2003 La Bastide Saint Dominique CDP

Post Reply
User avatar
AlexR
Posts: 2378
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:35 am
Contact:

2003 La Bastide Saint Dominique CDP

Post by AlexR »

Hello,

This is my one-man virtual tasting.

I have been spending most of today having a look at the text of Harry's book on CDP.

So, at the end of the afternoon I thought to myself: hey, isn't it about time you tasted some of the stuff?

So, at 6 p.m., I went down to the cellar and found a bottle of this wine.
Heck, it is Friday evening, after all :-).

2003 is, I'm told, a good year in the Rhône Valley.

This wine was, wait for it, 15° alc./vol.

It has a deep, dark purplish-red core just starting to brown on the rim.

The nose is reminiscent of those Alsatian fruit brandies - that is to say spirity, but refined at the same time.
The fruit in question is predominately blackberry.
Unobtrusive odors of leather lurking there.
Something strong and vital here, not unreminiscent of New World wines.
No oak showing (if it's there).

The taste is tremendously rich and strong. I immediately compare it to Zinfandel.
The mouth feel is heavy and there's a great deal of concentration.
This doesn't prevent their being considerable silkiness on the palate.
The main taste sensation is of currants and stewed fruit.
The aftertaste is long and mineral, and seemed fairly hot to begin with. However, this sensation lessened as time went on.

A satisfying wine, light years away from an elegant Bordeaux, but serious and tasty.

Nevertheless, there's no way I would have half a bottle at lunch and work efficiently in the afternoon!

Not knowing this appellation very well, I found this wine fine to drink now, but it will surely age well too.
As for how long, you'll have to ask an expert - like Harry!

Best regards,
Alex R.
User avatar
Winona Chief
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:11 pm
Contact:

Re: 2003 La Bastide Saint Dominique CDP

Post by Winona Chief »

I haven't had many 2003 Chateauneuf du Pape but I have enjoyed both the 2004 and 2005 Bastide St. Dominique Chateauneuf du Pape - Secrets de Pignan.

Chris Bublitz
User avatar
HarryKaris
Posts: 119
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:48 pm
Contact:

Re: 2003 La Bastide Saint Dominique CDP

Post by HarryKaris »

Aha, interesting.....Alex starts drinking solitarily CdP's!!
Maybe not a really suitable vintage for you Alex, this 2003..I think 2004 and 2006 are more 'your style'...

CdP-Harry
User avatar
Chasse-Spleen
Posts: 958
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:07 am
Contact:

Re: 2003 La Bastide Saint Dominique CDP

Post by Chasse-Spleen »

Alex,
I enjoyed your note. However, I was shocked by your use of the noun mineral as an adjective. :evil:

-Chris
User avatar
AlexR
Posts: 2378
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:35 am
Contact:

Re: 2003 La Bastide Saint Dominique CDP

Post by AlexR »

Chris,

I see that the use of "mineral" as an adjective is accepted by Merriam Webster.

There are some wines whose aftertaste (in particular) is best described that way.
Especially white wines, but not only.

I find a fair number Google hits with regard to wine tasting as well.

The classic way to describe Chablis, for instance, is "pierre à fusil", or gunflint.
This is a not dissimilar to "mineral".

While I have never crunched minerals as such, I've also had spring water that definitely tasted mineral
(thus its description as "mineral water").

Why not wine?

All the best,
Alex
User avatar
Chasse-Spleen
Posts: 958
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:07 am
Contact:

Re: 2003 La Bastide Saint Dominique CDP

Post by Chasse-Spleen »

Alex,
Thanks for your very informative reply. I understand and of course we need words to describe this quality. I often wonder though when I see this usage in wine notes if it's a sort of 'new style, abbreviated English,' if you know what I mean, like the way even the NY Times now omits the customary 'and' at the end of a sentence sometimes like: He was enjoy a quiet ripaste of bread, cheese, wine.

I always see James Suckling, for example, use the term 'mineral.' I was mainly just kidding. But I do wonder, is there another way of putting it? Minerally? A long, minerally finish? It does sound a little awkward. Perhaps 'this Chablis has a mineral-laden finish. Not exactly serving the interest of brevity...

-Chris
User avatar
Tom In DC
Posts: 1566
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:10 pm
Location: Colorado Foothills
Contact:

Re: 2003 La Bastide Saint Dominique CDP

Post by Tom In DC »

Hey Chris,

I think some of the "standard wine descriptors" (SWD's? :geek:) are a bit forced, but accepting the conventions seems like a reasonable way to communicate taste elements versus starting over every time a taster opens a bottle...something about reinventing the wheel comes to mind.

As Alex suggests, I don't think it's a stretch if one compares a glass of San Pellegrino to a glass of tap water and calls the difference "mineral".

Ciao,
Tom
User avatar
Chasse-Spleen
Posts: 958
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:07 am
Contact:

Re: 2003 La Bastide Saint Dominique CDP

Post by Chasse-Spleen »

Thanks, Tom. As long as I'm at it, I will further explain my questions regarding this descriptor, though not in the way Alex used it. Before I begin though, just want to let you know that this is in fun, OK? So please don't get all worked up about it. I realize that the right of wine folks to be creative with their tasting notes is inalienable.

Sometimes I see notes like this: Great body, with hints of spice, legumes and mineral. Now, that's not exactly that precise, is it? Wouldn't 'minerals,' (plural) be better? Which mineral, after all, do they refer to? Are we to believe that 'mineral,' singular, is a person or flavor that we all know? For example, 'he reminded me of Charlie,' or 'it reminded me of soil.' You get my drift? Let me explain further - it seems that awhile back, people would always say minerals or minerally or something like that, basically it was English. But as Alex explained, the word mineral is indeed in Webster's as an adjective. I have to look it up.

I did look it up. The def. wasn't that clear other than that usually, when a noun is used as an adjective, another noun follows, ie mineral water, etc. It's not a criticism. Only trying to have a bit of a laugh.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 21 guests