'15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

Tasting notes, varietals, grapes - anything related to wine
Post Reply
Message
Author
MitchTallan
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2886
Joined: June 3rd, 2009, 10:17 am

'15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#1 Post by MitchTallan » October 22nd, 2018, 10:43 am

'15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts; I predict that those who are deeply into Oregon pinot and who bought this are going to be extremely happy. Giddy happy. My three cases arrived Friday. I had to try one last night. In the context of the '13 WB Cuvee' (a somewhat oafish but likable heavyset teenager) it's successor the '14 (more angular, chiseled, but slightly brash/coarse), the '15 Marine Sedimentary is in a different league. It is medium bodied at best, medium dark, with an immediate impression of cinnamon, allspice, clove. It is as soave and silky as one can ask for while still showing 600 grit grade sanding paper tannin. The balance is amazing. As I seem to recall Jim himself saying, this is the kind of class one would expect in a good $50 bottle. Unlike the two WB wines, this drinks so incredibly well now, I wonder if there is anything to gain by aging. Perhaps some further nuances will flesh out with time. Although hit and miss, Chehalem Winery has made some Stoller's that I thought were awfully damned good. This reminds me of one of those better Stollers. Thank you Jim.

User avatar
rfelthoven
Posts: 1781
Joined: June 7th, 2011, 9:07 am
Location: Seattle

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#2 Post by rfelthoven » October 22nd, 2018, 10:52 am

Mitch,

I opened one bottle after getting my deliver and here was my immediate impression:

"Wine shows/drinks as advertised, with more pommard character than anything else. Dark red fruited with plums being the most pronounced fruit on the palate. This is a sultry, sexy, and smooth pinot noir. It's way classier than the Berserker sales price would suggest, and is sure to be a crowd pleaser. It isn't sweet by any means but shows the warm 2015 vintage more so than some of the other PGC wines I've had from the previous warmer vintages. Acid seems med/med-low on this one. Probably a pass for hardcore Oregon AFWE types, but I think it will be a hit with your guests."

I need to revisit the wine but I recall loving the texture of the wine but also wishing it had a bit more zip. I have purchased from PGC in warm years and they always seem to find balance, so I am pretty sure this will age nicely.
Ron

MitchTallan
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2886
Joined: June 3rd, 2009, 10:17 am

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#3 Post by MitchTallan » October 22nd, 2018, 11:12 am

I agree that the acid level is low, a bit lower than I would normally like to see, but the wine is not the least bit flabby.
I like to think that I know a fair amount about Oregon pinot-I sure as shit have drunk tons of it-but I don't profess to be proficient at picking out clones. I am going to guess that Jim mentioned the Pommard somewhere along the way but I normally associate Pommard with a denser, meatier feel to it. It might very well be 100% Pommard, but to this ignorant fan, it reminds me more of Dijon.

User avatar
rfelthoven
Posts: 1781
Joined: June 7th, 2011, 9:07 am
Location: Seattle

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#4 Post by rfelthoven » October 22nd, 2018, 11:53 am

From PGC, looks to be about 40% Pommard and 30% Dijon:

http://patriciagreencellars.orderport.n ... Pinot-Noir

The Marine Sedimentary bottling takes wine from selected blocks and barrels from across multiple sites. Our entire Estate Vineyard, both Pommard (The Anklebreaker Block) and Wadensvil Clone from Olenik Vineyard and Dijon 115 and Mariafeld Clone from Lia’s Vineyard created to show how the silty marine soil both drives our plants lives and produces wines that are distinct on their own; such a huge contrast to the Dundee Hills wines that we produce and in particular the soil-based Volcanic bottling that we also do. The interaction of dark fruits, stony/earthy-driven characteristics from the Pommard, sweetness from the Dijon 115 and acid and tannin from the Mariafeld produce a wine that will appeal to those that want secondary characteristics, structure, cool minerality and restraint within the context of power to be the hallmarks of their Pinot Noir. This is the inherent nature of wines from vineyard planted in these soils. The basis and largest component of this bottling is the Anklebreaker Block at Olenik which makes up nearly 40% of the overall blend. The next largest component is the Dijon 115 from Olenik, making up about 30% of the wine. The rest of the wineis from select barrels from the Olenik Wadensvil Block, the Winery (oldest vines) Block and Hallelujah Block (1990 planting) both from the Estate Vineyard as well as a single barrel of the Mariafeld from Lia’s Vineyard. No new barrels were used so as to further show the explicit nature of this wine’s literal roots.
Ron

Siun o'Connell
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 4864
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 9:02 am

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#5 Post by Siun o'Connell » October 22nd, 2018, 7:30 pm

I'm not a tasting note pro so I'll defer to the comments above for specifics and simply say wow, what a wine! Deep color, serious flavor - not fruity, more spicy as Mitch mentions. This feels like a decidedly grownup wine to me - one I took time to savor and explore but still fun. I wish I had bought much more!

User avatar
G. Bienstock
Posts: 2713
Joined: December 29th, 2009, 6:32 pm
Location: Reno, NV

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#6 Post by G. Bienstock » October 22nd, 2018, 7:37 pm

No new oak. Let it flow.
Glenn

Positive Rastaman Vibration

ITB 1999-2005

Michae1 P0wers
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 4260
Joined: March 6th, 2010, 1:47 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#7 Post by Michae1 P0wers » October 22nd, 2018, 7:42 pm

I’m curious about your remark that the 2013 BC was the heavyset teenager, and then, similarly, about the ‘14 being more angular. To my recollection the ‘14 was far less angular than the ‘13. The ‘13 with the lighter and more acidic wine, in keeping with the vintages’ relative styles. I found ‘14 to be rather on the plush, more glycerin side. I’ve enjoyed both very much, and buried my remaining bottles to keep away from them. I found the ‘13 was rather angular at the beginning, but put on a bit of weight and texture with some time the bottle. I could be completely off-base but that was just my experience, and seemed to be consistent with the CellarTracker tasting notes. Curious to hear others’ thoughts on this.

User avatar
G. Bienstock
Posts: 2713
Joined: December 29th, 2009, 6:32 pm
Location: Reno, NV

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#8 Post by G. Bienstock » October 22nd, 2018, 7:57 pm

OR has a very interesting confluence of marine and sedimentary topologies due to the Missoula Flood which deposited Montana and Washington influences via the massive and I mean massive break in the Missoula ice dam at the end of the last ice age.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_Floods
Glenn

Positive Rastaman Vibration

ITB 1999-2005

User avatar
rfelthoven
Posts: 1781
Joined: June 7th, 2011, 9:07 am
Location: Seattle

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#9 Post by rfelthoven » October 22nd, 2018, 8:57 pm

Michae1 P0wers wrote:
October 22nd, 2018, 7:42 pm
I’m curious about your remark that the 2013 BC was the heavyset teenager, and then, similarly, about the ‘14 being more angular. To my recollection the ‘14 was far less angular than the ‘13. The ‘13 with the lighter and more acidic wine, in keeping with the vintages’ relative styles. I found ‘14 to be rather on the plush, more glycerin side. I’ve enjoyed both very much, and buried my remaining bottles to keep away from them. I found the ‘13 was rather angular at the beginning, but put on a bit of weight and texture with some time the bottle. I could be completely off-base but that was just my experience, and seemed to be consistent with the CellarTracker tasting notes. Curious to hear others’ thoughts on this.
I don’t find the PGC Berserker wines tracking the vintage trends you accurately described for 13 and 14. I think Jim described the 13 as having “bass notes” and to me the 14 is considerably more bright and upfront. The 14 has been one of the most popular wines I’ve ever served guests/family. I think it’s a better wine. The 13 has evolved for sure but I like 14 Berserkers better.
Ron

P Intag
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 748
Joined: September 5th, 2010, 9:19 pm
Location: SoCal

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#10 Post by P Intag » October 22nd, 2018, 8:58 pm

Michae1 P0wers wrote:
October 22nd, 2018, 7:42 pm
I’m curious about your remark that the 2013 BC was the heavyset teenager, and then, similarly, about the ‘14 being more angular. To my recollection the ‘14 was far less angular than the ‘13. The ‘13 with the lighter and more acidic wine, in keeping with the vintages’ relative styles. I found ‘14 to be rather on the plush, more glycerin side. I’ve enjoyed both very much, and buried my remaining bottles to keep away from them. I found the ‘13 was rather angular at the beginning, but put on a bit of weight and texture with some time the bottle. I could be completely off-base but that was just my experience, and seemed to be consistent with the CellarTracker tasting notes. Curious to hear others’ thoughts on this.
Totally agree with you on the BC '13 and '14.

As far as the Marine Sedimentary, maybe my palate was off that day, but there seemed to be an alcohol spike when I tried my lone bottle shortly after delivery. Nobody else has mentioned this though, so maybe I'm off base with this.
Paul

User avatar
rfelthoven
Posts: 1781
Joined: June 7th, 2011, 9:07 am
Location: Seattle

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#11 Post by rfelthoven » October 22nd, 2018, 9:21 pm

Yep, I noticed that. Agreed.
Ron

Michae1 P0wers
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 4260
Joined: March 6th, 2010, 1:47 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#12 Post by Michae1 P0wers » October 23rd, 2018, 7:47 am

rfelthoven wrote:
October 22nd, 2018, 8:57 pm
Michae1 P0wers wrote:
October 22nd, 2018, 7:42 pm
I’m curious about your remark that the 2013 BC was the heavyset teenager, and then, similarly, about the ‘14 being more angular. To my recollection the ‘14 was far less angular than the ‘13. The ‘13 with the lighter and more acidic wine, in keeping with the vintages’ relative styles. I found ‘14 to be rather on the plush, more glycerin side. I’ve enjoyed both very much, and buried my remaining bottles to keep away from them. I found the ‘13 was rather angular at the beginning, but put on a bit of weight and texture with some time the bottle. I could be completely off-base but that was just my experience, and seemed to be consistent with the CellarTracker tasting notes. Curious to hear others’ thoughts on this.
I don’t find the PGC Berserker wines tracking the vintage trends you accurately described for 13 and 14. I think Jim described the 13 as having “bass notes” and to me the 14 is considerably more bright and upfront. The 14 has been one of the most popular wines I’ve ever served guests/family. I think it’s a better wine. The 13 has evolved for sure but I like 14 Berserkers better.
That's funny, as I have consistently found the two wines to track the vintages. I drank four bottles of the '13 with two remaining, and approximately a case of the '14 with a half case remaining (I know, poor restraint). I have found the '14 to have considerable glycerin on the palate and while very good, initially to push the limit on plush. The '13 I found initially a bit anemic but with some time it filled in, while the '14 integrated better.

Here are examples of what CT offers, basically going down the line of what each reviewer is saying and trying to take a representative term that implies weight and ripeness. Both wines rate similarly, and similarly well. It seems to me the overwhelming community experience is in line with vintage, though neither is regarded as a big or particularly ripe wine. And while one can sometimes criticize the overall merit of the community at large, in this case the community is essentially people here.

2013:
tart
bright
thin
tart
dark fruit (for counterpoint)
tart
light floral
cranberry
cran-cherry
rich (again for the counterpoint)
fresh red berries

2014:
intensity
nose a bit ripe,
sweet, ripe, almost confected (Bob H)
medium
fruity/lively
tart red berries
broader shouldered / hard candy (Frank Murray III)
"others pegged this as a Cali pinot"


Anyway, I like both wines quite a lot, wish I'd bought more of both, but to me the 2014 is clearly the riper wine.

User avatar
Corey N.
Posts: 26937
Joined: November 18th, 2010, 8:36 pm
Location: Certainly NOT Orlando

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#13 Post by Corey N. » October 23rd, 2018, 7:57 am

Michae1 P0wers wrote:
October 23rd, 2018, 7:47 am
That's funny, as I have consistently found the two wines to track the vintages. I drank four bottles of the '13 with two remaining, and approximately a case of the '14 with a half case remaining (I know, poor restraint). I have found the '14 to have considerable glycerin on the palate and while very good, initially to push the limit on plush. The '13 I found initially a bit anemic but with some time it filled in, while the '14 integrated better.

Here are examples of what CT offers, basically going down the line of what each reviewer is saying and trying to take a representative term that implies weight and ripeness. Both wines rate similarly, and similarly well. It seems to me the overwhelming community experience is in line with vintage, though neither is regarded as a big or particularly ripe wine. And while one can sometimes criticize the overall merit of the community at large, in this case the community is essentially people here.

2013:
tart
bright
thin
tart
dark fruit (for counterpoint)
tart
light floral
cranberry
cran-cherry
rich (again for the counterpoint)
fresh red berries

2014:
intensity
nose a bit ripe,
sweet, ripe, almost confected (Bob H)
medium
fruity/lively
tart red berries
broader shouldered / hard candy (Frank Murray III)
"others pegged this as a Cali pinot"


Anyway, I like both wines quite a lot, wish I'd bought more of both, but to me the 2014 is clearly the riper wine.
My experiences match yours, Michael.

I had the same experience as Ron, in that the 14 has been a crowd-pleaser. That said, I strongly prefer the 13, but I tend to have a preference for lithe, red-fruited wines. While the 13 as put on weight with time in the bottle, the 14, was a much bigger from the get go. It's a darker/riper wine and I think the California comparison is not unfair.
WOTY: 2013 d’Yquem

Nøv¡¢k

MitchTallan
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2886
Joined: June 3rd, 2009, 10:17 am

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#14 Post by MitchTallan » October 23rd, 2018, 8:39 am

I don’t find the PGC Berserker wines tracking the vintage trends you accurately described for 13 and 14. I think Jim described the 13 as having “bass notes” and to me the 14 is considerably more bright and upfront.
First and foremost, the focus of my note was the '15 Marine Sedimentary but since I commented on the '13 and '14 WB Cuvee's for comparative purposes, I realize my comments are fair game.
Michael Powers, why would you cite to CT comments for support? This is what our world has come to-anonymous stuff on the internet is suddenly deemed to be credible support for anything you want it to be, when and if it suits.
Ron Felthoven gets what I am referring to and it sounds like Jim Anderson himself has a similar description. Maybe it is a problem with semantics and interpretation of inadequate words. The '13 WB in my very humble and quite possibly deluded mind is very "bass note", less structured and comes across by virtue of that as being full-bodied. The '14 is as Ron states more bright, forward, and what I call "angular and chiseled". Another way to say the same thing is that the '14 has more structure. And again for what very little it's worth, I have gone back and forth but for the most part I prefer the '13. It is more savory and linear at the moment. The '14 imveryho will better benefit with time. The '14 is more interesting but just not as cohesive at the moment. But let me say it again-I don't claim to be a particularly adept or talented taster. I take pride in certain things and probably have too much ego as to those particular things (bikes, audio, music namely) but don't mind being labeled flat-out deluded on perceptions of taste.

User avatar
Corey N.
Posts: 26937
Joined: November 18th, 2010, 8:36 pm
Location: Certainly NOT Orlando

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#15 Post by Corey N. » October 23rd, 2018, 8:57 am

MitchTallan wrote:
October 23rd, 2018, 8:39 am
Michael Powers, why would you cite to CT comments for support? This is what our world has come to-anonymous stuff on the internet is suddenly deemed to be credible support for anything you want it to be, when and if it suits.
I'm not Michael, but I think the CT notes are particularly interesting in this case, since the wine was marketed to WB, so nearly all the notes are likely to have come from people on the board. I haven't checked in on the 14 lately, but the 13 I had a few months back has blossomed into a really nice wine, with more body and spice notes than on release. I don't find the 14 all that interesting at the monment, but perhaps it needs to shed some baby fat. At any rate, that's why they make chocolate and vanilla.
WOTY: 2013 d’Yquem

Nøv¡¢k

MitchTallan
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2886
Joined: June 3rd, 2009, 10:17 am

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#16 Post by MitchTallan » October 23rd, 2018, 9:04 am

Corey N. wrote:
October 23rd, 2018, 8:57 am
MitchTallan wrote:
October 23rd, 2018, 8:39 am
Michael Powers, why would you cite to CT comments for support? This is what our world has come to-anonymous stuff on the internet is suddenly deemed to be credible support for anything you want it to be, when and if it suits.
I'm not Michael, but I think the CT notes are particularly interesting in this case, since the wine was marketed to WB, so nearly all the notes are likely to have come from people on the board. I haven't checked in on the 14 lately, but the 13 I had a few months back has blossomed into a really nice wine, with more body and spice notes than on release. I don't find the 14 all that interesting at the monment, but perhaps it needs to shed some baby fat. At any rate, that's why they make chocolate and vanilla.
Valid point. Again, I need to be more like my hero, Tom Hill. Whenever someone questions Tom on anything of a subjective nature, he lets it go. He has no need to defend himself. Wise people possess that quality.

User avatar
rfelthoven
Posts: 1781
Joined: June 7th, 2011, 9:07 am
Location: Seattle

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#17 Post by rfelthoven » October 23rd, 2018, 9:25 am

Admittedly it's been a while since I opened a '13 and should probably do a side-by-side with the '14 at some point. I also won't discount that my perceptions could be different than others, or wrong.
Ron

Michae1 P0wers
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 4260
Joined: March 6th, 2010, 1:47 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#18 Post by Michae1 P0wers » October 23rd, 2018, 9:58 am

MitchTallan wrote:
October 23rd, 2018, 8:39 am

Michael Powers, why would you cite to CT comments for support? This is what our world has come to-anonymous stuff on the internet is suddenly deemed to be credible support for anything you want it to be, when and if it suits.
Ron Felthoven gets what I am referring to and it sounds like Jim Anderson himself has a similar description. Maybe it is a problem with semantics and interpretation of inadequate words. The '13 WB in my very humble and quite possibly deluded mind is very "bass note", less structured and comes across by virtue of that as being full-bodied. The '14 is as Ron states more bright, forward, and what I call "angular and chiseled". Another way to say the same thing is that the '14 has more structure. And again for what very little it's worth, I have gone back and forth but for the most part I prefer the '13. It is more savory and linear at the moment. The '14 imveryho will better benefit with time. The '14 is more interesting but just not as cohesive at the moment. But let me say it again-I don't claim to be a particularly adept or talented taster. I take pride in certain things and probably have too much ego as to those particular things (bikes, audio, music namely) but don't mind being labeled flat-out deluded on perceptions of taste.
I think Corey gets it right, and I mentioned this earlier myself, these aren't random tasters on CT, but mostly Berserkers, some of whom post quite frequently and at least two of whom I mention above. I mention Bob and FMIII because I have them set as favorites on CT and their names jumped out at me, but I'm sure if I looked more closely we'd see a number of regulars providing notes for those two wines. I suspect that those notes are credible support for a discussion of a comparison of the two wines. That said, if we took any two vintages of any two wines, each with over 100 tasting notes, and tried to determine which was the riper or weightier vintage, I'd assume there'd be a consensus and that it would be correct. Obviously it would depend on the vintages and the wines, but in Oregon, with the stark distinction between the '13 and '14 vintages, I'd suspect that to be true more often than not.

In any case, this wasn't asked to call you out, like it was a parlor trick, "can you taste persimmon in that wine?" or something like that. I just found it interesting that I've consumed multiple bottles of two vintages of the same wine and you posted what I consider to be wholly different interpretations of those wines, particularly with something as fundamental as weight/ripeness. I was legitimately surprised too see the '13 referred to as "oafish" and "heavyset" and the '14 referred to as "angular" or "chiseled." If you put up those two descriptions without telling me which wine you were describing, I would have, without a doubt, assumed you meant the opposite vintage. My recollection on vintage character and CT notes was consistent with my finding so I simply sought to explore that a bit further, particularly after Ron expressed the same thoughts. That's all.

MitchTallan
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2886
Joined: June 3rd, 2009, 10:17 am

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#19 Post by MitchTallan » October 23rd, 2018, 11:22 am

Here we go again Michae1 POwers. I should just be quiet. It aint worth it. I see from your posting history you like mixing things up with people. I saw that you recently argued with Wes Barton, one of the more knowledgeable people on this Board. There's a fine line between exchanging viewpoints and making sport of disagreement. I have better things to do than engage.

Michae1 P0wers
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 4260
Joined: March 6th, 2010, 1:47 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#20 Post by Michae1 P0wers » October 23rd, 2018, 12:30 pm

Wow, you're quite the sensitive flower. You asked me a question and I answered, assuming that you actually wanted an answer. This is after you sternly took me to task for using CT as a source of information (again, about wine). I'll just leave you to your musings then. I should have known better than to have a wine discussion on a wine board. It may well have been a moment of madness; I'm sure I'll think better of it later and come back to apologize.

PS, I can't for the life of me remember what issue I argued with Wes Barton about, but this place would be boring AF if people so deferred to knowledgeable people that they didn't offer contradictory viewpoints when they felt it was warranted.

User avatar
rfelthoven
Posts: 1781
Joined: June 7th, 2011, 9:07 am
Location: Seattle

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#21 Post by rfelthoven » October 23rd, 2018, 4:58 pm

My wife and I will taste the 13 and 14 blind, side by side tonight and get back. Not going to add 15 to the mix.
Ron

User avatar
rfelthoven
Posts: 1781
Joined: June 7th, 2011, 9:07 am
Location: Seattle

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#22 Post by rfelthoven » October 23rd, 2018, 6:09 pm

Okay -- here are my impressions. I have to say that I found my results consistent with some of my earlier recollections and inconsistent with others. That's not to say what I'm about to write is correct or will agree with others, but that it's at least updated from recollections from earlier bottles tasted over a few years, wherein the wine may have changed and my memory may have failed me.

I have to say that the general impression of the wines (weight, acidity) are generally consistent with the vintage generalizations (counter to what I claimed yesterday from my memory of individual bottles not tasted side by side). The 2014 was rounder while the 2013 was more tart, bright and forward. However, the 2014 seemed more nicely integrated and smooth, with a polished finish while the 2013 seemed a touch forward on the entry with a slight harshness/brightness making itself known.

Those were the real differences we could discern, but for the most part the wines were more similar than different in many characteristics. Both were a deep to medium red in color, and showed cherry, strawberry, and plum on the nose and palate. The 2013 showed a bit of reduction in the nose while the 2014 showed a bit of sulfur on the palate. The 2013 had a touch more grapefruit, and the 2014 had a fuller, richer body.

I think we both came away giving the edge to the 2014 for being a touch more polished at this point, but both were really enjoyable. I don't know if any of this makes sense and I apologize for inconsistencies between my memory of the wines and what we tasted tonight, but that's where we landed. Cheers all! Keep it civil :)
Ron

User avatar
Jim Anderson
BerserkerBusiness
BerserkerBusiness
Posts: 6378
Joined: October 20th, 2010, 1:18 pm
Location: Portland/Newberg, Oregon

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#23 Post by Jim Anderson » October 23rd, 2018, 9:58 pm

Thought I would chip in here. Times have been unusual in Oregon starting in 2013. 5 above average/hot vintages out of 6 with 2016 being the only non-“warm” vintage despite being the earliest of all 6 vintages. I would say that there is a new learning curve we are all going through here. I have talked about the new concept of ripe with several winemakers over the past few years. I think we are adapting, improving and getting better every year. The 2013 “Berserker Cuvée” was an utterly unique wine that was simply barrels I felt were unique and excellent but didn’t have a particular home. I love that wine. Another winemaker described it to me as “tasting like the cave (a real cave, not a winery cave)” and that meant a lot to me. The 2014 was the follow up with an uptick in site selection but certainly a warmer vintage. They’re wines that can appeal to a breadth of palates but the 14 probably is going to be more universal. That’s okay. The 2015 Marine Sedimenatary would be a riff on the 2 Berserker wines (it’s really the other way around) so I figured folks whomnhad enjoyed the previous two would find something interesting in this wine. 15 is the warmest vintage in Oregon’s history (unless 2018 topped it) and as much as I think embracing the concept of the vintage is important one still has to work within the context of the nature of the grape. Being said I expect this bottling to have and show tannin, muscle and dark fruit in its youth. That’s the nature of MS soil in a very particular way. I think this wine will do absolutely fine with time and the other two wines will be delicious over at least the next 10 years. I have said that these are wines that should not be treated as wines that were sold at the prices that they were sold at but I get that there is a lot of enthusiasm around them and I appreciate people drinking them young and posting information on them.

I appreciate people here supporting the endeavors we have had on these wines. Truly. It’s a lovely community that has made some cool stuff possible. I think there are good, honest wines and I am glad that real wine lovers are enjoying and conversing about them. I hope it continues. I know that what we were doing then was only scratching the surface as to what we are capable of in this new paradigm that we find ourselves in.

Again, I appreciate the support of everyone who purchased these wines and hope folks have found this a good two way street. There is a lot of wine in 2018. It, in my early regard, is ALL of exceptional to amazing quality. Maybe we can work something out for people here again.
Co-owner, Patricia Green Cellars

Matt W
Posts: 23
Joined: April 21st, 2010, 6:32 pm
Location: O'Fallon, MO

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#24 Post by Matt W » October 24th, 2018, 9:13 am

Jim, that would be great! Have really enjoyed the ‘14 and ‘15 opportunities you provided. IMO, they are really nice wines that drink well beyond the price you asked.
In Vino Veritas

john stimson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3455
Joined: January 24th, 2010, 8:11 pm
Location: seattle

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#25 Post by john stimson » October 24th, 2018, 3:21 pm

Jim--we didn't get to chat all that much last time you were in town. It would be very interesting to know how you are handling the heat, and the "new concept of ripe". It has certainly been an issue in Washington for a while with other grape varieties, and certainly is an issue now all over the wine world. Some folks have become very good at it (eg Ben Smith in our neck of the woods), others can't handle it. It's strange how in the last 30 years in wine we've gone from hoping and praying for a warmer, riper vintage, to hoping and praying for a cool, not so damn ripe year.

User avatar
Jim Anderson
BerserkerBusiness
BerserkerBusiness
Posts: 6378
Joined: October 20th, 2010, 1:18 pm
Location: Portland/Newberg, Oregon

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#26 Post by Jim Anderson » October 24th, 2018, 10:19 pm

john stimson wrote:
October 24th, 2018, 3:21 pm
Jim--we didn't get to chat all that much last time you were in town. It would be very interesting to know how you are handling the heat, and the "new concept of ripe". It has certainly been an issue in Washington for a while with other grape varieties, and certainly is an issue now all over the wine world. Some folks have become very good at it (eg Ben Smith in our neck of the woods), others can't handle it. It's strange how in the last 30 years in wine we've gone from hoping and praying for a warmer, riper vintage, to hoping and praying for a cool, not so damn ripe year.
Yes, strange indeed. I would say the main reaction has been in vineyard management. While we do not grow our all of our fruit we do have great relationships with our non-Estate growers and we are looking to get in agreement with them on how to manage sites in drier, warmer year round growing cycles. I think these conversations were beginning back in 2014/15 and have gone to a whole other level of seriousness and implementation of the outcomes of said discussions now.

I think 2014/15 were good learning experiences. I think we, on the whole, did very well at making balanced wines within the context of what we had to work with. I don’t think the wines are overwrought and I think they have balance and are generally excellent wines. That being said I saw room for adjustment and improvement. I think we have done both in the vineyard and the winery.

Believe me, I would rather not spend as much time thinking and agonizing over decisions as I do these past couple of vintages. I would love a 2005, 2001 or 2016 to be the norm. It’s a warmer and different world out there and we have attempted to work in our own sites and with others to proactively take on those changing aspects so that the wines are not only keeping pace but getting better in this new paradigm. Sounds like a sale pitch I guess but it is what what we are doing.
Co-owner, Patricia Green Cellars

john stimson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3455
Joined: January 24th, 2010, 8:11 pm
Location: seattle

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#27 Post by john stimson » October 25th, 2018, 10:16 am

Yeah--around here it's vineyard management, and the Russian Roulette of deciding how early you can pick and still get the maturity you want.

User avatar
Br@d S w @ l l o w
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 6345
Joined: January 27th, 2009, 12:39 pm
Location: Ellicott City, MD

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#28 Post by Br@d S w @ l l o w » October 25th, 2018, 7:38 pm

I have looked through the discussion above and agree that the '15 Marine Sedimentary is fantastic. People with far more Oregon Pinot experience than I have extolled the virtues of this wine even in the short time since it was shipped. I think it is dark, brooding, sorta mushroomy, but hard to put down because it is so layered and nuanced -- interesting to drink now, but will reward patience.

My tasting note is irrelevant. I just felt it important to thank Jim and PGC for this awesome hook-up. [worship.gif]
"Oh, bliss! Bliss and heaven! Oh, it was gorgeousness and gorgeosity made flesh. It was like a bird of rarest spun heaven metal or like silvery wine flowing in a spaceship, gravity all nonsense now. As I slooshied, I knew such lovely pictures!" ~Alex

Doug Uno
Posts: 130
Joined: January 28th, 2010, 4:50 pm

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#29 Post by Doug Uno » October 27th, 2018, 8:06 am

Jim you said,

“I would love a 2005, 2001 or 2016 to be the norm.”

What are the unique characteristics of these years that set them apart from some of the recent warm vintages?

User avatar
dcornutt
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 10343
Joined: February 12th, 2009, 4:19 pm

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#30 Post by dcornutt » October 31st, 2018, 4:26 pm

This wine is SO good. Thanks Jim. Beautiful seamless pinot with lots of red/black fruit, acidity and mineral notes. Vibrant. Gorgeous. Just needs time for the nose to really blossom. I would have had trouble blind picking this out as New World. Stunning value. Lucky to have this.
DON Cornutt

"Before you eat or drink anything, carefully consider with whom you eat or drink rather than what you
eat or drink,because eating without a friend is the life of the lion or the wolf." Epicurius

User avatar
Jim Anderson
BerserkerBusiness
BerserkerBusiness
Posts: 6378
Joined: October 20th, 2010, 1:18 pm
Location: Portland/Newberg, Oregon

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#31 Post by Jim Anderson » October 31st, 2018, 8:50 pm

dcornutt wrote:
October 31st, 2018, 4:26 pm
This wine is SO good. Thanks Jim. Beautiful seamless pinot with lots of red/black fruit, acidity and mineral notes. Vibrant. Gorgeous. Just needs time for the nose to really blossom. I would have had trouble blind picking this out as New World. Stunning value. Lucky to have this.
Thanks. Always nice to have people appreciate stuff. While I am always partial to vineyard designated Pinots I do like the MS bottling a lot and have fun putting the elements together. The ‘16 is much edgier which I like. I will have more components to work with in ‘18 having picked up 2+ acres from another Ribbon Ridge site.
Co-owner, Patricia Green Cellars

User avatar
Mason H
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 199
Joined: June 30th, 2010, 10:13 am
Location: Charleston, SC

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#32 Post by Mason H » November 1st, 2018, 6:18 am

On the '15 MS, I popped one when they arrived and think it has great potential that won't be realized for 5-8 years, maybe more. It seemed to have more of everything than the '14 Berserkers Cuvee, which I love. I'm sending mine away to rest for several years. I really appreciate these special wines for this community. I've introduced PG wines to several people using the '14 Berserkers Cuvee because it's such a great story.
Mason Hewitt

MitchTallan
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2886
Joined: June 3rd, 2009, 10:17 am

Re: '15 PG Marine Sedimentary thoughts

#33 Post by MitchTallan » December 19th, 2018, 8:51 am

I opened another of many '14 Berserker Cuvee's last night, my first in several months. It's an angry wine. I still don't think it's "bigger" than the '13, just tighter, more structured, and more intense. Those qualities don't necessarily equate to size. The '13 comes across as fleshier and riper. After an hour, the profile went from tight, slightly shrill, and whole-cluster stemmy to showing some nice fruit peeking out from the outer winding of the 'forementioned barbed wire. My wife and son tried some in the first ten minutes that it had been poured and declared it undrinkable. They drink quite a bit of my Oregon pinot when I open a bottle and liked the '13. The '13 is simply a much friendlier wine.

Post Reply

Return to “Wine Talk”