A Food and drink forum. FoodBanter.com

Welcome to FoodBanter.com forums which provide access to the finest food and drink related newsgroups.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most newsgroup discussions and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics to the food related newsgroups, communicate privately with other FoodBanter.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support.

Go Back   Home » FoodBanter.com forum » Drinking » Wine
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Wine (alt.food.wine) Devoted to the discussion of wine and wine-related topics. A place to read and comment about wines, wine and food matching, storage systems, wine paraphernalia, etc. In general, any topic related to wine is valid fodder for the group.

TN Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess Napa CS 1978



 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2008, 05:15 AM posted to alt.food.wine
cwdjrxyz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 507
Default TN Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess Napa CS 1978

The wines are Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess
Napa Cabernet Sauvignon 1978. Both were bought soon after release, had
a sound cork, a fill still in the neck, and were stored properly.

This was the last bottle of the Burgess CS, and I have had it before.
It has always been decent, but not quite at the top. It is still
holding well, but perhaps is beginning to lose a bit of fruit. It is
not in the class of the Ridge MB 1990 I reported recently, but few
other California CSs are. It is a bit simple compared with the best
examples.

I had several bottles of the regular Saintsbury 1990 Chardonnay at one
time, but they were all consumed many years ago. I only had one bottle
of the mentioned Reserve that I somehow neglected to open for many
years. I even had a backup bottle of another wine waiting. A
California Chardonnay that is still on top form at nearly 18 years is
very much the exception rather than the rule. This Chardonnay turned
out to be in top form, and it was one of the most individual
Chardonnays I have ever tasted. It was well balanced and now smoothed.
There was no hint of excessive oxidation or other fault. Many very old
California Chardonnays, if they have not oxidized, have lost most
fruit and some are more like oak tea than wine. This wine had very
intense fruit with mixed citrus and light stone fruit. It had one of
the most intense bouquets I have ever smelled in a Chardonnay. It is
nearly as if one had extracted some of the floral components from
Viognier and Riesling and added these to the usual Chardonnay bouquet.
The floral character, although very intense, was very pure and light.
Honeysuckle and jasmine come to mind, but neither is exactly right. I
refer to the bouquet of the blooming flowers, not perfumes made from
them that often have musk, civet, or ambergris added to give the
perfume some animal as well as floral notes.
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2008, 12:24 PM posted to alt.food.wine
Emery Davis[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default TN Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess NapaCS 1978

DaleW wrote:
On May 6, 12:15�am, cwdjrxyz wrote:
The wines are Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess
Napa Cabernet Sauvignon 1978. Both were bought soon after release, had
a sound cork, a fill still in the neck, and were stored properly.

This was the last bottle of the Burgess CS, and I have had it before.
It has always been decent, but not quite at the top. It is still
holding well, but perhaps is beginning to lose a bit of fruit. It is
not in the class of the Ridge MB 1990 I reported recently, but few
other California CSs are. It is a bit simple compared with the best
examples.

[]
thanks for notes. Only Burgess Cabs I've tried were the '76 & '84, but
enjoyed both. Seem to offer good value.

Fascinating note on the Saintsbury, thanks.


Indeed. I meant to respond to this earlier. I'm pleased to hear the
Burgess
is still holding up -- we have a bottle (I think only 1) of the 84 left.
It was
hale when last tried, but that was years ago now.

I have 6 or so bottles of Mayacamas Chardonnay '92. Like your Saintsbury
it was doing remarkably well. I shall have to try a bottle soon.

Thanks for the great notes.

-E
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2008, 02:11 PM posted to alt.food.wine
DaleW
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,943
Default TN Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess Napa CS1978

On May 6, 12:15�am, cwdjrxyz wrote:
The wines are Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess
Napa Cabernet Sauvignon 1978. Both were bought soon after release, had
a sound cork, a fill still in the neck, and were stored properly.

This was the last bottle of the Burgess CS, and I have had it before.
It has always been decent, but not quite at the top. It is still
holding well, but perhaps is beginning to lose a bit of fruit. It is
not in the class of the Ridge MB 1990 I reported recently, but few
other California CSs are. It is a bit simple compared with the best
examples.

I had several bottles of the regular Saintsbury 1990 Chardonnay at one
time, but they were all consumed many years ago. I only had one bottle
of the mentioned Reserve that I somehow neglected to open for many
years. I even had a backup bottle of another wine waiting. A
California Chardonnay that is still on top form at nearly 18 years is
very much the exception rather than the rule. This Chardonnay turned
out to be in top form, and it was one of the most individual
Chardonnays I have ever tasted. It was well balanced and now smoothed.
There was no hint of excessive oxidation or other fault. Many very old
California Chardonnays, if they have not oxidized, have lost most
fruit and some are more like oak tea than wine. This wine had very
intense fruit with mixed citrus and light stone fruit. It had one of
the most intense bouquets I have ever smelled in a Chardonnay. It is
nearly as if one had extracted some of the floral components from
Viognier and Riesling and added these to the usual Chardonnay bouquet.
The floral character, although very intense, was very pure and light.
Honeysuckle and jasmine come to mind, but neither is exactly right. I
refer to the bouquet of the blooming flowers, not perfumes made from
them that often have �musk, civet, or ambergris added to give the
perfume some animal as well as floral notes.


thanks for notes. Only Burgess Cabs I've tried were the '76 & '84, but
enjoyed both. Seem to offer good value.

Fascinating note on the Saintsbury, thanks.
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2008, 03:09 PM posted to alt.food.wine
Lawrence Leichtman[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 199
Default TN Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess Napa CS 1978

In article ,
Emery Davis wrote:

DaleW wrote:
On May 6, 12:15�am, cwdjrxyz wrote:
The wines are Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess
Napa Cabernet Sauvignon 1978. Both were bought soon after release, had
a sound cork, a fill still in the neck, and were stored properly.

This was the last bottle of the Burgess CS, and I have had it before.
It has always been decent, but not quite at the top. It is still
holding well, but perhaps is beginning to lose a bit of fruit. It is
not in the class of the Ridge MB 1990 I reported recently, but few
other California CSs are. It is a bit simple compared with the best
examples.

[]
thanks for notes. Only Burgess Cabs I've tried were the '76 & '84, but
enjoyed both. Seem to offer good value.

Fascinating note on the Saintsbury, thanks.


Indeed. I meant to respond to this earlier. I'm pleased to hear the
Burgess
is still holding up -- we have a bottle (I think only 1) of the 84 left.
It was
hale when last tried, but that was years ago now.

I have 6 or so bottles of Mayacamas Chardonnay '92. Like your Saintsbury
it was doing remarkably well. I shall have to try a bottle soon.

Thanks for the great notes.

-E


Has anyone tasted any recent Burgess Cabs? The last I had was 1988.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2008, 06:01 PM posted to alt.food.wine
cwdjrxyz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 507
Default TN Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess Napa CS1978

On May 7, 9:09 am, Lawrence Leichtman wrote:
In article ,
Emery Davis wrote:



DaleW wrote:
On May 6, 12:15�am, cwdjrxyz wrote:
The wines are Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess
Napa Cabernet Sauvignon 1978. Both were bought soon after release, had
a sound cork, a fill still in the neck, and were stored properly.


This was the last bottle of the Burgess CS, and I have had it before.
It has always been decent, but not quite at the top. It is still
holding well, but perhaps is beginning to lose a bit of fruit. It is
not in the class of the Ridge MB 1990 I reported recently, but few
other California CSs are. It is a bit simple compared with the best
examples.


[]
thanks for notes. Only Burgess Cabs I've tried were the '76 & '84, but
enjoyed both. Seem to offer good value.


Fascinating note on the Saintsbury, thanks.


Indeed. I meant to respond to this earlier. I'm pleased to hear the
Burgess
is still holding up -- we have a bottle (I think only 1) of the 84 left.
It was
hale when last tried, but that was years ago now.


I have 6 or so bottles of Mayacamas Chardonnay '92. Like your Saintsbury
it was doing remarkably well. I shall have to try a bottle soon.


Thanks for the great notes.


-E


Has anyone tasted any recent Burgess Cabs? The last I had was 1988.


I have not had recent Burgess CS, but they they are still listed in
Hugh Johnson's 2008 pocket wine book. The 1995, 97, and 99 are listed
in bold type meaning they are ready for drinking. Vintages from the
2000s are not listed yet. I don't know if they just have not been
tasted or if something has happened to change for the worse at
Burgess. There is mention that Burgess CSs are dark and weighty and
come from from hillside vineyards on Howell mountain. They also have
made some fairly powerful Zinfandel. If Burgess continues in their old
style, I would guess that any frome the 2000s in better vintages may
benefit from at least a few more years of age. Howell mountain has
produced several well known, powerful CSs.
 




Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


fitness forum |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6
Copyright ©2004-2008 FoodBanter.com, part of the NewsgroupBanter project.
The comments are property of their posters.
Loans - Remortgages - Sprint Ringtones - Buy PSP - Home Loan