WTN: I begin to get Henschke's Mt.Edelstone.

Mount Edelstone Shiraz Vineyard Keyneton 1995 - Henschke – Alc.14%.
I did not enjoy younger specimens of this wine and of its 1993 version because of, for me, excessive elements of mint, boiled sweet and wood flavours such as vanilla and toffee. So it is great to find that, after nearly 16 years, it was at last drinking beautifully. The body was quite full, the brambly dark fruit deep and complex with some ripe rose aromas, the tannic structure was ripe, the length decent and the texture velvety with the previous exaggerations of mint and boiled sweet now background elements of greater complexity and with the wood flavours now no more than sweetly polished patina toward the finish containing flecks of coconut a bit like with a good “modern” Rioja of similar age like Contino; 17/20.

Unlike with most of the finest European wines when mature, one would never need to ask oneself whether this wine has seen a lot of new wood. So I can’t help questioning whether the wine would not have been even finer with more terroir character without the still obvious wood presence, however agreeable. But perhaps we have to accept overt wood as an integral part of South Australian Shiraz.

Thanks for your notes.

I have a 2002 vintage of the same wine in my cellar.

I think I'll wait a few years before opening it.

Alex R.

[David M. Bueker]

Unlike with most of the finest European wines when mature, one would never need to ask oneself whether this wine has seen a lot of new wood. So I can’t help questioning whether the wine would not have been even finer with more terroir character without the still obvious wood presence, however agreeable. But perhaps we have to accept overt wood as an integral part of South Australian Shiraz.

Then there is the question (which is hard to answer because of all the wood) of what is the terroir character for so many of these wines. Is the huge wood treatment an attempt to provide flavor interest when there is nothing else behind it.

Unlike with most of the finest European wines when mature, one would never need to ask oneself whether this wine has seen a lot of new wood. So I can’t help questioning whether the wine would not have been even finer with more terroir character without the still obvious wood presence, however agreeable. But perhaps we have to accept overt wood as an integral part of South Australian Shiraz.

Then there is the question (which is hard to answer because of all the wood) of what is the terroir character for so many of these wines. Is the huge wood treatment an attempt to provide flavor interest when there is nothing else behind it.

That is an excellent question, which I hope that someone Oz knowledgeable will take up.

As it happens, I polished off my last bottle of 1995 Mt. Edelstone some months ago and agree with you sentiments, Tim. A fine wine at the peak of of its powers.

David's question about excessive wood masking a lack of fruit does not, IMHO, apply to Henschke, and to the bulk of Aussie wineries as a rule, but more to those maker's cashing in on what I call the "Parkerization" factor. I can't think of the last time I opened an over-oaked South Aussie red didn't reek of overripe fruit, too. It should be mentioned that some years back Parker (& Co.) began handing out mammoth point scores to massively endowed, high alcohol reds that led to a Barossa cult-led charge chasing the big bucks. This wine style has been a blight on the Australian wine industry ever since. The fact remains that the few of these "high scoring" monolithic, dead-fruited monsters (I've had the misfortune of trying) have mostly all but fallen apart with relatively little time in the bottle with terrible hot alcoholic finishes and their maker's should be slammed for the travesty they have committed.

However, I also do recognise and acknowledge the usage of particularly aggressive American oak in South Australian Shiraz over the years and have noted (as has happened with recent Australian Chardonnay production) a trend to use less, relatively unseasoned new oak and a shift to the use of less aggressive French oak. Australia has, in the main, a relatively warm viticultural climate that delivers ripe fruit flavours that, usually, can handle a fair dose of oak.

I forgot to add - whether there is anything of interest in the fruit/terroir behind the oak is purely a question of personal taste.

David, do you know of any South Australian Shiraz producers who use no new oak or use it in such a way that its presence is not or scarcely detectable after 10-15 years?

If so, how good is the result for your taste?

The fruit on this Mt.Edelstone had certainly become beautiful and supported the remaining oak, but I still wonder if I wouldn't have found additional beauties without the oak patina.

Penfolds St Henri Shiraz uses little to no new oak, and is a long term ager too. However I'd describe this more in terms of the Penfolds house style (sans oak) rather than being terroir driven.

As David says a lot of the new wave Barossa producers have dialled back the oak use, but I cant think of many that have 10yr+ ageing history, except maybe Teusner and Spinifex?

Cheers

Andrew

Are most Australian vineyards irrigated?

One of Napa Valley's "contrarians" (Frog's Leap) claims that over-oaking is one approach to providing "flavor" to wines which are almost effectively hydroponic.

Are most Australian vineyards irrigated?

Guessing the figures here, without looking up any reports, but probably about 80% of vineyards are irrigated. Drip irrigation is the most common. Having said that, dry-grown grapes are prized by many producers particularly small/boutique producers and some larger concerns favour dry-grown grapes for particular wines.

Interesting discussion. Not much to add, but I will say a 1988 Mt Edelstone is probably the best (well, my favorite) Australian wine I've had. I don't remember oak as that prominent, but it was in the company of a bunch of Bdx 1st and 2nd growths, so all saw some new oak.

Interesting discussion. Not much to add, but I will say a 1988 Mt Edelstone is probably the best (well, my favorite) Australian wine I've had. I don't remember oak as that prominent, but it was in the company of a bunch of Bdx 1st and 2nd growths, so all saw some new oak.

Dale, I would be disappointed with a mature claret where the oak patina remains as present as it was on this Mt.Edelstone 95 and I would have more confidence that the wine would be better without it, based on wines from vintages before big oak traetment became common.

Tim,
I just meant the '88 showed similarly to the '88 and 89 Bdx we had that night- Lafite, Certan de May, GPL, LynchB- as far as oak. I have no experience of the '95, but for me the '88 didn't seem to be scarred by oak, it seemed well integrated. So I don't know if it's a vintage thing, a change in their regimen, or differences in our tastes.