In my brown bag group tonight, we had an interesting line-up:
1973 Ch. Montelena Sonoma Cabernet Autumnal claret notes in the nose (wet leaves, a trace of sweat). Fruit thinning a lot in the mouth, with a tart edge. The finish was downright acidic. Is it claret or old California cab? Seems a bit one-dimensional for Bordeaux. 84 for me. But clearly cabernet. I would guess this was acidulated; the acidity didn’t seem integrated at all.
1987 Sterling Three Palms Cabernet In the nose, clearly mature cabernet. In the mouth, it’s thinning a bit but there’s still a lot of nice fruit. Pretty tannic and some alcohol showing. Not terribly complex, but pleasant enough. 85/86 for me. Clearly cabernet based. (63% cab, 27% merlot, 10% cab franc)
2006 BV Tapestry Very oaky, very Californian. Raspberry jam on the nose. Zin, perhaps? Or syrah? In the mouth, ripe, raspberry jam, oodles of oak and a fair deal of alcohol. This wine seems made for Parker (“He’d wet his pants over this,” someone said), and I’m told he proclaimed the winery back on form based in part on this wine. But we’re stumped by the grape? Zin? Syrah? No one guessed cabernet. Happily, the 06 and 07 BV Rutherford, which are cheaper, are more balanced and taste like Napa cab. This is a points-chasing wine. If it were a zin, I’d be happy, but this isn’t what I want or expect when I buy a Napa cab. (Prices on this vary widely. In Westchester County alone, they range from $25 at Wine Connection in Pound Ridge and Rye Brook Wines in Port Chester to $50 at “If you can find a higher price, we’ll match it” Zachy’s.)
Unfortunately, I don’t have access to eBob, where I posted a number of times about other experiences like this with Napa cabs that couldn’t be pegged as cabs. At least the Tapestry is not as much of a rip-off as Araujo, Blankiet and others that have been systematically stripped of all cabernet flavors.
Doesn’t anyone like the taste of Napa cab? I do.