If I could nominate one reason alone for choosing to review a wine over a number of days, this 2012 Mourvédre from the excellent team at Chapel Hill would rank up there as the prime body of evidence submitted.
It was good from the off, gamey, small berries and blue fruits emanated from the glass on initial opening. It was speaking of its variety, but one sensed it had a little more to give.
Give it twenty-four hours, it was altogether a different story. Vibrant, expressive - blue fruits abound, florals, violets - it was truly singing.
Showing cherry, moving to a savoury expression on the palate, tannins were fine grained - easing from an initial firmness - and hints of cool espresso and chocolate made themselves known. It simply grew in stature with time, as such I would recommend either a serious decant or a good spell in the cellar for a few years. 92+
Tasted on: Wednesday 12th March, a Flower transitioning to Leaf Day
Source: Sample
Price: $35
Alcohol: 14.5%
Closure: Screwcap
Website: chapelhillwine.com.au
Follow me: http://twitter.com/TheVinsomniac
I don't wish to recommence the debate from last week Stu, but, I agree in this instance. The Chapel Hill house style lends itself to improving with time in the bottle and a good decant. Firm tannins give way to underlain fruit and complexity. I am OK with any method, and appreciate context in all wine reviews. Cheers!
ReplyDeleteHello BE,
DeleteThanks for the comment - agree that such an approach is situation specific, but really wanted to highlight that to not do so in this case would be doing the wine a disservice.
So, in agreement here.
Thanks
Stu
Stuart, in response to your review, I wrote a fairly long discourse this morning on the problem winemakers have with wine like this in terms of what the average punter might think when trying a bottle and drinking the lot at a restaurant or at home, but lost the lot when I tried to upload it. Low and behold, I just opened my email and there was an article by Whitey which encapsulated my thoughts and expanded upon them in his usual wonderful way. http://drinkster.blogspot.com/2014/03/tomorrow-never-comes-or-does-it.html
ReplyDeleteThanks Bob for bringing Whitey's - as ever insightful views - to my attention, I hadn't quite picked up on that on the blog.
DeleteI wasn't looking to add to anything that had already been said, in fact I do believe I stated I was happy to be labelled a "geek" if that was how reviewing a wine over a number of days is so perceived.
I also thought from the outset that the original comment was designed to create a bit of debate, or certainly provoke. Anyway, a shame your own thoughts on the matter have been lost.
Stu