And now I might very well be older than they were at the time.

(My torts professor summed it up quite nicely when he quipped, “It’s a strange feeling when both the president-elect AND the chief justice are younger than you are.”)

Now that I’m a quarter century old, I feel as if I should be an adult.  I certainly feel adult-like at certain moments–for instance, when I cook dinner, or when I go to the Ritz-Carlton for drinks (that one time!)–but sometimes feel as if I’m a child playing grownup. I think many of my peers feel the same way.

All that aside, it IS nice to get together and do grownup stuff–like hold wine tastings.  My roommate and I decided to throw a wine tasting; I decided also to throw a wine tasting before that wine tasting to get the feel of things.

I’ll spare you (and myself) the details of the parties.  The first coincided with the arrival of Margie’s friend Ruth from Michigan and Alisa’s friend Kami from Arizona.  The second coincided with Margie’s birthday.  All in all, fortuitous timing.

This was the first wine tasting event I hosted, so I was anxious to do it right.  To that extent, I went to the Wine Specialist and talked to J.C. (their Spanish wine buyer) for over an hour, picking out wines.  The combined wines over both tastings were:

• 2007 | Visión “Cono Sur” | Sauvignon Blanc | Casablanca Valley, Chile
• 2007 | Verget du Sud | Chardonnay | Vin de Pays du Vaucluse, France
• 2007 | Mulderbosch | Chenin Blanc | Stellenbosch, South Africa
• 2006 | André Lorentz | Riesling | Alsace, France
• 2007 | Jean Descombes | cru Beaujolais | Morgon, Beaujolais, France
• 2007 | Maipe “Rosé of Malbec” | Malbec | Mendoza, Argentina
• 2006 | Domiciano de Barrancas “Cosecha Nocturna” | Malbec | Mendoza, Argentina
• 2007 | Oracle of the Stars | Pinotage | Western Cape, South Africa
• 2007 | Thorn-Clarke “Shotfire” | Shiraz | Barossa Valley, Australia
• 2007 | Cueva de las Manos “Bonarda Old Vine Reserve” | Bonarda | Mendoza, Argentina

I bought a few repeats, as well.

There was also a Chilean cabernet sauvignon that I wasn’t intending to serve (and so didn’t write down) but ended up serving after the first tasting; we also went through a few other bottles from my own “collection” and from others.

The theme for both tastings was “1.5 Generation Wines: Between the Old and New Worlds.”  Many of the varietals–sauvignon blanc, syrah/shiraz, and malbec, especially–have had great success after being transplanted to different parts of the world.

The first tasting was a bit more improvised–I didn’t have any food to go along with the tasting, but we more than made up for that by drinking a lot of wine.  The second tasting was more planned–Alex and I made appetizers such as pork sausage fried with apples and cider, lox with chevre and green garlic on melba toast, roasted Hungarian peppers with Greek goat cheese on sliced baguette, hummus, dark chocolate drops with raspberry, etc.  Daphne brought some spicy tuna rolls and vegetable rolls, as well.  Delicious.

I won’t comment on all the wines, but only the notable ones.

The Visión “Cono Sur” is an excellent sauvignon blanc–midway between the Old World (minerals, concentrated) and the New World (lush, grassy) styles, this was a real crowd pleaser.  The Maipe “Rosé of Malbec” was an intense blood red, almost as dark as the Beaujolais or a pinot noir.  It had a bit of a rubber boot nose, but this gave way to some nice berry fruit that ended on dried notes of raisin.  The Oracle of the Stars pinotage was a favorite–smoky, nice acid–and a steal at $7.99.  It’s definitely a wine I’d keep around for dinner or easy drinking.

Jordan and Margie donated a bottle of 2005 Bodegas Arrocal tempranillo from the Ribera del Duero region of Spain.  We poured it in a decanter and swished it around.  I happen to love tempranillo from Ribera del Duero (Tinto Pesquera, anyone?)–they’re intense and dark, with earth and tobacco.  “This is going to be evocative of a dry, dusty riverbed,” I announced drunkenly as I poured out tastes from the decanter.  Yup.  It WAS like a dry, dusty riverbed.

Overall, I really enjoyed the process of hosting a wine tasting, and people seemed to like it.  Then again, who wouldn’t like to pretend they’re adults and get drunk off of good wine?

Philosophy and semantics aside, I’ve thought a lot about the symbolism inherent in wine. There’s a lot: the land as woman, the farmer as man (I know, I know–some might object to this rather antiquated system, but it’s there, and I’m sticking to it); the grapes as the land; the vineyard as the soul of the land. Etc., etc., etc.

Quite a few posts back I wrote about how one of my earliest experiences with wine was with an older, beautiful junior transfer of Spanish extraction. Her skin was tanned and smooth; her eyes dark, her lips full and sensual. She held a bottle of syrah and offered me a glass. It was as if she was offering me the essence of life.

Sometimes–luckily? unluckily?–I would find myself punch-drunk in love, holding someone close against me, my head spinning and heart beating in a way no substance could ever duplicate. The taste of lips–strawberry, raspberry… cherry… the vanilla of lip balm… the honey of her skin…

Before I complete this piece of erotica, I want to list a few people in my life and compare them to the wines I’ve had. I’ll only list them by their initials:

(1) S. P. | A wine from the Languedoc–possibly l’Esprit du Silene: beautiful, seductive, loads of flavor. This is not a simple wine; nor was it a simple woman. One taste left you wanting more. Or, conversely, she could be like a nice champagne–Veuve Clicquot–effervescent, fun, and extremely classy. Or maybe the Ampelos Rosé of Syrah: refreshing, thirst-quenching, lively, and strawberry blonde.

(2) E. Y. | The Montlouis chenin blanc from François Chidaine: smooth, supple, honeyed, and slightly sweet, though this sweetness is offset by a bit of acidity. One of the few whites I absolutely love.

(3) A. B. | The Sea Smoke Southing pinot noir: refined, graceful, and yet, possessing a whollop!

(4) K. Y. | This new Pleiades XVI from Sean H. Thackrey. I opened it yesterday–my mom loved it!–and finished it off today. It stood up to everything, even fried chicken and oranges. Awesome wine. Fiery, intoxicating aroma, beautiful color. Delicious, long finish.

(5) J. C. | A malbec–maybe the Maipe malbec from posts past. Dark, velvety. Tight grip of tannins that open to a full, voluptuous body.

(6) S. H. | A shiraz: loves Australia, loves chocolate. Smooth, easy-drinking, great match for almost any situation. Probably like the Thorn Clarke Shotfire Ridge.

(7) Me! | Dunno. Probably the Charles Cimicky Trumps grenache / shiraz: mouth-filling, delicious, memorable, and short finish!

Any thoughts? What sort of wine would YOU be?

Joining me in the 25-and-under group were some fellow “Zoomers”: Jonathan (not Jonathan Lewis from entries past), a film major from USC; Will, the Guatemalan martial artist who can squat-press over 1,000 pounds; Erica, of Coloradan extraction; and her boyfriend, Jack, the New Yorker accountant.

We were in for a treat: a wine broker was present for the tasting showcasing wines from his portfolio. This portends well because importers, winemakers, and brokers are pretty keen to put forth their best; Saturday was no exception. The five wines on the “official” tasting list were:

1 | 2006 Lioco Chardonnay | Sonoma, California | $19.99
I hate to admit it, but my palate’s not very refined. I sipped this chardonnay and thought I detected vanilla and oak. Hell, I was dead certain I detected vanilla and oak. The broker came over and told us some more about the wine, including the little fact that this chard had not been aged in oak. At all. It had not even touched neutral oak. All stainless steel. I did taste a lot of fruit–very tropical–and some nice acid. A bit of butter–not a big butterball like many other California chardonnays I’ve had. Overall, one of the better chardonnays I’ve had, though I would have to say that I still have never encountered a chardonnay I wanted to take home with me.

2 | 2005 Miura Pinot Noir Silacci Vineyard | Monterey, California | approx. $60.00
Leave it to a woman to say it: Erica, upon tasting this pinot, declared, “Ooh, it tastes expensive”, by which she meant this was a very good pinot noir. Black cherry. Smooth, velvety. Like sleeping on satin sheets, except instead of sleeping you are drinking and instead of satin the sheets are waves of intense fruit flavor. Pretty darn good, though it still has not usurped in my mind the supremacy of the Sea Smoke Southing.

3 | Barrel 27 Grenache | Paso Robles, California | $22.50
Grenache is a grape I feel I should like, for some reason. It originated in Spain, where it is called garnacha. It is generally spicy and berry-flavored. It is light–it is low-tannin, somewhat low in acid, and of a thin color. You can probably find a lot of wines made from grenache in the supermarket aisles, either alone or blended. Some of my favorite wines–including the Charles Cimicky Trumps–include grenache. Grenache is also the dominant part of wines from the Southern Rhone in France, including Chateauneuf-du-Pape.

And yet, I had not up to this point really encountered a good, solid wine made solely of grenache. I’ve had Little James’ Basket from Chateau de Saint Cosme, which is a blend of fruit from both new and old vines, but I wasn’t enthralled: I think the lack of heft was a bit off-putting for me. The Barrel 27, however, was substantial, with cherry or cranberry, spice. It started smooth but ended with a mouth-puckering note of tannin. This may be because 2006 marks the first vintage of this wine from Barrel 27. Nonetheless, pretty solid wine and one I would definitely purchase again.

4 | 2004 Tejada Tempranillo / Grenache | Lake County, California | approx. $40.00
I didn’t really like this one, unfortunately. I found it extremely tannic–even more so than the Barrel 27. According to the broker, the vineyard from which the grapes of the wine were picked is relatively young, leading to the high levels of tannin.

5 | 2004 Worthy “Sophia’s Cuvee” | Napa Valley, California | $29.99
The real winner of the “regular” tasting. Smooth, lush, sweet (maybe from oak?), the scent of roses and fruit wafting from the glass. I especially enjoyed the moderate level of tannin in this wine after the last two tastings.

This cuvee is a blend of cabernet sauvignon, cabernet franc, petit verdot, and merlot. This was probably the regulation consensus favorite among the tasters. A very powerful, yet feminine wine. Memorable. I would probably take this wine to any important romantic dinner.

Now, for the first round of overtime.

6 | 2004 Egelhoff Cabernet Sauvignon | Napa Valley, California | $75.00 +
Being an older guy at a fraternity had its perks. For instance, I hosted people in my room during any of the many parties and get-togethers thrown by the chapter. Of course, there were meek, excited undergraduates who were fresh from Cow Town or Overprotected Suburb U.S.A. and looking for fast times and free booze. At that period in my life I was a big fan of Early Times whiskey, which came in a plastic bottle, yes, but I thought was delicious and gave Jack Daniels a run for his money. (Hindsight has corrected me of that erroneous line of thought, thankfully!) Before parties I would take the plastic bottle of Early Times and pour it into a fancy glass decanter, then serve the five or six underclassmen who were lucky enough to find themselves in my IKEAd-out room. I still remember the look in their eyes as they accepted this precious liquid from a real glass decanter!

Well, same story for me, now. I’m the naive “freshman” and am thrilled to be served wine from a decanter, especially if the wine being served is the Egelhoff cab. This cabernet was brought by the wine broker and was a special “bonus”–another reason to try to go to tastings at which brokers or importers or winemakers are present.

Man. The bouquet was incredible–flowers and black fruit, a veritable cornucopia of aromas. Big, yet refined. I found that the wine started full but lightened in body once in the mouth. Double cherry, dusty, dusky cherry. Wood and spice. A long, long finish. Smooth and well-balanced tannins. The decanting probably helped a lot in this regard.

This was actually my favorite wine out of the six I had tried thus far–however, “Sophia’s Cuvee” would still probably be my choice as it’s a delicious, accessible, and sexy wine–and heck, it’s less than half the price of the Egelhoff.

I was thoroughly impressed and thankful to have been exposed to some very good wines. But, much to my delight, I wasn’t done. Our party had two more bonus tastings courtesy of Mission Wines, one more bonus from one of the regulars, and two bottles we bought to continue the buzz. We had 11 wines on Saturday, and in the interest of some semblance of brevity I will review the second five at a later time.

My first exposure to rosés was when I worked at Adagia Restaurant in Berkeley–specifically, we had Brander Vineyard’s Chateau Neuf de Pink and Domaine Tempier’s Bandol rosé. From what little I remember of those two wines, I liked Tempier–it had an austere quality, bone-dry. All I remember of Brander’s selection is chef Brian Beach poking fun at the name.

All in all, however, I was unimpressed. Reds–especially the brooding malbec and the sensual shiraz–were still my willing mistresses.

That changed when I tasted the Ampelos Rosé of Syrah last year. It was the late summer, hot as heck. “Teeth-staining” and “tannic” were not the qualities I was looking for in my wines, let alone any beverage. At a tasting they poured the Ampelos rosé and it was love at first taste.

Strawberries. Strawberries everywhere. It was as if strawberries were bursting forth–Dionysus-style–from the glass. Fresh. Quite simply spring in a glass.

The taste is even better than the bouquet. More strawberries, bright and with a lively level of acidity. The acidity, though noticeable, is not overbearing at all.

The most important thing here, though, is the heft of the wine. Most rosés I’ve had are thin–Kate Moss in a redhead wig. This thin body usually led to wines that were just uninspiring or downright disgusting. The Ampelos, however, is voluptuous–a ripe, full wine (maybe on account of its being made from syrah?) that reminds me of some fetching farmer’s daughter on a warm spring night. You can think of it as the sassy daughter of a plump syrah wife and some dour riesling husband.

Not sweet. But fruity. Balanced acidity. Soft finish that is free from that cheap plasticine quality I hate in whites and rosés. Overall, quite possibly the best rosé I have ever had in my life–and contender for one of the best wines I’ve had, period.

That was, of course, the 2005 vintage. How would the 2006 compare?

My love affair with the Ampelos was tragically short. After enjoying two quick bottles I found that all the stores in my area were out. And I had to wait 10 long months until April at Silverlake Wines sent a reply to my wistful e-mail: “We received a case of the Ampelos rosé today. Let us know how many you would like us to put aside for you.”*

I set aside four: one for myself, and one each for three co-workers. (I’m not a jealous man!) At $17 – $18 it’s more expensive than, say, a white zinfandel, but worth every penny.

I just came home from a day in Silver Lake (which will the subject of a future post) with Jonathan Lewis and opened my bottle. My mom, my sister, and I quaffed copious quantities of the wine. Utterly delicious. Entrancing. Beautiful. Spring in a glass, two years in a row.

COMPOSITION: 100% syrah.

APPELLATION: Santa Rita Hills in the Santa Ynez Valley of California
_____________________________

* One of the guys working at Silverlake Wine asked if I was the guy who sent an e-mail asking them to set aside some bottles of the Ampelos Rosé. I said yes. He asked if my name was Joon. Again, yes.

“That’s funny. There’s another guy–I swear his name is Joon Song–who wrote us an e-mail asking about the Ampelos. I thought you guys might be related or something.”

Whatever Ampelos Cellars is putting into their rosé certainly seems to be working with Korean-American males, specifically those named Joon Song. Ladies–now you know the way to my, err… our hearts!

The plot doesn’t drive itself as much as it saunters and moseys easily along.  The basic plot is set in the Cannery Row district of Monterey and revolves around a cast of well-meaning bums trying to throw a party for Doc, who is the central figure of the story.  They throw one party that ends in disaster but, by the end of the book, are able to throw a party that is hugely successful.

(What does this have to do with wine?  Or anything, for that matter?  Patience.  Have another sip of your merlot.  I’m getting to it.)

As a former social chair at a fraternity and a catering assistant for almost three and a half years, I’ve seen my share of parties–both highly organized and wildly spontaneous.  I’ve seen seventy-year-olds get drunk off their minds at bar mitzvahs and what looked like seventeen-year-olds do keg stands in dark basements.  There are events complete with wine charms and little signs for different types of cheese, and others that aren’t planned as much as they arise from some primordial, yearning, post-pubescent muck.

What characterizes a good party?  And how can one ensure that the party one is throwing is a success?

My thesis is that a good party, much like a good wine, is characterized by its finish.

Here’s what Steinbeck has to say about this matter:

No one has studied the psychology of a dying party.  It may be raging, howling, boiling, and then a fever sets in and a little silence and then quickly it is gone, the guests go home or go to sleep or wander away to some other affair and they leave a dead body.

Of course, not everyone is going to have a great time at a party.  It’s impossible.  But we all know that there are parties that are fondly remembered years later by its participants–what makes these stand out?

Drinking a lot helps, I have found, though nothing ruins a party quite as much as someone who is three drinks past drunk, someone who might have passed out in a bathroom stall in his or her own vomit and urine and must be lifted out by three people, hosed off, and accompanied home in a taxi (though in certain circles this MIGHT be considered an AWESOME night).

Close friends are always a crucial element, though not necessarily required.  Having a crush or romantic interest there can go either way.  As in wine, there are so many components that must be considered.

Let me present “tasting notes” of three of the best parties I’ve been to in my life:

Six Months ‘Til St. Patrick’s Day Fraternity Party | Berkeley, CA | 2003
I was wearing an ugly plaid green shirt.  We had dyed the beer green.  Green bulbs in the lights.  Green cups.  Green plastic beads, shamrocks, and plastic leprechaun hats.  Live DJ.  A LOT of people.  It helped that I lived in the house.  A lot of incoming freshmen.  No midterms, no finals to worry about.  No police to worry about.  A cute girl.  Dancing with her.  For forty minutes.  Upstairs.  Newly-renovated room with new bed.  Outside on the fire escape.  Some words about the moon.  She had a tongue piercing.

Friend’s 21st Birthday Party | Berkeley, CA | 2006
I didn’t really know too many people.  Some people were dancing, some people were outside in the patio smoking.  There was PLENTY of alcohol, though, of a large variety.  I took up the reins of de facto bartender and found I had enough to make many kinds of drinks, including the always well-received cosmo.  And, there was a sufficient amount of ice.  People were there and were there to have fun; no “bitches”, if you will.  It also helped that it was before finals.

Wine and Cheese Party | Oakland, CA | 2007
Dressed up in a collared shirt and slacks.  Others there were similarly attired.  I brought a bottle of shiraz from Shotfire Ridge and a bar of Scharffen Berger dark chocolate.  The guests came with their offerings.  A good number of people.  Everyone knew at least one or two others.  The majority of the party knew the hostesses and were on at least casual acquaintance terms with most of the guests.  Wine, cheese, food.  Quite possibly every contemporary Christmas song ever written.  Wine charms.  White elephant gift exchange.  Cigarettes outside.  Exchange students from France.  Newly-graduated college kids acting like adults.  A LOT of wine.

Maybe it’s true that parties just have a life–a mind–of their own.  That fits in with Steinbeck’s metaphor of the “psychology” of a party.  If people are there to have fun, if people are there and just want to talk and socialize and have a good time, then the party will be off to a positive start.  And if the party is sustained by more people (who bring more to drink, optimally) throughout the night then even better.

What do you guys think?  What makes for a good party? and how can we ensure as much as possible a long, warm, and delicious finish?

Dinner was at the dependable Monsieur Marcel, which has a wonderful ambiance in the evening. A beautiful, dark brunette smiled to me from the wine bar (at least, I thought it was me!), so things were already taking a turn for the better as we were seated.

I had a glass of rosé from Chateau de L’Escarelle–in Provence–made from cinsault and grenache. It was wonderful–absolutely breathtakingly fresh, full of ripe strawberry, not in the least bit cloying. It was light but had substantial heft for a rosé. And at $6.49 a glass (one of the less expensive wines on the menu) it was nice to my wallet. This wine reminded me of another wonderful rosé, the Rosé of Syrah from Ampelos Cellars of the Santa Rita Hills in California:

Will had a glass of the 2004 tempranillo from Bodegas Ercavio. It was fruitier than other tempranillos I’ve had–less vanilla from oak. (Maybe this is because Bodegas Ercavio is not in Rioja, which has a reputation for oakiness.) It was a light, pleasing red, and well-priced at $6.99.

I had the Croque Marcel, basically a French panini consisting of grilled smoked turkey and goat cheese, with a side of frites. The top was covered with what the menu described as “mornay sauce” but what I will describe as heaven. Will had the coq au vin, a stew of chicken slow-cooked with mushroom, carrots, onion, and celery, served with a side of potatoes au gratin. The food, combined with a few Dunhill Lights and the aforementioned wine, made me forget LA for just a moment and feel like I was in Paris. (The table next to us was full of loud Frenchmen, adding to the atmosphere.)

After this dinner we wandered around the Farmer’s Market and the Grove, and I decided to check out the Cost Plus World Market. My previous post on champagne had elicited A LOT of positive reviews of Cost Plus on Yelp! and there was one a mere two-minute walk from Monsieur Marcel.

I have to say I was pretty impressed. Many different wines, many for a few dollars less than at your more frou-frou wine stores. In terms of Spainish wine, for instance, you can find a Conde de Valdemar Riserva for $14.99, and Marqués de Riscal for $12.99.

Will and I were looking around and a young woman says something indistinct to me. I turn around, and she says, “Oh, I’m sorry, I thought you worked here!” (a comment I get quite often at different sorts of stores–the Gap, Banana Republic, Jiffy Lube).

A few more words exchanged showed that she was looking for a malbec. I LOVE MALBEC! This woman and I searched the wine section and found the Argentine wine shelf–they had a few malbecs.

Then my eyes settled on the malbec reserva from Bodega Norton, priced at around $12-14. Then, below that the “regular” malbec from Bodega Norton for the bargain price of $7.99!

I had come across Bodega Norton frequently in magazines and online reviews. This estate was established in 1895 by an English engineer, making it the first winery in the now-famous Mendoza region of Argentina. I related this to the woman, who picked up a bottle. She either was won over by this information or was just tired of my going on and on about wine!

Whatever the case may be, I decided to pick up a bottle for myself–tasting notes will follow soon!

Actually, let me qualify that statement a bit: I have a love-hate relationship with Berkeley. But, as they say, “absence makes the heart grow fonder.” So, being at home now for nearly a year and five months, working at LegalZoom.com, I love Berkeley now more than I hate it.

One of the great things about Berkeley is the abundance of absolutely wonderful food and drink. There is a culture of organic produce, slow cooking, artisanal craftsmanship, and good living.

There are a lot of wine shops in Berkeley or in the surrounding areas. Kermit Lynch is the one everybody knows about–he imports all those small French producers and sells them retail at his store on San Pablo. Then there are Vino! locations everywhere–one on College in Oakland, another on Solano, one off of Fourth Street in Berkeley, another in San Francisco. The Andronico’s market on North Shattuck (accessible on the 7 or 9 buses, for you college kids!) is also surprisingly good.

I want to focus on “A Wine Store for the People”–Vintage Berkeley, which is appropriately on Vine Street near the original Peet’s Coffee:

(My apologies for blatantly ripping off this picture from the Vintage Berkeley webpage!)

The store itself is housed in a former water pumping station, which makes entering the place a whimsical experience (if only there were special pipes that carried wine instead of water… try taking a bath in that, eh?).

Vintage Berkeley has wines that I’ve never seen anywhere else. It has selections from super-small growers from California and all around the world. It’s one place where you will be able to find the elusive txakolina, a Spanish (specifically Basque) white wine that is not always but usually a bit effervescent. Originally reserved for Basque royalty, txakolina is now ubiquitous in the tapas bars of the region. Txakolina is usually off-dry, with a pronounced mineral quality. It’s very refreshing, especially on a summer day.

The appeal of Vintage Berkeley is that most of the wines are below $20. The txakolina, for instance, is around $14. You can also sometimes find gems like the Shotfire Ridge Shiraz, a delicious powerful wine from the Barossa Valley of Australia, on the “clearance rack” for a few bucks off.

They have wine tastings in the afternoon, though I never was able to make it to any for various reasons. The salespeople are very friendly, young, and very enthusiastic.

Not all is rosé, however. Vintage Berkeley is hit or miss with its wines–some are very, very good (like the Pie Franco Rueda verdejo from Blanco Nieva or the txakolina) while others–despite salesperson recommendations–are simply terrible. The prices are right, however, so on the balance you’re still coming up ahead.

Also, the salespeople are very young and are probably just starting out in wine like me. One observation is that they seem to use “stone fruit” to describe every single white wine! But hey, at least you won’t be confronted with pretension! They’re so friendly you’ll forget you’re in a wine store.

____________________________

A few weeks ago I was at a Saturday wine tasting at Mission Wines in South Pasadena with my co-worker Erica and her boyfriend Jack. A representative from Epicurean Wines came to display his company’s wares. Among the five selections were:

1. Glaetzer 2006 Amon-Ra Shiraz (Barossa Valley)
2. Glaetzer 2005 Godolphin Shiraz (Barossa Valley)
3. Charles Cimicky 2005 Grenache/Shiraz Trumps (Barossa Valley)

There were two other wines–one was a sparkling shiraz which was interesting, and another was a rosé of some variety.

If you couldn’t tell by now, Epicurean Wines specializes in wines from Australia.

(An aside: one of the first wines I remember was a shiraz… I was a sophomore at Griffiths Hall in Unit 2, and a sultry and much more mature junior transfer named Veronica invited me to her room for a glass of wine. I don’t remember the name of the wine, but I remember thinking how well wine went with women [and alliteration, apparently]).

The Amon-Ra and Godolphin from Glaetzer were billed as the headliners of the tasting, and at $70 and $60, respectively, were a bit too expensive for this college grad’s wallet. They were delicious, to be sure, very full, very round, very “classic” shirazes. Erica bought a bottle of the Godolphin as a Christmas present for her mom. But the standout for me was the grenache/shiraz blend from Charles Cimicky.

Grenache itself is a very peppery, high-alcohol grape–to my untrained palate it is a bit sharp and seems to lack heft. Shiraz, on the other hand, is pretty hefty and very round. The Trumps blend is 60% grenache and 40% shiraz.

When I first tried it I was blown away by how high up in my mouth the flavors seemed to hit. Rather than staying low on the tongue like the other shirazes I have had, this one was elevated, rising up to my hard palate and floating through my nose. However, it was still grounded (it does have 40% shiraz, after all!) and overall was nicely balanced.

The price was right too: it retails for anywhere between $16 to $19. It was a family favorite as well–both my sister and mom loved it, and it’s hard to get them to agree about anything!

FOOD SUGGESTIONS: Lamb or barbecue, even chocolate.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: This is a very friendly, approachable wine. Easy on the budget. I think it’s a safe bet for a romantic evening or a dinner with friends.