To me, Arcadian is a great example of American pinot that has a track record of really blossoming at over 10 years from vintage - the 2001s are a good example. Good in youth, but quite a bit better at maturity.
I have always thought the idea of aging and when to drink is as personal as which of a flight of PN would you pick as your WOTF. My wife likes wine older than I do. I attribute it to her growing up here and being around wet earth, mushroom, horses(leather), a lot of her life and liking those secondary aromas in older wine. I usually like wine 2-3 years younger than her as I like some fruit to remain just as the earthy stuff is coming into play. The only exception to this is bubbles I like them older than she does.
When we decided to start a cellar we decided to do it in minimum quantities of 3 and usually 6 for our favorite wines from any given producer. Then buy 3-6 of that same wine for several or more vintages and do vertical tastings. Not only does this let you learn when a given producers style with a particular vineyard is best for you but you get to see the change over time. Even if you don’t do verticals if you have a 6 pack you can open one every other year or so to watch it evolve over time.
If you only have one bottle of “something special you have to age” then when that prefect time to open for you is a needle in a hay stack. In that case I recommend cellar tracker to get some idea of how a wine is progressing.
In my mind, Arcadian is the ONLY example of a range of pinots that consistently are able to age and vastly improve over a period of many years. Joe has his act together.
Other pinots have the ability to age but not truly evolve into something truly complex.
Mount Eden can improve but only for 8-12 years after which they get leathery (which I hate but others like).
Older Chalones can be a special experience.
Testarossa under the Ed Kurtzman reign (1998-2002) aged a surprisingly long time.
Older Rhys is approaching the age where it will show it’s true colors. (The 2006 Alpine is really coming into it’s own)
The 2002 Rhys Home was REALLY nice after 11 years!
I’m also hopeful for Ceritas (given a few more years to evaluate).
Jay, thanks for your comments and commentary. The stimulation I expected from posting this certainly has occurred and you took off with it in a big way. When I first read this, I too had some insights of personal preferences. I appreciate your viewpoints.
Good points and well stated Joe. Since I have tended to go for more trophy type wines in the past [$100-200+], I found I was limited in buying in the 3-6 numbers literally priced out of reasonable consideration. Ive changed a bit and now do more of 3-6 or more in the area of wines that are more reasonably priced [$25-100] and in my preference profiles. Ive enjoyed tracking them and paying attention to the evolution in comparison to where I anticipated them to go as opposed to where they actually landed. It`s a fun exercise and in most cases very rewarding.
Paul, Id like to resubmit, Pinots from Burt Williams [from the 80s through 97] and Jim Clendenen, ABC, [from 90` to present] are consistently truly long lasting and ever developing gems that skew the curve for longevity of Pinot Noir. Plus, I agree with your inclusion of Chalone and found that was true for Hanzell and Calera of the past as well.
Given all other considerations being a constant, i.e. transportation, shelving, storage, etc., in effect, provenance, I agree. This is why I buy more from specific producers even in “off” vintages.
I think winemakers are the worst at trying to predict or “design” the longevity of a wine. We’ve all enjoyed bottles that were not “designed” to age and yet blossom into delicious wines long after the “supposed” expiry date.
I find this interesting as well; and agree with the “potential” scoring. It might be that the older vintages are being held and drank by more critical consumers of wine. Or it could be that earlier adopters of CT are more critical as well, compared those how are only recently been reviewing. I think the best clarity is has when one wine has been reviewed regularly over a handful of years and one can examine those specific reviews.
I agree with Blake on Burt’s Pinots. They aged well for at least 15 years (most are still excellent today) and I preferred them at age 6-10 years.
Overall contrary to the article, I find that virtually all of the CA Pinots that I cellar improve with age. I believe this because the Pinots that I buy are typically below 14% alc (almost none exceed 14.5%) and receive minimal additions or manipulation. I know alcohol is a controversial topic but it is hard to discuss aging without mentioning it. Natural alcohol levels are a good proxy for tannin ripeness and oxidation. Of course there are Pinots that are manipulated (watered or RO’d) to achieve low alc and IME they do not age as well. I have tasted CA Pinots back to the early '50s and many have aged and improved as well or better than similarly aged Burgundies.
To add a log on the controversy fire - While many CA Pinots improve with age, the vineyard (rather than the producer) plays the larger role in determining whether a wine shows additional complexity as it ages.
I thought that a bottle of Pinot should not be touced before its 15 years birthday no matter of vineyard/producer. Or does it only apply to domestic wines? For Pinot, “domestic” off course means la France
Kevin, thanks for your insights and input. Your last comment on the vineyard being the decisive issue for longevity is well taken and my comment on going with certain producers regardless of vintages was not appropriate in this conversation as that is what my criteria is for Burgundy [although I recognise the vineyards play a factor here to].
Im also in agreement with your statement re "manipulated" Pinots and there inability to age well as Ive had too many that already have proven that to be the case. I`ve unloaded all of these from my cellar, the first and only time I bought wine to drink and sold all of these made from 3 different producers.
Definitely agree on all points but one. I do however think producer matters as much as vineyard domestically. We have so much freedom (to much in my mind) with what can be added/subtracted to wines. I have long though a big part of Burgundian terroir was all the rules, the most important of which to me was the “ban de vendange” or the picking date window that everyone had to follow. I know they don’t have it anymore and am interested to see over time how that changes things. It is amazing to me how the same clones of PN in the same vineyard can be picked up to 8+ weeks different depending on what each producer deems “ripe/ready”. Even on our little plot its usually 2-3 weeks from the first pick to the last PN pick. Typically when I worked with Ferrington it was 6-8 weeks from first guy in to last guy out for PN. Even in years with winter rains threating it still was 3-4 weeks which in my mind is a HUGE difference.
Hanzell for me has to be a part of this conversation. I have had the pleasure to taste nearly every vintage of library wines from the mid 60’s to mid 90’s. The wines that Brad Webb and Bob Sessions made can easily and routinely go 10+ years.