Humbert Freres - An Introduction

This tasting was done courtesy of Auric Pacific, the newly appointed distributor of this domaine, and Vins Divins at our group's old favorite Chinese haunt, Crystal Jade Golden Palace restaurant.

Domaine Humbert Freres has a shared connection to the vineyards with their more famous cousins, Claude and Bernard Dugat, specializing (at least at this point) in the wines of Gevrey-Chambertin. In essence they share the same parcels of land as the Dugat domaines.

According to Michael Stephens (of Vins Divins), the domaine’s first commercial vintage was 1997. The turning point of the domaine’s wines, however, was 1998 when the domaine which didn't at that point invest in higher-tech equipment to deal with hot weather (and consequently had some issues with the 1997 vintage) made less obstructed wines. Michael is of the opinion that 2002 was Humbert's best set of wines ever.

Sharing the same family heritage as the Dugat cousins gave me a certain sense of unease initially. I had been less excited by Dugat's wines of late (though I must maintain I was once totally blown away by his 1998 humbler wines), and had not been able to fully appreciate all the muscles and size of Dugat-Py wines. For sure I had hoped Humbert's wines would not fit in either mold.

Boyer Martenot's Meursault-Charmes 2001 was served as aperitif -- a very lovely wine. Very elegant nose and decidedly Meursault from this front. Pineappley fruits in the mouth. At this point still quite youthful and rather uncomplicated. While not especially dense this had a very good volume and intensity in the mouth. Some oak traces but very pretty and healthy. It looks increasingly clear that 2001 whites are turning out to be more sound than the rapidly declining 2000 in spite of contrary initial buzzes and hisses.

Right from the start, the first (red) wine was exhilirating -- Gevrey Chambertin AC 2002. A mere villages this was but the sense of exuberance, transparency and balance was impeccable. This reminded me immediately of Dugat's Gevrey AC 1998. Red-fruited with icy candiedness and suggestions of haw flakes candies (this is the part that is very Dugat to me). The palate was seamless, plush, high-pitched and, though lacking some midpalate density, uniformly weighted with a gentle haunting sweetness that lingered on so unusually for a wine of such 'humble' origin. Interestingly this is the wine that I kept on thinking about days and weeks later. The genteel frankness of its red fruits redefines the idea of 'deliciousness' in villages level burgundies.

Next was a very little known (in fact never knew this existed till now) premier cru called les Craipillot. By the sheer fact that no other domaine produces this wine (at least not labelled so), very old vines (60+ years old) and the miniscule production size (600-700 bottles), the sense of expectation out of this exclusivity was indeed high. This turned out to be a very pretty, discrete wine. The Gevrey 1er Craipillot 2003 sported vitamin-B, shaved ham flakes, dark cherries and plums on the nose. In the mouth, vintage influence or not, there was a confectionery like element. Dense yet reticent, this finished remarkably elegant for the vintage. A brooding wine of understated breed. I like this very much -- and earn my first high score for the 2003 red burgundy I've tasted to-date.

The Gevrey 1er Petite Chapelle 2003's character was quite different. Shy aromas which was lower-pitched than the Craipillot, it was sweet, four-square and rather simple. This reminded me more of a higher-pitched version of Cote-de-Beaune, but a worthy 2003 still. This apparently lies in the south-eastern part of the combe lavaut in Gevrey-Chambertin where the wines purportedly sport lower pitch, clarity and overall exquisiteness. Not an inaccurate generalization considering what I noted about this wine if this were representative at all...

The next flight was a trio of another lesser known 1er cru called les Poissenots. This also happened to be the apple of Humbert's eyes although he does make other 'grand' wines such as Estournelles St. Jacques and the grand cru Charmes-Chambertin (which actually contains Mazoyeres grapes). The Gevrey 1er les Poissenots 2001 had a slightly more advanced grilled peanut-shavings and meats on the nose. There were minerals in abundance here, and the sense of persistence and penetrating qualities were obvious. Finished off with a tell-tale Gevrey-earth finish. A structured, almost too stiff wine. Quite impressive.

The 2002 had a nose that literally would take your breath away. This I figured must be a complete wine -- and that's judging from smell alone. And more often than not, I am seldom wrong when such strong intuitions overcome me. Definitively funky Gevrey earth and soy with high-pitched cherries on the nose followed by a broad and linear mouthfeel dominated by red fruits that had what I would call a "spine of fruits" in the midpalate -- at once dense, gripping, intense, persistent and balanced. This is almost a perfect marriage of massive fruits with generous earthiness. Very savoury. Very special... Almost grand cru in size, but already a grand cru in balance and substance.

I knew it would be impossible to upstage the 2002 with the 2003. After tasting the '03, I _know_ that's largely true. Having said that, the 2003 impressed me with the same vitamin-B funk I got with the 01 version, along with earth and minerals. A touch of sweet tea leaves and plums emerged later on. On the palate this has right about the same volume as the preceding two wines and for an '03, an incredible penetrating quality. Finished off very cleanly, turning slightly sticky with extended aeration -- but this wasn't at a disturbing level at all. A highly competent 2003.

What an esoteric sounding name, "Estournelles St. Jacques". The 2003 version, hot on the heels of the Poissenots 2003, had the group divided as to which was their preferred '03 wine. Expectedly, the opinion was nicely divided (except for me, and I'd tell you later which '03 I liked best afterwards...) The Estournelles' nose was more serious than the Poissenots, more commanding if you will. Dark cherries fruits predominate here with a faultless density and sweetness. In the mouth, consequently this had more presence and authority of flavours. Fairly compact and backward in the context of the vintage.

(Grand cru, grand cru, where are you?) And now we move on to Charmes-Chambertin. Two wines were presented -- not sure if this was intentional, but they were totally different from each other -- 2001 and 2003.

The size enlargement of moving up to grand cru was evident when we tasted the Charmes-Chambertin 2003. This was huge and dense, replete with black fruits and plums. However, this had the strongest vintage signature so far -- it had a cloying sweetness and clumsiness that made it easy to guess which year it came from. A disappointing show after a string of refreshingly atypical 2003 tonight.

The 2001 Charmes-Chambertin served right after seemed eager to make up for its younger brother's shortcomings. And a stellar try it was indeed. In contrast, the minerality of this wine seemed to jump right out of the glass, with a typicity that SCREAM Gevrey(!!) Intense, penetrating with high-toned dark cherries that were plush, dense and velvety. An earnest and very hardworking wine but, in my humble opinion, did not show itself better than its lesser 1er cru siblings did.

In closing, Andy blinded us a bottle to compare with the 2001 Charmes -- this turned out to be Mazoyeres-Chambertin from Henri Perrot-Minot 2001 since Humbert's Charmes is technically a Mazoyeres. This wine was quite minerally and had a deep, reserved but rather wild, almost gamey, Gevrey-earth aromas. Quite dense, but rather one-dimensional to me. (Actually I guessed it was a premier cru... but then again I've been so wrong so often in blind, I had already expected another mistake.)

All in all, this is a major discovery for me. I have not been thrilled by a set of burgundies from a single domaine for a long time, and this experience would long be remembered. These wines had a linear, clean and transparent approach to it. They are definitely not old school, but the wines were distinct from each other, and they have typicity and class. Moreover, without a doubt, these were the best 2003 red burgundies I've had to-date. The pitch, brightness and details each 2003 wine tonight displayed were mind-boggling. Some even showed a sense of reserve and restraint. At this point, I feel I must mention that the most special '03 tonight was the Craipillot, but overall the runaway champion must be the Poissenots 2002 -- a complete wine inside out and head to toe with an effortless sense of breed and funky complexity.