Rosenblum Part I

I like Rosenblum a lot. I'm on their mailing list. They make numerous huge fruity, oaked red wines using zin, syrah, petite syrah from numerous appellations (vineyards). Plus they have some whites, a rose, dessert wines and several other reds (often a Merlot, a Cab Franc, a Mourvedre this year), so there are many styles to choose from. Their case productions are slowly rising.

Their wines define an extreme style. Very ripe, and very high alcohol; many wines break 15% which would have been unheard of 5 years ago. (Aside: I was wine tasting this past weekend and had a 16%+ wine at Martinelli, which is probably the highest I've had.) Rosenblum wines are meant for drinking alone. They are often too big to have with serious food. The critics (Wine Spectator, Robert Parker) also seem to like them, for what it is worth.

At their best, there is a dark berry, vanilla, alcoholic nose. Across many of their wines I've sometimes found coffee, chocolate, vanilla, coconut in a rich, big body amidst all the fruit. At their worst, they taste jammy with hints of raisin and are overly "hot" (alcoholic).

Anyways onto some tasting notes and recollections.

Rosenblum, 2003 Rockpile Road, Zinfandel ($24, Winery): WS 94. This is/was the highest rated zin by WS. Ever. With such expectations, it was disappointing. Big, somewhat rich, with a variety of berry flavors and a slightly burnt flavor (I'm guessing this was the "toasty oak" in the review). I'll probably share the remaining bottles. [C+].

Rosenblum, 2004 Rockpile Road, Zinfandel ($24, Winery): I had a brief taste of this Zin and it didn't get much of a chance to breath. Thinner than many Rosenblum Zins but started to develop a nice berry, cedar complexity with a nice smooth finish.

Rosenblum 2003 Oakley, Zinfandel ($15, ?) - The 2002 initially was one of my "finds" for $12 a massive smooth oaky fruit bomb. The 2003 tasted on 11/08/2006 (election night) is still a big dark wine but rougher. Dark fruit with leather and a hint olives. Just the barest hint of jammy and sweetness in the smooth finish. Interesting nose. Not sure what to make of this [C+].

Rosenblum 2002 Allegria, Zinfandel ($15, WC) - nose of raisins with bit of spice. Med-big smooth with ripe but mellowing fruit and raisiny after taste. Mostly smooth with a bit of acidity and minimal tannins. It's definitely started to mellowed out a bit. (WS 88) [C+]

Rosenblum 2001 Allegria, Zinfandel ($15?, WC) - mild vegetal, spice nose (camphor or euculyptus?). Big purple berry with some brambly wood (neither good nor bad) in a med body. Can taste the heat (15.4%). Med-thin finish with med tannins. Not too complex. (WS87) [C]
I left this out in a glass overnight and it was still good the next evening. It had lost some fruit, but gained balance with a more wood and body. [C+]

10/02/06

The Richard Sauret Zin and I have a relationship.

Rosenblum 2001 Richard Sauret, Zinfandel ($14, Winery): I discovered the 2001 by accident and was astonished at how un-zinlike it was. Big, lush, smooth with chocolate and a cabernet-ish berry. The first few bottles were absolutely wonderful [A]. I bought 6 bottles overall I believe. Subsequent bottles a year later tasted overly jammy [C].

The 2002 came, got a huge 92 from WS, and went. I never got a bottle.

Rosenblum 2003 Richard Sauret, Zinfandel ($16, Winery)
Ready for the 2003, I secured 4-6 bottles. It too got a WS 92. Fearing a fading wine, we had a bottle of the 2003 tonight. There's not too much of a nose. Strong wonderul flavors among a disappointly medium body. Elegant berry, with growing vanilla, oak and chocolate notes. As of two hours later, it has rounded out nicely, but still not as rich as I wish for, but with more vanilla and chocolate. Yummy. But the bottle and my glass is empty. Sigh. [B+ to an A-].

10/04/2006:

Rosenblum 2004 Richard Sauret, Zinfandel ($16, Winery): Not nearly as good as the 2003. Started out overly plummy and bit jammy (not a flavor I like so much anymore) but still a nice wine. After a few hours, it was more balanced but it was mostly a nice plum, berry wine. Not much creamy oak or vanilla. While big in flavor, it wasn't rich. [C+].

Rosenblum 2002 Annettes, Zinfandel ($18(?), WC): Nose of spice and dark fruit, almost burnt at first. Palate of berry with oak, vanilla and hints of chocolate. Well balanced with some tannins. Big but not rich. Better than I expected, as many Rosenblums fade after a few years. [B].

Will be continued as more Rosenblums are tasted...

Norton 2005, Malbec ($10?, ?) - Opened up a bit after 30 min. Medium bodied, smoothish malbec (bit of violets and just a hint of acidity). Fruity, but nothing exceptional. A co-worker described it as "muddy" (which I did not taste). [C+]

Rosenblum 2004 Vintner's Cuvee, Syrah ($10?, winery) - Medium bodied fruity. I didn't let it breath long enough. Alternated between non-descript and fruity with a decent body. Drink now.
[C+]

Tried a Romanian wine today.

Cotnari 2003 Grasa di Cotnari ($? - from a coworker). Pale yellow. Aroma like mead. Tastes like light honey and a very weak grassy wine that do not mix or blend physically. Pleasant.

Rosenblum 2004 Rhodes, Petite Syrah ($20? - winery): Too tannic for me at this point. Good dark fruit in a big style. But never opened up. [C+].

This blog is about wine. Not just any wine, but wine you can reasonably expect to buy if you live in a major metro in California and you want to spend no more than $20 for a bottle. Most of the wine I comment upon is less than $15 a bottle and can be bought at one (but not all) major distributors (Costco, Trader Joes, Bev Mo, Safeway or Albertsons), which is where I get a decent bit of my wine. "Unfortunately" (for some of you hypothetical readers) I live near the The Wine Club, which only has a few Calif locations, so I'll undoubtedly be reviewing harder to get wines.

My style:
- reds: big, fruit forward, oaked, non-acidic.
- white: big oaked chardonnay; zingy, crisp sauvignon blancs.

I'll try to use the following scale:

• A = I should buy a case or more of this wine at this price
  
• B = I should buy 3 more bottles of this wine
  
• C = I enjoyed this bottle and would buy it again
  
• D = Didn't care for the wine at this price, but not at complete waste at this price.
  
• F = You would have to pay me to drink this again

Wine stores:

• TJ = Trader Joes
  
• Costco - selection varies considerably by store.
  
• WC = The Wine Club www.thewineclub.com
  
• BM = Bev Mo or Beverages and More
  
• Safeway
  
• Albertsons
  
• CP = Cost Plus
  

My intended naming/labelling convention is "Winery Year Designation, Varietal ($price - where)". For foreign wines, I hate it when I can't tell the winery from the designation, so I hope this labelling helps.

Among recent tastings:

Columbia Crest 2002 Grand Estates, Syrah ($7 TJ): nice coffee, chocolate hints. Smooth, almost big. Really nice. My first [B+ to A] wine a while.

Rosemount 2002 GSM South Aust ($10 TJ - a special deal): Smooth, plush, medium bodied and intensity. Black fruit with bit of oak. I wished I'd picked up more at this price. [B+] at this price.

Costco Napa Merlot 2002 (?) ($10 Costco Mountain View): A great example of wine with food versus without. On its own, the wine has nice red and black fruit with a woody decent acidity. Thin but flavorful, though I wasn't too fond of it [B-]. With food, it paired nicely as the lean earthy acidity was quite nice. [A-].