Last night we popped around the neighbour’s place with a couple of bottles of wine; they couldn’t have been more different.

Morey Saint-Denis 2002, Domaine Dujac
Oh what a ravishing nose, I am instantly smitten by its compelling beauty and charming refinement. There is perfectly ripe fruit which, whilst not lacking intensity, is exquisitely lovely and is enhanced by a subtle jasmine character which tickles my fancy no end. There is certainly earthy complexity here, but I prefer the complexity of the fruit; it is scrummy. On the palate there is a silky tannic structure which has shades of rigour to it, this wine is still bursting with life. The complex, ripe fruit on the palate adds to the impression of this being a svelte little number. The acidity is perfectly balanced and keeps the wine fresh, quaffable and vivacious. This is almost as far from being a huge blockbuster as it is possible to get, it is an elegant little wine of sculpted attractiveness. I’d much rather drink a little beauty like this than a huge alcohol and fruit bomb; you could drink this all day whereas some wines you don’t want to finish off a glass.

Cotes du Roussillon Villages ‘Cuvee Coume Marie’ 2007, Preceptorie de Centernach
I think I opened a bottle of organic solvent rather than wine, the hot burn that boils off this stuff goes beyond heroic. Indeed, it is distinctly loopy, but sadly loopy in an unattractive way. I don’t like my wines to be inhalation anaesthetics. There is a lot of fruit on the nose, but it is the stewed, jammy fruit of Grenache that has been given a really serious baking in a crazy climate. I’ve only sniffed this ludicrous monstrosity and I already actively dislike it and find it draining. I’ll taste it, though. By the danglers of donkey’s that was a real mistake. This is some harsh, aggressive, contrived facsimile of  wine; I find it hard to believe it was made of grapes. The tannins are violently coarse and bitter, giving the impression that my mouth has been given a vigorous roughing up with a Brillo pad. There is severe acidity here as well, quite unforgiving in its ruthlessness. There is also some of that unattractive jammy fruit here as well, but to suggest that this discordant, abrasive palate has any form of balance would be so bonkers it would instantly make one worthy of being sectioned in the local nut-house. This is over-blown filth of the most unremittingly horrendous style; I couldn’t even finish my glass.

We were supposed to be having a little vertical of Annie’s Lane Clare Valley Shiraz at Hawksmoor tonight. Somehow, our hosts managed to forget them when heading from horrible, horrible Woolwich to the City. Consequently, I popped into Uncorked and scored these two. One was quite delicious, the other just a woeful example of over-blown tedium.

Auxey-Duresses Premier Cru 2006, Comte Armand
Quite a pale colour. A lovely nose of fresh, ripe fruit. The fruit character is quite complex by itself, but together with its earthy richness and extremely subtle oak treatment this is a properly pleasing nose. Perhaps not as ripe and powerful as the 2005 flavour of this wine that I’ve had a couple of times recently, but sometimes we appreciate refinement rather than power. Now that is an attractive palate. Its rigorous tannic structure is backed up with lovely, attractive fruit and a fine backbone of acidity. Again, not as powerful, nor as tough, as the 2005, but this great drinking stuff. I really like the fruit/tannin interplay, plenty to keep you interested here. There is length and complexity to the palate as well, with fruity, earthy flavours persisting for a long time after you’ve swallowed. Whereas the 05 was really asking for a bit more time in the cellar, you can extract a lot of pleasure from this right now. And we did. For £25 this this high-quality bargain Burgundy, well worth every penny.

Clare Valley Cabernet Sauvignon ‘Blocks Road’ 2006, Kilikanoon
By arse, what an over-blown nose: heavy with dense, stewed, over-ripe fruit and a powerful alcohol burn. This smells like all that is dull and tedious about the Australian wine idiom: just because they want to harvest grapes that are ripe doesn’t mean they need to roast on the vines until they’ve been stewed to jamminess. I don’t really want to taste this, it just smells like it’ll over-whelm my delicate aesthetic sensibilities and leave me tired, shagged-out and generally bored. However, since I dropped eighteen fun tokens on this piece of over-rated rubbish I suppose some had better pass my lips. Yes, this is Cabernet soup mixed with slightly burnt jam. The tannins are over-ripe, there is no acidity to speak of and that fruit has just been cooked to buggery. I really feel offended by this wine. As Peter’s comments on another recent post suggest, this kind of Australian wine is perilously short of redeeming features: you just feel drinking it is far too much like hard work for little reward on the pleasure-front. Does anybody really enjoy these souped-up monsters? We are finding it really hard to finish this bottle even though we are heroes of the booze world who would normally require far more than two bottles of red to drink with our steaks. Clearly sub-interest; it is quite scandalous that people can sell dull, crap, monotonous wine like this for so much money. Dreadful filth. Many apologies to our hosts for supplying this bottle of tedious filth; next time remember to bring the wines you had planned!

I’m normally happy to pop a bottle of Morey-Saint-Denis wine, but this is far from one of the most pleasing examples I’ve had.

Morey-Saint-Denis Premier Cru Faconnieres 2005, Virgile Lignier
The nose has a lot of very ripe fruit, which you’d hope would be quite attractive, but I am just finding it a tiny bit clumsy and poorly-focussed. I don’t think the oak has been handled with with much sophistication. Whilst there are no specific winemaking faults on the nose, it doesn’t really speak to me as a good Morey charmer. The palate has plenty of fruit and vigorous tannins, but where is the complexity? Where is the love? Again there are no obvious flaws, but it seems perilously lacking dimension, style and interest. If you are pleased by simple fruit and tannin concoctions you’d probably get on well with it. However, if you are a lover of beautiful, harmonious and classy Morey-Saint-Denis you should avoid this wall-papery entity of monotony, pop down Rue de la Bussiere and see if those lovely people at Domaine Dujac will sell you some proper wine. Alternatively, cross the Route Nationale and pay a visit to my chum Cyprien Arlaud. He makes proper Morey Premier Crus of real character and does not charge the earth for them. I’m a bit vexed that, considering the distinctly high price I paid for this, it is just seems to lack any significant degree of personality. I love good Morey, and this should have been good, so it pains me to taste it and realise I’ll have to rate it as sub-interest. I threw my money away.

The partner says I am being too hard on this wine. Given that it has clean fruit and no obvious faults he rightly points out this is better than an awfully large proportion of the wine made in Burgundy. However, just because something is better than unspeakable filth doesn’t make it worth buying. If I were feeling charitable (rather than perturbed that I purchased so poorly) I’d say this is indifferent at best, and I want to drink better wines than ‘indifferent’.

Unless I have been misinformed, the Virgile Lignier labelled wines are the negociant arm of Lignier-Michelot (please correct me if I am mistaken). I had the same premier cru labelled Lignier-Michelot last summer. Whilst I felt it was lacking a bit of complexity and clearly aimed to be a tits-out wine rather than an ethereal entity of beauty, there was more interest and charm to it than this distinctly tiresome expression of vinous tedium.

My father sent me these two bottles that he had picked up in the gift shop at his local stately home. Obviously, when I opened the parcel I thought he had sent them as a joke; anyone with even a cursory knowledge of my interests could not reasonably expect me to get anything from wine like this. So when we spoke I chortled about them and said I’d probably use them for cooking. He replied, “But they come from [the local stately home], that’s posh!” Posh* or not, it is not who sells a wine that matters, it is who makes it and where. As far as the ‘where’ goes with these it is a region drowning in generic wines of tedium and mediocrity. Moreover, my previous experiences with this producer re-cast the words ‘dull’ and ‘dreary’ into new, stunning horizons of monotony. I told Roy I’d try them and write them up, but I really am more than a little confused as to why he sent them. Buying wine for other people can be very difficult, particularly if the buyer is a less rabid oenophile than the recipient. The best thing to do is ask what they want and get that rather than risk both parties feeling that money has been thrown away.

Sauvignon Blanc Vin de Pays d’Oc 2008, Baron Philippe de Rothschild
This has a really anonymous nose, it hardly smells of anything. The tiny bit of character that is there is confected and just smells too much like boiled sweets to make you think this is going to be a nice wine. The palate is vapid and insipid with unbalanced acidity and more hints of that grim, confected character. What is the point of this wine? It certainly does not speak of a place. It does not even manage to speak of a grape variety if we are honest. There is so little character here I just cannot see what enjoyment there is to be got out of it. I don’t think it is terribly badly made, it is just yet another piss boring stream of generic dreariness from an uninteresting locale and maker.

Merlot Vin de Pays d’Oc 2007, Baron Philippe de Rothschild
Oh dear. I mean this seriously, oh dear. It has the slightly vinegary nose of woeful red wine. There are shades of fruit there but this vinegar character is dominant and it one of the things I despise most about basic wines. The palate is slightly tannic, slightly acidic, with slight fruit flavours. It is less offensive than the nose, but there is so little to say about it that I’ll stop now.

*Some people say I am posh. They have no idea.

When discussing the day’s wines via text messages I have been reminded that Vincent Dancer makes wines for enjoying sooner rather than later. I wonder if that is the problem with this.

Meursault Premier Cru Perrieres 2002, Vincent Dancer
The nose is very buttery and fat, with an oaky character which I find rather unsophisticated. There is some nice fruit and minerality underneath this, but basically this nose unbalanced and crass. The palate is hot and fat, and its elements don’t seem terribly harmonious. It doesn’t seem to have any obvious faults, but there is something really flat and dull about this. Where is the balance and beauty of this great vineyard? Not in this bottle, that is for sure.

It has been a mixed day for wine. Oxidised Sorg and Weinbach (bloody Inedit 2000 of all things, I was vexed) started things off. This was followed by winemaker of the moment (Cedric Bouchard's) Inflorescence fizz. It was brilliant, especially considering it is a hilarious bargain, but painfully acidic. Then the amazing Roulot, and his wines really are amazing; I'd sell my mother, to an understanding buyer, to keep my Roulot allocation. She is aware of the pursuit of pleasure and the delight of beauty so I'm sure she'd understand that entirely (possibly). So where could we go from there? Grand Cru, of course! However, as I have followed the development of this BBM, from what is a well-regarded producer, it just seems a bit weird, simple and painfully less good than the Roulot.

Bienvenues-Batard-Montrachet Grand Cru 2002, Paul Pernot
The nose has shown some development as I have decanted and swirled, hoping it might get a bit less one-dimensional. It started off with pure but very simple lemon fruit. After a while in the decanter it had the most typical Pinot Gris nose, which was a bit odd. Now after about an hour the lemon fruit has come back and there are shades of matchbox wood. None of these things seem like really impressive aromas for flash Burgundy; quite mundane, indeed. When I first had a taste of this it had such a pronounced astringency it was perilously close to being tannic; again, this was more than a bit odd. After an hour it is a bit less austere, but it still seems like hard work. There is none of the explosive excitement and compelling complexity I want from Grand Cru white Burgundy, this is merely ordinary Chardonnay at best and totally fails to live up to the names on the label. I feel let down and disappointed. The Roulot Tessons, only a village wine, whips the arse of this; I'm so pleased to have a glass of it left to savour.

I have a lot of happy memories of Huet Premier Trie wines from the late eighties and early nineties, this just doesn't seem to live up to those memories.

Vouvray Moelleux Premier Trie 'Clos du Bourg' 2005, Domaine Huet
OK, sulphur may be varietal character for Chenin Blanc, but this is really preservative-tastic. If we are honest, this is not a terribly attractive character. It has some of the damp wool, rotting wood and general mould that one would hope for, but that sulphur is really distracting. I am not happy smelling this. The palate lacks the zip and life one would hope for from a Vouvray. It certainly tastes of a lot, it has complexity in that sense, but what it tastes of just doesn't compel me. I'm worried by its lack of personality. 1990 Clos du Bourg Premier Trie was a thrilling exciting and, let us be honest, orange wine of style and class; this just seems to be dull and pedestrian. I'd expect so much more from a supposedly top producer in a really throbbing vintage. Could it be that since they've been bought out they have sold out? More tastings required, I suppose.

I have been introduced to many fine wines via the offices of Paul Day. He also let me know about this wine, which in previous vintages was the best Beaujolais I have ever tried. You would have thought a 2007 Beaujolais would have been a terribly flattering vintage for this style of wine, but if you ask me this is just dull.

Fleurie ‘Clos de ls Roilette’ 2007, Coudert
There is some bubblegum fruit to the nose, but also a strangely meaty character. And that, lads and lassies, is pretty much it. It is a dull as dishwater, there is just nothing here to tickle your fancy. The palate is flat, boring and even more tedious than I am capable of articulating. Boring, boring, boring. I suppose at least it is not actively unpleasant, but I am fucked if I am saying anything even vaguely positive about a wine I find so boring. BORING. Get the message. I think this is a fundamental problem with Beaujolais, buggered if it grown on limestone or not, or if they don’t use carbonic maceration, it is just a broken pencil style of wine: pointless. Yeah, let us not hold back, it is crap. I’m unhappy that I have spent my money on this tossy pile of boring shite. Piss, that is what it is.

OK, I have had good Beaujolais, including the 2005 from Coudert, but I am really not sure this is a terribly interesting style of wine. Sometimes you feel the need to drink something like this, much as sometimes you need a bottle of Bandol rosé, but when you want to open something compelling for an early Saturday night's drink for your friends you can do so, so much better than this. My chums D&J with their huge quantities of Tim Adams drink better and more cheaply than Clos de la Roilette 2007.

I got this to celebrate the partner's return to London after two weeks away. He says, "If this is what you opened you cannot be too ecstatic to see me." I am ecstatic to see him, but this wine is piss boring.

Champagne Brut Grand Cru Blanc de Blancs Presidence 2002 Vieilles Vignes, R & L Legras
Bit bready and yeasty on the nose, with hints of... erm... I am not sure there are any hints of anything else. This smells fresh, and that is about it. By arse I am freaking bored to tears smelling this. Some character would be nice. The palate is watery and insipid. This must be called 'Presidence' because it is as short as Sarkozy. I'd like to rant semi-coherently about this having no redeeming features, but it just has no features at all. Avoid.

As well as this wine we had a Groffier Amoureuses 1999 on our trip which was similarly crap. I expect far more from these vineyards from a producer who is generally well thought of.

Bonnes-Mares Grand Cru 2000, Robert Groffier
This is quite medicinal. Ripe certainly, but not remotely attractive. Where is the pleasure in this nose? I am neither charmed nor impressed. The palate has a lot of nice fruit, but it just dies. No complexity either. This is distinctly third-rate Bonnes-Mares, give me Dujac, Roumier or Mugnier any day. Sure, this is a quite fruity bottle of Burgundy, but there is no Bonnes-Mares in this.

You may recall that I admitted to being foolish and buying Jean Grivot wines. Exactly how awful was one of them? Read on and find out.

Chambolle-Musigny Combe d'Orveau 2003, Jean Grivot
Does this even smell of Pinot? The nose is all over the place with poorly defined, excessive fruit, a big smack of alcohol and not much else. Where is the harmony of Chambolle? Where is the beauty? They are not on the palate, that is for sure. It is quaquaversal in its horribleness - weird, tough, unconvincing flavours assault your senses and leave you wishing there was a spittoon. The tannins in this wine are bloody awful, so hard and tough with nothing redeeming about them, there isn't even that much fruit on the palate to balance things out; it is all just bitter tannin and raw acidity. This is one of the most shamefully awful Burgundies I've tried in... oh... a period of time. It has been demonstrated that I am a fool for buying this and if you'll all form a queue outside my flat you can start throwing the rocks at me now.

My mother and step-father had this in their wine cupboard, I insisted we try it. Perhaps that was my first mistake.

Coteaux du Layon Beaulieu 1974, Les Caves de la Loire
Hell's bells, this smells like a mixture of glue and paint-stripper. Not entirely attractive, if we are honest. That being said, for a 34 year old wine it has a degree of freshness which is quite amazing; not nice admittedly, but amazing that it is not completely oxidised. Oh dear, the palate is really quite repulsive, not oxidised or shagged out, but just deeply nasty with far too many weird and chemical flavours. I have to say, it is amazing a wine this bad has aged so well. It is horrible, for sure, but it could be so very much worse. I will not be finishing off the glass, but I find myself being strangely impressed that it was not immediately emetic.

I was in Lancashire last weekend for a wedding to two lovely friends of mine. We paid a visit to the amusingly named town of Clitheroe to go to the excellent wine merchant D. Byrne. It was filled with an embarrassment of riches which were generally very reasonably priced. My chum Jeremy Seysses saw this wine on the shelf and told me I should buy it as it had rave reviews from some American journalists. It was only £13 so I thought why not? When I had paid I noticed it was 16.5% alcohol and so I challenged Jeremy, who I know to be a lover of beautiful wines, on why he had recommended lighter-fuel for me try. He came clean and said he knew I would hate it, but he likes to read my torrents of invective about horrible wines. He had knowingly got me to buy despicable wine. Thanks, Jeremy, thanks a bunch. So do I hate it? Read on...

Shiraz "The Boxer" 2006, Mollydooker
By arse, I've smelled less confected jam than this. This smells of alcohol, wood and jammy fruit; it is depressingly simple and horrifically overblown. Smelling this for more than a couple of seconds burns my nose. There is nothing even remotely attractive about its aromas. No. Oh no. Really, no. For fuck's sake, the palate is truly horrible. Sweet, flabby, painfully alcoholic; how can people like shit like this? It is vile filth. OK, if you want monster-get-pissed-fast, soupy, unbalanced, sweet mouthwash, this will do. If you think wine should have redeeming qualities like elegance, style and, let us be honest, drinkability, you'll find this as offensive as I am as I try to choke back enough to write this tasting note.

Which leaves us wondering what sort of wine journalism recommends this kind of crap. I am reminded of how I used to chose girlfriends whilst at university. Tall or short, beautiful or ugly, clever or stupid, it didn't matter to me as long as they had big tits. That was all that mattered - huge bouncers. Of course, this is a terrible way of viewing women, just as viewing over-ripe monstrosities like this as the pinnacle of wine-making is a shameful view of wine. Complexity, style and balance are to be applauded, and simple, booze-tastic, beasts are to be pilloried. I am disgusted to think that someone could recommend something as shamefully crap as this.

OK, I admit that very few Sauvignon Blancs do it for me, but this is horrible beyond my powers of description. I'll give being rude a go, though.

Sauvignon Blanc "Selection 94" 2006, Dog Point Vineyard
The nose is completely confected and contrived, clearly made from over-ripe fruit that has been cold-fermented. It is not all that clean, either. Utterly disgusting filth would be a fair description of the nose; it revolts in so many ways. I've had two mouthfuls and that is enough. It is blowsy and distinctly sweet, with truly horrible rotting fruit flavours. It lacks any balance, harmony, or even any nice flavours that would make one want even sip this wine gingerly. This wine is a slur on the good name of wine. How could anyone make this and, even more incredibly, expect people to pay money and drink it? I have been drinking so well recently that this wine is personally offensive; the winemaker generated this filth specifically to revolt those who like nice wine and I bet the bastard was targetting me in particular. I am eternally grateful that I didn't pay for this, but my bad mood at having tried it will last until someone punches the winemaker on my behalf.

After the 'Egly-Ouriet being nice' shocker it is good to get back to some reliably crap producers. The 'sub-interest' status of Santa Duc wines is forever assured. Of course, Robert Parker gave it 93 points (whatever the hell that means) and said it will age until 2018.

Gigondas "Prestige des Hautes Garrigues" 1998, Domaine Santa Duc
The nose smells of raw booze, strawberry jam and horrible, horrible rancid dirtiness. This is unbalanced and simply repulsive. The palate has a hot, booze-tastic burn and sweetness to it, soupy tannins (if they can even be called tannins) and a nasty flavour of rotting jam. Is it possible anyone could enjoy this monstrous horror? It has aged really badly and (let us be honest) was bloody dire when it was released, so please, let us drink something else and use this for burning grease stains off the garage floor.

There is a bit more to this than simply oak, but not that much more.

Chardonnay Santa Rita Hills "Sanford and Benedict Vineyard" 2004, Au Bon Climat
The nose is hellishly oaky, with hints of off milk, which isn't terribly attractive. The ripe lemon fruit is nice, though. A lot of toasty, vanilla oak on the palate, with reasonable acidity and just hints of fruit showing past the wood. This is quite a simple wine, and it doesn't have much in the way of a finish. Vinous wallpaper.

This is raw booze. Sometimes that is nice, but this is just a bit too fiery and far too dull.

Lirac "La Reine des Bois" 2005, Domaine de la Mordoree
Incredibly dark. A hot nose of stewed fruit, not fresh in the slightest. It has some spiciness, too, but is mostly characterised by a shit-load of alcohol. I suppose my anaesthetised nose can just detect a bit of earthiness, but I wouldn't go as far as calling this complex, oh no. The palate is very hot and sweet with alcohol, with big, gum-busting tannins and some stewed fruit. And that, I am afraid to say, is very much it. No excitement here, move along please.

I have to say I've rarely got very much pleasure out of Mordoree wines, and yet I recommended this be purchased. I may be in touch with the deep message of wine but clearly I don't always pay attention when that message is "I'm a bloody awful bottle of lighter-fluid". I blame the beast of my Id, it just wants me drunk so I behave outrageously.

I was given this bottle to prove that 'Claret can be very good'. Now, as I have said before, I hate Claret. This makes me wonder why someone would give me something they know I'll hate. Do they, perhaps, hate me? Do they want me to suffer? It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't so bad.

Chateau Gloria 1971
The nose is quite Cabernet flavoured, it also smells quite a lot of cabbage. It has quite a pronounced vinegar aroma, which is a tad distracting. That being said, the nose is not so bad; there is some fruit, a degree of cedar-wood complexity. Not so bad. The palate, on the other hand, is bloody awful. It is dried-out and tough, with a really nasty vinegary finish. It tastes absolutely disgusting. This demonstrates all I hate about old Claret; it is dry, fruitless, acetic, and downright nasty. I hate it. Sorry, anonymous donor, but this is really horrible. The finish is worth torrents of abuse I am not capable of spewing. No. And I really mean No.

'Oh fancy!'-grade Beaujolais. I know some people who have raved about this wine, I hope it is nice.

Moulin-a-Vent "Chateau des Jacques" 2005, Louis Jadot
I'm surprised by how dark it is. It has quite a lot of cherry fruit on the nose, and is surprisingly oaky too. It seems quite big. The palate has some fruit, but is oddly heavy and dull. There is not enough acidity and there is really not enough tannin to make this anything over than an overblown tart of a wine. Yesterday's Tandem was better.

I only own one bottle of Claret, I hate the stuff. Red Bordeaux is simply dull unless it is fabulously expensive, and most of them are still crap. After this I am not going to buy another bottle of red Bordeaux.

Domaine de Chevalier 1995
Oh god, I fucking hate crappy fucking Claret. Yeah, yeah, it smells of blackcurrant and cedarwood, bit dirty. Piss boring. Palate dry and austere, not much fruit. Just what is the point? I really don't see it. I find this stuff actively unpleasant, and I feel ashamed of myself for having purchased it at a knock-down price eight-odd years ago.

Hell'ś bells. What the hell is this beast in my glass? Made by the old Cape Mentelle winemaker.

3 Amigos Shiraz, Grenache, Mourvedre 2005, McHenry Hohnen Vintners

This is a booze-tastic horror of christmas pudding fruit and alcoholic craziness. It has a very fruity nose, a very soapy, soupy, fruity palate. Of all of the hideous, dull, wallpapery, boring powerhouse wines I've had, this is perhaps the most hideous, dull, wallpapery and boring.

Another day, another Savennières. This seems a lot less extreme than the Eric Morgat.

Savennières Chateau de Chamboureau "Cuvée d'Avant" 2004, Pierre Soulez
This has classic Savennières aromas, dampness, hair, dogs and it is moderately mineral. There is a hint of apple and raisin fruit, but mainly this smells of slightly weird things. It is not a thrilling nose, by any means. The palate has some good weight, and good acidity, but the weird flavours are neither nice nor weird enough to make this terribly interesting. If such a thing is possible, this is quite dull Savennières; wall-paper wine. It might be his most basic cuvée, but I expect more from Soulez.

I am back drinking again. Hooray for wine! I was hoping for my first wine to be good, but I am very disappointed with this.

Savennières Trie Spéciale 1997, Domaine des Baumard
This smells rather big and powerful. A heavy nose laden with the decayed sweetness of a ripe blue cheese. There is a degree of botrytic apricot fruit on the nose as well, but it largely smells damp and rotten. I am concerned by the lack of minerality here. The palate is very full bodied, with some acidity and minerality, but it is terribly flat. There is no real dimension or excitement here, it is just a big mouthful of simple flavours. It also doesn't taste that nice, if I am honest. Doesn't taste nice seems a pretty damning quality comment to me.

Normally an excellent wine, even if it is getting a bit pricey these days. This bottle would have been a lot nicer a few years ago.

Pouilly-Fuissé Vieilles Vignes 2001, Château-Fuissé
Quite a dark yellow colour; this makes me worried as soon as I see it. Yes, it is really rather oxidised on the nose. Oh dear. There is some weight and fatness to it, but it is basically pushing up the daisies. The palate is quite weighty, but is also totally shot. There is also a nasty, harsh acidity to it. Like an aged, corpulent harlot this repels with its sickening stench, yet it tries to tempt me to dip in just one more time, knowing that if I do the only result will be to feel violently ill.

Today marks six years since my partner moved to England. I wanted to open something good, but I fear I have fallen slightly below par.

Champagne Brut Chardonnay 1998, Pol Roger
This has a very pure nose of lemon fruit with a hint of minerality. That, sadly, is pretty much it; it really lacks complexity. The palate also has good lemon fruit, some minerality and a hint of weight, but is really quite linear and direct. The acid is too fierce and there is not enough of anything else to balance it out. The mousse is also not as fine as one might hope for from a Pol Roger wine. It is a refreshing drink, with enough fruit and minerality to help one plough through the bottle, but it is sadly not up to the Pol standard. At least it is better than the straight vintage 1998, but I think the Gratien NV Blanc des Blancs I had recently is considerably better than this. It was a lot cheaper, too.

A few days ago I tried a bottle of Van Volxem Riesling Scharzhofberger 2005 with a friend; I was terribly disappointed by it. The winemaker, Roman Niewodniczanski, has made some great wines in the past, real models of harmony and elegance, but he just seemed to fail with this wine in this vintage. Normally he picks grapes at Auslese ripeness levels and ferments them to about 11.5% alcohol, which means they are off-dry. This wine was 12.5% and pretty god-damned dry. Like a lot of German trocken wines from the more Northerly wine regions, this resulted it it being extremely taut and linear, with nothing to balance the searing acidity. Indeed, it was actively unpleasant and we couldn't bring ourselves to finish the bottle. I had really hoped for great things, 2005 is such a good vintage in Germany after all, but with this I felt so let down I couldn't bring myself to write a note about it immediately.

Today marks five years since my partner and I moved in together; a bottle of Champagne seems in order. The wine merchant I got this from claimed on their website and shelf-sticker that this was was an old vines cuvée, yet there is no mention of this on the bottle. Perhaps they are trying to over-sell it. I was not terribly worried when I looked at the bottle as I have had plenty of Legras fizz before and they have generally been acceptable drinks for the money.

Champagne Brut Grand Cru Chouilly Blanc des Blancs 1998, R et L Legras
This smells of lemonade and bread, and that is it. Is there any complexity here? Any style? Any interest? No, it seems incredibly dull. The palate has some harsh acidity and a bit of citrus fruit, but it too is stunningly dull. No minerality, not much fruit, nothing nice, really. I'd be hard-pressed to guess this was Champagne if I were presented it blind so lacking in character is it. This really is wallpaper wine, there is nothing here to grab one's attention and put a smile on one's face. Yawn-a-rama. This merits a 'piss-boring' quality comment. And to think I opened this for a celebration. Oh how I have failed. But not as much as Legras has failed.

Jean-Michel Deiss used to make really good, single-varietal wines in Alsace. Then he appeared to go quite mad and started making blends of different grape varieties; I've hated every one of them I've tried. This is one of the last vintages he made named-vineyard vendanges tardives (late harvest wines), so I hope it is a pleasing view into the past of someone who used to be one of my favourite Alsace producers. This is only 11.5% alcohol.

Riesling Grand Cru Altenberg de Bergheim Vendanges Tardives 1994, Domaine Marcel Deiss
This looks really quite orange and mature. It smells of baked apples, with candied citrus and petrol hints. There is a rich earthiness to it. The nose suggests this is really rather mature. The palate tastes surprisingly dry, but is obviously ripe and powerful even though it seems to lack fruit. There is some good acidity there and minerals show on the finish, but this really isn't terribly complex or long. Simple and short are not features I would have expected from this, but sadly that is what the wine is like. Alas, this just tastes a bit over-mature; not oxidised, but on its way out certainly. How disappointing! I had hoped for an excellent Deiss wine of old and all I got was an old Deiss wine. At least it is not one of his filth blends; one of them would be completely dead by now and taste awful.

I really like Cyprien Arlaud's wines normally, but this is remarkably dull.

Morey-St-Denis Premier Cru les Ruchots 2000, Domaine Arlaud
This smells reasonably rich and fruity; ripe, dark fruit. There is a seasoning of oak but it is not intrusive. This is a pleasing nose. Sadly the palate is really quite dull, it is bland and doesn't taste of much. It has quite high acidity and some soft tannins, but merely hints of the fruit that show on the nose. There is no finish to speak of. I am terribly disappointed by this wine, Arlaud makes some really good wines, but this is as dull as dish-water. You can drink it, but it would probably put you to sleep rather than leave you chortling with pleasure; I like to chortle with pleasure. I wonder what went wrong with it.

This afternoon I am drinking with a past captain of the Oxford blind tasting team. He lost when he was captain, I won. We finished off the Spätlese from last night then obviously needed to move on to red wine. Sadly, the bottle we popped is not entirely satisfactory.

Chambolle-Musigny 2000, Ghislaine Barthod
The nose of this is quite woody and strangely chocolaty, it doesn't really smell like my idea of Chambolle. It is also distractingly alcoholic and lacking any fresh, charming fruit. The palate is reasonably balanced, with good acidity, but fruit is really lacking. It is quite tannic. What I find disappointing about this wine is that it really lacks the charm and pleasure of good Burgundy, my colleague suggests it even lacks the charm and pleasure of average Burgundy. I find this wine boring and depressing; I want racy, hedonistic excitement and this just delivers an extra-large helping of dullness.

This is the first time I've tried Bandol from Château Lafran-Veyrolles. Perhaps it was a bit of a mistake to buy a 2003, even though it does claim to be only 13.5% alcohol. It is 80% Mourvedre and most of the rest is Grenache with a bit of Cinsaut.

Bandol 2003, Château Lafran-Veyrolles
This has plenty of Mourvedre character on the nose: grilled meat and rich, dark fruit. It is quite earthy, too, but doesn't seem especially complex. At least it is not overpoweringly ripe and alcoholic. The palate is very dry and has really bitter tannins. Eeergh, I don't fancy this much. What fruit is present is completely dominated by the nasty, bitter character. The tannins go far beyond 'rigour' and arrive quite easily at the 'not very nice' platform. Give me Pibarnon or Tempier any day.

At the very disappointing Restaurant Etxebarri we didn't drink too well.

Albarino 2005, Pazo de Senorans
Very fruity, light bodied and refreshing. It was a passable drink but no great excitement here.

Rioja Roda I Reserva 2002, Bodegas Roda
Piss boring.

At Restaurant Alameda we had an Albarino worthy of mention and a bottle of a typically styled, big, modern wine; a 'dull wine' as I like to call them.

Albarino Seleccion de Anada 2001, Pazo de Senorans
This has been aged in large inert tanks for several years, which supposedly allows the wine to last longer than most Albarinos (which die after a couple of years). The nose has real density of good, Viognier-like fruit. The palate has real density too, and very good fruit. The finish is very pleasing. A very good wine.

Ribera del Duero 2003, AALTO
Too oaky, over-extracted. Much too butch with no harmony or elegance. No thanks.

The two Australian wines I had planned to have with dinner bored the tits off me.

Chardonnay 2003, Cullen
Soft melon fruit on the nose, some wood too. It smells quite dull; I've had so many similar wines in the past. The palate has fruit, acidity and oak, but is frighteningly boring. I am not impressed.

'Joseph' Nebbiolo 2002, Primo Estate
Oh no, I am not really sure I can be bothered. Yeah, there is cherry fruit and there is a hint of bitterness, but it is just another ripe Australian wine, really. I think it is well made, with plenty of fruit and tannin, but it is just wall-paper in the realm of fine wines.  

I first tried this at the London wine and spirit trade fair. I thought it seemed a nice enough drink. It is an adequate, but slightly dull, aperitif.

Riesling 2004, Plantagenet
This has but hints of fly-spray on the nose, a common problem, I find, with Australian Riesling. It is obviously ripe, but has some pure grapefruit notes on the nose. It is quite weighty on the palate, with good, but not excessive acidity. It is a perfectly nice drink, but doesn't really engage me.

I used to travel from Oxford to London just to buy Rockford's Basket Press Shiraz. If only I hadn't wasted my time and money ageing them. This wine is a bit more junior in Rockford's range than the Shiraz. It is 56% Cabernet Sauvignon, 44% Shiraz.

Barossa Valley Rod and Spur 2002, Rockford Wines
A very Porty, stewed nose of blackcurrants, blueberries and leather. It is really quite hot and alcoholic. The palate is really dense and heavy, quite tannic too. There is plenty of over ripe fruit on the palate, and alcohol sweetness, but it is all a bit one-dimensional. I suppose there is a degree of severity to the tannins, but the lack of acidity and over-ripe fruit suggest this is not for ageing. It is certainly well made, and a reasonable drink, shame it is quite dull.

Dugat-Py are quite well thought of, on my occasional tastings of their wines I have often wondered why they are so popular and so expensive. They are not really beautiful, lovely Burgundies.

Gevrey-Chambertin Tres Vieilles Vignes Coeur de Roy 2000, Bernard Dugat-Py
This is a very dark wine. It smells more like an oaky Syrah or Cabernet than lovely Pinot. The nose is certainly that of a big wine. The palate certainly has big tannins, but it doesn't have much for to balance this out. It is very drying, not terribly complex and certainly not lovely. As I've thought with previous wines of theirs that I have had, they are just far too extracted and lacking any real charm. I won't be buying more of their wines, far too expensive.

Purchased for a laugh, to remind ageing memories of what wine used to be like. All I can say is: By arse, this is disgusting.

Blue Nun Original 2005, H. Sichel Sohne
Has some odd, confected, artificial fruit on the nose. It also reeks of wet animal hair. In the name of all that is evil, this tastes disgusting. It is like sucking on an incontinent, diabetic rat. I can manage two tastes of this for the purpose of writing this note, no more will pass my lips.

I have no idea what grapes this wine is made from, if indeed it is made from grapes. The partner has been given a six pack, what will we do with them all I wonder.

Natural Sweet 2002, Buitenverwachting
It is quite orange. The nose has a lot of botrytis, acetone and vinegar smells. It also smells quite filthy. This is not a good start. The palate has a lot of sugar, a bit of acidity, but also some really dirty, off flavours. It tastes quite oxidised. It is utterly grim. Why do people people make such evil filth? No way, I am sure there is tastier diabetic piss than this wine.

I've popped my last bottle of Verset Cornas 1996. Just as with the bottle reviewed earlier this has painfully high acid levels, it is seriously unbalanced and not very nice. The levels of Brett are really distracting, too. No thanks.

More evidence of the super-ripeness of 2003 grapes. This doesn't really make for a refreshing drink on a hot afternoon.

Riesling Kanzemer Altenberg Alte Reben 2003, van Volxem
A very dense nose of ripe fruit, it smells quite Muscatty so overt is it. There is a bit of citric fruit as well, but it could hardly be described as a fine, elegant nose. The palate is pretty dense and concentrated as well. It is really quite rich. It has a bit of acid, but not very much. There is a touch of minerality on the finish, but I think all of the fine Riesling and terroir flavours have been baked out of this. Ultimately this is a bit heavy and ponderous, lacking the exciting, vivacious characteristics one hopes for in Saar Riesling. Sadly, I don't really like it.

Zind-Humbrecht do not hold back when it comes to making large-scale wines. Even in moderate vintages they can be real behemoths. 2003 was incredibly hot all over Europe, so some very ripe wines have been produced. Z-H produced some wines that have been quite terrifying in terms of ripeness.

Riesling Grand Cru Rangen Clos Saint-Urbain 2003, Domaine Zind-Humbrecht
The nose smells very strongly of tropical fruit-flavour chews, really confected. It smells quite hot and alcoholic too, despite only being a claimed 13.5%. Much to my surprise the palate is pretty much dry, lots of sweetness from the alcohol and confected fruit, but not so much sugar there. It is really confected, though, and I found it hard to discern any real terroir characteristics. Most of the class has been roasted out of this. I suppose it is quite a crowd-pleasing drink, but hardly fine Riesling. The price was pretty steep.

I've really hated every Egly-Ouriet Champagne I've had. This was recommended to me by someone reliable who claimed it was nice and fruity; niceness and fruitiness are characters lacking in their other fizzes I've tried. As it is their most basic cuvée it should have been fooled around with less. It is pure Pinot Meunier.

Brut "Les Vignes de Vrigny", Egly-Ouriet
The nose is bready with some fruit, but it smells pretty confected to me. The palate is short and lacking any form of complexity of favour. It is really one-dimensional and bland. What fruit there is there is strange and confected, nothing nice to report at all. It is very thin and what flavours it has are really actively unpleasant. The finish is seriously disgusting. No way, this is vile to the extent that even my first glass will not be finished.

One of the problems with Zind-Humbrecht wine is that you can never really know before you taste them what they are going to be like. Olivier Humbrecht has stated putting an indication of sweetness on the labels, but so far this seems to be quite a fanciful scale with little grounding in reality. The wines are usually incredibly alcoholic and this, clocking in at 15%, is no different. I've had some very good Zind-Humbrecht wines and I do own a few bottles that are in my cellar, but they can just be a bit tiresome.

Pinot Gris Clos Windsbuhl 2002, Domaine Zind-Humbrecht
Quite a dark yellow colour. The nose has some Pinot Gris spice and white fruit, but it is largely dominated by alcohol. It does smell very hot and cooked. The palate is largely dry, ignoring the sweetness that comes from the alcohol, and does have some Pinot Gris roundness on the palate. However, the finish is simply terrible. It is really hot with alcohol and leaves a lingering burning sensation which is just dreadful. When I first tasted this I thought it was quite a good Zind-Humbrecht wine, but when I swallowed I realised that finishing my glass would be a difficult and draining experience; it was also likely to leave me as 'tired and emotional' as a newt. The finish and balance were woefully poor in this wine, not a good Z-H wine. 

2003 was a crazy year in Europe, so hot. This wine demonstrates the problems with that.

Gewurztraminer Grand Cru Hengst 2003, Domaine Zind-Humbrecht
This honks of raw booze. An incredibly hot and alcoholic nose. What fruit there is is so confected it smells of foam banana sweets. There is no acidity to speak of. The palate has a huge alcohol sweetness which turns to a burn on the finish. It is quite sweet. All of the spice and fruit has been roasted out of the palate. This is hugely out of balance and is not fun to drink. No. To think Olivier Humbrecht made a more alcoholic Gewurztraminer in 2003, the mind boggles.

Another bottle popped before taking around to my neighbours tonight. After the heroism of the 2001 this is an almost moderate fourteen and a half percent. It also really stinks of arseholes.

Bandol Cuvée Spéciale 2000, Domaine Tempier
The nose really stinks of arseholes, farm yards and other less-than-clean things. There is a bit of dark, ripe fruit underneath. With extended swirling in my glass it becomes a bit less filthy, but this is not a clean wine. The palate is very alcoholic, it seems more so than the 2001. It is moderately tannic, but whilst there is some fruit on the palate, it doesn't live up to the filth and booze levels. It is not a harmonious wine and it is a very long way away from being elegant or refined. I am not sure ageing it will do any favours, the low tannin and fruit levels seem slightly over-evolved already. Much as it pains me to say this about a Tempier wine, this is decidedly sub-interest.

Noel "The Gnome" Verset used to craft some wonderful Cornas from his steeply-sloped vineyards. Sadly, it appears this one suffers a bit from 1996 Rhône-syndrome.

Cornas 1996, Noel Verset
A very animal nose, meaty, sweaty and hairy. It is quite Brett-y. There is a bit of dark fruit underneath that. The palate has really rather high acidity levels that begin to hurt my stomach. What fruit there is on the palate is over-whelmed by this acidity and it is definitely out of balance. This is a bit strange as only a couple of months ago I had a bottle that was much nicer. Could it be that the obvious Brett in this wine has led to bottle-variation? Quite possibly; bottle variation is an oft-reported symptom of high Brett levels. Whatever has caused it, this is dirty, painfully acidic and sadly sub-interest.

It's the first time I've tried wine from this producer. I met him in a restaurant on my last trip to Burgundy, he was very loud.

Mazis-Chambertin Grand Cru 1999, Domaine Christophe Newman
A pure and elegant nose of red fruit, it is not especially complex. The alcohol stands out a bit. The palate is similarly hot and the tannins seem a bit dry. It is not especially complex or refined. It is a nice drink but hardly Grand Cru quality; it is a bit big and lacks finesse.

A shame. He seemed keen on making fine wine and has some good vineyards. I was disappointed.

This was quite disappointing, not up to the required standard for here.

Cornas 1997, Clape
A nice nose of dark fruit and earth, but very dirty and bretty. The palate is angular and really filthy. Incredible levels of brett in this wine, it is very dirty indeed. There is not much else on the palate, hardly any fruit, and not much length. The nose promised some goodies, but the box was just empty. Very disappointing.

This is not going to be a tasting note, it is going to be a rant. Partly because I feel so personally offended by this wine, but largely because I have been obliged to drink half a bottle of the booze-tastic horror.

Macon Villages Cuvée Tradition E. J. Thévenet Domaine de la Bongran, Jean Thévenet
By arse, what am I doing drinking this lighter-fluid? It is 14% at the very least, in the name of all that is evil! Now, I am all for wines of heroism, but I like them to have some form of balance. The only balance this has is a large amount of alcohol to balance out the large amount of alcohol. Honestly! Where is the elegance? Where is the refinement? It is just a big glass of booze. I know Australians who'd be floored by this monster. I like my wines to have harmony, to speak of something more interesting than a mere glass of tart-fuel. This cannot speak because its speech is too slurred. I see no pleasure in drinking what is effectively a large glass of raw booze. There may be some acidity there, but it hardly competes with the whacked-out, crazy, booze-tastic monster that is this alcohol-fuelled frenzy of a wine. I am whammed even slagging it off. But, far, far worse than that, I am bored by having to drink it. No thanks.

The worst thing is, I've bought bottles of this before and hated them just as much. I am such a fool buying another bottle of bloody awful, completely atypical Macon. Cuvée 'Tradition'? Tradition my arse.

I welcome comments on this entry as I know everyone in the entire world has consumed this wine. This must be why the world is in such a state; everyone is pissed.

A bottle of wine from a producer that has rarely compelled me. I like their Riesling and their Cabernet. They are most famous for their chardonnay, which I find has the same problems as this.

Leeuwin Estate Art Series Shiraz 2001
Quite a ripe, alcoholic, chocolaty nose. The palate is fiercely acidic, along with being quite heavy and ponderous. This is one of those wines that 'strives for balance', but ends up being out of balance and lacking any real niceness. The harsh acidity hides the essential ripeness of the wine and ends up making it taste rather thin. Poor show, Mr Leeuwin.

... Is that people purchase shit wine and expect you to enjoy it. Last night I had the woeful experience of opening my aunt's christmas present to me: Staton Hills Cabernet Sauvignon 1994 from Washington State. By arse it was disgusting. Very much a style of wine that one found at the four-to-six pound price bracket in the UK during the early to mid-nineties; it was especially noticeable with wines from South-Africa, but also many wines from New Zealand. I had really hoped never to try such a thing again. Mostly it was made with unripe grapes, that had spectacular yields, and the the wine was chapitalised to buggery. Enough sugar had been added to allow it to get to 13.5% rather than its natural 11%-ish. Because of this it had the strange, green-yet-chocolaty nose than this kind of filth always had. Age had done it no favours and, to be honest, I'd only opened it to make gravy from it. I must stand up for my lovely aunt, though, as she rang me the day after christmas and said she had opened two bottles on christmas day and they were both undrinkable. She was right.