TN: Arcadian Tasting

WINE TALK
21

[quoteJoe Webb wrote:
John Glas wrote:

The Chards were both solid. Their Pinots are a mess. Overall the Syrah’s are solid and why I like Arcadian. Would not waste money on the Pinots when you can get A to Z for $15 and it is a better made Pinot. Not a fan of Cali Pinots in general.


So where do you like PN’s from? Oregon, Burgundy, Anderson Valley(baja OR), New Zeland? There is really only 5-7 great places in the world for PN so taking out CA you have only a few left.

Not at all my experience with Arcadian wines over the years. Mostly PN for me with a little of CH and SY.][/quote]
Oregon overall as I don’t have $100 plus Burgundy budget. My favorite producers are St. Innocent, Stangeland (great value), Antica Terra and Patty Green.

I am not a huge Pinot fan in general and paying $50 for a 90 point wine in my opinion is not much of a value.

22

Interesting, but — considering how many times we’ve sat at the same wine-laden table — not surprising, given your usual preferences, John. If you have not yet had the '06 Max, you should do so — it’s incredible.

Not sure you know of these little facts I found interesting, given your statements about CA Pinot and OR Pinot:
– Over 198 ratings of Oregon PN you’ve put into CT, your average score is 90.0.
– Over 154 ratings of CA PN you’ve put into CT, your average score is 88.5.

– In the past 2 years, your average CA PN score is greater than your average OR PN score. In the last 5 years, ave CA PN score is greater than ave OR PN score in 3 of those 5 years. And you do tend to score nearly every wine for which you enter a TN, so … yeah.

– You’ve entered 6 TNs into CT for the A to Z PN, along with scores. Those scores are as follows:
88
87
77
88
88
83

Brian I know you know math and 1.5 is a large range with that amount of notes. I have had a few Cali Pinots I like but Oregon is much better for me with the price point. I don’t have hundreds of thousands of dollars into wine and when I rate an 87 that costs $50 that wine stinks for me. If a wine is 90 points and $15 I am buying.

23

Like others above I have had good experiences with the pinot’s.

Try the ‘01 Garys’ Syrah if you want one of his best !

Jeff sounds good. I like his Syrahs. H of Max are excellent so will check out your rec.

24

Ted Erfer wrote:
I know everyone has his or her own taste buds and preferences — however, this is the first time I have ever heard Arcadian Pinots called “a mess.” I could not disagree more. IMHO, Joe’s Pinots are some of the best available.


A big +1 and beyond to what Ted just said.
Though I do tend to drink Arcadian pinots with more age than most of what John posted on and I’m more of a Pisoni and Sleepy Hollow fan.

Dennis an 01 Fiddlestix was terrible and I was kind with 85. What vintage/vineyard would you recommend?

25

My favorite Cali Pinots. Max 94 points. Oregon is higher for me and the 2007 Innocent White Rose I gave 96 points. My Minneapolis crew called the 07 vintage an excellent vintage which I saw the pros re-track on. We sold out the St. Innocent 2007 White Rose/Justice.

2006 Rhys Pinot Noir Swan Terrace Alpine Vineyard (USA, California, San Francisco Bay, Santa Cruz Mountains)
6/10/2016
wineglas
94
Excellence. Big but balanced. Cherry, strawberry, spices and cranberry. Fruit forward effort with aging potential.

2010 Mount Eden Vineyards Pinot Noir Domaine Eden (USA, California, San Francisco Bay, Santa Cruz Mountains)
1/8/2014
wineglas
93
Judith’s 70th Birthday Party (St. Paul, MN): Excellent bottle of wine and improved one point over the course of the night. Strawberry, underbrush, subtle wood, mint and blueberries. Complex and balanced. No heat and no big jammy fruit. Recommended. (2017 views)

2009 Peay Vineyards Pinot Noir Scallop Shelf Estate (USA, California, Sonoma County, Sonoma Coast)
10/13/2013
wineglas
94
Minneapolis Wine Club Offline: Off the charts stuff! Cranberry, cherry, spices and strawberry. Balanced and complex with good acidity. A really top notch Sonoma effort for a good price. I have been impressed with Peay over the years. This is awesome!!! Wow what a surprise that I agree with the boys at Steve Tanzer on the 94. That only happens about 80% of the time. Best in Minnesota palate again! (1741 views)

2009 Peter Michael Pinot Noir Clos du Ciel (USA, California, Sonoma County, Sonoma Coast)
1/21/2012
wineglas
93
Really nice and should have a long life ahead. Blueberries, cherry, spice, minerals, floral and earth. Concentrated and a bit tight but with time should evolve into an amazing wine. 93-95. (1719 views)

2008 Patz & Hall Pinot Noir Pisoni Vineyard (USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Lucia Highlands)
10/9/2011
wineglas
93
Patz & Hall Wines (Bloomington, MN): One of the best in the Patz’s lineup. Spice, floral, earth and cinnamon. The fruit is there but more of a earth based wine. This wine needs some cellaring and should drink well for ten years. (1827 views)

2008 Merry Edwards Pinot Noir Meredith Estate (USA, California, Sonoma County, Russian River Valley)
10/4/2011
wineglas
93
California Pinot Noir (Gail’s House): This is my favorite 08 wine from Merry Edwards. Wonderful balance and very Burg like with raspberry, earth, floral and subtle spices. Medium finish and smooth. This wine can be enjoyed now but I see it aging nicely for five years. Decanted 20 minutes. (2775 views)


2008 Roar Pinot Noir Garys’ Vineyard (USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Lucia Highlands)
5/16/2011
wineglas
94
Minneapolis does Domestic Pinots; 5/14/2011-5/16/2011: Wow! One of the best domestic Pinots I have tasted in a while. Floral featuring roses along with cherry, ripe strawberries and spice. Very concentrated palate and rich. Medium to long finish with multiple elements throughout the experience. A steal at $45 retail. 94+ (3209 views)

26

+1 regarding St. Innocent’s 2007 White Rose. I’ll be eternally disappointed that St. Innocent lost access to that fruit. Mark and crew turned it into something ethereal.

27

Very sorry to hear John and Joe you both had such terrible experiences with my wines. It seems so atypical of what most others experience. My apologies to you both for the disappointing experience.

I would certainly extend an invitation to visit me here in the cellar to revisit those wines to see if I might be able to redeem myself in your eyes. Should either of you find yourself here on the central coast please let me know and we can sit down and enjoy a lunch and retry the wines and or find something that you may like.
best,

28

Keep making great wines, Joe. There’s no wine that isn’t going to have at least some people out there who don’t care for it. There will be plenty of people out there to love your wines, and plenty of other wines for John to love.

29

Thanks Chris,

Wine is subjective and not everyone will like a particular wine sure, but I wonder if the wine experienced any exterior damage in any way. The remarks as I read them were so off the mark of what I understand the wine to be. If its subjective so be it, but offering to meet with these two who were very optimistic and pro Arcadian is the least I can do to try to extend some good will.

30

One of the most gracious and classiest posts ever on WB.
Bravo Joe!

PS Love your wines.

31

+1!

32

Thanks Tim hopefully Joe and John will reach out for me to schedule a tasting. I certainly would like a second swing at the plate.

33

Joe has received a pipe of what passes for Amontillado, and he’d like you to join him in his cellar. :slight_smile:

34

I opened the 2002 Arcadian Pinot Noir Francesca’s Cuvée, and it was beautiful for a grand total of 10 minutes. The berry and earth were quickly overtaken by a mix of pool water and fish tank.

Too bad.

35

Pool water and fish tank…never seen either descriptor ever used in a TN. I’ll give you 1st hand knowledge of what pool water taste like, but fish tank…

36

Fish tank was more of an impression to be sure.

37

Very interesting. I had this same wine three days ago and it started out very primary. After about an hour in a decanter, it showed significant signs of brett, notably animal and barnyard aromas.

38

I popped a bottle last night and got the barnyard/animal immediately - although I really like this characteristic. Loved the nose, not so much the palate, had a sensation I can’t describe. Previous bottles have had a little fizz, not this one but something felt a little off. 02 has never been the best version of this wine in my opinion - this was the 4th bottle I have opened with 2 more to go. 03 is a much better version IMHO.

I did not get any pool water or fish tank though. Drank with a pork dish and it worked.

39

I, too, had a similar experience with the '02. And, like you, Tom, it worked well with a pork dish. Further in agreement with you that the '03 version is much better — in fact, it’s one of my favorite Arcadian Pinots I’ve tried.

40

Sounds like it is time to open 1 of the 2 bottles I’ve been sitting on since '07. At least my expectations will be low. Thanks guys. :wink: