2009 Courtney Benham Lucca Red, California

Color – Ruby red

Nose – Strawberry, blackberry, alcohol

Taste – Three things influenced the purchase of this wine. The first is that I quite enjoy Courtney Benham’s Cabernet Sauvignon, Napa Valley appellation. The second is that I have been on a red blend kick lately and after reading the tasting notes provided by Total Wine this wine had my interest piqued. The third is that at 13 dollars I was expecting to get some decent quality at a relatively low price. Having sipped this wine now for a few days and being near to the end of the bottle, I can honestly say that this wine doesn’t disappoint but it also doesn’t amaze. It’s a fairly fruit forward red blend, tasting more of “sweet” strawberry, blackberry and blueberry on the attack with minimal savory or herbaceous characteristics save for a small hint of black pepper right before the mid-palate. The mid-palate is full of playful, young tannins, abundant alcohol and what I like to call “fruit skin astringency” (the flavor of fruit skins followed closely by a mouth drying astringency). The finish is medium in length and carries more of those same berry flavors, with added dark cherry, tobacco, coffee and burnt sugar a la crème brulee. This wine falls right in the medium bodied category, though at some points it seems somewhat “watery” or thin. That doesn’t detract from the wine itself, but it just brings to mind the cheaper red blends I have had recently.

Overall, this wine is not what I was expecting, and I would rate is a mere fair QPR. It is a decent notch above Tres Pinos Three Pines Cuvee or Chariot Gypsy. But it’s also a few notches above those wines where price is concerned. I compare this to those two wines because all three of them are fruit forward, “sweet” red blends. This is the most complex of the three, but this doesn’t show off the level of complexity I had hoped for. For the same price I would much rather buy the Anakena Ona or Veramonte Primus. I advise passing on this wine unless you enjoy a more fruit forward red blend that borders on the sweet. If you like complexity, depth and boldness in your red blends pass on this and grab something else.

Courtney Benham from Martin Ray Winery

Revisiting an Old Friend in a New Vintage

2008 Trentatre Rosso (33.3% Cabernet Sauvignon, 33.3% Merlot, 33.4% Montepulciano), Italy

Color – Purple with a reddish rim

Nose – Dark brown sugar, plum, fresh pipe tobacco, gingerbread

Taste – While wandering the aisles of a Trader Joe’s that was not very close to my house I found the 2008 vintage of this wine and had to try it. Previously I’ve reviewed the 2007 and 2009 but the two closest Trader Joe’s to my house didn’t have the 2008. I’d read reviews of this vintage all of them calling this the vintage to get if you like this particular blend. On the one hand I was dubious that this would be that much better than the 2007. But on the other hand I just knew it had to be better than the 2009. I popped, poured, swirled, sniffed and sipped…and found out that if this isn’t my favorite vintage of this particular wine, it is the most balanced vintage. Let this get some air (20-30 minutes worked for me) and then take a nice swirl, sniff, sip and let the magic begin. The attack is much like the nose; dark fruit (mainly plum and cherry), brown sugar/molasses and baking spices. None of those flavors truly stand out; they merely blend together nicely and then fade into a beautifully mild-mannered mid-palate. The mid-palate really only features two things, but they work together in perfect harmony; firm tannins and tingly, biting alcohol. The alcohol lasts a little longer, staying as the mid-palate segues into the medium length finish. The tingle from the alcohol evades a long finish and mixes nicely with more fruit (plums again), berries (blackberry and maybe boysenberry) and then a mélange of tobacco, bittersweet chocolate, black pepper, dust and smoke. This is a full bodied wine, with a balanced attack, playful mid-palate and deep, dark finish. The aftertaste is one of burnt brown sugar, smoke and leather, which sounds quite harsh but in reality is extremely pleasing.

Overall, I still prefer the 2007 Trentatre Rosso over this slightly younger version. I admit this is the most balanced in flavor and texture, but it’s also a little more subdued (especially during the attack/mid-palate). The finish here is sumptuous and I would drink this wine if only to get to the finish, but the 2007 is the pick for me. This is still a good-to-great QPR (I challenge someone to recommend a 6 dollar bottle that is as complex or fulfilling as either the ‘07/’08 Trentatre Rosso. I don’t think it can be done); and would recommend this bottle over just about any other Cabernet Sauvignon, Carmenere, Malbec, Merlot, Shiraz or red blend out there at a comparable price point. Get this one if you can find it, preferably by the case.

2006 Waterbrook Melange Noir (28% Cabernet Franc/21% Syrah/19% Cabernet Sauvignon/17% Sangiovese/14% Merlot/1% Tempranillo) , Washington

Color – Dark red, with a purple core

Nose – Blueberry, vanilla, grapes

Taste – I had hoped when I picked this up on clearance at my local supermarket, that this would be a standout wine. I had hoped it would surpass the two other Waterbrook wines I had tasted up to that point. Unfortunately I was sadly mistaken. This isn’t a bad wine, but it doesn’t have the depth and complexity that the Waterbrook Syrah and Waterbrook Cabernet-Merlot characterize so well. This wine looks big, bold and dark. It smells just a little more timid than that. But it’s in the flavor that it fails for me. The attack is full of jammy, fruity blueberry, raisin and plum flavors with veins of brown sugar, molasses and leather running through all the fruit. The mid-palate is relatively one dimensional, with the alcohol and astringency hiding and chewy, playful tannins showing up as the mid-palate makes its way into the finish. The finish might have redeemed this wine had it been just a little more complex and a little longer. It’s a medium finish that holds more brown sugar, molasses and plum flavors and brings on hints of vanilla, licorice and very minimal baking spices. The wine itself is medium bodied, though when left to sit and reach slightly above-room temperature this wine feels “heavier” on the tongue.

Overall, I can’t call this a bad/poor wine or QPR. At its normal price of 17 dollars I would have called it a poor QPR. But I picked this up at 9 dollars and for that price this wine is lightyears ahead of most other 9 dollar wines. The reason I deride it is because the other Waterbrook wines I’ve tasted have been so good, I expected the same from this wine. I didn’t get it. It’s a little thin, a lot confused as far as flavor goes and lacking anything I would call depth or complexity. If you can get this for under 10 dollars then I would recommend grabbing it just to try it and maybe you‘ll prove me wrong. If you can only find this for more than 10 dollars I’d advise passing and grab any other Waterbrook red wine.

Waterbrook Wines

2009 Urban Maule Red Blend (50% Cabernet Sauvinon, 25% Cabernet Franc, 20% Merlot, 5% Carignan), Chile

Color – Very dark purple, almost black in the glass

Nose – Blueberry, pepper, herbaceous nearly green bell peppers

Taste – This wine is really something of a conundrum to my palate. By the looks of the color I’m expecting big flavors. The nose hints at fruit, but pushes more in the realm of sharp and savory vegetal notes. And the flavor is basically a mish-mosh of both. The fruit comes on quick and is gone just as quick, personified by smoky, somewhat charred blueberry and blackberry flavors. This is very quickly overtaken by some very herbaceous flavors; sage, thyme and pepper as well as black tea leaves. These flavors linger through the mid-palate which is fairly acidic from the alcohol and equally astringent. The finish is medium-long and is the most straightforward part of the wine with flavors equal parts tart berry, smoky pepper and savory herbs. The wine leaves and aftertaste in my mouth of cherries and a spice cabinet, as if I’ve been licking the lids of every spice/herb container I have on hand. Not that pleasant of an experience. I will admit that I tried this over several days and only sat down to take the majority of notes on the last day rather than the first. My memories of day one are more pleasant, though the wine tasted very young with big tannins and flavors more closely in line with blackberry, green bell pepper and some hints of sage. That being said it wasn’t an amazing glass of wine then but it was slightly better than it is right now.

Overall, I’d say I wasted about 10 bucks on this bottle, and advise you don’t even bother with this wine. It’s a poor, nearly bad, QPR. Maybe it’s the blend, maybe it’s the grapes, maybe it’s me; but this wine just doesn’t work at all. It tastes convoluted on the attack and mid-palate, the finish is just barely passable, and the aftertaste is downright bad. For the same price you can find a myriad of good-to-great red blends, most of them available in your local supermarket (yes even the supermarket red blends taste better than this). Trust me, this is one wine you want to skip.

Bodegas y Vinedos O. Fournier

Head to Head to Head: Three Cabs

Being limited in my posts-per-week due to lack of internet, my next few posts will be multiple bottle reviews. We'll start with three Cabs (2 from California and 1 from Chile). This review will lay them out from least expensive to most expensive (not taking into account coupons or sale prices) and at the end I'll give a recap as to my preference of the three taking into account flavor, cost and availability. Without further ado, on to the review!

2008 Santa Helena Vernus Cabernet Sauvignon, Chile

Color – Ruby red

Nose – Blackberry jam, blueberry, raspberry, green bell peppers

Taste – This bottle of wine showed up at my local Costco, and I couldn’t pass up the chance to sample yet another Chilean Cabernet Sauvignon. After this wine had decanted for nearly 30 minutes I decided to take my first sip, and I was nicely surprised. This wine seems simple, but in reality is far from it. The attack bears lovely notes of black currant and blackberry with just a hint of bittersweet chocolate. The mid-palate is rather “warm” with firm tannins, astringency that is nearly perfect and acidity from the alcohol but not a lot of heat. The finish is long with heavy flavors of licorice, burnt caramel, tobacco and leather. This wine is full bodied, fruit forward with a finish that balances the fruit notes with “sharp” flavors and leaves a pleasant after taste on my tongue. For under 10 dollars this is a pretty good purchase as this wine holds up to a lot of different flavors (I personally tried it with burgers, steak and pizza on three different occasions and this wine went great with all three).
Overall, this wine shows a good QPR as the flavors are complex enough to allow this wine to hold up to multiple kinds of foods. This Cabernet Sauvignon is also very drinkable by itself. I was surprised that this is as good as it is. I am truly perplexed by the number of superior Chilean wines that are priced in the sub-10 dollar range is so large; perplexed but very happy. This is a must try, pick it up on your next trip to Costco because it might not be on the shelves for long.

Santa Helena Winery

2008 Dominican Oaks Cabernet Sauvignon, California

Color – Dark red, with a near black core

Nose – Black currant, licorice, chalk dust, caramel

Taste – This was a recommendation from one of the Total Wine “Beverage Specialists” or whatever they’re called. He talked about it as if it were the best Cabernet Sauvignon for under 20 dollars, considerably better than the Courtney Benham Cabernet Sauvignon I like so much. So at 17 dollars I went out on a limb and grabbed this bottle. I won’t say that he’s completely wrong, but his palate and mine differ quite a bit. This is a very silky, smooth red wine in the beginning that transforms into something of a mangled beast in the middle, then reforms again after the finish back to silky, smoothness. The attack is “warm” (reminding me almost of a liqueur or cordial) and somewhat heavy for my tastes. I can taste cherry, currant, raisin and licorice. The licorice holds on a long time, all the way through the mid-palate. Speaking of the mid-palate this one is a little rough for my palate; with the majority of it coming on as strong alcohol heat/acidity and puny tannins/astringency. As I said before the licorice comes through the rough but short mid-palate and right into the medium-length finish and is joined by blackberry, dark cherry, vanilla, black pepper and oak. The finish tapers off into a smooth, warm, silky mouthfeel that is full of cherry skins and red plum flesh. This is a medium-to-full bodied wine, and at warmer temperatures the medium falls right off that and this wine takes on a weight of its own that can seem rather cloying at times.
Overall, this is not my cup of tea, or glass of wine as it may be. I am sure this is a quality wine, I can tell by the mouthfeel and texture of the wine that runs throughout the entire sipping experience. It might even be a pretty good QPR, but for my palate I’d give it a fair QPR rating. I won’t be coming back here again even though this wine went well with steak and a hearty salad, it failed with simpler foods (spaghetti marinara on one night and grilled chicken breast with rice au gratin on another night). It’s just too much money for what I would consider a rather confused red wine. It starts yummy and smooth, and finishes yummy and smooth; but the middle is one big yucky “hot” mess. I’d recommend passing on this and getting the Courtney Benham I mentioned above for a few dollars more or maybe the Crios de Susana Balbo Cabernet Sauvignon for the same amount. Either of those are just as complex and far more balanced Cabernet Sauvignons. You let me know what you think.

2008 Wheelhouse Wine Cellars Cabernet Sauvignon, California

Color – Ruby red with violet hints at the edges

Nose – Plum, cherry, licorice, vanilla

Taste – This delightful Cabernet Sauvignon was nearly half off at Cost Plus, and when I can pick up a 20 dollar bottle for almost 10 dollars I jump at the chance. It only solidified my decision when several employees and a customer informed me I’d made a good decision on my wine choice. I am happy I listened to them, though I’m not completely sold on this wine’s qualities. Don’t get me wrong this wine tastes good, but it’s not 20 dollars worth of goodness. There is some complexity and it starts off right as the wine passes the lips. The attack is evenly layered dark fruits and berries; plum and blackberry mixed with dark cherry and red and black currants. These fruit flavors aren’t overwhelmingly sweet but rather dark, smoky and rich with underlying spice flavors when the wine is moved along the palate. The mid-palate is full of firm tannins, bright acids and pleasing astringency. The tannins run into the long-ish finish in the form of ripe fruit skins, but the finish is also rather dark; the predominant flavors being those of licorice, leather, tobacco, cloves and smoke. This is full bodied, though it tends to feel “lighter” when it’s chilled just a little. It tastes equally well slightly chilled or at warmer temperatures, though it fares best when paired with some charred beef and at room temperature.
Overall, this is a good wine and at the price I purchased it, I would rate it a good-nearly-great QPR. But I don’t think I would pay 20 bucks for this bottle. It doesn’t give Courtney Benham’s Napa Cab a run for its money, but falls far short of the quality of that wine. I admit that this is better than 95% of any wine you will find under 15 dollars. But if you do a lot of tasting you will find those 5% bottles crop up even at your local supermarket. In all honesty I have to recommend that you try this wine because it is a very flavorful and complex wine, that being said; seek, find, and buy – but attempt to do it on the cheap!

Wheelhouse Wine Cellars


In closing, all of these wines were drinkable though the Dominican Oaks almost got cut from the trio due to it's messy and confusing mid-palate. In my opinion, the Santa Helena Cabernet Sauvignon is the best wine for the money easily containing the most complexity and depth for the price. If you can get the Wheelhouse Cellars Cabernet Sauvignon at a reduced rate (15 dollars or less) than you are getting the best of the three, but at full price this wine comes in second. It does taste good and offer considerable complexity and flavor, but 20 dollars a bottle is just a little off-putting. Coming in last is the Dominican Oaks Cabernet Sauvignon and truly this wine was close to being taken off this list altogether. If I could focus just on the attack and the finish this wine would tie the Santa Helena for first, but the sheer brutality of the mid-palate knocks this down to third place and that's not even taking into account the 17 dollar price tag on this bottle. The Dominican Oaks and Vernus are probably the easiest wines to find. Though I purchased the Vernus at Costco, I believe you can find it at Total Wine & More which is where I purchased the Dominican Oaks. I have only seen the Wheelhouse at Cost Plus and it might not be available at the Cost Plus in your region due to the purchasing tendencies of the Beverage Specialist at your local Cost Plus. In all I hope these reviews help you on your journey with wine.

2008 Zingari Toscana, Italy

Color – Ruby red with a near black core

Nose – Blueberry, strawberry, cherry

Taste – This is a recent addition at my local Costco that sells for 9 dollars, and while I’m not overly familiar with Toscana (This is a blend of Merlot, Sangiovese, Syrah and Alicante; I was unable to find the specific quantities of each) I figured I would try it just to see if it passed my test. First off this wine benefits from decanting, and if you have the patience it really needs to sit overnight before you drink it. I sipped my first glass of this right after opening the bottle just to see what the wine tasted like and while it’s not bad it’s very tight with sharp flavors and tannins that tend to bite just a little. When I poured my second glass of this the following day the wine had softened, the berry flavors were not as sour and the tannins had mellowed giving this wine a pleasing all around flavor. The flavors on the attack are all berries and cherries; strawberry, raspberry and blueberry with a little ripe red cherry mixed in. The mid-palate has a mild alcohol tingle to it, tannins that still bite but not nearly as much as before and subtle astringency. As the mid-palate moves into the finish semi-sour cranberry flavors begin to pop up blended with sour cherry and raspberry flavors. The finish itself is medium in length with middling complexity that only really shows up in the aftertaste where flavors of leather mingle with the berries present throughout this wine. This is a light-to-medium bodied wine with limited depth in its flavor but that’s not necessarily a bad thing as the wine fares well with pizza, pasta and even salads.

Overall, I would say this is a decent-to-good QPR. The flavors are limited and they aren’t what I really seek out in a wine, but the wine itself isn’t bad rather it’s not my “cup of tea”. It drinks well with pizza and pasta as one would imagine, and doesn’t taste terrible by itself. It’s not going to win huge votes of admiration in my house, but I wouldn’t pass it up if I saw it at a pizzeria and wanted a glass of red to go with my slice of pepperoni pie. I would recommend this if you like cherry/berry reds with sour notes in the mid-palate and finish or as an alternative to your house Chianti. As for me, I’ll pass on this for now, but give it a passing grade.

Petra Wine

2009 Santa Julia Reserva Malbec, Argentina

Color – Garnet red

Nose – Blackberry, compost, forest floor, wet leaves, wood

Taste – This is another gem I found at my local Cost Plus World Market on sale for something like 5 dollars off the normal price, I think I ended up paying 12 dollars for this particular bottle. I am glad I decided to purchase this bottle, more than glad of that fact. This pours dark and heavy in the glass, with aromas to match, and I was almost giddy with excitement when I lifted the glass to my lips for the first time. I wasn’t disappointed; this wine virtually assaulted my taste buds with flavors dark fruit, oak, charred caramel and damp soil. The mid-palate is all elegant textures of full tannins, boisterous alcohol and perfect astringency. The finish is long and wandering; featuring flavors that bounce around from blackberry to smoky oak to sour dark cherry to coffee grounds. This is firmly in the full bodied category as the wine sits with a definite “weight” on the palate. The textures, complexity and depth of this wine are just shy of perfect. I would be happy had I paid full price for this wine, it’s that good in the glass. I will admit that I sampled this without pairing it, though I imagine a good steak, lamb off the grill, or savory fish would suit this wine quite nicely.

Overall, this wine is a good-to-great QPR, easily worth 15-20 dollars. It’s complex with flavors of oak, wet soil and dark fruits as well as tannins that grab hold and won’t let go. I would go out of my way to seek out another glass of this wine. It’s just that good. Sure it’s not a fruit forward Malbec, falling more into the category of a Cabernet Sauvignon-Malbec Blend. But it shows off some wonderful flavors and textures. This is a buy now wine, so seek it out at your next trip to Cost Plus, better yet go out of your way to make a trip to Cost Plus sometime this week, you won’t be disappointed.

Familia Zuccardi