2017 Pax Syrah Sonoma Hillsides- USA, California, Sonoma County, Russian River Valley (10/2/2019)
Day 1: 12.9% alcohol. One of the more interesting wines I have tasted this year. Black and green olives, tar, roasted meats, ink, stone, white pepper and violets. On the palate picks up some blueberries and boysenberries. This possesses a long, concentrated finish. Top five wine for sure this year! Reminds me of the better wines from the Rocks district. Outstanding. 95 points
Day 2: Not as intense but still many similar qualities. Black and green olives are pronounced along with stone, violets, roasted meats, white pepper and tar. Medium to long finish. Good acidity. Just a well made enjoyable wine. Not an in your face effort like so many Syrahs out there. 93 points
Day 3: Olives, tar, gravel, spice, floral, roasted meats and white pepper. Very interesting wine and holding strong on day 3. Similar to day 2 in quality. 93 points
Recommendation: For $40 this is a no brainer wine. Drinks better than wines 2 to 3 times the price. This will drink well from now to 2025. (95 pts.)
I suspect it will outlive your aging estimate by quite a bit. This seems built to last, and successfully so. I actually think somewhere around 2025 is when I might want to start drinking it. I agree that itās an impressive wine.
Doug one of the more unique wines I have tasted. My theory has always been if it is good now drink within five years. I donāt know that I could have the patience past 2025. Great value!
I canāt tell if this wine just has a ton of bottle variation or is just really polarizing. Ive tried it from 3 bottles: one I didnāt get to taste until it had been open for almost 4 days and it was just killer. olive and meat and bright fruit. one was all rip-roaring acid in the wrong way, even a couple days in, and one had some VA and still a mildly out of balance acid backbone that felt like it would eventually integrate with time.
The CT notes seem to be similar. Iām burying the two in my stash for several years before I touch them again. Iām an acid freak but these just seemed all out of sorts at the moment.
Iāve only tasted it once. It seemed like a really nice wine that needed a few years to come together. I might try that out to see what happens. VA on one that you tried concerns me a bit.
Had a discussion about ageability of the pax Sonoma hillsides (the ā16 in particular) a few days ago with a fellow berserker. I also feel like if theyāre drinking excellent now that I should enjoy now and save few/none as an experiment later (can always find at auction if Iām wrong).
Not enough experience with carbonic wines to know how they develop over time - anyone find an analogous RhƓne or other wine that we can benchmark these wines against?
I canāt tell if this wine just has a ton of bottle variation or is just really polarizing. Ive tried it from 3 bottles: one I didnāt get to taste until it had been open for almost 4 days and it was just killer. olive and meat and bright fruit. one was all rip-roaring acid in the wrong way, even a couple days in, and one had some VA and still a mildly out of balance acid backbone that felt like it would eventually integrate with time.
The CT notes seem to be similar. Iām burying the two in my stash for several years before I touch them again. Iām an acid freak but these just seemed all out of sorts at the moment.
The bottle I had olives screamed right out of the gate. It is amazing how bottles differ.
Iāve had 5 or so of these over the last year and the style appeals to me. Fans of acid and briny flavors will enjoy. I love the explosive aromatics, but everything seems to be settling down. Also, VA here and there is no stranger to Paxās wines
Im glad to hear that youāre feeling it settle down. thats what I was hoping it would do, and while I still have two in my cellar. some of the older wind gap syrups have been some of my favorite wines Ive had in the last year or so, which gives me a lot of confidence in the evolution
Matt, maybe ālosing steamā would be a better metaphor. I donāt mean to say that the wine is integrating or coming into balance, rather that it has lost some of that nouveau freshness and pop that make it stand out stylistically in the first place. When I first tasted 16 (and 17, too) they were total wow wines. They still are special but Iām viewing it largely as drink early
Matt thank you for that; Iāve been hoping that the 16 and 17 will integrate some of their stemmy austerity over time, and will be waiting to revisit my remaining bottles in 5 years or so
I have been operating under the impression that a lot of the Pax labelled wines now are made similar to how he made the wind gap wines early on based on some podcasts I listened to. Iām not 100% sure it translates to exactly similar winemaking though, but like I mentioned a little higher up in the thread, the selections of those wines that Iāve had in the past year or two are really well balanced at this point now. maybe it is the acid losing some steamā¦ but whatever brings that acid a little more into balance compared to at release is what Iād be hoping for anyways.
Largely agree Matt. Pax 2.0 is not the same as Pax 1.0. I jokingly refer to 2.0 as Pax Gap every once in a while. Itās not quite like Wind Gap, but not full on old Pax. Itās also rather wine dependent, with Sonoma Hillsides closer to the Wind Gap style, and things such as Griffinās Lair hewing closer to old Pax.
Sounds like an interesting wine - and Iām a big fan of Paxās use of whole clusters in his wines and always have been.
The thing that concerns me a bit is the bottle variation here - and what might be causing it. Some of this has to be chalked up to differences in perceptions from individuals, which is inevitable, but the VA thing is concerning (unless, again, different folks are looking at the same thing in very different ways).
I will probably grab a bottle or three and try at least one now to see whatās going on - but thanks for all of the notes and feedback thus far.
![[rofl.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/a/a7452fcd8e675af869f8da01174474a545b03944.gif "rofl"){kind=small}