Appellation Australia

A great eight hour long dinner at a friends place to enjoy and compare various bottles of Krug and then to try some various wines afterward.
The food was as follows;

-Amuse bouche: fresh oysters, salmon and avocado tartare, confit of ocean trout, duck and beetroot tartlet.
-Terrine au Saumon
-Roast Rainbow Trout
-Kangaroo Fillet
-Various salads
-Raspberry tarte with fresh cream
-Selection of various cheeses

The first flight compared the three labels that have been on the Krug Grande Cuvee bottle.  There has been some discussion on various message boards that the new label bottles have been not up to the Krug standard. One bottle I have had previously of the new label was brilliant and one was disappointing, in this case the new label performed well - but was blown away by the old old label.  I can see the new label going in the same direction though and it too should be unbelievable with time.
MV Krug Grande Cuvée (disgorged 1987)
Golden yellow colour. Incredibly fine bead. From the very first intake of aroma this left me stunned. Incredibly complex aromas of hazelnut, lightly burnt butter, earthy, ginger, caramel and chocolate. The palate is superb, exhibiting great power, texture and depth at the same time as the fresh acidity cleanses and refreshes across the incredible length of the wine, leaving you wanting more after every sip. Structurally flawless. This is the kind of experience that changes how you think about wine.
99/100

MV Krug Grande Cuvée (disgorged 2003)
Straw yellow colour. Very fine bead with good mousse. Nose is shy to begin with but opens up with time in the glass to reveal nutty oak, lemon, floral notes and some nutmeg. Great intensity and carry of flavour across the palate with a creamy texture along and a strongly structured acid backbone. Delightful to drink.
93/100

MV Krug Grande Cuvée (disgorged 2005)
Slightly lighter colour than the 03 disgorgement. Slightly larger bead than the previous two but still fine. The nose is powerful with lemon, graphite, smoke, peach and lime. The freshness of the palate is incredible. Intense fresh flavour and pinpoint focused acidity leading into a long, long finish. Obviously the one needing the most time of the three to develop, but still enjoyable now for my tastes.
94/100

The next flight showcased three vintages that are considered excellent years in Champagne. All three were excellent, with the 1988 standing out as a wine of distinction.

1976 Krug Vintage
Deep golden colour. Rich nose of butterscotch and caramel, honey, grilled nuts, toast and apricot. A lovely honeyed, sweet rich flavour to the long palate that is balanced out by the excellent acid structure. This bottle was in great condition, but it requires no further age, drink now and enjoy!
95/100

1982 Krug Vintage
A lighter yellow gold colour. The nose is reclusive, but it opened to show toast, nuts, dough and vanilla oak characters. The palate is more open, with intense, youthful characters and a long, lingering flavour. Excellent now, but seems to be in a bit of an awkward stage between youth and maturity. I think it may be a bit more coherent in 5 years time.
92/100

1988 Krug Vintage
Lighter again, straw gold colour. The nose is brilliantly layered with notes of pear, gunpowder, vanilla, smoke, lime, grilled cashew and floral undertones. The carry, persistence and depth of flavour along the palate is awe inspiring. This wine is the definition of class and it has the supreme structure and balance to get even better over the next 10+ years.
97/100

The final flight of Krug was a comparison of the old label Rose and the new label Rose. Of all the flights, this was the only one that disappointed. The wines were both very good, but at $450 a bottle very good does not cut it.

NV Krug Rosé (disgorged 1988)
Only very slightly darker in colour than the recent disgorgement. Ginger, caramel, toast and earth aromas to the appealing nose. The palate had a nice initial burst of simple flavour that faded away slightly toward the end. Good balance and enjoyable, but rather obviously not brilliant for my taste.
90/100

NV Krug Rosé (disgorged 2004)
Golden hued with just a tinge of pink. Fine bead comparable in size to the old disgorgement, but just slightly more aggressive in speed. Strawberry, brioche and toast on the lightly scented bouquet. Very light and fluffy palate weight with fresh flavour and good length. Nice to drink, but especially based on the older disgorgement, I can’t see this getting any better with age. Maybe I just don’t get these wines, but they seem to be missing the character to be considered exceptional.
90/100

Then to finish the night, a selection of random wines.

2006 Knappstein Clare Valley Ackland Vineyard Watervale Riesling
Opened at the start of the evening while waiting for people to arrive. Floral, lime, some botrytis style character. Some cloying sweetness and sherbet like flavour on the palate that ended oily and flabby. Got no better, and may in fact have been worse by the end of the night when we returned to it. The 2005 was very highly regarded, so this may be a product of the vintage.
79/100

1993 Domain Alain Burguet Gevrey-Chambertin Vieilles Vignes
Nose has good intensity of aroma with strong earth, pepper, raspberry and a slightly feral streak through it. The palate was not giving a whole lot with some stalk and otherwise looking pretty lean. An interesting wine, if only the palate lived up to the nose it may have been more.
87/100

2000 Domaine Armand Rousseau Gevrey-Chambertin “Les Cazetiers” 1er Cru
Corked.
:(/100

1982 Penfolds Bin 820 Coonawarra Cabernet Sauvignon Shiraz
Tobacco, rich blackcurrant, smoky oak, redcurrant and just a hint of background DMS. The palate is nicely integrated with the core of fruit richness just still holding things together. Drink up if you have bottles remaining.
89/100

1996 Rene Renou Bonnezeaux Cuvée Zenith
Poached pears, honeydew melon, kiwi fruit, honey and vanilla. Found the medium sweetness and intensity on the palate to want for a touch more acid. Simple at the moment, but could take on some complexity as long as the balance doesn’t slide too far out of place over the next 6-7 years.
89/100

2005 Mollydooker Carnival of Love McLaren Vale Shiraz
Ultra concentrated ripe and interesting nose of caramel, blackberry, blueberry, tar, blackcurrant, tobacco and a bit of spirit at the end of each sniff. The richness follows through onto the palate and it is quite approachable except for the slight spirity burning sensation down the back of my throat. I enjoyed trying it, but I don’t know that I could have faced a second glass and I think it would have overpowered any food it was served with. Don’t know that this has the structure to age, but time could prove me wrong. Glad I tried it, but I think I’ll leave it to the people that enjoy this style.
86/100

1996 Noon Grenache Shiraz
The nose consisted of pepper, smoky black cherry and some more alcohol. Palate lacks fruit and there is a burning sensation to the mouth-feel. Really struggled to drink this, I imagine that when it was young the fruit would have covered the problems somewhat, but now that it is fading they are all too apparent.
80/100

2005 Wild Duck Creek Fortified
A nice way to finish things off. On the nose there was liquorice, fennel, blueberry, earth and cherry. A smooth, sweet palate with just a touch of spice and florality to freshen it up and provide a needed lift. Very good length and actually very enjoyable to drink!
92/100

A few quick notes from a recent casual dinner with friends;

1979 Bollinger Grande Année Champagne

A slow, fine bead and tenuous mousse. The nose is explosive and intense with marzipan, yeasty bread, honey, apple and mushrooms.The palate is a delight, with lovely, balanced mouth-filling honeyed flavour and with an excellent core of acid to take it into to a very long finish.

93/100

2002 Domaine Laroche Chablis Premier Cru Vieilles Vignes Les Fourchaumes

Open with aromatic floral notes, as well as pomegranate, orange and peaches - very pure nose. Medium intensity and great depth of minerality and flavour on the palate leading into a long, clean finish. Really delicious to drink now, but will probably be better in 3 years time.

90/100

1999 Maison Louis Latour Cote de Beaune-Villages

A light, stewy nose with a touch of oak but not much else of note. Palate is awkward and disjointed. I feel that this may have been a poor bottle.

NR/100

2000 Domain Alain Burguet Gevrey-Chambertin En Reniard

Violet, strawberry, earth and wet hay on the nose. The palate is balanced but is simple and lacks depth. Probably around its peak and nicely drinkable, but nothing more.

87/100

2000 Domaine Fourrier Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Cru Clos St. Jacques Vieille Vignes

Lots of cherry with some gamey complexity, undergrowth and earth. Good texture and palate length with the complexity of the palate not really matching that of the nose. Still, a lovely wine with some potential to improve.

90/100

2003 Two Hands Max’s Garden Heathcote Shiraz

A bold, attractive nose of blueberry, cherry, spice, raspberry plus some coffee and cedar. The palate is quite restrained with the fruit richness balanced against some savoury characters. The initial wave of flavour trails off slightly toward the finish. Quite good structure overall, although I think it is going to be drinking at its best over the next couple of years.

90/100

A fun offline in Sydney focusing on “Cult” wines - generally defined as small production (and often hard to obtain) wines that receive large scores from prominent overseas wine critics.

All wines except for the two sparkling wines were tasted blind. The identities of the wines were known (except for the mystery wine) but not the order or the flight that they would be in. The wines were divided into the two sparklings and then four flights of four, the wines listed in the order of tasting below.

A vote was taken at the end of the night and before the identities of the wines were revealed, with each person nominating their five favourite wines, wth 5 points given for a 1st place vote and so on until 1 point for a 5th placed vote.

Tarlant “Brut Zero” NV (Champagne):
This has a light straw-green colour with a fine bead. Nose is comprised of lemon, pears and unripe nectarines. The zero dosage really shows on the palate which is very dry and tastes like tart apples. Finishes rather abruptly, but for the price it serves its purpose.
86/100

Wild Duck Creek “Sparkling #2″ (Heathcote):
There was a very light fizz and mousse to this wine. The nose is cheesy, yeasty and there is a touch of a spirity type background character on the nose and palate that adds to the wine rather than causing problems with balance. The light fizz lends a interesting texture and creamy character to the palate. There are multiple layers of complexity to this wine and I was rather impressed overall.
91/100

Kay Brothers “Block 6″ 1996 (McLaren Vale):
There is smoky, toasted oak on the nose as well as raisins, tar, brown sugar and some alcohol heat. The oak and alcohol carries onto the palate, throwing the balance of the wine into disarray.
84/100

D’Arenberg “Dead Arm” 1996 (McLaren Vale):
Liquorice, cherry and chocolate on the somewhat reclusive nose. The palate is soft and without any real complexity or character to call attention to. Fairly disappointing, especially once the identity was revealed.
86/100

Rockford “SVS Hoffmann” 1996 (Barossa Valley):
This wine delivers a ripe, rich, crowd pleasing nose of liquorice, blueberry, raspberry, blueberry and a cherry liqueur character. The palate was ripe and packed with deep fruit flavour but also showed good length and balance. I was surprised to find out that this was ten years old and still showing so much primary fruit character - it seems like it is going to live a very long life and if it stays balanced it could be very good.
89/100

Clarendon “Astralis” 1996 (McLaren Vale):
A bizarre (read: horrible) nose of pumpkin, green beans with melted butter and tobacco. Palate is short, with drying tannins and is genuinely dreadful. Something wrong with the bottle obviously, maybe it was opened and left in the oven with a roast dinner?
75/100

Whistling Eagle “Eagle’s Blood” 2002 (Heathcote):
A nose comprised of deep spice and blackberry, red fruits and a violet floral touch. Delivers a tight, classy palate with gorgeous texture and fine-grained tannins providing serious structure. This stood out in a crowd of generally opulent wines as showing that a wine can have good flavour while also showing restraint.
92/100

Standish “The Standish” 2001 (Barossa Valley):
Shows dominant medicinal characters, chocolate, vanilla and sweet, ripe raspberry jam on the nose. The palate is dense, jammy and lacks any sense of cohesion.
82/100

Kaesler “Weapons of Mass Seduction” Shiraz/Cabernet 2002 (Barossa Valley):
A bright, perfumed, complex nose of musk, cinnamon, violet, blackcurrant, chocolate, plums and smoked meat. The palate is brooding and there are oodles of deep set fruit here. Provides a balanced, refined palate with a defined structure that bodes very well for the future potential of this wine. Drinking the remains of the bottle two nights later and it is worth a points more, the nose is still vibrant and the palate has taken on a delicious spicy and smoky character while retaining its length and balance.
93/100

Glaetzer “Godolphin” Shiraz/Cabernet 2004 (Barossa Valley):
A punchy nose of dark cherry, blackberry, some vanilla and floral overtones. The thing that really lifted this wine apart from the rest for me was that while it was rich and generous in flavour, unlike some of the other wines on the night that felt one dimensional and forced, there was much more to it. It was structured, focused and balanced (15% alcohol but didn’t show it) with a super seductive, pure silky texture to it. This was a really impressive wine and my favourite on the night. The only “problem” is that I can perhaps see that it could end up being a better wine while young than with much more age on it, but that it easily solved by drinking and enjoying it now for the special wine that it is.
95/100

Chris Ringland “Randall’s Hill” 1995 (Barossa Valley):
Spice, earth, smoke and tobacco on the nose as well as a smattering of oak. The palate is opulent and slightly over the top, with the richness masking any nuance that the wine has to offer at this stage. Again, I was slightly surprised by the age on this when revealed.
89/100

Greenock Creek “Roennfeldt Road” Shiraz 1997 (Barossa Valley):
Seems rather restrained on the nose with tar, earth and some blackberry. The palate has a very big flavour profile without ever seeming to stray into over the top ripe characters. Very good and could well get better with time.
92/100

Torbeck “RunRig” 1998 (Barossa Valley):
Chocolate, blackcurrant and some stewed fruit characters - didn’t get any hint of Viognier and didn’t imagine it would be revealed as the Runrig. The palate is savoury and textured but the balance is marred by alcohol spikes along the line of the wine.
87/100

Wild Duck Creek “Duck Muck” 2000 (Heatcote):
A cooked, spirity, meaty, pepper, VA, vegetable nose. Palate has no balance and finishes very short. Perhaps something bad happened to this bottle, but I think it had been cellared properly since release by the owner. The nicest thing that I could say about it is that at least it wasn’t quite as bad as the Astralis.
79/100

Kalleske “Johann Georg” 2004 (Barossa Valley):
A youthful nose of lovely floral notes, black pepper and vibrant red fruits. The standout elements of the palate were the great texture and stylish mouth-feel although the generous flavour and very good length were also positive attributes. One of the wines on the night to show the critical balance between generosity of flavour and structure that turns a very good wine into an excellent wine.
93/100

The Mystery Ring-in - Domaine du Pegau “Cuvee Reserve” 2003 (Chateauneuf du Pape, France):
Chinese five spice powder, condensed onion essence, violets and a slightly rancid funky edge. The palate is unfocused, metallic and got worse with time in the glass before getting what it deserved (poured into the spittoon of shame). I don’t mind some brett but this was terrible.
77/100

Glaetzer “Amon Ra” 2004 (Barossa Valley):
There are notes of mocha, ground coffee, vanilla bean and raspberry on the nose. The palate is rich and generous, but there are signs of class there as well. Firm tannins form the backbone of the excellent structure with the finish very long and satisfying. Perhaps a smidge too much oak at this stage but the depth of fruit could well stand tall and hold things together until it comes into balance over the next few years.
93/100

Noon “Reserve” Shiraz 2004 (Langhorne Creek/McLaren Vale):
A mix of seaweed, blood, iodine and spirit characters. The palate has weight through obvious oak influence and there is an alcohol spike on the mid-palate that destroys any semblance of balance. Not enjoyable at all.
84/100

The group of 10 rated the wines as follows;
1: Kalleske Johan Georg….39pts (six 1sts, three 3rds)
2: Glaetzer Amon Ra……….37pts (two 1sts, five 2nds, one 3rd, two 4ths)
3: Glaetzer Godolphin……..32pts (one 1st, three 2nds, five 3rds)
4: Greenock Creek RR……..12pts (one 2nd, two 4ths, four 5ths)
5: Rockford Hoffman………..7pts (one 2nd, one 4th, one 5th)
6: Kaesler WOMS ……………6pts (two 4ths, two 5ths)
7: Standish…………………….5pts (one 1st)
8= Kays Block 6………………3pts (one 3rd)
8= Whistling Eagle………….3pts (one 4th, one 5th)
10=D’Arenberg DA…………..2pts (one 4th)
10=Torbreck RunRig…………2pts (one 4th)
12=Randalls Hill……………….1pt (one 5th)
12=Noon Reserve…………….1pt (one 5th)

No votes: Duck Muck, Pegau, Astralis

An enjoyable night and as always with blind tasting, very educational. Worthy of comment is the fact that the the wines that cost $100, $65 and $40 (my favourite on the night) came out by a long margin on top of some of the other wines that can fetch upwards of $400 at auction …

I went to a hastily arranged dinner at Sakana-Ya in Crows Nest following the Torbreck tasting at North Sydney Cellars that I wrote about here. The quality of the dishes was good and there was some interesting food that I haven’t tried previously (Fried Eel being an example). The service was attentive and polite. Take your own glassware if you are serious about wine as the provided stemware is sub-par. It was slightly on the expensive side, but I guess when you are paying for high quality, fresh sushi-grade seafood it is to be expected.

All wines were tasted blind except for the Plantagenet and the Leo Buring.

Clos Cazals Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru 1997 (Le Mesnil-sur-Oger, Champagne):
Slightly toasty, apples, pears, lots of flint and minerals on the nose. Very elegant and what I would call a “pure” tasting palate with good length and balance. It started to take on a bit of extra palate weight with air time but still had fine and focused flavour.
90/100

Gaston Chiquet Tradition Brut Premier Cru NV - Disgorged November 2004 (Dizy, Champagne):
80% 2000 and 20% 1999 fruit. 45% Pinot Meunier, 35% Chardonnay and 20% Pinot Noir. Nose is fairly intense with slightly funky/sulphurous notes and earth, with yeast and brioche. I found the palate a little bit broad and just a bit short.

An interesting contrast in style to the Clos Cazals.
87/100

Plantagenet Riesling 1992 (Mount Barker, Western Australia):
The nose is obviously quite developed - honeyed with some marmalade and orange and just a small whiff of petrol. Palate has some decent intensity to it, but is lacking the acid structure to retain balance.

It was doing alright for a 14 year old Western Australian Riesling, but the Plantagenet 1991 we tried 6 months ago faired a considerable amount better.
84/100

Leo Buring Leonay DW16 Watervale 1994 (Clare Valley, South Australia):
1994 was one of the few vintages when a Leonay was produced from both Eden Valley and Clare Valley fruit.

There was some gasoline and citrus (lemon and lime) on the nose. The palate is loaded with acid and a slight spritz as well as a bitter character on the finish. Not really falling over, but I doubt that this bottle would have come into any kind of balance in its remaining life.

I had enjoyed a stunning bottle of the Eden Valley Leonay last year, but this was just not as good.
86/100

Fox Creek Reserve Shiraz 1999 (McLaren Vale, South Australia):
This is clearly a serious wine. I found it to be brambly, a bit leafy and spicy which led me on the wrong path with options, as well as some bitter chocolate. Good tannins and what I thought was well integrated oak provided good structure. Clearly needs some time to develop fully, but I didn’t mind drinking it as is.
89/100

Wild Duck Creek “Yellow Hammer Hill” Shiraz Malbec 2000 (Heathcote, Victoria):
65% Shiraz, 35% Malbec. This is apparently inspired and moulded on the Wendouree Shiraz Malbec blend and only available through some restaurants and to some customers at cellar door.

A nose comprised of earthy, gamey, weedy and a hint of cheesy characters. It is certainly a wine with a point of difference. Nicely integrated palate components - everything working together well. I enjoyed it for being out of the ordinary.
88/100

Sanguine Estate (Heathcote) -

Chardonnay Viognier 2005 - Not faulty, but just bland and completely unexciting. Some hints of melon and a touch of florality on the nose, but nothing else of interest. 82/100

Heathcote Winery (Heathcote) - There will also be a review of the “Curagee” Shiraz from this producer in the Heathcote master class roundup.

“Mail Coach” Viognier 2004 - Some stone fruit and spices on the nose, but sadly overly alcoholic on both the nose and palate. 86/100

This is the final update from the Victorian Winemakers Exhibition 2006. This master class looked at seven Shiraz based wines from the Heathcote region. The wines are listed below in order of preference.

Heathcote Estate Shiraz 2003 - Nose is fairly tight at this stage, but after some vigorous swirling I got some dark chocolate, spice, red berry fruit and plums. Full bodied, ripe and rich palate - yet also retains balance and good tannin structure. There is oak lingering in the background, but the fruit is easily up to the task of keeping it in check. It is a very good wine that should continue to improve over the next five to ten years. 91/100

Carlei “Green Vineyard” Shiraz 2003 - Floral notes on the nose as well as pepper and spice. The front of the palate has a bit of sweetness but this is replaced on the mid and back palate with a minerally character. 87/100

Sanguine Estate “Heathcote” Shiraz 2004 - A nose of blackberry, plums and a stalky element. Palate is rich and generous, but there is a spike of acid on the finish that disrupts the line and length. 86/100

Downing Estate Shiraz 2002 - Nose is plummy, meaty and peppery. Palate shows overt alcoholic heat and is difficult to drink. 84/100

Heathcote Winery “Curajee” Shiraz 2003 - Nose has a large amount of alcoholic heat, but looking past that, shows some liquorice and chocolate bullets characters as well as a fair bit of vanilla/coconut oak. There is more alcoholic heat on the palate that is difficult to get past. Not showing well on this occasion. 83/100

Shelmerdine “Heathcote” Shiraz 2004 - Some cardboard like aromas to the nose (but sealed under screwcap!), as well as bitter chocolate and raspberry. Palate tastes flat and finishes short and slightly bitter on the back of the palate. Probably an off bottle as the bottle I tried on general tasting was much better. 82/100

Mitchelton Wines “Heathcote” Shiraz 2003 - Bitter chocolate and raspberry on the nose. Palate is syrupy and tastes like raspberry cordial. 82/100

The Heathcote Estate was the clear leader among this pack. Apart from the Heathcote Estate, I didn’t see anything at this master class that would change the views of anyone who doesn’t think much of the region. I personally think it has potential as a region for Shiraz and I hope to see some better wines from there (like the excellent Shelmerdine “Merindoc” written about in a previous update) in the near future.