2001 Hemannhof Vineyard Chambourcin

I am somewhat sure we visited this winery a few years back and were impressed by their offerings. so I grabbed this on our last trip to St. Louis and paid about $12.

Funky, earthy berries on the nose.

Good ol' weird Chambourcin – almost Italianlike in its funkiness – acidic, spicy, very soft tannins, a bit of chocolate, cherry, and oak.

Earth, chocolate, and funk on the finish.

Not bad stuff, heavy and definitely has some age on it...I wouldn't hesitate grabbing a newer vintage if I saw one.

2006 Stone Hill Winery Vignoles

Vignoles is one of these strange hybrid grapes that you'll see a lot of in the Midwest and East Coast and that's about it. I don't recall what we paid for this but it's the $10 neighborhood.

Pineapple and sugar on the nose.

Quite sweet – pineapple for the most part with some miscellaneous tropical notes. Viscous, cloying in its sweetness, and while there's acid the sugar overwhelms everything.

The finish is all pineapple.

Do you like pineapple? If so, grab it...if not, stay away. I can't imagine drinking this with an entree, but it wouldn't be bad with dessert. Definitely serve it with vanilla ice cream and fruit pie.

2003 St. James Winery Norton

Another Missouri wine we picked up on our St. Louis trip. I don't recall what I paid for this sells for $10 from the winery.

This is a fairly big, dark, fruity, and fairly dry wine. Not too much tannin, but a lot of black fruit – plum, blackberry – and some Italian style funk. A lot of strange earthy qualities – leather, dirt, tobacco. Norton produces a strange, earthy wine and it's one of these things where you may love it or hate it, but for $10, this is a very complex and interesting wine.

The finish brings out a bit of oak and some plum lingers.

I like this wine and am astounded that I paid $10 for it. One of the better Nortons out there and for the price, you can't go wrong.

2005 Stone Hill Winery Vidal Blanc

A lot of white wine (and red, for that matter) from the Midwest is sweet – even those described as “off dry” still tend to border on cloying. I grabbed this one for looking for something a bit more dry – while I don't remember the price, I'm sure it was under $10.

A bit of pineapple on the nose.

Pineapple on the palate, as well as a buttery mouthfeel – this must've seen some oak.

That oily butter residue for some people like lingers on the finish.

Sort of like a not terribly obnoxious Chardonnay. If you're into Chardonnay and want something somewhat lighter this could fit the bill. I certainly don't hate this bottle but it's just not my style.

2004 Mount Pleasant Merlot

This is our final Mount Pleasant Winery review for the near future. The prices of their red wine are way too high for the quality and this ultimately made me decide to quit their wine club. I have no problem dropping $30 (this one’s retail price) or even double that for a bottle of wine, but when we’re in that price range, I expect a wine to be truly excellent.

Oak, anise, and black fruit in the nose.

The palate has lots of wood–oak, tobacco, smoke, with some ripe black fruit–plums, blackberry, even a hint of strawberry. While it’s dry and tannic, it’s still medium bodied so it’s fairly easy to pair with whatever you’re eating.

The finish is all wood, with some licorice, and perhaps, just maybe a touch of raspberry. Very tannic. Even after being open for a full 24 hours, it’s still firm...maybe it needs some more time in the bottle.

Overall, here’s a wine that isn’t half bad at all...but the cold reality, especially at my age (20s), is that price matters a tremendous deal.

For $10 I’d buy it again, for $15 I’d recommend it, for $19 I’d say it’s good but somewhat overpriced though overall recommended. $30? I just can’t. Yes, it’s a smaller winery, it’s Missouri fruit, and it’s a nice place to visit....but this just doesn’t cut it.

Next time we go to St. Louis we will not hesitate visiting the winery, we’ll do a tasting, we’ll even buy a case, and perhaps, in the spur of the moment, I’ll buy one of their $30 bottles....and when I open that bottle months later I’ll remember a nice afternoon in Missouri wine country and we’ll enjoy it...but with no sentimentality attached, this is nothing more than a “good wine” that’s being sold at a “great wine” price.

2005 Mount Pleasant Cuvée Blanc

This is an odd review to write. Most of the wine we buy and review are things we’ve either tried, come with strong reviews from people who know basically what we like, or are so inexpensive that I’m very forgiving.

We received this wine with our “wine club” membership from Mount Pleasant. Knowing this one saw some time in oka, I didn’t even put this one on the rack, I just let it sit on the counter for a few days to settle it down, chilled it, and cracked it open.

Retailing at $14, this is made from the Vidal Blanc, a hybrid grape that can withstand harsh winters so you’ll find this a lot in the Midwest.

The nose has a bit of pineapple and oak.

For lack of a better way to describe it, this tastes like Pine-Sol. A bit of lemon, a bit of pineapple, and a lot of pine. There’s some acid, but that just makes it taste like a cleaning product....the wood flavors turn what could’ve been a decent wine to something unbearable.

The finish has lots of vanilla at first and fades away to Pine-Sol....unpleasant is an understatement.

This is really all a matter of taste, the notion of white wine in oak repulses me...I thought I’d give it a shot, but alas....terrible. Lots of people love this style, it just does not work for me.

2004 Mount Pleasant Norton

Towards the beginning of this blog we reviewed a white wine from Mount Pleasant negatively. A bit later, we reviewed a $25 Cabernet Sauvignon, and ultimately felt that while it was okay, it was not worth anywhere near the asking price. This is the only winery which we’re “members” of and I have to say that two mediocre wines in a row really shook my confidence.

So, here we are with a 2004 Norton. Norton is a varietal found in the Midwest and if you tour wineries in the area you’ll find a lot of terrible wine made from it. When we visited Mount Pleasant, we both agreed it was the best Norton we had, but also the most expensive at $35.

Norton’s typically are dark and this one is no exception. It’s dark purple, but looking at a full glass, it almost seems black.

The nose has lots of pepper, black fruit, and a touch of alcohol.

On the palate, this reminds me a bit of Syrah. Lots of pepper, licorice, and spice on the palate, but there’s also plenty of blackberry–to the point that I’d call it jammy. As soon as it hits the tongue, it seems to taste like blueberry but that changes to blackerry. It’s a nice but strange balance of strong jam and strong earth–a big wine for sure. I thought I was getting tobacco, but I think it’s more just smoke. The tannins are extremely smooth and silky, no burn or anything of that sort.

The finish is long–starting with prunes and fading away to raspberries.

I’m glad that my memory has held up....if this one was a disappointment, I probably would have quit our club membership. This is, hands down, the best Norton I’ve encountered. An excellent wine, regardless of region or varietal. Complex enough for the nerds, yet smooth enough for the friends-–highly recommended.

2003 Mount Pleasant Cabernet Sauvignon

Earlier in this blog we reviewed a white wine from Mount Pleasant negatively, and in that review I said I was looking forward to opening up one of their reds so they’re consistently good.

So, here we are. The 2003 Cabernet Sauvingon which retails at $25.99.

Even after a two hours in the decanter, the wine was still a bit tight, so it needs a lot of time to open up.

On the nose I get a hit of alcohol with oak. There’s also some cherries.

The palate is not unlike the nose: oak and cherries. The tannins are mild but there’s quite a bit of acid which makes it a little sharp. It’s a good wine, but it’s very simple–other than the cherries and oak there’s nothing really going on in the glass. At $25 bottle, I generally expect some more complexity than this.

My only gripe is the price. It’s a good bottle of wine, firm enough to stand up to hearty food but smooth enough to enjoy a glass alone.

2005 Mount Pleasant Villagio

Mount Pleasant Winery in Augusta, Missouri is one of finest wineries in the Midwest. We've visited there twice and are members of their "wine club"--everytime we get a shipment in from them I get excited because they consistently do a good job with red wine. Many Midwest wineries do okay with white but their reds are at best decent, at worst awful. Mount Pleasant's whites are a bit more hit and miss.

This wine tastes very "Midwest" which leads me to believe it has to be mainly Vidal Blanc or Seyval Blanc--hybrid grapes that you'll only find in places like Illinois and Missouri because they're more adaptable to the climate than something like Pinot Grigio is.

I get grass on the nose and not much else, I detect no fruit. Fran gets hay on this one.

As far as how it tastes--to put it bluntly, it's like a bad Pinot Grigio. There's not much going on at all, some fruit--grapes, actually--and not nearly enough acid. Acidity is a must in white wine and I just don't get much in here. Fran gets orange zest on the finish, I get something citrusy, but can't place my finger on what.

I like Mount Pleasant's red wines, but I can't just recommend this one. If you love Pinots and want something a bit different, it may not be a bad buy (it's only $10) but otherwise I'd pass. I have two bottles of their red wine (one Norton, one Cab) on the wine rack, when I crack them open (they're priced in our "special occasion" range, though) I'm sure they will be raves.