Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Another Winery on the Mornington Peninsula - Paringa Estate

The wineries on the Mornington Peninsula close at 5 PM and as we paid for our non-wine purchase at Port Phillip Estate that witching hour was fast approaching. There was only one thing to be done, we would have to ask for directions to the next winery, Paringa Estate. This young winery was established by the McCall’s in 1985 with the first vintage made in 1988. Their wines are made from both Estate and Mornington Peninsula fruit by Lindsay McCall. Fortunately Paringa Estate, we were informed, was just down the road. “On the left. Just down the road.“ I made sure to ask twice. And he was right, well almost, we had two left turns to make but it was close enough that we pulled into an empty parking lot at five minutes to five. Still this was going to be close! No time to visit any restrooms.

We need not have worried. Although the tasting bar was vacant, the restaurant still had tables occupied with diners admiring the view and in a couple of cases each other. And even though all the staff were in cleanup mode no one seemed to be a hurry, especially the guy behind the wine bar. Even so we thought that maybe we shouldn’t overstay our welcome, so we’d just do the reds. But as I perused the line-up of bottles it was obvious that the Reserve level wines were no where to be seen. This was unfortunate because the 2003 Reserve Shiraz was only the second release of this special barrel selection of Shiraz, and I’d been looking forward to tasting it. I’d even ignored the fact that one email to Paringa had been bounced back and a second try had failed to raise a reply. The wine might just be worth being ignored. But I guess I was going to have to put Paringa Estate down as another winery that pretty much ignores the enthusiastic amateur. Still I could at least take my time getting notes on the reds that were on offer.

Writing tasting notes can have interesting effects on the people around you. In this case I didn’t even need to ask if it might be possible to taste the Reserve wines. As soon as I had finished jotting down notes on the Estate level wine and poured the rest of my glass into the spit bucket the guy behind the bar reached to his right and brought the hidden bottle into view, gave me a pour and then left the bottle so I could make notes from the label. OK, so some wineries only like to pour their best for folks they think are serious about wine. Problem is that one of the best ways to get serious about wine is to taste the best stuff you can get your hands on and one of the least expensive ways to do that is to taste at wineries.

Long story short I’m all for wineries that let you taste the expensive stuff, even if you have to pay a few dollars to do so. Torbreck Vintners in the Barossa in a classic example. If Paringa Estate wants to hide their best wines from all but the most serious then they don't make make my list of wine taster friendly wineries. Which is unfortunate because they make some nice wines like the 2004 Paringa Peninsula Pinot Noir (screw cap) ($25AUD). Light cherry red in color with aromas of ripe cherries and a little nail polish. Soft and supple in the mouth with excellent carry of flavors onto the palate. A very pleasant wine. 2, 2, 3.8, 10.0 = 17.8/20, 89/100. 14.5% alcohol. The 2003 Paringa Estate Pinot Noir ($55AUD) was cherry red and very closed giving up only faint spices. But the quality shows in the excellent mouth feel, impeccable balance, and finely boned structure. 2, 2, 3.6, 10.3 = 17.9/20, 90/100. 13.7% alcohol. Its expensive big brother, the 2004 Paringa Reserve Pinot Noir ($90AUD) also cherry red is another shy wine with soft floral and spicy notes over smoky oak. Very well structured with excellent balance and great varietal definition. 2, 2, 3.9, 10.3 = 18.2/20, 91/100. 14.9% alcohol.

The three Shiraz wines seemed much riper than any other Shiraz tasted during our day on the peninsula. The 2003 Paringa Peninsula Shiraz (screw cap) ($25AUD) was cherry red with pink edge in color and gave aromas of pepper and rich tomato paste. Medium to full bodied it was rich and ripe with blackberry and pepper on the palate. Nicely structured with firm tannins and pleasant length to the finish. Surely the best value. 2, 2, 4.0, 10.1 = 18.1/20, 90/100. 13.4% alcohol. Somewhat unusual for cool climate was the 2003 Paringa Estate Shiraz ($45AUD) (40% New Fench Troncais Oak). Also cherry red with pink edge it gave a hint of chocolate over ripe jammy flavors. Medium weight, with the juicy acidity just a touch overdone, it was not as structurally sound as the other wines. The finish was supported by firm tannins. 2, 2, 4.0, 9.8 = 17.8/20, 89/100. 13.7% alcohol. The 2003 Paringa Reserve Shiraz ($70AUD) (100% New French Troncais Oak) was cherry red with red edge. The aromas are of red and black fruits, and again light chocolate. Nicely balanced, with the flavors carrying well onto the palate and supported by firm tannins it finishes with a slight bitterness. 2, 2, 4.1, 9.9 = 18/20, 90/100. 13.7% alcohol.

Chocolate in cool climate Shiraz? I cannot tell a lie, that is what I smelt in the Estate and Reserve Shiraz wines. Well 2003 did have extremely warm and dry conditions that would have allowed Shiraz to achieve more ripeness and concentration. Before we left I snapped up a bottle of the Estate Shiraz to drink later just to make sure.

Saturday, February 25, 2006

Something to Crow About?

Over the last couple of years I’ve noticed a group of crows that congregate along our street. They seem to show a great deal of interest in the large macadamia nut tree in the front yard. Today in the San Diego Union Tribune an article notes the boom in local crow numbers.

What has this got to do with wine? The article includes a photo by Don Kohlbauer of the Union Tribune which shows crows blanketing a vineyard northeast of Ensenada in Baja California, Mexico, every night at sunset last fall. Almost every post in the vineyard has a crow happily perched upon it. Happy until I guess someone from Crow Busters turns up! The interesting thing about crows and vineyard posts, according to the Crow Buster forum, is that they use the posts to congregate. Judging from the Union tribune photo and the photo on the Crow Busters forum this looks like a common, if potentially suicidal, activity for crows. Whether the crows constitute a serious threat to a vineyard is unclear. Although their diet does include fruit, it is quite varied. Still if you are a vigneron who wakes up every morning to crows occupying all the posts in your vineyard I think you might have cause for concern. If that is the case! Who you gonna call?

Monday, February 20, 2006

Palate Uniformity

I’m not sure why I have so little confidence in the idea of palate calibration. It may have something to do with the variety of individual tasting abilities I have witnessed at numerous tastings over the last 30 or more years. Couple that experience with the increasing scientific knowledge on the complexity of taste and smell receptors and uniformity would appear to be the exception rather than the rule among wine tasters.

I was reminded again about just how different we can all be at a recent tasting of Italian wines; my notes on that tasting should appear some time soon. As usual the tasting was done single blind but during the tasting we were supplied with tasting notes from various critics on a number of the wines. At these events there are almost always a few people who will try during the tasting to pair the wines against the tasting notes, usually with quite poor results. I find it hard enough to record my own impression without seeing if I can match what someone else has written. Once we had tasted through the wines, rated them, voted for our best wines, and the wines’ identities were revealed, the discussion among a few of us turned to just how different our perceptions of the wines were compared to the supplied notes. The differences in the descriptors used were so great that jokes were made about how professional wine critics come up with their tasting note descriptions!

As with any tasting, the voting for the best wines among the 10 wines tasted varied considerably. While there were several clear favorites, and wines that were favored by none, the middle ground was a mixed bag. Even among the agreement that existed there was far from consensus. Such diversity of opinion usually, but not always, reflects upon the experiences of the tasters present.

Just how variable can a group of tasters be? The best examples I have found are those from the Palate Calibration Exercises (PCE) on Tom Cannavan’s Wine Pages. The idea behind the PCE was for forum members on Tom’s site to taste the same wine and then record their score and impressions so that other members can then gauge their palate against those impressions; information that might prove useful when reading tasting notes on other wines from the same individuals. Two wines have been subject to PCE so far. In 2001 the 2000 Rosemount Shiraz Cabernet was tasted by 36 people from all over the world. I won’t go into the details as they are readily available on Tom’s site. It is sufficient to note that the scores vary widely (perhaps wildly may also be correct) from 6-18/20. A similar situation was found with the 2004 PCE in which 54 people scored the 2003 Louis Jadot Beaujolais Villages "Combe des Jacques". Again the scores covered a considerable range going from a low of 7 to a high of 18 out of 20.

It is very instructive to read the tasting notes that accompany the summaries provided with each of these two tasting exercises. Again I am not going to go into any detail here, mainly because there is a wealth of information there that would take considerable time to discuss. But it is quite easy to note that there is a range of experience among the tasters; some of the names may even be familiar. It is also obvious that some are not that experienced with scoring wines; this may have influenced the breadth of the scoring. What the PCE make clear, once again, is that palate variation is a reality. My palate is different from yours, Robert Parker’s, probably everyone’s. But does that really matter? If you and I are confident in our ability to identify the wines that we enjoy then where exactly is the problem? Why do we have to spend time trying to figure out whether we are calibrated to this or that critic?

Taster’s Choice

Before I get too many emails, cards and letters telling me how its what’s actually in a tasting note that counts and not the “score”, and that I should be “calibrating” my palate to some wine critic I thought I should perform a pre-emptive strike.

I’ve posted elsewhere on this idea of calibrating your palate to that of a wine critic. I’m not going to repeat that discussion here, but the dilemma is far from simple. Not only is it important to consider whether a wine critic’s description of a wine has meaning for you and whether you trust the critic to get his/her descriptors correct. But the biggest problem with this idea of calibrating your palate is that I have never seen any approach or description of the method that one would use to achieve it, beyond the glib advice to find a critic whose palate matches your own! How do you match palates? What aspects of the wine need to be compared? Are some aspects more important than others? How many of the individual aspects of a wine need to be identified by two tasters in order for a match to be achieved? How many wine critics should you try to compare with yourself?

I rarely see extensive comparisons of tasting notes from wine critics, so how do we even know that their palates are consistently different for accurate calibration to be attempted? Perhaps I shouldn’t be too adamant on this point. There seem to be endless comparisons between wine critic X with Robert Parker or vice versa.

Even so the idea that one wine critic may be more attuned to your tastes than any other can be tested in a rudimentary way by simply recording a tasting note and comparing it with said wine critics. In the interests of time and space I have selected a single wine in order to compare the description of four different wine critics to see what similarities, or differences, exist in the description of a wine. There is no reason why you can’t do this yourself with as many wines as you want.

The wine is Wayne Dutschke’s 2002 St Jakobi’s Shiraz (Barossa Valley).

My tasting note is from our visit to Dutschke Wines on December 13, 2004. I noted that the 2002 St Jakobi Shiraz was a dark cherry, and chocolate just exploded out of that glass! The wine had big rich blackberry flavors, but with a soft and elegant entry and wonderful balance. You didn’t have to wait around for the wine to hit your palate in bits and pieces; it was seamless, wonderfully integrated, with a lengthy finish (2, 2, 4.3, 10.5 = 18.8; 15% alcohol). For those who are counting an 18.8 out of 20 is a 94 on the 100 point sale.

The other tasting notes are:
Vibrant mix of black and red fruits, perfectly integrated vanillin oak and fine, ripe tannins. Elegant style. Rating 92. Drink 2012. James Halliday Wine Companion 2005.

…………..This wine is bang on the money: fruit expressive, laced with coffee oak but not excessively so, full of heart-felt blue and black and red berry fruit, and ripped with choc-mint flavour. If anything it’s a pass too heavy on both the mint and the alcohol-but its great drinking. Drink: 2004-2012. 91. Campbell Mattinson Winefront Monthly Collected Reviews 2002-20005.

…………….Layered and full-bodied, with notes of expresso roast, creosote, blackberries, currants, licorice, and pepper, this rich, full-throttle classic Barossa Shiraz can be consumed now and over the next 10-12 years. 92 points. Robert Parker, Jr.’s The Wine Advocate. Issue 155. (10-25-04).

Ripe and well shaped, with cherry, berry, plum, mineral and licorice that sail on. Just enough juicy acidity, with integrated oak and refined tannins. 94 Harvey Steiman. Wine Spectator October 15, 2005.

Now an initial run though these notes might see some saying that all reviewers find the wine to be excellent, so what is the problem? But this is not about the general assessment, or score, given to the wine this is about the description of the wine from aromas to taste. The description of aromas shows clear similarities and differences. The differences are Mattinson’s mint and alcohol, Parker’s currents, creosote, and pepper, and Steiman’s plum and mineral. Such differences in detection of aromas is not unusual among a group of tasters. Why such differences occur is not completely known. Some of the difference is physiological, that is, some people can smell better than others. But studies have shown that very few of us can smell more than a few aromas.

What about the other aspects of wine, its acidity and tannins? What about balance and integration of the components? Well again there are some similarities and differences. For me the wine is integrated as a whole, while Halliday and Steiman have integrated oak; oak is only a single component albeit an external one that does need to be integrated. In contrast I have an elegant entry, Halliday is more effusive calling the Dutschke an elegant style. These are very significant differences in the use of both integrated and elegant. Balance is only used once!

In truth all five assessments are quite different, although perhaps Steiman and Halliday are somewhat similar. But we come back to the real question. How do you choose one (or more) of these as a calibrator? For me I can only pick my own tasting note as the other four are too different from mine. The naysayers will argue that you can’t base the selection of a calibrator on just one wine. My question to these individuals is how many wines are enough? And what characteristics of the tasting note am I to base my selection on? I have a sneaking suspicion that if you rigorously compare tasting notes of multiple wine critics to your own for a number of wines you will continue to find differences and those differences will not be consistent.

Thursday, February 16, 2006

You are What You Drink and Eat.

Unhealthy alcohol drinking patterns may go hand-in-hand with unhealthy eating habits, according to a new study by researchers at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Examining diet quality of individuals who drink any kind of alcoholic beverage, researchers found that people who drink the largest quantities of alcohol — even infrequently — have the poorest quality diets. Conversely, people who drink the least amount of alcohol — regardless of drinking frequency — have the best quality diets. A report of the findings appears in the February 15, 2006 issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology.

More here.

Saturday, February 11, 2006

Wine Scoring – Seems Simple Enough To Me

The February/March 2006 issue of Gourmet Traveller Wine landed in our mail box yesterday. In addition to the magazine was a pocket-sized Tasting Notebook produced in association with Penfolds. Its an interesting little booklet with an introduction by Peter Gago, Penfolds Chief Winemaker and tasting notes on several of the Bin numbered Penfold wines. Gago comments that 2004 has a couple of firsts for Penfolds, one being “the first time that Penfolds has released a white wine in the Bin range”. I had to check that. According to my Rewards of Patience (4th Ed.) Reserve Bin whites were made in 1994 (Bin 94A Chardonnay, released 1997), 1995, (Bin 95A Chardonnay, released 1999), and 1998 (Bin 98A Chardonnay, unreleased as of May 2000). I guess what Peter means is 2004 is the first release of a white wine with a fixed Bin number.

But I digress. The notebook also includes a number of pages where the enthusiastic wine drinker can jot down tasting notes, which seems not unreasonable for a Tasting Notebook. You can record the identity of the Wine, Vintage, Price, Value for Money, Tasted Where, and then wax lyrical on the ethereal pleasures of the bottles’ contents. You can also make note of the food you might have eaten. And you can score the wine, and here is where considerable thought must have gone into this little booklet. Scoring requires a simple tick in one (or perhaps more) of the following four boxes – OUTSTANDING, EXTREMELY GOOD, VERY GOOD, or GOOD.

I’ve been known to sit and stare at various scoring systems and this one was no different. When I have been observed doing this its often been concluded that the visual concentration observed indicates deep, deep thought. But my mental state often depends upon the scoring system under review. Those closest to me know that the glazed expression can sometimes be closely akin to catatonia – I’m there, I’m just not responding.

I responded to the scoring system in the Gourmet Traveller Wine Tasting Notebook. Let’s not beat about the bush, or in this case vine. Wines are made to be scored, they need to be scored. If they could talk, they would tell you how important it is to them to be scored, to be scored by important people, to be scored often, and for the scores to be big, really, really big! Eighty-five is better than any thing less, ninety better still, ninety-five and you have really scored. But 100 is perfect. Still OUTSTANDING seems quite effusive, certainly better than GOOD. Well that is as long its accepted as the best descriptor available, and EXTREMELY GOOD accepted as the next level down. What about if you want to use stupendous, exceptional, incomparable, unrivaled, matchless, or any number of other descriptors. The limit is bounded by the extent of your vocabulary.

No, there are only four verbal descriptors in the Gourmet Traveller Wine Tasting Notebook scoring system, you can’t use more. Why not? That is the problem with verbal descriptors, or any non-numerical scoring system for that matter. Their greatest meaning is most often for the person using the system. And one of the problems with wine critics is that they need to be seen to be different, so there are a lot of unique scoring systems. True, numerical scoring systems are not perfect but there is no ambiguity in a numerical score. But hey, if you find less confusion between two puffs, recommended, three stars and extremely good, versus 18/20, 90/100, or 88/100 then more power to you.

Of course there are those who believe that wines should not be given numerical scores, or perhaps not even judged or compared at all. I find it an interesting thought as I stare, rather more blankly than usual, out my window into the canyon below.

Oh, and one last point. What happens when you taste a wine that is less than GOOD? I guess like most wine critics you don’t make a note of it in the Gourmet Traveller Wine Tasting Notebook.

Monday, February 06, 2006

Port Phillip Estate and Kooyong (Mornington Peninsula)

To get to the Port Phillip Estate cellar door you have to make your way up a long driveway. But first you have to find Port Phillip Estate. That involves more than just a little bit of back and forth along the roads of Mornington Peninsula. After Moorooduc Estate we were not under any illusions about how easy it would be to find another winery. After going the wrong way at least once we finally pulled up outside the cellar door just as a brief rain shower began falling. That made the now necessary visit to the restrooms more of a sprint than a leisurely stroll. But the few moments necessary for relief saw the rain off and allowed a comfortable amble into a very open and airy tasting room that overlooks rows of vines.

Both vineyards are very new with Port Phillip Estate having been established in 1987 and Kooyong even later in 1995. Neither winery seemed greatly excited when I proposed a visit by email but I was at least informed that the Kooyong wines could be tasted at the Port Phillip Estate cellar door. Consequently we only got to taste the wines that were being poured rather than all the wines that are produced by these two wineries. The wines tasted were poured by a young fellow whose family owns a small bottle shop. He told us he wants to get into the wine business and sees his stint at the cellar door as a step in that direction. He was at least attentive and talkative.

First up was the 2004 Port Phillip Estate Pinot Noir ($32AUD). Cherry red with pink edge. Slightly closed, it yielded notes of spice and white pepper. On the palate the wine was soft and supple and well balanced with the flavors carrying well onto the palate. 2, 2, 3.6, 10.0 = 17.6/20, 88/100. Next was the 2001 Port Phillip Estate Shiraz ($20AUD). Cherry red with a pink edge. This had aromas of menthol, oak and red current. In the mouth the wine had a soft entry backed up by nice firm tannins but lacked any real complexity. 2, 2, 3.2, 9.5 = 16.7/20, 84/100. The younger 2003 Port Phillip Estate Shiraz ($32AUD) was a deeper cherry in color with pepper, spice and blackberry aromas. It was soft and supple with pleasant carry of flavors onto the palate, juicy acidity, but marred by a little bitterness to the finish. 2, 2, 3.8, 9.8 = 17.6/20, 88/100.

The only Kooyong wine available for tasting was their 2000 Kooyong Pinot Noir ($37AUD). This is apparently the second vintage, and it was quite impressive. Cherry red in color with a pink edge. Rich, ripe and bold, it had intense spice and smoke aromas. On the palate it was medium weight with firm astringency, nicely balanced and well structured, and with good length to the finish. 2, 2, 4.0, 10.1 = 18.1/20, 90/10

Port Phillip Estate Wines can be obtained from Southern Hemisphere Wine. Kooyong is available through the Australian Premium Wine Collection, although the APWC web site has yet to catch up with that information. We didn’t buy any wines at the cellar door but we did see Glen Green’s Essential Wine Tasting Guide with the Port Phillip Estate logo, and quickly snapped one up.

Wednesday, February 01, 2006

Top 100 Wine Blogs

We are pleased! Shiraz - where you are right now - rates 16th and Tasting Notes rates 45th in the Top 100 Wine Blogs. The rating are based on standardized composite logarithmic scores based on multiple relative link popularity rankings from more than a half-dozen top search engines, as well as page rank and web rank scores. As such, they are general quantitative ratings of popularity and do not measure quality of content or frequency of updates, which can be found below. Quality and frequency - it sounds like some sort of measure of sexual adequacy!

Wine Blogging #18

Vintage Wines LTD, San Diego, California.
My first WBW and I have to praise a wine shop! Good thing I’m used to giving my favorite wine shop plenty of exposure, although it is usually on my other wine blog Tasting Notes.

Why continue to play favorites? Why not branch out and look for another wine shop in San Diego that feels the love? San Diego and surrounding counties are full of wine shops and wine bars doing great things for wine drinkers, just check out the events listed on Local Wine Events.Com. And then check out places like Wine Street , Carlsbad Wine Merchants , 57 Degrees , The Wine Encounter, Bacchus Wine Market & Tasting Room, Wine Sellar & Brasserie, Varietals Wine Merchants - the list goes on and on.

Even with such a large listing Vintage Wines has to be at the top. This wine shop, hidden away in a small mall on Miramar Road, is special to me for several reasons. First, I have along history with them. This goes back to some time in the mid-1980’s when I returned to California after I had returned to Australia; its not as confusing as it sounds, we can talk about it later. At that time I heard that there was this wine shop that had tastings on a Saturday morning. Once I started to attend the tastings I found that they also had a reasonable selection of Australian wines, long before Aussie wine was fashionable in the USA. Second, over the years their selection of Australian wines has grown so that they always have an excellent selection of wines on hand in all prices ranges from Yellow Tail to Torbreck. Third, they offer wine at attractive prices, very attractive prices. Fourth, the staff is knowledgeable, friendly, and diverse in their tastes. Very diverse! Fifth, they have a wide range of wines. American, Australian, French, German, Italian, New Zealand, Spanish, etc. And yes they have shelf talkers, and they will list the points – although for Australian wines you are just as likely to get Halliday’s scores as you are Parker’s.

Sounds like just another good wine shop? Vintage Wines is much more than that. One small example is the email conversations I have had over the last two days with Steve Frederick, the store manager. Yesterday I asked if they would be getting any of the John Duval Entity Shiraz. He replied that he would find out if his distributor is getting any of the wine. Then today I came across the press release confirming the rumors that Paterno Wines would be distributing Two Hands wines. Chasing up that news I rediscovered that Yabby Lake wines are also handled by Paterno. I’d tasted and really liked Yabby Lake on our last visit to Australia and so I fired off an email to Steve about availability. The reply came back with information on estimated pricing, vintages, and availability, and the little added extra that they also have Heathcote Estate Shiraz available – Tod Dexter is winemaker for both Yabby Lake and Heathcote Estate and I’d tasted wines from both vineyards with him last December. Money and wine will soon be changing hands.

Another of the features of Vintage Wines is the variety of wines available for tasting. You can always drop by for a taste from the Wine Bar (except Sunday). Changed every Friday the Bar consists of 5 whites, 6 reds, and 1 dessert wine offered by the taste or glass. The Wine Bar is set up by Bob Bartnett. Bob has been at Vintage for as long as I’ve been going there. Once the owner of a Mustang with the license plate ZINFAN, Bob knows and loves wine, especially Old World. If you are into over-oaked, high alcohol wines don’t ask Bob for recommendations. When Zinfandel was the topic of a Saturday tasting Bob would run it. I pretty soon figured out that we had different palates, but even though I tried I could never get my ordering of the wines to jibe with his. I could almost always come close when John Lindsey, the owner, ran a tasting but Bob could always fool me.

Those semi-structured Saturday tastings that initially drew me to Vintage Wines have long gone. Fortunately they have been replaced by more value orientated tasting schedule that can be done at your leisure. The $2 tasting usually consists of 5 wines under $15/bottle that are considered to provide the best bang for your dollar. The $5 tasting will get you 6 wines based around a varietal, style, or country of origin. Both tastings last from 11AM to 3PM. It is not unusual to find me at a table surrounded by glasses from the $5 tasting as well as few selected tastes from the Wine Bar. If Miranda comes we will often bring some nibbles, as do many of the Saturday regulars.

An event I try not to miss is the monthly Third Thursday tasting. This is a structured event run between 6.30-8.00PM. There are usually 8 top quality wines that are tasted single blind (i.e. you know the identity of the wines but not their order). Votes are taken for 1st, 2nd and 3rd placed wine, and then the identities are revealed. After that discussion and excuses ensue! For the cost of a reasonable bottle of wine (between $40-60) you can compare some outstanding examples of the winemakers art. The folks that attend these tasting can be quite diverse and I have often sat at tables with both novice and expert alike. The discussions can be interesting.

That’s Vintage Wines. If you are ever in San Diego, especially on a Saturday, drop by and spend $7!

No I don’t have a tasting note to go with this WBW commentary. But if you link to Tasting Notes you will find a bunch of notes on $5 and Third Thursday tastings from Vintage Wines.

Vintage Wines LTD, 6904 Miramar Road, Suite 101 San Diego, CA 92121
Web: http://shop.vintagewinessd.com/index.htm,
Tel: (858) 549-2112, Fax: (858) 549-0557, Email: info@vintagewinessd.com
Storefront Hours: Sun & Mon 10AM-6PM, Tues 10AM-7PM, Wed through Fri 10AM-9PM, Sat 10AM-6PM