The difference is huge, I'm pretty confident I could hit Willakenzie soil blind 85% of the time... I'm not going to say that one is better than the other but it is a rare that I like a wine that comes out of Willakenzie soil.

Taste a bottle of Ken Wright who is a huge Willakenzie fan.. What do you get? Big rough black candied fruit... Brickhouse? Beaux Freres? Patty Green estate? Shea? Candied black fruits. These wines taste very uniform to me, big rough black fruits that lack complexity and balance. The fruit tastes dehydrated which makes sense since they are all growing on a soil that does not hold water and these growers do not irrigate with the exception of Ken Wright.

I know many who prefer these wines over the wines on Jory soil, some people like aromatics that have that new car smell oak spice, the massive fruit one layered attack, huge mid palates and soft finishes but to me they are just not interesting. Does anyone else have a hard time with these wines or is this a Dundee Hills bias?

Interesting question. I was smacked with my answer at Patricia Green's nefarious November tasting of 437 different Pinot Noirs. OK, maybe just 14, but there sure were a lot. I walked out with bottles of 7 of the 14, and to my mild surprise the vast majority (cases) were from the Dundee and Eola Hills Jory soils, with a few bottles from other places, though none from the Willakenzie soils. Anden, Eason, Balcombe, and Goldschmidt, then some Reserve and Four Winds.

Related data points: I've never tasted a bottling from the Shea VIneyard - from any vintner - that knocked my socks off. They're always attrative and elegant but to my tastebuds a bit dull. Other vineyards that *have* attracted me include Murto, Le Pavillon, White Rose, Seven Springs, and Bergstrom, from the Dundee Hills, and some newer vineyards from the McMinville District (Meredith Mitchell, Stony Mountain) and other places not yet raised into legend (Belle Pente Estate, Laurel Vineyard).

So I'd have to say that between the two you mention, I'm in agreement, though I wouldn't say I "don't like" the Willakenzie wines, I just don't prefer them (or buy them very often).

I agree that there are differences between Pinot made from Jory vs Willakenzie that can be discerned in the glass, but I think some of your comments are more directed at winemaking style (ie, overripe, over-extracted) rather than soil type. You point out part of the problem - that if we fail to receive any summer rain (1999 comes to mind), the Willakenzie soils will invariably have drought-stress problems. Under those conditions it becomes very hard to not make over-ripe and over-extracted wines.

I've discussed this issue with Doug Tunnell at Brickhouse and he has acknowledged some of the challenges he has at his site. While they are excellent wines, his 2002s taste nothing like the wines from Beaux Freres (which the WS thinks are excellent wines) - they are more floral, perfumed, balanced, and much less alcoholic (13.8% vs 15%) and extracted.

Wine making style can make a big difference as well. IMO, Ken Wright and Patty Green's wines tend to have more style similarities than soil similarities.

That said, if I broke down my purchases by soil type, there is much more Jory than Willakenzie.

Very interesting discussion gentlemen - do you guys know what type of soil Elk Cove Pinots are produced on? I get a very ashy (volcanic soil?) earthiness from their Pinots, especially the regular bottling.

I am pretty sure that Elk Cove is on Jory but I'm not sure.. I have never spent much time out in Gaston.

While 2002 Beaux Freres and Brickhouse wines are different in some ways I think they have many similarities especially in the Aromatics.. In the 2002 Brickhouse Willamette I got that straight Willakenzie new car small in the nose followed by what I would expect on the palate.

Winemaking has a lot to do with the size of the wines since most of the producers that we meantioned extract quite a bit however comparing extracted styles from the Dundee Hills and you have a different creature.. Have you ever tasted Patty Green's Dundee Hills stuff vs her estate? I haven't but I'm curious as to the difference, I would imagine two pinots with some stylistic similarities but the core fruit very different. I would think that one of the reasons winemakers working with willakenzie fruit extract so much is because that is the character of the fruit that comes off the vine, the soil's personality leans towards a bigger style and so the winemakers craft it that way. I'm looking forward to appelations.. Anyone know wehen they are coming?

I believe that Elk Cove is on Willakenzie soil, but I will be there on Saturday so I'll ask. The volcanic reference is appropriate. Willakenzie is actually a bunch of different soil types with a thick (several feet) layer of volcanic ash over it. The ash came from an eruption of one of the local volcanos (St Helens, Adams, or Hood, I've never heard which one) in the past. From a winegrowing perspective, the ashfall was limited to the area north and west of the Dundee Hills. The ash layer drains well, and because it lacks clay, it holds little water. That why you have the drought stress issues.

As a side note, the initial St Helens eruption dropped about 6 inches of ash over eastern Washington. The eruption that dropped several feet of ash over parts of Western Oregon must have really been something!

James,
I think I'm beginning to understand what you mean by the "new car" smell. I don't like it either. I got a lot of that from the Brickhouse when I had it several months ago, but found it had changed significantly the last time I had it, but after reading your comments I think I'll try it again with that in mind.

I have tasted most of Patty Green's wines, and I found that I preferred her Willamette Valley (grapes from all over w/ a lot of Umpqua Valley grapes thrown in) and the Balcombe (Dundee Hills). The thing that stuck out to me about her wines was that I thought all her Willakenzie stuff pretty much tasted the same. I thought the Balcombe displayed better balance, with a better finish than anything from Willakenzie soil.

I just got off the phone with Elk Cove. They have Willakenzie soil. That said, they are located in the Coast Range itself so they are slightly cooler and damper than most Willakenzie sites.

Paul and I were drinking one night and Patrick (ex Torri Mor assistant winemaker) came over and brought the 2002 Brickhouse.. When we opened it up, Paul said "New car smell" and it was so dead on. I had been searching for a discriptor to use for that smell for a very long time.. It is an aroma which dominates the aromatics that creates uniformity in most Willakenzie wines.

The more I think about it Elk Cove probably is on Willakenzie.. I have not had any of their pinots.

On a side note if anyone is interested Paul, Paul D. Patrick and I are going to be drinking tonight from 8pm to 12 or 1 am at my place in SW Portland. We're always up for more company if anyone out there is interested give me a call 1-503-434-7689 ... I made some soup.

I tasted Belle Pente Murto and Wahle side by side last year at the winery. I prefered the Murto as much more complex and flavorful. TUrns out Murto is Jory and Wahle is WIllakenzie soil.

What are your opinions about other soils, like Laurelwood, or others?

I have not had enough wines out of Laurelwood soil to form an opinion.. I can only think of a couple which are situated on the soil... Quail Hill I know but maybe Four winds or is that Jory? I have talked to a couple winemakers which told me that the soil is too vigorous and they don't care all that much for it. The stuff up on Chehalem is a little strange.. Nekia soil.. It's a very rocky soil that is mainly Willakenzie with some patches of Jory mixed in. I have had wine from Chehalem vineyards which are constantly tight and tannic (Bednarik) and I have had some which have been nice (Prive). McMinnville foothills has some nice Jory stuff.. I don't like the Momtazzi fruit all that much, this might be due to the fact it is so young but there is a lot of promise in those soils. Eola Hills has a Jory soil similar to the Dundee Hills but much more shallow which gives the fruit a distinctive acidity. Eola Hills is my second favorite region, the main difference between Eola Hills and Dundee Hills is that Dundee Hills soil is much deeper clay and the Eola Hills has a strong wind which blows right down into it from the Van Duzer corridor. Combine this with the shallow soils and you get wines which are tighter, more tannic and darker rougher fruit.

I haven't had more than a single instance that I know about from Laurelwood soils, but if a single data point can represent a universe, I'm smitten. J Albin makes a vineyard designate Pinot Noir from the Laurel Vineyard on Bald Peak in the NE corner of Yamhill County, in a location that sports one of the best views in Oregon wine country. The rich, creamy, cherry/chocolate notes in this wine drive me nuts. For 2002 he's doing both a reserve and a regular bottling. The vineyard has been producing for over 20 years, but J started his own label with the 2000 vintage, I believe. It's lovely stuff, very heady in the nose and long in the finish, neither heavy nor sharp. Wonderful stuff.

J Albin

If Laurelwood soils can turn out other similar examples, I'll be buying.

James, I too like Prive. They make a wonderful Nord Pinot(no new oak I think), now that they use all their grapes for their own label. The vineyard is over 20 years old, as is Medici that is right next door, for those that don't know. Personally, I like Momtazi. We visited Mo's Maysara winery in December and sampled his wines. I don't know about the others that buy his fruit, and the vines are young, but I think have great potential. His estate Pinot and Delana Pinots are great. His 2002 and 2003 Delana's we barrel sampled and, I predict, will be fantastic. They are in the learning curve of managing their vineyards. I don't know the soil type, though.

OK, I'll bite!

There is a side of me that wants to debate the soils, but there is also a side of me that says it is one of many contributing factors that can be substantially impacted by many non-soil / non-site factors. Even at the barrel sample level there are so many variables: clones, root stocks, dry or irrigated, vine age, oak selection, fermentation format, yeasts, etc. I get nervous over broad generalizations exclusively around soil because it is almost impossible to isolate all the other variables that make a wine what it is.

Then there is the other side of me that notes that a comparison of similar young vine fruit (in barrels and from specific sites and clones) that goes into the DePonte wines (an example that I'm familiar with) varies greatly, and the variations more often than not are from vineyard location. In the first three vintages, the Black Hole fruit definitely has tasted different than fruit that is roughly the same age, same clone, same vineyard manager, but that is from Red Hills sources. I'll withhold opinions regarding preferences, but suffice it to say that the final result is certainly different!

BUT: I'd be very reluctant to say that I favor general areas / soils greatly over other general areas / soils. I have had "really great" and "really crappy" wine from just about every area and every soil type. AND, I often find that clonal differences are more substantial than soil differences. For example: 777 vs. Wadensville, to me, is a bigger spread than Jory vs. Willakenzie soil from common clone vines of roughly the same age, and farmed in the same way.

One more "AND": Vine age is a big deal! To me, one of the most exciting things about Oregon pinot noir is that great wines are being made largely from comparatively young vines. (By no means all, but much of the incremental tonnage growth is, obviously, young vine material). Most of the 100-series clones didn't get planted until the mid to late 90s, and the 667, 777, 828, didn't go in until the late 90s or after. Magnify that by the fact that the combination of vine age, clone, root stock, and soil all conspire to produce the final qualities of the fruit / wine, and it's anyone's best guess as to how certain clones will perform on certain soils with certain root stocks 15-years from now. How might, for example "Jory 777" compare to "Willakenzie 114"? Perhaps one of these combinations will, when the vines are 20-years old, have "an 'old car' smell"

There are a lot of variables... All of that you mentioned play a big role in the personality of the finished wine but no matter what clones you use, how much oak, what yeast or any other process you use to make wine the signature from the soil will always be there even if just a faint nuance. While 777 and Wadenswil are complete clonal opposites and the two will be drastically different wines in the barrel, if they were both harvested from Willakenzie soils I would expect 777 with Willakenzie personality and Wadenswil with Wilakenzie personality. You can take an African from the congo, dress him up like an eskimo, fly him to Alaska and put him in an Igloo but at the end of the day it's stil going to be clear this guy is from the congo.

It is incredible to think about the future of Oregon wines. There have been some stunning wines coming out of young vines and I can't wait until these vineyards get 25 years on them. We have some 33 yaer old vines which are awesome but at the same time how much better would they be if they be if they were not 12 feet apart and had some dijon clones? There are more and more clones coming out also.. Maybe in 15 years 777 and 115 are gonig to be our modern day Pommard, Wadenswil. Archery Summit has some La Tache clone that I am buying this year to test out... Talked to vineyard manager at Archery Summit and she likes it a lot..

I'm a big prive fan, I liked the le nord quite a bit but I prefered the le sud.

Jim,

Despite my somewhat contrary argument above, I'm inclined to agree with you about the soil signiture being imprinted on the wine. That has certainly been the case with the wines made from BHV fruit. In broad, general, terms, your views are most certainly true; but my point was to say that in many cases it is difficult to make real accurate comparisons because it is so difficult to isolate all the variables. Consequently, most of the time we taste a wine and we want to say its characteristics are soil-driven, and perhaps they are, but often what is tasted are a combination of factors, of which soil is but one of many. These variables are easier to define for folks like you and me that have access to barrels of specific clones from specific soils with common winemaking practices, but most folks don't get a chance to taste wines at that stage. By the time a wine is bottled and at retail, it has many inputs and evolving dimensions.

Along the same lines as my post above, but with a slightly different twist: As you know all too well, not all "Jory" (and not all "Willakenzie") soils are created equal. According to the the local soil map, the BHV property has a bit of Jory in the Northeast corner of our property (currently planted with 114-3309 2nd year plants), and then it says the rest of the property is Nekia. But according to a soil specialist that I had survey the site, much of the property is actually a soil that he called "Widzel" (sp?). He describes this as "shallow Nekia", and of course, Nekia is usually described as "shallow Jory". We'll need to wait a couple years to know, but I'm quite certain that the 114 from the Jory on the BHV property won't taste like 114 from Jory in the Red Hills. Could be wrong, but that would be my bet.

In this regard, a very knowledgeable winemaker / grower visited the site and he noted that the soil was "more grey in color" than the typical Dundee Hills Jory, and thought that it had a certain Willakenzie-like appearance. The wine from BHV is definitely black-fruit oriented, deep, and earthy. To my palate and niffer it has neither the "rough" qualities that you describe in many Willikenzie wines, nor do I believe it has the "new car smell" (although you'll need to tutor me a bit on that one when we finally get to meet). [Duke has had barrel samples and a bottle-shocked sample of the 2002; perhaps his input / description on this front would be different?]. In either case, it most definitely doesn't have the bright red fruit flavors that I often get from Red Hills wines.

So, I guess what we're saying is that flavors are both soil and micro-site driven.

I think that every area is different. We don't have the differences by site that Burgundy has - yet (and probably won't in my life time), but I think you can find differences between the regions. Willakenzie is different from Dundee Hill is different from Eola Hills is different from Parrett Mountain.

I was out at Matt Kinne's place on Saturday and tasted his 2003s. They are definitely red fruit driven, but softer and less electric than Red Hills (of course everything we tasted anywhere was 15+% alcohol). On the other hand, the Black Hole, IMO has the elecricity. Of course there are few other vineyards planted in gravel yards!

BTW, Doug has a section of his vineyard that is planted on a deep gravel field. He vinifies it separately and gets a couple barrels out of it. It tastes more like Black Hole than Brickhouse, so maybe the rockiness makes a difference.

BH you make some great points. It is going to be very interesting to see how the soils are going to be classified in the next 15 years. I expect Willakenzie to be broken down into many sub categories. Shallow Nekia?? I have never heard of that before. I think it is pretty clear that we are going to see some site specific terroir coming out of Chehalem due to the diversity of soils from site to site.