The wine was more layered in flavor and would most certainly lend itself to extended cellaring, but I still would be hard pressed to spend over $100 on a bottle of wine right now.

Thanks for your comment

Josh

What is distressing to me is the common trend that reveals itself here: Two wines, similar blends, same year, one with 43% new oak, one with 70% new oak, and a price tag that predictably matches the oak treatment. Your review indicates that the wine stands up to the oak, which is obviously key, but I find that less new oak tends to equal much better value.

The same is true in Tuscany, and particularly in Montalcino, where I almost always prefer the normales over the riservas of Brunello.

Perhaps it shouldn’t trouble me; perhaps I should be thrilled that the wines I dig most are the ones priced lower. But it’s a trend that perpetuates the general winebuying preference for oak, because customers who think of nice wines tend to think of heavily oaked wines.