This was wine number three in our white wine dinner extravaganza. We started with two very lovely Chardonnays (see the other reviews here and here). So we decided to follow those with this.

In one word: wow! This was really tasty. Obviously it was very different than the Chardonnays. But it worked really well as our wine relay anchor for the evening.

First off, this is not a sickly sweet Riesling, not at all. This is strange to write, but it tasted like a white wine. And there was just a hint of a sparkle to it. It was sort of like an apple cider as it's turning (but in a good way). Herb loved the slight effervescence.

The nose was really flowery. Rose was the consensus. The fruit was apricot and Anjou pear. And of course honey! Specifically it was clover honey (flowery). And if that wasn't enough, there was some sort of vegetable in there too, but I couldn't quite figure it out: not exactly cucumber, not exactly celery, and not exactly dill --- but something like that in there.

And despite all this about honey and such, this wine finishes without any sweetness. It's just not sweet at the end at all. The finish was crisp like a cucumber and floral. That clover honey remains, but it's the taste without any sweetness. Yum. A little later, there was also hints of orange blossom too -- actually it was almost like biting into a Satsuma! At the very end there was also some tartness, like a crab apple mixed with raspberry. Subtle and not bitter, just opposite of a sweet Riesling.

And while it wasn't sweet, this wine did taste much "wetter" (if that's a word) than the Chardonnays. But then, this is an entirely different animal.

Everybody loved this wine. It was complicated and nuanced. It was Yummy. Did I mention this is only $16?

Cost:    

Rating:    9.0

So this was a California Chardonnay to compare with one from Oregon (see earlier review). Again, this was the same vintage (2006) and the same price point (about $32). And I was surprised to find that this one was not that super-oak, super-butter Cali Chard. In fact, it was very nice as well.

The nose was -- I kid you not -- gruyere cheese! This, mixed with lime. The taste was very crisp and fruity. Much more fruity and sweet than the Oregon Chard. No, this isn't to say it was sweet. Just relatively. It did have an oaky aroma, but it wasn't that buttery/oak bomb at all. It was crisp like a cucumber or a bartlet apple. Like the Oregon Chard, this also had tastes of pears and hints of melon. And there was also some tangerine in there, but in this one, it was a much sweeter tangerine than the Oregon version. Someone else thought it tasted like sweet lime (not sugary, but not at all sour).

Alexandra noted that this one had "more fruit aroma than fruit flavor". Herb noted the flowery aromas. Everyone thought this was clean and fresh and crisp. Well done.

Cost:    

Rating:    9.0

I have to admit upfront that we don't drink all that much white wine. Of course we drink a lot more wine that the average, so we likely drink more white wine that most as well. And frankly, Denise rarely likes drinking white wine. Sometimes, but not often. So what do we do? We have a dinner with nothing but white wines. This is the first of three reviews where we deliberately compared two Chardonnays, and then followed with a Riesling.

Up to bat first was this Oregon Chardonnay. The second wine is also a Chardonnay and also the same vintage -- 2006 -- and the same price point -- about $32. The difference being that the second was from California. We deliberately started with the Oregon Chardonnay because we figured it would be more Burgundian in style. So, how was it?

The nose was flowery and pear and lychee. Despite my early caveat, Denise just loved this wine. She described it as "gorgeous", and "rich, like an elegant woman", and it "smells and tastes like a great perfume".

The taste was a mix of pear and paper whites (narcissus). It starts like a honey few melon (just a hint of sweetness), then it transitions quickly. In the middle there's tangerine and guava (as it seems sweet, though not literally of course). The finish returns to the pear and flower flavors, and here it's not sweet in the least. And when I say that it seems sweet, I mean it's just a flash of fruit. Then that fruit continues, but in a very dry way (and then, mixed with those flowers).

Denise kept going, saying how complex is was, and mentioning that drinking it was like "smelling the neck of a woman". Goodness. And indeed it was interesting. There was just fruit everywhere, but not in a sweet way. Interesting and popular. Everyone really loved this wine ... and surprisingly, especially Denise!

Cost:    

Rating:    9.5

This wasn't a bad wine, yet it was disappointing. Here I am at a party, and there's a lot of open bottles of wine. This one? Maybe not. That one, hmmm. Ahh: I spot a Grand Cru St Emilion. Okay, that's what I'll drink. And yet, it wasn't much like what I was expecting.

The nose was wood, fruit, cherry, stems, saw dust, river rock, and a very subtle vanilla.The taste was black cherry, and maybe blackberry and/or plum. The vanilla was there too, and still very subtle. The body was medium and it was dry. The finish was black cherry, and very tannic (lots of stems). A bit later I found some pepper in the finish too. Surprisingly it was not as earthy as I would expect.

Again, this wasn't a bad wine. And later I found out it was about $15 for the bottle. So for that, it was very decent -- just not anything like what you might guess to be inside a bottle with a label reading "Grand Cru".

Cost:  

Rating:    6.5

Here's something we opened at the tail end of the evening after a Chilean Malbec, and two Oregon Cabs. Immediately, it was obvious that this was much drier (and lighter) than anything else that we had earlier.

The nose was dusty, along with a subtle white pepper. The taste was predominantly red cherry. The finish was a traffic jam of dirt (earth) and a bitter stem taste.

Not a big hit after those heavier cabs, yet not horrible either. Just ill placed in the order of our consumption, I suppose.

Cost:   

Rating:    6.0

Brian Kurth:  Brian is the founder and president of VocationVacations®, a company offering working adults short-term “internships” while on vacation. VocationVacations® has quickly spread across the US and abroad, gaining widespread attention from the media. Brian has made guest appearances on NBC’s Weekend Today Show, MSNBC’s Your Business, CNN, BBC, CBS Marketwatch Weekend, Bloomberg Television, FOX News, ABC News, NPR, PBS and numerous other television and radio programs across the US, Canada, the UK, Australia and Japan. To learn more about VocationVacations, click here: www.vocationvacations.com.
 
Wade Fickler:  Wade is the Director for Policy and Communications at the Children’s Institute. Wade plays a leading role in developing and advancing the organization’s programmatic, policy and advocacy agenda and managing the Institute’s external communications. Prior to this job, Wade was the Policy Director for City Club of Portland. To learn more about the Children’s Institute, click here: www.childinst.org.
 


Robin: Robin is an editor for Oregon Live. She enjoys making yogurt and bread and is intrigued by urban chicken farming. When Robin is not working, she is busy at play with her four-year old son.

Don: Don is a journalist for NW Labor Press and Willamette Week. He is a direct descendant of Don Quixote, yet rather than ride a horse, Don rides the bus to most places. Don is a lover of words and a dance enthusiast.

Dinner:

• garden salad
• butternut squash soup with parmesan cheese
• beet wedges with satsuma tangerines and cilantro
• spinach and mushroom lasagna
• ginger date and pear cobbler with vanilla ice cream

Wine:

• Vui Manent, Malbec, 2007 
• Arcane Cellars, Cabernet Sauvignon, 2006 
• Redhawk, Cabernet Sauvignon, 2005 
• Chateau Fontblanche, Bordeaux, 2005

We deliberately paired this bottle with the Arcane Cabernet (see other review). Both are Cabs. Both are produced by winemakers near Salem. However, Arcane's grapes are from the south (Rogue Valley), and Redhawk is from the north (Columbia Valley). Oh, and to be fair, Arcane was a 2006 and Redhawk was a 2005.

The Arcane was considerably "oaked" and was therefore noticeably more "sweet" with that vanilla taste (not literally sweet of course) than this wine.

The Redhawk nose was leather, manure, and pepper. Robin said it smelled like a riding saddle. And yes, again, we're using "manure" to mean something good and enjoyable.

The taste was black cherry and pepper, and it finished that way too. The wine was noticeably more earthy than the Arcane Cab. Whereas the Arcane had a better mouthfeel and was smoother.

As I mentioned in the Arcane review, the group was split on which was better. I generally prefer earthier wines, and at the beginning I thought I liked this one better.

Cost:   

Rating:    7.5 

This was our first bottle from Arcane Cellars. Jason Silva is the mastermind behind Arcane. Before becoming a winemaker ("coming to my senses" as he described the change), he had gotten his M.A. in English Lit with a focus on medieval literature. So, I suppose he and his wines are a natural match to our medieval theme. Anyway on to the first bottle ...

The first impression was: vanilla! Clearly this wine had sat on oak for awhile. It smelled of that vanilla sweetness. And while the alcohol was high (nearly 14%), it wasn't hot. Once past the vanilla, the nose had river rock, and rose pedals. I caught hints of something like cedar. And Denise claimed to smell something like Kiwi. Both of us weren't exactly sure ... elusive aromas to be sure. And a bit later, the nose had clove too.

The taste was red cherry, and vanilla. Brian noted that it was a "bit of a fruit bomb for a Cab". And indeed it wasn't your run-of-the-mill Cab. First, it was very smooth -- the mouthfeel was really great. We drank another Salem Cab along-side this, and the Arcane was much smoother. In fact, the tannins were very elusive in the taste. You really didn't taste them until the finish.

I kept some of the wine around and tasted it again the next night. The nose at that point was decidedly: vanilla, rose, and clove. And in that order. Intriguing. The mouthfeel was still very smooth, and supple. The taste was immediately sweet from the vanilla which hung there for a second or two. Imagine a cherry jolly rancher, but without any sugar -- sort of a not-sweet hard candy. It was sort of like that. And then it went dry. Even in the taste and finish, there's that strong vanilla+rose+clove. At the very end, pepper comes through and some of the tannins. No, not that bitter stem taste exactly, but it was no longer sweet.

Overall the group was split on this wine. First, we have to mention that the Brian and Wade didn't like the label design. However, Wade, Don and myself very much liked this wine. We felt it was the best bottle of the night. Don was very emphatic about this. However, Denise doesn't like wines heavy with vanilla, so this wasn't for her. It is likely that over time, that vanilla will mellow out -- if you can patiently wait for such things. Denise didn't like it, whereas Don loved it, so the rating will have to be a compromise.

Cost:    

Rating:    7.5

In these desperate economic times, finding a cheap bottle is a god-send. Frugalistas of the world unite ... and buy this Chilean Malbec!

The nose was interesting for such an inexpensive wine: raisin, bark, rainy dusty smell, river rock, clove, and pepper. Yes, there was alcohol too, but what do you expect at this price. Denise went crazy and was smelling eucalyptus. Well, perhaps not totally crazy; I can't say that it was eucalyptus exactly, but there was something unusual in there that hinted of eucalyptus.

The taste was a bit sweet. I don't mean literally sweet in terms of sugar. No, nothing like a White Zinfandel or anything. But compared to all the French wines we've been drinking, it wasn't exactly that. Mainly the taste was a dry cherry candy taste, along with vanilla and perhaps plum.

The finish was bitter, but not overly so that it ruined the wine. It had that stem taste at the end. No, at this point there was no sweetness anymore.

This was pretty amazing for about $4.50 for a bottle! Crazy.

Cost:   

Rating:    6.0

This is one of those Vin de Pays d'Oc wines. This is one of the only places in France where the varietal is clearly marked -- such as "Syrah" in this case. Usually you spin the roulette wheel; sometimes for good, sometimes for bad. And this time? Well, it wasn't so good.

The nose was nice: raisin, prune, subtle vanilla, and something metal. I could overlook that metallic smell if it weren't for the taste. In a word: bitter. Tannic. Branches. Stems. Bitter in a bad way. Oh, and some raisin in-between all that bitterness. And it keeps coming, next with a gritty finish. Raisin and prune is there at the end too, but it's hard to get past that nemesis: it's bitter to the end. For Denise, the bitterness was surrounded with metal: "it smells like metal, tastes like metal, and finishes metal". I didn't get that metal taste, but we both agreed that it was too bitter to enjoy.

Cost:    

Rating:    3.0

This is a wine that our sister-in-law had purchased years ago, and we had it following the Chateauneuf-du-Pape for our Thnksgiving feast. Being an Oregonian, it was hard to want to like this commercial California wine. But I have to admit, this wine knocked the doors off the CndP we had preceeding it (though, to be fair, it was one of the poorest CndPs I've had). Anyway, this was not that. And, honestly, it was nice.

The nose was vanilla, and a strong river rock smell. Later, the nose got a bit more funky: cayenne, tobacco, prune, smoky, raisin, and white pepper. The taste was prune and tobacco. Really strong smoke, sort of like Grandpa's pipe. Denise went off on this. She described it like a "thick button down sweater by the fire place hearth". The finish was also tobacco and prune, and a little raisin to boot.

All-in-all, this was the favorite of the night.

Cost:   

Rating:    8.5  

We were in Destin, Florida of all places for Thanksgiving. Denise's brother and his family are living there. Yeah, it's the Florida panhandle, but it does have that green water and white sand beaches. Quite lovely.

We ended up at Chan's Wine World, apparently the best place to buy wine there. They had a decent selection of wines, especially French and Californian. To my chagrin, there was only a couple Oregon Pinot Noirs. But then, I had to buy one -- A to Z, 2006 -- and it wasn't as good as it is here in Portland. Seriously. Maybe the travel wasn't so good for that bottle.

Anyway, we bought this Chateauneuf-du-Pape to have with the Turkey feast. Denise has been a fan of Perrin for a long time. We bought a case of their 2000 'Reserve' Cotes du Rhone a number of years ago (a really decent CdR for about $10). Anyway, Perrin is apparently going well, and they make a number of wines now -- including a Chateauneuf-du-Pape. The card next to the price claimed it scored 91 with Robert Parker. So it has to be good, right? Maybe.

The nose was very nice: red cherry, pepper, vegetable, oregano. And then later, the nose had vanilla, nutmeg, and strawberry. The taste was predominantly red cherry, pomegranate, green bean, and was earthy. Later there was raisin too. The finish was raisin, some branches and stems, pomegranate, and that green apple pucker (really dry).

Bottomline: I can't say that we liked this so much. No, it wasn't bad. I'm not saying that.  Denise wanted to like it, and said it was "flirty". But compared to other CndPs, it wasn't all-that. And especially for the price -- next time I'll grab something else. Even Denise had to agree. Bummer.

Cost:   

Rating:    7.5

Here was another nice little Cotes du Rhone we had around Thanksgiving. Nothing special I suppose, but definitely quaffable (sometimes it's good if those cheap bottles aren't so memorable). The nose was pine needles, moss, prune, bark, and wood. Denise got a strong metallic taste, though I didn't get at all. It tasted like raisin and prune to me. It was also musty, and it had a meaty finish too it.

Cost:   

Rating:    6.0

(Grenache 70%, Syrah 25%, Mourvedre 5%)

Caleb: Caleb works for Metro. An environmentalist, Caleb cuts his grass with a push mower. He loves everything French, kitsch and chocolate. Caleb is very easy to shop for.



Cheryl: Cheryl is a professional photographer who works for Stewart Harvey Photography. She's a Upper (originally from the upper peninsula of Michigan) and very proud of it! When Cheryl isn't photographing events for her friends, she enjoys reading, gardening and fine dining. 



Dinner: We have a philosophy of not catering to picky dinner guests--there's plenty of bread and wine to fill an empty stomach. But when doctor's orders call, we respect the dietary restriction. In this case, our dinner was accomplished by getting back to the basics--a hearty and wholesome harvest meal.

• tamari-roasted almonds
  
• garden salad
• creamy carrot soup with parmesan cheese
• ratatouille with couscous
• stovetop beans with brown rice
• Caleb's flourless chocolate cake with vanilla ice cream
• grapes

Wines:

• Jean-Maurice Raffault, Chinon, Rouge, 2005
• J. Calvet, Reserve de L'Estey, Medoc, 2004
• Wildaire, Reserve, Pinot Noir, 2006