Somewhere in the last month, with cold rain coming through town, we got it in our heads to try mulling some wine. We’ve mulled mead before, and had mulled wine at fall tastings, but hadn’t tried it on our own.

We’ve seen folks use a pot on the stove top or packaged mulling spices; most wineries seem to leave the wine in the bottle and stand the bottle in some water in the slow cooker. We just poured our wine into our slow cooker, added some spices if the wine wasn’t already spiced, turned the slow cooker on to low, and waited for the aromas of mulling wine to permeate the house.

We first tried Linganore Winecellars‘ Steeple Chase. It’s marketed as a semi-sweet red, good with chocolate, but Matt added whole cloves, a cinnamon stick, and a little nutmeg. It was almost dessert in and of itself – sweet and fruity.

We liked it so much we next tried their Spicy Regatta, on the advice of Lucia Simmons, Director of Marketing at Linganore, although only with a stick of cinnamon, since it’s already spiced. This is the wine Linganore suggests for mulling. This had more subtle flavors than the mulled Steeple Chase and a smoother finish; Matt, who likes drier wines, seemed to like this more than the Steeple Chase.

Our next endeavor was Boordy‘s Spiced Wassail. Like the Spicy Regatta, it was already spiced, so we only added a cinnamon stick. It was similar to the Regatta, pretty smooth on the tongue, with a deeper finish.

Given our success with the Steeple Chase, I wondered what other sweet reds might be good for mulling. At the Maryland Wine Festival with friends, I tasted Running Hare Winery’s Jack Rabbit Red, and bought a bottle to bring home and mull. Even more than the Steeple Chase, it was obviously not created for mulling, but rather as a table wine. However, the unabashed fruitiness meant it went well with spices, and it was almost like a party version of a mulled wine.

So I’m now curious to try various meads and compare them, especially with the spiced meads coming out of Orchid Cellars. Given our success with the table reds, I’m curious to try other blends and even dessert wines.

What wines have you mulled in the past? Is it a custom for you, or a special event for the holidays? Has anyone mulled dessert wines?

Are you looking for reviews?

As a teacher I’m awash in numbers and data and objective ratings. But wine isn’t objective. It’s subjective. Wine will taste one way to me, another to Matt, another to Gary, and yet another to you. I may taste boysenberry and cherries, and my cherry-loathing husband might taste stink bugs and sunscreen. (And sometimes, I just picked it for the label. Can’t lie.)

I ask because Lenn Thompson of the New York Cork Report (excellent wine blog, by the way) posted a few weeks ago about changing the rating system on that site. Eric of the Terroirists posts about why numerical scores need to go gently into that good night. The Wine Curmudgeon agrees, and goes a step further to say that scores diminish the variety available in regional wine (i.e., a Maryland cabernet franc isn’t a California cabernet franc, and shouldn’t be). And then there’s the ScoRevolution, where the magic of Web 2.0 lets you sign a manifesto saying that you don’t like numbered wines.

We generally don’t post a lot of reviews, let alone use a rating system. I personally, for the reasons above, wasn’t looking to start using numbers a la Robert Parker and many wine publications. But if that’s what you’re looking for, let me know in the comments below.

And while we’re at it, what else are you looking for here at VinoTrip?

Now, I consider myself the slayer of hubris when it comes to Maryland wine that is priced over $20. Many have tried (Black Ankle, Galloping Goose, some others), and so far none have succeeded in providing any measure of value to your petulant host. Decent wines, sure, but not ready to come out swinging at that price. If you’re going to price your wine at $40, in the immortal words of Samuel L. Jackson, “you got to show me something.”

So it was with great enthusiasm that I purchased the ambitiously-priced Boordy so that I could drink up and post something smug to my blog about pricing Maryland wines. I have a history of this sort of thing. The Boordy’s blind-tasting opponent would be the crowd-pleasing 2007 Chateau St. Michelle Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley. Chateau St. Michelle (hereafter: CSM) is the go-to in the immensely crowded sub-$15 price range.

I had the wines poured blind, tasted them, and scored appropriately. The notes follow:

Wine 1
Color: Very dark and purple. Not over-the-top-clown purple though, which is usually a sign of too much Petit Verdot.
Aroma: Petrol, greasy, trees, mossy-ness. The Maryland “smell” is in here. I feel it.
Palette: Very little up front. Some jam. Develops nicely though. Okay tannins and eventually lots of fruit.
Finish: Unbalanced and weird. Hits hard and runs away.
TWO STARS

Wine 2
Color: Dark Ruby. Translucent but barely. Nice.
Aroma: Oak, mint, menthol, peat
Palette: Very full bodied. Typical Cabernet profile. Well-balanced, not a ton of fruit or tannins or complexity, but enough of all three to keep it interesting.
Finish: Nice. Good lingering finish. (something I can’t translate from my notes). Not too alcoholic or anything that upsets.
THREE STARS

Wine 2 was a superior wine, no doubt. So of course I wrote down that Wine 1 was the Boordy and Wine 2 was the CSM. Of course, I was wrong.

The Boordy Long Name was Wine 2! I was pleasantly surprised and resolved to investigate further by continuing to drink from the bottle for the remainder of the evening.

The wine improved glass after glass. Halfway through the second glass I decided that this was a wine to be reckoned with. We’re not talking a good Maryland Wine anymore, we’re talking good wine. It’s a critical distinction; a distinction that hasn’t yet been made for a Maryland Wine (by me, anyway). This wine fits in on a National level alongside favorites from well-known regions like California and (clearly) Washington State. I still feel like $25 is a shade high, but that aside, know that we are dealing with a real wine here. Boordy and Maryland can both be proud.

The Octavin packaging box claims to keep the wine fresh for up to eight weeks after opening. I set out to see if that was true.

Week 1: The wine was good, fruity with some weight. One advantage that I’ve found to boxed wine is that they are often have the volume turned down on the alcohol and oak. The experience is very much about wine without bells and whistles (and bottles and corks). Some cola, cherry flavors around there somewhere too.

Week 4: The opened box has been on the second shelf of my fridge surrounded by turkey bacon and sippy cups. No change to the wine, though. Tough stuff.

Week 8: The wine has thinned out but it’s still fine. In all seriousness, I’d have no problem serving this to a big dinner party of people who showed up at my house. The finish was fading, and the aromas were flatter after eight weeks in a refrigerator.

Week 12: The wine finally gives up and becomes nigh undrinkable. Still, three months after opening is a triumph.

One 3 liter box can be had for around $20, so you’re talking $5-$6 bottle average. In that range, it’s a laughable value, blowing away many of its peers. Much improved since I first encountered it several years ago.

Matt had the chance to chat with the winemaker at Big House, check it here.

Fine wine – Get 50% off shipping when you buy a half-case or more with code “vino40″

Creative commons image from Flickr user russmorris

Recall, if you will, last year’s Top 5 wines of 2009. Only one wine cracked 90 points, the rest shuffled in at 89 or 88. 2010 clocked in a lot better, particularly in the early months. I had a long dry spell int he summertime where I can’t remember drinking anything of note. December stole the round for the year, though, with two wines that made me perk up and ask for another glass.

These are wines that I owned and drank in 2010. Nothing that follows comes from tasting rooms, swanky events, or international what-have-yous.

My original tasting note is in italics followed by any current commentary I have on the wine. Notes have been revised to use the five-start system (see here).

2004 Philip Togni – Cabernet Sauvignon Tanbark Hill Vineyard

Color was a dark brick red. Togni bottles his wines unfiltered, and it shows. Pop and pour: There’s a nice color complexity that you don’t see from filtered wines. The wine smelled like olive, menthol and even a little floral. Palette has cherry, oak, a thick and coating wine. Long solid finish. After one hour decant the wine was much bigger up front, both on the nose and palette. There was a lot more finesse in the wine as it delivered up front, in the middle, and on the finish. Much improved. 5 Stars.

I don’t know what I meant by “Much improved.” Regardless, I was a big fan of the wine. See the post on it here: 2004 Philip Togni – Cabernet Sauvignon Tanbark Hill Vineyard

2005 Tempier – Bandol (Cuvee Classique)

(Note missing) [5 Stars]

Look, I’m a big sucker for wines from Provence because they’re really good. I don’t know where my note went for this wine, I only have a score of 90. Weird for me.

2005 Clos de la Cure

Nice and full. Menthol, oak, leather aromas. Full palette with mocha and coffee. Big huge tannins, seriously drying. Could use another five years or a two hour decant. Lots of promise. 5 Stars.

Bordeaux may be one of the most disappointing wine regions in the world. There’s just big hype and bigger price tags. This wine delivered, though. I think I got it for $25 too so big bonus there.

NV Moet & Chandon – Imperial (Formerly White Star)

Never thought I liked a touch of sweetness to my Champagne, but Imperial really does a great job of blending the sweetness with acidity. All comes with in a nice balance. 5 Stars.

Had this several times throughout the year and it’s always good. The wine is a perfect example of how balance is everything in wine. Imperial clocks in with a touch of residual sugar making it a step sweeter than Brut Champagne. You’ll be hard pressed to get pucker-face though. The Wife actually commented on the dryness.

2006 Auteur – Pinot Noir Sonoma Stage Vineyard

Big fruit. The wine isn’t really my style being _so_ fruit forward. Lots of fruit on the nose: fig, chocolate too. Big fruity palette and a gummy, coating finish. After a few sips and some air, I realized that this wine isn’t masking anything with anything. No huge oak, no huge alcohol. It’s a great example of why I love the region and the style. A nice wine, initially not my thing but it really grew on me as the night went on. 5 Stars.

Drank a lot of Oregon Pinot Noirs this year. More often that not, the wine was good times in a bottle. This Auteur was the finest example across all of them.

Sponsored link: Buy 6 or more bottles of wine and get 1/2 off shipping with promo code “vino70″

Rather than fisticuffs at the local Best Buy, the family and I instead opted to spend Black Friday at a few Maryland wineries.  Our launching point was a beautiful rental house on the beach in Scotland.  Along for the ride were my wife, our two daughters, my mother-in-law, and Phil.

Our first stop was Solomons Island Winery (Website, Twitter).  My older daughter liked them best [She's two years old -Ed] – they had a ready supply of goldfish crackers, from which she was encouraged to help herself.  The wines were pleasant.  They don’t have a huge selection, and they don’t list everything they have on the website, but we were most impressed with our first taste, the un-oaked Chardonnay.  The oaked one wasn’t bad,  but we both preferred the other.  Their dessert wines were interesting.  My favorite was the chocolate port, which surprised me.  I have no experience with ports, so I can’t compare this one to anything else.  But it was good, and the description on the tasting sheet matched the experience.  Phil really liked the Green Apple Riesling from their Solomons Island Mist line, which are sweet and low alcohol.  Solomons Island doesn’t grow a lot of grapes.  They mostly get their grapes shipped in as juice from elsewhere.  They get local or semi-local grapes whenever possible.

Next was Cove Point Winery. They had a larger selection and a cheaper tasting.  My favorite was the CabSyrah.  The cab is my favorite grape – no surprise, really, since the Fall 2010 Maryland Wine Press Official Guide to the Maryland Wine Industry tells me that the cab is the “king of reds”, “often recognized as the premier red wine grape in the world”. After tasting the petit verdot, which I thought was decent, I asked the wife what she thought.  She turned to me and whispered, “I was shocked that a Maryland wine was that smooth”.

The wife also liked the surprisingly sweet off-dry Pinot Grigio.  The Cherry ‘n White fruit wine blend was interesting.  The smell was like a florist’s shop punching you in the face, though the taste was much more cherry. The chambourcin was terrible.  I don’t know why people continue to make wine with this awful grape.  I’ve never had a chambourcin that was even remotely drinkable. [Also noted here -Ed]

Our last stop was Perigeaux Vineyards and Winery.  Unfortunately, we didn’t pay enough attention to the hours posted in their website, which clearly stated that they were only open during the week by appointment.  The grounds looked nicer than the other two, for whatever that’s worth.

#1: Dark, dusty ruby. Definitely filtered. Menthol, alcoholic nose. Rubber, leather in there somewhere. Had a gummy cola mouthfeel, thin and a bit slinky. Short finish with some stingy pucker and tart

#2: Medium-dark purple. Rich, powerful nose. Fig on the palette, bigger on the front but then sort of cola on the back. Don’t know, can’t quite get a handle on things. Big tannins, somewhat complex. Bold.

Pretty easy layup to guess that #1 was the Boordy and #2 was the Concannon. You don’t often find adjectives like “bold” and “big” describing Maryland wines.

I preferred the Boordy for the typical reason I prefer one wine to another: it is what it is. Unlike a lot of Maryland wines, it punches its weight. The Concannon being from California actually works against it. It has CALIFORNIA WINES to compete with so it felt like it was trying to be a little bigger than its proverbial britches. CALIFORNIA WINES like to punch you in the face with WINE. DEAL WITH IT.

Sponsor message: Wine Gift Baskets & Discount Wine: Get 1/2 off shipping when you buy 6 or more bottles with code “vino87″

That said, both the Boordy and the Concannon were good. Different styles, different wines, and both will scratch your itch if you’re looking for what they offer.

A previous taste off featured the 2006 Boordy Petit Cabernet. Why, then, did I use the Boordy again? One, it’s one of the better wines in Maryland so I know if I put it up next to something then it won’t be a pounding. Two, I wanted to see how things went from 2006 to 2008. The 2008 performed better than the 2006. More pleasant, better finish, better wine all around.

Part of the mystique and allure of wine is the marvelously inefficient packaging. Soda cans have evolved to save aluminum. Costco sells milk in updated milk containers to save stacking space. It’s the nature of the beast: be more efficient than your competitors or you will lose.

While this may be true in the wine business to some degree, it has not yet led to widespread acceptance of efficient packaging. Some wineries seem to love putting their wine into bottles with weight and girth worthy of a dumbbell rack at a gym. Champagne especially: the bigger, the better.

Sponsor message: Get 50% off shipping when you buy 6 or more bottles of French wine with coupon code “vino66″

It isn’t that we haven’t cracked the case on better wine packaging. We have. There are lighter bottles, bottles with better shape, foil bottles, and the old stalwart: boxed wine. What we need is for someone to step up and put good wine into a box. While Maryland Wine fans may argue that Terrapin Station is doing just that, we need this to happen on a national scale.

Octavin is trying to do that. They’re putting “Artisan wines” into a three-liter box. Check the demo on their website to see their take on the problem.

So it was with great pleasure that I received a sample of Octavin’s boxed wine for me to try: the Silver Birch Sauvignon Blanc from Marlborough, New Zealand. Seeing such a specific designation on a box of wine is rare. Usually you’re lucky to get a varietal. Usually you’re resigned to “White table wine” or “Alcohol.”

Well the Silver Birch didn’t disappoint. First twist of the spicket yielded a torrent of golden wine. It was like a firehose. We aren’t here for refinement, though. We’re here to drink wine and this enclosure gets it to your glass in a hurry.

First look: Light, golden color. Fresh apple aroma, some floral. Nice example of a New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc. On the palette is was nice, very light and refreshing. Not trying to do too much. The trend with boxed wine is that they are pleasant but less complex than their bottled counterparts. This is no exception, however less-complexity is just fine as long as you aren’t overcompensating with oak or alcohol. Are you listening, small wine producer?

Long term test: So, boxed wine claims to last longer than wine in a bottle. It’s nice. You can have one glass and not worry about punting the whole 750ml. The wine help up okay. Octavin advertises that the wine will last up to six weeks. The Wife noticed a change after a week and after three weeks the wine had tired out quite a bit. I’m very testy about open wines though, one of the harshest critics you’ll find on the morning after.

Octavin’s entry into boxed wine is a welcome one. They are delivering a superior product when compared to other boxed wine offerings. At the price point ($25-$30 per box, 3L equivalent) it is a great competitor to bottled wines in that class.

Ghost Block is produced by an outfit called Bonded Winery Number 9 based in Napa, California. 2003 was the first vintage of this Oakville Cabernet and by 2004 the wine was receiving modest praise. The Wine Spectator gave it a 92. Doug Wilder called it “Better than some of the cults.” and hung a 96 on his review.

Things didn’t go that well for me.

First thing I noticed on the pop was the unbranded cork. I feel like an elitist snob for saying this, but an unbranded cork? People often forget that the majority of wineries are very small family operations on tight budgets. Sometimes they’ll just use whatever they have laying around to bottle their stuff and get it out the door. Domanie Du Pegau is one such example. Pegau produces hearalded wine but often ships it with a variety of foil capsules which confounds wine collectors who think they’ve been the victim of wine counterfeiting.

But this is America, and you’re producing a top quality Napa Cab. Gimmie something on the cork so I know you’re paying attention.

At least it was natural cork.

Pop and pour I immediately got this huge green olive aroma out of the glass. I’m an olive fan. A lover of olives, if you will. But this was like sniffing olives that had been sitting around for a few days, weeks even. Not good. Some more vegetal notes were in there. Not feeling the smells, I went ahead and took a swig.

It tasted nothing like it smelled. Huge burst of menthol, tobacco and alcohol up front. Gave way to some fruit then kind of wandered off and left me without a finish to write about.

By the end of the glass the weird olivey smell had blown off and it turned into a stronger wine. Nice aromas, much better finish and a more solid wine all around

Ninety minute decant The olive smell was back, and the wine seemed to crawl back up and go away during its time in the decanter. Clunky palette and no finish.

Maybe I got an off bottle that had been spoiled somehow or maybe the wine is the the “closed down” phase so often cited by critics when a wine falls short of expectations. Regardless, the wine was disappointing and is not worth the prices it is being offered it in the secondary market.

The theme was Syrah/Shiraz. Guests were asked to bring a wine where Syrah was the principal grape. Price limit was set at $20. No regional bounds were set, so of course I went with a Maryland wine. I knew I was bringing a bottle of Maryland’s Finest from Black Ankle Vineyards. My target was their Passeggiata, but Wells Liquors was out of it that day. Rather than drive around town looking for the wine I wanted, I swallowed my pride and paid up $44 for the Black Ankle Leaf Stone Syrah.

Wine were evaluated blind with the tasters knowing only that the wine was Syrah. Wines were bagged and capsules stripped prior to tastings.

As I tallied up the scores at the end of the night, I realized something really cool: two people had brought the same wine. The 2006 Colonial Estate Explorateur came out of both bag 3 and bag 4. The people who brought the wine did so independently. It’s the sort of thing that got me really geeked. Here we had evaluated the exact same wine without knowing it was the same wine.

So, two interesting factors in play. One, two of the wines were the same. Two, Maryland was in there tangling blindly with Australia, California, and Chile.

The contenders:

1) 2007 Miguel Torres Santa Dinga Shiraz, Chile
2) 2005 Zaca Mesa Syrah
3) 2006 Colonial Estate Explorateur Old Vine Shiraz, Barossa Valley Australia
4) 2006 Colonial Estate Explorateur Old Vine Shiraz, Barossa Valley Australia
5) 2007 Black Ankle Leaf Stone Syrah, Frederick County, Maryland
6) 2008 Raw Power Shiraz, South Australia

Onto the scores…

Wines were scored out of fifty possible points. Scores were Parkerized by adding fifty more points.

And the analysis…

The Leaf Store Syrah finished third by average score at 80.7 and medaled four times. It was my Wine of the Night (WOTN) receiving an 86. An 86! From me! And, Maryland! I was pleasantly surprised as it was the only wine that wasn’t barreling me over with alcohol and oak. Good balance, good fruit, some floral aromas. It’s not worth $44 (let’s not get ahead of ourselves) but it is a well-made wine.

How did the duplicate bottle of 2006 Colonial Estate Explorateur Old Vine Shiraz fare? It was the clear winner by score with an average of 82.6 and three medals. It also finished fourth at 78.8 with a gold and a bronze to show for the effort. Jon was the only one that scored the wine the same, but it should be noted that his component scores (for nose, palette, etc…) were different. For more, here’s one of those wine tasting videos where the taster stares at you while he drinks wine link.

The 2007 Miguel Torres Santa Dinga showed well, barely being edged out by the Explorateur. It averaged 81.6 and picked up one gold, two silvers, and a bronze. Dead last was the 2005 Zaca Mesa Syrah averaging 72.58 and turning up as the least liked wine on three ballots. Mike brought that one, and he says “you’re welcome.” No wine scored over 90. The Explorateur was the only one to come close pulling down scores of 88 and 89.

Nobody left impressed with any of the wines unfortunately. Perhaps tasting blind leaves you with some sense of anticipation, leading on the hope that you’ll uncover something really good. Not so in this case.