TN: 2012 Matello Pinot Noir Lazarus (USA, Oregon, Willamette Valley)

WINE TALK
1
  • 2012 Matello Pinot Noir Lazarus - USA, Oregon, Willamette Valley (9/1/2014)
    Light to medium garnet, nose has metallic mineral, gravel. Dry, acidic fruit, lighter body. Bright red berries, raspberries. Nicely acid focused, medium fruit, light tannins. Very accessible and drinking very well now, good summer wine. Superb for the price. BTW, I love pickles. Some may think this is a bit thin, I think restrained, maybe like a rose on steroids. (90 pts.)

Posted from CellarTracker

2

I gave this another couple of nights, and it continued to improve. I have a hard time justifying paying twice this for another Pinot. I can open a sub $20 bottle any day.

3

I have a few of these on the way. Have you opened any of their single vineyard offerings from '12? How did they show?

4

Eric @ Sec said these were drinking well, so I decided to give one a try and rest the '11s. Most of the entry level '12s that I have tried are tasting pretty well. I think the SV wines will need time, I’ll let the more knowledgable post their notes on them as I do not get enough for experimentation.

5

The 12 hommage is gorgeous now. Let the other 2012’s and all of the 2011 SVs sit in a bit.

6

The 11 Durant SVD was a real knockout when I was out on July 4th.

If you haven’t tried his Pinot Gris, I would give it a try. I’m not usually a big fan but what Marcus does with it is different in a good way.

BTW, Marcus and Gaironn became parents of Fletcher Poole Goodfellow on 8/29.

7

I had the Hommage in a restaurant a while back which got me in the buying mood. [cheers.gif]

8

2012 Matello Pinot Noir Lazarus - USA, Oregon, Willamette Valley (9/16/2015)
Restrained and nice, my daughter finished it before I got a second glass for a proper note, so I thing she liked it. Not much reason to pay more for the better ones, just drink the cheapies. Drinking super well now, need to back fill. (91 pts.)
Posted from CellarTracker

9

The Lazarus “was” a delicious entry level wine, replaced recently by his 2013 Goodfellow WV which remains an amazing QPR for $20.

Where you’ve gone completely off the rails is any suggestion that an additional $10 - $25 won’t buy you better Pinot. There are few PN producers, mostly limited to OR in my experience, where such a small $ increase will take you from entry level to the top of the pecking order. The quality increase is appreciable and the value at $30 - $45 (i.e.: Whistling Ridge; Durant; Souris) is, IMHO, unrivaled.

RT

10

I think it would be fun to try some WV blind against the same producer’s SV offerings. For most producers I get some of both, but I suspect it’s not always a clear step up.

Michael

11

Michael, “blind” is always humbling and the results can be unpredictable. That said, over the years I’ve done it with Belle Pente, Evesham Wood, Cameron, St. I, Westrey and even the '11 Matellos. The step up can be fairly dramatic, especially in terms of structure and intensity.

Not to say the entry level won’t be enjoyable, but you’re not going to get a Murto, Cuvee J, Clos Electrique, Freedom Hill, Abbey Ridge or Souris.

RT

12

I have always found this topic fascinating. As a consumer we just see the bottles and the text describing what’s inside, and that text can be very compelling, but the winemakers/growers see the sausage making and know the true differences of the caliber of the fruit they are putting in each bottle. The quality gradient between WV and SVDs is surely dependent on vintage, producer (some folks have access to some really amazing sites) and other factors. I think conventional wisdom is that a rising tide raises all ships, so to speak, so in good years one can get great values that compete w/ the top wines.

13

Ron, the comparisons do get complicated, especially if you mix producers and vintages. Personal style preferences play a big role. Marketing, labeling, hype and reputation provide a significant push to “upgrade” unrelated to the juice itself.

It could be my misperception, but I’ve always viewed WV bottlings (released by producers with a line-up of better SVDs/cuvees) to be a safety release valve. That certainly doesn’t mean that the WV Pinot is likely to suck (case in point being Marcus’s 2011, 12 and 13 efforts).

OR PN lovers can (and will) argue at length about what a “good year” is. WV PN bottlings can definitely be great values and almost as a rule, need to be more open and immediately accessible. The extent to which they consistently (or infrequently) compete with the top wines from the same producer/vintage, I have doubts. In this specific case, my doubts involve the 12 Lazarus. It’s an exceptional value, but I’d encourage tasting it vs a wine like the 2012 Goodfellow Durant.

RT

14

I “sort of” did a comparison w/ Evesham Wood’s 11’s recently, but across several days. I had the WV, La Grive Bleue and the Cuvee J. Definitely saw increasing quality across the board.

15

If truth be told, I post these notes not to here my own voice, but to hear your comments. I have learned immensely from your and a few other’s collective wisdom these past few years. I readily agree that for a few more bucks, you get a more distinctive wine, but the bar is pretty high at the beginning. For daily drinkers these entry level wines are in my opinion hard to beat. I buy them 3:1 over the SVG. I look at what to drink and my indecisiveness leads me to just grab the WV. Fortunately one of my favorite neighborhood restaurants has a varied selection of local AFWE glass pours for me to sample and Eric @ Sec has made good recommendations.
My comment on the cheapies was in reference to all the hype over the $75-100+ bottles everyone is falling over themselves to buy or get on the list. I personally see no need to pay past the $40-50 range, but just as I was starting to buy some Clos Electrique & Abbey Ridge, John Paul bumped the price $15, so now instead of 2, maybe just 1. [cry.gif]

16

Knee(or more) deep in grapes right now but I wanted to toss my two cents in. I’ve been tasting some of the older vintages lately and the WV vs SV has kind of clarified for me.

Rich has the right of it that the WV is the first culling of barrels. However, both Ken Pahlow and myself(and many others I am sure) have a serious aversion to mediocre wines. So the cut off point for WV moves up the ladder until the wine gets to the point I feel it lives up to the standards for Matello/Goodfellow. I also work really hard to not have mediocre barrels to begin with, starting with vineyards and moving through the life of the wine.
The drive to make Burgundian wines(re-cemented regularly by tasting wines like the 2006 Roty GC that Rich brought to IPNC) means that the SVs often don’t show well young, and the WV often is not only less expensive but drinks better as well. Between 1-4 years, for the person seeking a pleasurable wine experience, I think the WV is a good choice. Vintages like 12 make it a bit tougher because while the WV is better than normal, the SVs are both great quality and a bit friendlier than in vintages like 10 & 11.
That said, as the wines move beyond 4 years old the SVs (and Souris and Hommage) take over and, IMHO, become the better wines and better value. By 10 years, it’s no contest. Recently the 04 WV was tiring and while not dead, definitely past it’s best years, the 04 Souris is just really hitting it’s stride.
I am pretty proud of the quality of the WV but at this point I no longer keep more than a case for the library.
Thanks for the notes, and as always for the great thoughts. I’m happy to do a WV vs SV tasting if you guys have the time