It's always been intriguing for me how different wine can be. And I don't just mean varietals, or vintages, or vineyards. I mean the same damn wine. Specifically, I talking about open two different bottles of the same wine. Same wine exactly -- it might even be two bottles from the same case. And for reasons that are inexplicable, these two (perhaps more) actually taste a bit different.

I'm not talking about only this bottle of wine, I'm speaking generally. I've had various wines over the years (obviously). And sometimes I'll have more than a single bottle of the same thing. And sometimes I might even buy a case. And no, I don't mean opening the bottles years apart. I mean they even taste different weeks and days apart. So, there's something else going on.

And then there's this Drouhin. Domaine Drouhin has essentially three tiers to their Pinot Noir: "Willamette Valley", "Laurene" and "Louise" (lower end to high end). And the funny thing here is that all of them are created the same way. It's only barrel tasting and such that make this barrel "Lousie" and another "Willamette Valley". So perhaps there's even some differentiation from bottle to bottle? I think so.

This bottle -- the Domaine Drouhin "Willamette Valley", 2007 -- is a case in point. I've tasted about four bottles of this. Two were basically so-so, and two were fabulous. I'm blogging this now because this last bottle -- the fourth one -- was really stunning ... almost haunting. But what gives with the ones earlier that were not so memorable? Nothing against Domaine Drouhin -- I've experienced this with others, including St Innocent (another favorite of mine).

I'm not saying I have the answers, but it's been bothering me that there can be such a difference bottle-to-bottle. It makes me wonder about reviews generally. Why on earth did bottle XYZ get such a rating when I hated it so much? Maybe I got the not-so-memorable version and the reviewer got lucky ... or maybe vice versa? Anyway, food for thought.

This particular bottle, anyway, was really nice. The nose was oak, vanilla -- yet not sweet. Dust. Hazelnut. Pepper. Cherry and rose and strawberry. Yeah, definitely rose! The floral element was extraordinary. The taste was a little smoke, red cherry, and strawberry. It ends strawberry with hints of something like blueberry. Then -- and this is a French vintner who only happens to be making wine with Oregon grapes -- it turns very earthy. The finish is Burgundian for sure; elegant, and not rich.

This was just an exquisite bottle of wine.

Cost:   

Rating:    9.0

Funny and perhaps fitting that after a couple months I start posting again yet with a French wine! And despite all the great Oregon Pinot that I've been drinking recently (see my earlier post), it was apparently this bottle that got me back to blogging wine. And I've also received very nice and encouraging emails from folks wondering what happened to me.

So, this Marsannay (Burgundy) was quite nice. No, not Oregon. Not jammy. And oh boy: such earthy flavors and aromas! It's very nice if you like that. And once I got into that earthiness of the French Pinots, it helped me understand that whole French terroir thing. It's not that I think Oregon wines are inferior -- to the contrary -- but there is something deep and mysterious in a really good French Pinot. That earth can be haunting -- in a good way, if you ask me. Though, it's also easy to spend $30/40 on a bottle that's thin and flabby. French Burgundy is not for the faint-of-heart; it's can definitely be a gamble. So beware!

The nose included: nutmeg, strawberry, dusty/earthy, a little dank, a little vanilla (but this is french). However, later I think that nutmeg might be more like cinnamon. There was white pepper. And perhaps not strawberry, it was more like a salmon berry (the smell).

The body was light -- but then I said it wasn't jammy. The fruit was raspberry and red cherry. And you can actually taste that dank smell. Oh boy: yummy earth! The fruit flavors were very quick, then earth and then dry. It was ever-so-slightly bitter at the end -- like a turnip or maybe an artichoke.

This is not a bottle that I'd recommend regularly. It's a bit different than what many palette's prefer. But for me, this was very, very yummy. I thought it might be peaking, but I think this one is likely to remain good for another year or two (maybe more).

Cost:   

Rating:    8.5

Despite my recent lack of postings, I have actually continued to drink wine regularly. It's just that I lost my friend and business partner of the last 11 years, and that's made blogging wine especially difficult to manage these last couple months.

So, I'll start with a post that lacks any detailed reviews per se. I simply haven't had the energy to take notes lately. So instead, I'll just mention some of the notable wines I've had recently.

Let me start by mentioning how much I'm likely the 2007 vintage of Oregon Pinot Noir. I know everybody's talking about 2008. And yes, I'm sure 2008 will be wonderful (and expensive). But most 2008s aren't released yet anyway, and I'm just really enjoying most of the 2007s I've had recently.



First, the David Hill 2007 Pinot Noir is just a killer deal. This is not a fruit bomb. It's Burgundian with a little more earth that a typical Oregon Pinot has. And it's a steal at about $16/17.



Second, King Estate's "Next" -- their off-label -- is also fantastic. Also slightly on the lighter side (though not thin) and about $18/19 depending.

Third, is EIEIO's off-label, their "Swine Wine". Unfortunately, it doesn't have a vintage on it. I'm assuming it's 2007. But then, maybe it's a mix; hard to say. I picked this up at the Carlton Tasting Room awhile back. Very nice as well.

Fourth is J.K. Carriere's "Provocateur". A super yummy Oregon Pinot that usually will cost you $35/40, yet only about $24. Definitely a great deal.



And lastly -- admittedly (and obviously) not an '07 -- is the the Eola Hills Reserve, 'La Creole', Pinot Noir, 2006. Funny thing about wine, the stuff changes. Sometimes it's the time you open it. Sometimes it's the bottle; I've literally had two bottle of the same wine/vintage/everything -- and one was good and the other not so much. So funny that we've reviewed this (here), and the rating was noting to write home about. However, I just had this again and really liked it. Earthy, complex, down right yummy.

Anyway, I hope to get back into the swing of things again here. It's not like I'm not drinking wine most nights. So I'm hoping I can spare enough time to post at least once a week.

More to come ...