Shirazorama

My super-cool cousin, Lori, gave me a lovely bottle of wine during our last visit. (I knew she was my favorite cousin for a reason.) Lori, bless her heart, is not a wine drinker, and I haven't had time to convert her yet. I mean, yeah, I've known her since before I was born, but she lives far away and I don't get to see her often. Thus, Cousin Lori's wine-drinking status is a work in progress.

Meanwhile, I get to enjoy the (fermented) fruits of her shortcoming. At some point she had been given a 2004 bottle of Rosemount Estate Shiraz as a gift (from someone who doesn't know her well, obviously. OR . . . could it have been a fellow wine evangelist?) The bottle followed her on several moves and quite possibly had questionable storage circumstances on more than one occasion, but I have high hopes that the wine will still be enjoyable. And tonight--tonight!!--I will find out.

But wait, there's more. During my most recent hunting and gathering expedition to the Party Factory, I picked up a pair of bottles for a horizontal tasting (yeah, I had to look up the terminology to refresh my memory, so to keep you from having to do the same thing: that's a comparison of wines from the same vintage but different wineries) and the pair I picked up happened to be two 2008 Shirazes. (Shirazi? Shirazeses? Whatever.)

By a happy coincidence--or perhaps some sort of strange subconscious guidance?--guess what one of those two bottles was? None other than a 2008 Rosemount Estate Shiraz. I didn't even realize the serendipitous duplication until I got the two new bottles home where they belonged. So tonight I bring you not only a horizontal tasting, but a concurrent vertical tasting as well (different vintages of the same wine type from the same winery).

The other 2008 Shiraz is a [yellow tail], and as the odd man out, I will begin with the description of that one. The label claims mulberry, spice and smooth vanilla (sounds excellent), as well as an "approachable, fresh, flavorsome personality all of its own." Now THAT sounds like a wine I could be friends with.

The 2004 Rosemount is described as "intense, spicy fruit with a richly textured finish . . . [and] subtle oak." I guess by 2008 they gave up trying to describe their Shiraz, because that label doesn't give me any help. I guess I'm on my own there. But the bottle is kind of cool because it's square at the bottom. Unique. I just hope that's not the best part of the wine.

The 2004 bottle, by the way, isn't without its own pleasant little idiosyncrasies: a cute little red wax seal on top of the cork instead of foil, and a great big lip around the edge of the mouth that almost kept me from letting out that extra (and for me, apparently inevitable) drip.

First, a good look at each. Of course they're all a beautiful deep dark red, and nearly opaque. The 2004 Rosemount has a discouraging brownish tinge which I'm hoping is not a portent of doom. The 2008 Rosemount is a pure ruby red, and the [yellow tail] is just a tad purplish. I am not sure if Shiraz is commonly an amputee, but I'm not really seeing much in the way of legs on any of these three. The 2008 Rosemount is a definite Bob (you know, what you would call a legless man in the ocean). But since I have no idea what legs on wine might signify, I'm not too worried about that.

Now for the sniff test. Mmmm, the 2008 Rosemount smells good. Good and spicy. The 2004 Rosemount smells disappointingly bland. But, urg, it smells better than the [yellow tail]. (Do I really have to type those pretentious little brackets every time?) It doesn't have a strong aroma, but it smells a bit green. Already I'm predisposed to prefer the 2008 Rosemount.

And now--yippee, the best part!--to taste each one.

Ahhh, the 2008 Rosemount is lovely. Spicy, a little tangy, and a very smooth finish. I'm afraid this may be one of those that is all too easy to drink!

The 2004 Rosemount is not as bad as I expected, though it tastes every bit as bland as it smells. It really just tastes kind of watery, though I'm sure several years of less-than-ideal storage conditions are to blame.

The 2008 [yellow tail] is a pleasant surprise. I think I really do taste a bit of berries and vanilla. It doesn't have the zippy spice of the 2008 Rosemount, but it's definitely worth drinking--though I must admit I've not met many wines that aren't.

My vote is for the 2008 Rosemount Estate Shiraz. I'm still in search of the Best Wine Ever, but this was a nice little pit stop on the journey.

It's time . . .

I worked all weekend and my house looks like an elephant took a dump in it. In other words, it's Sunday night. This calls for another of my own personal private wine tastings. Maybe then I can focus on the fact that my kids are in bed and there's all kinds of peace and quiet to be appreciating until 7 a.m.

Tonight it's the Jacob's Creek Reserve Shiraz, Alexander Valley Cabernet Sauvignon, Rex-Goliath Pinot Noir, Layer Cake Primitivo, and a boxed Cab. (It's Franzia, in case you wanted to know, but does it really matter?) Since you probably don't feel like going back and reading those posts (heck, I don't even want to), I'll give you the short version of what I thought of each previously.

The Jacob's Creek was smoky, spicy and nice. The Alexander Valley was a little dry, and mild but complex. (I'm expecting this one to be the winner tonight, by the way.) The Rex-Goliath was fruity but unremarkable (and my favorite in the last tasting flight). The Layer Cake was acidic, green, and smoky--good but not great. The boxed Cab was green and tart.

Ok, so first I'm giving them each the sniff test. They each have a distinct smell. The Jacob's Creek, well, it just smells like wine to me. The Alexander Valley still has that flowery smell. The Rex Goliath smells beer-y (though back when I opened it, it smelled fruity. Maybe it's gone bad . . . after all, it's been more than two months since I opened it). The Layer Cake smells sweet. The boxed Cab smells kind of bad. Like cheese. Or feet. I wonder if I would have had a more favorable opinion if this had been a blind test.

I think I actually like the Jacob's Creek Shiraz the best, although the Alexander Valley (definitely the unique one of the bunch) is nearly as good; it's just different, and I find the Shiraz more pleasant. I'm afraid the Rex-Goliath just isn't right anymore. It is definitely my least favorite of the five, but it would be nice to be able to compare a freshly-opened bottle of it to the others. The Layer Cake is a little bit too sweet, and I'm sure it has changed since I first opened it a month ago, because my previous call (acidic, green, smoky) does not match up at all anymore. The boxed Cab was the most boring one, but it is a decent backup, and it actually tasted the best with the crackers and cheese I tried with each wine.

I know what I need to start doing: I should do my taste tests on freshly-opened bottles. Guess that means I need to get me some more unopened bottles.

Jacob's Creek Reserve Shiraz 2006 South Australia

It's been a while since I've opened a new bottle of wine, even though I've had two waiting on me for weeks. This is mainly because one of the other things I learned from Mark Phillips' book is that drinking wine makes you fat. So while I still don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with drinking one glass of wine each evening, I have cut back to one glass once or twice a week.

Well, it's Friday night, the kids are in bed, one of my stupid dogs ate one of my stupider chickens this afternoon, and I have a whole mess of laundry to fold, so I'd say the situation calls not only for a glass of wine, but for something new instead of my old standby out of the box. I'm going with the Shiraz I picked up two trips-to-the-Party-Factory ago, which was the first time I was looking for a bottle of Layer Cake and chickened out because it was too expensive. (Don't laugh. Remember, I'm cheap. I mean thrifty.)

The description on the back of the bottle, as always, sounds great: "This premium, full-bodied wine . . . displays intense ripe plum flavors with pepper spice, balanced by soft tannins and leading to a lingering smooth finish." Of course it also adds that this is "a wine that will develop further with cellaring," but I just don't do cellaring since I lack the resources and the patience.

So. The wine is nice. I liked it a lot. Didn't really notice any plumminess. (Is that a word? Even if it's not, I'm sure you get the idea.) A little smoky (or is this from the Chick-fil-a sandwich my son set on fire in the microwave earlier this evening?), nicely spicy, but in need of a comparison for me to decide if I like it more or less than other wines I've tried. After I open the last bottle I have waiting on me I'll have to do another tasting flight. Wait, did I say "have to"? I meant "get to"!

Wolf Blass Yellow Label Shiraz 2006 South Australia

It took me a while to polish off the wines used for my taste test in my last post, but now I am fresh off a trip to the Party Factory and am in the midst of enjoying a glass of this Shiraz. I have tried Shiraz just two or three other times. I'm pretty sure the first time was at Old Chicago in Denver with the Finlaysons in November 2007, but of course I don't remember anything about the vintner or vintage; by now, I just remember the good times.

I'm calling this a good bottle but not a gotta-have-it or gotta-buy-it-again wine. The label claims it is "a rich, well-structured Shiraz that exhibits attractive plum, spice and pepper characters" and "good length of flavour." Too bad the bottle has a screwcap rather than a cork. I can't say that his affects the wine any, but it somehow adds to the experience to pull a cork when you open the bottle.

I'm not sure if it's my nose or the wine, but I can't smell much in my glass. It has a fresh green taste with a lingering bold spiciness--so much so, that after I swallow it almost prickles as if I'm holding Coke in my mouth. I'm pairing it with some dark chocolate (as usual) but this would be a great complement to a thick juicy steak.