The California Pinot Blues

B

Ben Sherwin

Ben Sherwin
Those who know me know that I drink a lot of domestic Pinot and some don't even hold it against me. Like everyone else, my tastes have evolved and, while most of my fairly extensive California PN collection is wine made in a more refined style (such as Littorai or Williams-Selyem), I still have some pre-Enlightenment bottles laying around. I would never serve these to my friends (at least not the ones I like) and thus they become unholy experiments on me (and sometimes my wife if I've feeling in a particularly malevolent mood). A solitary Dr. Jeckyll alone in his laboratory if you will. So, it was with great trepidation that I opened a 2003 ROAR Garys' Vineyard that somehow remained in my collection. I'm not sure when or why I bought this, but apparently I drank through a couple of bottles a few years ago. Out of a sense of optimism or horror I had left one bottle until now.

Whatever charm it may have had has been lost on this train wreck of a wine. The fruit has settled somewhat from its youth only proving that it once masked the prominent alcohol that it now sweats like a hobo at the bus station. If you told me that this "Pinot Noir" was fortified, I would have only asked how much. On the bright side, the fruit is muddled and there isn't a hint of acidity or, if there is any acidity, it is crushed under the unrelenting heal of the fruit and alcohol. The finish was shrill and charmless. Other than that, it wasn't that bad. I saved some for the next day, which was a useless experiment and goes to prove the old saying that when you find yourself in a hole stop digging. So, down the drain it went.
 
originally posted by Ben Sherwin:
The California Pinot BluesThose who know me know that I drink a lot of domestic Pinot and some don't even hold it against me. Like everyone else, my tastes have evolved and, while most of my fairly extensive California PN collection is wine made in a more refined style (such as Littorai or Williams-Selyem), I still have some pre-Enlightenment bottles laying around. I would never serve these to my friends (at least not the ones I like) and thus they become unholy experiments on me (and sometimes my wife if I've feeling in a particularly malevolent mood). A solitary Dr. Jeckyll alone in his laboratory if you will. So, it was with great trepidation that I opened a 2003 ROAR Garys' Vineyard that somehow remained in my collection. I'm not sure when or why I bought this, but apparently I drank through a couple of bottles a few years ago. Out of a sense of optimism or horror I had left one bottle until now.

Whatever charm it may have had has been lost on this train wreck of a wine. The fruit has settled somewhat from its youth only proving that it once masked the prominent alcohol that it now sweats like a hobo at the bus station. If you told me that this "Pinot Noir" was fortified, I would have only asked how much. On the bright side, the fruit is muddled and there isn't a hint of acidity or, if there is any acidity, it is crushed under the unrelenting heal of the fruit and alcohol. The finish was shrill and charmless. Other than that, it wasn't that bad. I saved some for the next day, which was a useless experiment and goes to prove the old saying that when you find yourself in a whole stop digging. So, down the drain it went.
Click to expand...
I gather you didn't like it? You didn't have to insult hobos.
 
Thanks, Ben. I love reading negative reviews when there's some humor in them. Wine rags got a lot less interesting to read when they only printed the positive reviews.

Mark Lipton
 
Jane you ignorant slut...

As someone who also owns some Roar... with your note prompting me, I opened a '03 Garys' Vineyard Pinot Noir..

Is it clearly from California..no doubt..it is very fruit driven and extracted..clearly... BUT, this has actually gotten more interesting and integrated over time with some mild sweetness, rich fruit, good structure, some dirt showing and really no sharp edges or alcohol (at least excessive) showing...no oak of note...I would revisit this in 2-4 more years.. I don't find any "hobo" notes or anything close to the horror show you experienced..I expect that some young Oregon PN's might even show somewhat like this FWIW

For the style that was likely intended, this seems to be aging well and showing well. For those who prefer austere, focused or less extracted styles this could indeed be a lot less than pleasureable...

CAVEAT: I must admit that my cellar is an inch deep and a mile wide and I am often less critical of wines than others
 
Well, the poor thing is only living up to it's maker's assessment of it:

Loading…

www.roarwines.com

2003 Garys' Vineyard Pinot Noir
Bright cherry, red fruit and violet flavors with notes of crme brulee and vanillin oak. Round and silky smooth with refreshing acidity; this wine is ready now and will drink beautifully for up to three years.
Aged: 10 months in 100% French barrels - 60% new (Remond, Francois Freres)
Bottled: unfiltered and unfined on August 15, 2004
Alc: 14.7% Total Acid: .50 pH: 3.85 Cases: 400
 
originally posted by Ben Sherwin:
Keith-maybe we should do an "Appall Jay Miller" off-line, er, Jeebus, and clean out our cellars.
Click to expand...
I've been trying to get people on board for a "Mystery Science Theatre 3000" taste-off where everyone has to bring the comically worst bottle in their cellar.
 
Roar was one of the many Calipinot producers that pushed the envelope too far in '03. (I think most have pulled back since then) The Roars that I sampled from '03 (Rosella's and SLH) were hot and disjointed. Not enjoyable young and even worse as they aged. I do have the '04 Rosella's and an '03 Syrah that I haven't tried yet, but I don't have high hopes.

I did read, however, that Ed Kurtzman is now making the wines starting with the '07 vintage, which could turn things around. I certainly liked the older Testarossas.
 
I've only had this wine once, the '01. It was oaky, clumsy, and obvious. My notes called it a Keystone Kop in comparison to the other wines on the table -- some Burg, some Oregon.
 
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
originally posted by Ben Sherwin:
Keith-maybe we should do an "Appall Jay Miller" off-line, er, Jeebus, and clean out our cellars.
Click to expand...
I've been trying to get people on board for a "Mystery Science Theatre 3000" taste-off where everyone has to bring the comically worst bottle in their cellar.
Click to expand...

I've told you, I'm all over that. Better yet, bring the bottles blind, and then we all just have a go at them. We'll need cameras to capture Jay's facial expressions.
 
originally posted by Dan Donahue:
Roar was one of the many Calipinot producers that pushed the envelope too far in '03. (I think most have pulled back since then).
Click to expand...
I think that in general this is true. The ripeness envelope for CA Pinot hadn't really been explored, so many of us were trying to see where the "sweet spot" was. In order to know for sure, we had to push ripeness higher and higher. After 2003, and then 2004 where a relentless heat wave caused sugars to soar, many of us did take a step or two back down the ripeness ladder - to a place where we felt comfortable being.

I will say that in our defense, most of us warned people that what we were doing had no track record, and that the wines should have been consumed within a few years. And that advice has proven to have been prophetic in that most of the 2003s have fallen apart. Some of the 2004s are still doing fairly well since many of us did a better job watching acid levels. But the 2004s probably don't have any upside in them at this point.

I think that a lot of people who got turned off by the 2003/2004 vintage wines would be pleasantly surprised if they gave more recent CA Pinot vintages a try - especially 2005 and 2006.
 
originally posted by Brian Loring:
I think that a lot of people who got turned off by the 2003/2004 vintage wines would be pleasantly surprised if they gave more recent CA Pinot vintages a try - especially 2005 and 2006.
Click to expand...

Good point Brian, and I'm in agreement with you about CA pinot in general, but my basic issue is that I'm just not all that enamored of the pinot noir coming from the Santa Lucia Highlands. I've tried to like them but it just doesn't work. The wines are usually very well made but I find them consistently lacking in a capacity for delicacy and finesse, but then, I'm a wimp who likes lighter, more supple pinots. I've tasted a lot of SLH wines over multiple vintages and about a year ago I came to the realization that they're just not my thing. FWIW, I used to feel that way about pinot from the Santa Rita Hills but have found some that I enjoy quite a lot. In general, the winemakers there seem to be taking more chances by not pushing the envelope as much as they could and the terroir is showing up more readily (I think that vine maturity is a factor in SRH too).

Santa Lucia Highlands (at least the Pisoni/ROAR/Gary's strip) seems to be farmed in such a way that it produces fruit that's perfect for envelope pushing, so maybe it attracts the sort of winemaker who likes the post office approach.

-Eden (hell, I wasn't nuts even for the Arcadian wines from Pisoni)
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
Acid unitsBrian,

That 0.5 acid number is grams tartaric per 100 ml?
Click to expand...
Yep... or 5 grams per litre if that works better for you. That, along with the 3.85 pH underline the issue of low acid - relative to the overall bigness/extraction of the wine. My guess is the alcohol is understated and that it's actually over 15%.
 
originally posted by Brian Loring:
originally posted by SFJoe:
Acid unitsBrian,

That 0.5 acid number is grams tartaric per 100 ml?
Click to expand...
Yep... or 5 grams per litre if that works better for you. That, along with the 3.85 pH underline the issue of low acid - relative to the overall bigness/extraction of the wine. My guess is the alcohol is understated and that it's actually over 15%.
Click to expand...

Gotcha,

thanks, Brian. Just another picky chemist.
 
originally posted by Brian Loring:I think that a lot of people who got turned off by the 2003/2004 vintage wines would be pleasantly surprised if they gave more recent CA Pinot vintages a try - especially 2005 and 2006.
Click to expand...
I have to confess, your 05 Keefer and Rosella's are much closer to my strike zone than the 04s ever were. Nice job on the 05 Palis too.

RT
 
originally posted by Michel Abood:
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
originally posted by Ben Sherwin:
Keith-maybe we should do an "Appall Jay Miller" off-line, er, Jeebus, and clean out our cellars.
Click to expand...
I've been trying to get people on board for a "Mystery Science Theatre 3000" taste-off where everyone has to bring the comically worst bottle in their cellar.
Click to expand...

I've told you, I'm all over that. Better yet, bring the bottles blind, and then we all just have a go at them. We'll need cameras to capture Jay's facial expressions.
Click to expand...

I had a Roar Pinot the last time I was at Peking Duck House. Nyah, nyah, you missed it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top