2009 Hohe Domkirche Scharzhofberger Riesling Spätlese

2009 Hohe Domkirche Scharzhofberger Spätlese

I promised to write about this participant in our Michigan vs. Mosel Riesling tasting seperately for two reasons. First, I want to talk about the Scharzhofberg a bit more, because the vineyard matters to me, and second because I want to talk about the winery in a bit more detail.

The Scharzhofberg is a vineyard along the Saar, a tributary to the Mosel. The Saar meets the Mosel just south of Trier, in the town of Konz. The Saar commences in France and then flows into Germany. It is a mere 246 km (152 miles) long, but only the final parts in the state of Rhineland-Palatinate are used for growing wine, mostly riesling. The Saar is known to produce more mineralic, somewhat tarter rieslings than the middle Mosel. The microclimate is cooler than at the Mosel, so the grapes tend to ripen later and can reach acidity levels without the higher sugar levels you can find on the Mosel, which gives them a distinct character. Most of the vineyards belonged to the church, but in the course of the secularization in the 19th century, many private investors bought plots and began wine making. Rich families began to settle later in the 19th century which led to the term “Saarbarone” (baronets of the Saar, a term derived from “Ruhrbarone” which was used for the industrialists in the Ruhr area that made a fortune when the industrial revolution took off). A lot of the estates on the Saar are very grandiose, unlike most Mosel estates.

The Saar boasts many prime vineyards like the Kanzemer Altenberg, Ockfener Bockstein, Ayler Kupp and also, the most prominent among them, the Scharzhofberg. Technically belonging to the village of Wiltingen, the vineyard is so prominent, that the wineries do not have to list the village name on their labels. They proudly just use “Scharzhofberger”. The area stretches over 28 hectares (around 70 acres) in steep slopes (30 to 60 degrees) towards the South, the soil consisting of slate with rocky soil with iron and clay. Only riesling is grown here by a few producers that read like the who is who: Egon Müller-Scharzhof, van Volxem, Reichsgraf von Kesselstatt, von Hövel, Bischöfliche Weingüter, Vereinigte Hospitien as well as Johannes Peters and Weingut Resch.

The most prominent producer here is Egon Müller, a star among German winemakers, whose wines command the highest prices in the business. I just checked some of the prices in German online stores: a bottle of Kabinett $40, spätlese $170,  auslese starting at $250. That is a LOT for Germany…I have not had an Egon Müller, but I sure hope to try some at some point. Other Scharzhofberger are more affordable.

The Bischöfliche Weingüter, that produced the spätlese I want to talk about here, is a rather unique winery. As its name indicates (Episcopal Wine Estates), the winery belongs to the bishop of Trier. It manages and produces wines for the estates Bischöfliches Priesterseminar (Episcopal Priest Seminary), Hohe Domkirche (High Cathedral), Bischöfliches Konvikt (Episcopal Convent), and Friedrich-Wilhelm-Gymnasium (Grammar School Friedrich-Wilhelm). In the middle ages, the church partly financed itself with producing and selling wine. I mentioned in an older post that the same was true for universities. The church therefore had vast properties, often in prime locations. Separate branches of the church had separate lots. As the names of the estates indicate, the proceeds went to each separate institution. During secularization, the church was forced to sell most of its properties, but the Bischöfliche Weingüter bought back lots when the chance arose in the mid 19th century.  The Bischöfliche Weingüter today own over 130 hectares (320 acres), which is a whole lot in Germany. The Hohe Domkirche consists of 22 hectares in two locations: the Scharzhofberg and the Avelsbach estate close to Trier. They now have a modern tasting room in Trier, and their wines have gained a better reputation over the last decade.

This 2009 Hohe Domkirche Scharzhofberger Spätlese was given to me as a parting gift by one of my best friends in Trier. She knows how much I love Scharzhofbergers, and she has been a “Weinfee” (wine fairy, i.e. pourer) at the Bischöfliche Weingüter to help finance her degree. So, what better way to make me miss her than giving me a bottle of my beloved Scharzhofberger. I usually buy the Vereinigte Hospitien version, and have a couple in my cellar.

THAT is cork art!

We opened the wine and first up to admire is the beautiful cork art. The Bischöfliche print the three coat of arms of their wineries (Convent, High Cathedral, and Seminary) on the cork, and them being rather elaborate, it looks gorgeous! Pouring the wine into our glasses, it showed a light yellow color. On the nose I got very creamy, perfumy notes, then almonds. On the palate, the wine initially showed ripe strawberry and some cream. It had a very long finish, and there was a depth to it that was beautiful. After a while, I got more aromas of mango, and other tropical fruit. It was a very pretty wine. Two participants in the tasting told me later that it was their favorite of the evening, which I might sign up to, but I was still so impressed with the Michigan rieslings that I do not want to make that statement.

If you ever get a chance, give a Scharzhofberger a try. I have yet to be let down by a single bottle of it. Just beware: All vineyards in the Saar valley that do not have their own name (aka are not renown) can use the name “Scharzberg” on the label. These wines usually have nothing in common with the Scharzhofberger steep hill beauties, because they are usually from flatter plots and often lower quality land (thanks to Rob for that info!). So, watch out when you go hunting!

Tagged , , , , , , ,

2011 Chateau Grand Traverse Late Harvest Chardonnay

Quite the surprise!

We threw a party last weekend and our usually pitch line is bring your own booze. Most of the booze that arrives at our house this way is Bud Light, Heineken Light (yuks) and other sorts of beers. Another significant share is hard liquors like Candian Club and stuff…it’s a grad student party, so hey.

Occasionally, though, someone brings a bottle of wine, and I do jump right onto those when they come. I want to taste and experience what others drink and bring. This bottle was brought by our friends who also attended the Michigan vs. Mosel Riesling Tasting. They were the ones that first introduced me to Chateau Grand Traverse wines earlier this year. In short, I trust them.

But when I looked at the label and saw that it was a chardonnay, I cringed. I am not a very big fan of this ubiquitous grape. All too often, especially in this hemisphere, you get a buttery, over-oaked heavy weight that has nothing in common with its lighter, fresher, crisper cousins from Burgundy. But even those just never feel overly interesting to me. The grape is solid, and so are the wines, but they lack interest for me. And then a late harvest? I wasn’t so sure. But I trust my friends, so I was willing to give it a try.

And, boy, what a surprise. The wine had 10.5% ABV and 4.2 BRIX of residual sugar, which, if I am not mistaken, should translate to about 40 grams of residual sugar/liter (please, my American friends and experts, correct me if that is wrong…I am still struggling big time with this BRIX thing!). Upon pouring, a light golden, very inviting colored wine presented itself. On the nose, I got tropical fruits (in a chardonnay, seriously!!), very fruity, and it did remind me of a riesling nose. Nothing of the usual chardonnay aromas at all. On the tongue, it was nicely fruity as well, with a good spätlese texture, friendly sweetness and enough acidity to go around. It was such a surprise. I cannot recall ever trying a chardonnay that was that yummy. There are winemakers in Germany making chardonnay, sometimes as spätlese, but they tend to make dry wines out of it. This wine presented a side of chardonnay that I was not aware of, and I am really happy I got to meet chardonnay this way. I will try to pick up another bottle sometime soon to re-taste it and see whether my tastebuds were already tainted from the Bud Lights and PBRs I had had, but if this holds up, that would have been THE surprise of my August tastings…

Tagged , , , , ,

Sunday read: Why you should be drinking cheap wine

Argh, my scheduler messed up, that is me…this should only have been posted tomorrow…a well, you can still decide to come back tomorrow…

Today, let’s go for something more provocative, because I am in the mood for it.

Brian Palmer over at Slate published an article in November 2011 that reflects on some things I have been thinking about/puzzled by since I moved to the US: Why is wine so expensive here? Palmer starts with an initial assessment that a wine merchant will tout a $15 bottle as an everyday wine and then wonders why that is. I have definitely been in that position before, and I am used to paying around $5-7 for my everyday wine bottle in Germany (and those wines were from good winemakers!).

To quote from the article:

“In Europe, consumption is 3-to-6 times higher than in the United States. But only the most affluent would spend 11 euros to drink a bottle of wine at home on a Wednesday night. Europeans seem perfectly comfortable cracking open a 1-euro tetra-pak of wine for guests.”

While I would not open a 1 euro tetra-pak for guests, or buy the $1.79 bottles my compatriots in Germany seem to crave, I still think it should be possible to get good wine in the price range of $5-8 per bottle. The fact is, I (and many others) simply cannot afford to drink $15+ bottles three to four times a week. Wine seems to be priced like a luxury article here in the US, and not something that is part of daily life. I think it deprives us of something. The instant connection of expensive equals good is also not really helpful. There are cheap wines out there that are good. Maybe not outstanding, but good, decent wines that can fulfill our everyday needs, not our luxury needs…

I don’t necessarily agree with everything that Palmer says, and I do think that there are instances where paying more for good work should be something we all care about. But to me, a good wine has one major component and that is whether I like the wine or not. I can love the idea behind a wine, but if the wine does not taste then sorry, I don’t want the wine. It all boils down to taste. And I can find wines I love for $50+ per bottle, but I can also find wines I like (or even love!, like this one) for under $5. It’s all up to my tastebuds…

So, go get yourselves a cheap bottle of wine that you love, and enjoy your Sunday read…

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/drink/2011/11/why_you_should_be_drinking_cheap_wine.html

What do you think on this Sunday morning?

Tagged , , ,