Aging Domestic Pinot Noir: Better or just different?

[Glenn_L_e_v_i_n_e]

Lots of those Hanzell PN age gracefully for decades. Good bottles of the 78 & 84 are amazing now.

[Blake_Brown]

@Joe Webb

@Kevin Harvey

@Blake Brown

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.

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.

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.

Hi Joe, your point is well taken and all I have to do is go to the sources for Burt`s wines to agree. Obviously, kudos to him for discovering these vineyards and showcasing their individual attributes by allowing the vineyards to express their individuality.

I was so grateful for an experience that occurred at Restaurant Gary Danko in SF where we dined in their private dining room with Bob Sessions and tasted all of the Pinots he made during his tenure at Hanzell. The ones that were 20 + years old were simply amazing, quite viable and expressing incredible profiles that pleased all of the discerning palates amongst the 8 of us.

I also find it intriguing as to the difference as to when people choose to pick in the same vineyard and the reasons for doing so, not to mention the long term agibility influences this has on the wines.

[lleichtman]

For me, I find that intermediate aging of Domestic Pinot Noir in the 5-10 year range is optimal. I have not had any really old domestic Pinot Noir from CA or Oregon that I liked much after 15-20 years but that may just be personal preference. Also, I’m at the age that I’m not buying wine that needs 20 years because odds are good it would just go to my children who can buy their own wine. Everyone has a personal preference for taste and, for example, my wife doesn’t like really aged wines for the most part.

[Brent_C_l_a_y_t_o_n]

Enjoying this thread while drinking a nicely resolved bottle of 2006 Kutch McDugall Ranch Pinot Noir.

[dsGriswold]

I keep trying to age my OR PN, but cannot seem get past 4 years.

[Joe_Davis]

@Kevin Harvey

@Blake Brown

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.

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.

Kevin makes an excellent point, the vineyard plays a huge part in having the raw material to age well. I do think that the producer’s understanding of how wine ages and what factors play a roll in aging (dissolved oxygen case in point) contribute to furthering the cause.

When I read Rusty’s article I wondered if he was speaking just about California Pinot Noir or all Pinot Noir here and abroad. Most of the critics who have reviewed my wines have given longer drinking windows then what his article suggested.

All of the above producers Blake has sighted have made beautiful wines that have aged gracefully and have improved in my opinion.

[Brandon_J]

This thread is great, I am always discussing this topic with friends. Half of those points made in the Pinotfile article I don’t agree with but I am a novice in comparison.

I’m curious what exactly people would NOT like about an aged pinot? If you look at a vintage like 2011 or 2013 , some of those pinots are quite acidic with not a whole lot of body or fruit and it seems to me they will cellar great and really come out of their shell around 2020. Same with 2007. I didn’t care for the ones I had 4 or so years ago but now they are awesome.

My logic has been, if it’s from a great producer, they’ll be at optimal drinking in 5-8 years depending on vintage. I found a source with a bunch of early 2000s Cristom, Bethel Heights and Beaux Freres and I was like a kid in a candy shop. Every one I’ve since tried has been spectacular.

[larry_schaffer]

@Joe Davis

@Kevin Harvey

@Blake Brown

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.

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.

Kevin makes an excellent point, the vineyard plays a huge part in having the raw material to age well. I do think that the producer’s understanding of how wine ages and what factors play a roll in aging (dissolved oxygen case in point) contribute to furthering the cause.

When I read Rusty’s article I wondered if he was speaking just about California Pinot Noir or all Pinot Noir here and abroad. Most of the critics who have reviewed my wines have given longer drinking windows then what his article suggested.

All of the above producers Blake has sighted have made beautiful wines that have aged gracefully and have improved in my opinion.

Joe,

Would be interested to hear your thoughts on dissolved oxygen and whether you try to minimize or not in the making - and bottling - of your wines, and how you achieve this.

Cheers!

[Joe_Davis]

I prefer to work in a reductive environment Larry which as you know can be tricky given the H2S issues that often arise in Pinot Noir and Syrah. We also track our dissolved O2 levels throughout elevage and can adjust if need be. We don’t rack our wines throughout that process and leave on gross lees for sometimes up to 30 months. Diligent SO2 management and timely topping along with relatively low pH all contribute to relatively fresh wines despite their long evolution in barrel and bottle.

[Bob_Hunnicutt]

I’ve found (for me) the sweet spot is about five yrs from vintage date. Always exceptions of course.

[Blake_Brown]

@Joe Davis

@Kevin Harvey

@Blake Brown

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.

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.

Kevin makes an excellent point, the vineyard plays a huge part in having the raw material to age well. I do think that the producer’s understanding of how wine ages and what factors play a roll in aging (dissolved oxygen case in point) contribute to furthering the cause.

When I read Rusty’s article I wondered if he was speaking just about California Pinot Noir or all Pinot Noir here and abroad. Most of the critics who have reviewed my wines have given longer drinking windows then what his article suggested.

All of the above producers Blake has sighted have made beautiful wines that have aged gracefully and have improved in my opinion.

Hi Joe, I was remiss in not including your wines in the longevity group. I`ve been very pleased with your Pinots that have “aged gracefully” and have gotten better with time. All the best.

[Chris_Seiber]

For me, I usually start drinking most of my California pinot around the 4 year mark from the vintage. I don’t think I buy any California pinot which is declining in any way by year 4 or 5, and if it did, I wouldn’t be buying it.

Most of them improve from the time of release until at least that age, often significantly, and some will improve quite a bit longer than that. Some have a track record of 15+year improvement (e.g. Arcadian, Mount Eden, Au Bon Climat, Dehlinger, Williams Selyem), others are newer but suggest they will age well longer term (Copain, Rhys, Sea Smoke, Kutch), and then some are probably at their best in the 4-8 year range (Kosta Browne, Anthill Farms, Sandler).

Is it better or just different? It depends on your tastes and on the particular producer, vintage and bottling. I personally tend to like the development that occurs from good producers, good sites, and good vintages, and I think many people assume these wines are only to drink young while the fruit is plump, and they miss out on the better things ahead.

[M_Dildine]

@Chris Seiber

For me, I usually start drinking most of my California pinot around the 4 year mark from the vintage. I don’t think I buy any California pinot which is declining in any way by year 4 or 5, and if it did, I wouldn’t be buying it.

Most of them improve from the time of release until at least that age, often significantly, and some will improve quite a bit longer than that. Some have a track record of 15+year improvement (e.g. Arcadian, Mount Eden, Au Bon Climat, Dehlinger, Williams Selyem), others are newer but suggest they will age well longer term (Copain, Rhys, Sea Smoke, Kutch), and then some are probably at their best in the 4-8 year range (Kosta Browne, Anthill Farms, Sandler).

Is it better or just different? It depends on your tastes and on the particular producer, vintage and bottling. I personally tend to like the development that occurs from good producers, good sites, and good vintages, and I think many people assume these wines are only to drink young while the fruit is plump, and they miss out on the better things ahead.

Nicely stated Chris!

[DougS]

@Paul H Galli

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.

I think Eyrie is another huge exception to this. John Thomas also seems to be well on his way, from what I have read. I haven’t had any older wines from him, but I have with Eyrie, and I don’t think there is any question.

[Lee_Short]

Agree with Doug on Eyrie. Also Evesham Wood in Russ Raney’s tenure. Others like Cameron, St Innocent, DDO, have shown well when I have had them, but I don’t really have the depth of experience to judge. I have a friend who swears that Ken Wright ages well, but he’s never served me an aged bottle.

[Dennis_Kanagie]

@Lee Short

I have a friend who swears that Ken Wright ages well, but he’s never served me an aged bottle.

That might be the best proof ever - he’s saving them for himself because they’re so good.

[Scott_E_Wade]

Great thread.

I tend to like my U. S. pinot at about 5-6 years.

So many of the U. S. pinot noir vines and vineyards are so relatively young, compared to Burgundy, that the predictability seems lesser. It’s so interesting to watch it play out as people are planting and discovering the best sites. The time they’ve had in Burgundy is why their hierarchy is so well established. It is exciting to watch here.

One of the most important concepts to understand about aging wine is the distinction between enduring and transformational improvement. I have little room allocated in my cellar for those that just endure.

[Howard_Cooper]

Virtually all of the best red wines I have had (whether domestic or foreign) have had a good bit of age on them. It is fine to say that you like having a wine that is drinkable at 3 years and not having to wait, but I think this means (at least for my palate) that I would be drinking good and not great wines. Like all of us, I drink a whole bunch of young wine and for most occasions they are perfectly fine and maybe preferable. But there is something about what happens to a top Cabernet or Pinot Noir (pick your country) or Nebbiolo, etc., when it has a good bit of age to it. The complex flavors cannot be matched by any young wine I have ever had.

And, there is a huge difference between a wine that ages and a wine that holds.

[Oliver_McCrum]

I agree about the older Chalones, also I used to distribute Bryan Babcock’s wines and have some older (10-15 years old) Estate Pinots that were wonderful. They were pretty chewy when young.

[Chris_Seiber]

@Scott E. Wade

One of the most important concepts to understand about aging wine is the distinction between enduring and transformational improvement. I have little room allocated in my cellar for those that just endure.

@Howard Cooper

And, there is a huge difference between a wine that ages and a wine that holds.

We all agree that there is, but let’s not undersell the value of wines that just “hold” or “endure” too. Most of us have way too much wine, and so many different things we want to try, and we occasionally lose track of bottles. So it’s a very good thing if that wine you didn’t get to until four years later is still good and hasn’t gone downhill when you get to it, even if it hasn’t evolved into something better than it was four years ago.

I just opened a 2005 Reignac last week, which was never a great wine or probably an especially good vintage for Reignac, but it has become positively undrinkable now. All oak, bitter tannins, coffee grounds, little fruit, just really unpleasant, and worse after being open a few days than at first. I would have been far happier if it had just “held” or “endured” to this age.