Well, where/what are these Cali pinots that are Burg-like? They are not the Bearwallow and Costalina cited in the OP since both are very clearly Californian to me.
I started my Pinot odyssey in Sonoma, and tried all the west of the west type pinots… Peay, Ceritas, Littorai, Rhys, Windgap, Cobb, Mount Eden and on and on. The only one I am still a buyer of (at retail) is Littorai. And not because it’s Burg like, but because it is sui generis and I enjoy its flavor profile in and of itself.
I wish I could find Cali pinots that scratch the Burgndy itch – so much easier in terms of access and provenance. So which ones should I try that I haven’t?
I am not so confident that I could blind-taste Oregon pinot vs Burg correctly…in fact, I’m sure I couldn’t do that.
I’ve seen the lines increasingly blurred with some of Jamie Kutch’s more recent PNs as well as a couple of Hirsch efforts. After aging some 04 Pey-Marin trois filles for several years, I’ve been quite surprised by the metamorphosis and oak integration. After dozens of Rhys/Alesia Pinots, I kept wondering how on earth someone could call them Burgundian…until the 07 and 08 Horseshoe, one was tasted in contrast to a ripe Jadot Corton-Perrieres.
Anyway…when it comes to new world, I’m an OR guy! Dildine is the Cali fanatic.
I had an 09 Windy Oaks “Cuvee” (SCM) at a dinner with friends the other night and it was really surprising. This is Windy Oaks low-end estate Pinot. At release (when I tend to drink them) these wines tend to be somewhat sweetish and oaky - very easy drinking. This wine had lost/integrated the oak and sweetness and gained a bit of weight. I always like the Cuvees, but never considered them to be particularly “serious.” This wine had begun to take on a little bit of that.
I mention this, because many high-end, age worthy CA Pinots are at an awkward stage right now. Take Rhys. I think these will greatly improve with age. Wine age … and vine age! The oldest Rhys I have is 06 Swan Terrace. In 06, I’m guessing that the vines were about six years old?
My expectation is that over the next decade, the perception of these wines will totally transform. I have a big bet on this and look forward to the verdict!
But this is really interesting. Now you’re moving the argument a little bit and saying that you think existing high end CA pinot bottlings like Rhys’ will improve with age and b) that the newer vintages will get better as the vines get older. Both these arguments (especially the first) are guesses --educated and informed guesses to be sure, but still guesses.
The wines are however not priced accordingly. Higher end Rhys now at $99 and regular at $69. That’s an expensive gamble. I thought one was supposed to be compensated for risk. In France you can pay in the $60s for something like the Jadot Ursules where the vines are already 35 years old and you are not guessing that the wines will have a graceful aging curve.
Correct Katrina - I am making an informed bet - it’s one I feel increasingly comfortable with, but it is a bet nonetheless. I fully expect an interesting and rewarding journey!
You can already see how wines like Arcadian age, and their SVD pinots can be purchased already with 6-12 years of age and often for $40-60. Arcadian pinots from the early 2000s are still very much on their way up. I often say that Arcadian was just ahead of its time, and it is already what we hope the bottles from many more expensive, more pursued wineries these days will eventually become.
Having said that, I agree with the comment earlier that if you want Burgundy, just buy Burgundy. There is a growing number of good producers in California blurring the lines and not conforming to the stereotype of California pinot as all about big fruit and lacking complexity, and I’m not sure you couldn’t fool some experienced tasters some of the time in a blind tasting lineup with these wines and Burgs, but it’s not really the point. As any vigneron in Burgundy would tell you, pinot should express the site and climate, and the site and climate in California for the most part is just different than in Burgundy, so you should get different wines. Up to you if you like them or if you don’t.
Lots of climatic and geologic variety in California Chris, from the RRV through the SCM, Santa Lucia Highlands, SRH, Anderson Valley and the true Sonoma Coast. Burgundy, by comparison is very homogeneous (in a good way, like Napa and Bordeaux are for Cabernet Sauvignon).
As a omnivonovore, can’t you find pleasure in all of these?
Chris beat me to it. I have seen people fooled in a blind tasting by Arcadians with age, more than once. People not only thought it was Burgundy, they thought it was very good Burgundy, possibly GC.
I used to think I could tell even the restrained style Cali pinots easily from Burgundy, but some experiences since (like tasting some 09 burgs that reminded me of Rhys) make me not so sure anymore. Katrina, I generally agree with you in preferring burgs generally, but I enjoy the Cali terroirs too, and the greater consistency in my opinion.
Thanks Chris and Alan for the Arcadian rec. Just picked up a bottle of the Arcadian 2001 Sleepy Hollow Monterey from K and L to try and out. Stay tuned, I guess.
And I do agree that some of the 2009 Burgundies have Cali like characteristics. In fact, in my CT note on the 2009 Croix Beaune Pertuisots, I wrote that this wine reminded me of Rhys (I was thinking of the Alpine). I don’t really want my Burgundy to taste like Cali, however. I’d prefer to find a CA pinot that is burg-like. That is harder, I think.
Anyway, looking forward to the Arcadian experiment.
The wines are however not priced accordingly. Higher end Rhys now at $99 and regular at $69. That’s an expensive gamble. I thought one was supposed to be compensated for risk. In France you can pay in the $60s for something like the Jadot Ursules where the vines are already 35 years old and you are not guessing that the wines will have a graceful aging curve.
Comparing it to finance, you can see some of these wines as equity in a start up. Upside is limitless. You are looking at it as if they are debt(a bond). Upside is limited and you should be compensated for risk. Not the same to buy stock in Uber(to name one) than to buy Argentinian Bonds. Sorry for the Finance analogy but could not come up with sometime better.
Thus, if Rhys can become a Cali DRC(please forgive the blasphemous hyperbole, just trying to make a point), $100 is actually not that much.
And your point is well taken that saying “California pinot” is probably even far broader than saying “French syrah,” for all the regions, climate zones, clones, styles, price points, etc. that it represents.
Katrina, good for you trying the 01 Sleepy Hollow. I don’t know how much you’ll love it, or whether you think it scratches your Burg itch at all, but given how earnest and open-minded of a wine lover you seem to be, I’d be shocked if you didn’t find it a worthwhile experiment at least. Please do post your impression, whatever it ends up being.
Another pretty obscure one you might look at is Clos Saron Home Vineyard pinot, particularly if you can find one with some age. The 06 that I had early this month could be a WOTY experience for me. If it interests you, look around for notes here and on CT, particularly from Keith Levenberg, who seems to be quite on top of this eccentric little producer in the Sierra Nevada foothills.
I wade into this with trepidation since I am clearly conflicted but against my better judgment here goes…
FWIW, I have rarely had a taster get above 50% correct (a coin toss would do better) in a blind CA vs Burg tasting. Admittedly I choose wines that are intended to fool people but it is possibly to accomplish this with highly sought after Burgs and without using 2009.
Since I have done this often, here are a few general observations:
-Most people key on oakiness as a CA Pinot trait
-Burglovers are often shocked at how fruity (and often oaky) the most sought after Grand Crus are in their youth. Generally people don’t have much experience opening them young.
-Many blind tastings are setup for easy tells. Meaning aged Burgundy vs young CA Pinot or cold vintage Burgundy vs hot vintage CA Pinot etc.
-When compared to CA Pinot, it is much easier to differentiate low end Burgs than it is high end. Like some posters above, I find little value in the low end (and I am a card carying Burgophile!) but these more often fit the Burgundy stereotypes when young.
-Some CA Pinot styles are easily differentiated so my comments don’t span all styles
Here are my recommendations for a blind CA vs Burg tasting:
-use wines of similar age
-Use 1er or better Burgs, particularly Cote de Nuits
-Use AFWE (I can’t believe I used that term but need a shorthand) CA Pinots, particularly less oaked
-Use wines of similar vintage characteristics (ripe, less ripe vintages etc). CA does not have many vintages that compare to Burgundy’s coldest and wettest (I do enjoy 2007, 2008 etc but would concede that CA would be easier to recognize in this context). 2005 Burgundy is a good choice if you want to fool people
Or $100-200 Burgs compared against $50-75 California pinot.
Good post. I can see how the contrast is greater the lower you go down the price scale – most $20-30 type Burgs are far lighter in style and color than their California counterparts.
Mike, qualitatively and on average IMHO, Burgs are almost always lighter in style than Cali PNs. There are many individual exceptions. Not sure how you’d measure it? Opacity? Specific gravity? Staining/reflectance? Alcohol %?
It’s blasphemy…but my experience with a couple of younger DRC’s is that they reminded me of fairly oaky structured Cali Pinot! I’m no DRC expert, but my experience is that the trajectories are distinctly different. DRC seems fairly reluctant to budge and then takes a unique direction at 10 - 15+ years. YMMV.
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
