Friday, June 30, 2006

Blue Pyrenees Shiraz 2003


Just finished dinner. We drank the Blue Pyrenees Shiraz 2003 (Avoca VIC). This was one of the wines from the Wine Society I mentioned earlier.

In some ways it was not a fair tasting of the wine. My better-half had prepared tandoori chicken and the smell and tang of the spices overshadowed much of the wine. Over dinner the wine did not have a chance to state its case.

I did however save some until about half an hour (now) after dinner when the smell and taste of the tandoori has subsided. I am glad I did! The wine is much better than I had originally thought.

The wine is a medium red in colour. It is not dark red but certainly not light either. The nose is not big but there was definitely plum and maybe a touch of pepper (spices?) on the nose. The label on bottle talks of licorice but I couldn't find it - but that may just be me or the after-effects of the tandoori.


The palate is commensurate with the nose and there is a touch of oak and, very mild or soft tannins. There is reasonable intensity and length (I actually timed it this time - I can't believe I did that - how anal - oh! around 20 seconds). There is a nice balance to the wine. You couldn't say it had a lot of complexity but what it does have is quite well balanced and structured. It could never be said to be close to being a premium wine but is a pleasant guzzler with no apparent (at least to me) defects.

How this rates on a scale of 20 or 100 - beats the heck out of me - I am still to jump that hurdle and I am sure there are a few of the other wine bloggers that will give me some gratuitous advice on the matter (yep - I have seen the way you have badgered poor Ed).

Would I buy this wine again? Maybe! I may be way off base here, but I seem to recall having a bottle of the 2001 vintage that was a bit better than the 2003 (at least in my mind). I think I will try the 2004 when it comes out just to see.

(Many thanks to Melanie Dickinson from Blue Pyrenees for the photo and the kind permission to use it)






4 Comments:

Anonymous Murray said...

Scoring a wine is damn hard, as is writing a good tasting note. That being said the only way to get better is practice.

I am clinging to my rating out of 10 for a bit longer, it serves as a general guide, and places a particular wine somewhat amongst its peers.

1:28 PM  
Blogger Mal said...

Murray

I know what you mean about it being hard! Because I am new at it I finding there is a real lack of confidence (or conviction) that what I am describing is accurate. Take the 2004 Tyrrells Heathcote for example. Now I have read your 2003 review I am more than a little nervous that I have totally cocked up the review of the 2004.

Also I owe you an apology! For some reason I thought it was you having a go at Ed to go to a 100 point system. It was actually the work of the dastardly GW and Cam.

3:53 PM  
Anonymous Murray said...

I wouldnt worry about lack of confidence in giving a wine a score, its not like you're being paid to do it at a professional level, its just your own personal view on the day.

For me, where a lot of reviewers are able to list specific flavours they can find in a wine, ill often be a bit more generic, "red fruits" rather than cherry/raspberry/cranberry etc. Perhaps over time ill become more specific.

I am still keen to try the 04 Heathcote, others have given it a positive review as well.

4:36 PM  
Blogger Mal said...

Thanks - that's good advice. I needed to hear it.

5:35 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Site Feed
Enter your Email and receive the latest posts immediately


Powered by FeedBlitz