There is something very reassuring about the style of Yalumba’s The Signature. Something unchanging. Stoic. Idiosyncratic, maybe, but also wholly assured. You know what it will taste like before you crack the cork (and it is still cork-sealed).
No change, really, with this Yalumba The Signature Cabernet Shiraz 2018.
Named in honour of Nick Waterman and proudly Barossan in every way. Indeed, there is quite a deal of old school, 90s-world toasty oak in this typically full-bodied red, but it’s French, Hungarian & American oak (whereas once upon a time, it was more American wood). Vanilla soaked plums and a bit of bourbon with that oak too. But it works – the barrel-derived richness is a part of this wine’s furniture. The fruit is instantly plush, warming, chunky, coffee, yet it’s savoury, and the tannins come through as a mouth coat to finish (they’re both oak and fruit tannins).
Having your own cooperage (which Yalumba has – what a luxury) means you get the pick of the oak world, and I often see this translating into a welcome oak-lifted savouriness in The Signature (and especially The Caley).
In Signature terms, this 2018 is a strong release. Maybe not an all-time classic (like the 2012), but a high-quality release.
Do I like it? Yes. It’s not a strictly fashionable wine – no whole bunches or amphorae in the mix here – nor it is smashable, or even particularly approachable, drinking. But that R.M Williams wearing, True Blue singing, Australiana essence is unmistakable. Couple it with the unwavering fruit and tannin intensity (and unquestioned cellarability), and you have a pretty smart bet for $65.
Best drinking: later. History says this is best opened from about eight years after vintage. Then it’s purely about the tree bark in the neck. 18.5/20, 94/100. 14.5%, $65. Yalumba website. Would I buy it? Worth a bottle for the cellar.
You might also like
13 Comments
Love it especially after 7-10 years bottle age. Agree with your comments, one of the few wines that hasn’t changed in style. Yalumba must be congratulated on that point (one of the few that haven’t tweaked or bastardised a quintessential product).
Talking of quintessentials, the closest thing to 389 I’ve tasted in a long time is Coates 2016 Shiraz Cabernet – fabulous stuff at a fraction of the price.
I have loved this wine in the past, and it is very good value for such a premium wine. Would like to know what percentage cabernet to shiraz? I think if this uniquely Australian blend is to gain more acceptance worldwide, it needs to be significantly more cabernet than shiraz, just as much as shiraz/viognier needs to go light on the viognier. Cabernet has such great character that can be complemented by merlot, franc, malbec or shiraz, but not steam-rolled, as too many Australian cabernet-shiraz blends do.
54% Cab, 46% Shiraz. I’d probably go even more Cabernet tbh.
It’s good to know that some things in the wine industry endures. Apart from the fact that they are maintaining the consistency and quality of the wine, I also like the fact that it still uses the same label design and is sealed with a cork. It looks just like the one I have – the 1996 – but for the back label which honours a different person associated with Yalumba’s storied history.
A great Signature vintage the 96 is too
It’s reassuring that in this fast changing world some things are consistent. There is no need to fix something that is not broken and Yalumba continue to produce something one associates with Australian Wine when I want something Australian. I always think that if I wanted something different there is a world of wine waiting for me.
Andrew, good review as always and a little more expressive too. I guess ‘classics’ tend to do that to you. My query is how a less developed palate like mine can pick up on ‘no full bunches’ or ‘amphorae’ in the mix in teh wines I imbibe? You do use the ‘bunch’ character in your reviews often and I assume more bunch, less stem, more fruit, less bitter and astringent, and therefore better, but let me know. In reference to your 1996 addendum above, my SECOND favourite wine of all time happens to be a 1996 Saltram Mamre Brook Cabernet made by the one and only Nigel. I will answer your next question. My numero uno of all time was the Crofters 1994 Cabernet/Merlot. Keep up the great reviewing Andrew.
I loved that 1996 Mamre Brook. I blame that wine, the 1998 St Hallett Faith Shiraz & the 1994 Wynn’s John Riddoch for kickstarting everything.
The smell and taste of whole bunches is indelibly burned in my brain – my first student wine included a 100% whole bunch Shiraz and I’ll never forget how it affected that wine. Forget the cinnamon/pepper beef/cloves/dandelions, this was like someone had emptied a mulcher into my fermenter. I fermented it in the garage.
I can still smell it now.
Anyway, that wine was terrible, but it was so instructive – whole bunches have a signature on the nose (dive into those characters above) and especially on the palate. Stem-derived tannins start earlier, hit harder (and can be more astringent, but a more cutting bite), finish earlier and are less powdery/mouth coating.
As for amphora? That’s harder. I’ve done a side by side comparison of Pinot from amphora vs stainless steel tank and oak barrel at Pyramid Valley ages ago. The amphora parcel looked bright, like the more reductive tank parcel, but with softer edges. That seems a constant for amphora, but concrete (and especially say concrete eggs) have a similar vibe.
My passion starters were 85 and 86 JR. it took me a year of living in France in the early nineties to realise how good they were. Drank some early eighties Margaux that weren’t a patch on them.
I agree with Chris late nineties/early 00’s Mamre Brook were exceptional although i preferred the Shiraz. Ditto Seppelt Chalambar when it was unfined and unfiltered.
Personally i think the whole bunch, amphora and carbonic treatments are more suited to medium reds like Pinot and early picked Grenache.
Mamre Brook. Now there’s a name I don’t often hear and we certainly don’t get it here in Canada. When I was in Australia some years ago I opted to bring home a couple of bottles of the 1998 Cabernet, choosing it over the Shiraz because Jeremy Oliver gave it an edge (in scoring and longevity) though, like Rick above, said that he liked the Shiraz a bit more. He said that there used to be a single Mamre Brook, a Shiraz-Cabernet blend, though I don’t know when it changed.
It’s fun reading people’s posts as I still have a few 1994 John Riddoch and a couple of the 1998 Chalambar with the ugly labels.
Ah the funny Chalambar label! Great, inexpensive wines. I like the pre-98 wines myself.