Yesterday I had my first La Rioja Alta 904, 2011 and I loved it! Can anyone explain the differences between this and the other wines, Vina Alberdi, Vina Ardanza and Vina Arana? I don’t know enough to explain what I liked about the 904 other than it was fantastic.
Thanks
By virtue of the 904 and Arana being GR, they are required to age, combination of oak and bottle, for at least 5 years.
Ardanza, being a Reserva, is required to age for at least 3 years.
Alberdi is a Crianza and requires 2 years.
The rest of the differences are numerous nuances on grapes used, location/age of vineyards, winemaking techniques, and age of barrels that you should read up here:
Wow I had that 2011 in the spring. Should be drinking great in 30-40 years. The 1981 I had was barely drinkable after a couple hours of air and had lots of life ahead. Strap in and enjoy the ride!
All of their wines represent great value. The Alberdi can be aged but I have always found it is good on release. Ardanza is my favorite of their lineup and 10 to 15 years from vintage is when I like to drink them. Usually can get them between $30 to $35 on sale.
Get your hands on some 890s also!
I think there is some nuance to the above, for the weirdness of the US.
Arana used to be presented to the market as a reserva, and then starting in 2014, LRA decided to mildly bump up the price, and change to a GR. I don’t think they actually changed their elevage. Arana is much smaller production than their other bottlings.
Alberdi is sold as reserva in the US, but I think in Spain its offered as a crianza; this can be seen on Spanish retailer Decantalo’s site https://www.decantalo.com/us/en/vina-alberdi.html
I don’t know why the bodega takes those actions; the ways of the Riojanas are inscrutable to me.
And if anything, the whole GR/R/C system seems to be losing favor with the next generation of winemakers. I picked up a direct import Rioja from Leizaola while at K&L yesterday that is trading under a ‘fantasy name’ of El Sacramento rather than the usual DOCa type of nomenclature.
I think I only had 904 once and indeed it is outstanding.
But for $30 less, Ardanza is so good I don’t feel a need to pay extra.
Comparing Ardanza and Alberdi:
Alberdi is more fruit forward and more concentrated but still has the elements but a great Rioja. Selling at $19 it is a great value.
Ardanza is more nuanced and complex wth the fruit being more in balance. I have seen quite a lot of variation over the three vintages I had had it.
Some say the current 2012 is not the best vintage but I still find it very enjoyable. Also a good value at $32.
I enjoy both of the wines a lot, it just depends on my mood which one I will open.
According to the winery website, and based on my understanding of the contained descriptions, both 2016 and 2018 Alberdi spent a minimum of 3+ years in barrel and bottle. The designation requirements that I read all say something like “… must spend a minimum of X years to be labeled as GR/R/C …”. I can only suppose that they have the leeway to use whatever designation, e.g. Reserva or Crianza, as long as their wine meets the minimum aging required for both.
It is still weird that they designate the same wine differently from 1 country to another, other than for reasons of marketing for larger sales and higher pricing (US) with the Reserva designation.
The entire Rioja alta lineup is among the best value in wine to me. Compared to the 904 you tried I’d say ardanza is the most similar–at a young age there’s often not a huge difference between ardanza and 904 to me (other than the $). Presumably 904 can age longer since it’s a GR, but I have some 2001 Ardanza left and it’s still drinking great. Arana is also really nice, it has more prominent new oak flavors than any of the others. Alberdi is like a baby ardanza–not quite as smooth, can have a little sharpness or booziness in some years, but still an incredible QPR for $20ish. There’s also an 890 GR, which I haven’t tried.
That’s what I originally thought as well, but I’ve noticed that the early 1990’s to 1980’s 904’s are becoming a bit iffy - I’ve had some very tertiary and even oxidative wines - whereas the 1970 Ardanza me and fellow forumites Ilkka and Mikko had a couple of years ago was just singing, showing no signs of decline whatsoever.
And about that 2001 Ardanza you mentioned - that’s still a mere baby! Of course it’s still drinking great, because it’s so young. 
We had 2001 and 2004 Ardanzas along with that 1970 and they were just starting their journey up, probably still decades from their peak.
And 890s seems to be quite indestructible. Quite similar to 904, but more serious and less oaky. The oldest I’ve had is 1985 and none of the bottles I’ve had have shown any signs of decline - on the contrary, many have felt relatively youthful.
I had no experience with this producer when I strolled up to the tasting room in Haro a couple weeks ago. They have a nice Coravin program for the 890 and 904’s GR’s, which multiple vintages of each going back to the late 90’s / early 2000’s.
Price was quite fair (around €20-30 per glass for most, less for newer ones, €40-ish for the most expensive). Couldn’t agree more with what’s said here. They are nice wines, and a fantastic QPR. Texture on those with 15-25 years on them was just so soft. Contrast to many of their neighbors making heavier, more extracted wines.
Almost in front of La Rioja Alta’s driveway entrance is Bodegas Lopez de Heredia’s tasting room in the Viña Tondonia complex. I’m sorry but, there’s no way that I would declare that LdH wines are heavier and more extracted. On the contrary, comparable La Rioja Alta which would be the 904s and the 890s at about 20ish year old are heavier, oakier than LdH wines that would have been recently released and at comparable age.
Don’t get me wrong, I do like La Rioja Alta GRs, but I need 30+ years on them to like drinking them with the oak and extraction materially subsiding.
Alberdi also ages beautifully, at least the 1995 I had a couple years ago
I think the bolded part is right (just as wines from other regions can be declassified down).
A friend served a stunning 1970 Marques de Risqual Crianza in August. Just spectacular! One of the most memorable old Riojas I’ve ever had, and he and a cohort of his have served many over the years. He said that it was actually a GR but in those days it didn’t matter much what the label said, so they just called it a crianza.
Did I say that LdH’s are heavier and more extracted? No, not at all. I love LdH’s wines, and completely agree that that they are less extracted.
Probably my favorite winery in the world. The 2001 904 is, so far, my favorite red wine of all time.
I find the Ardanza can be aggressively oaky in its early youth, though still delicious. A couple extra years in bottle helps it round out beautifully, and then they age for a loooong time after that.
The Alberdi I find to be lighter, very savory, and much more amenable to early drinking. We buy it in half bottles and drink it on weeknights, or any time we’ve had a disappointing wine from somewhere else.
I have found the consistency to be remarkable. Though there are certain vintages in which the wines have been unusually great (2001 and 2004 come to mind), even the lesser vintages represent superb value and excellent drinking.
Well, you mentioned neighbors and the immediate and closest ones quickly came to mind. Even Bodegas Muga, a couple of minutes walk on the same side of the street as LRA is not as extracted as a young LRA.
This - although Muga does make a very big and extracted Torre that is much heavier than any of the LRA wines. But otherwise I’d agree that both Muga and CVNE make their wines in a lighter, less extracted style than LRA. And there are no questions when it comes to LdH’s style.
While one really couldn’t describe LRA’s style extracted or heavy by any means, I’d still argue that among its closest neighbors, LRA makes probably the most impactful and extracted wines.
I love these wines and find Ardanza the best value. 904 is better, but not worth over twice the price. I have never had the 890.
Dan Kravitz
The wines are all good but the 890 is special. I serve a blind flight of the 2001 vintage of the 890, the 904 and the Torre Muga a few years ago. I did not write much of a note, but here it is:
Posted from CellarTracker
Based on this thread, I was moved to uncork a 2017 Finca San Martin ‘crianza’ [Rioja] and consumed it over three days, in a variety of stems. La Rioja Alta established a large vineyard in the Rioja Alavesa area, and bottles a variety of wines from there, which tend to have the brand names highlighted, even though they are still under the traditional DOC system for years in barrel/bottle. The crianza level is called Finca San Martin. 14.5% abv, medium bodied, vanilla/cream/lactic notes. It gets 60% new American barrels and 40% one year French, so in the bodega style: an offering for those who enjoy wood treatment along with red berry fruit. I also find it has a bead of sweet balsalmic vinegar running through it. 2017 is not a well regarded vintage from what I have read - this is the first / only bottle purchased - and given the plentiful 2015/2016 on the shelves as well as the last trickle of 2010 Gran Reserva’s, I don’t see a need to explore. For my tastes, even though the wine was likely best on day 1, it didn’t deteriorate much, and I preferred this young wine out of a Bordeaux stem. The natural cork seems on the short side, and even though intended for drinking young, I think it still needs a few more years to round out. Fruit is stronger than tannins and acid at age 4. It’s a $13-$17 supermarket wine in my area; it gets a B+ in my ledger.