Spencer Roloson Winery sent wine samples for VineSugar's official review. Well, we at VineSugar like to share the wealth so I put together a blind tasting event with some friends and sampled their wines having everyone note their impression for the write-up. Palates were livened by new exposures and thoroughly dissapointed, all in the same event. Before the holidays were in full swing, I received a package of wines from a winery I never heard of: Spencer Roloson Winery. The package contained four bottles of wine "for my review" and their standard media kit. At first, I was thrilled and thought, "wow, free wine" but then my conscience kicked in and I began to question my credibility as a critic. About five minutes later, my guilty conscience faded and I was once again happy that people were sending me wine samples. Hey, it saves me time and money to get them myself and I have no problem telling them if their wines were orgasmic or panther-piss... I'm heartless like that.
I concluded the best way for me to sample these wines for review and still maintain some credibility would be to hold a tasting event and post the results. I figure, the winery can get my reviews and also the thoughts of several other people ranging in wine experience.
The event was scheduled for 8 people total but only 5 in total made it. The event went down like this: Everyone was aware of the winery name as they arrived. It was announced as "Spencer-Roloson Winery from Napa Valley." I informed everyone they were about to sample 4 wines; 1 white and 3 reds which were brown bagged and labeled A through D. Everyone was given a pen and index card with A-D written on the top. The instructions were to first sample the wine then write any thoughts on the respective card and include their overall rating on a five-star scale. Then the "floor" was opened up for discussion and a general room opinion was formed. Once discussions ended, the wine varietal was revealed including production details and the winery's tasting notes. I wrote my own tasting notes for review and contributed little to the open discussions so I wouldn't sway the room.
2003 Viognier Suneo Vineyard, Lodi $26
Hugh:
Strong citrus, full mouth feel, possible malo-lactic fermentation, high alcohol - hot finish
Gail:
nice fresh nose, smooth taste, pleasant and crisp finish with a tropical after taste. Very nice!
Tim:
full bodied, citrus, pineapple and apple notes.
Jen:
peaches, nectarines. aromas weren't that great but flavors were better.
Alex:
fruity, light, crisp at first, slightly fuller finish.
Ryan:
pale gold with green tint color. Bright tropical aromas- pineapple, peaches, grapefruit notes. Full mouth feel and creamy vanilla texture and citrus. Long finish with notes of high alcohol.
First thought was Chardonnay but most everyone later deciphered it as Viognier. Only one person felt the finish was hot but not to a discerning degree. Served chilled, this would be great with an array of foods and would even make a good cocktail wine. Everyone seemed to enjoy it and happily finished off their taste.
2002 Palaterra California (red table wine) $16 
Hugh:
fruity nose. low tannin/acidity. soft fruity. No oak.
Gail:
pleasant berry nose. nice berry flavors, woodsy taste, light tannins. might be good as a "summer red". not my style
Tim:
eh...not bad but not my style
Jen:
fruity nose, mellow taste. too woody/oak.
Alex:
strong fruity nose. lots of plum. weak in flavors. nice texture
Ryan:
aromas similar to malbecs. floral/rose. briar, minerals, earth, oak with notes of mocha and dusty berries. Stone fruit flavors, red berries, spice. Long finish-- chewy raspberries, spice and cherries. good structure.
It was agreed that it was a unique blend of grapes and well constructed but it wasn't in a style that agreed with ours palates. The aromas seemed similar to that found in traditional Malbec. Lots of earth quality with bright berries. I personally enjoyed it very much for its uniqueness and value.
2002 Tempranillo Madder Lake Vineyard, Clear Lake $25
Hugh:
cherry and spice nose. hard to tell what it is. huge tannins. fat from cheese helps cut the tannins. not enjoyable
Gail:
spicy, cherry, oaky nose. beautiful color. tons of tannins. needs hearty steak or rich cheeses. 
Tim:
cab? cherry and oak filled nose. very tannic and peppery taste.
Jen:
zin? fruity nose with pepper and cherry
Alex:
zin? spicy, peppery nose. moderate tannins. better with food.
Ryan:
Obvious aromas of pepper and spice with wild berry notes. Chewy finish, big, full round tannins puckering the mouth. Chalky, mocha notes, leather, toasted oak nuances.
This was another favorite but because of its huge tannins, food was needed to cut it down. I put out some sharp cheese which everyone gobbled up while sipping this wine. As the wine opened up, aromas of "wet dog" were introduced and became a turn off for most. Definitely requires food to be enjoyed but initially it was a hit. Give this monster PLENTY of time to open up. It also tastes a bit young and hints at softening a bit with time and cellaring well.
2002 Syrah La Herradura Vineyard, Napa Valley $35 
Hugh:
inky. tar - bad nose. surprisingly soft taste. Petite verdot?
Gail:
beautiful color- inky jewel tones. horrible nose- wet damp cloth. tons of tannins- fine when eaten with cheese. Did not like
Tim:
very dark purple. "interesting" nose. aromas of tar. slightly tannic. Burns the nostrils! 
Jen:
terrible nose. wet shoes! 
Alex:
nose isn't pleasant. ink? tar? eeww! one of the first wines I truly dislike.
Ryan:
dark inky color. wet tar, smokey spice and black fruit. big, full round tannins. black cherry and licorice finish.
This wine went over like a fart in a crowded elevator. No one could get past the strong aromas of tar and could barely finish what was in their glass. It was pretty bad but quite comical none-the-less. It was agreed to be tight and uninviting. Interestingly, when I read their "official tasting note", that sealed the deal. The final sentence in their note is: "The finish is equally exotic with granite and floral essence, iodine and blood." mmm.... pour me some of that! The room was repulsed that they were consuming a wine the actual winery described as blood and iodine. I must agree. Even if those qualities are apparent, they are far from appealing attributes for effective marketing and sales. If I'm at a store and the shelf hanger describes the wine having blood and iodine qualities, I'm gonna put the bottle down.
I later tasted this wine nearly a day and half later and it was completely different, however. The floral and berry aromas were much more prominent and the tar notes softened and married well with the spice and earth qualities. Much better with ample time to open up.
I had to laugh as we were tasting through these wines. Many other critics have been given them good marks but the overall consensus at this event was simply average. I must confess that all these wines were so much better 24 hours later as they evolved into much more balanced wines but who the hell has 24 hours to let them decant?! This is a prime example of being able to taste a wine a discern it as being age worthy or cellar worthy. It hard to get past the initial tight impression and focus on how it will evolve. Everyone in the room were your average wine drinkers for the most part and couldn't care a bout if a wine is age worthy -- they simply want good wine at a good value and be able to enjoy within an hour of opening it.
I was slightly happy the way things turned out if only for this observation. Critics analyze the hell out of wines and know all the tricks to looking past what may initially be a bad first impression only to reveal an impressive wine after the second. If we're desperately trying to capture aromas or fighting to describe the mere hint of a wine, we'll let it sit for some time and see if things opened up or not. We may adjust the temperature of the wine or our environment. The point is, we know how to find if its us or the wine.
The average wine consumer unfortunately would never make it to the second impression. Our tasting group that afternoon certainly didn't. Everyone immediately dismissed the wine they didn't like and the winery name was etched into their minds under "don't buy" -- sad, but true.
In summary, the Viognier was a hit and enjoyed by all. The Palateraa was appreciated for its uniqueness but none would buy it even at $16. I believe it was because it far from anything they're used to and are used to "cocktail wines" instead of thinking of wine for food pairing. The Tempranillo was also enjoyed but the shear size of this wine (mainly the tannins which would soften with food and time) swayed them from thinking of it as one to buy. The Syrah was, well, short of impressive. This one was the clear loser of the group as no one could get passed the ferocious aromas of tar. It seemed apparent to all that these were young wines from young vines.
Other online critics that reviewed their wines include:
- Vinography
- Lenndevours
- Professor Bainbridge
My hopes for this event was to expose the Spencer-Roloson name to other drinkers as well as provide them with own personal impression and review. Feel free to judge me now since I suppose I'm a critic that accepts gifts and should be stoned but you know what?-- as long as I have friends that will help me review the wines and provide just that much more feedback for the winery, then I honestly don't see the harm in accepting samples. We all had a great time and hopefully can do it again soon!
