The Royal Tannin Bombs

5 Comments on "Zinfandel, Tier I, mk ii, affordable, (assaggio majoralus)"

1. 

   Tally Ho
   01/04/2009 at 3:17 pm Permalink

   I loved this tasting, though that should come as no surprise if you’ve read any of our previous tasting posts since I count Zinfandel up there among my favorite varietals.

   As noted, this was not originally intented to be a Rosenblum only tasting but it was really fun to taste these garnet jewels side by side. Rosenblum definitely has a recognizable Zin profile, but lest you think these wines all tasted the same, terroir came into play and showed the various sides of this juice in the hands of one of the original Zinfandel “R” producers.

   And how happy was I that I picked the Snows Lake as my top fav (that’s 2 for 2). This after only ever ’sampling’ this wine at a huge 30-40 Zin tasting event at Wine Thieves a few months ago. Not to steal kudos from the lovely “Annette”, this Snows Lake has it all for me…nose, fruit, spice, structure, mouthfeel- my perfect flavor profile. This is currently my favorite Zin! There, I said it.

   You can read my tasting notes for specifics so I won’t bore you with repetition here but take it from the Royals, Rosenblum knows their way around a Zinfandel. Paired with a perfectly cooked filet (textbook medium rare) homemade mashed potatoes and broccolini with garlic and fresh lemon juice and I defy you to find a better dining/drinking experience at any 5 star restaurant.

2. 

   badman
   01/04/2009 at 4:48 pm Permalink

   Wow, a throw-down from our very own Tally-Ho!  I wholeheartedly agree, as her cooking proficiency rivals the very best (and trust me I’ve put in my time perched at many a 5-star linen draped table) and of course the cost is considerably easier on the pocketbook.  I am glad you found a new firm winner; I just wished it had shown better for me in the first tasting in which we encountered it.

   I know I’ve said it before but it bears repeating: for me I felt lucky and honoured to have nailed the Rosenblum Annette’s Reserve Redwood Valley 2005 Zinfandel for the umpteenth time in a row.  Actually we had the Annette’s Reserve in 3 MAJOR BLIND tastings and in all three I ranked it #1!  Too bad we’re on the tail end of the ‘05 vintage – now I can only find it via mail-order at about $35/bottle.  We’ve had it formally a total of 7 times, and in one of those the bottle was slightly corked.  At a few of the other lesser tastings I felt it needed more time (a good thing) and that it wasn’t structured as well as I preferred (not a good thing).  But the layers of intense fruit, beautifully exotic nose, elegant body and finesse style all stack it up as being the best “affordable” (i.e. under $40/bottle) Zin, period.  For me only, of course.

   For those keeping score at home, here are the competition results from the three major tastings, and in each of these three tastings I BLINDLY picked the Annette’s Reserve as my #1 favourite pick (further note that we never had the Annette in a major tasting except these three times):

   20081010: Zinfandel, Tier II

   Ridge Lytton Springs California 2005 $32
   St. Francis Pagani Vineyard Reserve Sonoma Valley 2004 $35
   Rosenblum Annette’s Reserve Redwood Valley 2005 $32
   Ridge Pagani Ranch California 2006 $48
   A. Rafanelli Dry Creek Valley Sonoma County unfiltered 2006 $38

   Bad Man #1: Rosenblum Annette’s Reserve 2005
   Full tasting notes here.

   20081024: Zinfandel, Tier I

   Turley Cellars Hayne Vineyard Napa Valley 2005 $100
   Lamborn Family Napa Valley Howell Mountain Proprietor Grown “Vintage” 2005 $43
   Turley Cellars Hayne Vineyard Napa Valley 1996 $135
   Ridge Lytton Springs California Dry Creek Valley 2002 $37
   Martinelli Jackass Hill Vineyard Russian River Valley 2002 $200
   Martinelli Jackass Hill Vineyard Russian River Valley 1996 $220
   Rosenblum Annette’s Reserve Redwood Valley 2005 $30

   Bad Man #1: Rosenblum Annette’s Reserve 2005
   Full tasting notes here.

   20090320: Zinfandel, Tier I, mk ii, affordable

   Rosenblum Cellars Snows Lake Vineyard Lake County 2005 $30
   Rosenblum Cellars Harris Kratka Vineyard Alexander Valley 2006 $34
   Rosenblum Cellars Monte Rosso Vineyard Sonoma Valley Reserve 2006 $40
   Rosenblum Cellars Annette’s Reserve Redwood Valley 2005 $30
   Rosenblum Cellars Aparicio Vineyard Amador County 2005 $28
   Rosenblum Cellars Rockpile Road Vineyard Rockpile Upper Dry Creek Valley 2006 $32

   Bad Man #1: Rosenblum Annette’s Reserve 2005
   Full tasting notes here.

   So I’m very impressed with Annette and myself, cuz statistically to come away with such consistency must be nearly impossible – these other contenders were certainly no slouches – including a Heidi Barrett, a pair of Turley Haynes, and a pair of Martinelli Jackass Hill Vineyards – one of each of the latter two from back in the days of Helen Turley.

   Next up: I’d love to try the ‘05 Rosenblum Annette’s Reserve up against an ‘06.  Too bad I have no ‘05, and I don’t know when the ‘06 will hit the shelves…

3. 

   Hamakko
   05/04/2009 at 5:32 am Permalink

   Looks like an awesome tasting! Was it just the two of you for 6 bottles? Damn. I gotta move back to the states…

4. 

   tally ho
   05/04/2009 at 1:37 pm Permalink

   Great idea! Let me know when to set a place for you; you’re always welcome.

   ~th

5. 

   badman
   06/04/2009 at 2:11 pm Permalink

   Just to make a point here – the number of people has nothing to do with the number of bottles in a wine tasting.  One isn’t blind.  Two is too much a duality; you can too easily deduce too much – like playing a game of Hearts with two people.  Three – starts to become interesting, but really you can’t get a good representation across the spectrum.  Four is the bare minimum.  Five is good.  Six is beginning to do the subject justice.  7 and 8 are ideal, because too many becomes too demanding on the palette.  Too few and you’re having to re-purchase more bottles because you’ve had to split the tasting up into multiple events.  And then what if the tasters don’t agree on which wine to promote to that next tasting?  Oh no, we’ve become pros at this – your imperative is to taste all contenders in the same sitting, or you’re really not able to correctly compare them at all.  Note that none of that has anything to do with the number of tasters at the tasting.  That factor has to do with depth for each bottling.  In other words if you have 4 people, you’ll need two bottles of each, 7 people three bottles of each, and so on.

   Anyway, come on over!

« Downloading Music Illegaly – a message to SLAG

Sideways maybe isn’t quite so evil after all »