Frank Family and Tres Sabores: Two Highs at the High...

I'm pretty lucky. Not in the Irish sense, but practically speaking. As a blogger and wine educator, I get to go to a lot of amazing wine events and try a ton of wines so I can share my opinions with you (although, as you probably know by now, that's not always a good thing for the wineries!). With that said, I hate sounding like a total ingrate and ass when I am critical of events I attend...but I gotta tell the truth.

So when I say that the biggest wine event that my current city, Atlanta, has -- the High Museum Wine Auction, which took place last week -- was a big snoozer for me, I hope you don't think I'm a jerk.

The annual auction is for an amazing organization and our best fine arts institution, so it's no knock on the cause. It's one of the highest grossing wine auctions in the US and each year they assemble a big assortment of very expensive, high-end wines for people to try and buy. But after three years of attending, I've noticed that the selection is the same year after year and fewer than 10% of the wine there is from outside of the US. For an adventuresome wine lover, hell, just even for someone who isn't particularly fond of high alcohol, very fruity, oaky, lower acid wines, this spells trouble. It's not a terribly interesting proposition to taste dozens of wines so similar and flavorful, and it's one that can make your mouth really tired after a while from tannin and too much fruit flavor building up on your cheeks.

At all wine events, you've got to have a strategy to tackle them. I always try first to survey the landscape and then figure out what I want to try. You can't taste it all (although I think some of the people there were attempting to do so, with bad results), and I'm all about discovering something new so I picked wineries that are well reputed but whose wines I haven't tried. I stayed away from those that I knew and have pretty good access to (either because they make wines under $20, which I can afford and get or because I see them on the shelf and know they're there if I want to spend more).

So this time I went to about 8 tables and am only going to tell you, in depth, about two of them. The rest were just blah to me. Not to be too bitchy, but I'll call a few out...for example, Ovid -- which showcased two wines (at $95 and $175 respectively) was just over the top. You couldn't possibly drink them with food -- they were food! Hawkes Winery, out of Sonoma, had a good Chardonnay, but their Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon didn't have the interesting, multi-faceted flavors I want from those wines.

Although loved and lauded by so many, I thought Cliff Lede's wines were just meh. Although it smelled good, the Sauvignon Blanc's alcohol was so high that, for me, it burned my mouth and made the grapefruit and grass flavors taste like they'd be wrapped in sandpaper. Give me New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc any day over this one! Their $60 Stag's Leap District Cabernet Sauvignon had so much sweet oak and overwhelming blackcurrant, black plum, and blackberry fruit that it was a little much to take. That with the mouth-drying tannins had me scrambling for a few glasses of water and crackers so I could taste wines afterward. The Cab wasn't bad, but it was a little over the top.

So when I finally happened across Frank Family Vineyards, which I'd heard so much about but had never tried, and the wines of Tres Sabores, which I've seen so many times but had, (I'm now embarrassed to say) passed over, I was relieved and excited to have some good things to tell you about. I tried 7 wines, so below are shorter reviews but if you have questions on them post on the comments and I can elaborate.

First up for review, Frank Family Vineyards. Housed in the third oldest winery in Napa, way up north in Calistoga (which is where the fabled Chateau Montelena, another very old winery and a favorite of mine, is located), Frank Family makes sparkling and regular wine. I have to insert my snarky comment about how this Winery, like most in Napa, has the rich-former-executive-loves-wine-and-buys-winery pedigree, since Rich Frank is a former big-time Disney exec who earned bank in the corporate world before turning his big fortune in for a small one in wine (always the case for those of you considering buying a winery). But I'll hand it to the guy -- he's got the right talent on the job. Each wine was pretty spectacular and I'll be visiting them the next time I'm in Napa, for sure. Here's the lineup:

2008 Frank Family Chardonnay, $32.50
Color: From the looks of this wine, I was already liking it. Rather than a rich golden yellow that's typical of Napa Chardonnay because it's so ripe it has no acidity and has so much oak you're picking splinters out of your gums, this was the color of a bale of hay -- a medium straw color.

Smell: It smelled delicious -- like jasmine and gardenia flowers and the like a ripe bosc pear (the brown ones -- my favorite) and a golden delicious apple (sweet and a little tart at the same time). I didn't smell much oak -- maybe a little vanilla, even though the wine was aged in 100% new oak barrels, which should make the it ultra-vanillay and like licking a tree.

Taste: The taste was in line with a Chardonnay from the cooler southern area of Napa: Carneros, which is where the grapes for this originate. Pineapple and pear flavors with some sweet vanilla oak weren't overwhelming, because they were offset by the taste of savory herbs sauteed in butter and then a big hit of mouthwatering acid.

Drink or down the sink? Drink. I really loved this wine. Totally balanced, even for someone like me, who doesn't really like oak on her Chardonnay! I could have this with a cheese plate and be a happy girl.


2009 Frank Family Reserve Pinot Noir, $57.50
Color: I wasn't too encouraged by the very dark color of this Pinot. As I've mentioned in my posts on Burgundy, I'm a pretty firm believer that Pinot shouldn't be dark plum colored. It's a thin skinned grape and in its natural state generally light on color, so the hue kind of made me think it was going to be a heavy style of Pinot that I'm not crazy about.

Smell: Smelled like a typical Pinot Noir from the Carneros region -- plum, dried cherry, with a little earthy/minerally note.

Taste: Sour cherry with a touch of exotic spice (like chai tea) from the oak. The wine had pretty high acid and alcohol but it was just squeaky clean -- no earth, very crisp cherry flavors.

Drink or down the sink? Drink. This was good, but not great. Definitely the weakest of all the wines I tasted in their line, which is funny because it was also the most expensive (see price doesn't always dictate quality!)


2008 Frank Family Zinfandel, $36.75
This wine is 16% Petit Sirah and 84% Zinfandel (remember that the law in the US only requires that 75% of the grape be in the bottle for it to be labeled as such). I think the heavy, bold Petit Sirah added a real kick to the Zinfandel.
Color: This was super dark -- maroon and purple-y. Lots of color hopefully would mean lots of flavor, which is a plus in a Zin.

Smell: The backbone of black raspberries and ripe purple plums was overlaid with serious Indian spices -- like sandalwood and cardamom (Chai tea again). It was also kind of floral, like dried roses. It was unusual for a Zin, which is usually peppery, fruity, and less exotic.

Taste: Some prune flavor and then bold, mouth-drying tannins -- it was more textural than ripe and juicy than I would normally expect, which is definitely from the very tannic Petit Sirah addition. It also had a hot burn from the 14.9% alcohol (pretty high).

Drink or Down the Sink? Drink. This was a stunner. It was so ballsy and brazen -- just what I want out of a blend of two American grapes! There's nothing like an unabashed, full-flavored red every now and then and this fits that bill.


2006 Frank Family Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon, $45
Color: This was DARK. Blood red and so heavy in color that the legs on the sides of the glass were stained red. I expected lots of flavor.

Smell: The wine wasn't too fruity but more like dried flowers, cinnamon, and sauteed thyme and other cooking herbs. Totally interesting for a Cab.

Taste: Super tannic with a short finish and very stingy on the fruit -- like it was there but was a lot of flavor hiding behind the tannin...

Drink or Down the Sink? Need another category, which is HOLD. This wine is not ready to drink quite yet. It needs to chill out in a major way for a few years. When big, tannic wines like Cabernet are served too young they just don't live up to their potential. This wine will be amazing in another 2 years or so. All the elements are there to make it so, but right now -- not ready.

________________________________________________________________________
With my support of organic farming and admiration of female winemakers, I'm a little embarrassed that I haven't had the wines of Tres Sabores before. I've passed the sign for their winery when in Napa and never knew about the gems I'd find in the turnoff. I was fortunate enough to have an acquaintance point me in the direction of Julie Johnson, owner and winemaker, who was right next to Cliff Lede. Julie's unbelievably warm, open character...which, in my skeptical New Yorker way, I at first thought may be a screen for the fact that her wines weren't great...was an instant plus but more importantly, her wines really kicked ass.

This graduate of Columbia School of Nursing found a second career in wine and her caretaking skills translated to the vine and the land. These wines were surprising, innovative, and all around delicious. They're in pretty wide distribution, so you can actually get them, and the ones I tried were all less than $35, well worth the money! Here are quickie reviews of the three I sampled:

2009 Tres Sabores Sauvignon Blanc, $22
Color: Julie told me that the wine was fermented 2/3 in stainless steel and 1/3 in 4 year old, nearly flavorless barrels. With no oak and growing in a cooler climate, the wine was so pale it was almost colorless.

Smell: This was nice and subtle. It had some grapefruit and gardenia, but was so light and airy. A very different style of Sauvignon Blanc and atypical of Napa, which I was happy about. I'm not at all an advocate of putting Sauvignon Blanc in an oak barrel, which is common here and was happy to see someone letting the grape express itself.

Taste: Just like it smelled except with great acidity. I could have mistaken this for a very light style New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc. The grapes grow on a cool, Northeast facing slope, which spares them from too much sun and preserves acidity -- just what Sauv Blanc calls for.

Drink or Down the Sink? Drink. I'm not generally a Napa Sauvignon Blanc fan, but I loved the delicacy of this wine. Perfect for spring and simply delicious!


2008 Tres Sabores, Rutherford Estate Zinfandel, $35
In a place known for Cabernet Sauvignon, Rutherford (people usually talk about how the wines have a dusty, earthy flavor that's unique), I'm impressed that they'd give up the land to Zin, which they can less money for. But it's a good call in this case -- Zin apparently likes the unique soil of this area as much as Cabernet!

Color: Like a bowl of dried roses! It was a dark rose color -- so pretty and appetizing!

Smell: A subtle plum and cinnamon note with a hit of violets and dark-colored flowers. I loved that it wasn't overpowering, and that I couldn't smell alcohol (which feels like my nasal cilia are burning), which I often find with Zinfandel.

Taste: Fruit, black pepper, and cinnamon spice were wrapped in a creamy vanilla texture. The black cherry and plum were rich and jammy. Again, I loved that the alcohol was in check -- it didn't burn the sides of my mouth. There was great mouth-drying tannins and mouthwatering acid but nothing stuck out. It hung around in my mouth for a long time and that was just fine by me! The wine was very harmonious and just great for sipping.

Drink or Down the Sink? I love Zinfandel, but I've been a little disappointed lately with many that I've tried. I expect a bold style wine made out of this grape, which is so authentically California. This is one of the best Zins I've had in a year or more. Definitely my favorite of Tres Sabores, and a new fave in the world of Zins. Go Julie!


2008 ¿Porqué No? Red Blend, Napa Valley $25
Literally, ¿Porqué no? means 'why not?' in Spanish, but Julie explained that it also translates to an amorphous concept that challenges you to use your imagination. And that's what she did! This wine is like a good chef throwing something together. It's mainly Zinfandel (50%+) with Cabernet Sauvignon (about 30%), Petit Sirah, and Petit Verdot thrown in. The fruit is from Napa, Sonoma, and Lake Counties and it's a very interesting, if totally unorthodox, mix (Zin and Petit Sirah are common partners and Cab and Petit Verdot go together, but the double date isn't something you usually see).

Color: With the grapes blended in above, all thick skinned and robust, you better believe that this wine was super dark. I expected big, bold flavor -- dark color usually means big taste.

Smell: It wasn't too different from the Zinfandel -- plums, black cherry, and cinnamon spice were the leaders. There was a hint of some sort of thyme or tarragon too -- very cool

Taste: Immediately I thought of Christmas! It tasted piney or like one of those Christmas shops that smells like cinnamon sticks and balsam. This was rich, flavorful with fruit and nutmeg/cinnamon notes and super balanced. There was just a little bit of mouth-drying tannin, but it was easy drinking.

Drink or Down the Sink? Drink. Although given the choice between this and the Zin, I'd pick the Zin, I really liked this wine. It's interesting, creative, and pretty cool. There's a balance between the bold fruit and the pine forest flavors that was very cool. A great wine and one to try for sure.
________________________________________________________________
So that's a wrap on this year's auction. I'll go next year (if they let me after this post!) but unless they expand the floor to a more international set of wines, I expect the results will be similar -- a 25% success rate for stuff I can tell you about. But hey, it's better than nothing! If you've tried these wines, let me know what you think!

Wine For Normal People Radio: Episode 12, Wine Etiquette...Approving, Tasting, and Spitting, Oh My!

Building on last week's episode of "How to Speak to a Sommelier," we get into it on wine etiquette basics. Thanks to Matt M. and Brandy for leaving comments on the blog and giving us the idea for this show topic! We love when you suggest stuff for us to talk about!

• Shout-outs - Awesome reviews on iTunes, the blog, and the Facebook page. Thank you so much for engaging with us and for giving us great feedback. The motivation is huge for us to keep doing cool stuff and making the 'cast better and better! You are awesome!
  
• Huge props to Steve Paulo at Notes from the Cellar - a wine blog that previously covered 8 Rules for Visiting Tasting Rooms, some of which we covered and some that we didn't!
  
  
• Main Topic - Wine Etiquette
  1. We go through the whole presentation schtik in a restaurant -- and tell you what to do with the cork (don't bite it PLEASE!).
     
  2. I don't mention my pet peeve about fingerprints on the bowl of glass, but instead we tell you the real reason why you should hold a glass by the stem or the base.
     
  3. We discuss the spit or swallow controversy...in a tasting of course (you didn't think we were going X-rated on you, did you?)
     
  4. I can't help myself and discuss the dos and don'ts when you attend a wine class with an expert (I may sound rude, but from my angle, if you don't want to learn, don't go!).
  5. Rick and I explore the etiquette of wine tasting rooms and what you can expect when visiting...including the burning question: When visiting a tasting room, are you obligated to buy a bottle of wine?
  6. And lots more!
     
     
• Grape of the Week - Merlot (I don't know if we did a great job explaining this one, to be honest so if you have questions, pop 'em over. At least I admit it...)
  
  
• We didn't say it, but next week is Food & Wine Pairing...it's my take on it, so a little different than the usual spiel. Tune in for more!
  
  
  Wine Etiquette
  

To listen, download the podcast from the iTunes store (and if you like it please add a comment or rate it so we can make sure to stay on the radar, which helps other folks find us easily that would be great!), click the link above, or use the player below! Thanks for listening!

Podcast Powered By Podbean

A Cool, New White Grape to Explore: Semillon

I've been in a very red wine state of mind lately, but as I was trolling the aisles of one of my favorite local stores (that, as an aside, inexplicably put down a faux marble floor that made me think of some of the garish homes of my Long Island childhood), a wine made from a grape I want to learn more about caught my eye. It was Torbreck's Woodcutter's Sémillion (SEM-eee-ohn) from the Barossa Valley of Australia.

Since I've talked about the Barossa and Torbreck in other posts, I'm going to focus on the Sémillon grape -- which, surprisingly, is the second most planted white in France (after a nasty, low quality blending grape that's also used in Cognac production, Ugni Blanc). It's a fickle grape but kind of fascinating and one that you don't often see made as a stand-alone wine -- it's usually part of a blend.

A few basic facts on Sémillon:

• It's a white grape that's high in alcohol, pretty low in aroma and has medium acid
  
• It does fabulously well when put in oak
• It is not a good grower everywhere, so be careful. In cool climates it can taste grassy like a Sauvignon Blanc and in really hot climates it loses all it's delicate character and tastes like cheap jug wine. It requires Goldilocks conditions
• It's a white grape that's a primary component of white Bordeaux, along with Sauvignon Blanc and another grape called Muscadelle. Because of the description in point one, it's a good blending partner for Sauvignon Blanc, which is both acidic and aromatic
• It's the leading star of another Bordeaux favorite -- the sweet wines of Sauternes -- where it's, again, blended with Sauvignon Blanc
• It's native to the Sauternes region of Bordeaux

So that's some background on the grape, but what the heck does it taste like? It's made in two styles -- dry and sweet. The more famous of the two is the sweet.

I know a lot of us have an aversion to sweet wine, but I'd be remiss if I didn't at least talk about how awesome Sémillon performs when it's attacked by a nasty fungus call botrytis (bo-TRY-tis), which has been renamed "noble rot" in many languages to make it seem less disgusting.

Sémillon, with its thin skin, growing in a humid region like Bordeaux or the Rheingau in Germany is susceptible to this fungus. And when it gets humid and then a cool spell hits (common in these areas), botrytis attacks Sémillon and does something really unusual to the grape. Instead of making it taste horrible and rotten, it concentrates sugars and flavors and leaves the acidity of the grape in tact. That means that the wines produced are sweet without being overly sugary and unbalanced -- the acidity puts the concentrated sugar and the honeyed, bready, tropical flavors in check and the wine is pure goodness without being overwhelming (pictures, left, are courtesy of a winery in Sauternes, Cru Berrejats).

If you haven't tried it, all I can tell you is that wine from Sauternes is unbelievable. Even if Sémillon isn't the most popular white wine in the world, it's got a bright future as long as it's grown in Bordeaux and botrytis keeps attacking it!

Before we move to the dry version, I do want to ponder something for a second... I've got to wonder how the hell someone figured out that they could make wine from grapes with this heinous fungus on it (the history is nebulous and there is no lore surrounding the specific person who made the 'discovery'). It's so ugly and looks poisonous, but I imagine that a few centuries ago some dude had his harvest ruined by botrytis and thought to himself, "no one will know if I make wine out of this crap. I'll sell it anyway." In his quest to make a buck, he stumbled upon liquid gold. So kudos to that dude, whomever he may be.

Ok, but onto dry Sémillon. It's made mainly in Bordeaux (in the blend and called Bordeaux Blanc), South Africa, and Australia, and is much different from the sweet version. Unaged, dry Sémillon is a very lemony, citrusy wine. It tastes like (dare I say?) just boring white wine -- neutral with some acid but not much character. Sometimes it can take on an herbal or tropical note, and can be a little like candle wax too, but it's generally a little boring without any age.

I think this wine is better when it's been held in the bottle for a while. With a little age, Sémillon gets interesting. I've had a few that are a bit older and they are amazing. Boring white wine turns into something honeyed and croissant-like, and can allegedly (I haven't experienced this particular phenomenon myself) taste like buttered toast, even if there's been no time in an oak barrel, which is generally responsible for toast-like flavors. That's kind of cool for such a low profile grape, no?

With all that in mind, you can understand why I was curious to try the (dry) Torbreck Woodcutter's Semillon and see how it stacked up. Torbreck makes insanely good Shiraz, and they are a really reputable producer, so it seemed like a great bet that they'd deliver on this wine. Here's what I thought about it:

The Wine: Torbreck Woodcutter's Semillon
Where It's From: Barossa Valley, Southeastern Australia
The Grapes: 100% Sémillon
Vintage: 2009
Price: $16.99

Color: A rich, golden color -- like liquid 14 karat gold. This is mostly from the grape, which tends to be more yellow in color but partly from the fact that the wine was fermented in oak barrels (although it's mostly the grape that lent color here -- the barrels used were old, so they could only give the slightest tinge of pigment to the wine).

Smell: Totally unique. The first thing I noticed was that it kind of smelled like a Riesling and Sauvignon Blanc mated. It was like Riesling because it had a really strong gasoline/petrol stink and an appley and unripe nectarine smell too it. It was like Sauvignon Blanc because it smelled like hay in a barn or green grass. There was a distinct gardenia smell and then an old oak smell too -- like the an old wood cabin. Interesting...

Taste: I know the oak on this wine wasn't new, but I could taste wood right away. With that wood flavor, the wine was like a combo of unripe peaches, honeysuckle glycerin soap, and wax lips (if you didn't have these in your childhood, you missed out. Go to a novelty store and get some. They are awesome and disgusting all at the same time). Waxy texture is a benchmark for Sémillon, so this was on target.

MC Ice (my husband) observed that the wine tasted like a winery smells -- like fermentation vats. Not sure why that the case with this particular wine (those smells are usually associated with the scent of yeast doing their business. I'm thinking this is the mark of a wine that could use more age and time to mellow, but that's just speculation) but I kind of agreed with him. To me, this wine didn't have a lot to it, but I liked the super creamy texture that was offset by a little tart acid.

Food: This is a simple wine and it should go with simple food. Raw oysters or light seafood with butter sauces would work -- scallops, flaky fish like grouper or flounder, and a light preparation of halibut. This isn't a wine with a lot of umph, so you want to make sure the food doesn't have too much going on or it will make the wine taste like water.

Drink or Down the Sink?: Drink. Is this one of the best wines I've ever had? No. But it was good and it went down very easily -- never a bad thing. It's a nice sipper -- simple and creamy. That said, for $16.99 I think I'd rather get a Bordeaux Blanc that's got the goodness of this wine with the punch of Sauvignon Blanc, that I love so much. Still, the wine peaked my interest and I'm going to try to seek out some older vintages of 100% Sémillon and see what I discover. Stay tuned.

If you have questions or have had a good Sémillon, share your thoughts in the comments!

Wine For Normal People Radio: Episode 11, How to Speak to a Sommelier

I've gotta say, this is my favorite episode to date. Although I love them all, this one gave me an opportunity to share some of the funnier things I hear in my line of work, and for Rick and I to talk about our experiences in restaurants (which are pretty common and sometimes frustrating). I hope you like it and it helps you next time you're out to dinner. Here is a rough outline of what we talked about...

• Shout-outs - Some awesome comments posted on the blog, Facebook page, Twitter, and also iTunes
• News - We're number one! We're number one! The U.S. ramps up its wine consumption.
• Main Topic - How to Speak to a Sommelier
  1. The correct pronunciation of sum-muhl-YAY (thanks to forvo.com)
  2. Different levels of wine expertise
  3. The surprising etymology of the word "sommelier"
  4. Ordering from the wine list, and what to ask the sommelier
  5. How ordering wine is like choosing kitchen cabinets (I'm going through a renovation right now, so I had to draw the parallel!!!)
     
  6. What to do if your sommelier is an ass
     
• Grape of the Week - Sauvignon Blanc
• Next Week - Keep listening and you'll find out!

Here's the link:

How to Speak to a Sommelier

To listen, download the podcast from the iTunes store (and if you like it please add a comment or rate it so we can make sure to stay on the radar in "New & Noteworthy," which helps other folks find us easily that would be great!), click the link above, or use the player below! Thanks for listening!

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Burgundy in Action: Greatest Hits from A Louis Latour Tasting

As a follow up to the post on Burgundy from earlier this week, I'm going to put that opus to use and talk about some stellar examples from the area and what the wines from three of the more prestigious places -- Chablis, the Côte de Beaune, and the Côte de Nuits -- actually taste like. I'll reference that post, but I'm not going to go into detail on the region -- this is a straight-up wine evaluation (I encourage you to read the other post because it's what you need to know about Burgundy to understand and appreciate these wines. Am I like a nagging mother now? Probably. Sorry.).

I recently had the rare and wonderful opportunity to attend a tasting of the 2009 vintage of some of Louis Latour's amazing vineyards, courtesy of Empire Distributors here in Atlanta.

Louis Latour is the oldest continuously family run wine merchant/producer in Burgundy -- it's on its 10th generation of family ownership. The Latours got their start as grape farmers in the 17th century and after a century and a half of straight-up growing and small time production, the Latours became negociants, compiling the best grapes from various farmers to make, age, and sell top red and white Burgundy. It took them another century before they started their own label, Louis Latour, launched in 1985.

It's no secret that even though I sometimes drink and review wines from big producers, I'm not a giant fan of the big dogs. But as cited in the Primer, you've got to go with negociants that you can trust and in the world of available, accessible, and solid quality, Latour ranks with the best. Generally speaking, you can rely on the Domaine (akin to Chateau in Bordeaux) to turn out a great product.

This is the second tasting of Latour's wines that I've attended. Both times, I've been blown away by their whites (Chardonnay) and how beautifully they show the terroir that I associate with Burgundy. This time around there were some that were lights-out amazing, and some that were just solid, but not one in the bunch that I disliked.

With the reds (Pinot Noir), it's a little more complicated . Maybe it's because these wines are like little babies and haven't developed their full personalities yet (they are all 2009) or maybe they are altered slightly for the American palate (something I suspect happens often from European larger producers), but all except the top tier lacked the earthy, spicy, minerally complexity that I expect from Burgundy. My notes on the reds say over and over again, "too clean," which could be a plus for some but for me, not so much.

One other note before I get to it: I had to remind myself that these are wine infants! Most Burgundies -- red and white -- are meant to be aged a minimum of about 5 years and up to 30 to 50 in some cases, so for the wines of the Côte d'Or, this was more like the IOWA tests in elementary school (do they still have those?) -- a test of longer term potential. But just like those tests, I think some of these were smarter than others...

Ok, so with that said, there are a ton of wines, so let's start with Chablis (all 100% Chardonnay) from Simonnet-Febvre, which is owned by Latour but run in a very hands-off manner, which makes sense given that they've been making wine quite successfully on their own since 1840.

Wine 1: 2009 Simonnet-Febvre Chablis
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: About $16.00
Typical Chablis is: Dry, super-acidic, with a little citrus and green apple fruit and a steel-like flavor.

Color: Almost a white or platinum color, this wine was pale, just as it should be coming from a cool climate like Chablis. The lighter color also tipped me off that there was no oak aging on this wine, for which I was thankful (a debate rages in Chablis about the use of oak -- traditional producers are completely against it because it takes away from the mineral-acid quality of the wine. I'm against it too...drink something else if you don't like the damn fine acidity!).

Smell: To my nose, this was a perfect Chablis. No fruit -- just a whiff of chalk, wet rocks near a waterfall, and a little bit of saltiness (like salt water smell. All of this makes sense since the soil type is chalky and you can smell the terroir in the wine). For a Chablis at this price, this wine was hitting on all cylinders in terms of what I want and expect.

Taste: Just like it smelled but with some bonuses. The wine was mouth-watering -- like sucking on a lemon -- from all the acidity. It was metallic (think of licking a butter knife) and minerally but so clean and pure in flavor. This all may sound very horrible and harsh, but layered on top of all the textures were jasmine and gardenia aromas that softened up the wine and made it so damn delicious.

Drink or Down the Sink?: Probably going to be my house wine all summer, so DRINK! I will say that this wine is not for your porch but for your cheese plate. What an amazing food wine -- especially for buttery scallops or white fish, and creamy cheeses. For the price, this is a huge thumbs up for those of us who love acidic, minerally wines.


Wine 2: 2009 Chablis Premier Cru "Vaillons"
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: About $27
Typical Premier Cru Chablis is: Heavier than standard Chablis -- with more fruit flavor and mineral components. They can age for longer and be a little more complex in flavors.

Color: This wine was a little darker than the basic Chablis. It makes sense -- for 10 to 12 months the wine sits on the dead yeast cells that converted the sugars into alcohol (during fermentation). As they decompose, they lend a little color to the wine (and some nutty flavors too! I know it sounds disgusting but this is a good thing, so go with it.).

Smell: This was like the basic Chablis, but on steroids. Lemon, lime, and jasmine flowers jumped out of the glass. The wine was like a lightly scented bouquet of white flowers. And there was a little hint of saltiness or oysters right out of the net hanging around too (that's, again, from the chalky soil type). Great contrast and combo of all this stuff. I had high hopes for the taste.

Taste: Tart, green apples, a little unripe pear flavor, and a jasmine smell/flavor were so delicious against the contrast of super-high acid, a strong mineral/wet rock thing, and a salt-water like taste (although the wine wasn't salty so you have to kind of stretch your imagination).

Drink or Down the Sink?: This wine is absolutely beautiful. Vaillons has a soil profile similar to many of the highest tier Grand Cru vineyards of Chablis, and it makes a wine about as unreal. Much fuller and softer than the basic Chablis, this wine would probably be more suitable for sipping than the first one, but its acidity and mineral profile still make it ideal for food. This was my favorite of the three Chablis I had. Awesome and totally typical of what Chablis should taste like, in my opinion.

Wine 3: 2008 Chablis Grand Cru, Les Clos
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: About $60 (it's a Grand Cru and they're in limited quantity, hence the price!)
Typical Chablis Les Clos Grand Cru is: The fattest and most luscious of all the Grand Cru Vineyards, this one is usually rich with fruit but still has a good mineral character.

Color: This wine was more similar in color to the basic Chablis than the Vaillons -- very pale and almost platinum -- which is kind of deceiving given that the wine sat on the dead yeast cells (called sur lie, by the way) AND 50% of it was fermented in oak barrels for over a year. Those processes tend to darken up a wine, as would an extra year of age, which this one has over the Premier Cru. But not here. Sight is the most deceiving of the senses in wine, so I've discovered!

Smell: This wine had less of the typical traits I associate with Chablis -- the mineral, salty, chalky, and citrus notes. It smelled like an Asian pear (which I call a papple because I think it's a cross between a pear and an apple...or at least that's what it looks and tastes like!) and there was a good dose of oak on the nose too, which I think overshadowed the more delicate stuff that I love so much. Wines from Les Clos are supposed to be the most aromatic and heavy of all the Chablis Grand Cru, which I think would be great if not for the use of wood here. I really am a hater on oak for Chablis -- it rained on my smell parade here and disguised all the stuff I like.

Taste: Although I still preferred the Vaillons (I guess I'm a cheaper date), I didn't dislike the wine. It certainly had the caramel, toasty, oaky, vanilla-y flavor that you'd expect from being popped in an oak barrel, but there was still an acid and mineral component to the taste that balanced things out. The fruit was hard to find here, but there were some apple and pear notes.

Drink or Down the Sink?: This is a great wine, and certainly not something to pour down the sink, but I have to admit that I was really disappointed. The thing that I treasure in Chablis is the citrus fruit and the tense acidity of the wine. It's kind of like a thrill ride for your mouth. Using oak on grapes that I'm sure would have made an awesome wine without it really marred the flavors. The oak was an unwelcome distraction from the real star of the show -- the fruit. I say leave the oak to the wines we're about to talk about from the Côte de Beaune -- that's where wood is a good friend to fruit!
_______________________________________________________________________

As a quick aside, all the wines that follow are from the excellent 2009 vintage. Mother Nature was kind to Burgundy so these wines all started off with the best advantages in life. They will get better with age, so I'll reiterate that I tried to review them with the elementary school teacher hat on and let you know who made the gifted and talented program.

White Wines From the Côte de Beaune
So I tried 7 whites from the Côte de Beaune and I don't want to go into detail on every single one. I'll review four in quick format and then elaborate on the three stunners.

Quickie Review #1: 2009 Louis Latour, Beaune Blanc (100% Chardonnay, Around $28) Even with a year in a barrel and a secondary, malolactic fermentation to make the wine creamy, it was light straw in color. I loved the floral nose -- gardenia, jasmine, begonia -- nice spring floral bouquet and a good hit of oaky vanilla that made the wine feminine and soft. Although the wine had some mineral notes, which I'd expect from a Burgundy and a touch of nice apricot fruit, it's finished was like a bad break-up -- they just never called again and you've got no choice but to forget them. White Burgundy tends to hang out a little longer in your mouth and keep on giving more yumminess, not so here. Needless to say, not as elegant as I'd hoped. For the aroma and acid it's still a good wine...just not the best when you compare it to the others.

Quickie Review #2: 2009 Louis Latour, Meursault Premier Cru "Chateau de Blagny" (100% Chardonnay, Around $60) Meursault is the closest style to the fat, oaky California Chardonnay that are typical of Sonoma and Napa. It's still a far cry from all but a few producers (Chateau Montelena being the first that comes to mind, hence why they won the Judgment of Paris in 1976). With riper fruit than the wine above and full oak aging, the wine is a lot darker in color -- almost a yellow. The smell was pretty fab -- there was a salt, mineral, and smoky combo (there's that terroir again) that offset the baked caramel apple notes (from fruit and oak) wafting out of the glass. It tasted like it smelled -- a caramel apple with some sea salt on it! There was great acid, and it stuck around in my mouth for a long time, making it water for ages. A great wine -- it was soft and creamy but still acidic. Definitely would have been even better with food.

Quickie Review #3: 2009 Louis Latour Puligny-Montrachet Premier Cru "Les Truffieres" (100% Chardonnay, About $65) This vineyard was apparently once a truffle bed, hence the name Les Truffieres...talk about soaking in a specific kind of terroir! At this young age, the wine is super light in color, and I thought it was kind of stinky -- salt water is ok, the kind of fishy/old truffle-y smell I detected, a little less good. There was some jasmine flower in the smell too, but I was tentative in popping this in mouth, to be frank. I'm all for terroir stink, but this was a little much. Thankfully, it tasted way better than it smelled. The wine was super delicate -- just a light green apple flavor with some jasmine, and solid, mouth-watering acid. I have a strong suspicion that this wine needs about 5 more years in the bottle before its ready to drink. It was cracked open before it's time -- those stinky scents are going to mellow into something more elegant with time and those lighter flavors will get bolder and more pronounced. I'd like to try this again in a few years, when I bet it will be an outstanding example of how terroir influences flavor.

Quickie Review #4: 2009 Louis Latour Puligny-Montrachet "Sous le Puits" (100% Chardonnay, About $60) A very lovely wine -- light in color and, again, like pretty white flowers -- maybe more like spring bulb flowers (freesia and hyacinth if you know what those are). There was a very light oak note to it -- nothing too bold. Amazing acidity balanced out the rich caramel apple and vanilla oak flavors. Another wine I think could stand about 5 years in the bottle to develop from a light, delicate wine to something with more serious flavors. Amazing what a little aging can do -- it will add weight and more intense, interesting aromas and flavors.

And now my top three whites:

Wine #5: Louis Latour, Chassagne-Montrachet Premier Cru, "les Caillerets"
Where It's From: The town of Chassagne-Montrachet in the Côte de Beaune
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: Around $60
A Typical Premier Cru from the les Caillerets vineyard in Chassagne-Montrachet is: Floral, creamy, spicy, and nutty with a good balance of oak and fruit, and always a hit of acid to keep the wine lively.

Color: No big surprises: it's a young wine and it was a light golden color.

Smell: Like some of the other wines, this had the green apple and caramel smells but there was a pronounced waterfall-running-on-rocks smell on this one and then some very subtle citrus and almost metallic smells that got my interest.

Taste: Just a little bit of green apple and then a full array of mineral, chalk, and wet rock-like flavors. But this wasn't like Chablis, which is sharp, this had a fuller, softer feel to it -- it was creamy, with a really great balance of oak. Perfect example of terroir from this vineyard in Chassagne-Montrachet, which churns out wines that are minerally yet fruity and full.

Drink or Down the Sink?: Like the others, it could stand some time to develop in the bottle, but this wine is insanely good, even now. It was so well balanced between acid and fruit, minerals and creaminess that I just couldn't get enough. I would love to have this with a meal. What a wine. I'm a huge fan of Chassagne-Montrachet (even the $25 bottle of the stuff is great, BTW) and this is just about as typical and delicious as they come!


Wine #6: Louis Latour Bâtard-Montrachet Grand Cru
Where It's From: Between the villages of Puligny-Montrachet and Chassagne-Montrachet in the Côte de Beaune
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: $200+
Typical Batard Montrachet is: Full-bodied, rich, with a nut and honey character. Very creamy and toasty.

Color: A pale yellow color -- a little richer than the previous wines, but still light.

Smell: The white flowers and apple were here, but with riper fruits like peach and pear thrown in. What made this a standout was the nutty, honeyed notes that were kind of in the background of the wine. It was totally intoxicating. I could smell this all day long. The salty mineral earth was prevalent and delicious, and once again, spot on for what I would expect a white Burgundy to smell like. These are never fruit bombs, but always a delicate balance of rocks and fruit (again, terroir is KING!).

Taste: Similar to how it smelled, but even better. Adding to the apples and honey, was a vanilla bean spiciness. There was a slight, really pleasant bite of acid but the wine was still silky and creamy. Totally complex and beautiful.

Drink or Down the Sink?: This is such an expensive wine and is worth every penny. AMAZING. The wine is subtle but bold, spicy yet gentle all at the same time. This is a serious show stopper -- not because it's bursting with flavor, but because it's just so representative of where its from and is intense without being obtuse and obvious with flavors. Subtlety is important in a white, and this wine has mastered it!

Wine #7: Louis Latour Corton-Charlemagne, Grand Cru
Where It's From: The town of Aloxe-Corton in the Côte de Beaune
The Grape: 100% Chardonnay
Price: About $95
Typical Corton-Charlemagne is: Buttery, fruity, and honeyed with vanilla notes and a good hit of acid and minerals.

Color: A little darker straw color than the previous wines, but still light. These are all so young!

Smell: Totally different from the previous wines, this was much more herbal. There was a tarragon or maybe even green pepper note to the wine that was really pleasant and not overwhelming. Baked bread or a croissant came to mind and the oak was kickin' big time -- vanilla and caramel stood up and said hello to my nose! A lot to smell and really interesting.

Taste: You could really taste the earth here -- minerals with fresh cut green herbs made this so fresh, but then the spicy oak character gave the wine a real richness that was full and warm in my mouth. There was great acid, but the wine was creamy and mouth-coating. It stayed around for ages -- LONG finish.

Drink or Down the Sink?: This is an unreal wine. So different from the Batard Montrachet in that it was richer and fuller and more herbal, and so great. Latour's home base is in the town of Aloxe-Corton and they own a big portion of this vineyard. I think is probably the greatest of their wines and definitely one of the best white Burgundies out there. Latour is such a master of whites and this wine is proof positive of that. Worth it.

____________________________________________________________

The Reds... As I said before, I had to judge potential in these wines. But I've had Latour's reds before and as I said previously, all but the top tier usually don't work for me.

I started with both the 2009 Pommard and the Beaune Premier Cru "les Vignes Franches," both from the Côte de Beaune. They had beautiful cherry, raspberry, and strawberry smells and a huge aroma of spicy and almost a sandalwood/Indian spice quality but the taste left so much to be desired in both. They lack a sense of place -- the terroir -- that I love in a red Burgundy. Some earthiness, some idea that the grapes grew in the land is the secret sauce of red Burgundy and what makes it so amazing and different from Pinot grown elsewhere.

I don't know if Latour cleans up these wines for the American palate (we don't tend to like dirty wines here, let's face it) or if this is just their style, but for my $60 I want a Burgundy that has the aromas these had but with a silky, yet earthy character that is totally distinctive. I've had Pinot from Sonoma that I think is more Burgundian in style than these!

So that's for those wines...but, oh the top tier. The two Grand Cru wines that I tried were unbelievable examples of what Burgundy has to offer. They were on different ends of the spectrum and each pinnacles of Pinot. I can't imagine what they'll be with 10 years of cellaring...something great for sure.

Wine 1: 2009 Louis Latour Chambertin Cuvee Hertiers Latour, Grand Cru
Where It's From: The town of Gevry-Chambertin in the Côte de Nuits
The Grape: 100% Pinot Noir
Price: About $190
Typical Chambertin is: Full, rich, and earthy with a balance of spice and fruit and a texture like liquid velvet.

Color: This is what I think Pinot Noir should look like. A light, pale ruby color with just a little bit of brick/brown-red. Pinot is not, in my opinion, meant to be a dark, deep color. That's just not the grape's style and soaking it in a cold water vat to make it look dark (called a cold soak or aqueous soak) is just for the beauty pageant...something I think Pinot can win without the fancy color.

Smell: Ah, finally. This is the wine that I was expecting out of a red Burgundy tasting. Forget the glycerin, clean flavors of the wines I mentioned above -- THIS is Burgundy in my opinion. A little raspberry and maraschino cherry but then this very pronounced smell of soil and minerals. I've never been to the Chambertin vineyard, but I bet it smells exactly like this wine. I felt like I was smelling the limestone in this glass and the chalk topsoil. For me, this is what Burgundy is all about -- terroir. I was so excited to taste this.

Taste: "What a pretty wine," exclaimed my brilliant friend and fellow wine dork, MO'C, who works with Empire. SPOT ON!!! With just a little over a year in bottle (and Chambertin can age for decades so this is an infant!), this wine already had all the components it's going to need to evolve into a wine paradise in about 10 years. The raspberry and earth were strong, but there was this insane sweet spice like chai tea, and a vanilla bean component that made this wine delicious. The acid was there, but not overwhelming and the wine stuck around in my mouth for a few minutes.

Drink or Down the Sink?: Not a chance this is going down the sink. That said, if I had a bottle, I'd be storing it for a long time. It's wonderful now, but it is going to be so much better in years to come, that I'd delay for the joy of drinking it in the future. It's like the difference between eating a pear that's almost ripe and one that is awesome and is so dripping with juice that you need to eat it over the sink. I'd go for the latter any day, even if it meant waiting!

Wine #2: Louis Latour Chateau Corton Grancey Grand Cru
Where It's From: The town of Aloxe-Corton in the Côte de Beaune
The Grape: 100% Pinot Noir
Price: About $100
Typical Corton Grand Cru is: Red and black fruit abound but when this wine is bottled, it's usually known to be a little tannic and rustic tasting. With age it develops softer flavors and textures.

Color: A much deeper color than the Chambertin above, this was the darkest wine of the day, but still what I would consider the 'right' color for Pinot Noir. It was ruby red, but still transparent in the glass. Very pretty.

Smell: Much lighter in aroma than the Chambertin, this wine was delicate and so lovely. It was like roses and light cinnamon spice with a little bit of earth thrown in. Another one I think has the perfect components to be a kick-ass wine with some time in the bottle.

Taste: This surprised me! What it lacked in aroma, it made up for on the palate. According to the Latour web site, this wine is only made in years when the grapes hit perfect ripeness. Clearly, 2009 was that year. This had a cooked berry or warm, baked berry cobbler taste that was savory and delicious. There was a sweet nutmeg flavor too. It was a mouthfull, but the acidity was still great to balance out the fruit. It would be awesome with food.

Drink or Down the Sink?: I'm going to say the same here that I said for the Chambertin, although I think this wine may be ready to drink a little sooner than the other. Still, with a few years to hang out, mellow, and meld together, in about 8 years this wine will be a complete knockout -- especially if you like more ripe fruit flavors and less earth in your Pinot.


_____________________________________________________________________

So that's the Latour/Burgundy round up. I hope at least some of it gives you an idea of how terroir expresses itself in the wines and how differently the wines of Burgundy can taste, even if they are from vineyards that are within miles of one another!

The real lesson: keep buying and trying...within the two main grapes, variety is the name of the game here!

A Primer on Burgundy: The 5 Things You Need To Know

You should see my desk right now. Boring and dork-ass wine books corner to corner, more tabs open than my browser can handle, and notes scrawled down in my notebook and on a few post-its to boot. This isn't usually how I work, but in the name of Burgundy I'm willing to make a mess to do it right.

What's even nerdier -- I've been thinking about this post for about 2 or 3 weeks now. Bourgogne (said Boor-GON-Yuh, which you'll see on bottles), as they say in France, is a hard topic. Like Bordeaux, there have been books and books and tons of articles and other stuff written on this pretty small region. But unlike Bordeaux, which is all about brand and marketing and lavish Chateaux, Burgundy is about farmers and terroir (that's why this post fits so well with the podcast from the past two weeks! See Part 1 and Part 2) and little differences in the wines based on nuances in the land.

Wine geeks say that the final destination in learning about wine is Burgundy because you can never know everything there is to know or really wrap your head around every difference of every vineyard.

Thankfully, we're not trying to go there. For our purposes we'll just talk about a few keys to understanding Burgundy so it's easier to try and buy. Once you figure out the basics, I swear you'll want to tiptoe into this crazy, convoluted French world. I'm not saying you have to become a Burgundy scholar, but while you're exploring the world of wine, Burgundy is a mandatory stop on the train so you may as well read this quick "travel guide" so you know what to expect, no?

Below I'm going to break down Burgundy in as normal a way as possible. I won't review any wines here, but later this week I'll do a post on a tasting of Louis Latour wines that I was privileged to attend and talk about how some of the factors discussed here affected the taste of what I had. My hope is to give a good, tangible explanation to some of the stuff discussed here.

So, as long-winded as it is...here are the 5 things you need to know about Burgundy to get started...

1. Where the hell is Burgundy? Geography and a short word on climate...
Why are we even talking about this? Because if you want to know how to get good Burgundy and appreciate it, you've got to know that geography and geology are king, queen, emperor and everything in between. With no understanding of that, you better pack your knives and go, as Padma from Top Chef would say.

So to start, Burgundy is in southeastern France. It's a narrow strip of land and kind of disjointed -- stretching from 100 km south of Paris down 360 km to the city of Lyon. It's packed inland and like all continental locations, it has pretty extreme weather (in the US, think Omaha, Nebraska). It's freaking freezing in the winter, has crazy rain and hail storms, and pretty short, but flaming hot summers.

Its climate and weather are erratic at best. It's a nail-biter every year to see what Mother Nature is going to dole out, hence vintage (which just indicates what the weather did that year) is huge in determining quality.

Burgundy has 5 distinct regions, each a little different. From north to south, they are:

• Chablis (pronounced Sha-BLEE and no, it's not a jug wine, but a fine wine region)
• The Côte d'Or (Coat Door), made up of the Côte de Nuits (Coat-deh-Nwee) and the Côte de Beaune (Coat-deh-Bone)
• The Côte Chalonnaise (Coat Shallow-NAZE)
• The Maconnais (Mah-coh-NAZE),...and the real black sheep of the region (think Sesame Street "one of these things is not like the other") Beaujolais (boh-jzhoh-LAY).
  
  

Out of these areas, the most complex part of Burgundy, and what people get geeked up on is the Côte d'Or or "golden slope," which is named for either the color of the leaves in the fall, or the serious coin the producers here make by churning out some the most expensive wines in the world (Domaine Romanée-Conti's Romanée-Conti, a Pinot Noir, routinely goes for $1000+ a bottle).

Although it kind of ties into the geography, we'll move on to key point #2, grape types, and talk about how geography influences the wines of each area, which are dramatically different from each other...

2. The Grapes of Burgundy: Where it gets simple (and where it gets hard again... the styles of wine they make)
This may be the only thing you care about with regards to Burgundy (I hope it isn't but no judgment if so). Unlike Bordeaux where it's blends galore and there are 8 grapes to keep track of, there are only 2 main grapes in the prestigious part of Burgundy...and a third if you count Beaujolais.

If you're drinking Burgundy, you're drinking Chardonnay if it's white, Pinot Noir if it's red, and Gamay if it's from Beaujolais. Done.

Now, the complicated part is that there is a huge variation in style, based on where in Burgundy the grapes are grown...terroir reigns supreme here and changes everything (again, listen to the podcast if you have no idea what terroir is!). But we'll touch on that in point 3. For now, here's a rundown of those 5 regions above and what kind of wines they make:

1. Chablis: This part of Burgundy is totally detached from the main drag (i.e., the Côte d'Or and down to Beaujolais), which is 60 miles south. The area used to be part of Champagne, which is a much closer neighbor and definitely has more traits in common. Chablis is at about 48 degrees latitude -- the outer reaches of where grapes can grow before they turn into potatoes and make vodka (just kidding...they just can't ripen at cooler temps). Here, Chardonnay is the big dog. It's a tough-ass grape so it can stand a little chill in the air but except in warm years, the grapes don't get super ripe so there is a ton of acid in the wine. And as far as fruitiness goes -- a little lemon, lime, and green apple flavors are the most you're gonna get.
   
   The soil is chalky limestone and you can usually taste that in the wine (no joke, think of beating chalk erasers together). These wines will make your eyes water and peel the enamel off your teeth from acidity -- they need food to shine. They are almost never aged in oak, which really lets you see what the Chardonnay grape tastes like.
   
   
   We'll split out the Côte d'Or here because there are different styles produced in Nuits v. Beaune...
   
2. Côte de Nuits (which means "dark/night slope," so you should think dark grape, hence Pinot Noir!): Go 60 miles south from Chablis and this 15 mile strip of land contains vineyards that make the most famous Pinot Noir on earth. Although the climate is cool and unpredictable, this is the grape's native home and it has adapted. The best Pinot is grown on steeper hillsides, where the sun hits the vines perfectly to allow for ripening. What's amazing about this area is that the style can vary so much from one patch of land to another. In some areas the Pinot is dark colored, saturated in raspberry/blackberry fruit flavor, and has all sorts of spicy (like cinnamon and licorice), earthy notes. In others the wine is much lighter in character and more like a floral perfume with exotic spices and a violet smell. It's this insane variation within a small space that allowed the monks to formulate the idea of terroir...but we'll get to that in section 4.
   
   
3. Côte de Beaune: You want to taste a Chardonnay like you've never imagined? Look no further. Although there are some great Pinot Noirs that come out of this region too, the finest, most complex and most ageable Chardonnays grow in this area, south of the Côte de Nuits. It's slightly warmer and wetter here than further north and Chardonnay loves it. The wines are much fruitier than in Chablis with ripe apple and sometimes tropical fruit flavors. What makes these wines different from Chardonnay grown elsewhere in the world is that they're honeyed, spicy, floral, and creamy but always have an acidity and mineral thing going on that makes them more balanced then some Chardonnays from warmer climates. Beaune, the town that is the heart of the Burgundy wine trade is situated here.
   
   
4. The Côte Chalonnaise: You know, these wines really get the shaft. This is a great region that makes Pinot Noir and Chardonnay but it's hard to find in the U.S. It has similar soil to the Côte de Beaune, but because it's not part of the big slope of the Côte d'Or, people kind of write it off. I'll concede that the wines are less consistently good, but some are a lot better than what you get from the mass produced wines in lower-level Côte de Beaune and are cheaper! If you see a Pinot from Mercurey, definitely try it -- it's like a lighter, less complex version of its cousins up north but is a great price and delicious!
   
   
5. The Maconnais: Who hasn't seen Louis Jadot's iconic Macon-Village or Pouilly-Fuisse labels? Both are Chardonnay and that's what's exported from this area (although some red from Pinot Noir and Gamay are also made). This is Chardonnay country (actually the town of Chardonnay is located here!) and the whites are awesome values. They're a little fruitier and more simplistic than the wines from other parts of Burgundy, but still have a good dose of acid and minerality that give the wine a certain balanced, ying-yang, fruit and mineral quality that's typical of whites from Burgundy.
   
   
6. Beaujolais: I'm not going to go into depth on the blacksheep of Burgundy except to say that it produces 50% of all the wine in the region and 50% of that is the yick that is Beaujolais Nouveau. Its main grape is Gamay, and it is here and only here from which Gamay can make a wine with class. Gamay hasn't had an easy run of it -- it's always being compared to its pretty, smart, and complex sister, Pinot Noir. It really couldn't get more humiliating for this poor grape -- it's the only one I know of that has been publicly slandered! It was banned from Burgundy, said to be bad for human health, and ordered to be pulled up in 1395 by Phillip the Bold, the son of the King, even though it's capable of making some magically delicious wines.
   
   Beaujolais from one of the 10 classified villages is so floral and fruity and soft-feeling in your mouth. It's delicious, but, honestly has nothing to do with the rest of Burgundy. If I were Beaujolais, I'd secede. At the Latour tasting, I also tried 6 Beaujolais from the same year, which I will post about separately since it deserves separate treatment.

3. Third But Most Importantly: Terroir...Or all the stuff that goes into making the wine growing area distinct
Ok, the podcast mentioned above goes into big detail on this, so all I'll say here is that the idea that a specific place -- an area as small as a row of vine for instance -- has distinct character was born in Burgundy.

Burgundy has varied terrain -- some slopes, some flat, different sun exposures, altitudes, and microclimates -- but the thing that distinguishes it is the variance in soil from which the vines derive nutrients and flavor. The geology of the region over the last 150 million years has created such diversity in soil type that in areas as small as a vineyard, the soil can vary dramatically and change the flavor and character of the grapes grown there. The Official Burgundy Wines Website says it perfectly when stating that the vineyards are "a mosaic made up of thousands of plots of land."

So it should be no surprise that quality varies dramatically based on the terroir of the plot and that the most coveted and expensive wines of Burgundy come from the best plots of land with the best combination of sun, slope, climate, and soil. That coupled with the knowledge gained over 1100+ years of experience in these vineyards, means that these wines have a truly unique character.

To harken back to points 1 & 2 -- you've got to know your stuff when it comes to geography in Burgundy and the style of wine you like, because unlike anywhere else in the world, a matter of a mile can alter the character of a wine so much (and sometimes the price!) that it actually makes a huge difference. To get started buying and trying Burgundy wines you don't need to know all the differences in vineyards and terroirs, but you DO need to know that there is variability.

Bottom line: Because of this nuance in Burgundy, within the world of non-sparkling Pinot Noir and Chardonnay, the region has nearly limitless possibilities in styles, so don't write anything off immediately. Keep on trying.

4. Catholic Guilt, A Short War-Monger, and Burgundian History: Yes, it's really important
Again, you may be asking...why the hell do I need to know the history of this region to appreciate the wine? I don't need to know the history of Monte Carlo to go lose my shirt at the gambling tables. Can't I just drink the stuff?

Sorry. You gotta know about this.

I don't know if history matters to the modern day structure of any wine region more than it matters to Burgundy. I'll try to be quick on the facts but if you hate history, this may be entirely banal to you. C'est la vie.

Wine has been made in Burgundy for millennia, but the earliest records we have are from the second century AD when the Romans came in. Things ticked along and then a big change took place that set up Burgundy to be what it is today.

In the 900s, the middle of the Middle Ages, Burgundy found religion. The Catholicism of the dark ages was fully in swing and the guilt of the church loomed large over the area -- what a boon for wine! Dying land owners bequeathed the monasteries in the area with their land, as a last ditch attempt to make it to the pearly gates. And with that land, the Benedictines (who were known for their love of luxury, BTW) created a form of heaven on earth with wine.

Blessed with nothing-but-time on their hands and the ability to read and write, this ostentatious, wine-loving sect set about cultivating grapes as more of a science project than a means to create sacramental beverages. They kept meticulous records of every vine, vineyard, and area they planted. Although kind of counter to their austere reputation, about 200 years after the Benedictines had a monopoly on Burgundian wine, the Cistercians got in on the act too and these two sects created the foundation for modern-day Burgundy wines.

Men of the cloth from both sects began recording some very cool, weird, unique-to-Burgundy stuff about the vineyards. Namely that each small climat, or plot of vineyard, produced totally different wines even if planted with the same grapes and made the same way. These dudes were the first to recognize and describe terroir, and to delineate vineyard areas and separate the best from the less good. That classification still exists in Burgundy (told you it was relevant!).

There is just one more wrinkle before we leave the history of the place that you should know about. And this is really where I think the s*&t hits the fan and over-complicates Burgundy to the point of craziness. The small vineyard plots certainly would be confusing enough since, as you'll see in the Classification section, there are a buttload of them, but if each were owned by a single person or group, it would be easier to understand. But, alas, that short, war-mongering dude couldn't leave well enough alone: in his anti-monarchy opus, the Napoleonic Code, Bonaparte convoluted Burgundy beyond belief.

Issued in 1804, the Code stated that any property left behind by dying parents to their kids had to be distributed equally among the kids. In the world of the Brady Bunch, that means if dad wanted to leave land to just to Greg -- no dice. It would have to be split evenly among Greg, Peter, Bobby, Marsha, Jan, and Cindy. That legacy lives on today, with some growers owning a few rows of vines and the most famous vineyard sites having dozens and dozens of owners. This fragmentation led to the rise of négociant -- winemaking outfits that buy grapes from these dozens of owners and then make, age, bottle, and sell the wine that's on our tables.

How does this matter to us? Well, even if you know that a specific vineyard is amazing, if the right person doesn't buy the right mix of grapes from the right part of the plot that go together harmoniously, it may not be worth the money. If the monks had just sold their plots to Chateaux, like in Bordeaux, then you'd know that one place was making wines from good vines year after year. In Burgundy you've got to keep your eye on the region, the vineyard, AND the producer/négociant to make sure they know what their doing. Damn Napoleon.

5. The Classification System: We did it in Bordeaux and we've got to do it in Burgundy
I told you in the Bordeaux Primer that the French LOVE to rank their wines, but Burgundy's system is so different from the one in Bordeaux. Where Bordeaux is all about brand (the Chateau) and bling...and somewhat about terroir, Burgundy is all about land -- and given what's laid out above, the fact that this is the focus makes a lot of sense. As discussed, the geologic machinations that took place in this area made it a place for vine growing like no other...a fact that the best vineyards are rewarded for through price and prestige. The vineyards are classified in four main quality levels in Burgundy. There's an inverse relationship, like everything in the world: as quality goes up, quantity goes down. The levels are:

• Grand Cru Vineyards: The best of the best, there are 33 vineyards that are classified Grand Cru (great growth). This level represents only 2% of the wine made in Burgundy. 32 of the 33 are in the Côte d'Or, the other is in Chablis. The other regions of Burgundy got snubbed and fall to the lower end of the quality pyramid. How do you know if something's a Grand Cru? The label is required to state that with the vineyard name. How else do you know? It's ridiculously expensive!

• Premier Cru (Pre-mee-aay Crew) Vineyards: There are about 600 of these, and they vary a ton in quality. Many of them are amazing, and some are good or better than the Grand Cru. These wines make up about 14% of all the wine made and you can always tell that it's a Premier Cru because it says the village name, "1er Cru" somewhere on the label, and the vineyard name. These can be expensive but you can find a bunch in the $20 - $30 range too. In my opinion, this is the best bang for your buck but, as noted above, you have to study the geography/wine style of the region before you buy to make sure you'll like the one you're choosing.
  

• Village (vill-AHHZHE) Level Wine: Ok, here's where things can get a little confusing. Like the Premier Cru wines, these wines have the name of the village listed on them. There are 44 village names that are permitted and they are supposed to have distinct characteristics (some do, some don't to be honest). You can usually tell it's a Village wine because of the price (much lower than a Premier Cru) and the absence of another vineyard name or the 1er Cru notation. I love buying these wines because they are completely affordable and give me a taste of Burgundy without a bite out of my wallet.
  
  
  
• Regional Wines: This is the most general and the grapes can come from all over Burgundy. You'll often see AOC Bourgogne as the classification. Macon-Villages is another big one in this category. These wines are affordable and some are good, but I think the négociants lose a lot of the Burgundy style in these wines and they can taste kind of generic. I'm not saying you have to spend a ton, but I would recommend trying to go up a level at least to buy a Village so you can taste the most important thing about Burgundy -- differences in terroir.

So there you have it.

I hope I haven't completely exhausted you with this 101. Burgundy is a subject that I could study for the rest of my life and only still scratch the surface (and I'm not really that old!). I hope it helps you understand and appreciate this complicated but awesome region a little more and encourages you to buy it, rather than fear it!!!

Let me know what you think and what your experiences are with it!


_______________________________

Sources for this post were:
The Oxford Companion to Wine, Third Edition, Jancis Robinson
The Sotheby's Wine Encyclopedia, Fourth Edition, Tom Stevenson
Kevin Zraly's Windows on the World Complete Wine Course, 25th Anniversary Edition
The Wine Doctor's Burgundy Wine Guide
The Official Burgundy Wines Web Site
Terroir France Web Site
Burgundy & Beyond (for Maps) Web Site