Champagne - Seven grapes are better than three

Conventional wisdom about anything - automobiles, movies, sports - can be a tricky thing. Usually that information is true, or at least accepted as true. I won't get into the misinformation that clogs up the internet these days - I could write all day on that topic.

Take Champagne for example, when it comes to universal truths. We all know that an authentic Champagne - produced from grapes grown in the Champagne district of France - can be made from three grape types, namely, Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier. That's a fact that everyone knows - right?

Well it turns out that there are actually seven varieties permitted in the production of Champagne. It's just that you don't hear about the other four as only a handful of producers use these other varieties. Then consider that these four varieties account for approximately 1% of the total planting in Champagne and you can understand why these varieties are rarely discussed.

Still, they exist and here they are listed: Pinot Gris (also known as Fromenteau or Enfumé), Arbane, found only in the Aube district, Pinot Blanc (also known as Blanc Vrai) and Petit Meslier. They're all white varieties by the way, so that means there are a total of five white varieties that can be used in Champagne (Chardonnay, of course, being the other) with two red varieties: Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier.

There actually are a few producers that craft a Champagne using all seven varieties and I recently tasted one, the Le Nombre d'Or "Campaniae Veters Vites" Brut from the great house of L. Aubry Fils of Jouy-les-Reims. This was the 2005 vintage and the primary grapes are Pinot Gris and Petit Meslier, while the other five varieties represent anywhere from 5% to 15% or 20% of the blend. The name incidentally means "the golden number," referring to all seven varieties in this wine. The specific cuvée name "Campaniae Veters Vites," means "old vines of the countryside." (Incidentally, there is also a Blanc de Blancs version of this wine - named Sable Blanc de Blancs - which is comprised of Chardonnay, Arbane and Petit Meslier.)

As you might imagine, this is a very distinctive Champagne; instead of the toasty, yeasty notes you find in the aromas of so many Champagnes, this has perfumes of green mint, dried pear, chamomile and even a hint of fig and dried yellow flowers. Medium-full, this is quite elegant and vibrant on the palate and there is a long, satisfying finish with very good acidity and a light earthiness. It's not an austere style of Champagne; it is delicious and extremely well balanced, and of course, displays marvelous complexity. It's beautiful now and should drink well for another 3-5 years - perhaps longer.


I may not have been in seventh heaven, but what a stylish Champagne!

Perfecting Pinot Noir in Chile

For decades now, vintners in Chile have known the benefit of the warmth of the sun. Theirs is a moderate to warm climate, meaning that conditions are ideal for varieties such as Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc, Merlot and their local grape, Carmenere. The country's finest reds have been made from these varieties, from areas such as Maipo Valley (especially the Alto Maipo, a bit southeast of Santiago), Colchagua and Aconcagua Valleys.

But there are a few dozen producers that have wanted to scratch an itch for years and that itch is working with cool climate varieties, especially Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, Riesling and Syrah. It all started in the 1980s when Pablo Morandé planted several varieties in Casablanca Valley some 12-15 miles from the Pacific Ocean. He took the chance, it paid off with many lovely wines and today, there are many established wine estates in Casablanca, while many other source fruit from this zone.

About a decade ago, a few more intrepid producers ventured even farther west, planting Pinot Noir, Syrah, Sauvignon Blanc, Chardonnay, Riesling and one or two other varieties in the Leyda and San Antonio Valleys. These wine zones are extremely close to the Pacific, with some vineyards as close as 2-5 miles from the ocean. This is a razor's edge climate, so ripening it sometimes difficult, but when it works, it does so brilliantly.

To date, I've tasted some lovely Pinot Noirs from San Antonio and Leyda, most notably from Casa Marin as well as Leyda Vineyards. I've also tasted some beautiful examples from Morandé and William Cole in Casablanca. However, I've also had some bottlings from these zones that have been disappoining, ranging from overripe to underipe to harsh and slightly bitter. It's clear that while Chilean Pinot Noir has improved dramatically over the past two decades, much works needs to be done.


I recently tasted three fine examples of Chilean Pinot Noir that I'll mention in brief.

The first was the Valdivieso Reserva 2009 from Casablanca Valley. My notes mention "fresh, attractive aromas of bing cherry along with a note of cardamom spice; medium-bodied, this has good concentration and varietal character, medium-weight tannins, tart acidity and a light touch of wood."

This is an elegant Pinot Noir that is styled for many types of food and is fairly priced at $17. I think most consumers looking for Pinot Noir in this price range would be very happy with this wine.


The second wine was the Veramonte "Ritual" 2009 from Casablanca Valley. I've enjoyed this winery's bottlings for many years now, be it the delightful Sauvignon Blanc or the red blend known as Primus. The wines are well made and offer very good to excellent character for their prices.

But as good as those wines are, they did not prepare me for the qualities, complexities and character of this new Pinot Noir. Displaying aromas of bing cherry, cardamom and a hint of bacon fat, this wine has delicious varietal fruit with perfect ripeness and a lovely elegance. The finish has good length and is quite flavorful and everything is in balance- the acidity is very good, tannins are round and silky and the wood notes are quite subtle.

For $20 retail, this is a steal. I would be happy to pay $30 for this, as here is a wine with beautiful varietal character, lovely texture and impeccable balance. I've tasted $40 and $50 Pinot Noirs from other countries that haven't had this sort of complexity and finesse. Best yet, this is a lovely food wine - I think it would pair especially well with a Thai preparation of chicken or pork.

Finally, I sampled the Cono Sur "Ocio" 2008 from Casablanca Valley. This producer has a series of special selection and single vineyard wines that have greatly impressed me in the past (especially the "20 Barrels" Sauvignon Blanc). This Pinot Noir has lovely varietal character, excellent depth of fruit and a velvety feel in the mouth. It is quite rich with beautiful ripeness, very good acidity and excellent persistence.

The only problem I have with this wine is the excessive oak; the wine was aged for one year in small oak barrels. Oak in Pinot Noir is a delicate thing and it doesn't take much for a wine to be laden with wood notes. I prefer a different approach to aging a glorious wine such as this in oak, but the winemaker was looking for a particular style. This approach is also taken with numerous vintners of showcase Pinot Noirs in California and Oregon, so this wine is not alone in its balance of fruit and oak. Besides, the wine still has an elegant feel to it; there are no bitter wood tannins present.

This is a trophy wine, so to speak, and is a fine example of what Chile can produce with Pinot Noir. Producing notable wines from this grape is a work in progress in many great areas around the world, even in superb zones like Sta. Rita Hills or the Santa Lucia Highlands in California, so Chile is holding its own with the variety. Based on these three wines, the future looks exciting for Pinot Noir in Chile.


P.S. A final note- the Cono Sur bottling retails for $65, this price no doubt due to its limited availability. But for me, I'll take three bottles of the Veramonte "Ritual" over one bottle of the Cono Sur bottling every time!

Style Points

Various skyscrapers in Chicago. Do you rate them with a score or do you identify each one's singularity?

(Photo ©Tom Hyland)

Regarding wine education, arguably the most unfortunate and regrettable tool introduced over the past 25 years has been the 100-point scale for rating purposes. First used by Robert Parker at The Wine Advocate and then at The Wine Spectator (and now hundreds of wine publications around the world), this system replaced the 20-point scale that was in use for decades. Admittedly, the 100-point scale is easier to understand for almost everyone than the other system (90 points for a wine is far simpler to comprehend than 17 points), yet I find it ironic that the 100-point scale has in essence, become a 20-point system itself. After all, does anyone treat a wine below 80 points with any seriousness today? And how many wines do you even read about that receive less than 80 points these days?

To me, there are two principal reasons why rewarding a wine with a score is a mistake. First, what do these scores mean? Tasting wine is a sensory experience – it’s not a scientific endeavor. A score of 92 or 88 represents a specific number in black and white, but how does one arrive at that particular score? This isn’t like a geography quiz most of us took back in the fifth grade where there were 20 questions, each worth five points. If you scored 95 and I earned a score of 90, you got one more question correct than I did (congratulations!)

That score is based on mathematics as is a batting average in baseball and you can easily arrive at these numbers. What’s more, you can’t argue the math; if a baseball player has 30 hits in 100 at bats, that’s a .300 batting average – no more, no less. But what does it mean if a wine receives a score of 92? More to the point, what’s the difference between a 92 and a 93? Going back to the baseball analogy, if a player with 100 at bats has 31 hits, then his average is .310, while the player with 30 hits per 100 at bats has that .300 average. So the higher batting average is based on math. But more often than not, the reason one wine gets a 93 instead of a 92 is based on the writer breaking a tie.

Of course, that’s the American way- we have to list things in order of importance or rank. I agree that consumers need guidance, but why do we need these specific numbered scores? What’s wrong with putting a group of wines into a particular category, such as very good, excellent or outstanding? Give the wines a star rating as with restaurants or a movie. Sure some people would disagree with that rating, but that’s fine – everyone has their likes and dislikes. But everyone would understand the difference between very good and excellent. I’m not so sure consumers (or even most wine professionals) understand the difference between 92 and 93 points. So much for the ease of numbered scores.

The other problem is the induced meaning of the score. Most publications reward higher scores for more intensity, deeper color and more extract; in other words, bigger is better. Well as one winemaker in California once told me, “Bigger isn’t better, bigger is different.” Amen to that! We’re all free to like or dislike what we want, so don’t tell me that a more approachable wine that is a bit lighter on the palate is less of a wine. Generally, I prefer more drinkable wines, especially as they work better with food. That’s why I drink wines and that’s why I think most people drink wines.

To me, if wines existed in a vacuum, numeric scores would make more sense. Then you could judge a wine simply on the merits of which is the biggest or boldest. But since wine is meant for food, then we need to look at balance in a wine and not power.

Then of course there are wines that have nothing to do with power. Try a beautiful Greco di Tufo from Campania or a tangy Sauvignon Blanc from Chile or New Zealand. Does someone choose one of these white wines because they are searching for power? No, they look for a well-made, balanced white that is delicious and has good varietal character. That means that the most influential wine publicaions rarely rank white wines such as these with big scores. But why not? Shouldn’t a beautifully made, complex white get 92 or 94 points (assuming we’re stuck with this rating system) just like a big red wine? Of course they should, but it rarely happens, thanks to the caste system of most publications that equates powerhouse reds with the highest scores.




I bring all of this up as an introduction to a wine I tasted last week that I loved. It’s a wonderful Pinot Noir from a new producer in Monterey’s Santa Lucia Highlands; the 2007 Puma Road “Black Mountain Vineyards” bottling ($40 retail). It’s a new project from Ray Franscioni, who owns several gorgeous Pinot Noir vineyards in this appellation. For me, there are a few areas in California that are ideal for great Pinot Noirs with beautiful varietal character, lively acidity and distinct spice; Russian River Valley and the far western reaches of the Sonoma Coast appellation in Sonoma as well as Sta. Rita Hills in Santa Barbara County are among those select zones and so is the Santa Lucia Highlands district.

My notes specify the distinct characteristics of this wine, especially in its notes of brown spice such as cumin and cinnamon. This is a wine redolent of West Indies spice, so think of the foods it would work with; I’d love this with grilled lamb or pork or vegetarian dishes with eggplant or zucchini.

So my rating of this wine is all about its special character and complexity as well as the array of foods it would accompany. That’s my rating and it has nothing to do with points. How could you award a specific point rating to this wine and do it justice? This wine isn’t about power (although it is a big wine); it isn’t about finesse (although it is an elgant wine); it’s about the spiciness that sets it apart. This isn’t a simple Pinot Noir with pleasant cherry fruit that you pair with duck with cherry or orange sauce. Rather this is a particular wine that needs a particular pairing. You can’t discover that with a numbered rating.

There are countless wines such as this and this is just the latest I’ve tasted. So forget the scores and dig a little deeper. Learn what the flavors are of a specific wine and then pair it with the proper foods. You’ll enjoy both the food and the wine even more when you do it this way!

Santa Lucia Highlands - Premier Chardonnay and Pinot Noir

Morning fog over Double L Vineyard of Morgan (Photo ©Tom Hyland)


Over the past five or six years, the Santa Lucia Highlands (SLH) has become one of the great viticultural appellations in California. Located about a thirty-minute drive directly east of the city of Monterey, this is Steinbeck country where fields planted with lettuce, asparagus, celery and other crops dominate the landscape. Tucked between these fields and the hillsides of the Santa Lucia range, a few dozen vintners have planted vineyards primarily to Chardonnay and Pinot Noir. A fierce wind comes in the valley every afternoon, moderating temperatures and shutting down the vines, making this ideal for early ripening varieties.

Dan Karlsen, winemaker at Talbott Vineyards (Photo ©Tom Hyland)


Some of California’s finest Chardonnays are from this area; two that immediately come to mind are the Sleepy Hollow bottling of Talbott and the “Double L” from Morgan. Both have great intensity of fruit and excellent structure and vibrant acidity that make them ideal candidates for aging. Dan Karlsen, who has recently taken over winemaking duties at Talbott, is currently producing some of the best wines from this estate in some time; the Sleepy Hollow offering beautiful pineapple fruit (a direct result of the classic old Wente clones), a rich mid-palate and lively acidity. The Morgan, made by Dan Lee, displays pear and Meyer lemon flavors along with notes of spice in the finish. Other first-rate Chardonnays from Santa Lucia include the 2006 Paraiso, an excellent value at $18 and the gutsy McIntyre Estate bottling from 2007, a wine that has great depth of pineapple and golden apple fruit backed by a rich finish with great persistence. This is an outstanding value at $27- don’t miss this one!

As for Pinot Noir, SLH has become one of the top growing areas in all of California. Joe Wagner, vineyard manager for Belle Glos (the Pinot Noir project of Caymus) told me that, “of all the Pinot Noir sites we farm in California, I get the most consistent fruit from our SLH site.” Other great sites include the Pisoni Ranch, which is the source of Pinot Noir for about a dozen of the finest producers of this variety throughout the state. Gary Pisoni, a free thinker if there ever was one, is a fanatic about French clones of Pinot Noir and it shows in the big spiciness in his wines. Pisoni along with his partner Gary Franscioni also owns the appropriately named Garys’ Vineyard, another great Pinot Noir site prized by some of California’s best producers.

Lee also crafts a gorgeous Pinot Noir from his “Double L” vineyard; the current 2006 bottling offers up aromas of cardamom, cumin and morel cherry; there is excellent depth of fruit, light spice and beautifully defined acidity. Also look for these SLH Pinot Noirs: the outstanding 2006 Belle Glos “Las Alturas”, the 2006 or 2007 Paraiso “West Terrace”, a spicy wine with silky tannins and the 2006 Pessagno “Four Boys”, made from the La Tache clone of Burgundy.

There are other varieties planted in SLH as well; Paraiso makes an excellent dry Riesling with light notes of pear and lime, while Lee has planted a small amount of Syrah at “Double L” (the current 2006 with its flavors of black cherry and mocha is remarkable).

But it is the Burgundian varieties that have made the Santa Lucia Highlands one of the finest growing areas in all of California and the good news is that the producers there are just starting to get on a roll. I can’t wait to taste the bottlings from this area over the next few years!

Pinot Days - The Latest, Greatest Pinot Noirs

(Photo) Tanya Walker and Jim Ball of Jim Ball Vineyards, Photo ©Tom Hyland

I don't attend too many big tastings these days, as the setting is usually not the proper one for me to sample wines and get the proper feel for what's in my glass. So when I leave feeling like I learned a lot, that's the sign of a good tasting. The Pinot Days event in Chicago this past Saturday was such an event.

I love Pinot Noir, so when I saw the list of producers whose wines would be represented, I was excited about attending. There were some of the who's who of California Pinot Noir estates, such as Siduri, Arcadian and Dutton-Goldfield as well as some lesser-known producers such as Inman, Scherrer and Jim Ball Vineyards (more on Jim Ball later) as well as some old standbys such as Gary Farrell, Buena Vista and Bouchaine Vineyards. Oregon was represented (Archery Summit) as was Chile (Veramonte) and there were even a few bottlings from Germany.

As for the best wines, well you certainly couldn't go wrong with any of the selections from Arcadian or Siduri. Joe Davis was there pouring his Arcadian wines, of which the most impressive for me were the Sleepy Hollow Vineyard from the Santa Lucia Highlands AVA in Monterey and the Clos Pepe from Santa Barbara, laden with attractive red cherry fruit and loads of spice.

As for Siduri, is there a better Pinot Noir winemaker working today in California than Adam Lee? Along with his wife Dianna, Adam has put together a superb assortment of PInot Noirs from almost every great growing region in California (as well as one from Oregon). Adam was present pouring five of his wines; the finest for me were the 2006 from Garys' Vineyard in the Santa Lucia Highlands and the 2006 Sonatera from the Sonoma Coast, which in my notes, I listed as having a long, lush finish with silky tannins. Along with his precise winemaking, I applaud Adam Lee for keeping these limted production wines reasonably priced in the mid $40 to lower $50 price range.

Other favorites included the 2007 Kanzler Pinot Noir (Sonoma Coast) from Landmark Vineyards, with a beautiful harmony of vanilla and wild strawberry notes, the seductive 2006 Paraiso "West Block" from their estate in the Santa Lucia Highlands and the 2006 Sanchietti from Dutton-Goldfield in Russian River Valley. In my previous post, I wrote about this winery's 2006 McDougall Vineyard Pinot Noir from the Sonoma Coast. For my money, Dutton-Goldfield may be the most underrated Pinot Noir producer in California; certainly Dan Goldfield is one of the best winemakers working with Pinot Noir today!

I also liked the two wines from Jim Ball Vineyards in Anderson Valley. This is a brand new winery and these offerings are their first releases. The 2006 Signature has good depth of fruit and is made in an earthy style, while the 2007 Booneville has more forward fruit and a longer, more elegant finish. A nice start for this producer - best of luck to them!

Finally, I tasted four examples from Germany. I've read a lot about how producers in Germany are working with Pinot Noir these days and judging by the bottlings I tried, I'd say they're starting to get the hang of it. A few of the wines were quite light, but some of them had nice depth of fruit. Most impressive was the 2004 from Georg Breuer from the Rheingau with tasty red cherry fruit and moderate tannins; this was a nicely balanced wine with excellent varietal character. A few more wines like this and we'll all have to start paying attention to Germany as a top Pinot Noir producing country!

California Pinot Noir - A New Star

While there are some that think it took the movie Sideways to make Pinot Noir a star in California, the truth is that hundreds of intrepid producers there have been excelling with this variety for some time now. There were a few estates such as Martin Ray (the 1950s) and Chalone (the 1960s) that made great Pinot Noirs back before there was much planted in California, but starting in the 1970s, especially in Sonoma’s Russian River Valley, producers such as Tom Dehlinger and the Rochiolis began to show the world what could be done with this variety when it was planted in the proper sites.

Today, there are great Pinot Noir growing districts throughout California, including Carneros at the southern end of Napa and Sonoma, Anderson Valley in Mendocino, the Santa Lucia Highlands in Monterey and the Sta. Rita Hills in Santa Barbara County. I’ll write more about these areas in the near future, but today, I want to concentrate on one wine from another great area for Pinot Noir. This area is the Sonoma Coast, or the TRUE Sonoma Coast near the town of Annapolis just a few miles from the Pacific Ocean. The Sonoma Coast AVA as it stands today is a large area that takes up much of Sonoma County, with a good part of it not that close to the coast. Politics had much to do with the final boundaries (what a surprise!), so while the name doesn’t have the integrity it should, there is that small part of the AVA I mentioned above that is the source for brilliant Pinot Noirs. The most famous producer here is Flowers, while the most famous vineyard here is Hirsch; lovers of Pinot Noir undoubtedly know about these wines.

A new bottling that may approach these wines in status very soon is the McDougall Vineyard from Dutton-Goldfield. This estate, a partnership between Steve Dutton, one of Sonoma’s best known grape growers and Dan Goldfield, a premier Pinot Noir winemaker, has been a bit of a well-kept secret since its inception in 1998.

The McDougall Vineyard sits at the 1100 foot elevation just a bit north of Flowers and is planted primarily to Dijon clones. The 2006 is a marvelous wine with deep color (typical of this area) and lovely aromas of wild strawberry, cola and vanilla. Medium-full, the wine has striking acidity, youthful tannins and distinct notes of red spice in the finish.

What I like best about this wine is the way it unfolds in the glass. Unfortunately a few too many producers in California tend to treat their Pinot Noirs with too much new oak, which tends to dominate the wine and overpower the fruit. Goldfield aged this wine in small barrels for 17 months, but used only 45% new French oak, which was a wise decision. This has lovely texture on the palate and a beautiful structure with outstanding complexity. This is a seductive Pinot Noir with all the components in harmony and one that comes across with great subtlety. While some producers try to force their Pinot Noirs and make as big a wine as possible, Goldfield takes a more low-key approach, letting the site dictate the style of the wine, resulting in a gorgeous Pinot Noir.

Priced at $55 per bottle, which is fair for a top notch Pinot Noir from California these days, this will be at its optimum in another 5-7 years, but if you prefer to drink it tonight, give it 45 minutes to an hour in the glass and enjoy it with braised duck breast with cherry or plum sauce.