Submission

Bingo! Adam hits the trifecta, getting three reviews out in one night after so many dry days. In the blogsphere, anyway. Enjoy.

It's hard to find a good Pinot Noir at a good price. It's a notoriously fickle grape to grow and manage, as such overheads in the vineyard and winery are higher than other varieties. Sub $20 Pinots are often tanic and thin. Not too pleasant, and need to hide behind a robust pasta or a spicy pizza. It's easy to spend upwards of $50 for Pinot, and even some of those are a disappointment, especially when you look at your empty wallet. At the other end of the sea-saw though, a good Pinot is sublime, complex and worth the search and expense.

So this 2006 Mission Hill Pinot Noir, a VQA wine from the Okanagan could have fallen either way. At $22 it's got a lot of competition. Does it hold up or wash out? But before I got to the wine, I had another conundrum. Should I put the arty-farty picture on the blog, or the one with the gold medal? Fear not, I put them both in for your visual enjoyment.



On to more serious fare. The nose; meaty, slightly unripe berries mix with richer plumb and raspberry flavours, with a little vanillan oak. So far so good. I was enjoying it.

In the mouth I found nice berry flavours, most of the greenness had gone, replaced with spicy plumb and integrated oak and a lovely lingering length (now there's a three letter acronym for you).

This was a wonderful surprise at this price point. I have not had a lot of experience with Okanagen Pinots, but I'll certainly be searching out a few more when I'm in the mood for a silky smooth Pinot in the future. I would have been happy paying an extra $5 for this one.

Parallel Universe

Well looky here, two reviews in one night...

Yeah, OK, I'm a stuck record. Predictable. Boring. I admit it. But here's another Cotes du Rhone wine...

The Parallele "45" from Paul Jaboulet Aine is a typical Cotes du Rhone red from the 2006 vintage.


Slap bang in the hotly contested "just a whisker over $20" market, I was just about to find out whether the heavy bottle and old-school label that marketers hope spells "classy" (and more importantly "buy me") lived up to the moniker.

--As an aside, I'd originally mistyped that last word as "monkier". Perhaps I should have left it like that, and those with a curious mind and a sharp eye would have googled it.

Well with a full glass in my hand the rich dark red colour definitely looked classy. The nose was slightly alcoholic, (no kidding I hear you say, but you can occasional get a real spiritsy whiff in wines with higher alcohol content) with tertiary characters. Dusty berries, lightly stewed blackberries, tobacco leaf and dark chocolate proceeded, keeping true to the marketer's wishes.

The palate was dusty, tanic and tight. Tobacco leaf, tea leaf, dried berries and a tight dry finish. Still tasty, but a bit of a let down after the previous hooplah.

Before you stop reading in disapointment, I have to say that most French wines are built to be drunk with food, and it was no exception here. Over dinner the fruit really came out to play. A rustic roast chicken, perhaps, with some chorizo and capsicum (bell peppers for you North Americans) thrown in to add flavour. Out come some great berry fruit flavours accompanied by a fuller mouth feel and a bit of cold tea (trust me). Fantastic.

As such, if you're looking for a glass of red by itself, the $21 price tag is about on the mark. If you're looking to whip it out with friends over dinner (the wine, that is) then I reckon you could get away with telling them it cost you $30-$35, such is the lift with a good hearty caserolle. Sante!

Looks like I'm Up Sh1t Creek Again

Wow, has it really been that long? I should really clear some of these wines in my note book.

Here's a start.

Ten Dollars Fifty is not much to pay for a bottle of wine in anyone's book, is it? Some days you could find that in coins in your pockets. So what do you get for spare change? Well, spare wine, really.


Sawmill creek Sauvignon Blanc is a non vintage blend, made of more than one vintage. So perhaps small parcels left over from other bottlings and blended, or perhaps picked up on the open market at a good price. But does all that really matter? At this price, not at all. You're not going to be worried about where it was grown (mostly in Canada, but no specific region) or the subtleties of the region, the meso climate blah blah. All that wine waffle doesn't come into play here.

The label says it all really. My notes nearly matched it verbatim.

Mine being: With a citrus and herbaceous nose this cheap wine is fairly cheerful. Slightly uncomfortable acidity has been masked by a creamy texture and a hint of oak. The shortish finish is also a bit sweet compared to the dryness of the nose and initial palate.

And the label, if you didn't read it in the pic: crisp, dry, citrus, slightly herbaceous, hint of oak.

Which presents two points. One. Obviously they're so desperate to be considered as such they've put the tasting notes on the front label. Kind of like pinning your CV to your tie when you go for an interview. Two. That was it. Bit of oak, some vaguely varietal characteristics and nothing. There's no real need to flaunt fancy tasting notes on a bottle of plonk at this price, let alone on the front of the bottle.

What I'm really trying to say here is a ten dollar wine is a ten dollar wine. Good enough to quaff while you're pouring a fair portion over your chicken hot pot, or bring out after the nice wine has run out and everyone is slightly tipsy. Nothing more, nothing less, and as such right on the money.