WTN: QPR red of the year?

With a dinner of an exceptionally meaty Carbonara we had two wines. Both worked well with the food. The red was just wonderful! Though fruitier than I would normally like, it had all the right savoury notes that hit the right spots for me. With the modest price (by Finnish standards anyway) I thought it brilliant and am sorry to see that it is no longer available.

• 1998 Clos du Bois Marlstone - USA, California, Sonoma County, Alexander Valley (1/20/2007)
  13,9%abv; 14,95€. At this price, this is one pretty impressive wine. The nose, though ripe and fruity, is much more restrained than I expected from my limited exposure to US wines. There is some earth and delightful green notes (herbal, not underripe), cassis, tobacco and a savoury, vegetal edge that begs me to take another sniff! The palate is full bodied and very ripe and sweetly fruity, but doesn't go over the top. It has adequate acidity and adequate bitter notes that bring in a freshness to balance the sweet fruit. The tannins are noticable but not at all intrusive - in fact at this point, I find it quite an ideal food wine. The 13,9% does show in a little bit of heat on the aftertaste, but with all the other positive attributes I don't mind this too much. Nice!
• 2005 Istituto Agrario San Michele All'Adige Trento - Italy, Trentino-Alto Adige, Trentino, Trento (1/20/2007)
  Quite a nice wine, though I'm not usually a fan of Sauvignon Blanc. The nose is instantly recognisable as SB with its blackberry leaf pungency. It is very, very ripe and fruity, but not over the top and has a nice minerality. The palate is very fruity and ripe and obviously from a warm year, yet has lovely, high levels of acidity and a touch of minerals. The aftertaste isn't too long, but it is still a nice wine. I like it.
• Bowmore 16yo Limited Edition 1989 - Scotland, Cask Strength (51,8%abv)
  This whisky is very sweet on the nose and the oak is rather noticable as a vanillary, butterscotch, banana-like note. There is some smoke, but not very much peat (if I have these two descriptors the right way around?). There is admirable depth to the nose, but it does seem a bit like a very oaky, Parkerised "wine" in some respects.
  
  The palate shows fine savoury notes of smoke and again lots of sweetness. A very tasty malt, though rather different from what I expected/remembered of this producer.

Posted from CellarTracker

That must be closeout pricing, as Marlstone is typically $35-40 in US.
Haven't had the '98, but thought the '97 was good, though pretty oaky and ripe even by CA standards.

That must be closeout pricing, as Marlstone is typically $35-40 in US.
Haven't had the '98, but thought the '97 was good, though pretty oaky and ripe even by CA standards.

Wow! Usually prices for US wines are stratospheric here, but this sounds like a bargain. It wouldn't have been good value at 35-40$ though.

Was 98 a cooler or rainier vintage? This really wasn't over-ripe and I thought the oak integrated also! Sounds like I sould avoid the 97 though if I see it.

Otto,
I stand corrected. I thought I recalled this thread as stating your Red wine of the year..not QPR. Your allegiance to Musar remains unsullied. Please accept my apology for doubting you!


JuliaB

That must be closeout pricing, as Marlstone is typically $35-40 in US.
Haven't had the '98, but thought the '97 was good, though pretty oaky and ripe even by CA standards.

Wow! Usually prices for US wines are stratospheric here, but this sounds like a bargain. It wouldn't have been good value at 35-40$ though.

Was 98 a cooler or rainier vintage? This really wasn't over-ripe and I thought the oak integrated also! Sounds like I sould avoid the 97 though if I see it.

Otto,
Yes, '98 was an "off" year for Napa and Sonoma. The wines were indeed less ripe than normal. I find that I have more '98 CalCabs in my cellar than '97s and '99s combined (those years being "standouts"). Like Dale, I usually find Marlstone fairly oaky, so I'm surprised that you didn't detect much in yours. It is typically a supple, very forward wine.

Mark Lipton

Mark Lipton

Otto,
I stand corrected. I thought I recalled this thread as stating your Red wine of the year..not QPR. Your allegiance to Musar remains unsullied. Please accept my apology for doubting you!


JuliaB

Doubting my allegiance to Musar is a pretty serious accusation, but I'll accept the apology.

Mark, I was afraid it was going to be an oak bomb, and maybe it was! Maybe I'm just getting more tolerant of oak

[Jenise]

What the others said, Otto. Clos du Bois is one of the more lavish oakers, not even middle of the road. It's a surprise to see you, of all people praising one of their wines. Just proves there are no absolutes, doesn't it?

What the others said, Otto. Clos du Bois is one of the more lavish oakers, not even middle of the road. It's a surprise to see you, of all people praising one of their wines. Just proves there are no absolutes, doesn't it?

Not having tasted any of the other Clos du Bois, I am equally surprised at them being classified as a lavish oaker! Has anyone tasted the 1998 that could compare it with the other vintages? Or could it be that I just accept more oak (as long as it isn't the horrible dilly stuff) if it is counterpointed by an extra sweetness like here?

My views on oak have been perplexing to me also for a long time. I don't know why some heavily oaked wines I find ok (this, apparently ...), yet others I find spoofy and over oaked (Haut-Brion 1993 blind was the most recent surprise - and this from a property I've usually liked ...). I'm starting to wonder if I have got all the different oakings mixed up. There are some things like high toast, dilliness that I simply can't stand, yet apparently many surprises like this that I do genuinely like. I know what I like, but it pains me that I am not able to use language in a way that it would be comprehensible to others.

-O-

Not having tasted any of the other Clos du Bois, I am equally surprised at them being classified as a lavish oaker! Has anyone tasted the 1998 that could compare it with the other vintages? Or could it be that I just accept more oak (as long as it isn't the horrible dilly stuff) if it is counterpointed by an extra sweetness like here?

My views on oak have been perplexing to me also for a long time. I don't know why some heavily oaked wines I find ok (this, apparently ...), yet others I find spoofy and over oaked (Haut-Brion 1993 blind was the most recent surprise - and this from a property I've usually liked ...). I'm starting to wonder if I have got all the different oakings mixed up. There are some things like high toast, dilliness that I simply can't stand, yet apparently many surprises like this that I do genuinely like. I know what I like, but it pains me that I am not able to use language in a way that it would be comprehensible to others.

I don't know that I can really assist you in this, Otto, but I know that my preferences are for lighter bodied wines and wines drunk younger to have little to no influence from new oak, whereas bigger wines and wines that will age for a decade or so can be quite oaky in their youth without offending me. One case in point: though I typically despise oaky Pinot Noir, the apex of my Pinot Noir experience to date has been an '88 Dujac Clos de la Roche that I am sure was quite oaky in its youth. I can admire the wine because I had it for the first time at age 18, when it was ethereal and perfumed and the only trace of the oak was in the texture of the wine. OTOH, despite Syrahs from the N. Rhone being big and long-aging, I despise new oak in them anyway -- that's just blind prejudice

Mark Lipton

Otto -
Not the 1998 or the Marlstone, but I drank a bottle of the 1999 Clos du Bois Sonoma Cabernet last week. I had pretty low expectations before opening the bottle as a more recent vintage was dominated by the flavor of new oak. Surprisingly, I found the 1999 Cab was pretty good. The dominate smell was dark cab fruit and some green herbal notes approaching bell pepper. It wasn't overly oaky. The palate was similar to the wine you described, sweet but not over the top or highly extracted. Lots of grippy tannins left also. Maybe the wines absorb the oak well at year 8 of their life?

Best,
Marc Davis