WTN: Recent bottles

2004 de Villaine, Bourgogne (blanc) Les Clous:
Somewhat closed at first but after an hour it opened to clean white fruit and chardonnay smells; clear and focused in the mouth as lemon, white fruit and a light spice note are delivered in a medium weight, silky texture; a medium length and balanced finish. Could use a year or two in the cellar but a decant helps if drinking today. 12.5% alcohol, imported by Kermit Lynch and about $25; I’ll buy more.

2006 Edmunds St. John, Gamay Rosé Bone Jolly:
Off the charts delicious; strong raspberry flavors with earth and spice tones and a lift of freshness from the acidity; I can not think of a more lip-smackingly good pink. Bravo! 13.2% alcohol and about $17; back up the truck.

2001 Giacosa, Nebbiolo d’Alba:
Dusty rose and red fruit nose; dusty also in the mouth with red fruit and earth flavors and a very light smoky touch; medium length finish. A charming wine with character. 13% alcohol, imported by Locasio and about $20 on release; I bought several cases.

2005 Tanca sa Contissa, Vermetino di Sardegna:
Bright, lemony and crisp on the nose; similar on the palate with a bitter almond note that keeps the fruit flavors vivid and the finish very clean. An ideal wine with seafood. 13% alcohol, imported by Vigneti d’Italia and about $10; I’d buy it again.

2004 de Villaine, Bourgogne (rouge) La Digoine:
What was once a bit stemmy and narrow is now fleshy and ripe; excellent cherry flavors with earth and fresh herb accents, a silken texture and a bright, intense finish. Lovely wine. 12.5% alcohol, imported by Kermit Lynch and about $25; worth it and then some.

2004 Montes Alpha, Syrah:
Quite a bit of oak on the nose, a touch hot and pretty sweet overall although it does taste like syrah; a soulless wine without character and obviously manipulated. I understand why this would have its appeal and why the Spectator would recommend it, but this is not my style. 14.5% alcohol, imported by T.G.I.C. Imports and about $17; no thanks.

Best, Jim

[David M. Bueker]

Total cost - less than most bottles of 2005 Grand Cru Burgundy. Total pleasure - greater than most bottles of 2005 Grand Cru Burgundy.

Good choices.

.......2004 Montes Alpha, Syrah:
Quite a bit of oak on the nose, a touch hot and pretty sweet overall although it does taste like syrah; a soulless wine without character and obviously manipulated. I understand why this would have its appeal and why the Spectator would recommend it, but this is not my style. 14.5% alcohol, imported by T.G.I.C. Imports and about $17; no thanks.

Best, Jim

OK, so the wine is souless and without character. Why does that make it 'obviously manipulated' (although it probably is, given large scale production, etc.)? Isn't it entirely possible that Mr. Natural on his 5 ha. plot could make a totally uninteresting wine using minimal manipulation and the best intentions? What if the maipulator was very talented and clever and was able to produce a brilliantly expressive wine?

[David M. Bueker]

.......2004 Montes Alpha, Syrah:
Quite a bit of oak on the nose, a touch hot and pretty sweet overall although it does taste like syrah; a soulless wine without character and obviously manipulated. I understand why this would have its appeal and why the Spectator would recommend it, but this is not my style. 14.5% alcohol, imported by T.G.I.C. Imports and about $17; no thanks.

Best, Jim

OK, so the wine is souless and without character. Why does that make it 'obviously manipulated' (although it probably is, given large scale production, etc.)? Isn't it entirely possible that Mr. Natural on his 5 ha. plot could make a totally uninteresting wine using minimal manipulation and the best intentions? What if the maipulator was very talented and clever and was able to produce a brilliantly expressive wine?

Joe,

That debate is more suited to the following thread:

http://www.wineloverspage.com/forum/vil ... hp?t=12446

OK, so the wine is souless and without character. Why does that make it 'obviously manipulated' (although it probably is, given large scale production, etc.)? Isn't it entirely possible that Mr. Natural on his 5 ha. plot could make a totally uninteresting wine using minimal manipulation and the best intentions? What if the maipulator was very talented and clever and was able to produce a brilliantly expressive wine?

Joe,
FWIW, I probably stated that wrong. What I should have said is that it gives the impression of being manipulated; that is, that when I smell it and I taste it, it leaves that impression with me.
So in fact, it may be as unmanipulated as any wine could be - I'm just writing my impressions.
As for your theoretical questions, my answers would be every bit as personalized and therefore, of little relevance to that discussion - which is one of the reasons I rarely participate in those kinds of intellectual manipulation.
Best, Jim

Jim,

Sorry to come off as so confrontational. But it seems so easy to accuse a large (especially new-world) producer of 'manipulation'. But I've tasted plenty of slick, fruity and/or over oaked wines made by people who probably have no idea what a spinning cone is. Winemaking is manipuation!

Slinking back into my cave,
Joe

Jim,

Sorry to come off as so confrontational. But it seems so easy to accuse a large (especially new-world) producer of 'manipulation'. But I've tasted plenty of slick, fruity and/or over oaked wines made by people who probably have no idea what a spinning cone is. Winemaking is manipuation!

I'm not sure I'd go quite that far but I do understand the concept.
A winemaker friend of mine has probably expressed it as well as I could, although in a different context - "thank God grapes want to become wine."
And while I too have manipulated the natural winemaking process to my own ends, I prefer the idea (and most of the wines) that arise from being a shepard and not a chemist.
Of course, there are exceptions. But in most cases, the more I learn about winemaking in the new world the more I gravitate to wines from the Jura, etc.
Best, Jim