![]() |
|
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. |
|
|||||||
| 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. |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
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. |
|
|||
|
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 |
|
|||
|
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. |
|
|||
|
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. |
|
|||
|
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. |