Davis 108 fell out of favor, not entirely for good reason but probably mostly. The places that either stubbornly or neglectfully stuck by it, well, did okay for themselves. You don’t see many bottlings that are nothing but. This, apparently, is some mis-plantings in a block she has at Weber Vineyard. At Torii Mor, Patty and I bottled 2 barrels of the 1998 Olson Vineyard on their own. This immediately reminded me of that wine, which, I maybe tasted once out of bottle. Creamy but not overt. Vanilla but just a touch. Golden in nature if that were a flavor. Spices but all very subtle. Deep texture without being heavy. Maybe some peachy tones thrown into the soft tropical fruits.
If you fancy the super-reductive style very much in vogue here in Oregon this won’t do it for you. If you like stupidly delicious Chardonnay that nods at Chassagne, this is your jam. There’s like 23 cases of it and she doesn’t charge enough. Do what you will this.
Not sure. Don’t swim in those waters. It produces incredibly intense and focused wines. It has a distinct signature nose and style to it that is associated with some of the highest level domaines in Burgundy. It’s likely a great story to tell (I wouldn’t know). It sells.
I think that at least part of the story is the influence of Dominique Lafon on the OR wine scene both at Lingua Franca and elsewhere. I am pretty sure his methods made a strong impact on Walter Scott which made a strong impact or Morgan Long. Other producers noticed their success. Maybe.
Apologies for any thread drift, but that’s interesting about the reductive vs non-reductive styles. I’m a long time drinker of OR Pinot, but have only recently started to explore OR whites. If one wanted to compare each style, what would be a good (and easily acquired) example of each?
Thanks. I have the reductive style covered with Goodfellow. I’ll see about acquiring a Kelley Fox or PGC (though these seem somewhat rare?) to have a comparison tasting with my regular group.
Tyson has experimented with both styles. If I’m not mistaken the top cuvées, Helen and Phoebe, play on both styles. I just can’t remember which one is which.
I’m curious on this topic of reduction. Can I tap into the group’s expertise?
I had Kelley’s 2023 Willamette Valley Chardonnay and picked up clear reductive notes….at least that’s what I thought. I then see a) Chris’ note on the 2022 which mentions there is no overt reduction and b) Justin’s list bracketing the style under non-reductive.
How do you think I should best understand this? In the reductive / non-reductive distinction, is it within the context of Oregon Chardonnay? In my 2023 example, I felt the reductive notes were clear in the global sense of Chardonnay. In that sense, I felt it is reductive. However, I certainly thought the reductive notes were subtle therefore I would not describe the style as reductive per se, particularly if the baseline in Oregon is reductive. Or….do you think I just misinterpreted the wine! Also very possible…
I shall do a tasting of the 2023 Durant & Dux this weekend (and perhaps a few others mentioned on this list that I can source in Japan - thanks!) so I’d be grateful for any thoughts.
What were the clear reductive notes that you picked up? I usually think of reduction in Chardonnay as presenting matchstick, flint, bitter minerals, perhaps saline. I personally have never found these in Kelley’s wines.
I definitely have not had enough of KF’s chards to give a strong view here - quite possible this year or cuvee has exactly the reductive notes you noted. It is definitely (so far as I understand it) something where you don’t have to be trying for the reductive style to get a little. (For instance White Walnut Estate described themselves to me when I asked as “not trying for it but not mad if we get a little” and that is about right to my palate when you taste the wines - some have a bit of steel to them but not nearly the thumbprint you get with a Walter Scott.)
Maybe I should edit the list to say “producers I know aren’t Trying For Reduction.”
Curious to hear others with more experience chime in.
