First the easy one: Germany is completely delightful and exactly as I reported it when I wrote the catalogue in April.  No refinements are needed.  The vintage rocks.

Austria is another story, and a rather happier one than the one I told following my first encounter.

I saw the wines quite young, as it turned out.  First, they were younger, having been harvested 3 to 4 weeks later than usual.  Second, they underwent an extremely cold and lingering winter, which delayed their development.  And finally, I myself was two weeks earlier than usual.

All of this being said, the 2004 Austrians still require attention to detail. Riesling gives both the very best and very worst wines.  Grüner Veltliner is better-behaved and more reliable.

I recently returned from a second journey to Austria in which I re-tasted all my selections in detail. I can’t say anything was worse than I recalled; everything was at least as good and many wines were better.

The issue with Riesling was botrytis, when it arrived and how it was managed.  There are wines with blatant flavors of rot, which one easily avoids.  Yet there are others more subtly “tainted,” over which opinions differ whether they are indeed tainted.  I think they are, but I am repelled by a certain vintage flavor to which other tasters do not object.

In essence, I don’t like Riesling to smell like mushrooms.  Some 2004s offer this fragrance and it puts me off.  It doesn’t put everyone off and it might not annoy you, but it does me.  Some of the growers don’t seem to notice it.  Others explain it will fade over time.  At times this aroma isn’t intrinsically disagreeable; after all I like the smell of fresh enokis or miitakes, just not in my Rieslings.  It is sometimes—but not inevitably strongest—in estates who do old-school vinification; i.e., conventional crush and skin-contact.  And yet there are estates where it doesn’t occur at all.  SETZER and HOFER, my two new Weinviertel producers, both made absolutely wonderful Rieslings.  So did NIGL and SCHLOSS GOBELSBURG.  So, dramatically, did JAMEK.

Here’s an index of revised impressions.  If a winery isn’t mentioned it’s because I got it right the first time, or hope I did.

PRIELER: I need to remember the extent to which my palate warps when tasting loads of astringent young whites.  I become oversensitive to tannin in reds.  Seeing Prieler’s reds again was revelatory; they are sumptuous and nearly profound.

SCHROCK: The Furmint ought to have gotten a “plus.”  I described it as “aloof” when it was just bottle-sick.  It’s generous and luminous now.  As are all Heidi’s 2004 whites, which coincidentally all have around 11 grams/liter residual sugar, which does them a world of good.

LEHRNER: The 2003 St. Laurent was in a just-bottled funk when I first saw it; it’s “plus” quality now.  I blew the call.

NIGL’s is the vintage that’s changed most dramatically.  I knew it was just being ornery back in April, but one notes what one tastes, not what one hopes to be tasting.  The GrüVe Alte Reben is wonderful and deserved a “plus,” and each of the Rieslings Kremsleiten and Privat  were underrated.  It is Martin’s best year since 1999.  Even the little GrüVe Freiheit is serenely beautiful and spicy.

BRÜNDLMAYER is generally as noted, though the Riesling Lyra is perhaps underpraised, and the Muskateller is certainly about as “discreet” as an air-raid siren.

At JAMEK I was essentially right but too sparing with my praise.  The Achleiten GrüVe Smaragd is a masterpiece, and the Klaus Riesling Smaragd a monument.

And finally, at NIKOLAIHOF there was a wine I just didn’t get, or which didn’t get me, but in either case a GrüVe Federspiel Im Weingebirge ought to have been selected.  I noted it as “correct but withheld” in my original note, but the wine is indeed lovely, and I’ll offer it in early 2006 if there is any to be had.

And the everyday wines are still the best they’ve ever been.

Terry Theise

July 7, 2005