MacRostie 2006 Carneros Pinot Noir - 3 Pack
$54.99 + $5 shipping
CONDITION: Red
PRODUCT: 3 MacRostie 2006 Carneros Pinot Noir
CT link above

Winery website

MacRostie on Twitter
MacRostie on facebook

Grape comp percentage?

Doesn't ship to Connecticut anyway but if it did I'm not sure I'd be up for $20 a bottle for this Pinot Noir, seems a little bit steep.

Kao1138 wrote:Doesn't ship to Connecticut anyway but if it did I'm not sure I'd be up for $20 a bottle for this Pinot Noir, seems a little bit steep.

$20 for a well-made, non-mass produced pinot (not that this or isn't either of those things) is not steep at all. Pinot, even considering the spike post-Sideways is a delicate grape that can be difficult to grow and hence, costs more than say Syrah which the market is beyond flooded with, IMO.

Can we get TA and pH numbers please?

Listened to the audio message and it says it's ready for drinking now, but would this be better sitting for a year or more? What's the drinking window and do you anticipate much improvement if I lay this down?

This looks interesting, does anyone have any recent thoughts on it?

Wine Enthusiast's review of the '06 Carneros Pinot:

Steve Heimoff wrote:MacRostie’s basic Carneros Pinot is always dependable, a dry, complex wine with good varietal character. The ’06 is satisfying in cherry, currant, tangerine zest, root beer, anise and peppery spice flavors. At its best now and for a couple years.

This wine is listed as a library collection and retails for $30/bottle.

ccrida wrote:This looks interesting, does anyone have any recent thoughts on it?

They make a pretty outstanding Syrah never tried there Pinot??

kylemittskus wrote:$20 for a well-made, non-mass produced pinot (not that this or isn't either of those things) is not steep at all.

Thanks, that's good to know. I'm not sure what a regular sized run would be but it says the vintage produced 2,163 6 bottle cases which is 12,978 bottles (or for you math nerds 9734 liters or 2571 gallons).

kylemittskus wrote:$20 for a well-made, non-mass produced pinot

The winemaker states they made 3,500 cases of this particular wine vintage, claiming that it is a moderate/light production.

worldofjohnboy wrote:The winemaker states they made 3,500 cases of this particular wine vintage, claiming that it is a moderate/light production.

Where do you read that? on the description it seems to say fewer than that.

Winedavid39 wrote:coming clean, i made a posting mistake and should have been $54.99.

Cesare needs to change his lead post as well...

worldofjohnboy wrote:The winemaker states they made 3,500 cases of this particular wine vintage, claiming that it is a moderate/light production.

Discrepancy between his quoted number and the number listed in the description.

Kao1138 wrote:Where do you read that? on the description it seems to say fewer than that.

Listen to the audio file at the top of this thread from the winemaker.

Winedavid39 wrote:coming clean, i made a posting mistake and should have been $54.99. changing shortly, and those who pulled the trigger will get a refund.

Sorry Mill.

That brings the price down to $18.33 per bottle before shipping, or $21.66 after shipping

That's down from $19.99 and 21.66 respectively before the discount

worldofjohnboy wrote:Listen to the audio file at the top of this thread from the winemaker.

The difference between a little over 1,000 cases and 3,500 cases is substantial. Winery: which is it? Thanks.

worldofjohnboy wrote:Listen to the audio file at the top of this thread from the winemaker.

Ah ok, serves me right for waiting to listen to the audio.

This vintage produced 2,163 (750 ml ) 6-bottle cases

tytiger58 wrote:This vintage produced 2,163 (750 ml ) 6-bottle cases

Audio says triple that.

worldofjohnboy wrote:The winemaker states they made 3,500 cases of this particular wine vintage, claiming that it is a moderate/light production.

In any case, 1k or 3k or 5k, whatever the exact number, this is a moderate production wine. Mass produced wines are an order of magnitude or two larger in scale. Production isn't so tiny, though, that you are paying for rarity as can be the issue with several hundred case productions.

Just for reference, a barrel produces 24 or 25 cases. So 40 barrels yields about 1k cases.

MacRostie on Yelp

MacRostie on on Snooth

Macrostie Pinot Noir 2006 on Snooth

MacRostie Pinot Noir 2006: Aged to Perfection

2006 Carneros PN at winery

gcdyersb wrote:... tangerine zest, root beer...

So, I'm just getting into the wine thing in the last year or so, but sometimes the descriptions make me laugh. Tangerine zest? Root beer? Really?

Is this just artistic license, or am I way out in left field here? I've zested lemons, meyer lemons, and oranges, but tangerines? I suppose I should envy the person who can distinguish between orange zest and tangerine zest - and who can do so in the flavors of a PN - but I really just chuckle a bit.

/bemused rant

michaepf wrote:So, I'm just getting into the wine thing in the last year or so, but sometimes the descriptions make me laugh. Tangerine zest? Root beer? Really?

Is this just artistic license, or am I way out in left field here? I've zested lemons, meyer lemons, and oranges, but tangerines? I suppose I should envy the person who can distinguish between orange zest and tangerine zest - and who can do so in the flavors of a PN - but I really just chuckle a bit.

/bemused rant

It's actually pretty amazing what you will start tasting after a while. I recently had a Corbieres that tasted like slate. It was the first flavor that came to my mind after it hit my tongue and I'll be darned if I'm going to change that.

FWIW, I've never "tasted" slate in my life. *shrug*

NightGhost wrote:Blog: MacRostie Pinot Noir 2006: Aged to Perfection

The above article states >> Production was 5,091 cases. Drink through 2012 or ’13, but careful storage is essential. Excellent. Suggested retail price is $30, which is what I paid, with Internet prices ranging from $25 to $32.

*EDIT - Ah, I think THAT article refers to MacRostie Sonoma PN rather than MacRostie Carneros PN.

This is good wine, I already have a couple of bottles of this in my cooler. Very nice wine and good quality for the price. Have fun!

michaepf wrote:So, I'm just getting into the wine thing in the last year or so, but sometimes the descriptions make me laugh. Tangerine zest? Root beer? Really?

Is this just artistic license, or am I way out in left field here?

Mostly poetic license in my opinion. It's not that people aren't experiencing the flavors they note, though there are probably some fakers out there. But they are overly specific given how individual sensory thresholds and sensory experiences vary. It's all done by analogy, and overly specific descriptions lose the forest for the trees.

Orange or citrus would be just fine instead of tangerine zest as far as I'm concerned. When reading notes it's good to interpolate back. Lists of citrus fruits, or stone fruits (plums, cherries), or flowers, or spices give you a broader sense of the components.

greggarcia wrote:The above article states >> Production was 5,091 cases. Drink through 2012 or ’13, but careful storage is essential. Excellent. Suggested retail price is $30, which is what I paid, with Internet prices ranging from $25 to $32.

*EDIT - Ah, I think THAT article refers to MacRostie Sonoma PN rather than MacRostie Carneros PN.

Not only do the production numbers suggest that, but the label shown confirms it, so I'm pulling it from my post. Thanks for the heads up.

Grr - I Googled the Carneros...foiled again!

edit: Pat has confirmed that it is the same - the only other PN they make is the Wildcat.

3 Times in one night....so what's the deal Woot?

As was said before being deleted:

kylemittskus wrote:Either the woot servers are buttafuocoing again or mods are deleting posts that, IMO, are not delete-worthy...

Seems to be happening a lot lately....it's getting a little ridiculous.

Off Topic-

I have about 125 bottles in my basement, mostly Woot Wine (WW keeps making offers I just can't refuse!). I've learned a lot about wines thanks to many fine comments in this community, and I have a general question for the group- I finally got a min/max thermometer/humidity gauge. My humidity runs 65+, but, unfortunately, so have my temperatures- yesterday being 67 degrees. I expect the temp to be in a more proper range as the weather cools off, but wonder about others' experiences with standard concrete, semi-underground basement temperatures on a long-term basis.

RRichmo wrote:Off Topic-

I have about 125 bottles in my basement, mostly Woot Wine (WW keeps making offers I just can't refuse!). I've learned a lot about wines thanks to many fine comments in this community, and I have a general question for the group- I finally got a min/max thermometer/humidity gauge. My humidity runs 65+, but, unfortunately, so have my temperatures- yesterday being 67 degrees. I expect the temp to be in a more proper range as the weather cools off, but wonder about others' experiences with standard concrete, semi-underground basement temperatures on a long-term basis.

From my understanding, keeping your cellar constantly at the magic 55 degrees is really only important if you're trying to properly age wines beyond five or ten years. If you're planning to drink most of your stuff within the next year or two, then it's not as big of a deal, as long as they stay out of the heat - that is, room temperature or lower. At least that's what I tell myself, since our two-room apartment doesn't really furnish any other options. There are many here much more expert than I who can chime in with their experiences, though, so, like LeVar Burton, don't take my word for it.

k1avg wrote:From my understanding, keeping your cellar constantly at the magic 55 degrees is really only important if you're trying to properly age wines beyond five or ten years. If you're planning to drink most of your stuff within the next year or two, then it's not as big of a deal, as long as they stay out of the heat - that is, room temperature or lower. At least that's what I tell myself, since our two-room apartment doesn't really furnish any other options. There are many here much more expert than I who can chime in with their experiences, though, so, like LeVar Burton, don't take my word for it.

Right, and thanks! I did, however, hope to age some of them more than a year or two. May be a pipe dream, though....

gcdyersb wrote:Mostly poetic license in my opinion. It's not that people aren't experiencing the flavors they note, though there are probably some fakers out there. But they are overly specific given how individual sensory thresholds and sensory experiences vary. It's all done by analogy, and overly specific descriptions lose the forest for the trees.

Orange or citrus would be just fine instead of tangerine zest as far as I'm concerned. When reading notes it's good to interpolate back. Lists of citrus fruits, or stone fruits (plums, cherries), or flowers, or spices give you a broader sense of the components.

This.

I read somewhere that scientists have actually done studies and found that the human palate, even for so-called "supertasters," is physiologically incapable of distinguishing more than three or four flavors when combined in food, so it's a little absurd to think it's possible with wine. Still, in defense of people who reel off seven or eight discrete components in their tasting notes (myself included), they typically don't all show up at once.

As well, many times I think the flavors a taster picks out are more psychological than actual, when the wine merely hints at something which the mind amplifies and recalls some obscure taste memory which may not be entirely accurate but is the closest frame of reference the taster has (like "tangerine zest"). Or it could just be tasting note writers trying to sound pretentious, see, e.g., Parker's "pain grille," "grilled/roasted Provencal herbs," and the classic "spice box".

Ultimately, though, I try to focus my notes, or at least make mention of, the much more crucial but often overlooked elements that really dictate how a wine feels - heat, acidity, and the balance thereof, sweetness/dryness, body, ripeness, minerality, etc. Parker's minions can list off a bunch of tasty dark fruits, black pepper, and a "91," but I may still hate the Shiraz if it's hot and cloying. Ah well, c'est la vie.

RRichmo wrote:Right, and thanks! I did, however, hope to age some of them more than a year or two. May be a pipe dream, though....

Well, my suggestion would be to get a 25-50 bottle wine fridge to keep those extra-special bottles at the proper temperature, which would surely be much cheaper than keeping your whole basement at 55 degrees. In the short term, though, I don't think you're going to hurt the good stuff by storing it a little warmer. After all, it's already been through shipping and everything.

A link to a wonderful review... btw, I have purchased and consumed this wine and agree with the review I am posting.

http://biggerthanyourhead.net/2010/08/25/macrostie-pinot-noir-2006-aged-to-perfection/

How good is this deal?

Click the link above for full discount details, links, etc.

k1avg wrote:This.

I read somewhere that scientists have actually done studies and found that the human palate, even for so-called "supertasters," is physiologically incapable of distinguishing more than three or four flavors when combined in food, so it's a little absurd to think it's possible with wine. Still, in defense of people who reel off seven or eight discrete components in their tasting notes (myself included), they typically don't all show up at once.

As well, many times I think the flavors a taster picks out are more psychological than actual, when the wine merely hints at something which the mind amplifies and recalls some obscure taste memory which may not be entirely accurate but is the closest frame of reference the taster has (like "tangerine zest"). Or it could just be tasting note writers trying to sound pretentious, see, e.g., Parker's "pain grille," "grilled/roasted Provencal herbs," and the classic "spice box".

Ultimately, though, I try to focus my notes, or at least make mention of, the much more crucial but often overlooked elements that really dictate how a wine feels - heat, acidity, and the balance thereof, sweetness/dryness, body, ripeness, minerality, etc. Parker's minions can list off a bunch of tasty dark fruits, black pepper, and a "91," but I may still hate the Shiraz if it's hot and cloying. Ah well, c'est la vie.

that "four taste" thing is a myth, regarding sweet sour, bitter and salt. (and umami perhaps). More research required.

For the questioner, I'd suggest: if it means something to you, great. Just beware that different people taste different thing in the same wine, and you're striving to find common, or enlightening vocabularies and conversations to share that experience.

Regarding Cellar Temperature, it's less about keeoing it 55 degrees all the time (that's COLD.. I have storage now and it's colder than any winery's cellar I know. Traditional cellars will range from 52-65 degrees (give or take a few degrees) over the course of the seasons, and that's fine as long as it's not fast daily swings. The underground factor keeps the temperature from changing more than half a degree over the course of a day. Most importantly, it stops the wine getting hot, preventing it getting much above 70 degrees.

Let me look for the reference for that...