Some might recall my rave months ago on a ‘cheap’ bottle of Cabernet from a ripe year (here’s the thread - http://www.wineberserkers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2239942#p2239942) and more recently praising the '08 Lagier Meredith Syrah for similar reasons - apparently, I just love mountain fruit, and it must be ‘a thing’ as there really does seem to be qualities that one finds in California mountain fruited wines. Last night, Jen and I went out to dinner at a restaurant in Long Beach - Bo Beaux - and were fortunate it was Wine Wednesday, with half off bottles of wine. We chose '12 La Jota (the wine list said '13, but they only had '12) as I’ve never had it, and it seemed like a great deal at $60 after the discount. Fantastic wine, to be sure, and I marveled at the mountain fruit quality that I see across the board - it’s a freshness and brightness that exists - a sort of ‘POP’ in the fruit profile, even if it is fairly ripe or sweet. It just has this freshness that I can’t seem to find consistently (or even frequently) in Valley fruit.
My experience was that it’s just about impossible to taste Fisher Coach Insignia [valley floor] next to Fisher Wedding [Spring Mountain] - same family, same facility, same winemaker? same barrels? - and try to fool yourself into believing that valley floor fruit bears any resemblance to mountain fruit.
Also, the overwhelming majority of all Americans [who are largely neophytes by our standards] are going to vastly prefer the wines made from the fruit of the valley floor.
So don’t be cruel to them - just ease them over to the Dark Side very gently and patiently.
People have been talking about mountain fruit since they started planting up on the slopes. Mayacamas, Chappellet, Diamond Creek, Spring Mountain, Dunn, ect. Their reputation was for bigger wines with more tannins needing age.
Actually in mid-summer the diurnal temperature swings are narrower at altitude - higher low temps and lower high temps. There is night time ripening during warmer periods.
I agree that mountain fruit seems to hold its acids. I think that is related to less fertile/thinner soils.
Mountain Fruit is most definitely different than valley fruit. Stonestreet Estate Vineyards makes some of the best Sauvignon Blanc, Chardonnay, and Cabernet Sauvignon from a 5,000 acre mountain estate (less than 900 acres planted though). The acidity, concentration, structure, and unique aromatics completely surpass anything made in the surrounding valley floor. The wines tend to have an energy to them, a red/blue fruit character, and an exotic floral note that doesn’t often appear in the surrounding valley floor fruit.
Yes, very true about night time temps in the growing season especially. I was lucky enough to farm a great mountain site for many years and track the wine that came from it. Mountain fruit doesn’t always mean bigger wines. Some of the Zin and Syrah that came off of Eaglepoint were actually quite elegant, but that can also be a style thing. I would say the general reduced vigor of most mountain sites is what can lead to quality wines. Farmers have to be more diligent about every aspect of management because there’s less room for error.
Now that I’ve been a valley floor farmer in Anderson Valley (with generally better soils) for a few years, I can see that there is much less to worry about day to day. The vines have more reserves. You don’t really have to worry about crop levels early in the season either. With the better fertility you don’t have to worry about the vines collapsing late in the ripening cycle.
Interesting things can happen with individual producers or bottlings. I’d be curious to see how consistently the people saying there are such noticeable differences can discern those differences blind. I’ve done a couple of comparative tasting of Cabernets, each including several producers, and the only distinctions I could consistently find were structural: tannins and possibly acidity. It’s the tannins that were most apparent. I found firmer tannins and seemingly more of them from the mountain sites.
One fun and interesting thing about mountain fruit-based wine is how different it can be (from conventional wisdom about vintage character) for a particular region. I’m thinking of Northern California - where e.g. Napa valley wines for a vintage (1998, 2011) may be weaker, but the nearby higher elevation wines may be excellent.
Besides the mountain/floor difference, I also notice a morning sun/afternoon sun difference. The afternoon sun vineyards seem to me to have more body and often more ripeness but lack the acidity of the morning sun vineyards. Of course it’s a generalization so there are always exceptions.
I learned something here. A large number of times I have heard or read about producers who have high-altitude vineyards wax poetic about how the high altitude means cooler evenings and, for that reason, preservation of more acidity. So that’s BS or are we just talking about “mid summer” temps?
I was going to point out the same thing - in California anyway, valleys hold the fog longer and that results in cooler morning temps. I think the poor soil/better drainage is probably getting onto something.
I fully agree on the special-ness of mountain fruit. That’s always how I narrowed down which Turleys to buy - stick to the mountain vineyards.
As a side note, I always found the diurnal temp swing to be a funny thing to brag about. Maybe, probably, there’s something to it promoting better wines, but I think more likely just contributing to the uniqueness of the area. I was familiar with Chateauneuf-du-Pape before I had ever studied a CA vineyard, and they will credit their rocky soils for reducing diurnal swing, which just like increased diurnal swing, also for makes better wines. Cynically, whatever you have in your vineyard, is what makes for better wines.
Not that is more a general rule than fact. In Burgundy it’s the mid-level sites that show best. The Hautes-Cotes are inferior, as are the lower slope sites. There are sites here in CA where the lowest sections of vineyards are the best, since they’re washed out river beds and have the best drainage. Look at some of the vibrant, minerally whites out of Arroyo Seco, for example.
Yes generally a July/August pattern. In low pressure conditions (i.e. much of winter) and when the marine layer is thicker, particularly in Spring and Fall, our place (at 2500ft) is cooler than Boonville both on the low and high temp sides.
I think the most recent vintages of the La Jota Cab’s are the best that they have produced since the Jackson Family acquired them. The 2013 is also excellent but needs a lot of time. I think you did well purchasing the 2012, Todd!
Mountains are more impressive than valleys and valleys are fertile which is bad for good wine so obviously mountain fruit is always better.
I think it’s a matter of perspective. Spring Mountain and Stony Hill are not far geographically or altitude wise from Pride and Lokoya, but are fairly disparate in style
I think there may be, if averaging mountain vs floor/benchland, a tannin difference. So perhaps on average floor/bench wines are softer or earlier drinking. But the neophyte thing is silly. Plenty of experienced drinkers love cabs from To Kalon, Martha’s, Schafer, SLV, State Lane, Spottswoode, Montelena, Rubicon, etc, etc. Even Herb Lamb and Showket, Screagle, Abreu might be considered benchland, not mountain. There’s a ton of great cab grown on the mountains AND lower down. I like mountain cab a lot, but there’s no expert/neophyte divide.
