WTN: I don't get the reverence for Henschke

I try from time to time but I just don’t understand the reverence accorded to red wines of Henschke. Let me add the proviso that I have never had Hill of Grace and would be very happy to accept a glass or three to see if it changes my mind. I have enjoyed a Riesling.

Last night I opened another red.

Henschke Keyneton Estate Shiraz Cabernet Sauvignon Merlot Barossa 1999 – Alc.14%
C: Deep red.
N: Powerfully and unmistakeably Oz with notes of bramble jelly, boiled sweets and the perfume pot marinated in discreet vanilla; 12 hours after opening there appears an additional and more attractive note of violets from the heeltaps.
P: Full, deep, rich and complex but somewhat confected with a smooth mouth-feel, lots of sweet plum and ripe blackberry fruit with touches of butterscotch, chocolate, English boiled sweet and a little sweet herb. The problem for me is that this wide palette does not contain many flavours which I find noble in a wine and I would appreciate more mineral notes, savoury tang, leather and structure. So I hope that this explains my own lack of enthusiasm whilst understanding that this taste profile may be popular. How do I rate it? Subjectively little more than 15/20.

Here is another Henschke drunk in 2003.

Henschke Mount Edelstone Shiraz 1993
A big powerful wine. N: At first typical Aussie shiraz bramble (blackberry and black current) fruit but mercifully not reeking of the almost equally typical new American oak. Then mint veering to pepper-mint aromas started to dominate. P: V complex w good depth, concentration and structure. Same mint dominated aromas with some chocolate; strong toffee notes appearing in mid-plate moving into alcohol burn on finish. We could not finish the bottle although it went well with the food (venison with sweet red cabbage and fig compote). Why no more enthusiasm? It is much better integrated, more complex and less obviously dominated by wood than a bottle opened some three years ago. I think that, for me, the problem is the excessive mint, toffee and alcohol notes leading to a lack of elegance and harmony and a sense of clumsiness which increasingly palled. No more than good for me but probably excellent for those who like the style.

I had a Mount Edelstone 1995 a few years ago and remember reactions similar to those on the 1993 plus more overt wood. I have one or two bottles left.

What was the alcohol level of the second one?

Tim, Hi....

Not at all certain that Henschke is held in awe by all that many. Indeed a producer capable of excellent and interesting wines but whether that particular style of excellence and interest will appeal to all is quite another story.

I have followed Henschke in detail for quite a few years and although many of their wines have earned very high scores from me (including, for example, the 2003 Eden Valley Hill of Grace Shiraz which earns 98 points), these are wines that while they may be well appreciated and highly praised, will not often grace my personal table.

All of which brings to mind an important point about scores - the 98 referred to above indicates that this is an outstanding wine in every possible way. It says nothing, however, about whether you, I or Ms. Jones will "like" the wine.

Best
Rogov

All of which brings to mind an important point about scores - the 98 referred to above indicates that this is an outstanding wine in every possible way. It says nothing, however, about whether you, I or Ms. Jones will "like" the wine.

Chuckle, that reminds me of the old sawhorse, "the operation was a success, but the patient died..."

What was the alcohol level of the second one?

The 1995 has 14%. I didn't take a note of the alcohol on the 1993.

All of which brings to mind an important point about scores - the 98 referred to above indicates that this is an outstanding wine in every possible way. It says nothing, however, about whether you, I or Ms. Jones will "like" the wine.

Best
Rogov

Hi Rogov,

I think that I would make a bad wine critic because I could never bring myself to award "outstanding in every possible way; 98 points" to a wine whose flavour profile does not appeal.

I rarely like warm climate Shiraz/Syrah and new American oak in the cocktail doesn't help.

Noticeable alcohol is definitely a turnoff for me, in a way that doesn't seem shared by many professional reviewers (part of the uselessness of their scores for me).

I wonder if critics who don't seem to mind noticeable alcohol as much come to wine from a background of scotch, vodka, or anything else that makes it less obtrusive to them. I'm definitely a spirit wimp, and never drink any distillate by itself.

Somewhat limited experience here, though perhaps my issue is not quality but price. Difficult to find a bad wine and I've no doubt some are exceptional (HOG, Edelstone, Cyril, etc.), but at all levels I've tried, they've just been above the top end of what I'd want to pay. In the cellar I currently have just one bottle of the Keyneton (now called Euphonium) - I think 2004 vintage.

regards

Ian

I think that I would make a bad wine critic because I could never bring myself to award "outstanding in every possible way; 98 points" to a wine whose flavour profile does not appeal.

Tim, Hi....

Indeed amoang the tasks of the professioal critic is to develop the ability to place his/her personal biases aside as much as is possible and to evaluate a wine for "what it is" and not for the personal pleasure that it offers the critic.

The example I like to give is with the very popular half-dry Emerald Rieslings or White Zins that are made. I can assure you that if I live to be 130 (and no, I am not that old yet), I will never walk into a wine shop to buy one for my pleasure because I know they will not give me pleasure. On the other hand, when writing and tasting those the task at hand is not my pleasure but evaluating the wine for precisely what it is - that within knowledge and experience of what such wines are capable of, whether their off-dryness is supported by adequate acidity, whether the wine is so floral that it reminds more of perfume than of a beverage, etc. And in that never to scorn those who do enjoy such wines.

To the critic to be as objective as possible. To the reader, I suppose the ultimate example of: "The best wine is the wine you enjoy the best"

Best
Rogov

I wonder if critics who don't seem to mind noticeable alcohol as much come to wine from a background of scotch, vodka, or anything else that makes it less obtrusive to them. I'm definitely a spirit wimp, and never drink any distillate by itself.

I'm not a critic, but . . . I love spirits, almost uniformly served neat--but strongly dislike overt notes of alcohol in my wines. Of course, I may be less sensitive to alcohol than you are, but in any case I suspect preferences on such things depend a lot on the individual. Though it's possible there's a correlation between appreciation of spirits and tolerance for alcohol in wine, I am dubious as to whether that would explain why some critics don't mind stronger alcohol wines.

As for me, I'm a devotee of Armagnac, Cognac and Calvados as well as certain other forms of brandy. Alcohol has its most defiite place in such beverages. As indeed it does in grappa, marc or cousins to those.

On the other hand, alcoholic heat loses its charm when it tends to be out of balance with wood and fruits or for that matter, body and structure in wines. A step further, when I do enjoy cocktails I look for those that while perhaps high in alcohol content do not let the alcohol fully through.

Best
Rogov

'm not a critic, but . . . I love spirits, almost uniformly served neat--but strongly dislike overt notes of alcohol in my wines. Of course, I may be less sensitive to alcohol than you are, but in any case I suspect preferences on such things depend a lot on the individual. Though it's possible there's a correlation between appreciation of spirits and tolerance for alcohol in wine, I am dubious as to whether that would explain why some critics don't mind stronger alcohol wines.

Of course you're a critic. You just don't profit from it directly as the canny Rogov does, thassall.

As a consumer of pretty much all potable ferments and distillates, I don't think there's any necessary correlation between appreciation of spirits and tolerance for alcohol in wine. As Mr. Stoppard said so eloquently, "Balance is everything, tiding out time..."

Tim, I have had a couple of recent Rieslings from Henschke. Not sure I would want to cellar though?
Oz reds are mainly off my radar screen these days `cept for Durif.

Quite a few years ago, when Australian wines other than Grange were just beginning to show up over here, I was browsing the wines at Corti Brothers. They happened to have a few bottles of Hill of Grace for the then-rather-high price of $28. I asked the clerk how the wine was and his answer was, "you don't have enough taste buds to experience all of the flavors in that wine". I took a flyer and bought a bottle and it was dazzling - a truly memorable bottle of wine. I went back to get more and it was all gone. It was years later that I learned that HoG was a highly sought after wine.

The fact that the wine left such a lasting impression with me when I had no idea of what it was makes me believe that there's something to the legend. Or at least, there was back then.

IN addition to the HoG, I was really impressed with an 88 Edelstone David Wainwright brought to a dinner last year, one of my top 10 Aussie experiences for sure.

I think the wines had more reverence in the 1980's and 1990's than they do now.
I couldn't handle the Brett-riddled 1998 HOG - and they've never really featured in my own personal drinking since then.

I couldn't handle the Brett-riddled 1998 HOG - and they've never really featured in my own personal drinking since then.

A little touch of leather (brett?) would have improved the Keyneton for me.