The range of descriptors used by the critics gives you an idea of the complexity of this wine. And all that with no oak! For me, new-mown hay, persimmon, and a touch of honey sum it up nicely. If you've ever had a late-harvest semillon "sticky", you'll have an idea of what to expect from the nose, but it's a bit of a shock to the palette when the wine arrives bone-dry. Definitely not for casual wine drinkers, but adventurous wine aficionados owe it to themselves to give it a go.
Screw cap. Complex aromas of orange, tropical fruits, tea leaf, and beeswax. Medium-full bodied with an oily and very creamy texture. Palate is ever-so-slightly off-dry (slightly sweet) and has tropical fruits, tea and beeswax flavours. Smooth, lengthy finish that is slightly tart, bitter and extra dry. For a 2004, this is drinking very well, but drink this yummy white now. It's different. I enjoyed it! Tasted Sept/2013.
This wine sits greeny golden in the glass. Then the nose detects hints of petrol and machine oil. The palate is beguiled with an herbaceous, almost cabbagey taste with some bitterness. A long and complex mouthfeel with good acidity and some creaminess. A challenge to rate. I can understand the professional critics being enamoured with this wine's intriguing complexity, but is it really pleasurable and appealing on the palate? I say yes, especially with some softer creamy cheese as an accomplice to this wine's international intrigue. Grip it n' sip it! May 2013.
Certainly different than any wine I've tried before. Aromas of wet hay on the nose, and waxy bitter petrol on the palate. Hard to believe that this wine is unoaked, as there us distinctive oakiness to its finish. It's distinctes will likely not appeal to the masses, but make for an interesting selection for those with adventurous tastes. Tasted April 2014.
What a disappointment. I was expecting something special with a 2004 wine rated 91. Instead, it tastes like it is long after its best before date. Maybe this bottle is off, because I sure do not recognize it from the reviews.
Jim Beam?
Jim Beam?