i have acquired six bottles and i had one of them... wow!... very good. Parker gave it 96 points, i believe, and jay miller a 97. I wasn't going to open any more for another year maybe three or four years). Does anybody have any input on what they think the maximum cellar time is with this blend? There sure is a lot happening inside that bottle... pricey,though. (i won't even tell u what i paid for each bottle as i am a little embarrassed to say). 2004 is quite difficult to obtain now apparently.
Dean Martin: "I feel sorry for people that do not drink; they wake up in the morning and that is the best that they feel all day"
I've been known to enjoy a bottle or two of this one.
Actually, I've drank more of the '05s, letting the 04s have a little bottle time. The 03s were excellent as well! I 'discovered' these via several others here that found this first and really enjoy them as well (Board-O, w+a, etc). The subject of much debate, you tend to either love them...or not. Not much in between. If you do a search, you'll find much info and discussions throughout various threads. The general feeling, on this board, is that they are not built for significant aging, but I do find a year or two laid down does benefit them.
Glad you like them. They're tasty. You won't experience an epiphany with this wine however, IMO, it is a very well made wine
It's a blend of cab and monastrell and has a stated alcohol level of over 15%. Although monastrell is of course originally from Spain, there isn't a history of producing really age-worthy monastrell there. Over the past ten years or so there has been a lot of effort to produce something more significant and this is an example.
As to how long to keep it - I can't see why you would. What exactly would it turn into that is better than it is now? The primary appeal of the wine is the thick, sweet fruit overlaid by the buttery oak. Sort of like buttered toast and jam. Where does that go? Does it evolve into something layered and subtle and complex? I doubt it. If you look at wines that have a similar profile, say by Marquis Phillips, Mollydooker, Turley, Garretson, how many of those evolve into something better? None on that list that I've found. And don't get hung up on the fact that they are all different grapes - all of the varieties in that list are fully capable of making age-worthy wines.
The only reason to age a wine is to get it to a point that it's better - you certainly wouldn't want it to get worse! If you're just hoping that it holds on, then buy the most recent vintage.
Nobody has enough experience with that particular wine to make a call on aging it with any certainty. FWIW, I have had it since the first vintage. I won't buy it but I understand its appeal. And as for maximum cellar time, I'd drink them young to capture what earned the 97 points. And as to what part of the 97 is for future potential, remember that neither Parker nor Miller has any more experience with the wine than anyone else. So their guess is based on a region and blend that they don't know particularly well, and given to a wine made by an importer and winemaker they seem to love. In other words, it's as good as anyone else's guess.
Posts: 801 | Location: NY | Registered: Dec 09, 2007
I'm in the drink 'em young camp as well. For me, the 2004 has lost a lot of what made it so fun to drink a few years ago. Many folk disagree and say it still needs time. Truthfully, I think if you're waiting for the wine to calm down a lot, there are better wines to buy to fit that category.
The 2006s are doing really nicely now (both Clio and El Nido). The 2005s were my favs, but the 2006s are worthy successors.
BTW - did some barrel tasting at El Nido last month. If you like your Clio/El Nido on the calmer side, 2007 is for you. But if you're like me and like them BIG and WILD, then 2008 will make you muy muy happy!! Since I have no previous experience tasting these wines in barrel, it's somewhat hard to say for sure... but 2008 may be even better than 2005!
Loring Wine Company
Posts: 353 | Location: Lompoc, CA, US | Registered: Feb 05, 2003
I have been drinking and enjoying the 2004 over the last several months, while I let the '05 and '06 rest a bit. If you have 6 of the '04's, I would suggest trying one or two a year until they are gone. GregT summed it up pretty well. I do not think these will improve much with age, but they should certainly hold on for several more years. Enjoy now over the next 4+.
"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return."
Originally posted by GregT: It's a blend of cab and monastrell and has a stated alcohol level of over 15%. Although monastrell is of course originally from Spain, there isn't a history of producing really age-worthy monastrell there. Over the past ten years or so there has been a lot of effort to produce something more significant and this is an example.
As to how long to keep it - I can't see why you would. What exactly would it turn into that is better than it is now? The primary appeal of the wine is the thick, sweet fruit overlaid by the buttery oak. Sort of like buttered toast and jam. Where does that go? Does it evolve into something layered and subtle and complex? I doubt it. If you look at wines that have a similar profile, say by Marquis Phillips, Mollydooker, Turley, Garretson, how many of those evolve into something better? None on that list that I've found. And don't get hung up on the fact that they are all different grapes - all of the varieties in that list are fully capable of making age-worthy wines.
The only reason to age a wine is to get it to a point that it's better - you certainly wouldn't want it to get worse! If you're just hoping that it holds on, then buy the most recent vintage.
Nobody has enough experience with that particular wine to make a call on aging it with any certainty. FWIW, I have had it since the first vintage. I won't buy it but I understand its appeal. And as for maximum cellar time, I'd drink them young to capture what earned the 97 points. And as to what part of the 97 is for future potential, remember that neither Parker nor Miller has any more experience with the wine than anyone else. So their guess is based on a region and blend that they don't know particularly well, and given to a wine made by an importer and winemaker they seem to love. In other words, it's as good as anyone else's guess.
I just looked up this wine as I am not familiar with it.
Perhaps CT is wrong, but it says the blend is Cab and Mouvedre. Edit: Just realized Monastrell is the same thing Never had anything like it so I don't know what it is like.
Is this new world fruit bomb stuff like Mollydooker? I realize it is a different blend, but am I on the right track? This sounds interesting, is priced well, and has good reviews. I think I will pick a few up.
Posts: 1859 | Location: Anaheim Hills, CA | Registered: Nov 18, 2007
Hey, what do you want? The French renamed the grape!
Anyhow, it's good wine but it's of a type and if you want to put it in a category like Mollydooker, that's not inappropriate - i.e. lush with massive fruit. It's not like a Barolo that you want to stash for a while.
I'm not prejudiced and have lots of those big and jammy wines. But I drink them pretty young too. The winemaker, Chris Ringland is making the Marquis Phillips wines now as far as I know, as well as his own Australian wines. And what he did with those is why he was chosen to work in Spain. So it's not an accident that the El Nido and Clio wines have the profile that they do.
Monastrell is often really funky and leathery. In fact, in that guise it's quite distinctive and easy to spot. It's kind of touchy about where it grows and so in CdP it's probably less than 10% of the plantings. However, it's a debate as to whether that leathery quality is inevitable or can be attenuated by the winemaker.
I believe that it can be attenuated because I've had enough that are anything but leathery. In fact, if made in a fresher and cleaner style, it's the one grape that truly does make you think of blueberries.
Posts: 801 | Location: NY | Registered: Dec 09, 2007
As KSCO2 said, I think you either like it or hate it. After trying the '04 and '05, I definitely don't like this wine but it sure has plenty of fans. Honestly, I barely recognise monastrell here. The way it is vinifed, it seems that it could be another varietal and the profile would remain the same..but that's just me.
__________________________ Show a little faith, there's magic in the night
Posts: 1235 | Location: Chicago | Registered: Sep 05, 2006
This wine has no track record for aging potential. I think it has the backbone to age and improve for years, but it's just an educated guess. I'll be following this wine's progress over the years.
Just one more sip.
Posts: 25023 | Location: NY | Registered: Oct 18, 2001
I really do love this wine. Ive been drinking Clio since the 02 release, but the 04 was what got me hooked. The 05 and 06 are also really nice as well, but the 04 was my favorite to date.
Posts: 3 | Location: NJ | Registered: May 29, 2009
Had the '04 on the 4th. Drinking well right now. Very buttery with plenty of oak when tried right after the 2002 Two Hands Deer in the Headlights Shiraz. A surprising contrast there.
"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return."
Great wine. Unfortunately I opened my last bottle of Clio a couple of weeks ago. It was the wine of the night. And those who had never had tasted the Clio were VERY impressed.
Bob.
Posts: 166 | Location: Connecticut | Registered: Aug 10, 2006
Originally posted by Brian Loring: BTW - did some barrel tasting at El Nido last month. If you like your Clio/El Nido on the calmer side, 2007 is for you. But if you're like me and like them BIG and WILD, then 2008 will make you muy muy happy!! Since I have no previous experience tasting these wines in barrel, it's somewhat hard to say for sure... but 2008 may be even better than 2005!
Appreciate the info, Brian. Thank you. Nice to see what's ahead.
Very few wines (outside of OZ) that strike up as much discussion (controversy)
Sidebar: This wine is an easy target to throw barbs at. However it is also one that I've found that can easily 'grow' on you. I've known more than one person who, after a couple years of 'not liking it', begin to quietly collect it.
