Not really aged yet. Talk to me about things that are at least 30 years old for Cabernet.
2 Likes
Kids today, tisk, tisk
1 Like
I am officially an old fart. Someone at work called me a graybeard today.
1 Like
1981 La Crema Vinera Vin Gris of Pinot Noir. Inherited. Wondered why he had so many, so we popped one. I’ve shared them with several winemakers. Barrel aged, high acid, tons of SO2 did the trick.
1947 ETts M. Hautefaye & Cie Bordeaux blanc. A winemaker friend found this going through his collection and brought it to a dinner. Had no recollection where it came from. Solid and enjoyable.
1966 Chateau Touzet Coteaux d’Aix-en-Provence. I was at a friend’s and he heard my birthday was coming up and pulled this as a gift. Just an oddity that came with a lot he purchased. Weird bulbous bottle that has a second bulb in the neck. Found that it was a Grenache blend and ended up opening it at an August West bottling. It had a bold youthful ripeness upfront and a fully mature aspect down in the mix.
197x NoCommentVineyards Pinot Noir 2nd tier multi-region California blend. What-the-heck nerdy purchase because of the producer. Expected it to most likely be dead. Served blind. One friend was mad that I opened it on such a casual occasion when I could easily resell it for well over $300, certain in was a '60s era Chambolle Musigny. (In retrospect, he knew about some purchase I’d made, but that seemed out of left field since I don’t flip wines.) But, that’s about the 20th producer of a great CA Pinot I’ve had from an era “they didn’t yet know how to make Pinot”. Sure, there was garbage, more so with larger volume producers. But in the late '70s, who was motivated at the artisanal level seemed to have an idea what they were doing. Contrast that to the mid-2000s when the vast majority of hyped up critic darlings were soupy crap.
Well, adding in some chenin from the past couple years:
- 1989 Foreau Moelleux Reserve. No surprise it’s still great. Except the bottle I tried had been opened, partially consumed two months prior, then covered in saran wrap and stored outside on a balcony. And it was still ridiculously good when I had it two months later (and still pretty clearly Foreau).
- 1996 Huet 1er Trie (I forget which vineyard unfortunately). Same deal w/ the two months of saran wrap balcony storage. Also ridiculous, perhaps just a step behind the Foreau
- 1980 Huet LHL (the “Vin De Glace” vintage)
- 1996 Coulee de Serrant. Not surprised at all about Day 1, really surprised about Day 6.
- 1982 Olga Raffault Champ-Chenin. Tasted straight up young. Not “young for 40 years,” but young, period. Blind I might have thought it was 5-7 years old.
I appreciate your comment, but aged according to you or a set standard? I think that anything over twenty years old is considered aged.
But it shouldn’t be surprising '97 Napa Cabs are showing well. I’d expect them to be at peak and would have insults to throw if they’re past that. I mean, no frills mass produced Napa Cabs much older than that are still doing fine, so they’d have to had put some effort into making them less age worthy.
Wes captured it. It should not be surprising that ‘97 Napa Cabs are showing well. ‘97 Napa Chardonnay showing well would be a surprise!
2 Likes
I opened the first year of Dehlinger Sonoma PN, the 1978, when it was 40. The bottle was culled from the Davis cellar.
it was stupendous, not just alive, but vibrant with cherries and sandalwood dominating the nose and the cherry following thru on the palate wth a long finish.
Here is the kicker, it drank beautifully for three+ hours, an anniversary bottle.
1 Like
A little more context to my thoughts on “surprising”:
I opened a 1986 Montelena Estate Cabernet from my dad’s cellar a few weeks ago. I wasn’t surprised it showed well. What was surprising was how strikingly good it was, and that it did not fade one bit over four hours. It was a secondary market purchase, so unknown (but in hindsight clearly good) provenance.
I would consider that one a mild surprise.
I can’t speak for who posted this but there was a lot of talk in the past about how '97 was too hot and the wines were not aging well. It is true that the classically made examples are doing great. I opened a Forman a couple weeks ago that was doing great minus a tad too much brett. That was certainly a period of transition where wine making styles were shifting in some quarters.
I think some of the culty ones that pushed the envelope are probably not doing so well. The only one that would be culty that I can remember trying was pretty terrible. That’s the '97 Harlan.
1 Like
'97 Harlan has been bad for a long time. It was flawed from the beginning.
Because of clearing out my dad’s cellar I have had some of the riper stuff (e.g. Pahlmeyer), and it’s been really good.
1980 Selvapiana Chianti Rufina Riserva
1974 Brolio Chianti Classico
1974 Podere Castellinuzza Chianti Classico
1958 Lilliano Rosso Chianti Classico Riserva
1969 Villarosa Chianti Classico
On deck:
1959 Badia a Coltibuono Chiati Classico Riserva
1949 Villa Antinori Chianti Riserva
I’m a Burgundy guy, but as I love aged wines, the above were a revelation. These bottles were moved twice, from the producers to Pitti Gola in Firenze and then shipped to me. The 1958 Lilliano was Burgundian in aromatics and texture, and was simply a lovely drinking experience.
Contrast that to the ‘97 Mount Eden Chard we had in January. It was some peoples’ favorite wine on the table at a dinner the '82 Mouton Rothschild and '76 Yquem weren’t in everybody’s top 5. Amazing at peak wine.
Again, you can look back to classic Napa Chards from the '70s and early '80s and some are still doing very well. It’s sort of like wine’s success for thousands of years is because grapes naturally have what it takes to make good wine. That when you go too far manipulating that to pander to critics and the bigger-is-better crowd, you throw away essential quality. I’ll take the sportscar over the Humvee any day.
1 Like
Ah Mount Eden. Surprising only to those who don’t know that they were the exception during the era of excess. Thankfully more wineries are making seriously ageable Chardonnay these days.
Were these really good, or just surprising because they weren’t dead. Barbera has enough acidity that they can remain alive for decades. But I’ve rarely had one that really became really complex.
Well, almost every winery in the Santa Cruz Mountains was an exception. With Pinot, looking elsewhere was “why bother” for a long time. The most rustic micro producers were making good ones while maybe one in twenty tastes of unknown quantities from elsewhere, that someone or other was championing, were superficial, oaky, over-ripe, lacking in any degree of alluring terroir expression. At the tasting of 20+ top '05s I went to - that was top names favored by critics and on wine forums, with a bunch of the winemakers in attendance - I rated all but on in the 78-87 point range. Those would translate to a current release price of around $80. Pathetic. I had many of those (and plenty of others) in our 10 year retrospective series. None “came around”. Some more humble wineries did well. My second favorite '05 on release (after the Mount Eden) was the McHenry. I opened one after one of the retrospective tastings and it outclassed every wine in the series (100+) by a good margin.
1 Like
The Prunotto in particular was excellent. Integrated, tertiary, layered, and still 100% alive.
The Brovia was very good too. It may have been a step behind what I remember the Prunotto to be, but it was also in a lineup with a Giacosa red label and a bunch of other Barolo from the 60s/70s/80s, so I may also be judging it a bit harshly. The Giacosa was transcendent and everything else paled in comparison at least a little.
I feel you on this. Maybe 15 years back, we had a wine dinner in NYC at the Tribeca Grill. Some folks from here prior to it being here, GV, WL folks, we all got together to break bread and drink interesting wine. I brought a 1906 Haut Brion. It was a legit bottle I got from a family friend, just not well kept. We opened it and it was shot, we kinda figured, but it was about the fact that there was still some fruit present. Julius, who is on here time to time, found that fascinating and that stuck with me. Sometimes its not about perfection (which is nice), its a time and place and there was still an air of what was from 1906 and that made it an experience.
1 Like
I drank an 1907 (or maybe it was an 06) HB with a friend on Xmas day in 2015. It was only a half bottle and it was as dead on opening. We left the bottle though to slow ox for the rest of the day and after 6 hours or so it came back to life. Still only a 2* wine, but drinkable. A 73 Lafleur, drunk the same day, was brilliant. 73 was not bad though for Pomerol, so it doesn’t fit into the ‘surprise’ category.
In the last few weeks
The Chandon is the first vintage of the Brut made in the Yarra valley. Cork fell to bits, but after using a Durand the wine was sound and lighter than it looks. My guess is that this is from 87 (from the Cuvee Nr) and it’s like a complex aged Chardonnay, which lots of the elements of aged Champagne, expect of course that all the bubbles have gone. That happens to older ‘sparklers’ and if you accept that, you have a lovely drinking experience for $5.
Brown Brothers have the most popular Cellar door in Australia and there wines are meant in general to be drunk young. The perfect looking 91 showed all the traits of a aged wine, with lots of cigar box, silky red fruit and a balance that surprised. Drank like an aged claret and really surprised me. I have an 82 which I will try soon.