quite high with some high peaks and there are a lot of original flavours around.

There's a lot of insipid pinot noir out there to be sure!

Jenise, I agree that there is a lot of dilute and boring, if rarely actively unpleasant, PN out there. However, I feel that quite a few people don't give a chance to a PN (or indeed any red) which shows light colour and body. A flagrant example of this is Parker's denial of the existence of red Coteaux Champenois, of which good ones, though light, show wonderful purity and subtlety of aroma and fruit and have a definite place in gastronomy served not too warm with simple preparations of white meat, poultry and even fish.

In the last decade or so some Coteaux Champenois have taken on more weight (global warming effect?) so maybe RMP will start noticing them.

[Jenise]

There's a lot of insipid pinot noir out there to be sure!

Jenise, I agree that there is a lot of dilute and boring, if rarely actively unpleasant, PN out there. However, I feel that quite a few people don't give a chance to a PN (or indeed any red) which shows light colour and body. A flagrant example of this is Parker's denial of the existence of red Coteaux Champenois, of which good ones, though light, show wonderful purity and subtlety of aroma and fruit and have a definite place in gastronomy served not too warm with simple preparations of white meat, poultry and even fish.

In the last decade or so some Coteaux Champenois have taken on more weight (global warming effect?) so maybe RMP will start noticing them.

Tim, I tend to agree with you, my complaint with 'insipidity' would have less to do with body than style, namely the modern, candied, one-dimensional American pinots that tend to dominate the budget category over here. But interesting about red Champenois, I did not realize that Parker turned a blind eye to them categorically. However, that would explain a lot about why we virtually never see them here--he who can create demand, has not.

I had a Handley Cellars Mendocino County Pinot recently that was quite good for the $25 price tag. Great berry nose and a nice smooth mouth feel. I had never heard of the winery before purchasing this wine, but I would definitely pick up another bottle if I run across one.

PS: I am infatuated with the Sea Smoke Pinot, which I tasted on one occasion. With any luck I will make it onto their allocation list before death sets in.

I do enjoy
A-Z Willamette Valley , Oregon
J Russian River Valley, California
Fess Parker Santa Barbara, California

Out the above, I like the Fess Parker the best. But that also is saying that I have tasted the entry level J. There are so many other J Pinot's that I have not tasted

I drink a fair amount of pinot noir from Cali, Oregon, and Burgundy. Generally, I find it difficult to find something under $15 that is satisfying. (The Mark West, A to Z, and a few others can be ok.) But around $20-5, I find a jump in quality and much good wine. Many of these have been mentioned (I like the Erath in some years, but not all). Two from the states that have not been and that are widely distributed are Calera Central Coast (or on sale his Mt Villiers) and Melville Estate bottling, which I find consistently good. (David Bruce's stuff was also in this zone, though I have not drunk it lately and Chalone in some years could be a real pleasure.)
I myself am not a huge Martinelli fan, nor Kosta Browne, but on that end of the spectrum (in terms of alcohol percentage), I'll admit to a weakness for Rochioli (the mere estate) and also their sauvignon blanc, which I always enjoy.
I drunk a bunch of the '04 Sea Smoke (Southing, Ten, etc.--I thought the former better than the latter); it was fine, very good, but I did not think it transcendent. The Peay Scallop Shelf, a different style, probably remains my personal favorite from California. Though I am now on the mailing list, I have not yet gotten or drunk any Rhys.

Cheers,
Josh

I drunk a bunch of the '04 Sea Smoke (Southing, Ten, etc.--I thought the former better than the latter); it was fine, very good, but I did not think it transcendent.

In my opinion, the most pure expression of Pinot Noir is from Burgundy. I find myself comparing all other Pinots to Burgs, and I usually find them coming up short. For a transcendent Pinot experience I think that one has to look to the Cotes (whatever the plural form is).

[David M. Bueker]

I drunk a bunch of the '04 Sea Smoke (Southing, Ten, etc.--I thought the former better than the latter); it was fine, very good, but I did not think it transcendent.

In my opinion, the most pure expression of Pinot Noir is from Burgundy. I find myself comparing all other Pinots to Burgs, and I usually find them coming up short. For a transcendent Pinot experience I think that one has to look to the Cotes (whatever the plural form is).

While I would have agreed with you in the past, I have recently (last few years) been drinking Pinot Noir from Rhys and Anthill Farms. While all the wines are younger vines, the purity of the Pinot fruit is definitely there.

Come on folks, I'm as Pro-Burgundy Bigoted as the next person with good taste, but let's not call it the 'purest' form of pinot noir. If anything, the whole point of Burgundy is that it's not pinot noir it's Chambertin, Taillepieds, Amoureuses, etc. But even moving beyond that, how are we measuring this 'purity'.

Because purity is definitely an objective criteria and not something like 'tasty' which is easier to defend as a subjective preference. I've seen so many people post notes about all kinds of wines calling them pure, and while I agree we get that sensation of clarity from certain wines, more often than not it's the clarity of cepage + terroir. Hard to defend pinot noir marked by Burgundy terroir as more 'pure' than one marked by Otago or Santa Cruz terroir. More delicious, more intriguing, that's a lot easier to defend. It's personal.

Come on folks, I'm as Pro-Burgundy Bigoted as the next person with good taste, but let's not call it the 'purest' form of pinot noir. If anything, the whole point of Burgundy is that it's not pinot noir it's Chambertin, Taillepieds, Amoureuses, etc. But even moving beyond that, how are we measuring this 'purity'.

I don't know Rahsaan. I argue that "purity" constitutes the combination of terroir, and winemaking technique that allows for the best characteristics of the varietal to be displayed (my definition). Though I am certainly nothing more than a rank amateur I would also argue that "purity" is a matter of some subjectivity among the masses. I don't know that variations on a theme (Chambertin, Taillepieds, etc.) negate the potential for purity of expression within the wine(s). Perhaps it's true that though I can identify manipulated Pinots I cannot define, or recognize a standard of Pinot purity. That's where I fall back on my subjective opinion. I certainly have not tasted widely enough to claim that Burgundy is "the" global standard for purity in Pinot. It is simply my benchmark.

If there is a wine that exemplifies a purity benchmark for Pinot, please point me to it. I am always happy to learn.

Thanks for your recommendations, David.

I don't know Rahsaan. I argue that "purity" constitutes the combination of terroir, and winemaking technique that allows for the best characteristics of the varietal to be displayed (my definition).

Now you're shifting the argument by conflating "better" and "pure".

I agree that Burgundy is more important historically and it is certainly my preferred interpretation of pinot noir (by far). But I have a hard time calling it more 'pure' because that type of claim implies ranking of manipulation and seems very hard to back up on such a broad regional scale.

I agree that Burgundy is more important historically and it is certainly my preferred interpretation of pinot noir (by far). But I have a hard time calling it more 'pure' because that type of claim implies ranking of manipulation and seems very hard to back up on such a broad regional scale.

I essentially agree. Perhaps my claim should have been "best expression", rather than "purest expression". Simply squeezing the juice directly into a glass would be the purest expression of the grape in a technical sense. What is a suitable working definition of "purity" when it comes to wine? I still think that my definition fits, but perhaps it should not be applied so broadly.

What is a suitable working definition of "purity" when it comes to wine?

I don't think there is one that can be objectively defended. I think it's one of the (many) tasting note terms that don't survive scrutiny. Generally I don't worry too much about these things because tasting notes are not supposed to be clinical observations but rather fanciful impressions and if people sort of understand the TN then that's fine by me.

I suppose the most logical definition of "purity" would be wines that don't taste of oak and are neither too ripe nor underripe. But even within those parameters there are plenty of vineyard and winemaking decisions that can change the taste of the wine. We see that in Burgundy with all the producers making very different wines from the same vineyard.

And when I see the wide range of wines that get called 'pure' by folks on wine boards and in the wine industry it really makes me laugh.

Hi Ron,

I am a pinotphile also. Some of my most memorable pinots come from Oregon, California and, or course, Burgundy. Perhaps the best CA pinot I have ever had was a Muir-Hannah from the foothills of the Sierras. This pinot had a wonderful nose of fresh morels sprouting on the forest floor with cherries and raspberries, A 2004 Drouhin pinot from the Willamette valley enjoyed at a restaurant in Bloomington, IN was perhaps the best OR pinot I have ever tasted. My tasting note on this wine: Semitransparent ruby red wine with a nose that smelled like the forest floor after a spring rain, cherries, and a hint of red raspberries. Sumptuous sweet tannins on the the midpalate that blended nicely with tart cherries and strawberries. Medium long finish that nicely finished what the midpalate promised. I have had many delicious burgs, but no one stands out in mind.

[David M. Bueker]

The idea of Burgundy exemplifying purity troubles me as well. Purity would have to be an outcome of the wine making process, as there are things that can be done (e.g. use of 100% new oak) that would obscure the varietal characteristics or terroir characteristics of the wine.

There's plenty of Burg producers that do things to obscure both.