Plonk of the week at the local supermarket is Faustino VII rioja listed as
"cosecho" as opposed to Crianza, Riserva and Gran Riserva. Is this the low
grade stuff someone was talking about?

jcoulter wrote:

>Plonk of the week at the local supermarket is Faustino VII rioja listed as
>"cosecho" as opposed to Crianza, Riserva and Gran Riserva. Is this the low
>grade stuff someone was talking about?
>
>
Well, that seems to be a misunderstanding. As far as I know, it should
be "cosecha" and it just means vintage.

The Faustino VII is probably a crianza, with 10 months of ageing in oak
barrels and 6 months in bottle. For marketing blurb, see the Bodegas
Faustino website at www.bodegasfaustino.es.

Cheers,

-Topi Kuusinen, Finland

Topi Kuusinen > wrote in
:

> jcoulter wrote:
>
>>Plonk of the week at the local supermarket is Faustino VII rioja
>>listed as "cosecho" as opposed to Crianza, Riserva and Gran Riserva.
>>Is this the low grade stuff someone was talking about?
>>
>>
> Well, that seems to be a misunderstanding. As far as I know, it should
> be "cosecha" and it just means vintage.
>
> The Faustino VII is probably a crianza, with 10 months of ageing in
> oak barrels and 6 months in bottle. For marketing blurb, see the
> Bodegas Faustino website at www.bodegasfaustino.es.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Topi Kuusinen, Finland
>
>

the stuff we have has a picture of Faustino on the label clearly shows
the number VII but does not have crianza anywhere on the label, It is
the wine shown under "classic red wines" from 5 year old vines. I will
try some (free tasting tomorrow) and report on the results.

jcoulter > wrote in
. 199.17:


> the stuff we have has a picture of Faustino on the label clearly shows
> the number VII but does not have crianza anywhere on the label, It is
> the wine shown under "classic red wines" from 5 year old vines. I will
> try some (free tasting tomorrow) and report on the results.
>

Not to pick on this winery in particular but on their web page they show a
chart of vintages
http://www.bodegasfaustino.es/ingles/vcalendario.html
in which wines from 1955 are shown we see 4 Average (being the worst) 8
Normal and the rest very good nad excellent. How can a year be average if
there is nothing on the other side?, How normal if more years are excellent
and VG than Average? At least on say Hugh Johnson vintage charts a 4 isn't
so hot and a 10 is.

jcoulter wrote:

> jNot to pick on this winery in particular but on their web page they show a
> chart of vintages
> http://www.bodegasfaustino.es/ingles/vcalendario.html
> in which wines from 1955 are shown we see 4 Average (being the worst) 8
> Normal and the rest very good nad excellent. How can a year be average if
> there is nothing on the other side?, How normal if more years are excellent
> and VG than Average? At least on say Hugh Johnson vintage charts a 4 isn't
> so hot and a 10 is.

Obviously, they're fans of "A Prairie Home Companion" where all the children
are above average. ;-)

Mark Lipton
(with apologies to non-NPR listeners)

Hi,

While Faustino is not my cup of tea (to put it simply) they do seem to
have a broad group of customers worldwide. Classic style as it could be,
though they have introduced some "new style" wines such as "Faustino de
Autor" and "Faustino de Crianza".

Rioja, when in a classic style, displays the well known hierarchy:

- No backlabel
- Crianza backlabel
- Reserva backlabel
- Gran Reserva backlabel

while many people thinks that this is a quality grading hierarchy, I
don't think this is the right approach. The hierarchy only says how much
time the wine has spent in oak barrels and/or bottle prior to release.
It does not say much about the quality of the barrels, if they are new
or if they are as old (and dirty) as the owner.

Many big houses save their best wines to become Gran Reserva, but not
all follow this approach. In my humble opinion, Rioja Reserva are far
more balanced that Gran Reservas, even from the big houses.

To get back to your original question, I would think that Faustino VII
is a wine that should be an example of classic Rioja. And perhaps is
the kind of wine that a regular to this forum could find a bit simple.
It retails 5-6 eur ($6-7) in its country of origin.

Regarding the vintage classification, in Spain this classification is
usually done by the D.O. Council, after examining young wines from the
wineries. Since the D.O. Council is formed with people from the
wineries, you can understand that their vintage ratings don't go below
the midscale so often. I think this were the latest vintage ratings:

-1994 Excellent
-1995 Excellent
-1996 Very Good
-1997 Good
-1998 Very Good
-1999 Good
-2000 Good
-2001 Excellent

If you think that the D.O. Rioja is huge, it is not true that all 1997
were so bad as the "Good" classification suggests. And not all the 1994
wines were so truly excellent as the thing shows. Producer is important
not only in Burgundy <g>

Best from Spain,

Santiago

On 12 Oct 2003 08:53:58 GMT, "Santiago G.H." > wrote:

>Rioja, when in a classic style, displays the well known hierarchy:
>
>- No backlabel
>- Crianza backlabel
>- Reserva backlabel
>- Gran Reserva backlabel
>
>while many people thinks that this is a quality grading hierarchy, I
>don't think this is the right approach. The hierarchy only says how much
>time the wine has spent in oak barrels
snip
> I think this were the latest vintage ratings:
>
>-1994 Excellent
>-1995 Excellent
>-1996 Very Good
>-1997 Good
>-1998 Very Good
>-1999 Good
>-2000 Good
>-2001 Excellent

Hi Santiago

This system makes a choice very difficult. As you know, to a
non-spanish palate many of these wines appear hugely overoaked. What I
have always found difficult is finding the vintage that has enough
substance to it to match the oak. I would imagine from the above that
I should look for Reserva 94-95-01, but stick to Crianza for the
lesser years.

Similar problems are encountered in Brunello, which is always "gran
reserva", and so generally (depends on producer) not worth drinking
except in great years. Except you have the added problem of there
being so much bad wood in the area...

Cheers

Mike

"Santiago G.H." > wrote in
. 1.4:

> Hi,
>
> While Faustino is not my cup of tea (to put it simply) they do seem to
> have a broad group of customers worldwide. Classic style as it could

>
> To get back to your original question, I would think that Faustino VII
> is a wine that should be an example of classic Rioja. And perhaps is
> the kind of wine that a regular to this forum could find a bit simple.
> It retails 5-6 eur ($6-7) in its country of origin.
>
>
Thank you Santiago, i tasted teh Faustino this weekend and found it
totally unfocused and jarring to the palate.(things were happening but
not many of them good) but the real surprise was the white a wine that
promised fruit but delivered only a watered down experience sort of like
junk food, one drinks too much in order to try to consoidate the taste,
but the taste is gone, there is nothing but alcohol to consolidate.

Mike Tommasi > wrote in
:
>
> Hi Santiago
>
> This system makes a choice very difficult. As you know, to a
> non-spanish palate many of these wines appear hugely overoaked. What I
> have always found difficult is finding the vintage that has enough
> substance to it to match the oak. I would imagine from the above that
> I should look for Reserva 94-95-01, but stick to Crianza for the
> lesser years.

It all dependes. Just think that the difference between Reserva and
Crianza is not always related to oak-aging period:

- Crianza: 24 months total, 12 months minimum in oak barrels.
- Reserva: 36 months total, 12 months minimum in oak barrels.

That said, I have had good Reservas from the lesser 1997 vintage, and
bad ones from the very good 1996.

So, again, my advice is... check the producer. I really agree with you
when you say that many classic riojas are overoaked, and that's why I
usually prefer crianzas for the everyday and reservas from selected
producers and vintages. What classic Rioja do I have in my (sort of)
cellar?:

- Marqués de Cáceres "Reserva" 1994 ( I didn't like the 95 so much)
- Viña Albina "Reserva Especial" 1995 (I didn't like the plain reserva
as much as this Reserva Especial)
- Marqués de Murrieta "Reserva" 1998 (99 is said to be even better)
- Muga "Reserva Especial" 1995 (Muga is usually a sure choice).


These three are Reservas from Rioja in which I feel there is enough
fruit to balance the oak, while following a classic style. However, I am
more in the new style (Roda I, Artadi Pagos Viejos, Finca Allende or
Sierra Cantabria).

Best,

Santiago

Salut/Hi Mike Tommasi,

le/on Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:09:39 +0200, tu disais/you said:-

>On 12 Oct 2003 08:53:58 GMT, "Santiago G.H." > wrote:

>>while many people thinks that this is a quality grading hierarchy, I
>>don't think this is the right approach. The hierarchy only says how much
>>time the wine has spent in oak barrels

Agree with Santiago here.
>
>This system makes a choice very difficult. As you know, to a
>non-spanish palate many of these wines appear hugely overoaked.

Not to this "non-spanish" palate. But I'v e long known we have quite widely
different tastes in wine - which is not - repeat "NOT" to say that you're
wromg and I'm right. But I love oakey Gran Riservas, especially with plenty
of bottle age on them.

>have always found difficult is finding the vintage that has enough
>substance to it to match the oak.

As _always_, it comes down to the grower/wineery. Try Riserva 904. A gran
riserva, but one only made in years which can take it - or was when I was
able to buy it affordably in the UK some 15 years ago.

BTW, I've never had a Brunello de Montalcino that I really like. So if ever
you come up to taste my last bottle of Reserva 904, bring a decent
Brunello.

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare

Sometimes oi just sits and thinks
Sometimes oi just sits.

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 17:02:02 +0200, Ian Hoare
> wrote:


>
>BTW, I've never had a Brunello de Montalcino that I really like. So if ever
>you come up to taste my last bottle of Reserva 904, bring a decent
>Brunello.

Easier said than done. I'll try and get a Castello di Camigliano or
something.

Mike

Mike Tommasi > wrote in
:
>
> Easier said than done. I'll try and get a Castello di Camigliano or
> something.
>
> Mike


Hi all,

I will take advantage of this turn from Rioja to Brunello and ask about
Argiano "Brunello di Montalcino" 1998. I have been offered this wine at a
good price and, since I haven't had a Brunello, I'd like to know if this is
a good producer and a good vintage.

Best,

Santiago