WN: Longoria 2007 Blues Cuvée vs. Campo di Sasso 2007 Insoglio

This is a comparative tasting I've been hoping to do for some time. Both the Longoria 2007 Blues Cuvée and the Campo di Sasso 2007 Insoglio have similar blends roughly evenly split between Syrah, Cabernet Franc and Merlot. But the former is a "Super Barbara" sourced from a variety of terroirs in Santa Barbara County while the latter is a "Super Tuscan" indicating it consists of international varieties like Cab, Merlot and Syrah grown in Toscana. By most accounts 2007 was a strong vintage in both regions.

As of now, the Insoglio gets the edge. While it doesn't have much structure for the long run, the mix of varieties shows through and there's genuine earthy complexity. The Blues Cuvée in contrast is big, structured, fruity and oaky in a well-made New World style. It has better potential long-term, though it's hard to say whether the fruit and oak will eventually recede to reveal the intrinsic character. The smoke of the Syrah and tobacco of the Cab Franc and Merlot are deeply buried if they are there at all.

Both are around $20 to $25 depending on where you look and really illustrate why style and structure are so important. Both have plenty of fruit, but beyond that picking just one would come down to personal taste and intent. Do you want a fruit-driven wine to age? Blues it is! Do you want some earthy, funky complexity right now? Then there's the Insoglio. The Insoglio would be a re-buy for me personally, but it's not a question of it being better. The flavor profile just works for me.

• 2007 Campo di Sasso Insoglio del Cinghiale Toscana IGT - Italy, Tuscany, Toscana IGT
  
  
  
  35% Syrah, 30% CF, 30% Merlot, 5% PV. Aromas of tobacco, smoked meat/bacon, toast and cherries. Medium bodied, medium-low acid, light tannins. Light on oak, too. Nice cherry fruit upfront, then finishes heavy on olive tapenade. Mellow, earthy wine with a core of red fruit and a great herbaceous edge. Structured for near-term consumption.
  
  
• 2007 Longoria Blues Cuvée - USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Barbara County
  
  
  
  31% CF (Alisos), 27% Merlot (Alisos), 24% Syrah (Clover Creek), 18% CS (Estelle). Aromas of plum, cedar, tar and vanilla. Definite new world Bdx blend aromas. Full bodied, creamy, but also fresh with med-high acidity. Tannic with a dose of new oak. Finishes dry. Big, ripe, balanced, dark fruited. Needs a few years to let tannins mellow in my opinion. A little one dimensional now, though the delicious factor is there big time.
  
  

Vinography: Where Self Awareness Goes to Die

Alder Yarrow is a talented guy, no question about it. But self awareness is not his strong suit. He's published another blog entry on Vinography decrying the tragedy of wine being treated purely as a investment or trophy. In principle, the post says all the right things. He tells these cynical wine speculators and hoarders essentially to take a shit or get off the pot. Drink the wine, because that's what it's there for.

But the same sentiment can be directed to Vinography: take a shit or get off the pot. A blog that breathlessly glorifies ultra-expensive cult (or at least aspiring cult) producers like Kapcsándy, Blackbird, Sea Smoke, Bond, and Giacomo Conterno is not exactly the spokesblog for the common man. In fact, it's perpetuating the same class divide that Yarrow criticizes. Yarrow simply doesn't get that one can't lionize $100+ Napa cult Cabs one day, then criticize luxury wine collectors the next for hoarding them.

Yarrow wants to end what he calls "the travesty of wine and social class." You know what else is a travesty? Hypocrisy. Yarrow does an excellent job covering a variety of wines, and has a special ability for illustrating what makes high end wineries tick. But if you're covering a luxury good--and that's what wine is, even down to the $15 or $20 Mondavi Napa Merlot at Von's--there's no getting around it. Vinography is about luxury goods, pure and simple. There's just no sense in criticizing the same market that Vinography covers.

I'm not begrudging anyone for enjoying or writing about expensive wine. Heck, I've done the same thing myself! But let's drop the pretense. Writing up all the minutiae related to a bottle of fermented grapes is not dispelling the notion of wine is a luxury. Instead it feeds into the same mythology that it is complicated, expensive and snobby. We can't have it both ways.

TN: Quinta do Vallado 2007 Douro

The Quinta do Vallado 2007 Douro was one of those Costco finds where the thinking goes, "this is $15, looks interesting, let's give it a try." Usually these sorts of buys work out pretty well since Costco doesn't typically sell plonk, and even the less standard choices are fairly reliable as a result. Plus, Jeff gave it a good write-up on Viva la Wino.

This is a blend of the port varieties Touriga Franca, Touriga Nacional, Tinta Roriz, Tinta Amarela, Tinta Barroca and Sousao. I'm not a big port drinker at all, though a recent encounter with varietal Touriga Nacional has me intrigued by the floral, spicy character of the grape. After tasting this, I can definitely recommend it for its Touriga character. It's also in the plushly textured, delicious, easy drinking mode. The only drawback was a pesky reductive, rubbery aroma that hid some of the wine's character. While I don't think this is an ager, it's definitely worth the price. The only concern here is the variation evident in the notes in CellarTracker. Were there multiple lots blended? Is the wine not stable? Did some get treated badly in the distribution process? Given the bottle variation, best to try a bottle from your local source before buying multiples.

• 2007 Quinta do Vallado Douro - Portugal, Douro
  
  
  Rubber tire reduction at first. But cinnamon and musky floral aromas (Touriga at work here!) are there as well. Blackberry and herbs also. Seems structured for near term. Fruit forward with good savory depth. Silky tannin. Nice freshness. Crowd pleasing, easy drinking, and delicious! Little heat, would be a notch better without the rubber tire funk.
  
  

When Demystifying Terroir Turns into Bad Science

Wine Peeps, a Washington-centric wine blog, posted, at first glance, a compelling article documenting formal chemical analysis of a Syrah from the producer Cayuse. This is essentially a "cult wine" producer who critics have consistently lauded. The gist of the article is that the wine showed some seriously funky characteristics consistent with high levels of mercaptans or volatile sulfides. So the authors paid to have a sample of the wine tested by ETS in Napa to determine if the compounds were present in abnormally high concentrations. The results were compelling:

Within two days, we had the results, posted online and emailed to us. Then we had a follow-up call with a representative at ETS to discuss the results. The evidence was clear. The Cayuse was a flawed wine. It had volatile acidity slightly above the normal sensory threshold but at a level a massive Syrah can support, but the worst result from the chemistry panel was that it had a high pH level, which made it more susceptible to bacterial attack. The most damning result, however, came from the sulfides panel. Published literature and ETS studies say that low levels of dimethyl sulfide can contribute roundness, fruitiness, or complexity; however, at levels greater than 50 ug/L, it may contribute vegetative, cooked cabbage, or sulfide smells to wines. According to the ETS representative, this wine had the highest dimethyl sulfide level he had ever seen (312 ug/L), more than 10 times the normal sensory threshold (17-25 ug/L), which accounts for the canned corn, rotten vegetables, and decomposed greens flavors. And, those dimethyl sulfide levels and resulting unpleasant sensory characteristics will only increase with wine age, according to ETS.

What was apparently attributed to terroir is apparently an extremely high level of dimethyl sulfide. (Just as a cross-reference, Jamie Goode confirms that various sulfides can bring some serious funk.) Perhaps the terroir does indirectly contribute to this character by producing fruit that naturally ferments in a manner that generates high quantities of volatile sulfides. Or perhaps it's mostly the "house style" that shows, especially if fermentation technique is reductive. Maybe a high pH allowed some in-bottle microbial development. In any case, though, it's clear those attributing the sulfide-heavy character directly to terroir are not on firm footing. Many factors can contribute to production of sulfides.

The Wine Peeps, however, go awry arguing that this is some sort of objective, absolute and unequivocal flaw, especially in the comments that follow. I love science more than most people, and data indicating the presence of stinky compounds is priceless in my book. But when it comes to personal taste, objectivity simply doesn't exist. The most one can do is indicate that sulfides have a large sensory impact.

I recently wrote about a Merlot that had an intense briny, seaweed characteristic, which may well be related to volatile sulfides. In any case, it is quite likely some less than commercially acceptable sulfur-based compound was present in a high concentration. Yet I really liked this "flawed" wine. The seaweed aroma made it unique and interesting. For a mass market wine this would not be desirable because it may well displease a large segment of consumers. But for smaller production wines the real art is in differentiation if not a tension between easy to like flavors and more challenging ones.

Ultimately it comes down to taste. One man's flaw is another man's intriguing characteristic. Some folks like fruity, oaky wines. Others like stinky, dirty wines. Who's right? Is excessive fruit a flaw? What about high alcohol? No, it's about taste. Many technically "flawless" grocery store wines I try have a vanilla if not tapioca or yogurt flavor most likely due to spoofy oak treatment. This is way above my sensory threshold. But is it a flaw? No. I just don't like this flavor. Others do, and that's fine.

TN: Longoria 2002 Blues Cuvée

One of the nice benefits to being in a local wine club is access to library wines at fair prices, often after having tasted the wine. Such was the case with the Longoria 2002 Blues Cuvée. This bottling was originally started by Rick Longoria as a means to foist Cabernet Franc upon unsuspecting consumers. Over the years he has shifted its purpose to blending, though Cab Franc has remained a large portion of the blend.

The 2002 vintage has an interesting near 50-50 split along two dimensions. First, it's 54% Cabernet Franc and 46% Merlot. But 30% of the Cab Franc and 26% of the Merlot Came from Westerly (now McGinley) Vineyard in the warmer eastern portion of Santa Ynez, while 24% of the Cab Franc and 20% of the Merlot came from the cooler Alisos Vineyard in Los Alamos. In other words, there are really four evenly divided blending components. The result is a fruit-driven, New World styled wine, but one with structure and complexity.

While this isn't Longoria's most expensive wine, it is the one I've enjoyed most with age on it. In fact, it seems it needs a few years to integrate. For around $25 as a new release, this is a really decent value in wine that hits its stride 5 to 10 years from vintage. I paid a bit more as this bottle came pre-aged, though.

• 2002 Longoria Blues Cuvée - USA, California, Central Coast, Santa Barbara County
  
  Drinking really nicely. Has the texture of velvet being rubbed against the grain. Creamy, with softness of aged tannins, but still pretty darn tannic and drying. Seems to have both fruit and structure to support further aging. Chocolate, blackberry, cedar, tobacco, anise and coffee on the nose. Fruit showing some advancement, but nothing to worry about. Full bodied, creamy, with nice freshness. A lot of spicy anise flavor on the finish. No rough edges here. Finishes very well. Balanced New World wine with bones for aging I'd reckon.