This is an experiment. Unedited. And sometimes less than articulate. And I am absolutely not giving the standard 'wine tasting' assessment. Chalk it up to stage fright. But here's the deal: I received an email from the distributor Terlato. A 'very high profile' story on pinot noir declared pinot to be more drinkable, less dense and more pinot-like. And yes, that might be true but the writer didn't allow for vintage variation. And would I be willing to participate in a blind tasting to illustrate how sometimes vintage does indeed make a darker, more concentrated wine? And so, I did. After I made the video --on my FLIP--in one take, I had more thoughts. Such as--why was the more "European" year--the 2005 the darkest and the most reduced? Could it be an attempt at concentrating the wine? The wine was the most unpinot-like, yet other's I had from that vintage that weren't tampered with were MOST pinot like. And what was that buttered popcorn aftertaste--on all of the wines. Normally I would think terroir, but I do know that to be a winemaking effort and not terroir. As the wines were open, the wood, at first lurking in the background became more profound. The wines tasted much hotter than the 14% advertised, And actually according to the label, now that I look again, 2005 & 2007 are 14% and the 2006 14.5! All gave me acid and heat burns to the roof of my mouth. The balance on all of these wines were to the front and the took a wong turn on the back palate. However they did win points for not being the sweet, candied California pinot that scared me away in the first place. The Clos de la Roilette 2006 Fleurie afterwards was a joy of an antidote. Balance. Wonderful winemaking. Great blend of wild forest fruit and earth, danced on the tongue. No burn, but just a fun jig in the mouth. Thanks to Sarah Norris for her camera work!