It’s March and it’s 80 degrees. I’m in shorts and sandals. I was about to ring in the Gin & Tonic season early (why the hell not?) when to my shock and shame realized that I had no gin! So off I went to a local shop where I spotted this.
I say spotted because I freely admit, despite enjoying Ferrari Carano’s wines in the past (Sienna mostly) I channeled my inner woman and purchased this wine purely because of the label! Yes, marketing matters.
The 2010 Ferrari-Carano Bella Luce, Italian for “Beautiful Light”, is a proprietary blend of Chardonnay, Sauvignon Blanc, Muscat Canelli, and Gewurztraminer. It’s been a long time since I enjoyed a domestic Chardonnay so I was glad when this wine didn’t behave like one. The color is a very light, pale golden, hay like hue. The absence of color however doesn’t distract from the intensity of the wine. The aroma displays peach, pineapple, lemon and spice. In the mouth, the wine is medium bodied and viscous. I sense this was not only fermented in stainless steel, but don’t know for certain. The Gewurztraminer really contributes a lot of spice to the wine, and lends acid for structure. Lemon and tropical fruits dominate the palate. Overall, this is good, and I suspect many will like it more than I did. For my tastes, it was a bit too “thick” in the mouth. I prefer crisper, leaner, more delicate whites. It paired well with a shrimp and vegetable saute. 87 points, fairly priced at about $11.
And here’s the eye catching label that won me over…..
Ferrari Carano Bella Luce – 2010 |
John, I'm catching up here, but it seems to me that every Ferrari Carano I've tasted is lusher than the average within the varietal! If I'm right (there's always a rare chance that I am) then it is one of their winemaker's hallmarks.
Oh, it's nice to see the "inner women" in you: they're not the only ones who can appreciate beauty! P=, or is it =P either way I'm somewhat smiling.
You know I've never done live video conferencing, and would that be fun to have a few of us, all with the same wine, live viewing tasting from Kan, St.Louis, NJ and Man. and comparing notes?
Crazy me ;-/
Any residual sugar? Or was this bone dry? Either way, it sounds quite refreshing.
Gents, at the least, if not completely live, it would be interesting to taste the same wine on the same night. I've organized things like that in the past and the results can be pretty revealing. Make some suggestions and I'm there. And if there's really an issue with selection, we can work on that too.
This wine was not bone dry, but I would still say it was "dry". It was not overtly sweet, if that makes any sense. I should just stay away from white stuff. But I need something to drink with pesto.
John, if there is some interest in this, we can each make a list until we find one that we all have on hand so as to not put a monetary burden on anyone. Then we can synchronize a day and time.
For instance I have three Brunello DI Montalcino wines that I'm wanting to try:
2005 Ciaccin Piccolomini d' ARAGONA
2006 IL Poggione
2006 Tenuta La Fuga
Merlot:
2005 Chalk Hill Sonoma County
2006 Robert Mondavi Napa Valley
2007 Castle Rock Napa Valley
Zinfandel:
2007 Grgich hills Napa Valley
2009 Ridge York Creek I've done the 2005 (great wine)
2009 Verde Sole Sierra Foot Hills
This is just for an example, and if you've already done one of these, it's no problem to just find another, or list from Chardonnay or whatever.
Just a thought.
The idea is to be fun with no hurry or sweat involved.
Hmmm, these are all strikes for me. 🙂 But I love, love, love this idea. And agreed, no muss, no fuss. I'll tale to Prost man and see what we have laying around.
John,
For some reason I couldn't reply on my blog to your comment, so I'm sending it your way, and if you delete it I'll have no problem with that.
At least you have thought about Kant, but the headache I get is with those whose technical language precludes their reliance on the "general reliability of the senses." You might think that Kant has influenced a number of people who hate wine critics because they hate the idea we should have relative wine preferences concluding in a substantial standard that some people appreciate.
I don't begrudge anyone an honest opinion, but when I sense a cheat, I'll turn him/her off; I and others believe we have one of those right here in the Granite State.
Thanks for once again making me think, even when I'm not feeling well.
If you're up this way and you can stop by, I'll be sure to let you cook, 😉 while I supply the food and wine.
No problem at all. And yes, the reliance on language and technicalities, real or otherwise perceived, can often obscure the even more reliable senses as you so correctly state. People often ask me – "How do I know if a wine is good?" I simply respond, "if you like it." Does it smell nice, does it taste nice? It matters little how *I* perceive the wine. It's, as you say, relative and subjective. As far as Kant and the Categorical Imperative is concerned, the latter is defined by it's absolute nature; i.e. the death penalty. And while I don't believe that wine reviews or critics result in or pose hypothetical imperatives, they also do not result in categorical imperatives. That is the flawed nature of the latter. The review itself is always subjective and based on numerous variables, be it food, mood, temperature, and not to mention the immediate tasters own preferences.
Whew….mixing Kant with wine reviews is tiring. Maybe over a bottle it would become easier? 🙂