Last week I came across 2 separate articles regarding the aging of California syrah , one Here, Wine Review Online with W. Blake Grey and another from Levi Dalton's I'll drink to that podcast from 1/15 with John Gilman.Both men make the case that California syrah cannot age and imply that the alcohol levels are responsible.
Mr. Grey states that in 2010 he brought back from his wine locker a half a dozen 2004 cal. syrahs that he loved on release and now were undrinkable, proving that California syrah can't age and at the end of the article he makes the case that it is all about alcohol level for him. Now without knowing specifically what wines Mr Grey brought back from the 2004 vintage I can't argue that he is wrong regarding those wines, but I can argue that he is way off regarding the aging of California syrah. Having recently had an 06 Pax Griffins Lair that came in at 15.1% alcohol, and noting it was as good now as ever, along with a 2005 Scholium Project Tenbrick petite sirah that comes in at 15.7% and was still drinking great. I believe it still comes down to style preference, Pax Mahle, the wine maker for the 06 Griffins Lair I mentioned has commented on the record that he didn't like the way his wines were aging and changed his style when he started his new project Wind Gap, but for everyone that is complaining about high alcohol syrahs not aging well there are just as many wine drinkers on CellarTracker posting notes on 7 year old 15% Saxum wines that are still loving them. So maybe it is more about changing tastes than the wine actually not aging well.
Mr. Gilman, on the podcast, states that it is very rare for high alcohol wines to age well and that after 2 or 3 years people are trying the wines and saying I don't like that wine at all. I would expect that maybe those people don't like the style of wine to begin with, Mr. Gilman admits to not enjoying those wines and having an old world palate, and are foolishly expecting the wine to some how change to a more old world wine with time in the cellar. We get it, you don't like big new world wines, I don't see the need to put down a whole style of wine to validate your preferences. I'm guessing that there are still more wines available in Mr. Gilmans "old world" style than he could buy or drink in his lifetime. I am also on the Rhys allocation list, the winery mentioned by Mr. Gilman as suiting his style, and recently had the 09 Horseshoe syrah and found it very mediocre, it had one dominant flavor of black pepper and little else with an extremely light body and that makes it a very bad qpr imho at $60.00, and I've had conversations with other Rhys drinkers who said my note for the most part was spot on but they loved the wine. Different strokes I guess and that is the important issue. Drink what you like! We don't need you to like these "oversize caricatures" of wines. As it is the mailing lists for Saxum, Carlisle, Alban, SQN are all full with long waits.
This idea that Robert Parker is the only one who appreciates the big
flavorful style of wine and everybody else is just point chasing is
laughable and short sighted, I know and drink with more than a few
people who enjoy new world wines more than old and have been doing so
for years.
There are wine styles and regions I don't like or understand well. Burgundy too shrill and acidic with no body. Beaujolais uninteresting. Spanish reds always seem musty to me.I don't see the need to rail against the winemakers,criticizing them and wanting them to make a different style of wine, I just don't buy them. I will continue to occasionally try them to see if my tastes or their styles have changed, but I know there is more wine being made in a style that I enjoy than I can ever buy, so why would I care what the other producers are doing? Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and that is all this is. :)
Wine is constant proof that God loves us and loves to see us happy.
~Benjamin Franklin
No comments:
Post a Comment