Lots of talk of the QPR of '13 ABC Chard recently, so I picked one up at the local Spec’s, which had plenty on the shelf. And it’s not for me. It’s balanced and well made. But it has a little bit of a popcorn character and lacks the lift and minerality that generally defines good Chardonnay for me. I will not be buying again. For the same price, I’d much rather have a good muscadet or low-level dry riesling or gruner from Germany or Austria. The only California Chard’s the I’ve come to really like are the ones from Rhys and a couple from Ramey. I like Ceritas but have stopped buying. Just shows how we all look for different things in wine.
That is true Daniel certainly, and clearly many love the LF wines. I hope they continue to do well. But it is fair to have a counterpoint here since what is normally posted here is pure lovefest. I’m just saying that if you have an old world palate are looking for that great white hope of CA Chard, this wine, for my taste, is not it. Some have suggested otherwise. Those people are probably more omnivorous between old world and new. Sometimes those of us with feet firmly in one camp merely wish to see if there is something to be had in the other. For instance, I like Oregon PN very much, and should likely be looking there for older-world-styled whites.
I’ve not had anything from Cali or anywhere else that compares to the best white Burgs I’ve had. They’ll always be different. Not that I think it’s not worth trying, at least going in that direction.
I’ve only had 2 bottles from this producer. One was so reductive that I would be close to calling the bottle faulty. The other was also quite reductive, but much less so. It was nice, but certainly not mineral at all, unless one counts the reductive character, which can come across that way. I would bet that’s what is tricking many tasters into thinking “mineral”.
Your point is a fair one. Though is it possible you had somewhat of the reverse effect, expecting something you were going to love and expecting it to fit a certain flavor profile, then being disappointed when it was not quite that?
I’m not questioning your opinion of the wine, just engaging on the general point of how expectations can sometimes make us find a way to like a wine more than we would have, but can also sometimes cause us to like it less than we would have.
One interesting case study is Robert Parker trying Kosta Browne for the first time. You can see in his comments how he ended up not liking them because he expected them to be extreme in one way and they turned out not to be extreme enough.
“I purchased four Kosta Browne Pinot Noirs from one of the Mark Squires’ Bulletin Board members (who graciously offered them) since I am unable to find them in the state of Maryland and I have been wanting to taste them since they have been getting such rave reviews. To say I was disappointed is an understatement. They are not bad wines, but I had read that they were “massive,” “syrupy,” and “opulent,” and none of these wines were. In fact, three of them seemed to have unnaturally high levels of acidity . . .”
after hearing many good things about liquid farm i was quite curious to taste some but it seems not worth it after i keep seeing notes like this. on a related note i tried the 13 abc on a whim and frankly was disgusted. aromas where very synthetic like banana runts and the palate was very disjointed and harsh. i hope it was a bad bottle but for $15 i thought it was poor value.
Well, at some point I think trying to dissect pre-conceived notions is kind of pointless, particularly if you trust you palate. For instance, I wanted this to be good, and the hype pointed to Chablis, but I still approached with a fair degree of skepticism that such a thing was possible, if with a bit of hope that it was. However, having had this wine twice and two other LF wines once I believe my grasp of the wines are sound. Doesn’t mean that they won’t improve and/or won’t impress others more, but I trust my opinions at this point.
Well, at some point I think trying to dissect pre-conceived notions is kind of pointless, particularly if you trust your palate. For instance, I wanted this to be good and in a certain style - certainly the word Chablis had been bandied-about - but I still approached with a fair degree of skepticism that such a thing was possible, if also with a bit of hope that it was.
Having had this wine twice and two other LF wines once I believe my grasp of the wines are sound. Doesn’t mean that they won’t improve and/or won’t impress others more, but I trust my opinions at this point.
Even the flabbiest Donnhoff Riesling likely has demonstrably more g/l of acid as any California Chardonnay. (And for the record I find the '99s from Donnhoff too soft…)
Michael, I fear you took my comment as an attack on your conclusion, and it wasn’t meant that way. But since you were talking about how outside factors can affect the perception of a wine, I was just musing about what you might have thought of the wine if someone had just poured you a glass and said “here’s a glass of a California chardonnay.” Perhaps you would have been pleasantly surprised rather than disappointed? Who knows.
I really fell for LF with the 2011 White Hill, which, in my opinion, did have a lot of things in common with Chablis. But 2011 was the coolest year ever in California, and the 2012 and 2013 were not nearly as chiseled. Still good wines in their own ways, but the 2012 and 2013 don’t make me think of Chablis.
For what it’s worth, I actively disliked their rosé as well, so dropping is no burden.
I really fell hard for the 2011 White Hill. I caught it blind in a larger flight back in 2013 and it grabbed me big time. I do hope the LF wines are not getting hit with more oak and allowed to be made more ripe in style, as for me, what made LF so good was the Chablis-like comparisons. I called the 2011 WH Chablis-like and having tasted it blind, it rung true for the other side of the ocean for me and I stand by that complement I paid that wine.
I miss Nikki the Nerd posting here and maybe she’ll come back and grab this thread–not sure anymore how much winemakers want to tread into here but we have beat that topic up separately in other threads.
LF are great people, they have supported my annual charity gig the last few years, attending in person. I just hope whatever is being said above is a blip on their style curve, as I’d be disappointed if their wines got fuller in style.
This. Well said, Frank.
The 2010 and 2011 White Hills I thought had an amazing salinity to them while still be clearly Californian which I appreciate 12 & 13 are different but in my opinion are still delicious. I appreciate that they make leaner and fuller styles as I enjoy both. The Golden slope is our preferred, I like the extra body the wood gives and the spicy almond butter note I get( lees contact, Malo?) keeps me coming back.