J, R and I headed down to Miami yesterday for an afternoon of New Zealand Pinot Noir with Kim Crawford. Now, I am a big fan of New Zealand Pinot - they have earthiness like Burgundy and candy-apple fruit like the Russian River Valley Pinots, but they never (ok, maybe not never) try to be something they're not. Kim set up a tasting of 5 regions of New Zealand Pinot's so we could taste the differences in the wines that NZ is producing - Marlborough (most consistent), Martinborough (nice), Central Otago (getting all the press for it's deep-colored, highly extracted earthiness), Waipara (Chambolle-Musigny like elegance), and Hawke's Bay (only 2 producers in the entire region...) And on to the tasting... Bubblegum? No... can't be... Yup. There it is again. Whole cluster fermentation. Oooooooooooh. Why not just suck it up and stop pretending and plant Gamay instead of the highly-expensive Pinot Noir? The Pinot's were ok, but as Kim described them as wines that the New Zealand wine producers would like to get people to just pop a bottle and drink, they fit that bill perfectly. Underwhelmed.
After a short break, an interesting tasting... 5 clones of Pinot Noir planted from the same vineyard, vinified the same (generally) way. UC Davis Pommard Clone 5 (the classic NZ Pinot Clone), Dijon Clone 114 (fermented with wild yeasts), Dijon Clone 115, Dijon Clone 667, and Dijon Clone 777 (the last 4 are from Morey-St.-Denis). I won't bore you (or myself) going through the differences, but there ARE differences! Very cool.
Kim made the comment that he thinks New Zealand Pinot Noir is 10 yrs behind Sauvignon Blanc... and I agree with him. The wines were ok, but not stunning.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment