Extended
tasting note 6
Wynns
Coonawarra Cabernet Sauvignon 1998
I’m
becoming increasingly disenchanted with tasting notes that serve
merely to list descriptors of a particular wine. Yes, we are trying to
tell people what a wine tastes like (by ‘taste’, we mean both
taste and smell, and their combination with other sensory inputs, of
course). But beyond this, we are sharing a perceptual experience.
Don’t let the word ‘perceptual’ put you off, though – I’m
not about to launch into a tirade of half-baked amateur philosophy (I
save this for other places on this site). What I mean is we are trying
to share what is inside our heads when we taste wine. It’s a
seamless experience that can’t easily be reduced to words.
I’m drinking a Wynns 1998 Coonawarra Cabernet
Sauvignon as I write. I have a ready for drinking rack, and this Wynns
is one I put there a few weeks ago, not expecting much from it,
although I have had good experiences with the 1991 and 1993 cellared
for a decade each. But with wine, mood guides me a great deal, and I
guess I’d lost enthusiasm for this particular bottle. This comes
back to the rather vexed issue of choosing the right bottle to open on
any particular night. I’m mood driven in my drinking, and despite
having a reasonably large selection of wines stored at home I often
find it really difficult to decide what to open, and when.
It’s Monday night, and I’m working writing assorted
bits and pieces up. It’s part work, part fun: I enjoy what I do
quite a bit, and anticipating an evening with the laptop and some
notes is quite a comforting thought. Normally, I’ll not open
anything too special to accompany my work, especially on a Monday, but
the Wynns is proving a very respectable drink indeed.
Earlier on, putting one of my sons to bed I read him
Goldilock and the Three Bears – his choice – and was struck by the
comparative porridge tasting undertaken by Goldilock. Father Bear’s
porridge was too salty, while Mother Bear’s was too sweet; it was
only Baby Bear’s palate that matched Goldilock’s. It’s
interesting that different taste preferences are such a common
occurrence that they even make it into children’s fairy tales. The
nature of individual differences in taste is one that fascinates me;
I’ve just written an overlong piece on this for Harpers.
I feel the wine trade has been slow to recognize this phenomenon, and
a lot of confusion has resulted from the assumption that we are all
sharing the same experience when we taste a bottle of wine.
Back to the Wynns. The reason I’m enjoying this wine
so much tonight is threefold. First, it out-performs my expectations.
Each of us brings expectations to our wine drinking experience, and if
these aren’t met because they are too high the wine can disappoint
irrespective of its merits. Second, it shows typicity – or terroir,
if you like. I can recognize it as a Coonawarra Cabernet, which brings
me immense satisfaction. I’m getting blackcurrant fruit with a
minerally, slightly chalky core. It’s savoury and quite well
defined, with sweetness of fruit at one end of the flavour spectrum
and slightly tarry, spicy, gravelly bite at the other. There’s quite
a bit of mouth drying tannin, too. I’d spot this as Australian when
tasted blind, but I hope that its restraint and minerality would put
it firmly in Coonawarra for me. Third, it’s a wine that’s in
balance. There isn’t too much of any one component, and specifically
oak and alcohol which I find problematic in some new world reds.
This isn’t a great wine, but it’s a pretty good
one, and considering that it cost around £7 when I bought it, it’s
a fine value. If you have some stashed away, then I’d recommend
drinking it over the next decade: there’s no hurry to drink this up,
and it’s just started drinking well. A score? A solid 90, if you ask
me.
Other
ETNs:
Grünhaus;
Roc des Anges; Gaillard;
Veratina; Arturo;
Wynns; Drystone;
Foundry and Columella; Meruge;
Foillard Morgon; Clonakilla
Back to top
|