Previously in this saga, I related the story of buying three bottles of wine at a silent auction to benefit a non-profit dog and cat spay and neuter group, thinking I was boosting the bidding but ending up purchasing the wine to the tune of $245. Almost immediately, we opened one bottle for dinner, and it tuirned out to be wonderful. This was the Cakebread Cellars Merlot 2002, Napa Valley.

Next, I opened Napa Valley wine, the Hartwell Misté Hill Cabernet Sauvignon 2003, Stags Leap District. We drank with my last excellent pizza — I mean the last pizza I made that was excellent; the next one was a (rare) dismal failure –and it was terrific.

The winery was founded in 1986 by Bob Hartwell, a veteran of the aerospace industry, and his wife Blanca. The first wine they produced was a cabernet from 1990 that spent 22 months in all-new French oak, giving you some idea of the seriousness of the enterprise.

The Hartwell Misté Hill Cabernet 2003 is no longer on the winery’s website, and retailers that carry it on the internet don’t describe the blend, but based on later bottlings the 2003 must be primarily cabernet sauvignon with some merlot and a dollop of petit verdot put through considerable oak. This is a grand effort, a wine that’s deep and broad and generous, dense, intense and concentrated. The color is dark ruby-purple through and through. Classic notes of cassis, cedar, dust, black pepper and crushed gravel define the seductive nose, while in the mouth the wine is succulent, almost plush, yet tempered and cooled by clean acidity and a towering mineral element. Flavors of ripe, spicy and slightly macerated black cherries and black currants are supported by sleek tannins and oak surprisingly unobtrusive for the usual Hartwell barrel treatment. Altogether, the wine is both engaging and dynamic, elegant and profound, a sort of amalgam of personality and character, and it should drink beautifully until 2015 or ‘16. Excellent. The suggested retail price for this wine was about $60, which is what I paid for it at the silent auction, but it’s available on the internet from prices ranging from $42 to $72.

Next in the roster of three silent auction purchases: Silver Oak Cabernet Sauvignon 1998, Alexander Valley.

Founded in 1978, Renaissance Vineyard & Winery turns out unfortunately minute qualities of Bordeaux- and Rhone-style wines that are sterling examples of individuality, integrity, restraint and frankly old-fashioned appeal. Old-Fashioned? Winemaker Gideon Beinstock uses minimal new oak and keeps alcohol levels low, as in generally between 12 and 14 percent. No commercial yeasts are employed and red wines are neither fined nor filtered; the vineyard now is completely organic. He also holds some of the cabernet sauvignon wines for extraordinary lengths of time before releasing them, as in 12 years for the Premier Cuvée cabernets. The winery is in Oregon House, about 70 miles north of Sacramento, in the North Yuba region of the Sierra Foothills; the vineyards lie at elevations of 1,700 to 2,300 feet. If you’re looking for wines that embody the antithesis of the over-ripe, over-oaked, high-alcohol fruit bombs still fashionable today, you need to search for the wines of Renaissance.

We’ll look today at Renaissance cabernets released in 2008 and 2009 (and one white wine after them). These were samples submitted for review.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

The blend in the Renaissance Premier Cuvée Cabernet Sauvignon 1996, North Yuba, Sierra Foothills, is 77 percent cabernet sauvignon, 12 percent merlot, 11 percent cabernet franc; the alcohol level is an eminently sane 12.6 percent. This smooth, mellow but rigorously structured cabernet opens with classic and seductive scents of black pepper, licorice, black cherry and cedar. The wine spent two years in — you have to admire this forthright expression — “old oak barrels,” of German, French and American origin, so the effect of the wood is engaging shapeliness and suppleness, while grenadier-like acidity keeps a keen eye on appealing vibrancy and vitality. In the mouth, flavors of plums and dried red and black currants are packed with potpourri and dried spice and a hint of an earthy, granite-like minerality that expands into the slightly austere finish. 380 cases produced. Now through 2016 to ‘18. Excellent. About $45.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Renaissance Claret Prestige 1996, North Yuba, Sierra Foothills, is composed of less cabernet sauvignon (63%) than the Premier Cuvée ‘96, more merlot (25%) and almost the same amount of cabernet franc (12%). Oak aging — 23 months — is a smidgeon shorter. Alcohol is also 12.6 percent. The color is radiant medium to dark ruby with a tinge of light brick-red at the rim. The bouquet is rich and ripe with currants and plums, roasted and fleshy, displaying touches of ground walnuts and walnut shell. Dense, dusty, chewy tannins along with a tremendous backbone of acidity lend the wine plenty of structure, while mossy, forest-floor-like elements provide support of flavors of macerated red and black currants and black cherries freighted with what seems like all the savory dried spices in your cabinet. 390 cases. A great achievement for drinking from 2011 through 2016 to ‘18. Excellent. About $40.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Renaissance Library Release Cabernet Sauvignon 1995, North Yuba, Sierra Foothills, was originally issued in September 1999 and then re-released in May 2009.The blend is a fairly straightforward 86 percent cabernet sauvignon and 14 percent merlot, but there’s nothing ordinary about the wine. The color is deep brick-red with a hint of garnet at the rim. Swirl the glass and take a sniff; the rich, warm bouquet is saturated with spice and dried flowers and black currants, cherries and plums seemingly macerated for a lifetime in spiced brandy. Solid, dusty and slightly gritty tannins give some indication as to the motivation for putting this wine on the market again; a decade ago it must have been formidable, and indeed from mid-palate back through the finish, this cabernet picks up dry underbrushy austerity. Best from 2012 through 2015 to ‘20. How great this would be with a roasted game bird, though I typically drank a couple of glasses with a particularly hearty cheese toast. Excellent. About $50.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Released in May 2009 in a quantity of 830 cases — you understand that’s a huge production for this winery — the Renaissance Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon 2001, North Yuba, Sierra Foothills, is a blend of 75 percent cabernet sauvignon, 22 percent merlot and 3 percent cabernet franc and syrah. Aging was up to 18 months in used French, German and American oak barrels; the alcohol level is 13.6 percent. The wine is ravishing. The clean, fresh, perfectly defined bouquet offers spiced and macerated black currants, mulberries and blueberries wreathed with smoke, cedar and tobacco and an edge of dusty, flinty minerality. In the mouth, this cabernet is smooth and mellow but no wimp; as usual with the red wines of Renaissance, the dimensionality of dense, dusty tannins dominates but does not overwhelm the rich warmth of wonderfully proportioned red and black fruit flavors that seem slightly fleshy and feral, with a fillip of wild berry. Best from 2012 or ‘14 through 2018 or ‘20. Excellent. About $45.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Here’s a note on a white wine from Renaissance that I tasted back in the Summer but neglected to write about.

The Renaissance Carte d’Or 2008, Sierra Foothills, is a blend of 70 percent semillon and 30 percent sauvignon blanc, aged six months in “neutral German oak ovals,” meaning large old German barrels. Few white wines made in California smell or taste like this one. The color is medium gold with a faint green highlight. Aromas of roasted lemon, lemon balm, dried rosemary and thyme with that dried herbal dustiness, smoke and pine resin dominate the nose; the wine is very spicy and lively in the mouth, very dry, quite austere with a tremendous foundation of limestone and chalk minerality under notes of fig, gooseberry and lemon and lime peel all enfolded in the sort of sunny leafiness I expect from dry semillon. Wow, quite a performance and probably capable of aging through 2012. Try with seared trout or swordfish. Excellent. About $20, which would be a Bargain of the Century except that Beinstock made only 58 cases.

With your indulgence, I’ll append my review of this wine in its manifestation of 2007, so you can see the differences that vintages and proportions make, and notice how much more of the wine Beinstock made in ‘07:

LL called the Renaissance Carte d’Or 2007 “a gift to vegetarians,” and indeed the wine’s striking fruity, herbal nature would make it appropriate for all sorts of vegetable-based dishes, including risottos (which don’t have to be made with chicken broth) and pastas. The wine is a blend of 60 percent semillon grapes and 40 percent sauvignon blanc that ages six months in neutral German oak ovals. It opens with herbal-grassy scents with touches of apples and figs and smoky dried pear. Carte d’Or ‘07 is very dry, spare, clean, crisp and tart without being citrusy (read: no grapefruit), and it brings up hints of celery, ginger and melon, a bit of riesling-like honeyed peach, a wafting of jasmine. Don’t mistake this for an aperitif wine; it’s too serious, too thoughtful for that blithe purpose. Drink through the end of 2009. Production is 258 cases. Excellent. About $20.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Remember, Readers, that this series is devoted to recent releases from classic California wineries founded in 1980 or before.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The story has been told and written many times — I heard it first from Portet at the Napa Valley Wine Auction in 1987 — of how Bernard Portet was looking for appropriate sites in Napa for growing Bordeaux red grapes, and as he was driving along the Silverado Trail in 1970 he felt a cool breeze wafting through a cut in the landscape, and he knew that he had found a microclimate that was tempered by a flow of air from the Pacific. That site is where he and John Goelet founded Clos du Val in 1972. Portet’s roots in Bordeaux go deep; he was born there, and his father was the regisseur, the technical director, at Chateau Lafite-Rothschild. Portet is now vice chairman of Clos du Val; John Clews is winemaker and chief operating officer.

Clos du Val’s red wines, which include cabernet sauvignon, merlot and pinot noir (from Carneros), are often condemned in the press with the faint praise of being “elegant.” To which I reply, “Thank goodness.” After tasting some of Napa’s high-alcohol, over-ripe, over-oaked, unbalanced cabernets, one turns to Clos du Val’s consistent harmony and elegance for relief and gratification. Not that the wines don’t display depth and complexity.

The Clos du Val Cabernet Sauvignon 2006, Napa Valley, a blend of 85 percent cabernet sauvignon, 6 percent cabernet franc, 5 percent merlot and 4 percent petit verdot, offers heady ripeness and succulence leavened by grainy tannins, elements of briers and brambles and walnut shell, by cedar with a touch of bell pepper and dried sage, by a dusty-gravelly factor that’s almost ecclesiastical in effect. Fruit? Yes, in the form of black and red currants and black cherry with undertones of dried currants. The wine spent 17 months in French oak, 25 percent new barrels, so there’s no taint of toasty wood or vanilla, just a smooth, supple texture and subtle spice. With its vibrant acidity (and reasonable alcohol content of 13.5 percent), this wine cut through the fat of a seared and roasted magret of duck with a mustard-tapenade glaze. I would far rather drink this wine than any of the cult Napa Cabernets that sell for three or four times as much. Drink from now or 2011 through 2015 to ‘17. Excellent. About $35.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Whence and whither Clos du Bois?

Founded in 1974 by Frank Woods, Clos du Bois Winery has been a perennial underachiever at the level of its prestige proprietary red wines Briarcrest and Marlstone. The greatest period for Marlstone — the wine under consideration today — was the mid-1980s, though I also liked the 1990 and ‘91.

Woods sold Clos du Bois in 1988, and the winery entered the portfolio of The Wine Alliance, a subsidiary of Hiram Walker. The other properties owned by The Wine Alliance were William Hill, Atlas Peak and Callaway. Wine Alliance became Allied Domecq in 1998 and then Beam Wine Estates, a division of Fortune Brands, in 2006. Fortune Brands was swept up by Constellation Wine U.S. in November 2007. Clos du Bois produces wine in three categories; the “Classics,” an inexpensive line often seen in restaurants, carry a Sonoma County designation; Sonoma Reserve wines are from Russian River Valley, Alexander Valley and Dry Creek Valley; and, at the flagship level, the proprietary Briarcrest and Marlstone and the Calcaire chardonnay. Winemaker is Erik Olsen.

Clos du Bois Marlstone 2005, Alexander Valley, a blend of 89 percent cabernet sauvignon, 5 percent malbec and 3 percent each cabernet franc and merlot, aged 18 months in French oak barrels, 87 percent new, and the process shows in the wine’s excessive smoky, toasty character. The oak dominates aromas of lavender, mint and granite-like minerals and ripe black currants and black raspberries. I found the oaky nature of the wine off-putting, so I slammed the cork back in the bottle and went back to it the next morning, probably 12 hours later. Now Marlstone 2005 displayed notes of pencil shavings and sandalwood and more lavender with hints of licorice and celery seed. In the mouth, though, the lean and sinewy wine was still all about acidity, tannin and oak; about a dense, chewy, almost gritty texture; about wheatmeal and walnut shell-like austerity that was close to astringent. Good details are present here, but the sum of the parts does not add up to an expressive, satisfying whole. Will time help? Try from 2011 or ‘12 through 2015 or ‘17. Very Good+. About $50.
A review sample.

Here are reviews and notes on previous vintages of Marlstone, culled from the electronic archives of The Commercial Appeal newspaper in Memphis, for which I wrote a weekly, nationally distributed wine column from 1984 to 2004. (These archives go back only to 1990.) Notice how the proportion of cabernet sauvignon in the blend used to be much less — and the price.

<>The Clos du Bois Marlstone 1997, Alexander Valley, blended from 52 percent cabernet sauvignon, 44 percent merlot and 4 percent petit verdot, is slightly disappointing for California’s best red wine vintage of a glorious decade. True, the wine is clean and minerally, with cedar and tobacco, smoke and black olive in an attractive bouquet, but despite its big, ripe, juicy flavors, polished oak and tannin dominate to the wine’s detriment. There’s nothing really wrong here, but the Marlstone ‘97 lacks the vibrant intensity and deep resonance the vintage should have imparted. Very good+. About $38.

<>The Clos du Bois Marlstone 1995, Alexander Valley, emphasizes structure and size now. A gloss of dried herbs and black olive gives color to concentrated cassis and black cherry scents and flavors touched with cedar, tobacco and dried porcini. It requires two to four years aging. Very good+. About $25.

<>The classic Clos du Bois Marlstone 1991, Alexander Valley (54 percent cabernet sauvignon, 35 percent merlot, 6 percent malbec and 5 percent cabernet franc), grows deeper and more complex in the glass, though its impeccable balance is never out of whack; it’s certainly concentrated on the plummy and curranty front, while medium tannins and brisk minerals give it a powerful backbone. Swirl and sip for a few minutes and see how it expands with tar and smoke and berry essence. Excellent. About $18-$20.

<>For 1990, the Marlstone consists of 52 percent cabernet sauvignon, 33 percent merlot, 7 percent malbec, 6 percent cabernet franc and 2 percent petite verdot This is a Beauty and the Beast of a wine, lovely but with a tough core; the intense raspberry and black currant fruit is enticing and so is the plush oaky, dusty texture, but layers of inky minerals, smoke and ash suggest three to five years aging. About $20.

<>More serious, a wine with more subject and structure, is the Clos du Bois Marlstone 1989, Alexander Valley, made from 61 percent cabernet sauvignon grapes, 26 percent merlot and 13 percent malbec; because the wine contains less than 75 percent of one grape variety, it cannot bear a varietal name. Under a proprietary name, of course, the winery can vary the blend as befits the year and quality of the grapes. This is a wine of permanence and power, deeply earthy and rooty with prominent oak and acid, yet the plum-raspberry fruit also penetrates nose and mouth; it grows rounder and more spicy in the glass, touched with licorice but with plenty of depth and darkness. About $20.

<>The Clos du Bois Marlstone 1987, Alexander Valley, is happily the best Marlstone in years. Predominantly cabernet and merlot, this wine displays tons of oak, with fruit in the black cherry-black currant range, hints of cedar and undertones of spice and olive; it’s quite tannic now, needing five to eight years to soften. About $19.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

We were having swordfish, a great fish to cook at home because it’s so easy, and LL made a smoked tomato sauce to go with it. With swordfish, the requirement is to cook it carefully and briefly, so it doesn’t dry out. You douse it with salt, pepper and lemon juice before searing or get a bit fancier and marinate it in lime juice, minced fresh ginger and garlic and a bit of soy sauce and white wine (or mirin). The point is to sear it on each side for a couple of minutes, so it’s a little crusty on the outside and just beyond rare at the center.

For the smoked tomato sauce, you start by lining a heavy pot with a double layer of heavy-duty aluminum foil. Make sure that the lid still fits on the pot tightly. Drop a handful of wood grilling chips, like mesquite or hickory or grapevines, on the bottom of the pot and set a grid of some kind over them, (to hold the tomatoes), put the lid on and turn the burner to high. Let those wood chips start smoking and then put quartered Roma tomatoes on the grid and replace the lid on the pot. When the tomatoes are nicely smoked, put them in a food processor with some olive oil and puree until smooth. Voila! Smoked tomato sauce. It’s pretty damned heady and flavorful, and it made a great accompaniment to the swordfish. On the plate here is also a medley of braised broccoli, turnips and roasted red peppers.

A couple of nights later, we used the smoked tomato sauce on meat loaf, which pepped up the flavor, and that weekend, for the Pizza-and-Movie-Night pizza, I used what was left of the smoked tomato sauce as the base for the pizza ingredients, which included slices of fresh tomatoes and a julienne of dried tomatoes, as well as marinated mushrooms, black olives and chopped salami. Yep, it was one of the good ones.

With all of these meals, we drank wines from V. Sattui Winery, a Napa Valley institution that sells its products only at the tasting room south of St. Helena or by mail order through the winery’s website. The company was founded in San Francisco in 1885 by the merchant Vittorio Sattui; 90 years later, Vittorio’s great-grandson Dario re-established the business at its present site, conceiving the unique idea of not selling the wines to wholesalers or restaurants. V. Sattui makes about 40,000 cases of wine annually, comprising 45 different wines. The company owns 230 acres, mainly in the Napa Valley, and also sources grapes from vineyards in Napa, Sonoma, Amador, Lodi and Mendocino counties. Winemaker is Brooks Painter. You can’t miss V. Sattui from Highway 29. It’s an extensive Italianate compound with winery, tasting facilities, picnic grounds and a store that sells all sorts of ready-to-eat foods as well as more than 200 cheeses.

With the swordfish, we tried the V. Sattui White Riesling 2008, Anderson Valley, Mendocino County. Made all in stainless steel, this exhilarating riesling offers a touch of sweetness on the entry, but that factor is easily balanced with crisp acidity and a prominent limestone element. Aromas of green apple and spiced pear are woven with hints of honeysuckle and roasted lemon, while in the mouth, a texture poised between the spareness of acid and minerality and the slight lushness of ripe peach and pear flavors is highly pleasing. The wine finishes with a touch of grapefruit austerity. 607 cases produced. Excellent. About $24.

With the meat loaf, we drank the V. Sattui Preston Vineyard Cabernet Sauvignon 2006, Napa Valley, which blends a dollop of Carneros merlot with the cabernet from a well-known Rutherford vineyard. This is a terrific old-fashioned Napa cabernet, sinewy and muscular but bursting with black currant and black cherry flavors and hints of cedar, bell pepper, tobacco and baking spices. It’s actually pretty sleek, with polished oak and smooth tannins providing framework and a little resistance — you feel that slight gravity of the tannins — but no interference to the fruit. Balance and integration are everything here, with each element eloquently making its case. 2,934 cases produced. Excellent. About $45.

Finally, well-matched with the pizza, was the V. Sattui Crow Ridge Zinfandel 2007, Russian River Valley, Sonoma County. The 94-year-old vines include, as is typical of Sonoma County zinfandel vineyards planted a century or more ago, a field blend of other varieties, including carignane, petite sirah and alicante bouschet, each represented here by a smidgeon. Again, this is a gratifyingly old-fashioned zinfandel in which the blackberry, black currant and plum flavors are twined with notes of black pepper, briers and brambles. It’s profoundly earthy and layered with granite-like mineral elements, yet, as with the Preston Vineyard Cabernet Sauvignon 2006, this Crow Ridge Zinfandel 2007 embodies an innate sense of balance among fruit and essential acidity, tannin and wood — 15 percent new American oak, 20 percent new French oak and the rest used barrels up to five years old. The alcohol level is 15 percent, but there’s nothing hot or overbearing or over-ripe about this wine. It’s a little shaggy, a little foresty, completely authentic and mainly delicious. 702 cases. Excellent. About $33.

Samples for review; further blandishments included small samples of three cheeses to pair with the wines.

Founded in 1979 by brothers Jim and Steve Allen, Sequoia Grove just slips under our limit (of 1980) for Old School California wineries. Sequoia Grove occupies the site of a 19th Century property in what is now known as the Rutherford Bench. There, it owns its original 24-acre estate vineyard as well as the recently acquired 50-acre Tonella Vineyard, also in Rutherford, as well as property in Carneros. The winery focuses on cabernet sauvignon and chardonnay, though it produces cabernet franc, syrah and sauvignon blanc in limited quantities.

There is nothing flashy or flamboyant about wines from Sequoia Grove, which are notable for depth, complexity and reticence. You will notice that through the reviews of the two wines runs the common thread of tannin, because these are indeed tannic, earthy red wines that require considerable aging to become more approachable. Be that the case, one cannot help being impressed by their authenticity and integrity.

Director of winemaking operations at Sequoia Grove, Mike Trujillo, has been with the winery since 1982. Winemaker is Molly Hill. The Sequoia Grove Chardonnay 2007, Carneros, Napa Valley, made my recent “50 Great Wines of 2009.” Here’s the original review.

These wines were received as review samples.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

The Sequoia Grove Cabernet Sauvignon 2005, Napa Valley, is 100 percent varietal. Fifty-six percent of the grapes derive from the winery’s estate vineyard, 12 percent from Oakville, and the rest from vineyards as far-flung as St. Helena in the north to Atlas Peak in the southeast. The wine is, in other words, an expression of Napa Valleyness, if such a thing is possible, rather than an embodiment of a more narrow sub-appellation.

The wine ages 18 months in American oak, 45 percent new barrels.

So, what do we have? A classic seductive bouquet of cedar, tobacco and lead pencil that cushions notes of briery black currants and black cherries with a background of walnut shell and dried porcini mushrooms. In the mouth, this is dense with grainy, chewy tannins and earthy, iron-like minerals, a panoply of dried baking spices and dusty potpourri, more walnut shell and dried porcini, underbrush and moss. The wine’s raison d’etre, in other words, seems to be structure — a noble, dignified structure — with glimmers of black fruit flavors patiently poised in the wings; there are intimations of generosity. Try from 2011 through 2015 to ‘17. Very Good+ with Excellent Potential. About $34.
____________________________________________________________________________________
The make-up of the Sequoia Grove Rutherford Bench Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon 2004, Napa Valley, is 80 percent cabernet sauvignon, 10 percent merlot, 8 percent cabernet franc and 1 percent each petit verdot and malbec. The majority of the grapes comes from the winery’s estate vineyard in Rutherford. The oak treatment is different from that of the “regular” cabernet; the Rutherford Bench Reserve sees no American oak but ages 20 months in French oak, 48 percent new barrels.

This is a powerfully earthy, minerally cabernet, intense and concentrated and as deep as the alluvial soil that fans from the western mountains and provides the basis for many of California’s — and the world’s — greatest and most distinctive cabernet sauvignon wines. Sequoia Grove’s Rutherford Bench Reserve ‘04 is monumental, a superb example of the balance and integration of acidity, oak and tannin, with tightly furled black currant and blackberry — the latter unusual in a cabernet — lurking in the fathoms. Give it a few minutes in the glass and hints of mocha, some mossy, root-like tea, licorice and black pepper emerge, over a seething element of smoldering potpourri. The finish is aloof, a little austere. The alcohol level is a fairly modest 14.4 percent. Best from 2011 or ‘12 through 2018 to ‘20. Excellent. About $75.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

The history of Mount Veeder Winery is not the most convoluted in the annals of the Napa Valley, but it’s typical of how ownerships change in a world of corporate takeovers.

Mount Veeder was founded in 1973 by Michael and Arlene Bernstein, 2,000 feet up the mountain for which the winery is named. From the beginning, they produced earthy, tannic, mineral-laced cabernets that often required a decade to shed their austerity and then rewarded those having patience with deep, rich, resonant flavors and balanced structures. Occasionally, the mountain-side tannins got the better of the wines, and there are Mount Veeder cabernets from the 1970s and early ’80s that never came around. Still, it was always gratifying to know that one could expect no compromise from this focused winery. The Bernsteins also made a little zinfandel, chenin blanc and chardonnay. I previously wrote, in the “100 Wines: A Chronicle” series, about the Mount Veeder Late Harvest Zinfandel 1980, and I went back in my notebook and found a label for a Mount Veeder Pinot Blanc 1981, as you can see a tough label to get off the bottle.

The Bernsteins sold the winery to Henry and Lisille Mathieson in 1982, but the significant change came in 1989, when the Mathiesons sold Mount Veeder to the partnership of Agustin Huneeus and the Eckes Corp. of what was then West Germany. The Eckes had hired Huneeus, a Chilean, to put Franciscan in shape to be sold, but under his sensible leadership, the winery had turned around and improved. In optimistic expansion mode, Huneeus launched Estancia, and then acquired the venerable Simi and Mount Veeder wineries. Along with Veramonte, in Chile, these properties comprised Franciscan Estates. The whole kit-and-kaboodle was sold to Constellation in 1998. Mount Veeder is now part of that giant corporation’s Icon Estates portfolio.

Here are reviews of the most recent releases, sent as review samples, from Mount Veeder Winery.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
My first notes on the Mount Veeder Cabernet Sauvignon 2005, Napa Valley are “so lovely and seductive.” Indeed, the warm, ripe, attractive bouquet is black fruit-laden, deeply spicy and winsomely floral and finely etched with notes of cedar, tobacco and lead pencil. In the mouth, grainy tannins and polished oak take over, and the wine turns briery and brambly, though leaving room for hints of bitter chocolate, platonic potpourri and a touch of toasted walnuts. Flavors of black currants and black raspberries need two or three years to find space to expand, though the potential is there for something fine. The blend includes 15 percent merlot and 3 percent “other red varietals.” The wine spent two years in French barrels, 84 percent new; that’s a pretty strict routine for a wine that came out fairly light on its feet, oak-wise. Try from 2011 to 2015 or ‘17. Very Good+ to Excellent. About $40.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

No caveats apply to the Mount Veeder Reserve Red Wine 2004, Napa Valley. The interesting blend — 53 percent cabernet sauvignon, 44 percent merlot and 3 percent malbec — represents the sort of fine balance between cabernet sauvignon and merlot sometimes seen in the Bordeaux Left Bank communes of St.-Estephe and St.-Julien, though the goal of the Mount Veeder Reserve 2004 is not Bordeaux-esque elegance but mountain-side eloquence. The wine opens with smoke, cedar and lead pencil-like minerality woven with ripe and concentrated black currants, cherries and plums. It’s an intensely aromatic and seductive bouquet, but in the mouth, the wine reverts to a rigorous strategy expressed in elements of wheatmeal, dried porcini, briers, brambles and underbrush, all the dusty, earthy range of dense, grainy tannins and polished oak. The regimen was 80 percent French oak barrels, 99 percent of them new; one wants to say, “Oh, hell, throw in that other damned barrel!” That’s a lot of oak, but as with its “regular” cousin from 2005, the Mount Veeder Reserve ‘04 absorbed that wood and came out stronger, more supple, more nuanced. Indeed, after a few minutes in the glass, the wine gives up hints of mulberry and some bright, vivid wild berry, bacon fat, licorice and cocoa powder. Above all, the wine is characterized by tremendous, engaging vitality and resonance. Try from 2011 or ‘13 through 2016 to ‘20. Exceptional. About $80.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

I’m defining “Old School” as wineries founded in 1980 or earlier. I’ll be working intensely on this series through the end of the year, which is — whiz! bang! –almost here. I’ve been fretting about this subject for months, thinking that I needed to write a blockbuster post for 25 or 30 wines, but that would have been insane, so I’m breaking the roster into parts. I think that will help me accomplish the job a little easier.
____________________________________________________________________________________ When E.and J. Gallo purchased the Louis M. Martini Winery in 2002, the company acquired not only a Napa Valley winery and production facilities, the Martini label and 720 acres of vineyards, it bought almost 70 years of history and goodwill and a solid reputation. Louis M. Martini began making sacramental wine in 1922, but he was ready for the end of Prohibition, producing his first cabernet sauvignon wine in 1934. Martini had studied winemaking in Italy, and he adhered to old-fashioned ideas of blending grapes from different vineyards and using large wooden tanks for fermentation and aging. Collectors with long memories recall the great Martini cabernets of the 1940s, ’50s and ’60s, and one reads about those wines with envy. The 1970s and ’80s, however, saw a decline in the winery’s ability to keep up with the times and with the many producers that emerged during those decades. Out went the redwood vats in 1989; in came the French barriques.

The reputation of Louis M. Martini has been slow to rebuild. Louis M. Martini’s grandson Michael remains as winemaker, and he seems dedicated to making cabernet-based wines of which his grandfather would be proud, wines that are neither over-ripe or flamboyant, that depend on acidity for structure, that keep alcohol to an acceptable level — for today, that is, meaning between 13.5 and 14.2 percent, generally — and that play down toasty new oak in favor of tannin. Old-fashioned, to be sure, forthright rather than elegant, not thrilling but virtuous.

Here are reviews of Louis M. Martini cabernet wines, sent as sample bottles, from the past several vintages.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

The Louis M. Martini Cabernet Sauvignon 2007, Sonoma County — this is the winery’s basic cabernet — offers remarkable detail and dimension for the price. The color is medium ruby; the pungent bouquet weaves black currants and black cherries with cedar and tobacco, mulberry, bitter chocolate and crushed gravel and a hint of rhubarb pie. Flavors of macerated and slightly stewed black and red fruit are permeated by grainy, dusty tannins, lead pencil and granite, dried porcini and spicy oak, all wrapped in a dense chewy texture and enlivened by vibrant acidity. You could drink this tonight with a steak or let it age for a year or two. Loads of personality. Excellent. About $17, a Great Bargain.
___________________________________________________________________________________

The Louis M. Martini Cabernet Sauvignon 2006, Sonoma County, blends 90 percent cabernet sauvignon with 4 percent each malbec and cabernet franc, and 1 percent each merlot and tannat, and what the hell is tannat, a rustic bruiser of a grape from southwest France, doing here and what is its one-percent task? Anyway, the wine is rich, warm and spicy, its bouquet a penetrating amalgam of macerated black fruit, black olive, coffee and cocoa powder and crushed granite. Vigorous tannins that incorporate dusty, gnarly, briery elements, bolster succulent black currant and black cherry flavors, with a few minutes in the glass bring hints of red licorice and rose petals to the nose. A cabernet that’s half serious and half charming. Drink through 2014 to ‘16. Very Good+. About $17, Great Value.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

A blend of 89 percent cabernet sauvignon, 9 percent merlot, 2 percent syrah and 1 percent petit verdot, the Louis M. Martini Napa Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon 2006, Napa Valley, begins with a clean, fresh granite-and-lead-pencil bouquet that teems with cedar and tobacco, smoke, cassis, black cherry and black raspberry. As enticing as these elements are, in the mouth the wine focuses on intensity and concentration, delivering the true grit of dusty, grainy tannins and polished oak from 12 months in new and used French, American and “European” — which must mean Hungarian or Slovenian — barrels. The finish devolves into wheatmeal, walnut shell and granite-like austerity. In other words, this is a cabernet whose raison d’etre presently lies in the expression of structure; allow it to rest until 2011 or ‘12 to unfold. Very Good+ with Excellent potential. About $27.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
A bit more accessible, the Louis M. Martini Alexander Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon 2006, Alexander Valley, drops the proportion of cabernet to 85 percent, increases the petit verdot to 13 percent and slips in 1 percent merlot. You could just stop at the aromas of anise, leather and lavender, mint and cassis and spcied and roasted plums spread on toast. Do continue, though, because in the mouth this wine is large-framed, generous, vibrant and resonant, with bright, ripe, juicy black currant and black cherry flavors abundantly supported by the tannic character of slightly astringent walnut shell and dusty, earthy dried porcini. This is, in a word, classic. Drink now through 2015 to ‘17. Excellent. About $35.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
How carefully calibrated can a wine be? Check this: The Louis Martini Cabernet Sauvignon 2005, Napa Valley, is a blend of 94 percent cabernet sauvignon, 4 percent petite sirah (unusual itself) and — get this — 0.9 percent cabernet france, 0.6 percent petit verdot (which the press materials that accompanied these wines insist on misspelling petite verdot) and 0.5 percent merlot. Is anyone going to say, “Yesiree, that half percent merlot made all the difference”? O.K., I don’t make the wine, I just second-guess the winemakers. Anyway, this is an incredibly attractive cabernet, deep, rooty, briery and minerally (think shale and crushed gravel), with touches of mint, eucalyptus and black olive threaded through meaty, fleshy black and blue fruit. Yeah, you could eat it with a spoon. Sweet spices add an exotic note to ripe black currant, black cherry and plum flavors nestled in a dense, chewy texture brightened by brisk acidity and supported by well-integrated oak and tannins. A classic to enjoy through 2014 to ‘16. Excellent. About $25.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Louis M. Martini bought the Goldstein Ranch, on the west side of the Mayacamas Mountains, in 1938, renaming it Monte Rosso, for its red volcanic soil. In the old days, grapes from Monte Rosso typically went into the winery’s “Special Selection,” cabernet, its previous flagship wine; Monte Rosso has been produced separately since the early 1980s. The Louis M. Martini Monte Rosso Vineyard Cabnernet Sauvignon 2005, Sonoma Valley, with 7 percent petit verdot, is profoundly earthy and tannic, a dusty, rooty, minerally wine that readily displays its (relatively) high-altitude origins. Wisps of mint and eucalyptus, cedar and tobacco and hints of dried currants seduce the nose, but this is clearly a wine in the grip of density, intensity and concentration, though after I tasted these wines in the afternoon, LL had a few glasses each with meatloaf and mashed potatoes, and it drank consistently and beautifully. The alcohol level is higher than usually seen in wines from Martini; the label says 14.8 percent, while the printed material says 15.25. Best from 2011 through 2018 or ‘20. Excellent. About $85.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

When producers send their wine children out into the world, how do they anticipate that people who purchase the wines will drink them? Sipped as an aperitif? (“No, no,” sobs the winemaker, “it’s too good for that!”) Consumed with an inappropriate dish? (“No, no,” sobs the winemaker, “not the chili-mac!”) Splashed into a plastic cup at a tail-gate party? (“No, no,” sobs the winemaker, “at least use a water-glass!”)

Above all, what amount of time do they intend for us to spend with a bottle of wine?

If you have been at the wine-writing game for a while, you have doubtless attended trade tastings where dozens, if not hundreds, of writers, retailers, restaurant wine managers and such flit from table to table sampling dozens, if not hundreds, of wines and spending about two minutes, tops, with each one. Now that’s the way we pros assess wines! Truly, though, one skill that writers and other wine-tasters must acquire is the ability to make these lightning (and enlightening) judgments; star-power tends to make itself known immediately. Sometime in the Fall of 2003, I was in New York to attend a mammoth tasting of the 2000 vintage from Bordeaux, an event conducted in a circus-like atmosphere of competition that amounted to desperation. It was like running a gantlet where people not only hit you but spit red wine on you. Fun! And even amid the many great wines on display that hectic, arduous afternoon, when I took one sniff and one sip of Chateau Pavie, it felt as if the heavens had opened and the secrets of gravity were revealed. (I guess Einstein already did that, but you know what I mean.) That’s the stunning effect of perfection, instantly perceived.

But wouldn’t it have been better to have a whole bottle of Ch. Pavie 2000 at dinner — yeah, right — and taste it throughout an evolution of an hour or so?

This theme arose last night during an autumnal meal of braised pork shank (with porcini mushrooms and prosciutto), sauteed potatoes and green beans with apples. LL and I shared duties: I did the pork shanks, which turned out to be fairly labor-intensive for a weeknight, and she did the potatoes and beans. Whatever the work involved, the shanks turned out to be a terrific dish, and the dinner altogether was filling and warming on a chilly evening

I took the opportunity to open three cabernet-based wines from California. I have been working for weeks — it feels like months — on a post called “Old School California Cabernets,” about, well, I think it’s up to 30 now, current releases of cabernets from wineries founded in 1980 or before. That’s enough examples that I may have to break the post into two parts so it won’t be too long and unwieldy. Anyway, this trio, one from Napa Valley and two from Alexander Valley — prices ranged from about $45 to $65 — felt bruisingly unfathomable when first encountered, but since we sat at dinner for more than an hour and went back to each wine many times, we had a chance to see how they evolved as they loosened and unfolded in the glass.

One of the Alexander Valley examples I summarily dismissed as “too typical, too much oak, too toasty.” Half an hour to 45 minutes later, however, the wine, while retaining an almost crisp oak character and formidable tannin, had opened beautifully, showing ravishing floral and spicy aspects and intense, ripe black fruit, all wound in vivid acidity. I went back to the wines the next morning and in terms of tannin, they were still hard as nails.

I wonder, though, if consumers who bought these wines and sat down to dinner with them would react the same way, or would they say something like, “Wow, pretty darn tannic,” and go about the business of eating and drinking and then in a few minutes say, “O.K., that’s smoothing out nicely,” and just leave it at that. I mean, it’s my chosen task to be an explicator of wine, just as when I taught English in college it was my task to explicate, say, a poem by Robert Frost — and when you think about it, both woods and wine can be “lovely, dark and deep” — but most wine-drinkers, I think, don’t conceive of wine as a beverage to be explicated, just consumed and enjoyed.

Would their enjoyment be greater if they paid more attention? It’s difficult to say. I spent 20 years writing about art and reviewing exhibitions for the newspaper where I worked, and I feel certain that my experience at an exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art or the Metropolitan is not the same as the experience of the thousands of people who traipse dutifully through the galleries. There are many levels of discernment and pleasure, in art or music or literature or wine. Knowledge and experience expand our range of discernment and pleasure, but such procedures are neither within the ken nor the desire of everyone.

Still, I would encourage my readers to spend more time with and expend a little more attention on the next bottle of wine they open. Give it a chance to open up and express its character and individuality, if it’s the sort of wine that manifests character and individuality. Not all wines do, nor is that their purpose. On the other hand, if you spend some time savoring a $12 cabernet and it turns out to have a surprising amount of nuance and dimension, then you have profited in pleasure and wisdom, and the wine has been allowed to do its job.

LL and I eat a steak perhaps once a month, and we want it to be a good one. Friday night, she took a rib-eye from Westwind Farms, a family-owned operation in East Tennessee that treks to Memphis every weekend to sell beef, pork and chicken, all organic, grass-fed, free-range animals, and rubbed it with a mixture of garlic, smoked paprika, salt and pepper. Then (courtesy of a recipe in the May 2009 issue of Bon Appetit magazine), she reduced a half-cup of balsamic vinegar over medium heat, added shallots, olive oil and crushed red pepper, simmered some more and then whisked in parsley, capers and thyme, thus producing an almost indescribably intense Sludge of the Gods. I fired up the ol’ non-gas Weber — I don’t understand people who feel compelled to have whole kitchens on their patios — with hardwood charcoal (no briquettes, please! and no “lighter fluid” that stinks up a whole neighborhood!) and cooked the steak about three and a half minutes on each side, coming out perfectly medium rare on the inside and crusty on the outside.

Have mercy! The combination of the steak itself and its spicy rub with the incredible dark, rich, primeval sauce was — vegetarians don’t read this! — transporting. Yay on the cavemen who discovered the fruitful conjunction of fire and flesh.

For the wine, I wanted a classic sort of cabernet sauvignon whose structure and minerally nature would align with the steak’s charry, toothsome, earthy character, and I got what I wanted with Tom Eddy’s Elodian Cabernet Sauvignon 2005, Napa Valley. This 100 percent cabernet deftly balances scrumptious, even sumptuous fruit with the rigor of dusty tannins and earthy minerals and a foundation of oak that’s primarily French but includes some American and Hungarian. Despite this arsenal of substantiality, the wine is clean and bright, vibrant with acidity and delicious with flavors of ripe, spicy and fleshy black currants and black cherries. It embodies the abundance of purity and intensity married to silkiness and invigorating presence that we relish in the best Napa Valley cabernet wines. 1,100 cases. Drink through 2014 or ‘15. Excellent. About $40.

Sometimes the difference between a good wine — I mean well-made and decent — and a great wine lies in the way the wines feel in your mouth. A great wine delivers the resonance, the vibrancy of character, an indefinable but still detectable quality that sets it apart from “regular” wines, however enjoyable they may be. And I wonder sometimes why we continue to see debut cabernets made from Napa Valley grapes; are there not enough of those in contention? The danger is in getting cookie-cutter cabernets that are difficult to tell apart. We review one of each today.

____________________________________________________________________________________
First the “Hooray.”

The Brandlin Cabernet Sauvignon 2005, Mount Veeder, Napa Valley, is a classic mountain-grown cabernet in every sense. The Brandlin family established a ranch on Mount Veeder, overlooking the Napa Valley, in the 1870s. They planted vineyards in the 1920s, those rugged and gnarly 80-year-old vines still standing. Cuvaison Winery bought 170-acre property in 1998 and recently began to produce wines from those vineyards, under the supervision of winemaker Steve Rogstad.

My first note on this blend — 94 percent cabernet sauvignon, 4 percent malbec and 1 percent each of cabernet franc and petit verdot — is “just beautiful.” A model of the balance between power and elegance, the wine is capacious in depth and breadth and in the generosity of its spiced and macerated black fruit scents and flavors. Ruggedly structured, with deep bastions of dense, grainy tannins, the wine displays lovely heft and poise, making for a mouthful of cabernet that you don’t want to end. Brandlin ‘05 smolders with lavender and licorice and potpourri and displays hints of sandalwood, wet leather, dried porcini and walnut shell. Black olive and mocha and more spice come up in the finish, along with increasingly vigorous minerality and dry, slightly foresty austerity. Wonderful character and a great (though admittedly expensive) match with chicken mole. The wine ages 22 months in French oak, 60 percent new barrels. Drink through 2016 to ‘20, well-stored. Excellent. About $85.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Perhaps “Boo” is too harsh a term, but to my palate the NapaAngel Cabernet Sauvignon 2006, Napa Valley, tasted as if it had been designed and executed by committee. The wine, and its more expensive companion, NapaAngel Aurelio’s Selection 2006, are projects fostered by Chilean winemaker Aurelio Montes, whose Montes Alpha “M,” Montes Folly and Purple Angel labels are well-known in the United States. The NapaAngel wines, made at Artesa Winery in Carneros, are the debut efforts of Aurelio Montes in Napa.

Blended with 10 percent syrah, NapaAngel Cabernet Sauvignon 2006 teems with lead pencil, slate, spice and toasty oak, with notes of cassis, bitter chocolate and bacon fat. All of which is fine, of course, but it also feels pretty much by-the-numbers. Flavors of ripe and spicy red and black currants are layered with brisk minerality and slightly shaggy, velvety tannins for good structure, but the toasty oak comes up in smothering swathes and buries everything else so that after a few minutes what you smell and what you taste are toasty oak. The regimen wasn’t overpowering — 18 months in French oak, 45 percent new barrels — but to my sensibility so much oak influence dampens the experience and enjoyment of the wine. If you like toasty oak, this is your cabernet. Drink through 2015 or ‘16. Very Good+. About $55.
_____________________________________________________________________________________