I was tempted to go for X is for Xmas, but I have several problems with that, none of which holds sufficient interest for anybody for me to explain further.
Therefore, as predicted last week, X is for Xinomavro. Again.
This is the third appearance in this blog made by this exact wine. The label is different this time, as is my supplier of choice, but it is the same wine. That gives me something of a problem as I have already researched the producer and described the flavours and aromas on offer in previous editions.
The last occasion I wrote about it was in Week X (2015). It was exactly a year after my first review and on that occasion, as in both years the wine had been the 2012 vintage, I had the sensible idea of buying a third bottle to compare at some point in the future the characteristics revealed by additional bottle age.
Of course the road to hell is paved with such good ideas and naturally I did not follow through. Usually a good thing but on this occasion, regrettable.
As luck would have it we do at least have a different vintage to play with. It doesn't help with the benefits of ageing as this wine is being tasted three years after harvest, as it was in 2015. Having read that last sentence back I am now pondering the very idea of the benefits of ageing. My knees aren't convinced there are any to be had, but I think maybe wisdom is claimable. Dunno.
This vintage seems to be at least as good as the 2012 at around the same age. It has lots of red fruit, cherries seem prominent, and a hint of spice. It has a similar feel to Pinot Noir and the brightness of a Northern Italian red. It has some complexity and a pleasingly long finish.
So, to sum up, much the same as previous tastings and demonstrable consistency across the years. I doubt I will buy it frequently, but am glad to know it is there should I want something from a less repeated regions.
Buy again? Eventually.
No comments:
Post a Comment