Donnie on the Spot Syrah NV (about $15)

About the Wine:  Syrah and its near relative Shiraz are successfully grown in the South of France, Spain, Italy, California, Australia, Chile, and Israel.  These hot climates bring out the grapes big, bold fruit.  This Syrah is from the Finger Lakes, probably the best growing region in New York and some say between the Atlantic and the Mississippi.  I've never had a cold climate Syrah before and I look forward to the experience.


About THIS Wine:  It's a fairly translucent red in the glass, much lighter than I'm used to for the varietal.  The nose is hearty and has the jammy fruit components a Syrah should, but it is not heady and massive as many of its hot climate counterparts are.  The palate is surprisingly complex and balanced.  It actually has many of the elements I would associate with California Pinot Noir, right down to the sour cherry finish.  This has more body than most, Pinots though.


Drinking This Wine:  It would pair well with a good pot roast.


Overall Impression:  The price is reasonable and I find no fault with the wine.  This one is good for the price.

Three Rings Shiraz 2013 (about $17)

About the Wine:  This is a Shiraz from Barossa, a region of Australia that, in my experience, often produces wines of great depth and concentration.  The best wines from this region have the richness and mineral notes that one might associate with something from the Northern Rhone.


About THIS Wine:  It is opaque in the glass with a dark red rim.  The nose is not overly generous, and I would not expect it to be from such a young red.  Smoke and red fruit notes do come through with time.  A strange and not entirely pleasant green note is strong on the palate.  It is not a flaw per se but it does not reflect the rich fruit experience that I look for in members of the Syrah family.  The fruit does come through on the finish, as does a fair amount of tannin and alcohol.  I didn't check the label before tasting.  This beast hits a 15.4% alcohol.


Drinking This Wine:  It's hard to pair something that alcoholic with food.  It might help clear up a sinus infection, though.


Overall Impression:  This is very bombastic wine with too much alcohol and too little fruit.  It's not a question of price.  It would be hard to recommend it at any price,

Red Silk Shiraz 2013 (about $17 per botte)

About the Wine:  Yesterday, I reviewed a Shiraz from Barossa, Australia and today, for comparison, I am reviewing one from McLaren Vale.  This is one is a relatively light wine at 15% alcohol.  That is insanely high for most traditional winemaking, but in a well made big wine can incorporate high alcohol.


About THIS Wine:  In the glass it is dark to the point of being muddy.  Almost reminiscent of a Ruby Port.  The nose is tight, even after some time in the glass.  It does give up a curious onion note.  There is vegetable quality on the palate but it is not nearly as pronounced as the Barossa that I tasted for the last review.  It may just be a function of the vintage, though in this case I would say that either the region was less affected or the winemaker tamed it better.  The finish is quite tannic.  It's an odd thing to say about a $17 screw cap, but this might benefit from a little more age.


Drinking This Wine:  It'll take a steak with heavy sauce to tame this beast.  Shepherd's pie could also work.


Overall Impression:  This is an example of a massive New World wine done right and as such it is good for the price.

Michel-Schlumberger Sonoma Coast Pinot Noir 2012 (about $17)

About the Wine:  I first encountered this producer through their very forgettable Chardonnay.  It is always tempting to dismiss a producer when you dislike one of their wines.  That is often a mistake. A producer may change styles radically between varietals so it is often worth a second look.

About THIS Wine:  It is bright red in the glass, much lighter than I am used to from California, but something I might expect from a delicate Burgundy.  The nose presents good earth and black cherry notes.  All that and more is there on the palate.  The wine is not heavy, but it is rich, lingering, and satisfying.

Drinking This Wine:  Roasted port or turkey would make a good companion.

Overall Impression:  This drinks like Red Burgundy without the Burgundy price tag.  As such, it is a good value.

Cantinia di Casteggio Barbera Oltrepo Pavese 2012 (about $11)

About the Wine:  Oltrepo Pavese is a wine region in Lombardy in the far north of Italy.  I do not believe I had heard of the DOC before I picked up this bottle, so I have no idea what to expect.  Wikipedia informs me that it is in the general vicinity of Franciacorta.  That region makes some of the best sparkling wine in the world outside of Champagne, so perhaps there is reason for optimism.

About THIS Wine:  In the glass it is a clear, ruby red.  The nose is reserved for a Barbera.  Strawberry jam notes do come through with time.  That rich strawberry defines the palate.  There is more tannin structure than I am used to from a Barbera.  It is not tannic per se, just tannic for the varietal.

Drinking This Wine:  This is another good barbecue wine.

Overall Impression:  It's a nice bottle and I would not have been upset if I had paid $15 for it.  It is good for the price.

Wild Oats Shiraz 2012 (about $12)

About the Wine:  The wines have Australia have never really captured my imagination.  That said, the Wine Spectator #2 of the top one hundred last year was a Shiraz from this same vintage.  It was at a very different price point, but it still gives me hope of finding something I've missed.

About THIS Wine:  It is almost opaque in the glass with a clear, dark red rim,  Dark fruit is heavy on the nose.  The palate is full and satisfying.  The tannin structure is solid but not gripping.  There is nice acidity and the finish stays with you.

Drinking This Wine:  This could be a sipper but it really wants to go with grilled meats.  Not a bad BBQ red.

Overall Impression:  I get lucky sometimes.  This is a really nice bottle for this price.  This wine is a good value.

Perdriel Coleccion Cabernet Sauvignon 2009 (about $13)

About the Wine:  Argentina is best known for its Malbecs.  Personal experience has been that Cabs from there are, at best, a hit and miss proposition.  Hopefully this is one of the hits.

About THIS Wine:  This one is blood red in the glass with a crimson rim.  French oak dominates the nose, but hints of fruit peek out.  The palate is bone dry with a solid tannin structure.

Drinking This Wine:  This is a real beast of a wine and it wants some food to go with it.  Steak would be good.

Overall Impression:  This is no South American fruit bomb.  This is a serious Cab.  It's not quite at the level of the greats Cabs of Napa, but it is on its way.  At this price, this wine is a steal.

Caliterra Edicion Limitada A 2012 (about $20)

About the Wine:  This is a blend of Malbec and Carmenere.  Technically that is a Bordeaux blend, though both of those varietals are have fallen out of favor in Bordeaux.  Some people remember relatives' birthdays.  I remember stuff like that.

About THIS Wine:  It is a very dense red in the glass with an almost neon rim.  The nose is big, even for a Chilean red.  There is a lot of fruit and spice jumping out of the glass.  The palate delivers what the nose promises.  This is a beast of wine in the best way.  There is good tannin structure.  The finish is a little short after the big palate.

Drinking This Wine:  This is a steak wine all day.

Overall Impression:  A good, lingering finish would elevate this wine to the next level.  Because it does not have it, I will say that the wine is reasonable for the price.

Cartlidge & Browne North Coast Pinot Noir 2011 (about $14)

About the Wine:  2011 was a cursed vintage for most of the world outside of South America.  Cold weather, hail, and unseasonable rain were the order of the day.  Oddly, the wines of California and Israel from that vintage have followings.  The colder weather meant the wines produced were not as ripe, not as jammy, and not as alcoholic as the wines from those hot climates usually are.  Many of the wines produced are more complex and elegant than their bigger siblings from more successful vintages.

About THIS Wine:  It is a clear, if slightly murky red with a copper rim.  The nose smells like blueberry pie.  Quite a bit of dark fruit is present on the palate, but the finish is a little flat.

Drinking This Wine:  Roasted dark meat would do well here.  I need a little more longevity on the palate for a sipping wine.

Overall Impression:  I can't recommend this for more than about ten dollars.  At fourteen it is overpriced.

Rhiannon 2013 (about $11)

About the Wine: I dimly recalled having tasted it early in my wine career and I have a nostalgia for those days. According to the back label the blend changes every year depending on what the maker feels is the best expression of the vintage.  There is no specific region listed on the label, so it is likely that the producer is using the best grapes they can source in a given vintage.  This year's blend is Syrah, Petite Sirah, and Barbera.  In many ways this represents the contrast between the winemaking style associated with Burgundy and that of California.  The Burgundians are so obsessed with terroir that every spit of land is measured against every other and they really focus on delivering the terroir in every vintage.  California just wants to make good wine every year.  That explanation probably summed up which way I lean.

About THIS Wine:  It is an opaque red in the glass with a narrow violet rim.  The nose is a bright wall of jammy fruit.  The palate is fruity but not over the top.  There is better tannin structure than I expected.  Sweet cherry and raspberry notes linger.

Drinking This Wine:  This is fine for quaffing.  It could be paired with lighter fare, maybe the appetizers before a meal.

Overall Impression:  My coworkers are Burgundy experts and enthusiasts.  I love sharing wines like these with them.  They hate me.  This is no twenty dollar bottle, but it is cheap and enjoyable.  As such, it is good for the price. 

Some Thoughts on Wine Critics

“Critics are like eunuchs in a harem; they know how it's done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves.”- Brendan Behan

Vintners and retailers rely heavily on, but also curse the existence of wine critics.  A ninety or better rating from a well-regarded critic all but guarantees sales.  Though people keep saying his influence is on the wane, Robert Parker remains the go to for many people.  He revolutionized the business of wine criticism by introducing the hundred point scale.  He also changed the nature of wine criticism with his focus on what is in the glass rather than the reputation and history of the producer.
For all of his contributions, Parker has his detractors.  He favors a bold, full bodied style of wine.  His realm is that of hearty Cabernet Sauvignon and oaked Chardonnay.  I don’t know the man, but I suspect that the delicate nuance of a Chablis or a Chambolle Musigny would be lost on him.  At least that is what his rating history would indicate. 

Particularly passionate derision of Parker came a few years ago when Figeac, a house long known for producing Bordeaux in an austere, classic style, hired a wine consultant known for “Parkerizing” the Bordeaux wines he worked on.  The fact that Figeac or any other house that deemed the classic style more appropriate could switch back at any time seemed utterly lost on those who were upset by the development. 

Still, the concern of wine producers pandering to the taste of one critic is a valid one. Parker loves California Cabernet.  I love it, too.  But I don’t want everything to taste like Cali Cab.  Another issue is what the producers do to get their ratings.  Wines are seldom tasted blind for wine rating.  No matter how much a critic claims to focus on what is in the glass, the critic is aware of where the wine is from, who made it, and roughly what it will retail for.  One of the first wines I ever really liked was 90 point rated Merlot from Chile that sold for about $13 a bottle.  There are $100 bottles that have received the same rating from the same critic.  Either I got the deal of a lifetime or there is something funny with the numbers.

Most critics only rate wines that are submitted to them for rating.  (If any producer reading this wants to send me a mixed case of wine for review then by all means let me know.)  A critic who consistently rates a wine poorly will find himself running short of samples rather quickly.  And samples are by no means the extent of it.  It is not at all uncommon for wineries to host critics.  That means that a well-known critic can expect to be routinely sent on all expense paid vacations to wineries all over the world.  Guess what happens to those vacations when a critic fails to deliver a good rating?

Sometimes the influence is less direct.  At my first wine seminar the instructor told us to look at the advertising in wine magazines.  It is a shocking statistical anomaly that, of the many thousands of wineries in existence, the ones that get the best ratings in a given magazine tend to be the ones advertising in the same magazine.
Adding to the confusion in the fact that though most critics use a hundred point scale, there seems to be little agreement on what that actually means.  Many critics seem to rate on a 90-100 point scale.  It’s like they have never met a wine they did not like.  Others, especially critics who focus on Burgundy, give much more conservative ratings.  A 92 from Burghound is high praise while the same rating from Wine Advocate is unremarkable.

If I’m honest, it is hard to blame the critics for behaving the way they do.  If anyone wanted to fund this blog through advertisement and kick in some free wine in the deal it would be a hard offer to say no to.  Honesty is a luxury of obscurity, or of having a day job, depending on perspective.

So are wine critics really useless?

Yes.  Yes they are.  Unless you know how to read their reviews. There are two crucial cheats to making sense of it.  One is actually reading a review and not just looking at the score.  Many critics will include subtle digs at whatever they are reviewing, trusting that whoever has bought them or their editor off will be satisfied with the score and less concerned with the actual content of the review.  This is a good idea anyway.  If a wine is meant to age for thirty years then you would want to know that before you buy it to have with tonight’s dinner. 

It is also helpful to realize that, even for a professional, taste is personal.  Each critic has his or her own preferences and concept of what wine should taste like.   If you are going to follow the ratings then try to find someone whose tastes resemble yours.  There is a reason there so many different kinds of wine and so many critics with conflicting views.  As with finding a good bottle, finding a good critic is all about ignoring the crowd and finding what works for you.  And there is no shame in it if your tastes happen to follow the crowd.  But do keep an eye on who their advertisers are.