Care to paraphrase some of the findings she came up with?
3 Likes
She reached out to the Krankl’s and explained the supplemental thesis of her reportage beyond tasting the current release lineup. She expressed a desire to taste back vintages of SQN from 2000-2008 attempting to deepen her general understanding of what allows wine to age and improve and her more specific curiosity of ascertaining SQN’s ability to accomplish that feat given the idiosyncratic and ever evolving winemaking practices.
She tastes the:
- 2000 In Flagrante,
- 2002 Just For The Love of It,
- 2003 Lil’ E, 2003 Inaugural,
- 2004 Poker Face,
- 2005 17th Nail In My Cranium,
- 2005 The Naked Truth,
- 2006 In The Crosshairs,
- 2007 Labels,
- 2007 Pictures,
- 2008 The Dual
…along with the most recent releases and presents a bit of back story along with her opinion.
Thanks for the mention! If anyone is interested in reading, the article is free to view, but the tasting notes are behind the paywall: https://thewineindependent.com/articles/sine-qua-non-2000-2022-the-third-twin-next-of-kyn/
10 Likes
With regards to your last sentence, I think that’s finally starting to change. For example, Littorai’s (I put them in the same category as Ceritas) membership program now has a waiting list. You can’t just sign up for a membership option whenever you want now like you could even a few years ago.
1 Like
I regret that I have but one “bravo” to give.
Already covered here:
1 Like
Very interesting perspective, Lisa–thanks for sharing the article for free. Having been buying and drinking these wines for a long time, I generally agree with your perspective on the wines agreeability. I would further argue that the newer wines are even more ageable than the older wines, which I think pushes them into the 40-50-year old range.
One thing about ageability that, much like wine, has very different perspectives from different people, is what exactly it means. I think virtually everybody would agree that a wine of any age that has lost its structure (i.e., the tannins are fully resolved) is over the hill. I think if the wine isn’t recognizable as what was originally vinified is also a negative element. For example, a friend I made some Syrah in the '07 vintage, and trying it blind at age 15 or so, most people thought it was a Pinot Noir. It would have been a pretty decent 15-year old Pinot, but that’s not what was vinified.
I think the disagreements about what is ageable falls into a similar category as other polarizing elements. For example, high alcohol vs. low alcohol–I seem to recall a lot of talk a few years back where there were strong opinions that any wines over 14.5% (or something like that) were, by definition, terrible (or at least would never be able to be considered “great”).
I care less about significant changes to the flavor profile over time than, it seems, many folks do. And if I am thinking about my limited experience with Bordeaux, I can see how the more significant evolution of the flavor profile of a 20-year old BDX might be an appealing part of the experience to somebody. That’s less-so for me. My palate evaluates most Bordeaux as being too tannic (relative to the fruit) when young, and then flavors like pencil lead and leather and dried tea leaves become more noticeable (so that the wine is, somewhat objectively, more complex) after the tannins soften. But I always feel like I missed something, and by then the wine is at a point where I’ve lost interest from a pleasure perspective even if I understand the intellectual element of it.
Wines like SQN, and the rest of the Krankl portfolio, have always tasted delicious (to my palate) off the UPS truck. But with each new vintage, it seems like they have gotten more “structured” to the point where they hide some of the nuance that existed in younger, earlier vintages. But I also know that the nuance will be coming in 7, 10, or 15 years. So I love them today, but I know that they’re going to be even more interesting down the road. And if they never end up tannin-less and tasting of weak tea and 200-year old manuscripts, I am never going to miss it.
4 Likes
Thanks for your thoughts on this - very interesting to read.
I think the term ‘ageability’ is certainly ‘subjective’ and it has so much to do with ‘expectations’. If you cut your teeth on Bordeaux of Napa Cabs or Barolo from the 1990s and before, you would expect a wine to go through stages where it develops secondary and then tertiary compounds. Will it ‘resemble’ a younger version of itself? Somewhat - but not entirely.
When we look at many ‘modern’ wines, they do not go through this same trajectory - or at least don’t appear to. Should a wine taste very very similar at bottling as it does at age 20? I would vote no - that I expect to see ‘development’ of some kind.
And as far as the syrah that you made, there are so many variables where it might fool folks. How ripe was it? What oak did you use on it? And what type of pinot was it compared to? Oregon? Burgundy? Russian River?
Love the converation and the differing opinions - and love that no one person is ‘right’ here - we just need to accept that we have different opinions, and perhaps in this case, ‘definitions’ to some extend.
Cheers
2 Likes
Larry–I agree that the terms are subjective, that was intended to be my main point!
You introduced another (subjective) term. It’s made me think about what is meant by “development”? Again, without repeating my whole post, like with ageability, I think development means one thing for BDX or Barolo from the '90s, and another thing for Central Coast wines from the 2000s. I do think SQN wines develop but they do so in a very different manner that I find quite appealing vis a vis other, more traditional experiences. In fact, I have to work harder to notice the subtleties of SQN development that’s 20-years old, but if I don’t want to put on my intellectual palate I can still flat out enjoy those wines more because there is still the hedonistic level that, quite frankly, I hope never goes away. So for me it’s a win-win.
1 Like
Great point - and one the separates folks for sure. For many, have a 20 year old wine taste just as it did 20 years ago is a positive - for others, a negative. And I believe @matthewluczy’s point was that if that is the case, and there is no development, then they do not follow a ‘normal’ aging curve. Obviously @LisaPB feels differently.
And speaking of this, @LisaPB , did you have any indication that SQN is growing their fruit any differently on their own vineyards vs the ones they used to source from?
Cheers
1 Like
Hi Larry - It’s a great question about the implications of the vineyard changes at SQN. The fact that the four vineyards owned by the Krankls (Eleven Confessions, Molly Aida, The Third Twin, and Cumulus) are different from the original fruit sources (Alban, Bien Nacido, Stolpman, White Hawk, etc.) means that the variables are different. Eleven Confessions, their largest vineyard, is quite a cool site on heavy clay, giving very structured wines. That’s why the single vineyard wines from this site are aged longer in barrels. A portion of the plantings at The Third Twin are own-rooted, which Manfred prefers. Apart from climate and soil types, row orientation, rootstocks, plant density, clones, vine age, etc., etc., are all different. In short, there have been a lot of changes to the “raw material” for the SQN wines since the beginning. What hasn’t changed is that the wines are highly structured yet approachable when young. The early SQN wines most certainly show considerable development with bottle age, and I expect the more recent wines to develop a little more slowly. Still, they are built for the long haul and will eventually provide a lot of tertiary pleasure in the classic sense.
8 Likes
For @larry_schaffer, @LisaPB, and @matthewluczy I’d continue to ask: what should “development” mean?
Because I do know this: a 20-year old SQN does not taste like a brand new vintage. And they do develop.
And I do think those posters who knocked the development of SQN wines would agree that their older wines have changed, albeit maybe not in the way that “a ‘normal’ aging curve” would suggest.
(Also, related, the wines across the Krankls’ portfolio don’t even taste the same. Sure, there’s a family resemblance. However, I have a friend who dropped off the NoK list becuase he said, “They’re nothing like SQN, and I don’t love them.” To the people who make claims like “these wines all taste the same,” I’d be curious how a guy who doesn’t live and breath wine like so many on this board (i.e., my friend) is able to make a statement such as that one. It seems that if they really did taste the same then he’d not notice a difference. (To be clear, this is not a question/comment about preference, or whether a person likes wines of high quality, BTW, but one about the ability to differentiate).)
So if we don’t expect, say, Central Coast Syrah to taste like Northern Rhône Syrah (I don’t know anybody who has this expectation), why do we expect it to age or develop the same, and why is there an implicit (or explicit) knock against it when it does not? There are significantly different factors going into the creation of the wine, so why is the aging or development expected to be the same as wines with very different inputs? Just look at the variation in the Krankls’ vineyards, which are all Central Coast–none of those wines taste the same, even when similar-ish blends are made from each. Now move farther north, or more coastal, or to a higher elevation, or somewhere with totally different weather overall, and of course there will be differences in how the wines taste, so why not in how they age?
So rather than knocking the development, I would rather see critics first ask the question, “Should the development be different?” And then, even more importantly, as a follow-up I’d like to know, “What is the expected development path for a given wine, and why is it so?” After the types of development are defined/described and ascribed to various wines, we consumers can continue to better choose wines that align with what we want, not only today but down the road.
Mark
3 Likes
Mark,
Great comments - and certainly something to think about re: aging of wines from different regions and if and how they should differ.
Cheers
2 Likes