Does Vintage Matter?

 

When it comes to your wine purchase, is the vintage Important? You’ve heard the word “vintage” but what does it really mean?

In winemaking, vintage usually refers to the year the grapes were grown. So, if you see a wine with a vintage date of 2004 on it, then you can assume the grapes were grown during the 2004 growing season. Now that makes perfect sense, unless of course you are looking at a wine from the southern hemisphere. Think about it….wines in Australia, for example, have a growing season that runs from about October to April. So what year do you use? The year of harvest is what is on the label. 

Okay, so we have that same bottle of 2004 Cabernet Sauvignon. All the grapes were harvested in 2004…..wait, not so fast! Most countries allow a vintage dated wine to include a portion of wine that is not from the year denoted on the label. Old World wines (European Union) only requires that 85% of the wine be from grapes in the denoted year. Australia and New Zealand follow the European requirements. In the United States, the requirement is also 85%, unless it is a designated AVA (i.e. Napa Valley or Paso Robles), in which case, it is 95%. In Chile and South Africa, the requirement is less stringent, only 75% required for vintage-dated wine. 

So, if you’ve got a bottle of wine and there’s no vintage date (often seen on wine lists as NV – “Non Vintage”), you can assume that the wine was made from grapes of several years’ harvests, or at least, did not meet the minimum requirements. This is a common practice for winemakers seeking a consistent style of wine, often referred to as a “house style”. Champagne is the most common NV wine, as the producer blends many years together, to maintain a certain flavor profile. That is not to say there aren’t any vintage Champagnes, as there are. Wines from the best vintages often sell for much higher prices than those from average vintages. Vintages wines are assumed to improve with further aging in the bottle. This has led to a misperception that any vintage dated wine is of higher quality, and capable of aging. While that would be great to believe, it is simply not true. There are some very poor quality vintage dated wines.

But why should you care about the year? 

If you live in California, you know we have a drought, and it has been an unusually warm winter, which has tricked the grapevines into early bud break. As I write this, the weather has turned to heavy rain, and is accompanied by cold weather, creating a much higher risk of frost damage or damage to the vine. Those little buds are very fragile and subject to damage during pruning if they have popped out of the wood. This would lead to a reduced crop, or possibly a poor crop. If you remember the weather right now, when the 2014 vintage is released, you’ll know why it tastes the way it does.

The importance of vintage, however, is often disputed. There is no doubt that cooler regions do see fluctuations in quality, a warmer growing season can produce riper grapes, while a colder growing season might produce lower sugar levels, and higher acidity. Extremely hot growing season can also produce flabby wines. The best example of where vintage makes a difference is Bordeaux. This growing region can easily be influenced by the weather during the growing season.

There is an argument that due to new winemaking techniques and the use of irrigation (particularly in the New World) has created a more uniform style of wine, that doesn’t vary much from vintage to vintage. Some even argue that there is not difference between vintages on New World wines. I am not one of those believers. If you’ve read this blog for a while, you have read about some of the vertical tastings dinners I have conducted, and there is a difference between vintages (a vertical tasting is a series of wines from the same producer, over a number of different vintages, i.e. 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 – which would be a 4-year vertical).

Back to Bordeaux….many wine collectors are concerned about vintage, as the best Bordeaux wines will age for decades in the bottle, and actually improve. These wines can be extremely expensive, and you have to have the patience to hold on to them, as well as cellar them under proper conditions. And, isn’t it nice to know the age of the bottle you have in your cellar? Inexpensive wines are typically meant for early consumption, so vintage is probably not as important. But, even with the inexpensive wines, it might be good to know the vintage. If you had that wine before, and you liked it, you can look for it again. If your wine shop is out of that vintage, and you still have one of the older vintages, try tasting them side by side, and see if you can taste any difference, or does that winery make a “house style” that is the same every year?

The importance of vintage is one about which disagreement can be expected to continue. For me, it does matter, particularly for Old World Wines.

Zinfandel Dinner

If you are a regular follower of this wine blog, you know that I am always looking for an excuse to do wine pairing dinners. I really enjoy themed dinners, but occasionally, opportunities present themselves to try something different.

This week, a small group of us got together to taste a four year vertical of Paul Dolan Zinfandel. I must admit, I was not familiar with this winery. They are an organic/biodynamic winery out of Mendocino County, in Northern California. We were able to pick up the 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009 Zinfandels. Each wine was opened about an hour before our dinner, and allowed to breath.

Each couple brought one course for the dinner, and there were four couples total. The menu consisted of an opening Caprese "style" salad. I say, "style" because, not only did it have tomatoes, basil, and cheese, but it also had avocado, and the cheese was a homemade cheese, which followed a traditional Croatian recipe. Why Croatian? Because it is thought that the Zinfandel grape originated in Croatia.

The main course was a Beef Bourguignon, following the Julia Child's recipe, and side dish of scalloped potatoes. My responsibility was the dessert. I like to experiment, so I made a blackberry Panna Cotta, topped with fresh blackberries and bittersweet chocolate shavings. I also made figs, poached in Zinfandel. The poaching liquid was later reduced to a syrup, and the figs with syrup were poured over vanilla ice cream.

All four wines were poured, and set in front of each place setting. The first noticeable difference was the color of each vintage. The '06 and '07 vintages were visibly lighter than the '08 and '09.  My process of tasting verticals (particularly with food) is to look at each wine in the glass, smell, then swirl and smell, then taste. After that first taste, I taste again, then take a bite of food, and taste wine again, to see how it changes with the food.

The 2006 Paul Dolan Zinfandel was the only vintage that had grapes from two growing regions. While all the vintages had grapes from Mendocino, the 2006 had grapes also sourced from Amador County. As mentioned, the 2006 vintage was lighter in color. It was fairly light bodied (for a Zinfandel). The alcohol level in all four wines as the same, coming in at 14.5% (again, low for a high sugar grape, like Zinfandel). The '06 vintage still had some fruit to it, but there was also some herbs on the nose. On the palate, the wine had some peppery notes, very light fruit, and moderate acidity. The most interesting thing about this wine, was how it changed in the glass over time. Most of the food overpowered this lighter Zin. But, by itself, I found it a nice drinking wine, particularly at under $20/bottle. I wouldn't run out and purchase this vintage, as it is already showing its' age.

The 2007 Paul Dolan Zinfandel was also light in pigment, and was by far the lightest on the palate. But, I found this vintage to be my favorite overall. It had the most complex nose of all four. There was some blackberry and cherry fruit, mixes with herbs, and bit of tobacco or leather. As with the 2006, this vintage was a bit light for the food (it couldn't hold up to the vinaigrette on the salad, or the richness of the beef). Of the four, this was my favorite...maybe not for pairing with food, but as a nice drinking wine.

The 2008 Paul Dolan was a dark ruby colored wine, and had mixed reviews. One person in our group picked this as his favorite, while most did not care for it at all. I am almost wondering if there might have been something wrong with the wine, as it was the only one in the vertical, that was purchased from a different retailer. There was a strong bacon smell to the wine. It was also the most "jammy" of the four. There also seemed to be a lot of oak on the nose, and a mushroomy character to the wine. This was my least favorite vintage of the four.

Finally, the 2009 Paul Dolan Zinfandel was also very dark in color, and was had the heaviest body of  the four. The weight of the wine made it the best for pairing with the meal...even up against the vinaigrette dressing on the salad. There was lots of black fruit and spices on the nose, making this more of a "jammy" wine. But, the fruit wasn't overpowering, there was a nice balance in all the components. Of the four vintages, this one tasted the most like what you expect from a Zinfandel.

As I said, I made the two desserts. Not knowing what the flavor profile of the wines was going to be, I made one with limited sweetness (blackberry panna cotta) and one with a Zinfandel syrup (poached figs). Remember you always want your wine to be sweeter than the dessert. Neither really worked, so we opened up a bottle of California Port, and called it a nice end to the evening.

 I hope this will inspire you to try your own vertical wine tasting. sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. But at least you get to drink wines, and get together with friends. And, isn't that what it is ultimately all about?

Vertical Wine Tasting

What do you do when you come across a number of different vintages, from the same winery? I put together a vertical wine tasting dinner!

Caramelized onions and goat cheese

A vertical wine tasting is where you have a number of bottles from the same winery, that are spread out over a number of vintages (harvest years). This is different from a horizontal wine tasting which a number of bottles from the same vintage, but all from different wineries.

In this case, we had found a deal online where five years of the Raymond Vineyards Private Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon were up for sale. Limited amounts were available. By the time I had ordered, only four years were still for sale, so I picked up the 1986, 1987, 1989, and the 1992.

There were a total of four couples, and each couple was asked to bring an item that they felt would best pair with some older Cabernet Sauvignon. We decided not to have a full sit down dinner, but rather small bites, that would give us an opportunity to see how each paired with the wines, but also have time to taste each wine on its' own.

We opened the evening with a small cheese platter, which included Gouda, a sharp Vermont Cheddar cheese, and some aged Parmesan. Additionally, I like to experiment on friends, so I created a fig tepanade (figs, olives, capers, walnuts, olive oil, balsamic, and thyme) which was put on slide baguettes with goat cheese. We also had some crostini with blue cheese and caramelized onions.

Cheeses and fig tepanade

For the main courses (if you want to call them that), we had large mushroom caps, stuffed with bison and blue cheese; grilled lamb loin with a blackberry sauce and mint; and a beef stew with pearl onions. Every item paired wonderfully with the Cabernet Sauvignon. I am partial to lamb with Cabernet, and don't eat lamb too often, but I really liked how it worked with the blackberry and mint.

While we really didn't have a dessert in mind, we did have a number of chocolates that we tried. Each had a range of cocoa in them. They ranged from 60% to 85%. There was consensus that 70% was the right mix for a good pairing with Cabernet. The lower level (60% was too sweet) and the highest (85%) was just too bitter. We also had one chocolate with some chile powder in it, but it was too overwhelming, and it just didn't work.

According to their website, “Raymond Vineyards was a family business before the winery was ever established. Roy Raymond arrived in the Napa Valley in 1933, where he took work in the cellars at Beringer Brothers Winery in St. Helena, helping with the long process of rebuilding after Prohibition was repealed. While working at Beringer, Roy met Martha Jane Beringer, whom he married in 1936. Together they had two children, Roy Jr. and Walter. When Beringer was sold in 1971, the Raymond family left, purchasing 90 acres just south of St. Helena and launching their eponymous label. Still a family affair, Raymond Vineyards has been producing elegant and polished wines.”

Grilled lamb w/ blackberry sauce

As for the wines, which were the stars of the evening...we were pleasantly surprised that all had held up. There was some concerns when I pulled the corks. Being a sommelier, I am pretty good at getting old corks out in one piece. This night would prove to be the exception. Of the four bottles, only one cork came out in one piece. Two others came out in pieces, but no cork made it into the bottle. The last bottle (1992) and the youngest of the bunch, disintegrated, and required filtering through a wire filter, and into a decanter. Also, the 1992 had the most sediment of all the bottles, so decanting was needed anyway.

The 1986 vintage faced  heavy winter rains in February and March followed by a warm spring leading to early bud break. In general, the wines of 1986 were round and soft. Some late season rains posed some minor issue for those that harvest late. Our bottle -  The cork broke about mid way, but no signs of oxidation, or signs of leakage. Light aromas of tart cherries, but more bouquet leaning to leather and oak. Tannins were flat.

Bison & blue cheese stuffed mushrooms

The 1987 vintage had a drier than normal winter and a hot spring. Late summer heat led to an early crush for most winemakers. The yield was light. Our bottle  - The cork was stained about 90% up, but there was no signs of oxidation. Not much nose left but the taste was excellent. A bit thin on the palate. Cherries, leather, coffee and a bit of eucalyptus and surprisingly long finish. For me, this wine as the best for pairing with all the different foods, and was my personal favorite of the night.

The 1989 vintage was a dry year with low rainfall and a cool spring, but warm weather late.  Without some canopy thinning, wines of this vintage would pick up some vegetal aromas (as did our bottle). Our bottle – Once again, our cork broke about mid cork, No signs of leakage, or oxidation. This wine was the most vegetal/herbal of the four. Eucalyptus, celery, mixed with cherries and earth notes.

Corks: 1986, 1987, 1989, 1992

1992 was a “classic” vintage for Cabernet in Napa Valley. Low rainfall, warm days and cool nights for the entire season. A late harvest, and a cooling trend in late May meant more hang time and stronger flavor development. Our bottle – the cork completely disintegrated on us, and we have to filter and decant. Lots of sediment (versus the other three vintages). This bottle had more of the classic Cabernet aromas: Cassis, vanilla, cherry. This was the most fruit forward of the bunch, and was the overall favorite of our tasting group.

All the wines held up well (better than I can say for the corks). Raymond Vineyards once again, proves that it stands with any of the fine wines of Napa Valley. And, their wines do age well.