Cinq Cépages Vertical
Our store recently held a six-year Chateau St. Jean Cinq Cépages tasting. This wine gained popularity, of course, when it was named “Wine of the Year” by Wine Spectator in 1999, at a surprising suggested retail of $28. Of course, the price has more than doubled since then, but then again a lot of prices have gone up. At any rate, most of the six vintages of Cinq Cépages that we tasted would value in around the $60 asking price, still a value considering some of the (overpriced?) competition on the market today. Winemaker Margot Van Staaveren was there to walk us through the different years.
Here are the notes I scribbled onto my placemat, translated from my sloppy and secretive cursive:
1996
Brick red color. Bright fruit on the nose. Very slight tannins, berry fruit and a hint of bitter chocolate. Full but not overwhelming. Certainly my favorite of the tasting.
1999
A nose of red pepper (?!), with dust and tiny amounts of fruit. A little warm on the mouth with an herbal presence. Interesting, if not great.
2000
Deep brick with a much dustier nose with much more subtle fruit. More fruit on the palate but still balanced. Softer, less pronounced.
2001
Softer, less details on the nose. Warm, mild fruit (light berries) and some spice. This wine lacks firm tannins. (Margo claimed this vintage as her “current favorite. I thought it was a little shy.)
2002
Nose full of jam and tight, young berries. It has seen less age, and is tannic with darker fruits and berries on the palate.
2003
More young fruit but less jammy sweetness on the nose. Big and tannic with some herb and dark chocolate. Obviously needs some aging.
Here are the notes I scribbled onto my placemat, translated from my sloppy and secretive cursive:
1996
Brick red color. Bright fruit on the nose. Very slight tannins, berry fruit and a hint of bitter chocolate. Full but not overwhelming. Certainly my favorite of the tasting.
1999
A nose of red pepper (?!), with dust and tiny amounts of fruit. A little warm on the mouth with an herbal presence. Interesting, if not great.
2000
Deep brick with a much dustier nose with much more subtle fruit. More fruit on the palate but still balanced. Softer, less pronounced.
2001
Softer, less details on the nose. Warm, mild fruit (light berries) and some spice. This wine lacks firm tannins. (Margo claimed this vintage as her “current favorite. I thought it was a little shy.)
2002
Nose full of jam and tight, young berries. It has seen less age, and is tannic with darker fruits and berries on the palate.
2003
More young fruit but less jammy sweetness on the nose. Big and tannic with some herb and dark chocolate. Obviously needs some aging.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home