Capezzana Barco Reale di Carmignano 2005: An old favourite that I have really enjoyed in at least a couple of previous vintages. The nose has only subtle herbal cherry fruit, with a simple character, with a slightly confected edge, only lifted by some calcareous, seashell-like notes. An attractive palate though, with a lean and minerally bite, and a crunchy although slightly sweet and confected style. Overall it is rather simple and not as I was hoping. Nevertheless it has some good grip and nice acidity. 14/20

Capezzana Carmignano Villa di Capezzana 2004: This has a darker hue than the Barco Reale, and it certainly has a more distinctive nose, with meaty, feral, funky aromas. The same character comes through onto the palate, although this is on top of a good depth of fruit here. Good concentration, ripe tannic grip, and nicely balanced acids. Interesting wine, and certainly a step up if you like the style. 16/20

Le Pupille Morellino di Scansano 2006: This wine exhibits some bright black cherry fruit on the nose, presented in a vivacious, open, simple but certainly attractive style. There is perhaps a little note of herb and butter alongside it all. On the palate there is a wealth of fruit, a touch confected but quite joyous in character, herby and unpretentious. There are good, charcoal-firm tannins too. Nice appeal here, and ready for drinking. 16+/20

Felsina Berardenga Chianti Classico 2006: This has a lovely glossy appearance. Nevertheless, there is little expression on the nose at the moment, just a faint seam of meaty fruit. On the palate though there is plenty of evidence of quality, It has a good weight and a very appealing structure at its core, where there is a lot of ripe but grippy tannin. It has a very firm character, but laid on top is a blanket of bright and lifted fruit. Good acid backbone. There is good potential here, but this needs time, two or three years at least. 16.5+/20

Fontodi Chianti Classico 2005: This seems rather shy on the nose, but what fruit characteristics there are here are slightly roasted. The style on the palate is big, creamy and mouthfilling. Underneath, though, there is good acidity and a ripe seam of tannins. It is a big and impressive style, but having said this there is an attractive seam of minerals and calcareous stone, and it doesn't seem anything like as over-the-top as I recall from my last tasting. It needs time - a few years - to show its best. 17+/20

Fontodi Vigna del Sorbo Chianti Classico Riserva 2003: There is plenty of concentration and aroma here, although it has a dense, meaty, feral character. There is also a stony edge to it, but the predominant character, at this youthful moment, is that firm, animal funk. The palate has a broad, creamy, youthfully brawny character. In that vein, on the palate this wine doesn't really connect; there are ripe tannins, nicely presented, and huge fruit concentration, but right now it has a rather detached feel. There is clearly excellent potential here though. 17.5+/20

Isole e Olena Chianti Classico 2005: This has a rather pale hue compared to some of the other 2005 Classicos. No lack of character on the nose though, which has bright, minerally, smoky-funky-feral fruit. The palate has appealing structure, although with a rather simple, charcoaly fruit profile. Despite this, there is quite a chewy grip. Overall this has a rather rustic style; I think there are better wines out there. 14.5+/20

Isole e Olena Cepparello 2003: There is a moderate depth of colour here, and on the nose some medicinal, cherry-herby fruit. It has some attractive, meaty elements of depth to it though. The palate is nicely composed, showing some ripe cherry pie fruit. It doesn't have the overtly brawny character of the vintage, and in fact it possesses a rather silky texture around a good, polished grip and a core of acidity. There is a warm feel to the flavours although nothing baked. A good wine, although not outstanding. 16.5+/20

Avignonesi Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 2005: Not a lot of depth to the colour here, and even some early maturity at the rim. This appearance is, I think, of some concern in a wine this young. The nose bears some unusual characteristics, aromas reminiscent of preserved meats, salami laced with peppercorns. The palate is lean, with a very sharp bite and yet ripe, swirling tannins. An unusual fruit profile completes the picture, This wine seems all over the place at present and is perhaps rather advanced in its development. Worrying. 12/20

Costanti Brunello di Montalcino 2003: Rather a pale wine in appearance, and it shows some considerable maturity too, with a red-raspberry core and an orange rim. The nose also has some well developed characteristics, plenty of sweet, meaty maturity and notes of old coffee. On the palate it seems to be holding up well; there is a good texture and a soft, pillowy style over grippy tannins and acid, but overall I think this wine seems rather advanced. In this case it may perhaps be an effect of the very warm vintage? There are some appealing elements to the wine now, but its future potential is certainly difficult to judge. 14+?/20

Massolino Barbera d'Alba Gisep 2005: This has a rather closed-down nose. but there is a fine textual quality to the palate. It is gently creamy, full, stylish, with a gentle balance of acidity. There is even some apparent bright fruit on the finish, more than the nose suggested I would find here. It is difficult to judge definitively in this state but all the components seem to be here. Potentially very good. 16+/20

Massolino Barolo 2004: At the moment this wine is not very expressive, showing just some slightly sour cherry aroma on the nose, with a gentle, chalky character alongside. There is, perhaps, also a little animal fur quality to it. But it does not yet have a real wealth of secondary character. The palate is broad, complete, a touch chalky, but quite dense with an elegant lift. This has a nice character. Very good potential. 16.5+/20

Pieropan Soave Classico 2006: There is very little on the nose here; this seems to be completely closed down to me. It has a nice colour though, crystal clear with a gentle green hue. On the palate it has an attractive presence, showing slightly peppery acidity and, despite the nose being so devoid of interesting aromas, holding the wine on the palate does release some youthful leafy and herby character. There is promise here; with time this wine will open up and give much more pleasure I think. 16+/20

Pieropan Soave Calvarino 2005: A similar hue to the 2006 Classico here, slightly less overtly green perhaps. It is also quite closed down on the nose, however, giving subtle wisps of honeyed fruit but, for the moment at least, nothing more. This has a really nice, well defined style on the palate, fairly full in character, quite broad, with an attractive composition. This has very good potential indeed. 16.5+/20

Allegrini Valpolicella 2007: Bottled under Stelvin. This has a bright, vivacious hue, as it should. It is simple, but has an attractively forthright herbal-cherry nose. Nicely styled on the palate, rounded and well integrated, with good pepper and grip. An enjoyable style, and impressive for a straight Valpolicella. 15/20

Allegrini Palazzo della Torre 2004: A nice, deep hue here. Less open on the nose than the 2007 Valpolicella, tasted alongside, there are dark fruits here, with a subtle, cola-caramel tinged character. The palate shows a more minerally character than is found on the nose, and it has a rich and creamy impact. This has a good blending of fruit, grip and acidity. That cola element reappears on the finish. Overall though, I think this has appeal. 16/20

Allegrini La Grola 2004: A very dense, rich hue on inspection. There is a lot of fruit here, with a roasted herb character. This is followed by lovely style on the palate; there is dense flavour, creamy fruit, intensity and yet also freshness and definition. Very appealing, as previous vintages have been, and also offering decent value for money. 16.5/20

Allegrini La Poja 2003: Another old favourite; I really adored the 1993 vintage. The aromas on the nose are intense and characterful, showing bright yet roasted fruit, with scents of cherry and earth. Great depth and fruit complexity here. Although it has a little roasted note the heat of the vintage is not overly transparent; there are no baked elements as yet. And there is a lot of acidity too, flavours of pickling spices, and overall a great composition. Lovely potential for the cellar here. 18+/20

Allegrini Amarone della Valpolicella Classico 2004: Very forward on the nose, which is open and expressive, with aromas of red cherry skins and cherry liqueur richness. The palate is fabulously rich and creamy, dense, pure and integrated. There is a fine concentration of flavour, with bitter cherry skins, milk chocolate and more. A lot of character here, and a lot of grip on the finish. Very good indeed, and with excellent potential. 18+/20

Loimer Kamptal Grüner Veltliner LOIS 2007: Bottled under Stelvin. Very pale, water-like hue, tinged with a little green. A very floral nose, chalky and perfumed, and in fact a touch soapy. Very soft on the palate, poorly defined, low acid style. It seems very lost on the palate. Hmmm. 12/20

Loimer Kamptal Grüner Veltliner 2007: Bottled under Stelvin. Another very pale wine, one that is less aromatic than the LOIS. Nice, showing some good fresh fruit here. Better definition on the palate, with a touch of the Grüner Veltliner spice and pepper. Quite soft though, although also a little minerally, although gently so. Overall it is straightforward, and with a short finish. 13.5/20

Loimer Kamptal Riesling 2007: Bottled under Stelvin. A softly mineral nose here, slightly perfumed and floral, not hugely well defined. Plump style on the palate, a touch soapy, simple but with good, firm acidity which certainly sets it apart from the two Grüner Veltliners. A decent wine. 14/20

Loimer Grüner Veltliner Terrassen 2006: Bottled under Stelvin. A nice, mineral character here on the nose. Chalky, although still with a very gentle character. Full, with a good weight, although moderate acidity at best. Plump, structured, but characterful. Decent-ish. 13.5/20

Bodegas Castaño Monastrell 2006: Of the final wine, 20% has undergone carbonic maceration, the remainder has had a more traditional handling. It has a really deep hue on inspection, and the nose is youth and juicy, and packed with summer fruits. It is sweet, and very appealing. The palate is just as vivacious, with a touch of richness from the creamy, brambly fruit nicely countered by a crunchy cherry vein underneath. A very enjoyable easy drinking wine, well made, and certainly good value. 16/20

Bodegas Castaño Hecula 2005: Another very dark wine, although the nose here is much more restrained than the 2006 Monastrell. There is dense fruit, with a smoky intensity to it, although it has a cherry and bramble character. It starts off in a very opulent fashion, rounded and creamy, but it shows more grip through the midpalate. There is plenty of substance here, a good tannic backbone, and a nice acidic cut too. This is impressive. 16.5/20

Bodegas Castaño Coleccion 2005: We have a lovely nose here, carrying restrained, serious, reserved fruits and an understated sense of richness. The palate has an immediately apparent deliciousness, showing the same brambly fruit also seen in the two other Castaño wines tasted here, but carrying lots of structure too, with very ripe, polished tannins supporting the fruit and fine acidity underneath it. This has really excellent potential. 17+/20

Bodegas Castaño Monstrell Dulce 2004: This has a dark, glossy, dusky-red hue. The aromas are redolent of Christmas pudding and dried cranberries, with an intense fruit richness. On the palate it is big, sweet and creamy with a huge texture. There is a lot of pepper and spice, and notes of creamy vanilla and bramble fruits steeped in alcohol. It lacks finesse and definition, but it gives simple pleasure in droves. 16.5/20

Serge Mathieu Brut Tradition Blanc des Noirs NV: This has a very clean and fresh nose. showing mineral, calcareous, seashell aromas. The palate has a similarly fresh style, and is imbued with a welcome, defining acidity. There is an appealing texture, a touch lean but there is some weight here, along with a youthful and foamy mousse. A chalky character, too. Good. 16/20

Serge Mathieu Brut Rosé NV: A pale, salmon pink hue on inspection. The nose, however, is currently heavily dominated by sulphur, and this is also the case on the palate. It absolutely swamps any other character, leaving just a full mousse and fresh, structural acidity. Light in style, but the flavour is very difficult to judge with this heavily treated wine. The sulphur here is so marked I can not judge this. Not rated.

Jaboulet Le Petit Jaboulet Viognier 2007: An appealing nose here, slightly peachy, with a little pine nut. It has a very plump style on the palate, with low acidity so typical of Viognier. Lots of texture here, and rather gently flavoured. This is attractive for the price, but in truth it lacks the concentration needed to match the texture. A short finish too. 13/20

Jaboulet Condrieu Les Cassines 2006: An unoaked cuvée. This has rather a mineral character to the nose with some lean fruit. It shows the same qualities on entry, then a more creamy edge to the midpalate. And although unoaked there is an appealing toffee edge to the fruit here. My criticism is that there is perhaps a lack of fruit concentration, but there is a promising, burgeoning richness through the midpalate. This is the first vintage made with input from the Frey family; I had hoped for something a little more dramatic. 15.5+/20

Jaboulet Crozes-Hermitage Les Jalets 2006: A dusky, raspberry-pink appearance. On the nose, cherry fruit with an earthy-funky style. A nice weight, gentle through the midpalate, with some nice tannins at the core. Soft, but with some decent grip at the finish. There is some potential here. 15.5+/20

Jaboulet Muscat de Beaumes de Venise 2006: A rather pale appearance. It has an inconsequential perfumed and soapy nose. It has a soft and plump character on the palate, and although there is some peppery acidity it is totally swamped by the rest of the wine. There is little here to recommend. 12/20

Jaboulet Crozes-Hermitage Blanc Mule Blanche 2005: Marsanne 50%, Roussanne 50%. Sourced from a 7 hectare vineyard, this cuvée spends nine months in oak. It has a creamy, buttery character on the nose, with nice honey-tinged fruit. There is similar pleasure on the palate, good grip from oak-derived tannins, and a flavour profile of dried and crystalline fruits. Moderate acidity, at best. This is good. 15.5+/20

Jaboulet Saint Joseph Le Grand Pompée 2005: A dusky, cherry-red hue. There is a lot of animal character and funk here, over some herbal cherry fruit. Full, gentle but broad, with a firm tannic core underneath. Rather simple, foamy, cherry fruit. An undistinguished finish. Short, but grippy. Good. 15.5+/20

Jaboulet Crozes-Hermitage Domaine de Thalabert 2005: This has a wealth of creamy, liqueur-like cherry fruit on the nose, with notes of black pepper and brambles. This has an appealing, clear, fruit definition. The palate is lovely, with a broad, full, seductive character. It is creamy, but underneath it a little brawny too. Good structure, with a lean, mineral twist on the finish. This is very good. 16.5+/20

Jaboulet Hermitage La Petite Chapelle 2005: A moderate depth of colour. Good cherry fruit on the nose, very primary in character. It isn't huge or very expressive though, but rather it is pretty. There is a lot of texture on the palate, which is rich, concentrated, deep and creamy. It has a good depth, broad character, with a good structure of acidity and tannin. Very attractive, with a lot of potential. If this is the second wine, it will be a delight to taste the grand vin. A success for the new proprietors, the Frey family. 17+/20

Chateau Laville Sauternes 2002: A pale golden hue on inspection, and just a low level of sweet crystalline fruit on the nose. It seems a touch woolly, soft and plump. It has a nice texture but is rather deficient in acidity. This is a cleanly styled wine but overall it is unimpressive. 12/20

Dobogó Mylitta Tokaj (Hungary) 2004: This certainly has an interesting nose, with notes of hay, and inorganic aromas which I find difficult to pin down, sitting somewhere between paint and glue. Nicely composed palate though - rich but with rather faint acidity beneath the rather challenging lemon-lime marmalade flavours. Nice substance but overall more unusually interesting than desirable. 13/20

Jeffrey Grosset Semillon Sauvignon Blanc (Clare Valley/Adelaide Hills) 2007: The aromas here are quie appealing, with a faint minerally seam to the green, leafy fruit profile. It has quite a full, rounded presence in the mouth, with a nicely composed pepper and spice character. A nice core of fresh acidity. This has an attractive style. 16/20

Jeffrey Grosset Polish Hill Riesling (Clare Valley) 2007: A very pale appearance. An open, gently aromatic nose, with little notes of sherbet, minerals and chalk. The flavours on the palate are rather more defined, classic lime leaves and spice, with that same minerally note as found on the nose. This has a very appealing style and has an admirable composition and direction. It should do well in the cellar. 16.5+/20