However, California cabernet is not without its detractors. A lot of cabernet is produced, and it’s typically from regions that aren’t ideal for it. There is a lot of cabernet that is highly processed, both cheap and costly, for one thing.
For the third month in a row, I recommended that folks drink three bottles of wine per month. These wines were Camp Cabernet Sauvignon 2019, Domaine Eden Santa Cruz Mountains Cabernet Sauvignon 2017 and Broadside Paso Robles Margarita Vineyard Cabernet Sauvignon 2018.
The goal was to sample three different varietals of Cabernet Sauvignon from outside of the Napa Valley. It’s also worth noting that the three wines are very varied in character, which I believe indicates that generalising about California cabernet is a mistake.
The differences in the wines are not just due to location and vintage, but rather a combination of factors. The primary deciding factor is the winemaker’s intention. Every decision, from the method of farming to the harvest date to the winemaking details, is chosen by the producer in order to achieve a certain aim.
It’s also worth noting that California cabernet sauvignons are frequently mixes of different grapes. If a wine is to be called varietally, it must contain at least seventy-five percent cabernet sauvignon. For the most part, the featured wines are blends.
Only 2% malbec and 8% cabernet were found in the Camp. It had a cedary scent and aromas of herbs and red fruits, despite its youth and ripeness, and it was simple to drink despite its young. It wasn’t a lean cabernet, but it was well-toned and lacked a lot of the typical Napa cabernet fruitiness.
Overall, I thought it was a simple wine with savoury undertones that was both refreshing and enjoyable. It cost $22.
It was more than twice as expensive as the Domaine Eden ($51), which included 82% cabernet, 11% merlot, and the remainder cabernet franc, petit verdot and malbec. This deterred many people from giving it a try. It was a fantastic experience.
