The wine had a lovely lemon, melon, and mineral Burgundian nose. It tasted a little rough and young with concentrated flavors of casaba and honeydew melons. Already fine, this could easily improve another point or two. Me 90. My wife 91.

Just one more sip.

We had this wine again last weekend.

It had a nice nose of citrus and melon. Pear and honeydew flavors were balanced by a light, not unpleasant, harsh edge. This might benefit from another year in the bottle. Me 90. My wife 89.

quote:

Originally posted by Board-O:
We had this wine again last weekend.

It had a nice nose of citrus and melon. Pear and honeydew flavors were balanced by a light, not unpleasant, harsh edge. This might benefit from another year in the bottle. Me 90. My wife 89.

I know what you mean about the hard edge. To me, it was a minerally edge that conflicted with the decent melon notes. My main objection, though, is that this is a little too oaky for me. Some have described Landmark's chards as being "burgundian," an adjective that I do not agree with. Went through three bottles of this over the nightmarishly hot and dry summer of '05. I give it 88pts.

I thought the nose was reminiscent of a white Burgundy. I'd compare the wine more with a Meursault than a Chablis if forced to compare to a Burgubdy.

Board-O

can you comment on the "weight" of this wine at all? i'm terribly picky with whites, esp. chardonnay.

thanks

It's a little hard to say. I didn't make any notes about it. From memory, I'd say it's typically medium to slightly heavier than medium weight, similar to many of the oaky style California Chardonnays.