Notes from a Ch. Montelena Vertical.
Krug Champagne Brut Grande Cuvée – something was needed to start and this was a great choice. All wines were served blind except for the organizer and myself, as I had contributed wines and time to the event. This had good colour as well as acidity and complexity and was delightful. My attempt to mislead them by asserting that one usually didn’t see that much complexity in a BC bubble failed completely!
1976 P. Licht-Bergweiler Erben Wehlener Sonnenuhr Riesling Auslese – this was a medium amber colour, and had a nose of ripe apricot, seemingly slightly hot. It was rich in the mouth and carried on for a long time. Very, very good showing, and sadly my last bottle of this!
1983 Guntrum Niersteiner Oelberg Auslese – not nearly as dark nor sweet as the older wine, this was drying out a but now but showed some nice orange hints in the nose, a finished lighter and cleanly. The tasters thought that this was the older wine, based not on colour but on presentation.
The main event was served as one flight, tasted oldest to youngest, but even the youngest was almost two decades old and the eldest was double that. The thing that surprised all of us was the evenness of colour – there was very little change in either colour or edge colour over the whole flight. The other thing that the tasters remarked on was the consistency among the wines, and they correctly concluded that it had to be wines from the same producer. The presentation was of an obviously warm country wine and there was ripe sweet fruit in all of them, but none of them, not even the 1977 (a notably hot dry year) were overly ripe. I used to buy this wine by the case back in the early 90s vintages as I always considered it to be the equivalent of a super second or perhaps even a first growth if California were classified that way.
1977 – this oldest bottle had a plain capsule while the others were monogrammed. Big blackberry nose with cedar, soft tannins still evident and Amazingly good. One of the best wines by popular choice, along with the 85, 91 and 95. Not what I would have predicted.
1985 – I love this vintage in California, although some of the wines are getting a bit long in the tooth now. This one showed brilliantly, with a slightly riper nose, pleasant on palate with good acidity (which all the wines shared – this and the ripeness levels tricked one taster into thinking it might be an Italian wine from Veneto!). Good length and still in good shape, but no point waiting on this one.
1987 – this divided the group. It was a Parker 98 point wine and it presented at first as being even riper, a tad warm, and full and intense in flavour, which seemed to put off some of the claret fanciers. It was opened a couple of hours before serving and decanted at least an hour before service, but it continued to open in the glass as we tasted (we tasted them all on their own before food and continued to taste with lunch, over perhaps an hour). It opened up nicely and still showed tons of power – no rush. Not surprising as of all the 1980s vintages, this was the biggest and most durable. I think it is just hitting plateau now and will last for years. The nose of deep fruit with anise and the midpalate power and exceptional length marked this as a stand out, though obviously a bit of a shock to the claret fanciers.
1991 – this pleased the reactionaries more with clearly more claret like black currant nose, elevated and with a hint of green, the wine rounder and pleasant in the mouth.
1992 – slightly light in the nose, at first, but opening into blackberry, floral and cassis aromas with time, and a sweet entry to a long plush mouth feel and lengthy finish. Good.
1993 – classic cab nose with capsicum, as well as hints of mint. On palate good presentation but lacked the intensity of many of the other vintages. A nice chocolate element crept in toward the end, which rehabilitated my opinion somewhat, and the finish was medium long.
1995 – excellent nose, showing more complexity with elements of dark cherry, cocoa, and an earthy truffley component that added a lot of interest. Showed a certain elegance (being relative of course as all were firmly structured wines) and a very long finish.
1996 – more spice in this nose, but with very slightly burnt noses too, and good midpalate fruit levels. Medium length. I think this one is further along than some but still showed very well.
The oldest vintages seemed much of a muchness – through 1991 perhaps and they obviously needed 25+ years to come around. I am not so sure that more recent vintages will follow quite that same path as there were indications that the younger vintages were more approachable a bit earlier on. I still shudder when I see notes on Montelena from people that buy a bottle in the store and pop the cork – they just don’t realize how much they are missing by not ageing! Amazingly good consistency with this winery – another of the criteria for first (California) growth status if there were such a thing. BTW, the lunch was a short rib, mashed potatoes and veg – simple and suitable to the wine, I think.
We finished up with another one out of my cellar:
1979 Joseph Phelps Johannisberg Riesling Select Late Harvest – to those that know this winery, this was the equivalent of Beerenauslese, at least in the opinion of Walter Schug the winemaker. It was harvested at 34.5 brix, and after fermentation to 9.6% alcohol, still retained a residual sugar of 16.8. For those into such things, the label has the silver rim as opposed to the gold rim reserved for the really sweet wines. I had pulled this, my last bottle, instead of a St. Jean, because I thought that would have been too obvious. This had all the appearance of a Madeira, with brown tint rather than golden, and a very sweet but not raisiny nose of honey, apricot and hints of nutmeg. Quite sweet in the mouth but also balanced by acidity, it presented quite well with cheese.
