A negative review today. They need to happen from time to time, for a fresher perspective on those wines which are really good.
Nice packaging, dud wine.
This wine ought to have been. Ca’ del Bosco is a leading producer of Italian wine that I praised here, and their Chardonnay belong to Italy’s finest. But this Chardonnay 2002 is just uninteresting and untasty. It has a funky nose of butterscotch and fudge, more like a flavoured latte than wine, and the malolactic fermentation character continues on the palate. I have nothing against malo Chardonnay but this wine has no fruit or structure to speak of. The acidity is very low, reinforcing the milky suggestion and the wine oxidises within a day of opening. There’s not even much evolved complexity that would add interest.
This wine also teaches an important lesson. An overoaked wine will always be overoaked. Don’t believe those tasters and producers who say oak will ‘integrate’ with time. If it sticks out like a sore thumb at age 2, it will be the same after a decade. It’s especially true of white wines. Without extract and structure, the oak will eventually devour them. It’s not easy, and many aspiring producers in Europe and New World fall into the trap. On the other hand, taste a really good Meursault with the same oak and malo fermentation regime to understand the difference: the Meursault has so much power that it eats up the oak within a few years.
Ca’ del Bosco Chardonnay 2002: disappointing.
Disclosure
Source of wine: own purchase.
I remember when in the eighties we couldn’t sample the audio cassettes and LPs we were buying in the stores. Being a teenager and having just spent all the money you had on a dud album was very upsetting. Same with wines for the adult.
Agree, though as adults we grow to be more philosophical about it. And there’s always another bottle in the cellar
Nice post. A bad review handled well.
Good point this last thing about oak and wines that can/cannot handle it.