2001 Quilceda Creek Cabernet Sauvignon- USA, Washington (12/11/2021)
I flat out hated this wine five years ago, finding it syrupy and bitter at the same time. I actively avoided my other bottles, burying them in an inaccessible corner of my cellar. Based on some comments from a person I trust I decided to perform an archeological dig to grab a bottle of the 2001. Opened with great trepidation, I was at first overwhelmed by a distinct blueberry/vanilla aroma, but decided to put the glass aside while I finished putting together dinner.
Fast forward an hour, and it’s still ripe, but also suddenly showing a real balance. It’s not thick or heavy as the initial aromatics would have indicated, but full-bodied with clear nuance. The fruit is still in the blue spectrum, and there is vanilla oak, but it’s not sloppy, goopy or murky. I know that’s damning with faint praise, but to go from detestable, bitter swill, to blue fruited, yet ripe modern Cabernet is quite a transformation. There’s plenty of material for further development, so I am likely to let my other bottles sit even longer, but instead of from fear, it will be in hope.
Are you saying the bitterness dissipated in an hour. That would be interesting since I shared a bottle recently and I found it bitter versus other prior tastings. Since shared it lasted about 20 minutes.
These wines were one of my biggest disappointments of the Wine Advocate back in the day. I never got the rationale behind the multiple 100pt ratings. Interesting wine? At times I suppose. But they always seemed a bit heavy on the oak and the fruit never seems to have integrated much. Sold a bunch of them off at a bit of a loss. Still just don’t understand the transcendent ratings. Glad you had a better experience than mine in the past.
My experience is that a heavy oak toast can develop a charred bitterness in modern wines like these. I haven’t tasted this one in a long time, but other QC have certainly had this. No idea if it resolves or not with more time, but hopefully David’s experience is some hope. A 2005 I had not too long back was very pretty and didn’t have this issue.
Interesting. I stopped buying these after the 2013 vintage because I came to the realization that I didn’t love them young (sometimes I like them if I’m in the right mood, but “like” doesn’t justify the price point) and they didn’t seem to be developing in a direction that would reward me for holding them. But I still have quite a few in the cellar. Maybe I’ll just leave them there and check in a decade down the road…
I know QC seems to be a favorite target here but I really do like them. I have enjoyed almost a case of the '01 over the years. Chocolate and vanilla I guess.
Years ago we did a 80s, 90s, 00s tasting of QC Cab…there was a distinct stylistic change in 1998, which in WA unlike CA was a hot vintage…lots of excellent wines. 99 returned with some balance as it was so cool, but 2000-2003 were full throttle.
I think they have a better grasp on cooperage and toast and I have always found the Red to offer great value as well as liked Cab in so-called “off vintages”. The 80s and wines thru 1996 were all stunning…if the current wines age anything like that they will be excellent.
Similar experience here. My last purchased QC’s were 2010 vintage. Just couldn’t see where the wines were headed and didn’t love them young. Initially convinced myself they were evolving at a glacial pace, which I think might still be true, but it’s hard to keep buying a $150 wine on reputation if you don’t start getting those great drinking experiences. Every other year I’ll open a bottle for a guys’ steak night and was pleasantly surprised by a 2005 this last summer. That tannic wall had faded or at least balanced out with the heavy food. Have about 15 bottles of various vintages left. Had tentatively thought about selling my QC’s, but reconsidered after that recent 2005. I think there might be a light at the end of this tunnel.