Most hospitable hosts Ming San and his wife are. The proceeds of this tasting are strictly for charity to the children's funds of Salvation Army -- which, I was told, would be very significant for them. God bless them all... Anyway, both the food and the wines were fantastic! A very satisfying dinner on all counts. I went home a very happy man, and let me tell you one of the reasons: the wines.
We started the night with two Corton Charlies. Before I proceed, let me admit that I have a certain fondness for Corton Charlemagne. For most people, they are four-square, impressive but rather charmless whites. But to me they combine the structural austerity of the best Chablis with the voluminous density of a Cote-de-Beaune grand cru. Make no mistake, they not very expressive, friendly wines, hence not so easily appreciated. Nonetheless, the Bonneau du Martray 1996 we had was fabulous. It had a mixed reticence of lime skin and slightly cheesy aromas (at first) but gave way to a rather generous, fruit-front, almost oily-textured palate framed with energetic lemony acids. It was at once voluminous and penetrating, and had an almost spherical texture in the mouth. Deliciously good.
The Rollin 1996 Corton Charlie however was quite different. Andy said there was an aroma of 'rubber' -- which I understood. To me there was a rather chemical-solvent like aromas interspersed with pear. Minerally oyster shells were discerned on the palate. The wine entered very linearly in the mouth, promising a good cut but seriously lacked both volume and penetration for a wine of such calibre. Although the acid angle was there, it ended short with a bitter tinge on the finish. Now, on to the reds...
1998 Drouhin-Laroze Bonnes-Mares had a lightish, very translucent colour. On the nose, green grape stems and cooked cherries. It was equally green on the palate. Besides, this wine lacked depth, sweetness and volume. Over time it gave off slightly cheesy aromas and the stemminess became slightly floral. Too bad the palate and finish were both hollow, grainy and short.
Potel's 1998 Bonnes-Mares was a big contrast to the previous wine. Although it also had that stemmy edge on the nose, this wine had a full-on dark fruits approach to it. There was, however, a certain stink that I found in a lot of southern Rhone wines -- something slightly brett-like (I tend to mistake this for reductive-ness, but this one is also present in the palate, hence can't be reduction). This wine is quite sweet, rich and voluminous. It's no doubt a well-made, albeit rather full-on wine. Finishes rather dry-edged and powdery.
Taking a more sedate turn, I appreciate the next wine: Clos de Lambrays 1998. On the nose it already showed the regal expansiveness and depth befitting its cru -- at once refined and sweet. Deep, bright red, it showed dark cherries and raspberries in a very elegant frame. Dense, plush, sweet entry that gently persisted to the finish, this is a delicious mouthcoating wine that was gripping from start to finish. I liked the slightly saline tastiness that developed over extended aeration. It's got the 'dirt' factor! Turned firmer at the very end. Excellent.
Talking about full-on, take-no-prisoners wine, the next wine is close to it. The 1998 Clos de Tart came immediately as a massive, wooded-style burgundy. The wine is powerful and the fruits came across as almost roasted. The wealth of fruits was at this point still overshadowed by a chocolatey and fine-grained oaky sweetness. Too frontal for my taste although the overall showmanship was quite impressive. I'd have appreciated more depth and cooler fruits in my burgundies.
Bruno Clair's wine is not easy to appreciate. Clair's wines are contemplative in nature and, especially in a comparative tasting, tend to be underwhelming compared to its peers. This might explain why some of our table-mates had a preference on Groffier's interpretation of the Chambertin Clos de Beze 1998 flight. Unmistakably Gevrey metallic red-fruits nose, Clair's Chambertin Clos de Beze had crushed cherries and ripe strawberries. In the mouth it too was shyly sweet but had a certain inner-mouth minerally pungency which I associate with Clair's wines -- an attribute which is not easily discernible, but an important one that gives it its uniqueness. Subtle saline minerality is found in the palate framed with a backward tannic spine. Still, I had hoped for more cut and angle at the finish. Otherwise this is a serious, understated and pure wine. Very good.
In contrast, Groffier's Chambertin Clos de Beze was a more lush and expressive version. Ripe raspberries and hints of caramels on the nose and similar profile on the palate. This wine is generous and sappy, and technically very competent, albeit rather oak-driven. However, the overall impression is that of breadth and waxy sweetness, not depth and layered complexity. A crowd-pleaser, actually my basic issue with this wine is its lack of typicity. Blind me and I'd guess Chambolle-Musigny -- and should it be such, I question, especially when this is supposed to have hailed from one of the two most renowned grand cru plots in Gevrey-Chambertin?
The next flight was Vosne-Romanee's grand crus. Robert Arnoux's Romanee St. Vivant 1998 had that tell-tale Arnoux meatstock aromas with a very Vosne-like spicy black fruits supporting it. This wine reminds me of a classier version of his Suchots -- every bit as complex and completely stuffed with black and red fruits, but with more elegance and depth, and one which is texturally silkier. This had an almost confectionery like sweetness in the mouth kept lively without undue palate weight. Excellent.
Domaine de la Romanee Conti's Romanee St. Vivant 1998 is a very different interpretation. Immediately classier and cooler right from the nose, it had an almost minty lift with sweet cherries and beetroot hints (stems?) What hit me was its transparency and nonchalant elegance. Although at this point the Arnoux is more stuffed and complete, I liked DRC's cool complexity. Holding its own in the glass, it put on even more sweetness over time but remain weightless in the mouth. There are layers here, again, just waiting to unfold. Classy juice. Excellent.
I recalled being taken aback by Domaine Dujac's Echezeaux 1998 when it was first released. I had always enjoyed Dujac's wines for its flirtatious femininity and aromatic seductiveness. But he seemed to be marching to a different beat in 1998. Even tonight, I noted the same tomato, roast coffee and chocolates in the palate as I had years ago. Its fruit profile hints at sur-maturite, and with a saline impression of extract (not to be confused with saline minerality here...) Alcohol impression was not shy either. This is again a very frontal wine: unabashedly luscious but devoid of midpalate sweetness which I seek in a good burgundy. New-worldish and shallow. Disappointing.
The good thing tonight is that for every less favourable turn, the next wine always came up refreshingly and genuinely good. And so was George et Henri Jayer's Echezeaux 1998 which followed on Dujac's out-of-whack showing. This wine was compact and massive -- perhaps too youthful tonight -- but no doubt had tremendous upside ahead of it. While the Dujac could have come from everywhere (new world included), one sniff of this and this could only be a Vosne-Romanee. Warmly enveloping, cosy nose of black cherries and redcurrants jump amidst hints of creme brulee backdrop. Implosive in the mouth with pungent smoky minerality of the best of Gevrey and the candied sappy sweetness of a charming Chambolle on the midpalate. This is one of the rare occassion where you could taste the shape of the wine: it was utterly spherical in the mouth. Despite the size, it's thoroughly balanced. I wonder when this baby is ready what the layers expression would become... Special.
The last wine was served blind. It had a seductively cool, candied, creamy, caramelly redcurrants and raspberries with violet hints on the nose. Gosh, this was complex... At once I thought of a Chambolle a la de Vogue. The otherwise deep, penetrating, bright and luscious red fruits interestingly had a very steely nervous backbone of uncommon minerality especially for a Chambolle. There were complication nuances of dark chocolates, but the core remained bracingly structured and minerally fresh. A complete wine. It can only be a Le Musigny. No wonder they call it one of the most profound piece of 'dirt' in Cote d'Or -- Comte de Vogue Musigny Vieilles Vignes 1998. Special.
Before we called it the night we took some time to plot possible future events. A riesling dim sum luncheon? A 1996 white burgundy comparative? A vertical of Comte de Vogue's Musigny? Well, all sounds good to me! You can't blame me if I already look forward to the next occasion(s)...
25 September, 2005
11 September, 2005
BurgFest 2005 Vol.II -- Le Clos Vougeot
Tasting at Ember restaurant, Sept-9 2005. Wonderful people, wonderful food, great wine lineup! Here are my ramblings of the tasting...
The lineup is:
2002 Louis Jadot, Puligny-Montrachet,“ Clos de la Garenne” Domaine du Duc de Magenta
1999 Colin-Deleger, Puligny-Montrachet “ Les Demoiselles”
2002 Gros Frère et Soeur, Clos de Vougeot “Musigni”
2002 Méo-Camuzet, Clos de Vougeot
2002 Lucien le Moine, Clos de Vougeot
2001 René Engel, Clos-Vougeot
2000 Hudelot-Noëllat, Clos de Vougeot
1999 Jean Grivot, Clos de Vougeot
1998 Anne Gros, Clos Vougeot “Le Grand Maupertui”
1997 Faiveley, Clos de Vougeot
1995 Robert Arnoux, Clos de Vougeot
1991 Leroy, Clos de Vougeot
1990 Louis Jadot, Clos Vougeot
Ringers -- Domaine Drouhin Pinot Noir Oregon 1998 and Bannockburn Serre Pinot Noir Geelong 1999
Evening began with Jadot's Domaine du Duc de Magenta 2002. This wine reminded me once more why I love white burgundies. Discreet oak aromas (like pencil shavings), butter and green apples on the nose. Fruits of steel with lots of purity and slight nutty tinge. Although it's closed, the wine is textured and long, with very bright penetrating cut on the finish so typical of the vintage. Still, it came across as round and generous. Excellent.
Red #1 looked aged - with medium red and moderate bricking. Meaty aromas and black cherries. On the palate it is delicate, and showing some stemminess. Frankly this was rather warm in the mouth and carried the warmth through the back. Finishes with sour-cherries and rather hollow. Lacks true sweetness. With aeration, it put on a medicinal hint. I honestly thought this was one of the ringers (prematurely aged with alcohol to boot). Wrong. Faiveley 1987. Sometimes the most obvious answers are the right ones...
Red #2 is a different animal altogether. Sporting a much darker red hue, it had a very striking minerally, earthy and horsey stink -- almost Gevrey-like, except that it's not as high-pitched? Compared to #1, this was a lot more structured with gripping tannic and acid spine. Black cherries turning curranty on the palate and it got sweeter with air. Still, it was all closed up and many years await this wine to unfold its best. Robust wine. Louis Jadot 1990. Very good.
We broke for white. Colin-Deleger PM Les Demoiselles 1999 had a oxidative, madeira-tinged nose. On the palate, it was lush and round, but lacked definition and cut. Came across rather flabby thought the fruits are still alive with interesting hints of ginko nuts.
Red #3 had a nose I always find special - bacon fat. Dark cherries predominate, and the wine was steely and quite minerally. The fruits are all dark. Sweet and sappy, it gave a slight stemmy back notes. Quite extracted with generous amount of creamy oak, applied skillfully not to throw the wine off-balance, this is quite impressive on the midpalate as the sweetness builds persistently. Domaine Drouhin (Oregon) 1998. Quite impressive.
Red #4's nose was distinctive -- wet earth, beetroot and very stemmy. It was at once sweet and spicy on the entry, with rather stew-like texture in the mouth. Quite soupy but delicious nonetheless, interestingly it held out very cool in the mouth without pronounced alcohol. Delicious but outclassed. All of the table guessed it right -- Bannockburn Serre 1999. (I maintain that all should try the 2000 version, which in my opinion has more class and cut on the palate.)
Red #5 is a brooding monster. Right from the colour, which was deep crimson with purplish tinge, to the nose which was reductive at first but blew off to give a meaty curranty profile. On the palate, it was again very unyielding, with plenty of materials completely imploded unto itself. It could only be a 1999, I thought. With coaxing, the reticent flavours gave off a spicy edge with slight mint aftertaste. Very steely, very huge, very impenetratable and quite impressive. I was right - Jean Grivot 1999.
Red #6 had a euphoric confectionery nose with plenty of black cherries. The palate was consistent too with a black cherry liqueur hint but was exceptionally fresh and delineated. On the finish hints of creme brulees emerged but the impression of crunchy fruits remained. It had a Vosne-like aspect to it and I thought it had to be a Meo. Indeed -- Meo-Camuzet 2002. Very delicious, impressive, if atypical (for a Clos Vougeot, that is...)
Red #7 was full of redcurrants and quite spicy. It was quite pure with fruity yet minerally flavours. It had a good mix of both red and black fruits and the texture was quite delicate. Despite gentle tannins, the wine was still quite structured. Also delicious, if not a tad shy of attention. Hudelot-Noellat 2000.
Red #8 gave off classy oak scents with rich generous flavous of cherries and redcurrants. Plush and sweet, it also had a slightly oily mouthfeel to it. Finished with caramelly hints, and again, if this was not a Clos Vougeot tasting, I would have picked it as a Vosne. Still has plenty of life ahead of it as the midpalate was still quite unyielding. Quite classy. Robert Arnoux 1995.
A nice mix of caramel and fresh raspberries on the nose, red #9, is again slightly atypical for the appellation. It was quite delicate and richly red-fruited on the palate, with a generous, plush mouthfeel. Still very youthful, again this has a vibrancy that can only be 2002. It was soft and round, and with extended aeration showed its un-shy oakiness. Can only be GF&S I thought... Right this time - Gros Frere et Soeur 2002.
After a string of plush wines, red #10 struck a totally different note. This wine is almost severe in its structure. Impressively built, this wine is stuffed to the brim with black cherries and raspberries, which turned curranty later. At once structured but entered and persisted in the midpalate with plenty of fresh sweetness. Velvety tannins hinted at the texture of dark chocolates. It's closed and steely today, but there is no doubt the sheer raw materials and balance will transform it into something more profound later. Excellent. Rene Engel 2001.
Red #11 is deeply coloured with an oily decidedly oaky aromas. Some steely elements can be detected. The wine is massive at the mouth and is quite tight-fisted. Sadly, it was all bells and whistles so far -- there was no sweetness in the midpalate. This wine is about apparent size, not depth. Quite disappointing. Lucien le Moine 2002.
Red #12 is sadly corked. I wanted quite badly to see how this wine would perform today. Anne Gros 1998.
Red #13 has a slightly evolved colour. Aromas of meats and aged beef, it was quite packed with spices, mint, stemmy aromas and meatstock. It was sweet, generous but the midpalate is still quite closed. Some tea leaves hint gave off toward the back. Leroy 1991.
The lineup is:
2002 Louis Jadot, Puligny-Montrachet,“ Clos de la Garenne” Domaine du Duc de Magenta
1999 Colin-Deleger, Puligny-Montrachet “ Les Demoiselles”
2002 Gros Frère et Soeur, Clos de Vougeot “Musigni”
2002 Méo-Camuzet, Clos de Vougeot
2002 Lucien le Moine, Clos de Vougeot
2001 René Engel, Clos-Vougeot
2000 Hudelot-Noëllat, Clos de Vougeot
1999 Jean Grivot, Clos de Vougeot
1998 Anne Gros, Clos Vougeot “Le Grand Maupertui”
1997 Faiveley, Clos de Vougeot
1995 Robert Arnoux, Clos de Vougeot
1991 Leroy, Clos de Vougeot
1990 Louis Jadot, Clos Vougeot
Ringers -- Domaine Drouhin Pinot Noir Oregon 1998 and Bannockburn Serre Pinot Noir Geelong 1999
Evening began with Jadot's Domaine du Duc de Magenta 2002. This wine reminded me once more why I love white burgundies. Discreet oak aromas (like pencil shavings), butter and green apples on the nose. Fruits of steel with lots of purity and slight nutty tinge. Although it's closed, the wine is textured and long, with very bright penetrating cut on the finish so typical of the vintage. Still, it came across as round and generous. Excellent.
Red #1 looked aged - with medium red and moderate bricking. Meaty aromas and black cherries. On the palate it is delicate, and showing some stemminess. Frankly this was rather warm in the mouth and carried the warmth through the back. Finishes with sour-cherries and rather hollow. Lacks true sweetness. With aeration, it put on a medicinal hint. I honestly thought this was one of the ringers (prematurely aged with alcohol to boot). Wrong. Faiveley 1987. Sometimes the most obvious answers are the right ones...
Red #2 is a different animal altogether. Sporting a much darker red hue, it had a very striking minerally, earthy and horsey stink -- almost Gevrey-like, except that it's not as high-pitched? Compared to #1, this was a lot more structured with gripping tannic and acid spine. Black cherries turning curranty on the palate and it got sweeter with air. Still, it was all closed up and many years await this wine to unfold its best. Robust wine. Louis Jadot 1990. Very good.
We broke for white. Colin-Deleger PM Les Demoiselles 1999 had a oxidative, madeira-tinged nose. On the palate, it was lush and round, but lacked definition and cut. Came across rather flabby thought the fruits are still alive with interesting hints of ginko nuts.
Red #3 had a nose I always find special - bacon fat. Dark cherries predominate, and the wine was steely and quite minerally. The fruits are all dark. Sweet and sappy, it gave a slight stemmy back notes. Quite extracted with generous amount of creamy oak, applied skillfully not to throw the wine off-balance, this is quite impressive on the midpalate as the sweetness builds persistently. Domaine Drouhin (Oregon) 1998. Quite impressive.
Red #4's nose was distinctive -- wet earth, beetroot and very stemmy. It was at once sweet and spicy on the entry, with rather stew-like texture in the mouth. Quite soupy but delicious nonetheless, interestingly it held out very cool in the mouth without pronounced alcohol. Delicious but outclassed. All of the table guessed it right -- Bannockburn Serre 1999. (I maintain that all should try the 2000 version, which in my opinion has more class and cut on the palate.)
Red #5 is a brooding monster. Right from the colour, which was deep crimson with purplish tinge, to the nose which was reductive at first but blew off to give a meaty curranty profile. On the palate, it was again very unyielding, with plenty of materials completely imploded unto itself. It could only be a 1999, I thought. With coaxing, the reticent flavours gave off a spicy edge with slight mint aftertaste. Very steely, very huge, very impenetratable and quite impressive. I was right - Jean Grivot 1999.
Red #6 had a euphoric confectionery nose with plenty of black cherries. The palate was consistent too with a black cherry liqueur hint but was exceptionally fresh and delineated. On the finish hints of creme brulees emerged but the impression of crunchy fruits remained. It had a Vosne-like aspect to it and I thought it had to be a Meo. Indeed -- Meo-Camuzet 2002. Very delicious, impressive, if atypical (for a Clos Vougeot, that is...)
Red #7 was full of redcurrants and quite spicy. It was quite pure with fruity yet minerally flavours. It had a good mix of both red and black fruits and the texture was quite delicate. Despite gentle tannins, the wine was still quite structured. Also delicious, if not a tad shy of attention. Hudelot-Noellat 2000.
Red #8 gave off classy oak scents with rich generous flavous of cherries and redcurrants. Plush and sweet, it also had a slightly oily mouthfeel to it. Finished with caramelly hints, and again, if this was not a Clos Vougeot tasting, I would have picked it as a Vosne. Still has plenty of life ahead of it as the midpalate was still quite unyielding. Quite classy. Robert Arnoux 1995.
A nice mix of caramel and fresh raspberries on the nose, red #9, is again slightly atypical for the appellation. It was quite delicate and richly red-fruited on the palate, with a generous, plush mouthfeel. Still very youthful, again this has a vibrancy that can only be 2002. It was soft and round, and with extended aeration showed its un-shy oakiness. Can only be GF&S I thought... Right this time - Gros Frere et Soeur 2002.
After a string of plush wines, red #10 struck a totally different note. This wine is almost severe in its structure. Impressively built, this wine is stuffed to the brim with black cherries and raspberries, which turned curranty later. At once structured but entered and persisted in the midpalate with plenty of fresh sweetness. Velvety tannins hinted at the texture of dark chocolates. It's closed and steely today, but there is no doubt the sheer raw materials and balance will transform it into something more profound later. Excellent. Rene Engel 2001.
Red #11 is deeply coloured with an oily decidedly oaky aromas. Some steely elements can be detected. The wine is massive at the mouth and is quite tight-fisted. Sadly, it was all bells and whistles so far -- there was no sweetness in the midpalate. This wine is about apparent size, not depth. Quite disappointing. Lucien le Moine 2002.
Red #12 is sadly corked. I wanted quite badly to see how this wine would perform today. Anne Gros 1998.
Red #13 has a slightly evolved colour. Aromas of meats and aged beef, it was quite packed with spices, mint, stemmy aromas and meatstock. It was sweet, generous but the midpalate is still quite closed. Some tea leaves hint gave off toward the back. Leroy 1991.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
