Been drinking some good wines this week.
This one stands as tall as any.
2001 Arcadian Pinot Noir Sleepy Hollow Vineyard- USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Lucia Highlands (12/29/2014)
Brilliant Cali Pinot that says Burgundy as much as it does Cali. Dark, spicy, perfumed nose that is elegant and beguiling. The red fruit is supple and seemingly primary, yet it’s weightless and delicate and dances with agility on the palate. So balanced, and so freaking good. seemingly poised to go for a few more good years…amazing. Thanks, Joe.
Thanks, Doug.
Your recent note inspired me to check in on this one.
I agree with the upward arc, which is amazing.
I open one every few years and I keep finding them just starting to strut.
Cheers and Happy New Year.
Oh dear…deep trouble here. I had several Arcadian Pinot Noirs “up,” awaiting my interest. I decided - randomly - to go with the 2005 Sleepy Hollow PN. Are you kidding me? This is gorgeous. Outstanding is the mouthfeel - something I never “got” or understood in my early years of winetasting and appreciation.
Upon pulling the cork, I was afraid there might be some VA. Something strong emanating from the nose. It was gone by the time the Rangers beat the Penguins, and from there on, nothing but pure pleasure.
Woodsy strawberry, which later showed as some form of cherry. There is a core of something very important, or perhaps decisive, here. Not full-bodied, no heavy hand here.
I must put the cork in and leave the other half for tomorrow. Reluctantly.
Later, now, some acidity showing. That is not a bad thing. Probably due to my own palate, which right now is all I have!
I decided to give this wine a try and bought a few bottles from K&L . Looking for some background I found two interesting notes on this wine on CT from Keith Levenverg I found interesting.
1/4/2007 - KEITH LEVENBERG WROTE: 84 Points
I picked up a few bottles of this after stumbling on a section of Arcadian’s web page that totally buried a very interesting lede, which is that the vines for this wine are planted on their own roots. The few Arcadians I’ve had so far didn’t prepare me for this bottle. I’ve definitely never smelled a wine quite like this one: picture effusive scents of a verdant forest with pine needles all around, combined with an intense woodiness like an antique desk turned to sawdust. This is definitely a woody wine to taste as well, with a sense of spicy oak and surely some stem influence as well. The palate is almost syrupy and intensely fruited with cherry and zingy wild berry flavors. 5 years old but tastes like it was born yesterday. It is mind-boggling to me how anyone can taste a wine like this and characterize Arcadian as a maker of “lighter style” wines. And in fact ultimately it really is just too big a wine for me, at least at this age. It just wouldn’t cooperate with dinner, which accentuated just how sweet the fruit was, and after a few hours the taste reminded me of Syrah. I left a third in the open bottle, and the next day the fruit is definitely mellower than the fierce concentration of before, and the graceful tannins are finally getting the opportunity to show off. On the other hand, most of the interesting aromatics are gone, with a light fruit-candy scent in their place. Clearly this is a wine that needs more time in the bottle.
And then…
. 8/1/2012 - KEITH LEVENBERG WROTE: 97 Points
Well well well, look what’s happened to the '01 Sleepy Hollow! This might be the first Arcadian I’ve had that’s really entered its primetime drinking zone - not only resolved in texture but overflowing with tertiary character, with the earthy aromas practically billowing out of the glass combining deep, sappy savory stuff with a more verdant pine-needly thing. You don’t have to swirl and sniff this thing. It comes to you. It’s a powerful wine but most of its power now feels like sheer torque and not just dense fruit. Dujac-like.
I thought it was great. So many vintages, so many vineyards. And I am totally undisciplined on keeping track of what I have or what I open. This 2005 Sleepy Hollow, for me (in the mood I was in) and for the bottle I opened, was on the mark. I did not have anyone else with me to confirm, so it is (or was) what it is.
I must say I don’t recall ever having the same wine by any winery that would go from 84 points to 97 points 5 years later ( I am referring to the Levenberg notes referenced above). I am going to call bottle variation on that one.
Tasting notes are what they are - a snapshot of a wine at one moment in time. I’ve had the '01 Sleepy Hollow at least a dozen times by now, including several times in between those two notes. I watched it get better and better over the years, but even that trend line doesn’t prepare you for how great it is now. It is a phenomenal, benchmark wine. I haven’t had any other Arcadians hit this level yet, but it gives me confidence that they can get there.
Nice, Mr. Levenberg - thank you for filling in some blanks. Of course I only saw the 2 notes posted here, and not your notes in between, nor your commentary. So, truly, thank you for that.
My added note here is for the 2005, and based on some notes saying the 2005s aren’t drinking well, I was careful to add that this one hit it for me. That bottle, that night. I had a few other Arcadian choices “up,” but decided the other night to go for this one.
I don’t have any Arcadian Syrah, and am not generally a fan of any Syrah, so we are all safe from my notes on those.
To get back on track, you rarely see 97± on Burgundy, forget PN. The burgundy crowd is usually very stingy on the pts. I relate to K.L notes and I am quite looking forward to trying this wine. Especially at trying a CA PN with a more mature profile.
