Beaucastel Horizontal in 2013
Sometimes the wine gods conspire against you. I actually knew something like this was coming. Things had been too good for too long. I recently thought about the roll I was on, nary a corked bottles in months and even some suspect oldies had showed well recently, rotted corks and low fills be damned. And then there was this.
What should have been a wonderful evening was marred by misfire after misfire, and sadly we suffered a 50% hit on rate on my favorite Chateauneuf du Pape, the always reliable and often awe inspiring wines of Chateau de Beaucastel. Now you might have read that I am not a particularly enthusiastic fan of Chateauneuf, which is true since I am usually the one writing that, but the truth lies more with grenache than with the wines of Chateauneuf.
The truth is I think I am fairly well aligned with many of the more traditional producers in the region with their reliance on the art of blending to make a better wine. Of course there are exceptions, stunning wines produced exclusively from grenache but they are few and far between. For me grenache rarely produces a complete wine, instead it offers up enticing perfumes of red fruit and herbs while delivering a relatively high alcohol, low acid mouthful of red fruit that can be mouth filling, yet at the same time a bit hollow. That’s where varieties like Syrah, Mourvedre, Cinsault and Carignan come in, not to mention all 13 allowable varieties in the wines of the application.
For my palate the magic happens when the big ball of red fruit is filled, like a toy chest, with the complexity afforded by these other varieties. Some black fruit, olives, bacon fat, leather gloves, dirty boots and hung game, all mixed around adding depth,. structure and nuance to the explosive core of grenache. That’s when things get interesting, and of course that is what beaucastel specializes in.
One of the few and perhaps only producers to use all the allowable varieties in their wines, beaucastel has historically allowed Mourvedre to share the spotlight with grenache, each grape making up roughly 30% of a typical vntage of Beaucastel. The results show in the wines, in their youth as added textural component and a more complete mouthfeel, and on to older age when the nuance really begins to show. In many cases I would tend to recommend drinking Chateauneuf du pape rather early as opposed to later, not because the wines don’t age well but rather because they don’t seem to improve significantly with age, change yes but for the better?
[PAGEBREAK]
In the case of beaucastel the opposite tends to be true. These are wines that reward ageing, the early exposition of grenache fruit inevitably yields towards the layered complexity that i look for in aged wines. Simplicity is supplanted by detail, at least that’s how it’s supposed to work. In the case of this flight of wine, simplicity was too often supplanted by crapola. Not necessarily the chateau’s fault of course, who knows where some of these wines have been, mostly in cellars since close to release though, and one hopes that quality control for corks is predictably better today, but while there were some pleasant surprises here, the tasting did little to further my thesis. That thesis being that it might be better to buy older vintages today that sell at or close to the release price for the current vintage.
That should be sage advice, and if the wine gods did not conspire against me this evening, punishing me for my recent good fortune, this last bit might well have been complete different. Consider that of the vintages we tried, 1995-2005, all can be had for less than $100 a bottle. I tasted the 2010 last night, a truly lovely vintage for beaucastel, and the price for that is pushing $100 in most places. Given the option of laying a wine down for a decade of buying one ready to drink I would usually opt for the latter. As it turns out I might be mistaken, but frankly not withstanding the sequence of unfortunate bottles here I would tend to stick with that advice with the obvious caveat that you tend to get what you pay for and working with a reputable retailer is essential. I still will recommend that people seek out some of these vintages of beaucastel because I love the wines and think that they offer good value, when they are showing well of course.
So how were these wines, well 1995’s, we actually opened a back-up bottle, were corked and then cooked. Ashame in light of the fact that this slow to evolve vintage had been showing promise of opening up just two years ago. This was followed by a corked bottle of the 1996! But then things took a turn for the better with a wonderfully over performing bottle of the 1997, a vintage I have dismissed in the past. Certainly not a great vintage, but one at peak, silky, lighter bodied, but open and expressive.
In contrast this was followed by the 1998, a vintage which showed great promise in its youth but one that has been nothing but trouble for the past several years. Gone is the explosive fruit but there’s not much seemingly replacing it. It’s worth noting that this vintage included an unusually high percentage of grenache, a departure for the estate due to the weather conditions that year. One has to wonder if this change in routine might be responsible for the wines awkward behavior or if it is in fact going through just an awkward phase. I’d put my money on the fact that this wine is not going to be better than it is today and would opt to drink up my remaining bottles sooner, rather than later.
With the 1999 we are back in form, rather classic form, Chateauneuf that shows excellent balance and restraint, even elegance. I really liked this wine, it doesn’t knock you out but keeps you thoroughly engaged. The 2000 was quite the contrast, totally fun and full of fruit plump and short, and not terribly complex yet a wine that you can’t help but smile while drinking. 2001 returned us to the doghouse, turning our nose down at a heat damaged, grey market import. 2002, the last truly bad vintage for the region was, as far as I know not produced so we moved onto the 2003.
[PAGEBREAK]
Now I am not a warm climate wine lover, and while this wine had all the pruny, high alcohol traits of that scorching vintage it was better than I had expected, though still not I would want to return to. In many ways it’s qualitatively on par with the 1997, just at opposite ends of the spectrum so I am sure there will be people out there who react to the 2003 as I’ve reacted to the 1997: a nice wine with a few faults but at it’s peak it will be a fine bottle.
Moving on to the 2004 we are treatede to another cork tainted bottle, though one where one can get a sense of what lies beneath. A vintage probably similar in style to but notable better than the 1997, I would love to try this again in 5 years but expect it will be drinking quite well today and has a lovely ten year window to enjoy it in. And that brings us to our final bottle, the 2005. Up til this point the wines had all been notably clean, brett free, though brett had been a trademark or sorts at beaucastel. that barnyard smells was one of the things that made beaucastel a love it or hate it wine, and in truth the high percentage of Mourvedre with it’s gamy, earthy aromas only helped to reinforce this aromatic profile, but beaucastel cleaned up the brett issues that they had, or did they?
Not with this bottle, which opened with decidedly meaty, leathery aromas but morphed into a poo-a-thon with a few hours of air. I expect some will say this is just the Mourvedre, but I would have to disagree, this was old school brett and was absolutely freaking delicious. This is a great vintage for beaucastel, powerful, complex, rich and with impeccable balance. This was classic beaucastel, and brings us back to the point of this article. If I were to be buying Beaucastel today I might be tempted by the 2010 tasted last night, but this 2005 is simply a better wine in my opinion, and at the same price a better deal. If you’re like me and enjoy austere, firm wines you might even want to backfill with some 1999, but this 2005 should be a must buy for any Beaucastel lover out there.
So in the end this was a lesson of mixed messages. Yes, buying older wines can be a risky proposition, but at times they offer such compelling value that they can’t be missed. And it should be worth noting that most, in fact nearly all of the wines we tasted this evening were purchased within a year or so of release, so buying the wines young is no guarantee of quality either. Ah the life of the wine lover.
Beaucastel vertical
1995
very evolved and kind of dark
just opened, tight, little dried fruit, mineral, licorice, candied medicinal,
broad, a bit hollow, a bit candied,
bottle 2
right, evolved and bricky but lively and attractive
1997
Smoky on the nose with mature aromas of leather, toasty briary pipe, and mineral notes with fine focus. On the palate this is broad and open with nice richness of fruit on the edges but a little lean on the mid-palate, a classic grenache mouthfeel. There is nice darker fruit on the backend and soft tannins that grow on the finish with has decent length, and earthy, forest floor, and lightly leathery flavors. At peak and quite enjoyable. 87pts
1999
Tight and focused on the nose with beautiful, spicy, leathery, clean aromas that are still youthful with hints of chalk, spice, and dark fruit On entry this is almost voluptuous with really vibrant acids with decisive cut and round, ample tannins that segue into spicy dark cherry fruit that shows a slightly dried edge. Ultimately this is a little touch but it does exhibit lovely focused, dark fruit and good length, with very chocolatey tannins offering a subtle density here. 93pts
2000
Another nose that remains somewhat tight with medicinal cherry, leather, and garrigue aromas framed with a little spice, and a little floral nuance. With a lovely combination of liquory, plump, rich fruit, and a bit a bit of bitterness this fills the mouth that drops off quickly on the backend this is a bit short, but the black berry fruit and plum fruit is just so pretty you can help but seeing this as a fun wine. 89pts
2001
a bit brothy, tight, minty, dried fruit, pipe tobacco, briar, young, carob,
a bit compact dusty, a bit tough, and chewy, short,
2003
Jammy black currant and blueberry fruit greet the nose showing off a bit of a pruny edge with very black peppery top notes and a slightly dusty character. In the mouth this has surprisingly intact acid, offering decent brightness and height in the mouth with lovely blackberry fruit but here is a fair amount of alcohol showing here, and while the fruit does show nice purity the wine is not particularly well balanced. 85pts
2004l
clean, woodsy, creamy curranty fruit, a little oaky perhaps,
fresh, simple, pure clean blueberry fruit, high toned, short, decent potential, sneaky length, sweet tannins, a bit simple but pure and enjoyable, etter than 97 in the same style
2005
awsome poop-a-thon, back to time , a touch spicy, clean poop,
bright and clear, very precise wine, lovely balance here with fine acid and super ripe tannins, breathtaking balance,
90-91 93
2005 14%
Color is a touch pale and showing early stages of evolution
Nose is very aromatic, leather, meat, black fruit, slightly candied with lovely smoke and herb nuances but in time this turns into an awesome poop-s-thon. Turn back the clock to beaucastel of days gone by all backed up with super clean fresh black fruit Big and slightly thick in the mouth, there is an early minty edge here followed by a palate full of tight but rich, muscular, meaty dark fruit filled with carob, earth and almost fudgy candied flavors. Finishing dry and dark with deep earthy notes hints of heat, pepperiness and some old woodiness this is still a bit tannic and firm in the mouth but at the same time it shows great precision and balance. A fabulous beaucastel. 94pts
2004 14%
darker more youthful color than 2005
a touch alcoholic and tight on the nose slowly revealing lovely floral, herbal and candid spice aroamas, very middle eastern spiced with some espresso foam and vanilla
tight on entry, good richness but fine acidity as well, really shows lovely focus, not flamboyant but firm and focused with deep, earthy and slightly vegetal flavors wrapped around a red berry core with medicinal notes on the back end. Finish is tough and short but the fruit powers through on the finale just giving glimpses of what’s to come. Tannins are very finely ripe. 92
2001 13.5%
showing a touch of amber around a ruby core
celery seed, meaty, spicy, perhaps a touch cooked with dried berry fruit, sandy soil tones, cofffee and polleny floral notes along with fennel pollen
Almost resolved, very fine powdery tannins, good acidity, a touch hollow perhaps in the mouth with some astringency showing subtle fruit, lots of wild cherry and cooked strawberry tones, gains sweetness of flavor without sweetness in the mouth finishing with good length and lovely red berry fruit. tight and not paricualrly generous 88
1999 13.5%
a touch paler than the 2001 with that seem hint of amber but a brighter core
smoke, earth, leather, and a huge incipient garrigue note come squirting from the glass, this is tight with a very fine pigs foot meatiness and subtle peppery notes accenting the ciinamon laced red candied raspberry fruit.
A point, this is bright and juicy in the mouth, broad and transparent with mineral edged flavors of wild red cherries and cranberries. Lovely supple texture and fine balance are the keys here with a subtle complexity building in the glass strawberry candied and light spices, surprisingly fruit driven with a surprisng amount of richness on the finish 90
1998 13.5%
similar to the 2001 in appearance
celery seed, carob, leatherand candied medicinal aromas greet the nose this is ripe and liquorious, a nice edge of garrigue and some white pepper notes add detail.
plump and almost soft in the mouth, this is packed with fruit but shows a certain light weight quality at the same time. Some astringency appears ont he backend and the fruit shows dried and candied fruit tones to the cherry and raspberry flaovrs. Finish is a bit short candied and clear with raspberry return. 89
bid candied blackberry and herb nose, fairly dark fruit and minty nose, smooth, nice density, a little plump but not terrible complex with long mineral and black spice notes, 91
1997 13.5%
more evolved but quite healthy color with just an edge of ember but more bricky red
smells evolved with plenty of forest floor, tea, dried herbs, tobacco, earth and some cow patty
Smooth if narrow, relatively high in acid with modest if dry tannins, this is rather narrow int he mouth, shows lots of evolved beefy, brothy, herb and forest floor flavors all layered over a touch of red berry fruit. Tannins seem a bit woody and this shows some oaky flavors in the finish along with a touch of heat a good but small scaled Beaucastel that finishes a little on the dry side 87
1996 13.5%
dark color and quite fully evolved with a core of bricky red overlaid with amber but this does show nice depth of color and a lively shine
lightly corked, minty musty
Round, again relatively higher in acid, beautiful soft tannins, lovely texture too bad about the scalped falvors
What should have been a wonderful evening was marred by misfire after misfire, and sadly we suffered a 50% hit on rate on my favorite Chateauneuf du Pape, the always reliable and often awe inspiring wines of Chateau de Beaucastel. Now you might have read that I am not a particularly enthusiastic fan of Chateauneuf, which is true since I am usually the one writing that, but the truth lies more with grenache than with the wines of Chateauneuf.
The truth is I think I am fairly well aligned with many of the more traditional producers in the region with their reliance on the art of blending to make a better wine. Of course there are exceptions, stunning wines produced exclusively from grenache but they are few and far between. For me grenache rarely produces a complete wine, instead it offers up enticing perfumes of red fruit and herbs while delivering a relatively high alcohol, low acid mouthful of red fruit that can be mouth filling, yet at the same time a bit hollow. That’s where varieties like Syrah, Mourvedre, Cinsault and Carignan come in, not to mention all 13 allowable varieties in the wines of the application.
For my palate the magic happens when the big ball of red fruit is filled, like a toy chest, with the complexity afforded by these other varieties. Some black fruit, olives, bacon fat, leather gloves, dirty boots and hung game, all mixed around adding depth,. structure and nuance to the explosive core of grenache. That’s when things get interesting, and of course that is what beaucastel specializes in.
One of the few and perhaps only producers to use all the allowable varieties in their wines, beaucastel has historically allowed Mourvedre to share the spotlight with grenache, each grape making up roughly 30% of a typical vntage of Beaucastel. The results show in the wines, in their youth as added textural component and a more complete mouthfeel, and on to older age when the nuance really begins to show. In many cases I would tend to recommend drinking Chateauneuf du pape rather early as opposed to later, not because the wines don’t age well but rather because they don’t seem to improve significantly with age, change yes but for the better?
[PAGEBREAK]
In the case of beaucastel the opposite tends to be true. These are wines that reward ageing, the early exposition of grenache fruit inevitably yields towards the layered complexity that i look for in aged wines. Simplicity is supplanted by detail, at least that’s how it’s supposed to work. In the case of this flight of wine, simplicity was too often supplanted by crapola. Not necessarily the chateau’s fault of course, who knows where some of these wines have been, mostly in cellars since close to release though, and one hopes that quality control for corks is predictably better today, but while there were some pleasant surprises here, the tasting did little to further my thesis. That thesis being that it might be better to buy older vintages today that sell at or close to the release price for the current vintage.
That should be sage advice, and if the wine gods did not conspire against me this evening, punishing me for my recent good fortune, this last bit might well have been complete different. Consider that of the vintages we tried, 1995-2005, all can be had for less than $100 a bottle. I tasted the 2010 last night, a truly lovely vintage for beaucastel, and the price for that is pushing $100 in most places. Given the option of laying a wine down for a decade of buying one ready to drink I would usually opt for the latter. As it turns out I might be mistaken, but frankly not withstanding the sequence of unfortunate bottles here I would tend to stick with that advice with the obvious caveat that you tend to get what you pay for and working with a reputable retailer is essential. I still will recommend that people seek out some of these vintages of beaucastel because I love the wines and think that they offer good value, when they are showing well of course.
So how were these wines, well 1995’s, we actually opened a back-up bottle, were corked and then cooked. Ashame in light of the fact that this slow to evolve vintage had been showing promise of opening up just two years ago. This was followed by a corked bottle of the 1996! But then things took a turn for the better with a wonderfully over performing bottle of the 1997, a vintage I have dismissed in the past. Certainly not a great vintage, but one at peak, silky, lighter bodied, but open and expressive.
In contrast this was followed by the 1998, a vintage which showed great promise in its youth but one that has been nothing but trouble for the past several years. Gone is the explosive fruit but there’s not much seemingly replacing it. It’s worth noting that this vintage included an unusually high percentage of grenache, a departure for the estate due to the weather conditions that year. One has to wonder if this change in routine might be responsible for the wines awkward behavior or if it is in fact going through just an awkward phase. I’d put my money on the fact that this wine is not going to be better than it is today and would opt to drink up my remaining bottles sooner, rather than later.
With the 1999 we are back in form, rather classic form, Chateauneuf that shows excellent balance and restraint, even elegance. I really liked this wine, it doesn’t knock you out but keeps you thoroughly engaged. The 2000 was quite the contrast, totally fun and full of fruit plump and short, and not terribly complex yet a wine that you can’t help but smile while drinking. 2001 returned us to the doghouse, turning our nose down at a heat damaged, grey market import. 2002, the last truly bad vintage for the region was, as far as I know not produced so we moved onto the 2003.
[PAGEBREAK]
Now I am not a warm climate wine lover, and while this wine had all the pruny, high alcohol traits of that scorching vintage it was better than I had expected, though still not I would want to return to. In many ways it’s qualitatively on par with the 1997, just at opposite ends of the spectrum so I am sure there will be people out there who react to the 2003 as I’ve reacted to the 1997: a nice wine with a few faults but at it’s peak it will be a fine bottle.
Moving on to the 2004 we are treatede to another cork tainted bottle, though one where one can get a sense of what lies beneath. A vintage probably similar in style to but notable better than the 1997, I would love to try this again in 5 years but expect it will be drinking quite well today and has a lovely ten year window to enjoy it in. And that brings us to our final bottle, the 2005. Up til this point the wines had all been notably clean, brett free, though brett had been a trademark or sorts at beaucastel. that barnyard smells was one of the things that made beaucastel a love it or hate it wine, and in truth the high percentage of Mourvedre with it’s gamy, earthy aromas only helped to reinforce this aromatic profile, but beaucastel cleaned up the brett issues that they had, or did they?
Not with this bottle, which opened with decidedly meaty, leathery aromas but morphed into a poo-a-thon with a few hours of air. I expect some will say this is just the Mourvedre, but I would have to disagree, this was old school brett and was absolutely freaking delicious. This is a great vintage for beaucastel, powerful, complex, rich and with impeccable balance. This was classic beaucastel, and brings us back to the point of this article. If I were to be buying Beaucastel today I might be tempted by the 2010 tasted last night, but this 2005 is simply a better wine in my opinion, and at the same price a better deal. If you’re like me and enjoy austere, firm wines you might even want to backfill with some 1999, but this 2005 should be a must buy for any Beaucastel lover out there.
So in the end this was a lesson of mixed messages. Yes, buying older wines can be a risky proposition, but at times they offer such compelling value that they can’t be missed. And it should be worth noting that most, in fact nearly all of the wines we tasted this evening were purchased within a year or so of release, so buying the wines young is no guarantee of quality either. Ah the life of the wine lover.
Beaucastel vertical
1995
very evolved and kind of dark
just opened, tight, little dried fruit, mineral, licorice, candied medicinal,
broad, a bit hollow, a bit candied,
bottle 2
right, evolved and bricky but lively and attractive
1997
Smoky on the nose with mature aromas of leather, toasty briary pipe, and mineral notes with fine focus. On the palate this is broad and open with nice richness of fruit on the edges but a little lean on the mid-palate, a classic grenache mouthfeel. There is nice darker fruit on the backend and soft tannins that grow on the finish with has decent length, and earthy, forest floor, and lightly leathery flavors. At peak and quite enjoyable. 87pts
1999
Tight and focused on the nose with beautiful, spicy, leathery, clean aromas that are still youthful with hints of chalk, spice, and dark fruit On entry this is almost voluptuous with really vibrant acids with decisive cut and round, ample tannins that segue into spicy dark cherry fruit that shows a slightly dried edge. Ultimately this is a little touch but it does exhibit lovely focused, dark fruit and good length, with very chocolatey tannins offering a subtle density here. 93pts
2000
Another nose that remains somewhat tight with medicinal cherry, leather, and garrigue aromas framed with a little spice, and a little floral nuance. With a lovely combination of liquory, plump, rich fruit, and a bit a bit of bitterness this fills the mouth that drops off quickly on the backend this is a bit short, but the black berry fruit and plum fruit is just so pretty you can help but seeing this as a fun wine. 89pts
2001
a bit brothy, tight, minty, dried fruit, pipe tobacco, briar, young, carob,
a bit compact dusty, a bit tough, and chewy, short,
2003
Jammy black currant and blueberry fruit greet the nose showing off a bit of a pruny edge with very black peppery top notes and a slightly dusty character. In the mouth this has surprisingly intact acid, offering decent brightness and height in the mouth with lovely blackberry fruit but here is a fair amount of alcohol showing here, and while the fruit does show nice purity the wine is not particularly well balanced. 85pts
2004l
clean, woodsy, creamy curranty fruit, a little oaky perhaps,
fresh, simple, pure clean blueberry fruit, high toned, short, decent potential, sneaky length, sweet tannins, a bit simple but pure and enjoyable, etter than 97 in the same style
2005
awsome poop-a-thon, back to time , a touch spicy, clean poop,
bright and clear, very precise wine, lovely balance here with fine acid and super ripe tannins, breathtaking balance,
90-91 93
2005 14%
Color is a touch pale and showing early stages of evolution
Nose is very aromatic, leather, meat, black fruit, slightly candied with lovely smoke and herb nuances but in time this turns into an awesome poop-s-thon. Turn back the clock to beaucastel of days gone by all backed up with super clean fresh black fruit Big and slightly thick in the mouth, there is an early minty edge here followed by a palate full of tight but rich, muscular, meaty dark fruit filled with carob, earth and almost fudgy candied flavors. Finishing dry and dark with deep earthy notes hints of heat, pepperiness and some old woodiness this is still a bit tannic and firm in the mouth but at the same time it shows great precision and balance. A fabulous beaucastel. 94pts
2004 14%
darker more youthful color than 2005
a touch alcoholic and tight on the nose slowly revealing lovely floral, herbal and candid spice aroamas, very middle eastern spiced with some espresso foam and vanilla
tight on entry, good richness but fine acidity as well, really shows lovely focus, not flamboyant but firm and focused with deep, earthy and slightly vegetal flavors wrapped around a red berry core with medicinal notes on the back end. Finish is tough and short but the fruit powers through on the finale just giving glimpses of what’s to come. Tannins are very finely ripe. 92
2001 13.5%
showing a touch of amber around a ruby core
celery seed, meaty, spicy, perhaps a touch cooked with dried berry fruit, sandy soil tones, cofffee and polleny floral notes along with fennel pollen
Almost resolved, very fine powdery tannins, good acidity, a touch hollow perhaps in the mouth with some astringency showing subtle fruit, lots of wild cherry and cooked strawberry tones, gains sweetness of flavor without sweetness in the mouth finishing with good length and lovely red berry fruit. tight and not paricualrly generous 88
1999 13.5%
a touch paler than the 2001 with that seem hint of amber but a brighter core
smoke, earth, leather, and a huge incipient garrigue note come squirting from the glass, this is tight with a very fine pigs foot meatiness and subtle peppery notes accenting the ciinamon laced red candied raspberry fruit.
A point, this is bright and juicy in the mouth, broad and transparent with mineral edged flavors of wild red cherries and cranberries. Lovely supple texture and fine balance are the keys here with a subtle complexity building in the glass strawberry candied and light spices, surprisingly fruit driven with a surprisng amount of richness on the finish 90
1998 13.5%
similar to the 2001 in appearance
celery seed, carob, leatherand candied medicinal aromas greet the nose this is ripe and liquorious, a nice edge of garrigue and some white pepper notes add detail.
plump and almost soft in the mouth, this is packed with fruit but shows a certain light weight quality at the same time. Some astringency appears ont he backend and the fruit shows dried and candied fruit tones to the cherry and raspberry flaovrs. Finish is a bit short candied and clear with raspberry return. 89
bid candied blackberry and herb nose, fairly dark fruit and minty nose, smooth, nice density, a little plump but not terrible complex with long mineral and black spice notes, 91
1997 13.5%
more evolved but quite healthy color with just an edge of ember but more bricky red
smells evolved with plenty of forest floor, tea, dried herbs, tobacco, earth and some cow patty
Smooth if narrow, relatively high in acid with modest if dry tannins, this is rather narrow int he mouth, shows lots of evolved beefy, brothy, herb and forest floor flavors all layered over a touch of red berry fruit. Tannins seem a bit woody and this shows some oaky flavors in the finish along with a touch of heat a good but small scaled Beaucastel that finishes a little on the dry side 87
1996 13.5%
dark color and quite fully evolved with a core of bricky red overlaid with amber but this does show nice depth of color and a lively shine
lightly corked, minty musty
Round, again relatively higher in acid, beautiful soft tannins, lovely texture too bad about the scalped falvors