Tag Archives: 2011

Gabbiano Solatio Toscana IGT 2011

The surroundings of Tuscany in Italy are breathtaking, and I know that people who live there should be inspired too. I expect wine makers in Tuscany must be especially inspired since they make wine from the fruits of this land. This is the fourth bottle from this region, amongst others with two decent reds, but up ’till now, not a real stunner yet. I now got a bottle from a real wine specialist so I have high hopes for this Gabbiano Solatio from 2011 (Picture shows the 2010 vintage). I like the label, the orange color really stands out on the shelves and the knight and the sun, really look appealing, The wine is a blend of 50% Syrah, 45% Cabernet Sauvignon and 5% Sangiovese. Not a lot of Sangiovese for a Tuscan blend, and compared to others no Merlot. That leaves more room for the character grapes of Syrah and Cabernet Sauvignon. I guess we may be on to something…

Gabbiano Solatio Toscana IGT 2011Color: Dark ruby-red.

Nose: Smells spicy and most definitely of Syrah and a bit less of Cabernet Sauvignon, no sense in mentioning the Sangiovese. Although Syrah and Cabernet Sauvignon can be pretty full-bodied, this blend smells fresh and lively. Sweet jam of red fruits, and the slightest hint of fresh acidity, yes all that on the nose. It leaps out at you from the glass. Very appealing, and appetizing fruity Wine. Strawberries and cherries, ain’t that lovely! Great balance. The nose alone is way better than the previous contenders!

Taste: Not heavy, but with a fair amount of body and soft tannins. Some slight wood influence matches the tannins. Not as heavy on the sweet fruits as the nose suggested, but very appealing never the less. I did suit our dinner fine, grilled chicken with rice and a creamy tomato sauce. It would have been less complementary to it, if it would have been much sweeter.

Just like the other Tuscan Red Wines I review earlier, this is an entry-level wine. Nothing very fancy, but even with pizza and pasta I’d like to drink something I really like without breaking the bank. A great Tuscan with easy drinkability and easy food pairing qualities, and in the first 24 hours after opening, very suitable for drinking by itself. Good one. Recommended!

Points: 85

Tamdhu 6yo 2004/2011 (52.9%, The Ultimate, Sherry Butt #5439, 680 bottles)

Just before Christmas I reviewed a young Tamdhu bottled by The Ultimate (Van Wees, The Netherlands). That one was only 8 years old and I dared to mention in that review that at 8yo that Whisky was maybe bottled to late, since a lot of wood was present in that bottling. Luckily the wood gave the Whisky a lot of character, but I hoped it would have been a wee bit sweeter. Now look here. I’ve got an even younger Tamdhu bottled by The Ultimate. This time I’ll have a look at a 6yo Tamdhu from 2004 (the second of the six, bottled in 2011), and have a look how the two compare. How was your Christmas, by the way?

Tamdhu 6yo 2004/2011 (52.9%, The Ultimate, Sherry Butt #5439, 680 bottles)Color: Pale gold.

Nose: Definitely a less full on nose. Less powerful, dryer and somewhat more floral than cask #347. Again nice woody notes, but less prominent. Still a lot of pencil shavings though. This one needs a little breather. I just opened the bottle. Good balance and again a very likeable smell. Appealing. Somewhat cleaner this one is (thanks Yoda). When smelling these two H2H, is think this younger example is even more complex, since the 8yo is all wood.

Taste: Sweet and creamy and delayed pepper, but overall a weaker body than the 8yo. Now you all are going to think that I’ve lost it, but this 6yo Tamdhu is more complex than the 8yo I reviewed before Christmas. On the taste lots of nice aromas have lined up and come through one after the other instead of all at once. Black and white powder, vanilla pudding, elegant wood, licorice, and some yellow fruits even. What a treat. The finish isn’t longer, but has some more aroma’s and this one is heavy on cask toast and a little bit of sulphur, but again not dominant, so adding to the character. A nanosecond of sweet on the entry, than quickly into wood and then the workings of layers when the Whisky is swallowed. These young Tamdhu’s are hidden treasures!

The whole is more toned down compared to cask #347, but this one has some more going for it. It is a bit sweeter (as I hoped), but the sweetness is a bit funky, so I’m glad is isn’t sweeter than it is. The Whisky is only 6yo, but still it seems to be more complex than it’s older sister. I like the finish better too, although it has some sulphur, but that gives it even more character. As I said, more going on in this one. Time will tell what extra air will do for this Tamdhu. For the time being, a well urned:

Points: 88

Bunnahabhain 20yo 1990/2011 “Isle of Islay” (52.8%, The Creative Whisky Company, The Exclusive Malts, Cask #251211, 298 bottles)

Here we go again. Another monstrously long title, again a Single Malt of which the distillery name is not on the label, but we know it’s a Bunnahabhain. So three in a row, this being the third Bastard Malt in a row, reviewed here on these pages. The Creative Whisky Co. Ltd. is non other than David Stirk. Fellow Rush lover and Whisky bottler par excellence, or should I say Exclusive Whisky bottler?

Bunnahabhain 20yo 1990/2011 "Isle of Islay" (52.8%, The Creative Whisky Company, The Exclusive Malts, Cask #251211, 298 bottles)This Bunna is pretty dark in color so my guess would be a Sherry cask. Since David didn’t specify what (kind of Sherry) the cask previously held, we can only speculate what this is. Maybe a Sherry Hogshead, or maybe a Butt that was shared with others, or only half the Butt was bottled? My guess would be the former (a Hoggie). It looks like a Oloroso or PX Sherry Hogshead to me, so we’ll have to try, to make another guess at it…

Color: Copper orange (the typical color of most Bourbons).

Nose: Fresh and Sherried but not heavy or cloying. Nice hints of spicy sweet and acidic wood. Definitely a lot of raisins and overall rather dry. Dusty with some fatty cardboard (nothing wrong with that). Ground coffee and hints of wet sugared cherries. Well balanced.

Taste: Heavy sherry with small hints of fat peat and a little bit of smoke and steam. Nice cloying black fruit. Tarry and a bit dirty. I like it. Yes it is a bit drying on the tongue, so maybe it should have been bottled a few years earlier. Still this is a great dram. It has a lot of character. Near the finish the wood starts to play a part with its spicy and slightly bitter finish and some black fruits come up. Dry black tea, so there are some tannins in here…

I brought this one with me when my Whisky club went to Switzerland two weeks ago and there the drying palate put some tasters off. I for sure noticed the drying qualities of this Whisky, but I didn’t have so much of a problem with it. Far worse for me is a heavily sherried malt, with lots of sulphur of bitterness in the finish, something this malt doesn’t have. By the way, for me this is a Oloroso Sherry Hogshead…

Points: 88

Santa Cristina Umbria IGT 2011

Somehow this is the end of some sort of trilogy. Earlier I reviewed a rosé and a red by Santa Cristina, and now here is a white, or Bianco. Way back in time I was told that Santa Cristina has a pretty good red in the shops, so I started buying some different vintages and was actually never disappointed. Much later I got hold of a rose wine by Santa Cristina and that one I didn’t like that much. Now here we have a chance to have a look at a white wine by Santa Cristina. By the way, this white wine is made with the Grechetto and Procanico grape varieties.

Color: Light White Wine.

Nose: Sweet and fresh, with hints of creamy and sugared apricots, but also hints of flowers. After the sweet apricot yoghurt I’m a bit struggling to get any more from this nose. The nose of this wine is appealing like a lemonade is, so probably a summery wine.

Taste: Very light, and not as sweet as I initially thought.Very anonymous. Slightly acidic and austere. Almost metallic. Actually this lacks a bit of sweetness to round the flavour out. Not very complex, which is no problem for a summery wine, but also lacks in the balance department, if you ask me.

For a light summery wine this could have been more appealing with some added sweetness. One-dimensional. Extremely simple wine. It does taste like a wine with an ABV of 12%, but when drunk like a lemonade, you will get a kick in the head, especially in the sun. Altogether not very interesting.

As said before, I was tipped some time ago about Santa Cristina wines (the reds). Now that I have tasted all three colours of Santa Cristina, I’m sticking to the reds. Santa Cristina red is good for pizza!

Points: 72

Antonin Rodet Chablis 2011

Two months ago I reviewed the first Chablis on these pages, and here is already the second one. Already, considering I mainly review Single Malt Whiskies that is.

Chablis is the northernmost part of the Burgundy Wine region. Chablis lies some 15 to 20 kilometres to the east of Auxerre. The Grand Crus all lie on one southwest facing slope just north of Chablis. The ‘terroir’ is clay with outcrops of the same chalk layer that runs from Sancerre to the White Cliffs of Dover. Chablis is made with Chardonnay Grapes and is famous for its clean, acidic, flinty and dry White Wines. Chablis Wines are more acidic due to the cool climate, compared to other Chardonnay growing regions. Not a lot of ageing in wood is done in Chablis, and this example I’m about to review has no wood ageing whatsoever.

The Chablis by Louis Moreau was pretty good, so let’s have a look, what Antonin Rodet did with his Chardonnay grapes.

Color: White Wine.

Nose: Sweet and fruity. Lychees and hints of peaches. Very fresh and lively. Wow, I always get happy smelling a white wine with a nose like this. It smells sweet and flinty. Chalk even. Also some floral notes like geraniums and it promises a nice acidity. Nice balance too. Very nice and typical Chablis nose. I like my Chardonnay. This nose, compared to the one by Louis Moreau, is cleaner, more elegant and lovely.

Taste: Zesty and acidic (Vitamin C). Very clean, fresh and likeable. I get the chalk from the nose again, but not a lot more. Not very complex, maybe even simple, but also without faults. Appetizing and easy drinkable.

As said above. The nose of Antonin Rodet is better than the one by Louis Moreau, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so it may depend on your mood, which one to choose. Taste wise I guess the Louis Moreau offering was a tad more interesting and had a finish with more meat on its bones, making that one slightly better in my opinion, but still, differences are small and I liked the Antonin Rodet Chablis a lot too. By the way the ABV is 12%.

Points: 84

Domaine Louis Moreau Chablis ‘Domaine de Biéville’ 2011

After the Chardonnays from Languedoc and Chile, now we return to France for the Mother of all Chardonnays, or maybe the Stepmother of all Chardonnays: Chablis! (the mother being Montrachet).

Domaine de Biéville, located in Viviers, was founded in the 70’s by Jean-Jacques Moreau. The Domaine comprises of one piece of 65 ha, and its orientation is south /south-west. It has a mild climate. Today his son Louis with his wife Anna lead the company (it’s also a wine traders).

Domaine de Biéville has great terroir (former Truffel grounds) and orientation, which often makes it as good as a Premier Cru. The grapes for this wine grow on 40 year old vines (vieilles vignes). By the way this Chardonnay has an ABV of 12%. The website of Louis Moreau is full of Premier Cru and Grand Cru wines, so if this Domaine de Biéville is any good, it is probably safe to say that the rest is even better, or so it should…

Domaine Louis Moreau Chablis ´Domaine de Biéville´ 2011Color: White wine

Nose: Fresh citrussy (lemon) and flinty. Slight hint of meat (beef). Typical Chablis, but a bit dirty, and I like that. It the meaty/gravy bit that does that. The more I nose this, the better it gets. Fruity (hints of apricot) and creamy

Taste: Nice acidity and when that rolls of the tongue, again that fabulous flintyness and depth emerge. Even the dirty part from the nose is here. The nose and the taste match up completely, how’s that for balance. The acidity is quite up front in this one, but a very nice touch to this Chablis is that long into the finish some sweetness emerges. The aftertaste is great. Well made.

Nicely balanced Chablis. Nice acids that play the biggest part in this wine, but hiding after that  is some great meaty dirtiness and of course a typical flintiness. No off notes and for fans of Chablis, well this will come as no surprise. Very easily drinkable and not too complex. Since the acids are quite prominent, this wine can age for a few years more. Recommended with fish, crustations and some cheeses.

Points: 85

Merci beaucoup, Richard!

Tarapacá Chardonnay Terroir Piritas 2011

Last time we tried a Chardonnay from Languedoc, made by a Burgundian winemaker. All French thus. This time let’s fly halfway across the world and have a taste of Chilean Chardonnay. This Chardonnay comes from Maipo Valley that has a cool climate, granite soil and is located near the pacific. Like I said before, Chardonnay is an easy grape variety and can be found all over the world.

Viña Tarapacá, as it is called today, was founded in 1874 by Francisco de Rojas y Salamanca. It was then named Viña de Rojas. In 1892 the winery got a new owner, Manuel Zavala-Meléndez and gave it its current name. Today the winery is owned by Chili’s largest matchstick producer!

Tarapacá Chardonnay Terroir Piritas 2011 Color: White wine

Nose: Sweet and fresh, typical Chardonnay. Promises a nice balance between the acidity and the sweetness. Estery, meaty and flinty with a slight floral perfume. Dried apricots and maybe some pear, nectarine and banana. The fruity sweetness is quite thick. Licorice.

Taste: A dirty kind of sweetness. Its acidity is quite raw and different from what I expected, but then again, this is no Chablis. Quite good when it get in the mouth, but the middle and especially the finish are not very strong. The acidity is matched with a slight hint of bitterness which takes away the elegance. It’s a bit like a Roter Vitamin C tablet. This still needs some work.

At first this appears to be a pretty decent Chardonnay, but for me it has more than one rough edge. The sweetness is a little bit strange, and the acids are not refined. Sometimes it can attack you, hidden away behind the initial fruity sweetness. Add to that the hint of bitterness in the finish. Still, it’s pretty good, but not excellent. There ís a lot going on, but to me it almost tastes like a work in progress. We’re on  our way, but not quite there yet. Especially the second part could have been better. The wine has an ABV of 14%.

Points: 77

And yes, this wine was also provided by Richard, muchas gracias!

Domaine Dupont-Fahn Chardonnay 2011 Vin de Pays d’Oc Languedoc

While we’re at it, why not try another gem (hopefully) by Michel Dupont-Fahn. This time his Chardonnay from…Languedoc! For those of you who are alarmed, don’t worry, this Chardonnay is well made into the Burgundy style (whatever that is).

Chardonnay is a relatively easy grape variety. It doesn’t need a lot of care, and it does well in a lot of places and terroirs. Therefore the Chardonnay grape can be found all over the world. The wines made with the Chardonnay grape, can be utterly different, just compare Chablis to a Montrachet. Yes both from Burgundy, where Chardonnay is BIG.

The Chardonnay grapes are manually harvested. After pressing and fermentation the wine stays for six to ten months in oak casks. 80% of them are used casks and 20% are newly made casks. This Dupont-Fahn Chardonnay is 13.5% ABV.

Color: White wine

Nose: Light and acidic. Grassy with lime. Small hint of peach. Actually the nose is not very outspoken, yet very fresh. Small hint of new wood. Good balance. Light and flowery. It becomes fruity and slightly vegetal, when it warms up a little bit. Lovely nose.

Taste: Definitely sweeter than expected. Again good balance and the sweetness counterparts the (lemony) acidity very well. Lovely light aperitif wine that also will do pretty well with fish. The fruity sweetness is a bit syrupy, as if a drop of PX Sherry somehow found its way into this wine. Very fresh and lively, and not a lot of wood influence. A little bit of new wood, but nothing bitter.

Easy drinkable and not overly complex. This is a quality wine. Drink young and preferably outside in warm weather. Thoroughly enjoyable. Lovely light quality wine from Languedoc, made by a Burgundy winemaker. Recommended (just like the Dupont-Fahn Cuvée Rosée reviewed earlier).

Points: 84

Thanks again Richard for the wine.

Domaine Dupont-Fahn Auxey-Duresses 2011 Cuvée Rosée Bourgogne

Michel Dupont-Fahn is a wine producer from Burgundy. He makes modern wines like ​​Meursault, Puligny-Montrachet and some other wines. Michel makes modern wines that are meant to drink young.

As rumour has it, some ten years ago, Michel used part of the Pinot Noir harvest to make this Rosé Wine. Dad was not happy! Obviously red Burgundy Wine fetches more money than a Rosé would.

The grapes are harvested manually and quite late, pressed lightly and fermented in oak barrels that previously held, for ten months, Michel’s Meursault.

Color: Pink salmon, grapefruit.

Nose: Fresh, half acidic, citrus fruits, but also a brooding darker meaty element, that funnily enough, makes the whole very elegant. This smells the business! Perfect fruit-perfume nose (strawberries and blood oranges) and some most. There is actually a lot happening here. Fantastic balance.

Taste: Slightly more acidic at first sip, but that quickly is counteracted by some sweetness (not a lot) and a hint of wood. Taste wise it’s more in the vicinity of a red wine (Pinot Noir) than other Rosé wines. It still keeps its refreshing traits (without the tannins). No off notes whatsoever. The sweetness of the Wine that emerges near the finish is of a deep maple syrup nature, very classy! Great as an aperitif, with fish and salads. This goes down nicely, bring on the sun, I say!

I have to admit, I never was a big fan of Rosé wines, probably that so much of these wines are tampered with, or just not good enough. It’s treated as a sort of B-product after red’s and whites. This one however ticks all of my boxes. Maybe from the tasting notes it is not quite clear why I like this one so much, but I find this a real find! At this time by far my favorite Rosé. I know it’s a bit more expensive than the usual suspects, but in my opinion well worth the money. Recommended! By the way, the ABV on this one is 13%.

Points: 86

Thanks to Richard for the Wine!

Ardmore 18yo 1992/2011 (46%, Mo Ór, Bourbon Hogshead #5013, 286 bottles)

Three months ago, I reviewed two Ardmore’s, and was very pleasantly surprised, not to mention impressed. At a certain moment I even called it the present day’s Brora, or something of that nature. First a 1992 bottled by Domiek Bouckaert a.k.a. The Whiskyman, that scored a nice 89 points, and second a 1993 by the omnipresent Gordon & MacPhail. G&M’s version still got a very nice 87 points. Both malts were available for (much) less than 100 Euro’s, and that’s a steal in today’s feverish market. Today after a week’s absence, let’s have a go at this 1992 bottled by Mo Ór. Let’s hope it will do as well as the other 1992.

Color: White wine.

Nose: Nice, fresh acidic and aromatic lemon, but it has a lot more going for it. The wood comes across as pretty sweet with lot’s of vanilla. A storm of fresh air, as I said, very fresh and quite clean. Barley. I remember the other Ardmore’s as more dirty versions of Ardmore. I can hardly detect any peat in this and the smoke does need some time to manifest itself. Perfumy it is and slightly buttery (hot butter). Actually this is a lovely whisky on the nose. Not very complex, but it does have a well-balanced nose.

Taste: Hmm, licorice, clay and the (earthy) grains from the nose return. I expected a bit more of an attack, but it stays a bit back. Well don’t underestimate the smoke now! That’s here in abundance, but there isn’t a lot more coming from this. I guess this one was quite clean and lovable from the start, but I feel the reduction to 46% ABV didn’t benefit the Whisky this time. It has a late and mild fruitiness to it, pineapple and the fatty, sweetish smokiness is quite nice. Still as with the nose, the palate is undemanding and of average balance. The finish is of medium length.

This time around, the cask didn’t do much for the whisky, probably second or third refill considering the color and age. Still a well-earned…

Points: 84