NEVER buy sweet and sour mix from the store. It's always nasty corn syrup sweet artificial crap. Do you have a leftover wine or liquor bottle? Clean it out real well, keep it on hand for things like this. My favorite bottles are Pimm's bottles, the neck has a little bulb that makes it easy to grip and you can run the bottle through the washer and use a razor to scrape off the label.

Anyway, mix together a cup of water and a cup of sugar in a pan and bring to a boil slowly, stirring constantly until the sugar is dissolved, and measure it, just to be sure. It should come out to be JUST about 1 3/4 cups of syrup.

You'll also need the same in lemon and lime juice, from concentrate is fine but fresh squeezed is better, albeit more expensive. In order to make it easier, I'll put in a half cup of each, then a quarter cup of each, then an eighth cup of each. If you're using fresh squeezed, you'll want to strain the juice through cheesecloth or fine mesh. This will fill up the 750 ml bottle to just about the top. Then you can use it for such delicious things as amaretto sours, whiskey sours, margaritas, and easy things like lemonade (I'll even pour a bit into a glass of coke).

Name/Label: Tilia
Type/Varietal: Malbec
Source/Appellation: Mendoza
Year: 2008
Price Paid: USD$9
Purchase Location: Louisville, CO
Rating: 4/5

Notes:
Malbec is one of the Bordeaux grapes, and is very tannic and sharp in flavor and thrives in high heat and bright sun, so it is particularly suited for places like South America, South Africa, Australia, and California, and Malbecs from those places tend to be pretty tasty.

This particular Malbec stays to form being tannic and sharp, with bright and sour flavors reminiscent of red currants, plum, and blackberries, but also maduro cigar and dry leather. The tannin is very strong, and only gets stronger as it airs, so drink soon after opening and in a small glass, like a sangiovese glass, not a cabernet or merlot glass.

It's a very big wine, so drink with something strong flavored and musky, or garlicky and spicy.

Name/Label: 30-30
Type/Varietal: Tequila Blanco
Source/Appellation: Guadalajara, duh.
Year: n/a
Price Paid: USD$20
Purchase Location: Boulder, CO
Rating: 4/5

Notes:
I don't know shit about tequila. We decided we wanted some because margaritas are amazing but when we made it to the tequila aisle in Liquormart were just like "uhhhhh uhhhhh" so I had basically two criteria: under $25 and not really shady looking. We decided on the 30-30 because it had a little tag under it that said "89 points!" I didn't even look at who rated it or what that meant. Generally if it has a rating it's at least, you know, legit, and not like turbo creepy. And more importantly it was $20.

What I look for in a tequila, since I don't know anything about them, are basically a good smell and a good taste. Duh. Tequila always has this rich, sweet, floral smell and usually you can tell when it's gross just by seeing how much gasoline you smell along WITH the floral smell. This stuff smells really good, like I want to wear it as perfume good, and there is no alcohol smell at all, even when i stick my nose all the way in to the glass.

It has a pleasant burn, but it's not overpowering, even when I roll it around my mouth, and the taste is toasty and fruity and floral and again, hardly any "fusel" alcohol taste at all, just a pretty clean alcoholic burn without much of a hideous lingering bitter aftertaste, just the agave. Most importantly, it blends REALLY well (with margaritas), and complements the lime and salt flavors like tequila should.

As little as I know about tequila, this stuff is very affordable and one of the better ones I've tasted, and certainly quite a few steps above Jose Cuervo for only a few dollars more. I'd buy again.

Name/Label: Crane Lake
Type/Varietal: Petite Syrah
Source/Appellation: "California" (on the reverse it indicates "Napa and Sonoma")
Year: 2005
Price Paid: USD$5
Purchase Location: Westminster, CO
Rating: 3/5

Notes:
After Cherie shot down my idea of making takoyaki for dinner and instead suggested something "lighter," I suddenly got the inspiration for a technically lighter dinner with pasta and olive oil. After a trip to Whole Foods where I found very nice looking watercress (which found its way into soup), some gorgeous fresh white anchovies, and some oil cured olives, I knew what I must do. I ran over to Total Beverage on 120th in search of a really nice, inexpensive gamay. And came up empty. They had a "Beaujolais" section which did not include any beaujolais, just stuff from surrounding regions all marked for $20-$30. Beaune is good, mind you, but not $30 good. Instead I just contented myself with wandering and looking for lighter wines that were in the free to $10 range. My eyes came across the Crane Lake, with ugly generic label (worse than the Pine Ridge label, ugh, it looked like some awful wedding invitation) and $5 price tag ($4 if you're in their club) and dwelled slightly.

"This wine is 5 dollars," I thought to myself. "I bet it's awful." "But on the other hand," my mind continued, "since it's only 5 dollars, if it's awful, I won't really have lost much in the gamble." So I grabbed a bottle. The only thing I wanted the wine for was a salad dressing anyway, so it didn't have to be fantastic. In fact, if it was more acidic, it would probably be better for making a "vinaigrette" anyway, so the only way I'd lose that bet is if it was just plain downright abominable, which $5 wine can tend to be.

Now, some of you may be aware of the (in)famous Charles Shaw label, sold for $2 (in California) and $3 (most other places) at Trader Joe's. Often referred to as "two buck chuck," many people, including my sister, swear by it. I gave it a shot, I tried I believe their syrah, and it was hideous! The flavor was... decent, as far as bad wine goes (I remember the $30 bottle of "Inferi" Montepulciano which was possibly the biggest waste of money I ever made), but there was something... about... the Charles Shaw that just rubbed me the wrong way. The hangover that lasted 2 days after drinking it really drove that point home. I can say without hesitation that this Crane Lake is 2 dollars more than Charles Shaw and much, much better. It's also better than everybody's OTHER favorite $5 wine, the Rex Goliath 47 Pound Rooster, which nevertheless still wins in the "humor" category.

Crane Lake really isn't all that bad. I can say one thing, when I started drinking I already had a slight headache from allergies, and my head actually feels BETTER after having a couple glasses. Whether I get a hangover from this is yet to be seen, but really it doesn't *seem* like that sort of wine. It doesn't have that... filthy... feeling that Charles Shaw gave me. AND REMEMBER, I drank the Charles Shaw before realizing what exactly it was-- my sister pulled a fast one on me, which is actually pretty easy. She wanted to prove that cheap wine could be alright. And she did. It was alright. I'd rather drink that than, say, Concha y Toro. And I'd rather get it sprayed into my asshole at high velocities than drink Barefoot.

On the nose of the Crane Lake you get a very distinct alcohol note. That is, in fact, the predominant tone of the bouquet. It isn't really so much of a bouquet as it is a hospital room. Underneath the strong alcohol there is a little bit of fruit, mostly cherry preserves, underripe pear, and a little bit of brandy and maduro cigar. Drink this in a close-mouthed glass, like a Sangiovese glass, not a larger bowl one like you would for cabernet, by the way. Trying to drink this out of a balloon glass like for pinot noir would be the recipe for disaster. Much like with brandy or other hard alcohols, dwelling too much on the nose would be unfortunate. Petite Syrah is SUPPOSED to be a more delicate nose anyway, so you're not really spending a lot of time there like you do on well-aged musky bordeaux or really excellent merlot, which can be candy-sweet.

Yes, this one is designed to go into your mouth and be swallowed shortly thereafter. On the tongue, it is a very tannic wine. Especially shortly after opened, it has a very distinct bitter "green" taste to it. You know that really sharp acidity and vegetable taste when you bite into underripe grapes? There you go. But fortunately after a few hours of being opened (you could easily decant this one and have it ready sooner), the acids relax a little bit, and it never has the misfortune of being too "tight," like younger Clarets can tend to be. It's fine out of the bottle, but improves with gentle oxidation. Predominant flavors are leather, tobacco, currant, raspberry, and a bit of shoe polish. I mean, what you'd imagine shoe polish to taste like, I don't touch the stuff myself. It does, I must say, have a very pleasant, lingering aftertaste of blackberries, which I very heartily approve of. It makes me wish I had a forest fruit tart.

I served the wine with a pasta dish I came up with with oil-cured black olives, picholine olives, anchovies, garlic, fennel, shallot, sun-dried tomato, two italian hard cheeses, and olive oil. The wine went actually extraordinarily well, cutting through the strong flavors and bitter undertones with its own bitterness, not overpowering but adding to. I also added it to a "vinaigrette" for salads with small slivers of anjou pear, fresh grown tomato, and the same two cheeses. I found it most satisfying.

Overall I'd rate this more than adequate for the imbiber on a budget, and I will probably try their other varietals at some point just because of how outrageously inexpensive it is. I wouldn't serve this to a guest without forewarning, however, as you can taste its cheapness, and paired with the wrong dinner it could have dire consequences on your social life. For instance, I would not even serve it with mushrooms, as they are much too sweet. The intensely bitter oil-cured olives were probably what brought the dish together. The Crane Lake, despite being tacky, cheap, and unsophisticated, was nevertheless leagues better than a lot of the swill that undoubtedly sells much better on the American wine market, and is an unexpected surprise to the wine drinker on a budget.

Name/Label: Aperol
Type/Varietal: Bitter Aperitif
Source/Appellation: Italy
Year: n/a
Price Paid: USD$18
Purchase Location: Thornton, CO
Rating: 4/5

Notes:
For those of you who know me, I have a sort of obsession with these sorts of red Italian bitter aperitifs: Campari, of course, being the most well known. Aperol is in the same "genre" of liquor, being sweet, syrupy, and bitter all at the same time. They're supposed to get the juices going before a big meal. And there is evidence to back that up: gentian and other bitters are supposed to make the stomach start producing digestive enzymes.

Aperol is perhaps the most "approachable" of all these kinds of fruity red bitters. It's by far the sweetest and least bitter, having a taste rather similar to Campari. The bottle advertises that it is a mixture of "orange, rhubarb, china, and gentian." I'm assuming that by orange, they mean the bitter orange, Citrus aurantium, and by china they mean the sweet orange, Citrus sinensis. It is very, very orangy. There is only a trace of a vegetable taste, no doubt the rhubarb, and as anyone who has even eaten rhubarb knows, it has more of a fruity, flowery taste to it than anything else, in addition to a slight bitterness.

As with all of these bitters, you have to be warned that they are, well, bitter. Like biting in to orange skin. It is also, to offset that, quite sweet. I find the experience quite satisfying all by itself, with a single ice cube to cool it down. Many people find the bitterness too off-putting and will mix it about 30/70 or 40/60 with orange juice, which is actually quite an appealing way to drink it. Aperol is a very low-alcohol drink, not intended to get you drunk or tipsy but to stimulate your stomach, so there isn't much risk of over-drinking; it has an alcohol content only a few percent higher than wine, and you typically consume much less of it than wine. Its low price and pleasant taste make me highly recommend it for those who enjoy bitters, even above others in its class like Campari and Cynar.

Name/Label: Le Tourment Vert
Type/Varietal: Absinthe
Source/Appellation: France
Year: n/a
Price Paid: USD$8
Purchase Location: Louisville, CO
Rating: 2/5

Notes:
On a whim, I bought a little sampler bottle of this absinthe, which I had never seen or heard of before. Absinthe is very expensive, so before I commit to any particular bottle, I am very interested to be able to try it first. Absinthe, in addition to being very expensive, also has the terrible burden of being very difficult to get right. This stuff does not get it right.

To begin with, it's blue. It's actually this very quite appealing shade of turquoise rather than the very deep, rich green that one usually associates with absinthe, especially in the popular imagination. I mixed it 1:4, but Cherie suggested it was a little diluted; I'm used to drinking pastis, which is more commonly mixed 1:4, but Absinthe is more often 1:3 apparently. I poured the rest of the bottle in after I had drunk a bit and it turned out fine. I used cold water, but it did not louche very well; it got a little hazy, but not very. On the nose it is very perfumy and medicinal at the same time. It smells sort of like the perfume you'd find collecting dust in Grandma's cabinet. And that's not a compliment.

The taste itself is also rather cloying. I thought I had detected mint; it has a very not-anisy flavor. After referring to the company's website, I discovered that the predominant flavor is actually eucalyptus, which also accounts for the bluish tint and the medicinal smell. And, guess what, it tastes sort of more like Vicks 44 than you'd expect absinthe to, down to the bitter aftertaste from the wormwood. All together, it tastes like somebody added cough syrup to a rather bad bottle of gin and called it absinthe. The eucalyptus flavor is especially strong, and it lingers, even past the bitterness from the wormwood. My days of drinking cough syrup are long over, and it is not really a flavor I ever really relished.

The company's website goes into length about how they wanted to "re-imagine" absinthe as a mixer, a party drink, and consequently does not do much on its own. It's unsophisticated, overly perfumed, it tastes like something you'd splash into cocktails mixed with other things to add a little bit of scent and color, but doesn't really seem like it would even be well-suited for that purpose, unless you were also in to sippin' on some sizzurp. I would not recommend it, especially to those who are interested in absinthe but have not really had the chance yet to try many, and to people who enjoy absinthe, it adds nothing to the art of the liquor and in fact detracts very strongly from the experience: the medicinal flavor and extremely long, lingering, sweet, syrupy taste are not qualities I relish in any sort of drink, absinthe doubly so.

Name/Label: Asahi "Brewmaster's Select"
Type/Varietal: Supposedly it's a pale ale?
Source/Appellation: Japan (although it's brewed in Canada)
Year: n/a
Price Paid: USD$6.59
Purchase Location: Louisville, CO
Rating: 4/5

Notes:
Yeah I don't usually do beer, but I figure not a lot of people have had this kind of beer, so I thought I'd weigh in my two cents. Asahi's more common beer is the "Super Dry," which is actually one of my all time favorite beers. What I like about the super dry mostly is that it is, in fact, very dry. There is practically no aftertaste, even though the taste it has in your mouth is a really nice dry pilsner style. You can make fun of me all you want. But I like it.

Anyway, on Asahi's website they claim the "Serekuto" is a pale-ale style beer, but I'd say it's actually much closer to a brown ale. Which is pretty good. Japan seems to be able to take anything and make it more or less palatable, despite being very distinctly Japanese. I'd compare the select most readily to Newcastle, believe it or not. It's a very caramely brown ale with an apple sweetness to it that is very refreshing. The taste lingers, too, just like Newcastle, but there is a much fuller sweetness to it that for just a moment can almost be slightly cloying, but is still nevertheless not strong enough to be a fault. I'd describe it as a very light butterscotch sort of flavor.

If you pour it into a glass you could probably pass it off as something more expensive; for just over a dollar a bottle, I can't really see anything wrong with it that would prevent me from getting it again, even though I am probably more likely to get the Super Dry just because I like it better and it goes better with dinner.

Name/Label: Dry Creek Vineyard
Type/Varietal: Meritage
Source/Appellation: Dry Creek Valley
Year: 2003
Price Paid: USD$20
Purchase Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Rating: 4/5

Notes:
As far as American wine goes, Dry Creek is one of my favorites. Not only do they make really affordable wines, but they were also one of the major spearheaders of the Meritage movement. Meritage is basically applying "Bordeaux rules" to American wine. Namely, they blend Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon, Malbec, Petit Verdot, and Cabernet Franc, the five accepted red grapes in Bordeaux.

This stuff is freaking gorgeous. You will seldom find a better wine for $20. Unfortunately for me, it's widely sold in Michigan but I haven't seen it a lot of other places. I got this at Meijer, of all places. I practically flipped my lid. I have long been a fan of their Cabernet Sauvignon (which isn't 100% Cabernet Sauvignon, by the way), and I'm a fan of red blends in general, so you really can't go wrong. It is cheap enough that if you're throwing a really swank party, you can pick up a couple of bottles and impress the living hell out of whoever you're serving. Or, just get one bottle, pour it first, get everybody in the mood, and then start pouring out the cheaper stuff.

Dry Creek is really good at doing American Bordeaux. It is strong, yet subtle, flavorful, yet subdued. Doesn't that sound pretentious. I'm serious though. You almost taste more in your nose when you breathe out after drinking than you do in your mouth. And it sticks with you. The only reason I didn't give this a five is that the acid is a little bit strong for a good Bordeaux style wine. If I did halves, this would be 4.5. If I did quarters, it'd be 4.75.

In the nose you get a lot of old books and sour red forest fruit. It's pungent and perfumy at the same time; drinking out of a glass with too wide a rim makes it almost overpowering in the tickle it gives on the nose. If you've seen a Bordeaux glass, you'll know what I mean. I'm drinking it out of a Pinot Noir glass and it's pretty huge. You get almost as much fragrance on the exhalation than you do on the inhalation--it permeates.

What is really impressive is the rare quality it has of amplifying the flavors of whatever you're eating. I just took a bite of sauteed asparagus, for instance, cooked long enough to release the flavors but not long enough to be softened at all, and it was one of the most beautiful things in the world. It is especially good with very strong Italian cheeses, like romano or very well aged parmesan. Those sorts of pungent, sharp flavors meld well with its own sharpness. The wine itself is rather mild on the tongue, besides a very pleasing tannic tinge, but it blooms in the entire head after having been drunk. It's as appropriate with light Italian fare than it is alone. Add it to your dinner involving garlic and pine nuts and you can send me a letter about how your life was changed for the better later. The only problem here is that if the food you're eating is BAD, then the wine will still amplify the flavor and make it taste WORSE. So eat carefully! Only the best!

If you're in Michigan and can buy this at any damned wine store you want, and even Meijer for Christ's sake, if you don't go out and buy yourself a bottle of this tomorrow you're doing a terrible disservice to yourself. If I sound pedantic it's because I am. This is incredible. I bet even if you were a lifelong cigar smoker and your taste buds have been murdered you'd still get a good deal of pleasure from this. I don't know how these people get away with making such good wine for so cheap. I mean, nobody's heard of them!

Name/Label: Hugues Beaulieu
Type/Varietal: Picpoul de Pinet
Source/Appellation: Coteaux du Languedoc
Year: 2006
Price Paid: USD$12
Purchase Location: Louisville, Co
Rating: 3/5

Notes:
Cherie said "Three and a half," but I don't do halves, so three. Picpoul is one of the lesser known French whites. That is both a shame and a benefit. It's a benefit because it keeps the price dirt cheap. You'll pay no more than $15 here (if you do you're getting ripped off) and no more than around $3-$5 in France. Picpoul is one of the redder of the white grapes, which results in a golden, greenish wine. Usually when you have green wine it means something is seriously wrong with it (serious oxidation, etc), but in this case, it's good. Compare with Vinho Verde.

Picpoul is famous for being one of the more acidic grapes, perhaps more acidic than even Pinot Grigio. Combine this with the absolutely hideous soil in Languedoc, and you get a really full, lush, mineraly-as-hell white wine. Languedoc is the far south of France on the Mediterranean, supposedly named because of the dialect there where they say "Oc" instead of "Oui"... Have I gone over this before? They are well known for their dry, mineraly wines, both white and red. I prefer the whites, actually. Though the better Rousillon reds are fantabulous. The pinks are actually pretty freaking good, too, if you like dry pinks (and I do).

This one has a very rich, fresh grape juice smell on the nose, with a tad of grapefruit and even less freshly tilled earth. There's even a bit of salty, humid air you can almost smell, just like where it's made. It's a summer wine, and it shows. Served very cold, it is outstanding and unparalled with shellfish, especially oysters, raw, on the shell, with only a hint of lemon and salt. I'd also recommend it with mussels, steamed in a broth made with the selfsame wine, tarragon, thyme, and a squeeze of lemon.

Unlike pinot grigio or some sauvignon blancs, which are also very acidic and citrusy, this one has a bit of an earthy, savory flavor that comes out more on the palette after you've swallowed and lingers, sort of like dashi or mushrooms or other high glutamate foods. I'd have it with fresh tomatoes with a little bit of salt for this same reason. I'd say in general a picpoul goes better with salty foods than some of the other acidic whites.

As for this bottle specifically, you can tell that the '07 is going to be coming out soon. The flavor is sort of going, and you can tell. It's not as robust as I'd expect a picpoul to be, or as dirty. I'll definitely try the '07 as soon as it comes out, and I would still recommend this as a good wine for entertaining as an alternative to chardonnay or pinot grigio as a white. It's just not that special. No major flaws, and in fact is a pretty decent representative of the varietal as a whole, but doesn't knock me over. Compared to the Domaine Felines Jourdan, for example, it sort of fails. But compared with others of its sort, it is pretty average. If you can get it for $12, I'd say why not. Just don't expect to be knocked over. It's worth trying just for a new grape.

Name/Label: Domaine Chandon
Type/Varietal: Pinot Meunier
Source/Appellation: Carneros
Year: 2005
Price Paid: USD$30
Purchase Location: Louisville, Co
Rating: 4/5

Notes:
Have you heard of Pinot Meunier?  It's used mostly in sparkling wine.  It's an accepted grape in Champagne but it's actually more popular this side of the lake than in France, although it's thrown in in small amounts for adding fruitiness and nuttiness, especially in Blanc de Noirs.  Only a handful of people make a still wine out of Pinot Meunier, and it's a shame.  Domaine Chandon, I believe, grows it more than anywhere else in the world?  Or maybe just this country.  But it was one of their flagship grapes, and it was their idea I think to make a red wine to begin with?  You can't quote me on this, this is just hearsay.  But it's true, not many people make a Pinot Meunier red, and I think mostly in this country. 

Pinot Meunier is very closely related to Pinot Noir and, as you may expect, tastes a lot like Pinot Noir.  But there's a difference: Pinot Meunier ends up, at least in this instance, of having a more earthy and chocolatey quality to it, more like the real stinky Burgundy reds of France than what you would associate Pinot Noir with in this country, which tend towards the more vegetal.  Pinot Noir in general, I think, ends up expressing more green pepper and grass flavors than a lot of other reds, and indeed, to me the sign of an underaged Pinot Noir is too much grass in the flavor.  This one doesn't have any of that, despite having a lot of the qualities of Pinot Noir that I really appreciate.  Namely, the rich, leathery sweetness and fruit forward blackberry jam tendencies.  Hardly over two years old and there were already sugar crystals forming on the cork when we opened it: a sign of its fruitiness.  We haven't made it to the bottom of the bottle yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a little bit of sediment forming to go with the sugar.  I can imagine, upon aging, of this becoming darker, more leathery, and more chocolatey than it is in its relatively young age. 

On the nose, it's got a richness reminiscent of Merlot: a lot of fruit, but dark fruit: blackcurrants, raspberries, a little bit of vanilla.  New leather and a very slight bit of dark cocoa powder sneak in, but the fruit predominates.  It is very appealing and strong.  You could probably smell it in a room if you had been pouring it for a lot of people.  After it's aired a little bit, the smell becomes stronger and more intoxicating.  It may look tacky, but I would recommend pouring it over between glasses a few times to work the air in to deepen the flavor before serving it, rather than relying on you or your guests to let it sit in its glass long enough to open up.  At the same time, it's not one that would be decanted, that may make it too loose. 

On the tongue, what is immediately and more readily apparent is strong cherry.  If you buy one of those cheapish cherry juice cocktails mixed with grape and apple juice, that's the flavor.  It's gorgeous, almost surprisingly so.  Chandon's sparkling wine is sort of bullocks, but this is outstanding.  It is a little tight when it first opens, but as it airs the flavors deepen and now, an hour after opening it, the apple and cherry stay on the tongue for a long time after swallowing, with a cocoa taste, not unlike porter beer, creeping in along with it.  There's also a tang of walnuts.  It would go extraordinary with a cherry cheesecake. 

We had it with a pasta dish I made up with smoked salmon, snap peas, and capers, sauteed in olive oil with garlic and parsley.  I felt like the tight, freshly poured wine really accentuated the smoke of the fish, but the fruitiness also acted sort of against the green taste of the peas.  I think with a more earthy vegetable like asparagus (which I originally wanted, but the stuff at the store was horrible) would have been better.  The wine's flavor matures and deepens with the meal, and as the food cooled the wine's flavor "warmed" along with it.  I thought it was a decent pairing, but not outstanding.  Perhaps it would have been better with a salmon and caper pate.  it's also something that would probably go with dessert as well as dinner, given that dessert was rich and creamy and used blackberry, cherry, or similarly sweet-sour dark fruit. 

This comes from me highly recommended, despite the slightly high price.  I would definitely opt for this again over even a more expensive Pinot Noir, since I seem to prefer this to even some of the nicer Oregon and Washington Pinot Noirs.  You will also always be able to taste the Pinot Meunier in sparkling wine when it's present after having this red still wine. 

Name/Label: Marramiero "Inferi"
Type/Varietal: Montepulciano d'Abruzzo
Source/Appellation: Montepulciano d'Abruzzo
Year: 2003
Price Paid: USD$27
Purchase Location: Boulder, Co
Rating: 3/5

Notes:
I am a huge fan of an inexpensive Montepulciano called Cantina Zaccagnini.  It is very easily identifiable because it is the only wine I know of that ties a stick to every bottle.  The label looks cheap and homemade, and it has a freaking stick stuck to it, but despite this it's actually very good.  So that predisposes me to want to experiment with a more "expensive" Montepulciano.  Cherie and I have been listening to Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince read by Stephen Fry for the past few days, and so the idea of a bottle called "Inferi" and depicting devils coming up from below was very attractive.  We decided it would only be appropriate to drink during Chapter 26.  

Alas, as Dumbledore might say.  More expensive, proves once again, to not be the same as better.  Upon opening, I gave Cherie the first taste, and she suggested that it had probably begun to turn.  I tasted, and I agreed it was bad, but it didn't have that horrible, drying, shriveling feeling on the tongue that vinegar does, but nevertheless is a bad tasting wine.  It just tastes like it was very badly crafted, possibly adulterated with different grapes (Montepulciano, I have read, allows for up to 10% Sangiovese, which shouldn't be a bad thing, but it is what it is).  In the nose it has similar character to Zinfandel: it is very fat, chocolatey, and sour.  But it also betrays a strange, deceptive sweetness that is distracting.  It's a very difficult wine to even get to your mouth if you are drinking out of a large Pinot Noir, Burgundy, or Bordeaux glass.  The fumes are very sharp and annoying.  Out of a Sangiovese glass or similar, however, it is much less offensive.  A little known fact about some Italian reds is that they are, in fact, better experienced out of a slimmer, smaller mouthed glass that might usually be designated for white wine.  

However, the correct glass does not remedy the negative qualities of the wine.  Upon drinking straight after opening the bottle, the character of the wine is simple, sour, and stinky.  It leaves a distinct taste of morning breath after you've swallowed, that lingers for an unpleasantly long time.  You can detect what the wine techincally SHOULD taste like, however, and if it was not $30 and instead around $8, the flaws would not seem as serious; they'd seem expected.  However, for a mid-range (and for the region, pricey) wine, the flaws are inexcusable.  However, as it sits open, a lot of the worse qualities fade away: I'd recommend that if you do have this, you decant it, or draw the cork and leave it open for a half an hour before drinking.  Originally I gave it a 2, but I decided to change it to a 3 because it really does become tolerable as it breathes.  Nevertheless, in respect to price and overall quality, the novelty of a wine named after a Latin term for the undead is not enough to justify its purchase.  Perhaps if I had the opportunity to purchase a bottle for under $10, I would drink it again.  Otherwise, never.  Consider it a... "2.5"?

Name/Label: Albet i Noya
Type/Varietal: Xarel lo
Source/Appellation: Penedes
Year: 2006
Price Paid: USD$13
Purchase Location: Boulder, Co
Rating: 5/5 

Notes: 
This is a very refreshing, crisp wine.  Immediately I thought that it resembled a cross between a Riesling and Pinot Grigio, then I decided that it tasted pretty close to a Pinot Blanc.  Xarel lo (there's techincally a dot between the two l's there, but I don't know how to make that figure) is apparently one of the major grapes in Spanish sparkling (Cava) wine production, and is thus immediately reminiscent of off-sweet grapes such as Pinot Blanc, Chardonnay, and Pinot Grigio.  There is a crispness to it that is not unlike that of sparkling Cava and Champagne wines, without being overly sweet or syrupy, like Pinot Blanc can sometimes be.  It was referred to us by a dude at this actually pretty crappy wine store in Boulder when we were debating buying another bottle of Burgan's Albarinho.  We gave the first bottle I bought away as a gift, and Cherie wanted to replace it.  He said that the Albet i Noya label was organic and sustainable and all that other crap that Boulder residents pretend to care about without really understanding what that means.  

Regardless, it has a rich, vanilla-sweet apple-pear scent in the nose, making it smell much sweeter than it actually tastes.  Here especially it betrays my comparison to Pinot Blanc: the two have a very similar nose to them.  At one point in the night I compared it somewhat facetiously to cream soda.  I'd also make comparisons to Chardonnay, but not gross California overoaked Chardonnay; more like Chablis.  You can already tell the sophistication with which I have with whites over reds.  I've compared it to Chardonnay, Riesling, Pinot Grigio, and Pinot Blanc.  I might as well compare it to Gewurztraminer and Sauvignon Blanc and get it over with, right?  I'll just say this: fans of crisp, fast-finish whites like Pinot Grigio or unoaked Chardonnay would find this very refereshing.  Enjoy it with shrimp or sharp cheeses like parmesan.  The mouthfeel is very creamy compared to the whites I usually like, but there is not enough sweetness to make it cloying or unenjoyable, unlike that Valley of the Moon Pinot Blanc, which could have been good very easily if it had not been too sweet in the aftertaste.  This one's aftertaste is very strong in pear above all else, but has enough acid to make it nice and crisp and excellent very cold.  

Cherie and I both rated it a 5 not because of any particularly excellent or extraordinary qualities that it possess, but based upon my criteria outlined for a "5" that stipulates that we can't imagine anyone not enjoying it.  It's that sort of wine: enjoyable, uncomplex, and suitable for a wide variety of foods.  If I was going to be more snoobbish about it and apply the Parker scale, I don't think I would give it more than say an 85; but given that its failings on the Parker scale are also its potential benefits to the general public, the "reccommendability" of the wine is very high.  We drank it with a shrimp scampi pasta dish, which I thought was good but I thought a dryer white would be better.  Cherie thought it was great.  This kind of wine I'd say is best enjoyed by itself, in front of the TV, watching some relaxing programming like "Trading Spaces" or anything on the Travel Channel.   As it breathes, the taste improves and rounds out to resemble Chardonnay more and more, but never the grotesque crap you get at a restaurant.  If you have a friend who won't drink anything but cheap Chardonnay, this may be a good way to get them to try something else, that is probably better than the Fetzer and Beringer they usually drink.  This is probably one of the few wine's I'd give a 5 to not because it's exceptional, but just because it's enjoyable and easy.

Name/Label: Talisker "The Distiller's Edition" Double Matured
Type/Varietal: Scotch Whisky
Source/Appellation: Skye
Year: 1992
Price Paid: USD$50
Purchase Location: Memphis, TN
Rating: 5/5

Notes:
Oh, Talisker. If you haven't tried their famous 10 year, you are depriving yourself of one of the great things in life. This is technically a 13 year, but they don't mark it as such because it is one of those very rare things called a "single vintage Scotch." It was grown and distilled and put to cask all in 1992. And it is significantly more interesting than the regular Talisker. Not to say that the regular is bad, this just approaches perfection.

In the nose, what really jumps out at me is grilled meat. It smells like hamburger, or steak, but not in a gross way. There's pronounced wood smoke and almost an oniony quality to it, with a definite meat smell hiding in there. It also has a nice honey sweet smell, as well, the mark of a good Scotch, if you ask me. There's also a very subdued floral, rose smell in there, right at the end. The sweetness breaks through right at the end of your breath, after the alcohol has stopped making your nose tingle.

As soon as it hits the lips, the first thing you taste is sweetness, followed by a very bright, spiciness. It makes your tongue tingle and burn like chili peppers. The onionyness comes back here, just a little bit, pungent and piquant and is subsumed nearly entirely by a very strong smoke. It has a very wet, lasting, sensuous finish, forcing your mouth to salivate wildly. It's only here that you really taste the barley, but there's also a dry parsley herbal quality mixed in with it. Finally, I sense a very slight wet seaweed saltiness right at the tail end, after the spiciness and the smoke have cleared away. Never at any point is there any bitter, fusel, or sour taste to it.

This seems to only be available in 200ml sample bottles in a blue box with similar bottles of 10 year and 18 year. If I could buy a whole bottle of this, I would, but as yet the box set is all I've been able to find. This is definitely a release for the enthusiast, and a definite must (in the box!) for anyone fond of hot and smokey Scotches.

Name/Label: Springbank 10 year
Type/Varietal: Scotch Whisky
Source/Appellation: Campbeltown
Year: N/V
Price Paid: USD$61
Purchase Location: Louisville, CO
Rating: 4/5

Notes:
This was claimed by Warren Ellis, says Cherie, to be one of his favorite whiskies.

In the nose, it is very floral, like fruit blossoms. Cherie says she smells grass or asian pears. I would definitely agree. I smell a very strong apple and pear scent, like apple cider or pear nectar, though, not the fresh cut original. It has a much more powerful sweetness than either do by themselves. The grass I would describe as very fresh-hay like, coming from a farm. There is only a very slight whiff of smoke, like you've stepped outside on a cool evening and you smell that someone, somewhere, is burning a fire. Right near the end there is a hint of honey. And I'm not just saying that because I was just reviewing that Baerenjaeger stuff, seriously if you take a slice of asian pear and dip it in honey, it wouldn't be too far off from this stuff. It is very candylike.

On the tongue, however, it is very dry, almost drier than the Scapa I reviewed not too long ago, and that stuff has trace amounts of salt in it! The flavor on the tongue while it's still in the mouth maintains the strong sweetness that it has in the nose, but as soon as you swallow the dryness takes over and all of the sweetness is replaced in the mouth by a very crisp grassy, grainy flavor, sort of like a really high quality wheat vodka. Smoke reappears at this point, too, but again, only a hint. Again, sort of like the taste in your mouth after you've walked past a bonfire. There's also an herbal aspect to it, as well. Like thyme or marjoram, perhaps. It is in this finish where it resembles some of the more famous Speyside malts, although instead of being very hot and bitter at the end, it has an almost spicy warmness on the tongue and quickly subsides into a very rich, filling maltiness. Several minutes after your last swallow, you'll still have the faint sensation of fresh baked bread left.

I prefer a bit of a sweeter finish than the Springbank provides, but I also understand the style and I can greatly appreciate the technique that went in to creating such a multi-nuanced product. And I think that is why Springbank is so highly regarded in the realm of Scotch Whisky: what you actually get goes far beyond anything you may expect from just smell alone. I would love to go into a room of people all drinking this heartily, the smell would be heaven. Overall, if you like a very crisp, dry (I wouldn't want to be too involved in conversation while drinking this, it makes your tongue dry!), but long lasting whisky, this is for you.

Just an aside note, Springbank apparently controls more aspects of the production process than any other distillery in Scotland. Which I suppose would be one of the reasons that the flavor is so complex. They have some "experimental" bottlings out there, too, but they are so prohibitively expensive that I don't think you will ever see me reviewing them. They have a 12 year rum cask bottling and a 9 year marsala finish in addition to their regular 10, 15, and 21 year bottlings. They also produce Longrow, which is more heavily peated and will probably be what I replace this bottle with, and Hazelburn, which is not peated at all and thus I don't have much interest in.

Name/Label: Baerenjaeger (there are umlauts)
Type/Varietal: Liqueur (dessert)
Source/Appellation: Steinhagen, Germany
Year: N/V
Price Paid: USD$2.25 (50ml sample bottle)
Purchase Location: Louisville, CO
Rating: 3/5

Notes:
The bottle advertises it being a "honey liqueur," and I find there has never been a truer claim made on any liquor bottle. It smells like a cross between honey and gasoline. Maybe not completely gasoline, perhaps rubbing alcohol with a little bit of gasoline or turpentine mixed in for health purposes. The honey smell is definitely the strongest, though, which is lucky. Have you ever made honey syrup? Where you just mix one part honey to one part boiling water and cool it again? That's the consistency of this stuff. I think that's basically what they do to make it, juust mix one part honey to one part heinously cheap vodka. It coats the tongue like honey, is very thick (even thicker when it's very cold, as they recommend drinking it), and tastes like... well... honey.

The alcohol they use for it is extremely poor quality, as you can taste the very negative quality of it underneath the honey taste. It is almost like they had vodka of such incredibly poor quality that they thought "the only way we could sell this is if we masked it with something really strong tasting... like honey!" And thus, Baerenjaeger was born. This stuff is not to be confused with Jaegermeister, which is simply Robitussin marked at a more competitive price in the liquor market.

Overall, the hideous neutral grain spirit they used loses its flavor much more quickly than the honey taste disappears, and it is a bit more tolerable when it is very cold, and as I said, the honey coats the tongue more and gives an even longer sensation. I could see this being very good with certain German sorts of pastries, like mohnkuchen or lemon tarts. I don't know if it's worth the price to buy the bottle of it, but I am convinced that if you simply took some good quality red clover honey and an equal part of high quality, very neutral tasting vodka like Luksusowa, warmed them both in a pan to just below simmering, then quickly put them into a corked bottle into the refrigerator, you could probably make your own that would taste much better. But it is not so bad that if somebody gave me a bottle of it for a gift that I wouldn't hug them.

Oh, the name, if you don't speak any German, is "bear hunter," and the bottle depicts a very angry bear about to slap a bee while a guy dressed like Link or Robin Hood is sticking his hand into the back of an absurdly large hive that is growing out of a bush. I think it would be more appropriate to call it "bee hunter," but not actually "bee hunter" but "crazy drunk man putting honey in his vodka."

Addendum:
Alright, looks like honey liqueur (baerenfang) has a long and glorious history in the realm of liquor, and it looks like the standard recipe calls for about 1 1/3 cups honey to 2 cups vodka in order to make 1 "bottle" of baerenfang, so it's not exactly a 1-1. A lot of recipes also seem to include a vanilla bean and a cinnamon stick to macerate in there for a little bit as well. I think I will have to make some. There are a lot of recipes that make it a lot more "herbal" and have stuff like flowers and plants and stuff in there as well. It also seems that the "original" baerenfang was based on rectified spirit (i.e. brandy) instead of vodka. I can see this being extremely, extremely tasty. Especially if you use good brandy.

Name/Label: Blandy's "Alvada" 5 Year Old
Type/Varietal: Madeira wine
Source/Appellation: haha. Madeira, maybe?
Year: N/V
Price Paid: USD$18
Purchase Location: Louisville, CO
Rating: 3/5

Notes:
Madeira is a type of fortified wine similar to sherry or port. In fact, technically it's Portuguese, although Madeira is an island off of Portugal, which is why it's Madeira instead of Port. Get it? Madeira is also made in a hilarious way. They make wine like port, but then they store it in this hot houses. Yup, hot houses. It sits to rot in the sun for months and sometimes years and so everything that can possibly go wrong with wine already has gone wrong with it. Which is also why Madeira is the most long lasted wine ever. They have found bottles of Madeira over 200 years old that still tastes great. I wouldn't drink the shit, but supposedly it's good. This stuff in particular sat in the hot houses for 5 years. The two major types of Madeira are aged and Rainwater. See, they used to put it into big barrels and leave it on the beach, so when the ships came through they could just pick up the barrels and leave other stuff, and they didn't have to coordinate anything. But sometimes the ships would get delayed, and the barrels would get soaked and the water would get in and water it down and add a weird wet woody taste to it and make it a lot milder. Most Madeira you find is "Rainwater" style, which the English liked a lot better and after a while they'd purposely let it sit out in the wet.

I didn't have particularly high hopes for stuff called "Blandy's"; fearing it would be... bland. Alas, it was the oldest they had of the aged variety, and it was cheap, so I thought I'd give it a try. I agree with the English, in this case, that the Rainwater is pretty tasty. But I was also looking for something a bit richer. I am not disappointed.

It smells almost like flan, really, strongly caramel and vanilla. There's also berry and grain notes. The sugar sticks to the inside of the nose. It smells almost exactly like something, but I am totally drawing a blank on what. haha. Flowery, like hibiscus maybe? Very concentrated rose? It smells good. I'm going to start applying it as cologne.

The taste is almost a little bit underwhelming compared to the smell. Really, it tastes like any other Madeira or sweet sherry. It's got a very toasty, fresh baked bread sort of finish, like you just took the loaf out of the oven, and smothered it with strawberry preserves. Which is very appealing. It's got a nice little cherry juice flavor, too. The best part about it is that it has a very lasting, persistent finish, lasting several minutes even. Honestly, there's nothing extraordinary about it. But there's nothing bad about it, either. Except it's got a little bit of a turpentine taste just for a second. But, I mean, besides that. You have to sort of expect a little bit of turpentine, you know? Not necessarily a bad thing, unless it's actually turpentine you're drinking, which I'm pretty sure is wickedly poisonous.

There's nothing really I can say about it, except it's pretty good, I enjoy drinking it, and it would be absolutely killer with a sweet dessert like a flan or tiramisu.

Name/Label: Underberg
Type/Varietal: Digestive bitters
Source/Appellation: Switzerland
Year: N/V
Price Paid: USD$4 (3x 20ml bottles)
Purchase Location: Louisville, CO
Rating: 4/5

Notes:

Recently I have become an enthusiast of bitters. I love flavorful things, and I think that drinking extremely flavorful things like bitters is a sort of obvious step. It has long been believed that bitter herbs have a tonic and digestive effect on the body, which is something I am half willing to believe. It is true that bitter things stimulate the stomach to produce acid, which could, potentially, be a bad thing if you suffer, like I do, from heartburn. But all the same, it is not the aggressive, irritant action of spicy foods, coffee, or very fatty foods (all of which I also love). Bitters have a very long history in alcoholic consumption, going most famously back to some of the eponymous monastic orders that still produce similar items, the most famous, of course, being Chartreuse and Benedictine. If they weren't so damned expensive, I'd probably have some in the house.

The idea of making tinctures of herbs for healthful effect is absurdly old. The idea for using bitters as an additive and flavoring for other beverages is still hundreds of years old: the most famous, I think, being "pink gin," which is simply a few dashes of Angostura in a couple ounces of gin, supposedly invented by sailors in order to stave off scurvy. It has truth, because Angostura uses citrus peel as one of their flavorants, and that, of course, contains vitamin C. What I still can't really grasp is the real difference between digestive bitters and aperitif bitters. For instance, for anybody who has tasted Campari, it is very bitter and sweet! But that is marketed as an aperitif: it gets the stomach juices going in advance of a large meal. But, on the other hand, things like Angostura, Peychaud's, and Underberg and others were marketed originally as a digestive aid, which are also bitter. Who knows!

The past couple nights I have felt a little ill and cold-ish, and whenever I get a cold my stomach gets irritated to the point of almost absurd pain. Yet also I have found that taking Angostura in soda water or coke, or more recently 20 ml of Underberg has had almost miraculous effect on the pain and irritation in my belly, so I am sold on the idea. Underberg also are very good bitters. They're actually sort of similar to Zwack Unicum, which is a Hungarian digestive bitter, which is also a bit thicker and a bit stronger than these. In the case of Underberg, Unicum, Chartreuse, Jaegermeister, Benedictine, and Becherovka, they are intended to be drunk in small amounts (say 1/2 to 3/4 oz?) after meals, which is not so much true for Angostura or Peychaud's, which are intentionally formulated to be a bit stronger and used sparingly as an additive or tonic.

Underberg itself comes in very distinctive bottles, and similar to other kinds of bitters, has a sort of silly amount of paper involved in the packaging. Each of the bottles is "single serve," although they do not preclude in the comments on the packaging its usefulness as an additive. Upon opening, one is almost overwhelmed by the smell of cloves and cinnamon. Its immediate "bouquet" is almost like Christmas cookies or potpourri gone hideously wrong. Mint and juniper are also very present, but they linger for a while after the spice has gone away. It, of course, has a very bitter aftertaste, much like Campari, in fact, although the mint and juniper also linger in a way that is very reminiscent of dry Gin. In fact, the flavor profile overall is extremely similar to that of Gin, but stronger and more bitter. One also tastes a gingery spiciness, perhaps grains of paradise or galangal? I also would not be surprised if there was cardamom in it, especially black cardamom, which has a more camphory taste than regular. It also has a slight, fast sort of numbing effect on the tongue like black cardamom or sansho, which subsides very quickly. Lastly, it has a very rich sweetness on the tongue, as could only be had from anise, fennel, licorice, or all of the above.

They claim on their website that 43 herbs go in to its production. I would wager money on the fact that gentian is in there for bitterness; clove, anise, cinnamon, mint, and juniper compose the main flavor profile; and that grains of paradise, allspice, or cubeb are involved--in addition to cardamom, perhaps coriander, and definitely something of the greater ginger family; and that licorice is involved at some level. There is also an earthiness to it, and I would not be surprised if there were more than trace amounts of something like patchouli. I would also not be surprised at all if another large part of the sweetness in the flavor comes from orange or lemon peel.

I give it a four because, compared to a lot of other medicinal and aromatic bitters, it really does have a pretty exceptional flavor. I would say that, as an additive, it may be very nice in the place of Angostura, like in cocktails like a Stone Fence or Champagne Cocktail, but I would probably expect it to make a Manhattan taste a little too weird. The clove is something to contend with.

I had a pretty bad stomachache after eating too much Brie too quickly, and a coke with Underberg pretty much solved that problem within 20 minutes. I had never seen the stuff before I moved to Colorado, so I would not be surprised if you've never heard of it either, but I would recommend seeking some out if you are similar interested in bitters or tonics. That would be a good idea, actually, see what Underberg and tonic water tastes like. It would probably make Cherie dissolve; she hates bitters.

Name/Label: Valley of the Moon
Type/Varietal: Pinot Blanc
Source/Appellation: Sonoma County, California
Year: 2003
Price Paid: USD$13
Purchase Location: Louisville, CO
Rating: 3/5

Notes:

Pinot Blanc is a new thing of mine. I had never had any, and now in the past couple weeks I've had two. I had never had one before, so I figured I'd try it. It's very unique, as far as white grapes go. I haven't had enough to judge on expressions, but both I've had so far have been off-sweet and quite nuanced. The Trimbach, the first one I tried, was an Alsatian pinot blanc, and much like every other Alsatian wine I've had, was quite dry and minerally. Even their rieslings, which in my opinion are some of the best in the world, have a nice dry bite at the end. The Trimbach was actually very nearly Chardonnay in taste and character. And I don't mean yucky California over-oaked Chardonnay, I mean really nice delicate Australian or Burgundy Chardonnays. But there was also a nice smooth sweetness underneath it, like you dashed a shot of Kabinett Riesling into a glass of Pouilly-Fuisse.

The Valley of the Moon, from California, is actually very nice. It's much sweeter than the French, but not obnoxiously so like a lot of cheaper Californias. I had never heard of Valley of the Moon. I have never been to another store yet, even the hilariously massive "TOTAL BEVERAGE" in Denver or nearly-as-massive "LIQUORMART" in Boulder, who has carried it. The place I got it was Brass Monkey, right down the street, which is owned by these really crazy South Asian women.

In the nose, it is very rich orange and grape, with assorted other fruity smells seeping in, too, especially a little bit of green apple and unripe pear. There's also a fair amount of woody, oaky, cedary sort of suggestion right near the end.

In the mouth, I reiterate that it tastes sort of like an unoaked Chardonnay with a bit of Riesling mixed in. Ever had a really good German Kabinett? It's not at all the cheap, almost corn-syrupy sweetness that Rieslings often have, it's very sophisticated sweetness; a fruit sweetness, a simple sweetness. The flavor also tastes a lot like Bartlett pear. Almost astonishingly like pear. There is also a nice tartness at the end, leaving a crisp, dry taste in the mouth. It is only there where you detect a bit of the wood present in the nose. It adds a nice, subtle earthiness to an otherwise sweetish wine.

I actually drank this with a dinner of artichoke and lemon-butter and it worked extremely well. the tartness accompanies the lemon, but the sweetness cuts through the slight bitterness of the artichoke. I would also like this with similarly tasting vegetables like asparagus or chicory. I'd think it'd also be pretty good with more savory dishes, involving thyme, savory, oregano, or rosemary.

As the bottle stays open, it gets sweeter and more Riesling-like. The Trimbach stayed as dry as it was when I opened it, and got a little more vinegary as time went on. Nevertheless, a recommendation!

Name/Label: Red Bicyclette French Rose
Type/Varietal: Syrah/Grenache/Cinsault
Source/Appellation: Languedoc, France
Year: 2005
Price Paid: USD$10
Purchase Location: Louisville, CO
Rating: 3/5

Notes:

I don't know why they have to label it "French Rose" except in order to differentiate it from a lot of the bullshit American pink wines, like the atrocity that is "white zinfandel." This is a nice, fruity, refreshing rose from my favorite region of France, Languedoc. Specifically, Gard and Aude. Not at all what I expected: my expectations were pretty low.

This is a really passable rose for casual drinking. It has a nice acidic twinge on the tongue like pinot grigio or pinot blanc (so many pinots!), but a nice rich fruitiness reminiscent of plum jelly, raspberries, and oranges. In the nose, it is pure strawberry patch. It is not at all cloyingly sweet like you may expect from an "American rose," but actually quite nice and dry in the finish. I'd love to have it with a nice blue cheese or caesar salad, or even better a nice garlicky pasta dish.

There is nothing particularly spectacular about this, but it has absolutely no glaring faults. Which is a benefit in itself. I would serve this to anyone and, as long as they didn't see the ugly bottle, I would have nothing to be ashamed of. It would be something I wouldn't mind having a few bottles of just in case something came up that required the immediate consumption of wine. Also good for a warm, dry summer night, up in the mountains.

Name/Label: Dry Creek Vineyard
Type/Varietal: 88% Cabernet Sauvignon/6% Merlot/1% Malbec/5% Cabernet Franc
Source/Appellation: Dry Creek, California
Year: 2002
Price Paid: USD$24 (1/2 bottle: at a restaurant)
Purchase Location: Boulder, CO
Rating: 5/5

Notes:

It has been a couple days since I drank this, so I can't be too specific. Cherie and I went to this place called "Boulder Cork" in Boulder, of all places, which was your typical upscale steak and seafood joint. They had one of the largest wine lists of anywhere I've ever been, and they had these neat climate controlled windowed lockers that had all of the bottles in them on the main floor of the place, so when I ordered my bottle of wine, I got to see our waiter struggling to find it. I actually had ordered a bottle of 2003 Kenwood Sonoma Cabernet Sauvignon, which they were out of, so instead they offered a bottle of 2002 Dry Creek, which I had actually never even heard of, for the same price. I figured I'd try it. It's a northwest Sonoma valley Cabernet, a bit to the west of Alexander Valley, so I figured it would probably be good. I found out later that Dry Creek is one of the older viticultural areas in California, and Dry Creek Vineyard was one of the first wine producers to join the "Meritage" movement, which is essentially the American version of Bordeaux. Nearly all of Dry Creek Vineyard's wines are blends, following the formula you can see here: they mark on the label the majority varietal, then mix in small amounts of blenders to smooth out the flavor, and if the others are any comparison to this, with excellent results. I am not as good with California as I am with France, but I believe that a lot of the better wine producers in Sonoma are going with this approach.

Anyway, Cherie was the first to point out after we had both taken sips that it tasted more like Merlot than Cabernet: it was very, very soft and rich. After reading the back of the label, they indicated that it was a Meritage, to which I immediately responded, "well, that settles it. It tastes like Merlot because it contains Merlot!" Or something like that. There was a nice plummy sweetness, too, which I guessed was probably a bit of Malbec, and I again was correct. The Cabernet Franc isn't as readily noticeable, which usually gives a very spicy taste as soon as you taste it, but there was a little bit of zing. Really though the first thing you taste is Merlot. I was eating brie with raspberry sauce and it was very nice. The brie was a bit too assertive for the really sweet subtle softness of the freshly opened bottle. By the time dinner came around, however, the Cabernet Sauvignon was coming out and the more rich tannins and spicy flavors were present, beginning to make it a bit more warm and full feeling.

It was this nuanced quality of the wine that made it really stick out, to me. I said a few times while we were drinking it how much I liked it, and how I really wouldn't mind having a few bottles of it at home at any point for special occasions. It really is very good. For those who don't like the more harsh, acidic, dry Cabernet Sauvignons, this is a very pleasantly drinkable alternative, instead tasting more like a young Bordeaux. I feel like I actually thought it tasted like it had more Merlot in it than it actually did, I was going to guess that it was only 60 or 70 percent Cabernet Sauvignon, but I guess really the grapes are just really extraordinary in their smoothness and softness. I'd love to taste a 100% Cabernet wine from this same region to compare.

So yeah, I don't have a lot of "tasting notes" for it, but shit ass hell, it's good! I am more than willing to give this a perfect five. I may even rate it a wee bit higher than the Stag's Leap, just because of how elegant and delicate it was, but still very flavorful and complex. Much better than similarly priced Bordeauxs!