Les Hauts de la Brune Coteaux du Languedoc 2004
Price: $8
Maker: Domaine de la Brune
Varietal: 80% Syrah, 10% Grenache, 10% Mourvedre
Packaging: 750 ml bottle, natural cork
Alcohol: 13%
Our Rating: 8 out of 10
We picked up Les Hauts de la Brune Coteaux du Languedoc 2004 as an alternate choice for WBW #33 - its inexpensive price disqualified it from the $15 - $30 price range, but we thought we’d give a sub-$10 wine from the Languedoc-Roussillon region a try. At that price, and with its 80% Syrah composition, this wine would compete directly with a broad range of Shiraz/Syrah wines from Australian and California. The nose was very mild, with spicy berry aromas predominating. Our initial take on this wine was that it was rather thin and very dry. Even an hour or two of breathing didn’t alter our feelings much. Oddly, after being stored for a day (with argon) and another hour or two of air, the wine smoothed out considerably. We found mainly cherry, currant, and black pepper notes, with slightly sharp tannins. We’re not crazy about this wine, but ultimately it was fairly drinkable.
We’re not sure if this is the winery’s official site, but it indicates that this wine earned an impressive 90 points from Wine Spectator. Based on that, it’s an incredible value, though I can’t say I’d rate what I tasted at nearly that exalted a level. Feel free to give this one a try, though if you are into a fruitier Syrah/Shiraz I’d suggest one of the many decent Australian Shiraz choices that are in the $5 to $10 range. If you do pick up a bottle, plan on plenty of time, or decanting (maybe an aquarium bubbler?) to bring out the flavor and balance in this wine.
Add this post to: del.icio.us - Digg it - Stumble it - Furl - Yahoo MyWeb
May 20th, 2007 at 11:22 am
I like the theory of this site and I’ve picked up some good info, but here is where I have a problem:
“We’re not crazy about this wine, but ultimately it was fairly drinkable.”
The score? 8-10.
So how can we objectively use your ratings, when a wine that you DON’T like scores 8 of 10. It throws the ratings concept (already hard to decipher) out the window.
May 20th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
Our original scale was based on the common 100 point scale, which tends to cluster ratings in a fairly narrow range. We didn’t want to actually use individual points, as it implies a degree of precision we don’t think exists.
The result is that we have a lot of ratings in the 7.5 to 9 range, and also that sometimes we are on the fence between, say, 7.5 or 8, 8 or 8.5, etc.
We’re looking at alternate ratings that would be more useful, but for the moment we’re carrying on with the current system.
This wine was particularly perplexing, as it started off quite poorly, but after breathing to a point that would have oxidized most wines it got much better.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:38 pm
I picked this up tonight, and 5 of my friends and I shared it. We were all a bit surprised by it. We didn’t pick up on the fruitiness as much as the black pepper. We found the spiciness came out more as the wine breathed a bit. I wouldn’t rate it a 90, as Wine Spectator did…perhaps a 8. I would have it again, especially since the wine shop nearby had it on sale for $9 - a steal!
December 28th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
No matter how you rate this wine, it is a steal at $8-$9 a bottle. I and all my friends like it as soon as we open it. I can’t get enough of it! Buy it today, if you can find it.