Skip to main content

Reply to "1994 Bryant Family"

quote:
Originally posted by cab chris:
latour67,

Please clarify. You state that the wine "didn't possess the concentration, structure, or depth that I would expect from a 1994 Cali Cult, and I think this bottle was prematurely aging!" Yet you scored it 91/93.

That's a solid score in my book. Very solid if you factor in the age of the wine.

We had the 1995 and 1996 Bryant's a decade ago and while they provided substantial enjoyment at age 4 and 5, I am not so certain they would maintain their depth and vivacity much past 10 to 12 years. Helen made the Bryant with enormous concentration but lower acid. They certainly were show stoppers.

How did the other wines fare?



cab chris

Yes, I know, and agree that 91/93 is a solid score. I guess you could say that it tasted like it was a quality wine, and perhaps just not typical, as it appeared younger than the taste, which was more aged. I still think it was a compromised bottle, and either had too much heat on one time, or perhaps it wasn't stored in a temperature controlled cellar. (guess)

Your experience with the 1995 & 96 at age 4 is excellent, but I can't see the value in buying a Cali Cult wine for immediate pleasure and one that won't last more than 10 or 12 years, especially at those prices. I think most of those Cali Cults would be good for at least 20 years. Confused
×
×
×
×