I drank these two bottles within the last week and it provided an instructive lesson in styles. There’s no question that the Arcadian has its roots in California fruit, but it presents it in such a lively way that one doesn’t grow tired of exploring what it has to offer. The Kutch, on the other hand, was kind of ponderous in comparison. It’s certainly nowhere near the worst offender among CA Pinot producers, but it left me yearning for the balance the Arcadian showed. To be fair, this was only Jamie’s second vintage and I haven’t opened any of the '07s yet, which I understand are considerably lighter in weight.
2002 Arcadian Pinot Noir Sleepy Hollow Vineyard- USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Lucia Highlands (7/1/2009)
Garnet. Giving nose of cranberries, herbs, and cherries. This is juicy and seems very forward, but it still makes a light and fresh palate impression and stretches itself out to seem like a complete wine. The fruit buffers some fine-grained tannins, and the finish is lengthy. This wine struck me as being very young still, not dissimilar to the way 7 year old Burgundy seems young. I will wait a number of years before opening another bottle.
2006 Kutch Pinot Noir Russian River Valley- USA, California, Sonoma County, Russian River Valley (7/5/2009)
Quite spicy on the nose, hard for me to know if it’s from oak, stems, or just RRV character, but it dominates pretty well, leaving the dark cherry fruit just a little room to show. With some air a brown sugar note emerges. On the palate this is plush and polished, fleshy and forward, but there’s a sense that it’s missing something in the middle. Very light tannins frame the finish, where there’s some heat apparent.
I’ve had several Arcadian Pinots, but never one with age on it, so I’m interested to read your notes, and the comment that it needs even more time. I will seek out some older bottles, perhaps by an OC member before the next Offline, convincing him/her to bring one, and check it out.
Good notes and nice to see someone on my side on the Arcadian aging curve. Arcadian’s library wines, including this one, still show young. Keeps boggling my mind how some people figure waiting 3-4 years on them is considered “age.” For perspective I opened a 1999 Sleepy Hollow a few months ago that was not substantially more developed than the '01s and '02s are now.
Yes library wines are a bit more costly than current releases but not so much so. The 2001 Sleepy Hollow is $65 and the 2001 Garys’ is $75 considering many current releases are the same price or a bit less. The 2000 Pisoni is $100 but look at the current releases prices for Pisoni wines and this has been sitting in our cellar for 9 years.