Syncline makes my favorite- Single Vineyard from Coyote Canyon vineyard in Horse Heaven Hills. They just rolled out a second one from a vineyard on Red Mountain called Heart of the Mountain. I just got my bottles and haven’t tasted it yet, but they have never let me down.
Bunnell uses Northridge vineyard from Wahluke Slope. A very peppery version, a bit fuller and more on the black fruit side, but high quality stuff.
McCrea has been making Rhone wine here long before it became the thing to do. Theirs is quite nice, and distinctive with a sweet bing cherry characteristic.
The new one is called Vox Populi from Rasa. The biggest and boldest of the bunch. Very interesting one for the fatty meat. A little more expensive than the rest. Scott Hollowell could chime in as he has raved about it.
Rotie is releasing one for wine club only this year. If you are expanding in Wa wine, I really recommend signing up for the Full Pull list. Disclaimer- he’s my friend. He does a great job of bringing less known producers in and can give access to stuff you might not see outside the PNW.
Rick,
Definitely agree with this. Trust me, I wouldn’t even think of spending $40 for a WA white rhone (especially when I can get world class whites like the Huet Secs, Donnhoff NK, and some chablis for around $25) but I feel this wine is worth it for two reasons: #1 – It’s damn good #2 – They only make around 50 cases so it’s hard to find
These are only my opinions and especially to the first question, mine does go against the grain.
No- there is nothing to be gained by dialing things up. Quilceda and Cayuse dial things up and are the respective kings of their hills. The old kings (Woodward Canyon, Leonetti) have increasingly dialed up the ripeness and oak and have become largely generic. Michel Rolland showed up and made a Long Shadows Merlot called Pedestal which is expensive and generic.
There has been a very consistent following for many of the wines we addressed in this thread, both old and new producers who make wines which are certainly new world, but stop short of going over the top. They might not get the flashy big scores, but are excellent wines.
Washington and Oregon could not be more different when it comes to a signature variety. Down there, we get to sample different takes on PN and to a lesser degree Chardonnay and Pinot Gris. Washington seems to be more producer driven. Seven Hills makes a variety of red wines in a distinctive style, Cayuse is best known for their Syrah although they make other wines, Cadence does Bdx style blends etc.
Distinction is the challenge right now. Gramercy has put themselves out there in pursuing a more old world approach with their wines. The beautiful thing is, people accepted it. They sell out of their wine, it gets good critical acclaim and most importantly to me, allows a choice for drinkers to decide a different direction if Quilceda or Cayuse aren’t your bag. The other producers have been around, but I would imagine they are hard to find outside of the PNW. This diversity, I believe is what will allow non- Washington wine drinkers to really sink their teeth into the region.
But, ANthony, it does two things that make WA wines harder to sell. First, the singular emphasis on one grape variety makes Oregon easier to understand.* Second, Cab and Syrah are strong points for California so WA wines have to directly compete against them and especially for Cab blends that’s a tough nut to crack since the phrase “Napa Cab” is so ingrained in the awareness of the general wine drinking population.
I fully agree with you that the wines need to distinguish themselves, but people DO need to also try them. I’m intrigued as to why more people don’t buy and drink WA wines when compared to Cali. I can’t imagine it’s price since many of the Cali wines we see discussed are as much or more. Hmm…
AS for people bemoaning the move to bigger… Look at the scores and reception that Grand Reve has gotten. Now consider that those wines are usually picked riper and get more oak than most. Then think of this - the GR wines seem to get higher scores and more raves than the winemakers’ own wines (remember GR wines are made by a stable of known, good winemakers who all make wine under their own labels). There’s certainly a segment of the market that rewards bigger wine both with score and with buzz.** Hence my comment that we need to talk more about more WA wines and not leave it up to the annual reviews in TWA/IWC/WS to generate awareness.
* Of course this also limits Oregon to those who like Pinot.
** I’ve met Ryan once and he’s a very nice, professional guy who’s a great vineyard talent. Don’t take those comments as a knock on GR but as an observation about the reception wines get.
Not sure why you keep writing that Cayuse are big wines and lumping them in with Quilceda. If your definition of big is high alcohol and lots of new oak then the wines of Cayuse don’t apply. If your definition of big is wine with complexity and several layers of savory vs. fruit, then I’ll agree. I have also never had a Cayuse wine that was flabby. They might not have the acid of sangiovese but they are far from flabby.
I’ve drank through the entire 08 Cayuse lineup recently (some wines twice) and am confident in saying that there is not another producer in the world that makes 11 wines any better across the board than Christophe. The 2008 Cayuse wines ROCK!
I love your love for them. Not oaky, but as ripe and full bodied as any Syrah I’ve ever tasted. The one I tasted last week picked up massive weight with air. That’s all. Bigger doesn’t always mean worse.
Rick,
I tell anyone who will listen to sign up for the Full Pull list. It affords people especially those not from here to try Washington wine across a wide spectrum. Even if people don’t buy, Paul Z’s write ups describe AVA’s, vineyards etc in great detail so non-PNW folks can get a good sense for what they are going to be tasting without California comparisons. He does quote scores, but it is only part of the description and not often the main part. You’re right, bigger brasher wines are often rewarded with big scores and the requisite hype, but I think the tide is turning a bit here, where similar to California, a Rhys can get a great review next to Marcassin. We are now seeing a Gramercy get a great review next to K Vintners. This tells me that the industry is expanding and maturing. The results aren’t complete yet, but I’m optimistic.
So, diggin the Reynvaan white lately?..really meh the few sips I’ve had, but I’m diggin Rhones whites more and more these days. Maybe I’ll get a chance to revisit.
FP looks interesting, but since I live in Seattle and know a bunch of wine biz folks I’ll pass - I can get those wines via McCarthy & Schiering. However, just in case others are interested at all it’s here: http://www.fullpullwines.com/
Anthony,
I would only challenge you on the notion of the old school (leonetti, Woodward Canyon) oaking more than they have in the past and Quilceda and Cayuse being ‘bigger’.
First after having almost every vintage of Woodward Canyon, I will tell you that the oak treatment has always been full-bore.
Leonetti has been the leader in heavily-oaked, rich, chocolate style wines that have ever come out of Washington. Again having had every vintage going back to 78’ they have always been the leader.
L’ecole=OAK.
Now, although I am not a huge fan, Quilceda has always tried to be as close to a classed growth as possible. I remember the 97’ on release, tight, tannic, 99’, 00’, 01’, ect were all tight and tannic with a great framework.
Cayuse, if compared to being big in the world of wine it would be nowhere near as ripe or rich as say, Saxum.
As to the list, and being a native of Oregon I agree that the ‘top 100’ wines that are listed from Washington, should be from Washington. I understand the argument that WW is in Oregon and Washington, but the list is the top 100 WINES from Washington, not the top 100 WINERIES IN Washington. There is a difference.
Funny, I was going to say JJ Prum. I’d add Jadot, Domaine Leflaive, Robert Weil, Domaine Leroy, d’Auvenay, and others too…big world to say a producer making wine since 1998 is the best in the world.
While WC and Leonetti have always used oak barrels, it tastes an awful lot to me that they have taken a turn in the last 15-20 years or so towards more toasty, rounder fruit, more viscocity etc making sure they are not left behind. A 1995 Leonetti Merlot and a 2006 Leonetti Merlot don’t taste like the same producer made it to my palate.
My point on Quilceda is that they make their wines in a big modern style which gains them annually big scores and critical acclaim. Many producers chase that style, and I think you agree that we end up with our fair share of big, generic red wine.
I taste Cayuse and I taste an awfully ripe wine. I think it is a big Syrah and in the context of this discussion one of the biggest, heaviest Syrahs in Washington. I hasn’t considered how it stacks up with heavy hitters from Cali, but outside of some of the K Vintners wines like Royal City, Bones et al, I’d certainly consider it as one of the “biggest” Syrahs in the state and a style others try to duplicate.
…and the wines have evolved into a more modern, international, big, parkerized whatever descriptor one might use. Especially evident in the Merlot. The passing of the torch may be what predicated this, but the fear of not keeping up likely played into it as well.
Leonetti’s always been a big oaky wine. It’s never been anything close to classically styled.
My main criticism of the rankings is that by score a lot of the wines are tied, that is there are a lot of 93s, 94s etc. Ranking them implicitly says that the higher ranked 93s are better than the lower ranked 93s which is silly of course - there’s no way anyone can differentiate at a sub-one point level. I suspect this was Seattle Met’s desire to have a Top 100 article though, so… .shrug.
If anything I would say that the son has dialed BACK on Leonetti a bit, but I have only tasted a few Leonetti’s lately. However the same cannot be said with Quilceda where Paul clearly dialed up the ripeness (and the scores) starting in 1998. I am still waiting to see if those work out over time, although I have had excellent bottles of 1999 in particular.
This is my opinion as well with respect to Quilceda, and especially Leonetti. I’ve found recent Leonetti bottles featuring less toasty oak - an intentional trend as I understand it. However, I’m in Anthony’s camp on the ripeness of Cayuse. I’ve always enjoyed Christophe’s wines (and as a WA homer to some degree, I’m pleased with Cayuse’s critical acclaim), but never to the extent of considering them worthy of the near perfect scores.