Varietal focus: Riesling

Set up
Hooray for Riesling! And looking at past examination, there’s an extremely good chance that it will show up again soon! I’ve tried to pull dry examples today – two from the old world and two from the new world.

The Wines
* Leitz ‘Eins Zwei Dry’ Riesling Trocken 2008 (Rheingau) $15, 12% abv
* Domaine Mittnacht ‘Les Fossiles’ Riesling 2009 (Alsace) $20, 13.5% abv
* A to Z Riesling 2007 (Oregon) $15, 12.5% abv
* Hay Maker Riesling 2009 (Waipara) $10, 12.5% abv


The Leitz had a noticeable CO2 prickle on the palate, which led me to think it was a new world wine using CO2 to heighten acidity. This was also the most dry of the bunch. The CO2 and dryness were my clues to support that it was new world, Oregon. Wrong! The flavors were some of the least intense in the bunch, which should have been my clue to this wine coming from the coolest climate. There was also a yeasty creaminess about the wine… I wasn’t quite sure what to make of that.


Mittnacht was easier to pick to me. Its appearance was a touch more intense than the other three, something I have seen before in Alsatian wines. It was off-dry, but barely so. Smoky on the nose, and then the palate was focused and medium intensity of lime, sour apples, and sour pears. The more extracted appearance, the sour nature of the flavors, the intensity and focus of those flavors lead me straight to old world, Alsace.



The A to Z was strongly petrol on the nose (and turned out to be the oldest wine in the flight at four years). This wine had the highest perceived RS in the flight, and was also the lightest in body. I focused on those two bits of data to conclude old world, Germany. What I chose to ignore was the fruit basket that appeared on the palate. My notes said lime, apple, pear, strawberry, tropical (?). Cool climates don’t usually do that, duh.



Finally, the Hay Maker was petrol and pears and spicy on the nose. Just having a basket of aromas on the nose got me thinking new world. The palate again, lots of juicy fruits to choose from propped up with a backbone of acidity. The fruits were not precise, but lovely, and that also led me to new world, New Zealand. Tech sheet: 24g/l RS.


Observations
Colors, with the exception of the Mittnacht were similar, and that turned into a valuable clue. Aromatics overall were not as important clues as were the palates: dry, off-dry, and by how much? Intensity of flavors. Muddled or precise. Those were the most helpful to get me to new world or old world. All of the wines had similar medium- to high-acidity and medium alcohol. The wines were similar in body as well, but I misread the CO2 in the German wine.

I also learned I should really look for the teach sheets before I conduct the tasting. It’s annoying not having the information right here to help guide what I’m trying to learn.

So overall, two right, two wrong. I’ll take it.

Latterals: Sangiovese versus Tempranillo

Set Up
Don’t laugh. I get Sangiovese and Tempranillo mixed up in blind tastings. A lot. If I were being really honest? I would throw Grenache in this party as well. And I’ve confused an extracted Pinot Noir for Chianti more than once. But I’m gonna try to tackle this one at a time.

The wines
Bibi Graetz ‘Casamatta’ 2009 (Toscana IGT) 12.5%, $11
Viña Herminia 2009 (Rioja) 14%, $12

The Casamatta has medium intensity of bright dark fruits and some florals. The palate was dry with alcohol in check and a medium+ acid with medium+ rustic tannins. The flavors were dark fruits, medium ripeness, and a sour savory tomato character.

This wine is 100% Sangiovese from young vineyards in different zones around Tuscany (including Sieci, Siena and Maremma) and is fermented (including MLF) in steel tanks before being transferred to barriques where it remains until bottling (I haven’t found an indication of how long that is).

Viña Herminia was much more muted on the nose with a real dry earthiness along with dark fruits. And again, the palate was more earthy and plumy than the Sangiovese. Tannins were higher here but were finer and sour notes carrier through the medium+ finish.

I had more trouble finding information on this wine, despite the winery’s slick website. It seems like there could be some Garnacha in this wine (up to 15%), but it could also be 100% Tempranillo. The winery also employs both American and French oak, but I don’t have the specifics on this wine.

Observations
Both wines displayed plums and a spiciness, but the Tempranillo was more muted and earthy. Both had a similar medium intensity of ruby color, but the Tempranillo was slightly more concentrated. Both were bone dry on the palate with similar medium+ acidity.

There were differences in their aromatic profile was stronger as flavor profiles: more savory/sour for the Sangiovese and more dried/earthy for the Tempranillo.

Both had almost the same amount of tannins, but the nature of those tannins were different: I felt the Sangiovese tannins were much more rustic over the finer (but still rather burly compared to say, a Pinot Noir) tannins of the Sangiovese.

Overall, I’m sad to report that I’m not sure this tasting help cement anything about these two varietals to me. I wonder if it’s a price point issue. Maybe I won’t be so cheap next time...

Quality flight: Mendoza Malbecs

This beat-up palate is brought to you by allergy season.

Set-up
While Malbecs from Argentina don’t show up often on the actual Master of Wine exams, I thought this would be a good place to practice quality levels within the same region. Malbec is not native to Argentina, but the area is more well-known for the grape than in France, where the grape has historically had to make up at least 70% of the wines of Cahors. Before the winter freeze 1956, Malbec used to play a more significant part in the blends of Bordeaux and some research suggests that the clones used in Argentina are decedents from the Bordelais vines rather than from Cahors or the Loire.

Located in the fat west of the country, Mendoza is the largest and most-important wine-growing region in Argentina (about 70% of its annual production). Luján de Cuyo is a subregion within Mendoza that features higher altitudes and more temperate weather.

Without tasting, I would expect the wines to display ripe plums, dark fruits, perhaps some floral, but above all, ripe (not cooked) fruits clearly indicating New World. I would think the palate would show medium acid, but higher tannins. Basically, I think of Malbec as a Merlot with more going on with the palate – acid and grip. I would suspect that the Altos would be more about upfront fruit and a quick finish, the Felino to show more interesting things on the nose, and a more defined palate, and the Bramare to build upon that, perhaps displaying some minerality? Plus oak.

The wines
Altos Las Hormigas Malbec 2009 (Mendoza) $13, 14.2%
Felino ‘Viña Cobos’ Malbec 2009 (Mendoza) $20, 14.9%
Bramare ‘Viña Cobos’ Malbec 2008 (Luján de Cuyo) $39, 14.9%

(Note the Bramare is a shiner – the front label says Cabernet Sauvignon and the back label says Malbec. It is indeed a Malbec.)

The Altos showed pepper and plums and a smokiness at a medium intensity. The palate had firm tannins, medium(-) acid and a medium(-) finish, with the simple taste of sour dark fruits. Both the medium(-) finish and linear flavor profile indicates that this is a high-volume production wine, and the lowest in quality in the flight.

This Malbec is the “main production” wine according to the Altos Las Hormigas website. The grapes are from different sites, vinified separately before the final blend. Stainless steel fermentation and aged for three months in the vats with French and American oak insertstaves. Annual production: 700,000 bottles.

The Felino displayed more dark plums, a slight bit of vanilla (oak?) and dry earthiness and a slight burn from alcohol. The vanilla softened the impact of sour dark fruits on the palate, and firm tannins were still on display. The length was a bit longer here (medium) and were carried by the tannins and fruit, indicating a better quality wine.

American winemaker Paul Hobbs is a partner in the Viña Cobos Winery which produced both the Felino and Bramare.The wine is 100% Malbec. The vineyards are from the smaller appellations of Luán de Cuyo, Maipú, and Valle de Uco at an elevation of 2,300 to 3,770 feet, yielding 4.3 to 4.6 tons per acre. Fermented in stainless steel with a native MLF in barrel that took four months to complete. It was then aged eight months in American and French oak, 21% new. Annual production: 262,320 bottles.

The Bramare had an overt use of sweet vanilla oak with plums and a slight floral perfume. The use of oak could indicate a more expensive wine. The oak made the attack smooth and sweet but the palate of this wine had the highest impact of acids, tannins, and flavors of vanilla and plums. Despite intensity, there was nothing angular so the wine was in balance. The use of oak and the balanced and clear flavors on the palate shows that this is the highest quality wine in the flight.

Bramare’s fruit was from the prime subregion of Luán de Cuyo with an elevation of 3,000 to 3500 feet. Yields here are 2.0 to 3.1 tons per acre. Stainless steel fermentation with MLF in barrels with native yeasts completed in three months. Eighteen months in 22% new American and 15% new French oak, the balance in used oak. Unfined and unfiltered. I couldn't find production numbers.

Observations
On the second round, when I tasted them blind, there was a distinct yeasty character on the Felino that I didn’t pick up before. Lees stirring on a red wine in Mendoza? Maybe a result of the MLF? That was the factor that helped me decide between the Felino and the Altos (the sweet oak on Bramare gave it away quickly).

What surprised me from this tasting was that despite high alcohol, I didn’t perceive it as much on the palate. I’m not sure if that was due to the fact that they were all in the same zip code, the fact that I’m in the middle of allergy season and everything hurts anyway, or that it was all in balance. I wonder if there was more RS leftover to soften the blow and my damaged palate didn’t pick up on it this time around. May have to try a few of these again…

Duck confit at Flea Market Café

Ya know that restaurant you pass by in your neighborhood all the time and keep saying “it’s so cute – we should go there”? Flea Market Café is that place to me. I finally went in and not only is the space absolutely adorable, and it’s staffed with servers who care, but it has duck confit on the menu (what did you think this post was going to be about?) And not a crazy preparation, this little café serves simple classic French dishes, so the set is simply French fries and a green salad. Did I mention this place is about a two minute walk from my apartment?

All of my requirements have been met in order for this café to become “my” local restaurant.

Ok. Well.


The French fries were great – with just a few overcooked (which I dig) and seasoned perfectly. The food runner even asked me as my plate landed whether I prefer mayonnaise instead of ketchup (duh). The salad was well dressed, not over doused, not naked, with a simple vinaigrette.

Aaaaaaaand I should end my post there. The duck confit was meh. The saltiness was in check, and that’s about the best thing I can say. The skin was rendered completely out so no pockets of fat at the corners like I enjoy. The meat itself was dried out, and whatever caused it to toughen out so much also subtracted the slightly gamey ducky favor in the meat.

The wine list was brief and listed by varietal and wines were from France and the US. In addition, they had a bottle of Guigal Côtes du Rhône open when I was there that they offered by the glass.

I will return someday, because it is a charming space, prices were reasonable, and there were enough people in the restaurant on a quiet Monday night to suggest that they do serve good food (mussels seemed to be the popular dish that night). I just can’t recommend the duck confit.

Flea Market Café
131 Avenue A between St Marks Place and 9th St.