It's not every day one sits down to a glass of Chambourcin. I gather this is one of Australia's better known examples, though (everything's relative).
A ruby red colour, not especially dense. The nose is actually quite interesting and expressive. There are bright, clean fruits in there, quite sweet, along with some foliage and perhaps even a slight hint of barnyard. Some vanilla/coffee oak also sits alongside, subtle but present. Certainly it's distinctive and well balanced. Entry promises further interest, with acidity registering on the very tip of the tongue, along with fruit flavour not long thereafter. But things fall apart a bit on the middle palate. A big gush of intensely sweet, lollied, slightly prune-like red fruit rushes along the tongue and rather dominates the other flavour components. A shame, as there is some real interest here, and well handled oak too. If you can look past the sweet fruit, there are genuinely savoury elements to the flavour profile that deserve a bit more attention within this lightish wine. Some time in glass has tamed the sweetness of the fruit a little, but not by much (perhaps my palate is adjusting). The after palate, mercifully, shows a diminution of sweetness in favour of the savoury notes, and the acceptably long finish is very low on tannin, riding instead the wine's acidity through to a close.
Interesting wine, this one. I must say, my reaction is based on what I perceive to be a flavour imbalance, and is representative of my tastes. Some people will undoubtedly go nuts for the easy sweetness and low tannin of this wine. In its favour, it has a flavour profile that is quite different from cheap Shiraz or Cabernet. I'm tempted to say it's Pinot-like, but it is so only in that it delivers quite an intense fruit character in the context of a light to medium bodied wine.
Price: $A16
Closure: Stelvin
Date tasted: January 2008
Leave a comment