TN: 1995 La Rioja Alta Rioja Gran Reserva 904 (Spain, La Rioja, La Rioja Alta, Rioja)

Doug_Lee · April 29, 2018, 4:35pm

1995 La Rioja Alta Rioja Gran Reserva 904 - Spain, La Rioja, La Rioja Alta, Rioja (4/29/2018)
Popped and poured. Garnet-ruby hue. Nose of cinnamon, plum pits, licorice, earth, damp cellar. Clear layers of vibrant plum and almost sour red cherry fruit cut with leather, earth, and hints of tobacco. Still-freshening acidity and smoothed tannin accompanied by gentle texture and a bit of oak. Feathery finish of coppery red fruit and dusty stone. Lovely with ribs. (92 pts.)

dsimmons · April 29, 2018, 5:06pm

Hi Doug,

Thanks for the note. I don’t have much experience with Tempranillo but the ones I have drunk have been rather harsh with lots of drying tannin. Most of these wines were 8-12 years from vintage. I am beginning to believe I may simply be drinking these wines too young. In general do you find that extended cellar time benefits Tempranillo??

Doug_Lee · April 29, 2018, 5:23pm

Hi D,

Yes, absolutely. In the interest of transparency, I have just recently started tasting Rioja also, and found a bottle of this recently on a retail shelf. My understanding is that these bottles spend a significantly long time in oak (often 100% American) to begin with and I would think it would take many years for the oak to integrate. There is always some oak presence on the palate for these Gran Reservas; it is just a question of how much. There are far more knowledgeable folks out there and hopefully they will chime in also.

Cheers,
Doug

GregT · April 29, 2018, 5:58pm

You can’t make a blanket statement about the grape without qualifying it.

When made well, there is no grape capable of making wines that live longer. Some, like Nebbiolo, can live as long. Many years ago I was able to taste a lot of old wines fairly regularly and I realized that once you hit say, thirty years or so, the ones I liked the most were always Tempranillo based. So I started drinking those. If you like older wines, some can definitely improve with aging.

But not all.

The wine you tasted is from a bodega in Rioja that dates back to the late 1800s. In the 1900s, those wineries tended to make wines with extended cask aging and additional bottle aging. The classifications of crianza, reserva, and gran reserva designate aging requirements, but most of the wines were aged far beyond the minimum aging requirements. And most were also aged in American oak. But not necessarily brand new 225 liter oak barrels. There is no requirement regarding the age or size of the barrels in Rioja.

Back in the early days the wines would often have a bit of Cabernet, Mazuelo, Graciano and Garnacha. And sometimes a bit of Viura, a white grape. Over the years they decided not to use Cabernet any more. What people typically call “traditional” is based on rules dating to the 1970s.

And then in the 1990s, everything changed. People started using new barrels frequently, sometimes made from oak from different European countries, they aged the wines for shorter periods, picked grapes riper, cleaned up their bodegas, and basically modernized.

So today you have a wide variety of approaches, depending on the wine maker and the specific wine he or she is trying to make.

As for tannins, Tempranillo almost never has harsh tannins, at least when made well. Remember it’s made in other regions too. Probably the most tannic is the Tempranillo from Toro, far more than that from Rioja. The key in Toro is to tame the tannins and not pick too late. Very few people have mastered it to the point that they’re making wines of elegance as opposed to power. Same in Portugal, but there Tempranillo is usually not the dominant grape. In Ribera del Duero, the wines tend to be somewhat between Rioja and Toro, which makes sense as the location is between them. The Tempranillo from elsewhere is generally from warmer places and you’re not likely to find a lot of it in the US, other than perhaps from Navarra.

In the US, there’s no really great Tempranillo made yet, at least as far as I’ve found. I think it’s only a matter of time, but I taste as many as possible and none are yet on the level as some of the basic Spanish ones. That includes rather expensive versions from producers like Cayuse and Abacela.

The wines of Rioja Alta will always and forever have a bit of oak that’s very detectable. Or at least for sixty five years, which is the oldest I’ve had from that bodega.

So depending on the location and the producer, the grape can age more than just about any other grape. But sometimes it’s no good after a year. Inevitably, someone will announce that you should drink wines from Lopez de Heredia. You shouldn’t unless you like their specific style. I think most people haven’t had a lot of Spanish wine in general so they try what others on this board suggest. But there are many producers worth exploring.
BTW - I’d be interested in knowing which were harsh and tannic.

Justin_S1 · April 29, 2018, 6:07pm

Even the current release of LRA Gran Reserva 904, a 2007 vintage, is not harsh at all. Opened significantly after an hour decant. There is still a lot of oak though. Drank the bottle with a friend who is a novice to wine and she described it as being “buttery”.

I’m going long on 2016 Edmunds St. John El Jaleo. It’s a tempranillo blend that includes grenache, mazuelo, etc. Stylistically it is more like other ESJ wines–i.e. no new wood, medium body, low abv–than the gran reserva’s from the traditional producers of Spain. Call it an ESJ with a Spanish twist. Not going to say it’s a “really great” Tempranillo in that sense, but it’s a really nice wine for $30 and I can’t wait to see where it goes with time.

dsimmons · April 29, 2018, 7:09pm

GregT:

You can’t make a blanket statement about the grape without qualifying it.

When made well, there is no grape capable of making wines that live longer. Some, like Nebbiolo, can live as long. Many years ago I was able to taste a lot of old wines fairly regularly and I realized that once you hit say, thirty years or so, the ones I liked the most were always Tempranillo based. So I started drinking those. If you like older wines, some can definitely improve with aging.

But not all.

The wine you tasted is from a bodega in Rioja that dates back to the late 1800s. In the 1900s, those wineries tended to make wines with extended cask aging and additional bottle aging. The classifications of crianza, reserva, and gran reserva designate aging requirements, but most of the wines were aged far beyond the minimum aging requirements. And most were also aged in American oak. But not necessarily brand new 225 liter oak barrels. There is no requirement regarding the age or size of the barrels in Rioja.

Back in the early days the wines would often have a bit of Cabernet, Mazuelo, Graciano and Garnacha. And sometimes a bit of Viura, a white grape. Over the years they decided not to use Cabernet any more. What people typically call “traditional” is based on rules dating to the 1970s.

And then in the 1990s, everything changed. People started using new barrels frequently, sometimes made from oak from different European countries, they aged the wines for shorter periods, picked grapes riper, cleaned up their bodegas, and basically modernized.

So today you have a wide variety of approaches, depending on the wine maker and the specific wine he or she is trying to make.

As for tannins, Tempranillo almost never has harsh tannins, at least when made well. Remember it’s made in other regions too. Probably the most tannic is the Tempranillo from Toro, far more than that from Rioja. The key in Toro is to tame the tannins and not pick too late. Very few people have mastered it to the point that they’re making wines of elegance as opposed to power. Same in Portugal, but there Tempranillo is usually not the dominant grape. In Ribera del Duero, the wines tend to be somewhat between Rioja and Toro, which makes sense as the location is between them. The Tempranillo from elsewhere is generally from warmer places and you’re not likely to find a lot of it in the US, other than perhaps from Navarra.

In the US, there’s no really great Tempranillo made yet, at least as far as I’ve found. I think it’s only a matter of time, but I taste as many as possible and none are yet on the level as some of the basic Spanish ones. That includes rather expensive versions from producers like Cayuse and Abacela.

The wines of Rioja Alta will always and forever have a bit of oak that’s very detectable. Or at least for sixty five years, which is the oldest I’ve had from that bodega.

So depending on the location and the producer, the grape can age more than just about any other grape. But sometimes it’s no good after a year. Inevitably, someone will announce that you should drink wines from Lopez de Heredia. You shouldn’t unless you like their specific style. I think most people haven’t had a lot of Spanish wine in general so they try what others on this board suggest. But there are many producers worth exploring.
BTW - I’d be interested in knowing which were harsh and tannic.

Greg,

Thank you for sharing your knowledge of Tempranillo. Sounds like there is a lot to learn and appreciate here.

As I said my experience with the grape is limited. My harsh and tannic comment was based on my memory of a Tempranillo tasting we had several years ago. Although I cannot remember the specific wines I do remember that they were all rather young. The consensus of the group (8 people) was pretty negative.

I have about a case of Tempranillo, '01 thru '06’s, in my cellar and am trying to figure out how long to hold them.

Thanks again for sharing.

GregT · April 29, 2018, 7:39pm

Don - not sure what you have but in 2001 there was a spring frost in Ribera del Duero that killed the buds. Then there was a second flowering and the rest of the year was perfect. Vega Sicilia didn’t make their top wine but everyone else said it was a great vintage, as it was in Rioja and Toro. 2002 and 2006 were not so great in most of north Spain, although 2002 produced some pretty good whites and in other areas it wasn’t so bad. Of the vintages you have, if you have any of the classic gran reservas or even the newer wines, depending on which it is, 2001, 2005, 2004 may be wines that you can keep the rest of your life. Wines from the early-mid 90s are coming into their own now.

dsimmons · April 29, 2018, 9:00pm

Thanks again Greg,

These are the tempranillo based wines that I have.

2004 Bodegas Alejandro Fernández Ribera del Duero Tinto Pesquera
2005 Bodegas y Viñedos Montecastro Ribera del Duero Montecastro y Llanahermosa
2003 Bodegas y Viñedos Montecastro Ribera del Duero Montecastro y Llanahermosa
2004 Bodega Numanthia Toro Numanthia
2006 Benjamin Romeo Rioja La Cueva del Contador
2001 Faustino Rioja I Gran Reserva Tempranillo Blend
2004 La Rioja Alta Rioja Gran Reserva 904 Tempranillo Blend

Doug_Lee · April 29, 2018, 10:14pm

Don,

Sorry not to get your first name right on my first reply as it did not come through on my I phone. My personal stash of Rioja consists of R. Lopez de Heredia bottlings from 1994-2005 with a smattering of bottles from LRA, Muga, and CVNE. I’m trying to sample the oldest ones first so just due to that I am tasting them at the 2-decade mark.

Greg and Justin,

Thanks for your comprehensive and detailed posts. There is so much depth of knowledge on this board and I too am learning quite a bit.

Cheers,
Doug

K_John_Joseph · April 30, 2018, 6:28pm

I think that some producers acid load, mixed with moderate tannins from relatively young pops = a perception of significant tannins. Acid levels and producer styles seem to vary greatly in Rioja and Ribera and, as a result, there is little in common between a Lopez de Heredia and a Numanthia. From my experience, anyway. Likewise Contador and Heredia are typically pretty different in style. I would suggest trying a few producers Gran Reservas from the same vintage, like 2005 or so, and see which style profile you prefer. I especially enjoy Muga, Murrieta Ygay, Lopez de Heredia, and on occasion beasts like Emilio Moro from Ribera, though I hate the huge, thick glass bottles.

Doug_Lee · April 30, 2018, 8:38pm

Sounds good. There is a bit of Murrieta Ygay GR available at a nearby retailer so I may take a look.

Cheers,
Doug

lleichtman · April 30, 2018, 10:34pm

I try to keep my Riojas as long as I can. The longer the better. My best drinking window is 20 years for most of them but LDH I have from mid-80’s and drinking nicely.

GregT · May 1, 2018, 5:41am

2004 Bodegas Alejandro Fernández Ribera del Duero Tinto Pesquera
2005 Bodegas y Viñedos Montecastro Ribera del Duero Montecastro y Llanahermosa
2003 Bodegas y Viñedos Montecastro Ribera del Duero Montecastro y Llanahermosa
2004 Bodega Numanthia Toro Numanthia
2006 Benjamin Romeo Rioja La Cueva del Contador
2001 Faustino Rioja I Gran Reserva Tempranillo Blend
2004 La Rioja Alta Rioja Gran Reserva 904 Tempranillo Blend

So the Pesquera isn’t a reserva or gran reserva. But it’s a great introduction to an icon. Fernandez is kind of responsible for the fame of Ribera del Duero. There was always wine-making there but in Spain, if you wanted serious wine, you bought Rioja, or maybe Sherry. The Vega Sicilia estate was famous but the wines weren’t really available for many years. So when Fernandez started making his wines, he kept his day job. The Pesquera family has grown - he’s got a winery for each daughter and some of them produce really great values. The Pesquera wines tend to have a bit of funk on the nose, perhaps a bit of brett, but it’s a characteristic Tempranillo aroma. They had problems in the 90s, but the corks are better these days and you have a classic wine from a great year. It’s an estate wine and a good intro to Ribera del Duero.

Montecastro is a lot newer - it’s a group of guys from Madrid who want to make wine. Mostly Tempranillo and sometimes with a bit of Cab added. Newer in style. The 2005 is the vintage to keep, drink the 2003.

Numanthia is a wine made by the Eguren family from Rioja. They also own Sierra Cantabria, Señorio de San Vicente and Vinedos de Páganos. They sold the bodega to LMVH and have if anything, a better one now. Toro is farther west than either Rioja or Ribera and it’s very hot and dry. That wine is big, dark, ripe and has a lot of new French oak. It’s what a lot of Napa producers would probably like to make.

Contador is in the same vein except it’s from Rioja. It is a huge wine. It had some serious problems in the early years but they say those have been resolved. We banned it from our tastings because of the issues but it was a big hit with Parker, even getting 100 points one time, which was absurd but the WA never really understood Spanish wine. It’s a new bodega, founded in the mid 90s. But perhaps the epitome of “modern” Rioja. The vintage was tricky and sometimes that’s a good thing as it forces producers to pull back.

Faustino is old school. And an indicator - when Faustino makes a good wine, you know it’s a good vintage. You have a good wine. Very different from the others.

There was some contention a few years ago that the “modern” styles were killing the “traditional” styles, but if you keep those wines for a long time, those differences kind of disappear. Most people don’t keep their wines though. Ultimately the grape shows what it is and more often than not, the styles age similarly.

jnbrown · May 1, 2018, 3:09pm

Faustino I has always been my favorite Rioja and it is a good value at $30.
I think it is a bit more rustic than LRA 904. Up until about a year ago it was pretty easy to find the 2001 vintage but it seems now 2005 is what is mostly available.

Mattstolz · May 1, 2018, 3:21pm

I was curious, I was looking at 904s on wine-searcher yesterday and there is a surprising variation in price from vintage to vintage. I get that some will be better than others, but I was seeing 400% differences from the lowest to highest base prices in fairly recent vintages, with pretty similar cellartracker ratings. whats the cause of such big differences? for example, while searching I got the last bottle of 2004 from JJBuckley for $40, but the best non auction price on the '97 is 120, and the '98 is 220! can anyone off any insight on that?

dsimmons · May 1, 2018, 6:02pm

GregT:

2004 Bodegas Alejandro Fernández Ribera del Duero Tinto Pesquera
2005 Bodegas y Viñedos Montecastro Ribera del Duero Montecastro y Llanahermosa
2003 Bodegas y Viñedos Montecastro Ribera del Duero Montecastro y Llanahermosa
2004 Bodega Numanthia Toro Numanthia
2006 Benjamin Romeo Rioja La Cueva del Contador
2001 Faustino Rioja I Gran Reserva Tempranillo Blend
2004 La Rioja Alta Rioja Gran Reserva 904 Tempranillo Blend

So the Pesquera isn’t a reserva or gran reserva. But it’s a great introduction to an icon. Fernandez is kind of responsible for the fame of Ribera del Duero. There was always wine-making there but in Spain, if you wanted serious wine, you bought Rioja, or maybe Sherry. The Vega Sicilia estate was famous but the wines weren’t really available for many years. So when Fernandez started making his wines, he kept his day job. The Pesquera family has grown - he’s got a winery for each daughter and some of them produce really great values. The Pesquera wines tend to have a bit of funk on the nose, perhaps a bit of brett, but it’s a characteristic Tempranillo aroma. They had problems in the 90s, but the corks are better these days and you have a classic wine from a great year. It’s an estate wine and a good intro to Ribera del Duero.

Montecastro is a lot newer - it’s a group of guys from Madrid who want to make wine. Mostly Tempranillo and sometimes with a bit of Cab added. Newer in style. The 2005 is the vintage to keep, drink the 2003.

Numanthia is a wine made by the Eguren family from Rioja. They also own Sierra Cantabria, Señorio de San Vicente and Vinedos de Páganos. They sold the bodega to LMVH and have if anything, a better one now. Toro is farther west than either Rioja or Ribera and it’s very hot and dry. That wine is big, dark, ripe and has a lot of new French oak. It’s what a lot of Napa producers would probably like to make.

Contador is in the same vein except it’s from Rioja. It is a huge wine. It had some serious problems in the early years but they say those have been resolved. We banned it from our tastings because of the issues but it was a big hit with Parker, even getting 100 points one time, which was absurd but the WA never really understood Spanish wine. It’s a new bodega, founded in the mid 90s. But perhaps the epitome of “modern” Rioja. The vintage was tricky and sometimes that’s a good thing as it forces producers to pull back.

Faustino is old school. And an indicator - when Faustino makes a good wine, you know it’s a good vintage. You have a good wine. Very different from the others.

There was some contention a few years ago that the “modern” styles were killing the “traditional” styles, but if you keep those wines for a long time, those differences kind of disappear. Most people don’t keep their wines though. Ultimately the grape shows what it is and more often than not, the styles age similarly.

Greg,

Thank you again for sharing. I appreciate the information and insight. My goal is going to be to target these wines for drinking at about the 20 year mark.

GregT · May 2, 2018, 2:20am

I get that some will be better than others, but I was seeing 400% differences from the lowest to highest base prices in fairly recent vintages, with pretty similar cellartracker ratings. whats the cause of such big differences? for example, while searching I got the last bottle of 2004 from JJBuckley for $40, but the best non auction price on the '97 is 120, and the '98 is 220! can anyone off any insight on that?

Insanity?

The 1997 vintage had a great spring and then everything went downhill. Basically a cool, wet vintage, probably the weakest of the 90s. The 1998 was way better except that there was rain right around harvest. Not a textbook classic year, but if you picked before or after the rains, you were OK.

You did well to buy the 2004 - a better year by far than either of the others.

Scott_Watkins · May 2, 2018, 2:56am

Thanks for the note! I have one left in the cellar, guess it’s time to pop the cork.

Mattstolz · May 2, 2018, 3:18am

GregT:

I get that some will be better than others, but I was seeing 400% differences from the lowest to highest base prices in fairly recent vintages, with pretty similar cellartracker ratings. whats the cause of such big differences? for example, while searching I got the last bottle of 2004 from JJBuckley for $40, but the best non auction price on the '97 is 120, and the '98 is 220! can anyone off any insight on that?

Insanity?

The 1997 vintage had a great spring and then everything went downhill. Basically a cool, wet vintage, probably the weakest of the 90s. The 1998 was way better except that there was rain right around harvest. Not a textbook classic year, but if you picked before or after the rains, you were OK.

You did well to buy the 2004 - a better year by far than either of the others.

thanks for the response! with the relative price that I got compared to other vintages I was only wishing that there had been more than one bottle available!

K_John_Joseph · May 2, 2018, 5:24pm

Greg’s comments about each of those wineries is entirely consistent with my own experiences. I believe Condado de Haza is owned by Fernandez and is often a little cheaper. In good vintages its a nice wine and usually only around $30. I think Faustino is a little hit and miss and is rustic, but in good vintages Faustino is typically solid.

As for WA and Spain, good gravy. Same deal as Australia…no wine too big, and the bigger the better, leading to wines like Contador and others growing massive and inundated with new french oak. It seems that’s toned down a bit now and Big Jay Miller was fired from WA, but some of those wines were really not indicative of Rioja, which is more typically a long living mid-weight wine with beautiful complexity than an inky black behemoth.