View Single Post
  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.food.wine
Bi!! Bi!! is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,930
Default Caymus Special Selection 1988 - 1997

On Apr 26, 2:05 am, "Bill S." > wrote:
> These are notes from a delightful dinner arranged and hosted at a
> local restaurant by a wine friend whose axis is located for the most
> part straight through Burgundy and Bordeaux.
>
> We were told only that the seven wines were from one property and that
> the tasting was a vertical. That was the full extent of our knowledge
> going in! A definite challenge. I found that the wines naturally
> arranged themselves into two groups, a young segment, characterised by
> riper noses, and an older group characterised by slightly assertive
> terminal acidity and a quite different aromatic profile, much more
> French in style. Very perplexing. They were announced toward the end
> of the meal as being Caymus Special Selection Cabernet Sauvignon.
>
> All of the food courses were calculated to complement red wines and I
> shall recite the food as well, as these choices merit recognition.
>
> Lamb Carpaccio, roasted garlic, capers, Dijon aioli, Manchego cheese
>
> Assuntine (pasta) duck confit, ramps, tomato sauce, parmesan
>
> Buffalo tenderloin with wine tip mushrooms and huckleberry sauce
>
> Venison chop, fingerling potatoes, red wine sauce
>
> Lemon tart and blueberries
>
> We started off with a rather fine palate cleanser:
>
> 1990 Dom Perignon - showing a little colour, and with a nose of clean
> lemon scented fruit, showing only slight maturity, with a really
> creamy smooth mouth feel and a crisp clean elegant finish.
>
> You will have to forgive us our thrashing and flopping about trying to
> decide if it had any Merlot (the nose on some definitely pointed one
> in that direction), was it a Bordeaux (the last three tempted one to
> conclude this, yet the first three were clearly riper Southern types),
> was it perhaps South American or even South African; all came up for
> discussion. We were left to taste as we wished throughout the meal and
> I opted to start at the oldest, as is my wont, lest I miss any nuance
> by beginning at the other end with more powerful and less subtle
> wines.
>
> 1988 - I got a pretty classic claret cabernet sauvignon nose off this
> one. There was slight lightening but little browning at the edges, and
> the tannins are mostly gone, the finish riding instead on acidity
> which with time became slightly assertive. The thought was later
> offered that it was the custom to acidify these wines in some vintages
> and the question was raised as to whether that sort of added acidity
> melds less well with the wines than does a natural grape acidity. This
> wine and the next two as well, were of low enough pH to have me
> casting thoughts in the direction of the Cape of Good Hope. 1988 was a
> decent but certainly not top vintage, and while this wine had early
> appeal, it was the next wine that ultimately garnered my vote for best
> of the early crew.
>
> 1990 - a lovely red plummy nose (this started me and another chap off
> on merlot theorising), showing good complexity, and on palate the wine
> was more harmonious, the acidity better blending in, with a lively
> finish of good length.
>
> 1991 - quite similar to the 1990, with perhaps a slight green note in
> the nose and just a hint of mint. Good length, but the acidity was not
> as well integrated in this wine.
>
> 1992 - this was my watershed wine, segueing from one style to the
> next. I can't attribute the change to winemaking as the same person
> made all of these wines, so it must be simple ageing, but the
> difference was quite striking. The 1992 was immediately remarkable as
> being an even better wine than the 1991, although I valued the
> complexity and development on the latter wine enough to make it my
> favourite. The 1992 had a darker colour, a nose with depth and
> sweetness, and there was great flavour concentration. It was also the
> first wine, looking at things from the other end, that I considered to
> be at prime drinking plateau, the younger vintages needing more time
> as they do.
>
> 1994 - switch back to a lighter sort of nose in this wine, and the oak
> is noticeable, even a bit to the fore for the first time. It developed
> with time in the glass (all these were opened an hour before the
> dinner commenced). The tannins are softer than the younger wines but
> still meaty and indicate that this vintage needs more time, both for
> the tannins to further soften and the complexity in nose and on palate
> to develop. It had excellent balance and has all the signs of being
> special in a few more years.
>
> 1995 - a riper, rounder nose, now with some currants rather than
> plums, and sweeter, which is what made me think of hotter climes than
> Bordeaux. The tannins are still quite hard, though certainly ripe. It
> is a fat wine with good middle and firly good length. Needs time.
>
> 1997 - this is the only wine that I hadn't tasted before, as I stopped
> buying California wines with the 1996 vintage when they exceeded
> sensible price levels compared to similar wines from other areas.
> There wasn't much happening in the nose at first, but with time it
> opened up and developed a profile quite similar to the 1995 - ripe,
> sweet, and full. The entry on palate was also sweet, but the tannins
> clamped down almost immediately, allowing a taster only a scant moment
> to enjoy the fruit before it was rudely snatched away, or rather
> enveloped by the looming tannin. I could detect, I thought, the same
> good balance that characterised the other wines.
>
> So what did I learn from this fascinating tasting? That Caymus stands
> if not alone, certainly in the minority among the upper ranks of
> California Cabernet producers, in making a wine that values elegance
> and style above raw power. You can (and we did) mistake these for
> Bordeaux once they have a few years on them - I'd say 15 is when a
> good vintage reaches maturity - something you would never be able to
> say of most of the brawny fruit bombs that otherwise populate this
> stratum of California cabs.
>
> We learned that acidification is not conducive to harmony, although it
> doesn't necessarily rule it out. In fact the perception of terminal
> acidity is highly food dependent as we observed in this menu in a way
> that made an impression on us. Most of us had written off the first
> three wines after an hour or so in the glass as being just a bit too
> acidic for us to really enjoy them and we concentrated on the younger
> vintages. Then the venison arrived and the older wines that had stayed
> too edgy with the other courses including the buffalo, absolutely
> bloomed, the acidity was transformed and the wines became more
> enjoyable than they had been all night.
>
> We finished up the evening with a special bottle that another attendee
> had brought along:
>
> Tarquinio T. da Camara Lomelino Ltda. 150th Anniversary Madeira Boal
> 1820 - this is a solera that was begun in 1820 and bottled in 1962,
> and apparently sold to celebrate the 150th anniversary of this firm
> (presumably no longer extant) in business in 1970. Great brown wine
> with an intense hot alcoholic nose, medium body and very, very intense
> flavour. Imagine that you were drinking vanilla extract (no, the
> flavours aren't vanilla, I am just trying to convey the sort of
> flavour intensity in this wine. Any of you who HAVE drunk vanilla
> extract need not join in this mental exercise....). The wine ended
> much more smoothly than it began and had truly exceptional length,
> lingering for minutes in the mouth. A special experience and a fitting
> end to a singular tasting.
>
> What a wonderful learning experience and opportunity! As I also own
> the 1990, 91, 92 and 94, it was also a great opportunity to gauge the
> readiness of my bottles.
> _________________


Thanks for the very engaging notes! SS has long been a favorite of
mine. I do believe that there was a directional change in 1993 giving
the wine much more concentration, body and oak.