Quantcast

Tag Archives: cabernet sauvignon

Expensive wine 68: Kelly Fleming Cabernet Sauvignon 2008

winereview

Kelly Fleming Cabernet SauvignonIn those long ago days before the recession, when price was no object for producers and their goal was to make Napa Valley cabernet sauvignon as over the top as possible, the Kelly Fleming cabernet sauvignon was not unusual. $90? No big deal. 14.8 percent alcohol? Nice, but not 15.1 percent.

What makes the Fleming (sample) unusual and worth reviewing six years later is that it held up in a way that many other wines from that fairy tale era have not. I cleaned out the wine closet at the end of this winter, working my way through a dozen or so bottles of similar wines that I got as samples when high-end producers still sent samples, and most of the wines were gone, faded and old. Some of the $100 wines had even started to turn to vinegar.

The Fleming, on the other hand, not only held up, but improved with age. Which I certainly didn’t expect. It was balanced in a way that it wouldn’t have been in 2011, with lots of black fruit but where the whole was greater than the sum of the fruit. The tannins were soft but noticeable, and the finish was spicy, long, and surprisingly complex. This is wine, and not something to marvel at — high praise from the Wine Curmudgeon for this style of wine.

Having said all of this, the Fleming is still a pre-recession, $90 bottle of Napa cabernet with all that entails. It is not subtle, but still showy in the way those wines are. Most of us will wonder why we would want to spend that much money. But if you like this style, and you have the money or dine at expensive steak houses, then you’ll enjoy this — and be glad you bought it and not something else.

Cupcake wine review 2014

winereview

Cupcake wine review 2014Cupcake Cabernet Sauvignon 2012 ($9, purchased, 13.5%)

Cupcake Pinot Grigio 2013 ($9, purchased, 12.5%)

Whenever the Wine Curmudgeon reviews Cupcake wines, I always end up writing as much about the brand and the company that owns Cupcake as I do about the wines. That’s because Cupcake may be the most fascinating wine brand in the world today, where what’s in the bottle doesn’t matter nearly as much as how the wine is marketed. It’s genius, actually, all those red velvet cake descriptors propelling the brand to national awareness without any help from the Winestream Media or scores.

Who else would have the nerve to market a wine called Chloe, with a suggested price of $17, targeting “weddings, birthdays and other celebratory gatherings” without any hint of what it tastes like? Or that calling it Chloe has more than a little to do with the name’s popularity for baby girls over the past decade?

Which doesn’t mean Cupcake wines are bad. They inhabit the region between the boring grocery store stuff and the best cheap wine. In this, think of the chain restaurant business, where Cupcake is an upscale steakhouse like Capital Grille or Fleming’s, and the rest of it is Red Lobster and Texas Roadhouse. The food is better at the former, but in the end it’s still chain food, and these wines, no matter how much Cupcake dresses them up, are still chain wines.

The cabernet, from California, is full, fruity, and almost balanced, with soft tannins, cherry fruit, and an odd sort of chocolate flavor. It’s not quite sweet, though the residual sugar is higher than in most red wines. It’s much better than I expected it to be, and certainly drinkable. If you’re going to make a focus group wine, this is the way to do it.

The Italian-made pinot grigio, on the other hand, is surprisingly disappointing, given how easy it is to make cheap, palatable pinot grigio. It’s oddly disjointed, with a dollop of sweet white fruit in the middle, a quality that doesn’t go with its traditional, Italian-style quinine approach that makes up the rest of the wine and is so popular among women of a certain age. My guess is that the dollop is there to sweeten the wine in line with Cupcake’s flavor profile, a winemaking trick that is cheaper or easier or more legal than adding sugar.

So one yes and one no. Assuming, of course, you can’t find a better $10 wine, which isn’t all that difficult. The labels just aren’t as much fun to read.

For more on Cupcake wine:
Cupcake wine review 2013
Cupcake wine review 2012

Wine of the week: Two reds from Josh Cellars

wineofweek

Josh cellars wine reviewsBecause both of these red wines from California’s Josh Cellars are worth wine of the week honors. But, given the way the blog works and that I don’t like to do two similar wines from the same producer as the wine of the week, I’d have to leave one of them out. And there isn’t enough quality cheap red wine from California to do that. In this, Josh Cellars is an example to the rest of California about how to make cheap wine honestly and honorably.

The 2012 cabernet sauvignon ($11, purchased, 13.5%) somehow combines cabernet varietal character with California fruitiness (very black) for less than $15. If I hand’t tasted it, I wouldn’t have believed it. Plus, this is not a soft wine, which is also surprising, since most cabernets at this price (like the old Avalon) sacrifice style for fruit. Look for some spiciness as well as well integrated oak. Highly recommended, but it does need food and especially red meat.

The 2012 Legacy ($13, sample, 13.9%) is a merlot-based red blend that has all the qualities it should have — sweet blueberry fruit, smoothish tannins, and enough acidity to offer some structure to the wine. It has more heft than I expected, which is quite welcome, because the fruit doesn’t get in the way. Like the cabernet, it needs food and probably red meat. Not quite as terrific a value as the cabernet, but that speaks more to the former’s qualities than the latter’s faults, since it’s also well worth drinking.

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: suv | Thanks to toyota suv, infiniti suv and lexus suv