scottreiner
scott reiner
Just tasted through 11 vintages of the famous Super Tuscan estate of Ornellaia. Ornellaia is in the Bolgheri DOC of Tuscany and is made from Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Cabernet Franc. This is regal, expensive stuff.
The vines were planted from 1982 and 1985, with 1985 being the first vintage. The farming was described as leaning toward the organic when possible, but they do what they have to do depending on the vintage. There is no irrigation. All wines from 1985 to 2005 were made using natural yeast. Since then, a determination is made in each of the the 60+ plots whether or not to use inoculated yeast based on the specific needs of the plot. The wine is never acidified or chapitalized. Sulfur is currently added after press and during fermentation. In fact, the wines were sulfured when ambient yeasts were used.
We tried the wines in 4 flights, reflecting the characteristics/ages of the vintages and their current drinkability: Early Years, Challenging Vintages, Wines To Drink Now and Wine For Tomorrow.
Early Years
1990 Nice tannins, red fruit, some secondary notes starting to appear. Could still use some time, but with a steak, mmmmm. Lighter and more balanced than I would have thought, decent acidity for a warm vintage. More about elegance without being prudish.
1994 Much more closed that the 1990, lower in apparent acid. More earth evident and less fruit, but somewhat unyielding. Less in the mid-palate, really a less complete wine. A weightier wine with distinctly less elegance.
Challenging Vintages
1996 Best acid so far. Darker berries at the forefront with finer grained, dry tannins. Secondary notes make an appearance, but relatively thin. Drink up son.
2002 Lots of cocoa on the nose and the palate. There is fruit there, but it is mostly hiding. Fine grained but very apparent tannins. Really nice acidity. Good fruit in a tough year. I could drink this.
2005 The last vintage made with 100% natural yeast. Lots of darker berries, cassis. Tannic and austere, they say that the wines are always 100% de-stemmed, but this is pretty green. Overall, it's a bit unbalanced. The acids/fruit/tannins are all there, but they're not playing nicely.
Wines To Drink Now
1997 Maybe my least favorite wine of the tasting. Why everyone likes 1997 in Tuscany I will never understand. This is very ripe. All fruit with no real secondary development. There is some nice tannin, and the acidity is low but present, but everything is going off in its own direction. No real structure. Compared to its brothers, if there is a glugging Ornellaia, this is it.
1998 Much more balance than the 1997. This is a young wine, but it really shows promise. You still get mostly fruit notes, but the earth is fighting to get out! And finally, something in the mid-palate. Most complete wine so far.
2000 A little more advanced than the 1998. There are some secondary notes, but the wine is also a bit more closed. Some nice acidity, and again like the 1998, there is some structure to the wine. The least tannic of the wines today, and to be honest the most fun.
Wines For Tomorrow
1999 The 1999 is young, austere and tannic, but has good stuffing. This could be really interesting in 10 years!
2004 RIPE! There is some decent tannin and good acidity, but tasted blind I might guess California Cab/Merlot. To me, this wine speaks much more of the grapes than it does of Tuscany.
2007 Young and tight with some decided aromas of soy sauce.
At this point I stopped taking tasting notes and gathered my thoughts. The 2007 was emblematic of most of the wines sampled today. They are very well made internationally styled wines, but to me in no way speak of place. They are textbook examples of 'correct' wines, but tell me no story. I kept asking myself, 'do these taste like Tuscany'? Some more than others, but overall no.
But this is not to say that they are not good wines. Especially the 1990, 1999 and 2000. Yes, they are more austere and 'serous' than fun, but they have their place. These are wines to drink with your father-in-law. While wearing a tie...
The vines were planted from 1982 and 1985, with 1985 being the first vintage. The farming was described as leaning toward the organic when possible, but they do what they have to do depending on the vintage. There is no irrigation. All wines from 1985 to 2005 were made using natural yeast. Since then, a determination is made in each of the the 60+ plots whether or not to use inoculated yeast based on the specific needs of the plot. The wine is never acidified or chapitalized. Sulfur is currently added after press and during fermentation. In fact, the wines were sulfured when ambient yeasts were used.
We tried the wines in 4 flights, reflecting the characteristics/ages of the vintages and their current drinkability: Early Years, Challenging Vintages, Wines To Drink Now and Wine For Tomorrow.
Early Years
1990 Nice tannins, red fruit, some secondary notes starting to appear. Could still use some time, but with a steak, mmmmm. Lighter and more balanced than I would have thought, decent acidity for a warm vintage. More about elegance without being prudish.
1994 Much more closed that the 1990, lower in apparent acid. More earth evident and less fruit, but somewhat unyielding. Less in the mid-palate, really a less complete wine. A weightier wine with distinctly less elegance.
Challenging Vintages
1996 Best acid so far. Darker berries at the forefront with finer grained, dry tannins. Secondary notes make an appearance, but relatively thin. Drink up son.
2002 Lots of cocoa on the nose and the palate. There is fruit there, but it is mostly hiding. Fine grained but very apparent tannins. Really nice acidity. Good fruit in a tough year. I could drink this.
2005 The last vintage made with 100% natural yeast. Lots of darker berries, cassis. Tannic and austere, they say that the wines are always 100% de-stemmed, but this is pretty green. Overall, it's a bit unbalanced. The acids/fruit/tannins are all there, but they're not playing nicely.
Wines To Drink Now
1997 Maybe my least favorite wine of the tasting. Why everyone likes 1997 in Tuscany I will never understand. This is very ripe. All fruit with no real secondary development. There is some nice tannin, and the acidity is low but present, but everything is going off in its own direction. No real structure. Compared to its brothers, if there is a glugging Ornellaia, this is it.
1998 Much more balance than the 1997. This is a young wine, but it really shows promise. You still get mostly fruit notes, but the earth is fighting to get out! And finally, something in the mid-palate. Most complete wine so far.
2000 A little more advanced than the 1998. There are some secondary notes, but the wine is also a bit more closed. Some nice acidity, and again like the 1998, there is some structure to the wine. The least tannic of the wines today, and to be honest the most fun.
Wines For Tomorrow
1999 The 1999 is young, austere and tannic, but has good stuffing. This could be really interesting in 10 years!
2004 RIPE! There is some decent tannin and good acidity, but tasted blind I might guess California Cab/Merlot. To me, this wine speaks much more of the grapes than it does of Tuscany.
2007 Young and tight with some decided aromas of soy sauce.
At this point I stopped taking tasting notes and gathered my thoughts. The 2007 was emblematic of most of the wines sampled today. They are very well made internationally styled wines, but to me in no way speak of place. They are textbook examples of 'correct' wines, but tell me no story. I kept asking myself, 'do these taste like Tuscany'? Some more than others, but overall no.
But this is not to say that they are not good wines. Especially the 1990, 1999 and 2000. Yes, they are more austere and 'serous' than fun, but they have their place. These are wines to drink with your father-in-law. While wearing a tie...
