Notes from a Chteau St. Jean 'survey' tasting dinner recently.

2002 Sonoma county Fume Blanc - light colour, crisp spicy fruit nose and decent
acidity. Could live without the oak in this sort of wine. Nice, but didn't get
in the way of the conversation. Served with arugula, chanterelle and chevre
salad.

2002 Sonoma county Chardonnay - a typical medium weight oaked chard, soft and
sweet with good terminal acidity. Inexpensive, but ultimately uninteresting -
just not my style. With grilled ahi.

2002 Sonoma County Pinot Noir - dark wine, with a slightly heavy nose of cherry
and
wood. Some sweet and some acid, but not well melded. Uninteresting wine. Served
with rabbit loin with fig and peppercorn glaze.

2000 Sonoma County Merlot - ah - signs of interest! Definite dark chocolate
aromas, decent concentration and length, a passable wine, though not worth the
local $46 Can. Price tag. I looked up the parker note on this later - 77
points and chalky tannins in a lean wine - must have been tasting a completely
different wine, as this one bears no resemblance to that description. With lamb
sirloin with truffle sauce.

2001 Sonoma County Cabernet Sauvignon - a bit of cocoa in the nose, and some
dark cherry. Decent concentration and length, the wood not overdone, and the
first really worthy wine tonight. With stilton, marinated (God only knows why)
with Port syrup (barbarians trying to pass themselves off as trendy chefs, no
doubt). The cheese alone (I managed to get some unsullied fromage) didn't do
the wine any favours, and I'm sure the sweet syrup would torture it beyond
reason.

2000 Cinq Cepages - first bottle corked - not off to a good start. Second one
fine, showing excellent depth of fruit in the nose - cassis and blackberry
mostly. At first juicy in the mouth, then it goes through an elegant stage in
mid-palate, and picks up power toward the end with good concentration
throughout and a nice long finish. Very good wine, though the pricing, as is
usual for me with American wines, leaves me scratching my head wondering if it
is worth it, and mentally surveying all the other equally good or better wines
I can buy for the price ($90 Can., $70 US) from other parts of the world.
Paired (no doubt by the same genius that poured Port syrup on decent cheese)
with chocolate cake and blackberry coulis!!?

On 28 Sep 2004 14:58:44 GMT, ojunk (Bill Spohn) wrote:

>
>2000 Cinq Cepages - first bottle corked - not off to a good start. Second one
>fine, showing excellent depth of fruit in the nose - cassis and blackberry
>mostly. At first juicy in the mouth, then it goes through an elegant stage in
>mid-palate, and picks up power toward the end with good concentration
>throughout and a nice long finish. Very good wine, though the pricing, as is
>usual for me with American wines, leaves me scratching my head wondering if it
>is worth it, and mentally surveying all the other equally good or better wines
>I can buy for the price ($90 Can., $70 US) from other parts of the world.
>Paired (no doubt by the same genius that poured Port syrup on decent cheese)
>with chocolate cake and blackberry coulis!!?

The Cinq Cepages suffered immeasurably from success when the '95
(IIRC) was declared "Wine of the Year" in the top 100 by Wine
Spectator. I had a half-dozen bottles, purchased at less than $30 US
from the local shop. Two months later I found one on the shelf for
$120!

I served the wine with Beef Wellington at a "Millenium" dinner on
1/1/2000 (I hope this doesn't start the discussion of when a millenium
starts or ends---)

While enjoyable, I didn't think the wine was exceptional. Simply a
nice dark wine. But, apparently by your pricing comment, the Shanken
curse is still operative.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

In article >,
says...
>
>On 28 Sep 2004 14:58:44 GMT, ojunk (Bill Spohn) wrote:
>
>>
>>2000 Cinq Cepages - first bottle corked - not off to a good start. Second
one
>>fine, showing excellent depth of fruit in the nose - cassis and blackberry
>>mostly. At first juicy in the mouth, then it goes through an elegant stage
in
>>mid-palate, and picks up power toward the end with good concentration
>>throughout and a nice long finish. Very good wine, though the pricing, as
is
>>usual for me with American wines, leaves me scratching my head wondering if
it
>>is worth it, and mentally surveying all the other equally good or better
wines
>>I can buy for the price ($90 Can., $70 US) from other parts of the world.
>>Paired (no doubt by the same genius that poured Port syrup on decent cheese)
>>with chocolate cake and blackberry coulis!!?
>
>The Cinq Cepages suffered immeasurably from success when the '95
>(IIRC) was declared "Wine of the Year" in the top 100 by Wine
>Spectator. I had a half-dozen bottles, purchased at less than $30 US
>from the local shop. Two months later I found one on the shelf for
>$120!
>
>I served the wine with Beef Wellington at a "Millenium" dinner on
>1/1/2000 (I hope this doesn't start the discussion of when a millenium
>starts or ends---)
>
>While enjoyable, I didn't think the wine was exceptional. Simply a
>nice dark wine. But, apparently by your pricing comment, the Shanken
>curse is still operative.
>
>
>Ed Rasimus

Ed, I seem to recall the WS accolades for the '96, but you could be correct
with the '95. I've always put down about 1/2 case, since about '94 and really
enjoyed this one. I haven't gotten my allocation for 2003, but will probably
do so. As to pricing, I paid US$35/btl of the '96, and US$37 for the '97. I
drank up all the '96 that a local steakhouse had in PHX for $55/btl, until
they flat ran out. Later, I saw it for $125 at Brooks in Den, then $450 there
about 8 months later! The sommelier there was a good acquaintance of mine from
the good old days in Den and I asked, "hey, what's the deal?" With a grin, he
just said, "I can get that price all night long!" Now, this was before the .
Com bust, and I'd venture to say that the $4000 dinner for 6 isn't quite what
it once was at Brooks - but maybe I'm wrong. Heck, I should have shipped up my
eight bottles, sold them to Justin and paid for a weekend at the Broadmoor!

The last price I have listed is for the '02 and I paid $60/btl - still worth
it in my book, but starting to hit the ceiling.

Hunt

PS Bill S, I hope that you were tasting at a restaurant and not from a private
cellar, considering the "corked" bottle.

I kind of liked the Sonoma Chard....guess I am not that picky on my
whites...typically I don't know the buttery affect of malocatic but I like
this one.

Oh well...to each his own....

I think they are good on their Reds but I never can detect much in terms of
complexity...they are nice fruit and wood bombs for me.

They do have one of the most beautiful wineries in Napa-sonoma.

Enjoy

"Bill Spohn" > wrote in message
...
> Notes from a Chteau St. Jean 'survey' tasting dinner recently.
>
> 2002 Sonoma county Fume Blanc - light colour, crisp spicy fruit nose and
> decent
> acidity. Could live without the oak in this sort of wine. Nice, but didn't
> get
> in the way of the conversation. Served with arugula, chanterelle and
> chevre
> salad.
>
> 2002 Sonoma county Chardonnay - a typical medium weight oaked chard, soft
> and
> sweet with good terminal acidity. Inexpensive, but ultimately
> uninteresting -
> just not my style. With grilled ahi.
>
> 2002 Sonoma County Pinot Noir - dark wine, with a slightly heavy nose of
> cherry
> and
> wood. Some sweet and some acid, but not well melded. Uninteresting wine.
> Served
> with rabbit loin with fig and peppercorn glaze.
>
> 2000 Sonoma County Merlot - ah - signs of interest! Definite dark
> chocolate
> aromas, decent concentration and length, a passable wine, though not worth
> the
> local $46 Can. Price tag. I looked up the parker note on this later - 77
> points and chalky tannins in a lean wine - must have been tasting a
> completely
> different wine, as this one bears no resemblance to that description. With
> lamb
> sirloin with truffle sauce.
>
> 2001 Sonoma County Cabernet Sauvignon - a bit of cocoa in the nose, and
> some
> dark cherry. Decent concentration and length, the wood not overdone, and
> the
> first really worthy wine tonight. With stilton, marinated (God only knows
> why)
> with Port syrup (barbarians trying to pass themselves off as trendy chefs,
> no
> doubt). The cheese alone (I managed to get some unsullied fromage) didn't
> do
> the wine any favours, and I'm sure the sweet syrup would torture it beyond
> reason.
>
> 2000 Cinq Cepages - first bottle corked - not off to a good start. Second
> one
> fine, showing excellent depth of fruit in the nose - cassis and blackberry
> mostly. At first juicy in the mouth, then it goes through an elegant stage
> in
> mid-palate, and picks up power toward the end with good concentration
> throughout and a nice long finish. Very good wine, though the pricing, as
> is
> usual for me with American wines, leaves me scratching my head wondering
> if it
> is worth it, and mentally surveying all the other equally good or better
> wines
> I can buy for the price ($90 Can., $70 US) from other parts of the world.
> Paired (no doubt by the same genius that poured Port syrup on decent
> cheese)
> with chocolate cake and blackberry coulis!!?
>
>

"Ed Rasimus" > wrote in message
...
> On 28 Sep 2004 14:58:44 GMT, ojunk (Bill Spohn) wrote:
>
> >
> >2000 Cinq Cepages - first bottle corked - not off to a good start. Second
one
> >fine, showing excellent depth of fruit in the nose - cassis and
blackberry
> >mostly. At first juicy in the mouth, then it goes through an elegant
stage in
> >mid-palate, and picks up power toward the end with good concentration
> >throughout and a nice long finish. Very good wine, though the pricing,
as is
> >usual for me with American wines, leaves me scratching my head wondering
if it
> >is worth it, and mentally surveying all the other equally good or better
wines
> >I can buy for the price ($90 Can., $70 US) from other parts of the world.
> >Paired (no doubt by the same genius that poured Port syrup on decent
cheese)
> >with chocolate cake and blackberry coulis!!?
>
> The Cinq Cepages suffered immeasurably from success when the '95
> (IIRC) was declared "Wine of the Year" in the top 100 by Wine
> Spectator. I had a half-dozen bottles, purchased at less than $30 US
> from the local shop. Two months later I found one on the shelf for
> $120!
>

Ed,

It was the '96. My wife and I happened to be in Sonoma shortly after that
WS issue was released. We'd enjoyed CC since '92 (I still have a bottle of
the '94 tucked away), so we scurried over to the winery. They were still
selling the '96 for the release price of $28 - one per customer! I've got
it sleeping with it's '94 brother. Has anyone tried the '96 recently?
How's it doing?

Regards,
Dean