Montevecchio Rosso 2011 (Heathcote)

Montevecchio is a new brand from the Chalmers family - one of the driving forces behind alternative varieties in Australia, both with their Chalmers Wines brand, their previous vineyard and nursery, and their support for the Australian Alternative Varieties Wine Show.

The Chalmers sold their original vineyard (from where I bought sagrantino fruit in 2007) to Macquarie. While much of the nursery stocks of rare clones, including the MAT clones imported from Italy, has since been bulldozed, the family also set up a Heathcote vineyard with a mixture of Italian and other varieties.

My first impression of the title 'Montevecchio' had me wondering if there was a chance of this being an exercise in passing off Australian fruit, winemaking and wines as if it were an Italian brand. But given the age of the Heathcote soils, the Mount Carmel range, and the clear badging of 'Heathcote, Victoria' on the front labels of the red and white blends and the moscato, I think this passes well.

The 2011 Rosso is described as a 'co-fermented field blend of hand-picked shiraz, lagrein, nero d'Avola and sagrantino'. The description has me wondering how many purchasers and drinkers would understand what 'field blend' might mean (not to mention co-fermentation)? Were the grapes picked at the same time and co-fermented as a single batch? Picked from one, mixed-block, or several mono-varietal plantings? Lots of room to move under that 'field blend' label, really.

Anyway, this is a wine of the cool, wet vintage rather than of the varieties involved. There is a bright, clean flow of light, crisp fruit all through the palate here. A pleasant, sour-fizz confectionery note is the main appeal. This is jug wine, in a good way, and has me thinking tapas as much as antipasti.

Purchase, $20, screwcap, 12.5% alcohol, website here.

Seppeltsfield Lagrein 2010 (Barossa)

A challenge for me when reviewing wines, Italian grapes or otherwise, is to look for what is right and good in the bottle, ahead of going searching for faults and flaws. A positive screen rather than a negative one. But there are some wines where you 'get' the good bits quickly and then find yourself wondering why there is not more good to find and talk about. Especially for wines well regarded by other tasters, where what you find in bottle, glass and mouth does not seem to reconcile with that regard.

This 2010 release of a Barossa lagrein is part of Seppeltsfield's plan to add table wines to their fortified offering. My first impression was the note below:

Had a look at this tonight (blind first) and will revisit tomorrow. Thought it looked a bit spliced-together: smells & front palate of something ripe and rich (great colour), but the mid & back palate look like another wine entirely, with the primary fruit dropping off and acid taking over. Comes across as washed-out/dilute through the finish, which ends up being appealing in a refreshment-factor kind of way, but no sign of the fruit the wine started out with. Perplexing. Over-cropped? Young vines? Late-irrigated? Want to know more.
Apparently 10% cabernet sauvignon in this too. 2012 Barossa show trophy for best other red and 93 points from James Suckling too. Maybe I’ll see something else on a second day.
And should have a $20 rrp, not $39 ($31.50 at cellar door), nice label and all.

Tasted again the next day, there was a bit of an improvement, but no more than polish on the edges. Maybe I just do not 'get' this wine in some way (the back label refers to Lagrein as the 'Shiraz of Italy', Alps and all), but I'm happy in the skin of my opinion that this is just not that good.

13% alcohol, screwcap, gift.