Quilceda Creek
Columbia Valley Cabernet Sauvignon
2018 vintage tasted June 2021. If I were to blind-taste this wine, I would have never guessed it’s a Cab! I think I’d say it was some sort of weird blend of Pinotage and Merlot. But if the tasting judge pulled off the wrapper, I would smack my forehead in embarrassment and exclaim, “of course it’s a Cab, but it’s soooo unique!” The tannic structure is not what you get from a Cab from its optimal growing regions (Napa, Sonoma, Coonawarra). The body is lighter, and its medium tannic structure lets a lot of spice through. I don’t think it’s quite as good as the 2016 vintage, but I have to give it same 9.8 rating which I gave the 2016. Maybe I should edit my 2016 rating and push it up to 9.9? (I’ve never given a wine a 10 or even a 9.9, but maybe I’m being too much of a wine snob?) Anyway, I taste so few wines at this level of sophistication that I worry I am underrating it and that I’m not damning it with faint 9.8 praise.
This wine is young, but I’m sure it will be fully drinkable in 20 years (long after I’m gone!). But I’m not sure it will get any better with age—rather it will only change from great to a different great.
Tasting notes: cinnamon and blackberries on the nose. Dry red fruit on the front. Medium tannic structure—not silky, but not puckery. It has a long finish with all sorts of spicy post-orgasmic pleasures.
All I can say is, if it you can get yourself on the Quilceda Creek mailing list, you will be blessed, and you will be one of the coolest wine drinkers around.
2018 vintage tasted June 2021. If I were to blind-taste this wine, I would have never guessed it’s a Cab! I think I’d say it was some sort of weird blend of Pinotage and Merlot. But if the tasting judge pulled off the wrapper, I would smack my forehead in embarrassment and exclaim, “of course it’s a Cab, but it’s soooo unique!” The tannic structure is not what you get from a Cab from its optimal growing regions (Napa, Sonoma, Coonawarra). The body is lighter, and its medium tannic structure lets a lot of spice through. I don’t think it’s quite as good as the 2016 vintage, but I have to give it same 9.8 rating which I gave the 2016. Maybe I should edit my 2016 rating and push it up to 9.9? (I’ve never given a wine a 10 or even a 9.9, but maybe I’m being too much of a wine snob?) Anyway, I taste so few wines at this level of sophistication that I worry I am underrating it and that I’m not damning it with faint 9.8 praise.
This wine is young, but I’m sure it will be fully drinkable in 20 years (long after I’m gone!). But I’m not sure it will get any better with age—rather it will only change from great to a different great.
Tasting notes: cinnamon and blackberries on the nose. Dry red fruit on the front. Medium tannic structure—not silky, but not puckery. It has a long finish with all sorts of spicy post-orgasmic pleasures.
All I can say is, if it you can get yourself on the Quilceda Creek mailing list, you will be blessed, and you will be one of the coolest wine drinkers around.
2014. Surprisingly accessable for a 4 yr old, but still a bit primary. A 100 pointer by Parker based on its future. Would love to have another bottle in 10 yrs.
2014. Surprisingly accessable for a 4 yr old, but still a bit primary. A 100 pointer by Parker based on its future. Would love to have another bottle in 10 yrs.
Mar 31st, 20182007. Tough to figure. Smooth but unremarkable at open. 3 hours in a little harsh but also quite intriguing. Too soon?
2007. Tough to figure. Smooth but unremarkable at open. 3 hours in a little harsh but also quite intriguing. Too soon?
Dec 2nd, 2017Love WA State wine, full body and so supple!
Love WA State wine, full body and so supple!
Jul 7th, 2017