“Baco Noir has been berry-berry good to me” – not sure if they say that around the winery at Henry of Pelham but they should – they are the Kings of Baco Noir – and one of three wineries in all of Ontario I feel are doing justice with this grape (the other two are Sandbanks (PEC) and Sanson (LENS)). At its best it can taste like a real wine – at its worst its not fit to clean the toilet … harsh words yes, but as someone who has waded his way through many a Baco Noir (way back in 2007 I organized an Ontario-wide Baco Noir Challenge) I can say that with authority.
Today, at the Summerhill LCBO, a dozen wine writers from the Wine Writers’ Circle of Canada joined Paul Speck (co-owner) and Ron Geisbrecht (winemaker) of Henry of Pelham to taste through 9 years of Reserve Baco Noir.
By the Numbers …
Henry of Pelham (HoP) started growing Baco in 1984 and making it into wine in 1988. The first year the word `Reserve` appeared on the label was in 1995. Oak treatment is always 100% American oak, of which 60% is new in the Reserve line … the wine rests in oak for 6-10 months (regular) and up to 18 months for the Reserve. Finally, Ron admitted to using 8-15% of Merlot in the wines, though sometimes he`ll use Cabernet Franc
The vintages tasted today ranged from 1997 to a 2010 barrel sample, missing were 01, 03, 04, 06 (no Reserve made those years) and 05 (limited made – sold out). On average HoP makes only 1500 cases of Baco Noir Reserve compared to 12,000 of the regular.
By the Nose and Palate …
General note: old Baco smells pretty rank, but the palate is surprisingly gentle and welcoming … the older wines also seemed to fall apart quickly in the glass.
1997 … an early favourite with a leathery nose and leathery red fruit flavours, but within a half hour it turned rubber hose and nail polish, drink quickly for best enjoyment.
1998 … smoky yet horrible on my nose, thought about plugging it before sipping, but that would have taken all the fun out of this (?) – palate has some redeeming qualities with hints of black cherry and smoke.
1999 … the best of the 90`s Bacos. The nose proved to be pretty harsh but the palate rescued it from being poured down the sink – full in the mouth with new leather and black cherry, still quite drinkable with a pleasant and long sweet fruit finish. Drink now.
2000 … “Not half bad, ” I wrote in my notes, “still has a stinky nose though” – palate is okay for a little while, half hour in the glass and it turns weedy and unappealing.
2002 … one of two that really had impressive credentials – we have here a nine year old Baco with red licorice and cherry on the nose and a lovely palate of sweet vanilla cherry, black currant and plum with blueberries. I could not swear this to be Baco, it tastes too good. Drinks very well now.
2007 … another hot vintage (see above) and another excellent example of well made Baco (this time Cabernet Franc was added). The nose was almost non-existent but the palate was more than just a little inviting: smooth red fruit (cherry) with nice tannin structure to hold it up and good acidity – great fruit core. Still a few years ahead of it, the question is: will it turn out like the `02? One can only hope.
2008 … no redeeming qualities at this time – varnish aromas and flavours – but as we have seen Baco needs time.
2009 & 2010 … both barrel samples that need time.
It was once said to me that “good Baco (if there is such a thing) needs at least 5 years in bottle to become a drinkable wine”. Judging by the proof of 1999, 2002 and 2007 – there seems to be some truth to that statement.
Big thanks to Paul Speck and Ron Geisbrecht for giving us some insight into this most maligned and misunderstood grape variety.