Chapitre d'Orchide. The now annual event with the Confrerie held to showcase Nicolas Potel's wines. I missed, what, two? three? of past events, and so this time I decided I have to make it. Besides, this gives me my first broader-scale exposure to 2004 red burgundies.
Dinner was excellent as always at Summer Pavillion @ Ritz Carlton. And so I wouldn't want to say too much about it. And the wines were served in two sections -- the tasting section, and the dinner selection. The tasting section featured some 2004 1er and grand cru reds and then with its similar counterparts circa 2002 vintage. And finished off with two 2004 whites. Very interesting format.
The dinner was more straightforward, just pairs of wines with each dish featuring a smattering of reputable appellations from vintages of 2000-2003. Some, as you would see later on, were standout. But many too were, in my opinion, flawed.
All in all, in retrospect (and in the interest of full disclosure I did have more 2004 reds later on, although from different domaines), Potel's 2004 (both red and white) were done a tad more blowsy that I would have preferred. Given the lesser raw materials in 2004 compared to the 2002 vintage, the levels of extract were quite trying in some cases. The Bonnes-Mares, in spite of its grand-cru status, particularly did not take too well to the oak and extraction regime. None of the Bonnes-Mares impressed me tonight - all came across as too heavy, clumsy, outsized. The fruits of the 2004 reminded of 2000 with slightly less ripeness. I don't know if within the next 6 months or so (in my experience red burgundies will fully stabilize within 12 months after bottling after which it would decide whether to shutdown or just cruise along) the truer characters of these reds would emerge, but for now this was as much as I could observe.
So now here comes my tasting notes... (not necessarily in chronological order)
Meursault les Vireuls 2004 was served as aperitif. This had very ripe fruits. Pristine but rather viscous and somewhat lacked that incisive cut 2004 whites are supposed to represent. Atypical for the vintage although generous. Lots of pear fruits. In fact, IMHO not very Meursault like.
Chambolle-Musigny les Fuees 2004 - Black-fruited with mainly dark raspberries fruits. Very ripe and textured. Stemmy nose, square mouthfeel and dusty finish. Lacked shapeliness in the mouth that Chambolles are famous for. Notwithstanding this was a Fuees (which is a mini-Bonnes-Mares as many people believe), this seemed over-extracted (though not over-powerful) and the finish was less clean than I would have preferred. The 2002 sported a scarily dark hue. The nose was still reticent. The profile was somewhat similar to the 2004 sibling but this was immediately sweeter in the midpalate. Finished off with a bold tannic edge.
Vosne-Romanee les Gaudichots 2004 - Typical Vosne-nose. Spicy and stemmy but had more substantial materials to support it. Has a certain sense of grandeur in the mouth, plush, velvety and brighter in its fruits too. I quite like this; very tasty. The 2002 also carried off stemmy nose but had even more presence in the midpalate. This was a brooding wine. Finished off with, again, a tannic bite. At this point the 2004 was more delicious.
Chambertin-Clos de Beze 2004 - Brooding nose with dark liqueur essence. In the mouth there was that tell-tale Gevrey minerals. Quite extracted and tough still. Had the materials to support the 'hardness' however; very ripe but possessed a sense of reserve. Spices, raspberry and cherry fruits. Quite typical of the vineyard. The 2002 was a lot sweeter and possessed more verve in the mouth. The Gevrey earth came through effortlessly and quite elegantly.
Le Chambertin 2004 - More reticent nose than the Clos de Beze, but in the mouth it's unquestionably bigger and more voluminous. Also, true to form, very square and large in the palate with undeniable deep-seated Gevrey minerality. Has a sense of presence and command that the Clos de Beze lacked. Things got even better with the 2002 with that special oily earthy quintessentially Gevrey minerality. Again, square and dense, commanding and tense. Finished with a grip not found in any of the wines before or after.
Bonnes-Mares 2004 - There certainly was a good reason to place Bonnes-Mares last in the lineup. Unquestionably the biggest wine tonight, this had deep, dense black and blue fruits. Very powerful, forceful, textured and quite alcoholic. Very sweet and ripe. The fruits turned curranty and blueberry-inclined. The 2002 was equally gigantic. In fact, to me this was perhaps more clumsy than the 2004 and I couldn't help but feel that there was too little materials and too much extract here. Turned rather herbaceous and somewhat blander later on, but without letting up that alcoholic warmth.
A repeat of the above performance (sans the whites) with the vintage 2002 version...
Chambolle-Musigny les Fuees 2002 - Very dark colour. Reticent nose even at this point. The wine did come across as fairly square too. This was however evidently sweeter in the midpalate than the 2004, but also showed tannic bite in the finish.
Vosne-Romanee les Gaudichots 2002 - Again telltale Vosne-nose. Also stemmy but had better density than its younger sibling. Pretty much like the 2004 counterpart in every sense but this possessed more concentration and darker fruits. Serious and quite tannic at the back.
Chambertin-Clos de Beze 2002 - A clear mark up in terms of sweetness. In fact, very sweet attack with noticeable Gevrey minerality, in an elegant frame. This was a very charming Gevrey in a befitting grand cru presence.
Le Chambertin 2002 - Finally a wine that hit all the right notes. A roasted, oily, bacon-fatty, earthy nose that is quintessentially Gevrey. Square and commanding in the mouth with an implosive substantial body and unmistakable nobility. Tense and gripping. Special.
Bonnes-Mares 2002 - Unlike the previous 2002s, this didn't better the 2004 version. That is to say this too was rather extracted, huge and awkwardly outsized. The strength of extraction pulled off too much stemmy note so much so it overwhelmed the fruits. Lost whatever was left of the tastiness with further aeration. Disappointing.
The dinner followed with several more bottles.
Chassagne-Montrachet Morgeot 2004 - Pears and popcorn oil on the nose. Quite Chassagne actually. This was simple albeit generous in the mouth. None too special.
Corton-Charlemagne 2004 - Always one of my favourite white burgundies, this immediately came across as leaner and meaner, even on the nose. Quite penetrating although ripe, with chalkiness I always associate with this piece of land. The malic acid peeked through in the true fashion of this (to me at least) lovely white burgundy vintage.
Distracted by the conversations and the food, I did not pay a close look to the second bottle other than noting that it had the "Corton-Charlemagne" label on it. I thought this was the same wine, and the host had extra! Not that I minded... This example possessed better mineral definition, culminating into an intriguing salinity in the mouth, mixed with citrusy freshness. It was sappy, and showed some buttery popcornish aromas, and texturally more voluminous and exotically oily. I could almost swear this was a different (and better) wine. Actually, it was. This was the Corton-Charlemagne 2002.
Flights of reds followed. Nuits-St.-Georges les Boudots 2000 displayed an earthy stink with a sauvage tendency. Blackberries and some brett was detected. In the mouth, the fruit was consistently blackberry. Quite crunchy and briary. Interesting although technically flawed by the unclean (brett) hints.
Vosne-Romanee les Malconsorts 2000 - Again, earthy and meaty stink. 'Stink' because of the brett I once again detected on the nose. This was very ripe. The fruits were almost red-plummy, and the ripeness was tipping over surmaturite: pretty direct and spine-less in the mouth. Not quite balanced.
Gevrey-Chambertin Lavaux St. Jacques 2002 - Lower-pitched steely Gevrey nose. Sweet, quite minerally, savoury with delicious soya flavours but ended in a slightly warmish feel. Delicious and useful at the dinner table.
Vosne-Romanee les Suchots 2002 - Opulent Vosne nose combined the usual spices with mocha and dark chocolate. Sweet inviting flavours of dark cherries and currants. Again, the pitch was unimpressive and this wine was marked by some mustiness.
Echezeaux 2001 - Black cherries predominated with meats and earthy hints. On the palate some earthy (not rustic) sweetness and pronounced stemminess, which fortunately didn't fall over to become unclean.
Le Chambertin 2001 - corked. Duh...
Grands Echezeaux 2001 - Now, what a difference this next-door vineyard to the Ech made. Sweet plums nose yet higher pitched altogether. The fruits were clean this time. With a midpalate viscosity exemplified by the better made concentrated burgundies. This was very Vosne-like with clean and trim downright sweet fruits. Lovely.
Bonnes-Mares 2003 - Warmish and quite obviously oaky. This came across very grainy and overripe and sacrificed the pitch altogether. The fruit profile was decidedly 2003 with black and blue fruits and finished with dusty (heat-spiked) tannins. Turned curranty but failed to deliver smoothness. Didn't come across as refined as one would expect from a burgundy.
Chambertin Clos de Beze 2003 - This too didn't turn out much better than the preceding Bonnes-Mares 2003. However this possessed better clarity and integration. Still the vintage characteristics were untamed in this wine and the clumsiness was not overcome.
30 May, 2006
A slight diversion: La Piemonte!
Even for a burghead like me, I am given to moments of weakness and crave for something different. Although I pledge my allegiance to burgundy and continue to be unconvinced that there is any other region more thrilling and more complete than it, I am partial to the wines of Piedmont as well as northern Rhone (the reds only).
A few days back Andy asked if the few of us should get together at the weekend and I suggested we should do something different (read: non burgundy). Perhaps syrah or Piedmontese. So he put up a line up of several interesting Barolos for the evening. This time we didn't do it blind. For a change too.
The scene at Wine Garage was just great. We were out there in the open by the riverside and the weather was quite cool. The crowd was bustling (business was good and the neighbour, Brewerks, was even better) but given the arrangement and spacing of the seats, we were nice and cosy: relaxed yet still enough to focus on the wines too. The food was great. Very pleasurable and tasty. Creative but not over-the-top, with the intention of the dish well communicated. Prices were fair too. And service? Good: not-intrusive yet quite accomodating when needed.
The Laurent-Perrier Grand Siecle NV Brut (supposedly a blend of 1992, 1995 and 1996 vintages) kicked off the evening and it was delicious. This certainly had finer bubbles than the Brut 1996 I had just the week before. Fairly Chard driven nose with a bready and buttery mood. Sweet yet crisp, quite clean, fresh and zingy. Very generous in the mouth yet maintained a slim and elegant frame. It was fantastic with the fresh oyster.
A blind white followed. A generous buttery nose introduced a slightly oaked Chard flavours. A softer, fleshier style but possessed quite a tight core. Lemon zests and hints of banana skins. The latter made me think of this as an 2003 white burg. Henri Boillot Puligny-Montrachet les Perrieres 2003. A good 2003 but like most of its counterparts, the details are somewhat muted.
The first Barolo, the 1999 Massolino Barolo Vigna Parafada, followed. Black cherries and curranty fruits. This was made in a somewhat modern style but was still restrained. Dark yet soft fruits. Evident details of ash, tobacco and smoke in the nose as well as vanillin. My grouse is that the wine lacked spine.
The first of the 'trio-Conternos' followed - 1999 Paolo Conterno Barolo Ginestra. The nose is now purer. Tell-tale tar and black cherry liqueur, with ash and tobacco. It was also sweeter, as the plummy fruits were elevated by a sound, better integrated acidity. This came through more transparent than the Massolino, and finished with broad yet refined tannins. This had the elements but just didn't carry that oomph or punch to stand apart from the others.
2001 Aldo Conterno Barolo Cicala was poured next. While I admire the elegance of the 1999s before this, the completeness of the 2001 vintage was undeniably clear. Crystalline nose with an impression of solidness. Ever the enlightened (semi-modern) school, this wine mixed - and quite successfully at that - ash, vanillin, black cherries, licorice and cream on the nose. Pure but still compactly blunt at this stage and with extended aeration opened up a little to show the fruit details. Still a bit modernesque for my taste. A viscous wine yet demonstrated an admirable transparency. Very good wine in a superb vintage.
The next house is somewhat of a legend for those who are into artisanal, classical, honest-to-goodness, massive Barolos built to age a lifetime. The 1998 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia was a knockout by the merits of its personality alone. Pure earthy funk on the nose underlied the dark cherry liqueur essense. Amazingly almost alcohol-less although there is doubting of the ripeness and immensity of this baby. In the mouth this had an almost wild energy, a certain zestiness that enlivened the dark fruits flavours. Totally a wine of pleasure. The aromas developed and added a crazy mix of earthy Italian herbs and porcini mushrooms. And need I mention that this came from a less-classical, very ripe vintage and this is not the top-of-the-line of the house? (His expression of Barolo in his Barolo Monfortino Riserva 1996, though painfully youthful, remains firmly etched in my memory as the most profound Barolo I've ever tasted.) I am partial, but this wine is one of the kind and a walks away from the rest tonight by sheer virtue of its character and charm.
How does one top up such an individualistic performance as the Cascina Francia? Well, the dinner ended with a very different interpretation of Barolo in the hands of Bruno Giacosa. His 2001 Barolo Faletto had a most pristine nose of berries, red plums and red raspberries. This was the most red-fruited Barolo of the night, and the overally body, aromas and texture unequivocally brought to mind a Chambolle-Musigny. Creamy in the palate with yet superbly pristine and pure. Very high pitched and framed by bright and harmonious acidity. This wine was balanced to the point that it felt almost weightless and the abundance of the fruits were such that the solid silky tannins were indiscernible. Flavoursome, complex and showed the wondrous blessings of its vintage to a fault. Superb.
What can I say? Old school rules, I guess. They rule in Burgundy and they sure rule in Piedmont too! The Giacomo Conterno and Bruno Giacosa were staggeringly impressive tonight. And most importantly, they proudly carried the flag of its region and charmed the table with its strong and root personality.
A few days back Andy asked if the few of us should get together at the weekend and I suggested we should do something different (read: non burgundy). Perhaps syrah or Piedmontese. So he put up a line up of several interesting Barolos for the evening. This time we didn't do it blind. For a change too.
The scene at Wine Garage was just great. We were out there in the open by the riverside and the weather was quite cool. The crowd was bustling (business was good and the neighbour, Brewerks, was even better) but given the arrangement and spacing of the seats, we were nice and cosy: relaxed yet still enough to focus on the wines too. The food was great. Very pleasurable and tasty. Creative but not over-the-top, with the intention of the dish well communicated. Prices were fair too. And service? Good: not-intrusive yet quite accomodating when needed.
The Laurent-Perrier Grand Siecle NV Brut (supposedly a blend of 1992, 1995 and 1996 vintages) kicked off the evening and it was delicious. This certainly had finer bubbles than the Brut 1996 I had just the week before. Fairly Chard driven nose with a bready and buttery mood. Sweet yet crisp, quite clean, fresh and zingy. Very generous in the mouth yet maintained a slim and elegant frame. It was fantastic with the fresh oyster.
A blind white followed. A generous buttery nose introduced a slightly oaked Chard flavours. A softer, fleshier style but possessed quite a tight core. Lemon zests and hints of banana skins. The latter made me think of this as an 2003 white burg. Henri Boillot Puligny-Montrachet les Perrieres 2003. A good 2003 but like most of its counterparts, the details are somewhat muted.
The first Barolo, the 1999 Massolino Barolo Vigna Parafada, followed. Black cherries and curranty fruits. This was made in a somewhat modern style but was still restrained. Dark yet soft fruits. Evident details of ash, tobacco and smoke in the nose as well as vanillin. My grouse is that the wine lacked spine.
The first of the 'trio-Conternos' followed - 1999 Paolo Conterno Barolo Ginestra. The nose is now purer. Tell-tale tar and black cherry liqueur, with ash and tobacco. It was also sweeter, as the plummy fruits were elevated by a sound, better integrated acidity. This came through more transparent than the Massolino, and finished with broad yet refined tannins. This had the elements but just didn't carry that oomph or punch to stand apart from the others.
2001 Aldo Conterno Barolo Cicala was poured next. While I admire the elegance of the 1999s before this, the completeness of the 2001 vintage was undeniably clear. Crystalline nose with an impression of solidness. Ever the enlightened (semi-modern) school, this wine mixed - and quite successfully at that - ash, vanillin, black cherries, licorice and cream on the nose. Pure but still compactly blunt at this stage and with extended aeration opened up a little to show the fruit details. Still a bit modernesque for my taste. A viscous wine yet demonstrated an admirable transparency. Very good wine in a superb vintage.
The next house is somewhat of a legend for those who are into artisanal, classical, honest-to-goodness, massive Barolos built to age a lifetime. The 1998 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia was a knockout by the merits of its personality alone. Pure earthy funk on the nose underlied the dark cherry liqueur essense. Amazingly almost alcohol-less although there is doubting of the ripeness and immensity of this baby. In the mouth this had an almost wild energy, a certain zestiness that enlivened the dark fruits flavours. Totally a wine of pleasure. The aromas developed and added a crazy mix of earthy Italian herbs and porcini mushrooms. And need I mention that this came from a less-classical, very ripe vintage and this is not the top-of-the-line of the house? (His expression of Barolo in his Barolo Monfortino Riserva 1996, though painfully youthful, remains firmly etched in my memory as the most profound Barolo I've ever tasted.) I am partial, but this wine is one of the kind and a walks away from the rest tonight by sheer virtue of its character and charm.
How does one top up such an individualistic performance as the Cascina Francia? Well, the dinner ended with a very different interpretation of Barolo in the hands of Bruno Giacosa. His 2001 Barolo Faletto had a most pristine nose of berries, red plums and red raspberries. This was the most red-fruited Barolo of the night, and the overally body, aromas and texture unequivocally brought to mind a Chambolle-Musigny. Creamy in the palate with yet superbly pristine and pure. Very high pitched and framed by bright and harmonious acidity. This wine was balanced to the point that it felt almost weightless and the abundance of the fruits were such that the solid silky tannins were indiscernible. Flavoursome, complex and showed the wondrous blessings of its vintage to a fault. Superb.
What can I say? Old school rules, I guess. They rule in Burgundy and they sure rule in Piedmont too! The Giacomo Conterno and Bruno Giacosa were staggeringly impressive tonight. And most importantly, they proudly carried the flag of its region and charmed the table with its strong and root personality.
29 May, 2006
Family day (a.k.a. Happy 7th Birthday)
My son turned 7 on this day. And as an act of novelty and an excuse to get together with families, we decided to throw a small party for Ethan. And of course there's reason for wines too, right? And Ethan's birthyear being 1999, I decided to set up a very small set of 1999 wines with the help of Andy's.
Highfield "Elstree" Marlborough Cuvee Brut 1999 (a Chard and Pinot Noir mix sparkling) -- Very toasty nose gave way to easygoing, lemon, guava, peach and custard infused flavours. The acids were rather flat however and this showed why old world still rules when it comes to sparkling wines. Held on and gave away into maderized pruney nose. Some residual sugar detected.
We just read the enthusiastic review of this wine in Tanzer's California coverage. Peter Michael "L'Apres-Midi" Sauvignon Blanc 2004 Sonoma -- Impressive, almost crystalline grassy, strawy Sauvignon nose (reminded me of riper vintages of Dagueneau's Pouilly Fume in the nose alone.) Filled with grapefruits and pineapples in the mouth. Juicy and brisk, quite crunchy in fact, and in spite of the alcoholic ripeness, this wine remained bright, clean and lightweight in the mouth. No trace of alcohol in the finish. The most compelling North American sauvignon blanc I've tasted to date but still some distance to go to compare with its French counterparts. Continued to evolve to passionfruits flavours and held its cool well a few hours later.
Moet & Chandon Brut Rose 1999 Champagne -- Again this was toasty and bready on the nose. The difference is in the palate. Brisk acidity kept the wine going and its greatest virtue tonight was that it paired very well with all sorts of food. Still this was simple and short in the mouth. Rather hollow, lacking intensity in the middle.
Etienne Sauzet Puligny-Montrachet les Perrieres 1999 -- Flinty, buttery nose combined lemon oil and pineapples. In fact quite Meursault-like, with aromas of toasted nuts. Cool and minty in the mouth but textured and generous with butter, peanuts and pears. Finished rather bracing and this wine refused to budge throughout the six hours it was opened. An odd, somewhat awkward combination of very ripe chardonnay and bracing almost steely acidity.
Domaine des Lambrays Clos des Lambrays 1999 -- I know it's against my principle to open a 1999 grand cru at this stage, but.... the occasion called for it. Typical dark almost impenetrable dark red hue a la 1999. Ripely stemmy with hints of beetroots and tomatoes atop of dark cherry infused nose. Almost liqueur like in its fruity aromas and not especially expressive at this point. Developed to reveal lovely red plums. Not especially refined but possessed a wealth of materials underneath waiting to come out. The question is whether they'd harmonize. The wine was not disjointed nor awkward, but the slightly rustic briary characteristics made me think about its harmonization potentials. Plenty of backbone and possessed grand cru volume and weight after (again) some 6 hours of airing. Plenty of structure, but not necessarily generous at this point, as evidenced by an unshy levels of tannins.
Marquis d'Angerville Volnay les Fremiet 2002 -- Have I ever told anyone I really admire this producer? This wine further ratified my respect for this domaine. Transluscent deep red. Creamy raspberries on the nose. High toned crushed berries and very red fruited so typical of 2002 red burgs. Similar profile in the palate with fatness and volume, and less in terms of minerality and cut. Lovely wine and an outstanding show for its pedigree.
Highfield "Elstree" Marlborough Cuvee Brut 1999 (a Chard and Pinot Noir mix sparkling) -- Very toasty nose gave way to easygoing, lemon, guava, peach and custard infused flavours. The acids were rather flat however and this showed why old world still rules when it comes to sparkling wines. Held on and gave away into maderized pruney nose. Some residual sugar detected.
We just read the enthusiastic review of this wine in Tanzer's California coverage. Peter Michael "L'Apres-Midi" Sauvignon Blanc 2004 Sonoma -- Impressive, almost crystalline grassy, strawy Sauvignon nose (reminded me of riper vintages of Dagueneau's Pouilly Fume in the nose alone.) Filled with grapefruits and pineapples in the mouth. Juicy and brisk, quite crunchy in fact, and in spite of the alcoholic ripeness, this wine remained bright, clean and lightweight in the mouth. No trace of alcohol in the finish. The most compelling North American sauvignon blanc I've tasted to date but still some distance to go to compare with its French counterparts. Continued to evolve to passionfruits flavours and held its cool well a few hours later.
Moet & Chandon Brut Rose 1999 Champagne -- Again this was toasty and bready on the nose. The difference is in the palate. Brisk acidity kept the wine going and its greatest virtue tonight was that it paired very well with all sorts of food. Still this was simple and short in the mouth. Rather hollow, lacking intensity in the middle.
Etienne Sauzet Puligny-Montrachet les Perrieres 1999 -- Flinty, buttery nose combined lemon oil and pineapples. In fact quite Meursault-like, with aromas of toasted nuts. Cool and minty in the mouth but textured and generous with butter, peanuts and pears. Finished rather bracing and this wine refused to budge throughout the six hours it was opened. An odd, somewhat awkward combination of very ripe chardonnay and bracing almost steely acidity.
Domaine des Lambrays Clos des Lambrays 1999 -- I know it's against my principle to open a 1999 grand cru at this stage, but.... the occasion called for it. Typical dark almost impenetrable dark red hue a la 1999. Ripely stemmy with hints of beetroots and tomatoes atop of dark cherry infused nose. Almost liqueur like in its fruity aromas and not especially expressive at this point. Developed to reveal lovely red plums. Not especially refined but possessed a wealth of materials underneath waiting to come out. The question is whether they'd harmonize. The wine was not disjointed nor awkward, but the slightly rustic briary characteristics made me think about its harmonization potentials. Plenty of backbone and possessed grand cru volume and weight after (again) some 6 hours of airing. Plenty of structure, but not necessarily generous at this point, as evidenced by an unshy levels of tannins.
Marquis d'Angerville Volnay les Fremiet 2002 -- Have I ever told anyone I really admire this producer? This wine further ratified my respect for this domaine. Transluscent deep red. Creamy raspberries on the nose. High toned crushed berries and very red fruited so typical of 2002 red burgs. Similar profile in the palate with fatness and volume, and less in terms of minerality and cut. Lovely wine and an outstanding show for its pedigree.
Mother's Day
The family went out at the ever-ready to serve, ever-ready to please, cosy fine dining modern Chinese cuisine touting Jiang Nan Chun. This is a restaurant I truly feel at home. While there are now many newer trendier restaurants precipitated by the fad-chasing Singaporean dining industry, it is sad to see that while these chase the new highs of chic-ness, most, if not all, have forgotten the fundamentals -- that people go out to restaurants to eat to feel good, not just to look good.
My family of four (yes, it suddenly dawned on me we're now four!) celebrated Mother's day simply by having lunch together. I picked a bottle of Laurent-Perrier Brut 1996 Champagne as a token for celebration. It's just too bad Fiona didn't quite get along with bubblies as she claimed that just a fraction of a sip she took earlier had gotten to her head. Well, it's Mother's day and it's her day. She calls the shots. So 'poor' me ended sipping the bottle all by myself (actually I asked the restaurant manager to join me for a couple of sips together as we chatted -- talk about cosy and homey...)
The bubbly was decidedly and bracingly dry a la 1996. The nose was quite Chard-like: leesy with pears, minerals and crushed stones. Moderately textured in the mouth and quite refined with green apples and again, bracing acidity. Rather austere and ungiving at this moment but I liked the bone-dry finish of this wine which accentuates its fairly sappy fruits.
Oh and the food? Compared to Graze the previous night, this one is simply superb.
My family of four (yes, it suddenly dawned on me we're now four!) celebrated Mother's day simply by having lunch together. I picked a bottle of Laurent-Perrier Brut 1996 Champagne as a token for celebration. It's just too bad Fiona didn't quite get along with bubblies as she claimed that just a fraction of a sip she took earlier had gotten to her head. Well, it's Mother's day and it's her day. She calls the shots. So 'poor' me ended sipping the bottle all by myself (actually I asked the restaurant manager to join me for a couple of sips together as we chatted -- talk about cosy and homey...)
The bubbly was decidedly and bracingly dry a la 1996. The nose was quite Chard-like: leesy with pears, minerals and crushed stones. Moderately textured in the mouth and quite refined with green apples and again, bracing acidity. Rather austere and ungiving at this moment but I liked the bone-dry finish of this wine which accentuates its fairly sappy fruits.
Oh and the food? Compared to Graze the previous night, this one is simply superb.
Gevrey 2002 Premier Cru comparative @ Graze
Rochester Park. Supposedly the happening hub of chic dining scene of the moment. Graze opened there and immense publicity preceded the establishment of its place in the hall of culinary fame. Well, to cut the long story short, I didn't enjoy the experience. The food tried too hard to be creative, mixing Pacific-rim modern cuisine with spicy flavours borrowed from the Thais, Viets and the what-nots. Fusion, or confusion? You decide. Quality was decent, but service was a let-down and the dishes cannibalise themselves.
But what am I talking about the restaurant? (I suppose it's bad enough for me to bitch about it...) Let's talk about the burgundy workout tonight. The idea was to gather wines to represent each premier cru at the combe de lavaut section of Gevrey-Chambertin, make the vintage constant and study their nuances.
Of course the exercise can never be perfect. Logistically it's already challenging to get the wines completely lined up. So we have a mixed bag of six 2002s (out of which one is not from the combe de lavaut section), and two bottles of 2003s. Not to mention the setting was too distracting and the stemware, being bordeaux in shape and of a certain thickness, kind of dulled the wine's taste and aromas. Okay, okay, enough bitching already! Let's talk about the juice. (All reds were served semi-blind.)
Aperitif -- A nice very ripe yet bracingly steely white with hints of meatiness. Finishes with some minerality but was rather simple. Malic acidity was pronounced so it had to be 2004. Lovely crisp drink. Hubert Lignier Fixin Cepage Chardonnay 2004
Red #1 -- Black raspberries and hints of stems. Very ripe and quite honestly, rather low-pitched. Unforthcoming, reticent sweetness and finished off rather dusty. Joseph Roty Gevrey-Chambertin les Fontenys 2002. Quite a disappointing display. I'm sure this could do better in other settings.
Red #2 -- Vitamins, meats and red crushed fruits. Slightly reductive at this point. Medium-pitched with sour tomatoes flavours (in a good way). Not particularly charming but finished off quite sweet. Domaine de Varoilles Gevrey-Chambertin "Clos des Varoilles" 2002
Red #3 -- Now this I recognise... Classic Gevrey nose filled with pure red crushed fruits. Vitamins, 'dirt' and earth. Sweet yet lifted endlessly by a bright acid backbone. Very cool in the mouth and finished with mouthwatering sappiness and a respectable grip. Not particularly complex but delicious as hell. Fourrier Gevrey-Chambertin Combe aux Moines 2002
Red #4 -- Well-pitched Gevrey nose. Complicating nuances of soy and sour plums. Serious, almost brooding in the palate. Not particularly easy to assess. Finished off with dusty tannins. Jean et Jean-Louis Trapet Gevrey-Chambertin Petite-Chapelle 2002
Red #5 -- Rather aristocratic nose. Quite voluminous and tannic in the mouth yet quite bright. A funky Gevrey combining both dark and red fruits - muscular and all-packed-in. Formidable, square wine and a very good showing of this house and more so given the vintage. Lucien le Moine Gevrey-Chambertin les Cazetiers 2003
Red #6 -- Flinty wood nose. Somewhat stemmy. Fairly disjointed at this point - on one hand it had a good lift at the finish, but somewhat incoherent. The sweetness came across as clumsy, almost syrupy. A disappointing and I'm sure an atypical show of this very good wine, which I've had the privilege to taste some time back. Humbert Freres Gevrey-Chambertin les Poissenots 2002
Red #7 -- Deep black fruits. Noticeable wood treatment with roasted fruit flavours but still managed to let its minerality to peek through. Some mocha notes emerged later on, confirming either the vintage (very hot year) or just plain modern school of winemaking. An underachieved Bruno Clair Gevrey-Chambertin Clos-St.-Jacques 2003
Red #8 -- Sauvage, almost Nuits-St.-Georges like nose. Rather oily with black cherry fruits. Not particularly generous nor sweet but there's an honest purity about it. Not a wine for everyone and to be frank I too have issues approaching it although I could recognise its latent talents. Domaine de Varoilles Gevrey-Chambertin La Romanee 2002
But what am I talking about the restaurant? (I suppose it's bad enough for me to bitch about it...) Let's talk about the burgundy workout tonight. The idea was to gather wines to represent each premier cru at the combe de lavaut section of Gevrey-Chambertin, make the vintage constant and study their nuances.
Of course the exercise can never be perfect. Logistically it's already challenging to get the wines completely lined up. So we have a mixed bag of six 2002s (out of which one is not from the combe de lavaut section), and two bottles of 2003s. Not to mention the setting was too distracting and the stemware, being bordeaux in shape and of a certain thickness, kind of dulled the wine's taste and aromas. Okay, okay, enough bitching already! Let's talk about the juice. (All reds were served semi-blind.)
Aperitif -- A nice very ripe yet bracingly steely white with hints of meatiness. Finishes with some minerality but was rather simple. Malic acidity was pronounced so it had to be 2004. Lovely crisp drink. Hubert Lignier Fixin Cepage Chardonnay 2004
Red #1 -- Black raspberries and hints of stems. Very ripe and quite honestly, rather low-pitched. Unforthcoming, reticent sweetness and finished off rather dusty. Joseph Roty Gevrey-Chambertin les Fontenys 2002. Quite a disappointing display. I'm sure this could do better in other settings.
Red #2 -- Vitamins, meats and red crushed fruits. Slightly reductive at this point. Medium-pitched with sour tomatoes flavours (in a good way). Not particularly charming but finished off quite sweet. Domaine de Varoilles Gevrey-Chambertin "Clos des Varoilles" 2002
Red #3 -- Now this I recognise... Classic Gevrey nose filled with pure red crushed fruits. Vitamins, 'dirt' and earth. Sweet yet lifted endlessly by a bright acid backbone. Very cool in the mouth and finished with mouthwatering sappiness and a respectable grip. Not particularly complex but delicious as hell. Fourrier Gevrey-Chambertin Combe aux Moines 2002
Red #4 -- Well-pitched Gevrey nose. Complicating nuances of soy and sour plums. Serious, almost brooding in the palate. Not particularly easy to assess. Finished off with dusty tannins. Jean et Jean-Louis Trapet Gevrey-Chambertin Petite-Chapelle 2002
Red #5 -- Rather aristocratic nose. Quite voluminous and tannic in the mouth yet quite bright. A funky Gevrey combining both dark and red fruits - muscular and all-packed-in. Formidable, square wine and a very good showing of this house and more so given the vintage. Lucien le Moine Gevrey-Chambertin les Cazetiers 2003
Red #6 -- Flinty wood nose. Somewhat stemmy. Fairly disjointed at this point - on one hand it had a good lift at the finish, but somewhat incoherent. The sweetness came across as clumsy, almost syrupy. A disappointing and I'm sure an atypical show of this very good wine, which I've had the privilege to taste some time back. Humbert Freres Gevrey-Chambertin les Poissenots 2002
Red #7 -- Deep black fruits. Noticeable wood treatment with roasted fruit flavours but still managed to let its minerality to peek through. Some mocha notes emerged later on, confirming either the vintage (very hot year) or just plain modern school of winemaking. An underachieved Bruno Clair Gevrey-Chambertin Clos-St.-Jacques 2003
Red #8 -- Sauvage, almost Nuits-St.-Georges like nose. Rather oily with black cherry fruits. Not particularly generous nor sweet but there's an honest purity about it. Not a wine for everyone and to be frank I too have issues approaching it although I could recognise its latent talents. Domaine de Varoilles Gevrey-Chambertin La Romanee 2002
Joseph Roty's Champs Chenys mini-vert
Back on the burg world again, and number poses no issues for the intrepid burgnuts in our group. Just the three of us and we went headlong into this mini vertical of Joseph Roty's Gevrey-Chambertin les Champs Chenys. This is a villages wine but my experience had shown that Roty's wines are typically consistently treated from top-to-bottom and each cuvee represents a unique interpretation of both the terroir as well as the admirable "Roty style" of winemaking. Four vintages of Champs Chenys were presented in semi blind format. There were 2003, 2002, 1997 and 1993. Add to that, two bottles of white preluded the tasting.
Tasting impressions?
Sanford Sauvignon Blanc 2002 Santa Rita -- Flinty, almost meaty nose. Wooded, spicy Sauvignon. Quite grassy but overcome by rich texture and ripeness. Textured and rather alcoholic but still maintained varietal character. Finished a bit warm (alcohol level read 14.5%) and possessed a texture of a new world Chardonnay. Not exactly my cup of tea but easy to appreciate and held its own throughout the night (and the next few days).
Chateau du Tourte 2004 Graves (Blanc) -- This was in complete contrast from the previous wine. Sauvignon dominated nose (but it's made of Sauvignon-Semillon as I understood it). Quite rich but not oily. Apparently it's a sur lie wine. Simple but flavoursome with crisp acidity and bright citrusy flavour. Quite steely yet fleshy in the mouth. Superb value. I can have this anytime. Superb table white.
Wine #1 -- Meatstock nose. Densely coloured. Sauvage aromas of black cherries. Almost roasted fruits but bright and well-pitched. Gevrey minerals. Quite intense yet simple at first. Finished with dusty broad tannins. Rather austere, but with a voluminous palate presence. Took a while for me to enjoy this wine. Started out rather hollow in the middle but with time the wine fleshed out and turned sweeter and denser in the midpalate. Impressive even on second day. Roty Champs Chenys 1993.
Wine #2 -- Candied raspberries. Dense but with bright yoghurt-like creaminess in the palate. Finished quite clean for a wine this ripe. Quite plush and textured. Expectedly this was the Champs Chenys 2003.
Wine #3 -- Lightish orange hue at the rim. Again, telltale meaty nose of Roty's. Fragrant cherry-skins, quite Gevrey like. Oily textured and with a pronounced sweetness supported by a healthy levels of acidity. A wine of pleasure. Held on very well until the last third hour when it became evident to have come from a less complete vintage. Nonetheless I have always admired Roty's 1997 (his Charmes-Chambertin TVV came to mind) and this, being a mere villages wine, was flat out delicious. Champs Chenys 1997.
Wine #4 -- Pure crushed red raspberry fruits. Ripe, candied yet minerally. Some telltale meat too but not quite as pronounced as the rest. For some reason the fruits of this wine eclipsed the earthiness that the other wines tend to show. The most complete and impressive wine of the tasting which combines purity of fruits and admirable structure that was non-domineering. Roty Champs Chenys 2002.
Tasting impressions?
Sanford Sauvignon Blanc 2002 Santa Rita -- Flinty, almost meaty nose. Wooded, spicy Sauvignon. Quite grassy but overcome by rich texture and ripeness. Textured and rather alcoholic but still maintained varietal character. Finished a bit warm (alcohol level read 14.5%) and possessed a texture of a new world Chardonnay. Not exactly my cup of tea but easy to appreciate and held its own throughout the night (and the next few days).
Chateau du Tourte 2004 Graves (Blanc) -- This was in complete contrast from the previous wine. Sauvignon dominated nose (but it's made of Sauvignon-Semillon as I understood it). Quite rich but not oily. Apparently it's a sur lie wine. Simple but flavoursome with crisp acidity and bright citrusy flavour. Quite steely yet fleshy in the mouth. Superb value. I can have this anytime. Superb table white.
Wine #1 -- Meatstock nose. Densely coloured. Sauvage aromas of black cherries. Almost roasted fruits but bright and well-pitched. Gevrey minerals. Quite intense yet simple at first. Finished with dusty broad tannins. Rather austere, but with a voluminous palate presence. Took a while for me to enjoy this wine. Started out rather hollow in the middle but with time the wine fleshed out and turned sweeter and denser in the midpalate. Impressive even on second day. Roty Champs Chenys 1993.
Wine #2 -- Candied raspberries. Dense but with bright yoghurt-like creaminess in the palate. Finished quite clean for a wine this ripe. Quite plush and textured. Expectedly this was the Champs Chenys 2003.
Wine #3 -- Lightish orange hue at the rim. Again, telltale meaty nose of Roty's. Fragrant cherry-skins, quite Gevrey like. Oily textured and with a pronounced sweetness supported by a healthy levels of acidity. A wine of pleasure. Held on very well until the last third hour when it became evident to have come from a less complete vintage. Nonetheless I have always admired Roty's 1997 (his Charmes-Chambertin TVV came to mind) and this, being a mere villages wine, was flat out delicious. Champs Chenys 1997.
Wine #4 -- Pure crushed red raspberry fruits. Ripe, candied yet minerally. Some telltale meat too but not quite as pronounced as the rest. For some reason the fruits of this wine eclipsed the earthiness that the other wines tend to show. The most complete and impressive wine of the tasting which combines purity of fruits and admirable structure that was non-domineering. Roty Champs Chenys 2002.
07 May, 2006
1994 Napa Cab showdown (followed by a heavyweight Burg workout)
It's been a long silence. My blogging seems to come in spurts. Too much work at work and short attention span up to today, just like the little boy I was some ages ago.
Alan invited some of us to join him and a few other winelovers to his home to review five Napa cabernets circa 1994 vintage. This was done in the name of charity, by the way. These wines were served semi-blind:
1994 Shafer Hillside Select
1994 Chateau Montelena
1994 Silver Oak (Napa)
1994 Beringer Private Reserve
1994 Dominus
I arrived late, but the whole set up was ready. This means five Bordeaux stemware per person already filled and labelled by coloured dots corresponding to the bottles. I was having very uncomfortable stomach (gastric?) for a few hours leading to my arrival but as soon as I started to taste and nibble at the finger foods, it got better. Hmmm... Is this a sign? I really shouldn't have stayed away from wine too long.
Everyone in the room already started sniffing and taking notes. Conversations were all about the wines. This was going to be good. As soon as I buffered my stomach lining with some of those hearty bite-sized Bockwursts, I was now ready to explore.
Napa 1994. Well, a very illustrious vintage for California and one that would go down in history with many a Californian classics to its credit I suspect. Personally I did not have many encounters with this vintage. In fact relatively speaking my experience with Napa, cabernets or otherwise, in any vintage is cursory at worst, trivial at best. And so after months of burgundies I begain my momentary journey tonight into this strange land...
Wine #1 (fuschia dot) -- Slightly sweaty nose. Blackcurrants, quite oaky, turned cedary and had dryish rustic tannins. With extended aeration the aromas and fruits turned green. Somewhat a flawed wine, but is it just this bottle? 1994 Dominus
Wine #2 (black dot) -- Generous plummy nose, smelled somewhat Merlot dominated with hints of redcurrants. The oak was spicier here but the fruits density and structure balanced out the modern treatment. Tannins were evidently due to oak (not raw materials). I didn't quite enjoy this at first but aeration gave it more balance and roundness as well as a late savoury note. Quite delicious. 1994 Shafer Hillside Select
Wine #3 (orange dot) -- Immediately evident american oak nose of vanillin and fennel. Spicy, Cabernet dominated dark fruits profile. A forceful, rather aggressive wine that finished off simple and relatively short. More aeration tired out the wine further with the fruits drying up slowly but surely. 1994 Silver Oak Napa
Wine #4 (white dot) -- Very ripe and quite opulently red-fruited, verging on jammy yet not quite there... On the palate quite savoury and carried brighter fruits. Very delicious and upfront. Morphed aromas of sweet tea leaves after some time. Finished off with dusty tannins and lost a bit of steam afterward. 1994 Beringer Private Reserve
Wine #5 (yellow dot) -- The only wine tonight that was reticent and inexpressive at the nose and also the darkest coloured. Serious, brooding wine. Muscular, taut and impressively voluminous, forceful and structured. Dark fruits and ripe. Even density characterises the mouthfeel. A classic Californian cabernet which is unforthcoming today but impressed me with its stature and latent persistent sweetness. My favourite of the flight. 1994 Chateau Montelena
Andy selected a ringer wine, also a 1994 Napa cabernet which I brought along. This one sported a very ripe, meaty, crunchy currants nose mixing together terroir characteristics -- ash, earth and tobacco after plenty of air -- and very chewy tannins. A big boy but well behaved. Delicious but still had unexpressed layers that might require some time. A classical Californian done in an old style to rival Bordeaux if it were to mature. 1994 Corison
Indeed a very interesting exercise. If these wines were representative of the vintage, then the wines generally behaved like its region and the structure of this undoubtedly ripe vintage is quite commendable. Frankly I would have preferred gentler bodied wines with better acid structure. But for what they are, these are very good indeed. Special mention must go to the Montelena. Most impressive and original.
But wait! There were Burgundy glasses, and Alan topped up a few more stemwares, and so each of us now had four Burgundy glasses each. Very impressive logistics of vinous vessels... Now I know that we're finally arriving at the main course of the night. A Burg workout of some kind (only the host knew).
Four wines were poured into respective glasses which were again colour coded. All the wines were served out of a decanter. Having poured all the wines we asked the host what the theme might be. He asked us to guess. After sniffing around and tasting bits of the pours, I thought this might be two different communes, two wines each, different vintage and possibly same producer. Some conjectured it's same commune different producers, while others thought it's same producer different grand crus. The host, after taking his time to watch the debate, disclosed that it's the same commune different producers, different vintage. When I asked whether he meant same commune or same grand cru, he said they were all of one grand cru. Now this gets interesting... In fact they were all Le Musigny. Nice! Not to mention, very generous.
Burg #1 (brown dot) -- Darkest hue of the lot. Smoky, almost reductive and flinty nose. Fruit flavours were dark, almost blue-fruits. This seemed to have been vinified with stems, but the stems were very ripe. Quite extracted and gave suggestions of mocha and coffee. Despite the massiveness and modernity, this had a nice tangy acids. 1999 Drouhin "Musigny"
Burg #2 (green dot) -- Dense but tea like on the nose with secondary aromas of mushroom and sweet tea. Acids were somewhat lower pitched but there was clear minerality. With aeration it turned caramelly sweet with a medicinal tinge. Interesting and quite delicious. 1991 Comte Georges de Vogue "Musigny VV"
Burg #3 (blue dot) -- Spicier oak on the nose. Quite opulent and sweet. Dense but rather low pitched. Sweet and in fact this was so ripe it bordered on being nearly cloying in the finish. In my opinion, I thought this was rather Vosne-like. Possessed good acid lift at the back but the density and extracted sweetness still weighed the wine down. Picked up intriguing roasty and oily texture. 1990 Moine-Hudelot "Musigny"
Burg #4 (red dot) -- This was the favourite of the group. Most lightly hued, quite advanced bricking. Floral nose from obvious stems treatment. Hints of rose petals on the nose. Easy going and nicely drinking but lacked structure and grip. Finished off with dusty fairly dry tannins, a sign of unbalanced extraction or a dehydrated vintage. 1995 J.F. Mugnier "Musigny"
When the night goes well, and people are excited about the wines, there almost always would be another unplanned bottle. (Wine freaks are sooooo predictable...) And so another bottle was poured and this one was utterly delicious. Very aged, heavily bricked and lightly hued. Some sediments. Palate staining sweetness with its red fruits still intact and in fact quite lively. Gentle wine but possessed good yet discrete structure. This too used stems but very well executed with all the elements in harmony. This is one simple example why people should age burgs. 1966 Leroy Corton
And a superb evening ended in technicolor olfactory sensations.
Alan invited some of us to join him and a few other winelovers to his home to review five Napa cabernets circa 1994 vintage. This was done in the name of charity, by the way. These wines were served semi-blind:
1994 Shafer Hillside Select
1994 Chateau Montelena
1994 Silver Oak (Napa)
1994 Beringer Private Reserve
1994 Dominus
I arrived late, but the whole set up was ready. This means five Bordeaux stemware per person already filled and labelled by coloured dots corresponding to the bottles. I was having very uncomfortable stomach (gastric?) for a few hours leading to my arrival but as soon as I started to taste and nibble at the finger foods, it got better. Hmmm... Is this a sign? I really shouldn't have stayed away from wine too long.
Everyone in the room already started sniffing and taking notes. Conversations were all about the wines. This was going to be good. As soon as I buffered my stomach lining with some of those hearty bite-sized Bockwursts, I was now ready to explore.
Napa 1994. Well, a very illustrious vintage for California and one that would go down in history with many a Californian classics to its credit I suspect. Personally I did not have many encounters with this vintage. In fact relatively speaking my experience with Napa, cabernets or otherwise, in any vintage is cursory at worst, trivial at best. And so after months of burgundies I begain my momentary journey tonight into this strange land...
Wine #1 (fuschia dot) -- Slightly sweaty nose. Blackcurrants, quite oaky, turned cedary and had dryish rustic tannins. With extended aeration the aromas and fruits turned green. Somewhat a flawed wine, but is it just this bottle? 1994 Dominus
Wine #2 (black dot) -- Generous plummy nose, smelled somewhat Merlot dominated with hints of redcurrants. The oak was spicier here but the fruits density and structure balanced out the modern treatment. Tannins were evidently due to oak (not raw materials). I didn't quite enjoy this at first but aeration gave it more balance and roundness as well as a late savoury note. Quite delicious. 1994 Shafer Hillside Select
Wine #3 (orange dot) -- Immediately evident american oak nose of vanillin and fennel. Spicy, Cabernet dominated dark fruits profile. A forceful, rather aggressive wine that finished off simple and relatively short. More aeration tired out the wine further with the fruits drying up slowly but surely. 1994 Silver Oak Napa
Wine #4 (white dot) -- Very ripe and quite opulently red-fruited, verging on jammy yet not quite there... On the palate quite savoury and carried brighter fruits. Very delicious and upfront. Morphed aromas of sweet tea leaves after some time. Finished off with dusty tannins and lost a bit of steam afterward. 1994 Beringer Private Reserve
Wine #5 (yellow dot) -- The only wine tonight that was reticent and inexpressive at the nose and also the darkest coloured. Serious, brooding wine. Muscular, taut and impressively voluminous, forceful and structured. Dark fruits and ripe. Even density characterises the mouthfeel. A classic Californian cabernet which is unforthcoming today but impressed me with its stature and latent persistent sweetness. My favourite of the flight. 1994 Chateau Montelena
Andy selected a ringer wine, also a 1994 Napa cabernet which I brought along. This one sported a very ripe, meaty, crunchy currants nose mixing together terroir characteristics -- ash, earth and tobacco after plenty of air -- and very chewy tannins. A big boy but well behaved. Delicious but still had unexpressed layers that might require some time. A classical Californian done in an old style to rival Bordeaux if it were to mature. 1994 Corison
Indeed a very interesting exercise. If these wines were representative of the vintage, then the wines generally behaved like its region and the structure of this undoubtedly ripe vintage is quite commendable. Frankly I would have preferred gentler bodied wines with better acid structure. But for what they are, these are very good indeed. Special mention must go to the Montelena. Most impressive and original.
But wait! There were Burgundy glasses, and Alan topped up a few more stemwares, and so each of us now had four Burgundy glasses each. Very impressive logistics of vinous vessels... Now I know that we're finally arriving at the main course of the night. A Burg workout of some kind (only the host knew).
Four wines were poured into respective glasses which were again colour coded. All the wines were served out of a decanter. Having poured all the wines we asked the host what the theme might be. He asked us to guess. After sniffing around and tasting bits of the pours, I thought this might be two different communes, two wines each, different vintage and possibly same producer. Some conjectured it's same commune different producers, while others thought it's same producer different grand crus. The host, after taking his time to watch the debate, disclosed that it's the same commune different producers, different vintage. When I asked whether he meant same commune or same grand cru, he said they were all of one grand cru. Now this gets interesting... In fact they were all Le Musigny. Nice! Not to mention, very generous.
Burg #1 (brown dot) -- Darkest hue of the lot. Smoky, almost reductive and flinty nose. Fruit flavours were dark, almost blue-fruits. This seemed to have been vinified with stems, but the stems were very ripe. Quite extracted and gave suggestions of mocha and coffee. Despite the massiveness and modernity, this had a nice tangy acids. 1999 Drouhin "Musigny"
Burg #2 (green dot) -- Dense but tea like on the nose with secondary aromas of mushroom and sweet tea. Acids were somewhat lower pitched but there was clear minerality. With aeration it turned caramelly sweet with a medicinal tinge. Interesting and quite delicious. 1991 Comte Georges de Vogue "Musigny VV"
Burg #3 (blue dot) -- Spicier oak on the nose. Quite opulent and sweet. Dense but rather low pitched. Sweet and in fact this was so ripe it bordered on being nearly cloying in the finish. In my opinion, I thought this was rather Vosne-like. Possessed good acid lift at the back but the density and extracted sweetness still weighed the wine down. Picked up intriguing roasty and oily texture. 1990 Moine-Hudelot "Musigny"
Burg #4 (red dot) -- This was the favourite of the group. Most lightly hued, quite advanced bricking. Floral nose from obvious stems treatment. Hints of rose petals on the nose. Easy going and nicely drinking but lacked structure and grip. Finished off with dusty fairly dry tannins, a sign of unbalanced extraction or a dehydrated vintage. 1995 J.F. Mugnier "Musigny"
When the night goes well, and people are excited about the wines, there almost always would be another unplanned bottle. (Wine freaks are sooooo predictable...) And so another bottle was poured and this one was utterly delicious. Very aged, heavily bricked and lightly hued. Some sediments. Palate staining sweetness with its red fruits still intact and in fact quite lively. Gentle wine but possessed good yet discrete structure. This too used stems but very well executed with all the elements in harmony. This is one simple example why people should age burgs. 1966 Leroy Corton
And a superb evening ended in technicolor olfactory sensations.
01 May, 2006
Chambolles, the Villages (a.k.a. Roumier vertical plus a few others)
The gang congregated tonight at Hachi, a Japanese joint. Within the unpretentious setting of a tatami room, the tasting began, semi-blind. The original intent was to explore the wine of Domaine Georges Roumier, a well-known Chambolle-Musigny based house, whose grand crus are among the most prized and especially for its Musigny is among the hardest to find (and afford) red Burgundies out there. The crowd here are shamelessly enamoured by the Chambolle region, no less thanks to the stellar examples we have had from domaines like Comte Georges de Vogue and J.F. Mugnier plus other no-less-inspiring showing from the other non-Chambolle-based makers.
When I suggested to Andy that we should do this tasting, it was primarily motivated by a few things. Firstly, most of us are not well exposed to Roumier's wines. Secondly, most domaines tend to accord less wood treatment to its 'lowly' villages wines hence it would be fair to expect a certain degree of transparency for us to reflect the vintage and terroir characteristics. Thirdly, villages wines generally tend to be quite drinkable even right after release, so we could expect nicely drinking bottles regardless of vintages (we did not go older than 1996). Lastly, after the many superb grand crus and premier crus we tend to preoccupy ourselves with, it would be good to baseline how these villages perform vis-a-vis its grander siblings and vice versa -- to reestablish the overall perspective as we move from cru-to-cru, if you will.
When I suggested to Andy that we should do this tasting, it was primarily motivated by a few things. Firstly, most of us are not well exposed to Roumier's wines. Secondly, most domaines tend to accord less wood treatment to its 'lowly' villages wines hence it would be fair to expect a certain degree of transparency for us to reflect the vintage and terroir characteristics. Thirdly, villages wines generally tend to be quite drinkable even right after release, so we could expect nicely drinking bottles regardless of vintages (we did not go older than 1996). Lastly, after the many superb grand crus and premier crus we tend to preoccupy ourselves with, it would be good to baseline how these villages perform vis-a-vis its grander siblings and vice versa -- to reestablish the overall perspective as we move from cru-to-cru, if you will.
#1 - Pale ruby. Traces of burgundy dirt on the nose, prior to the whack of quintessential Chambolle nose. Some charred oil and peanut skins too. Gentle wine, light-bodied and dominantly red-fruited. I guessed it was a Roumier '01, but this turned out to be Mugnier '02. And I must say this is so different from the same wine had not too long ago. The previous one was so much more powerful and dense. Even the colour was different, I dare say. What happened? Hmmm...
#2 - Very ripe nose turning toward blueberries. On the palate, black fruited, almost jammy and a definite lack of spine. Quite dense but warm. After the previous wine, this was almost tasteless. Dilute in the middle. I guessed Mugnier '03. Correct.
#3 - Intriguing nose. Smoky, flinty and in fact almost jammy. Ripe fruits, nicely stemmy and finished off with a dusty texture. Vitamins and meats galore, turning tea like later. Exotic and intriguing. I guessed Roumier '03, but it was in fact Roumier '01. A strange '01 I must say, but interesting nonetheless.
#4 - Vitamins on the nose atop of crushed red fruits. Rich and generous, with a generous but well-handled oak treatment. A very ripe Chambolle but still fresh and bright. I thought this was the Mugnier '02, but it turned out to be Lignier '01. Quite impressive.
#5 - Very ripe Chambolle nose. No, wait, in fact, not merely Chambolle, but a quintessential de Vogue Chambolle nose (creamy raspberries). Slightly warmish but generous and poised. Decidedly '03 yet possesses an uncharacteristic purity. Lots of black raspberries and very opulent. A joy juice. de Vogue '03? Spot on.
#6 - The most aged wine so far. Stemmy, ripe nose of very bright red fruits. The acid spine is amazing. Mouthwateringly sappy and flavoursome. Plenty of crushed fruits but with an incisive cut. An edgy and thrilling Chambolle villages. Very 1996 I thought. And so it is: Roumier '96.
#7 - Stalky nose, with complicating vitamins amidst a nice mixture of red and black fruits. Ripe yet very bright. Very 2002 in my opinion. Very rich and full yet light and balanced. Quite flavoursome. Roumier '02.
#8 - Almost blue fruits scented. Rather berry scented (cold maceration?), candied, yet cool and cleansing on the palate. Generously sweet with an exotic nuance of rose syrup. Delicious and quite complete. Many people liked this. I thought this was the Lignier, but it was Roumier '03. A very impressive showing for the vintage.
#9 - This, to me, was the most complete wine, and so I had to score this the highest, although I prefer #6 for sheer deliciousness. Very meaty and oily nose, with dense yet bright red fruits. Finished with an uplifting acid bite a la the 1996, but this is definitely more dense, dark and serious. Almost roasted flavours but balanced out unexpectedly with a tangy finish. All these attributed point to only one vintage, 1999. Most tannic and un-ready wine for the evening. Very chewy and ripe tannins. Indeed it was: Roumier 1999. A killer villages.
This tasting proved to me that the whole Burgundy cru-classification thing is true. After tasting the wines tonight there is no doubt that the premier crus and grand crus are heads and shoulders above these wines in terms of midpalate density, and intensity. The materials are just undeniably heftier, if not classier in the upper crus. But these villages, humble and un-powerful as they might be, are typical of the commune. There was no wine tonight that wasn't Chambolle-Musigny in flavour -- no doubt this is also a function of the producers' conscienciousness. These villages are lovely wines, and save for one, drinking beautifully, especially at the dinner table. Put this against new world pinot noirs and there is no comparison -- the new worlds would be so characterless compared to these, not to mention less flavoursome.
And oh yes, by the way, Roumier's Chambolle wines are truly good. This is a very high-quality domaine who understand Chambolle-Musigny. RESPECT!
Some white Graves (and Burgs too, of course!)
The following night I joined the gang for some Graves sampling... I am a novice when it comes to this region, although I must admit I've had great examples of the wines here (Laville Haut-Brion 1990 comes to mind). My evening conference call got cancelled and I decided what the heck, let's just head down to Hachi and join the guys for some drinks.
Chateau de Fieuzal 2002 Blanc - Lemons and minerals on the nose. Honeysuckle on the palate with classy pencil shaving oak. This possessed great acidity though it appeared more on the lean side. The finish reminded me of a Chablis. Delicious food wine.
Domaine de Chevalier 2002 Blanc - Guavas, grapefruits and honeyed lemon on the nose. In the palate, this was a lot more voluminous and textured than the de Fieuzal, yet at the same time maintained a good sense of restraint and despite its obvious richness, the supporting acidity created that delicious mouthwatering effect. Impressive.
Laville Haut-Brion 1993 Blanc - Complex nuances of cloves, cinnamon and dill on the nose. This smelled like a fresh fino sherry. But what got me was the texture on the palate. This was a wonder: at once round, viscous and centric (enclosing toward the midpalate). Clean, bright, candied and caramelly, yet still structured and edgy. The bright exotic fruits were complicated with crushed rocks minerality. Special.
Geantet-Pansiot Gevrey-Chambertin les Poissenots 2002 - Crushed cherries, minerals and some raspberries on the nose. On the palate, decidedly red-fruited, bright and sweet. This had that earthy terroir-ish element and very much Gevrey in style plus an intriguing note of dark cherry skins. In fact, for a Geantet-Pansiot this was quite structured and somewhat tannic. Very good, in fact probably the best I've ever tasted from this house.
Lechenaut Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru 2002 - Floral nose combined with dirt and spices. This domaine certainly uses stems. Raspberry and crushed red fruits with a certain oaky structure which quickly blew off to integrate with the fruits when sitting in the glass. This possessed a subtle steely minerality too and for a Chambolle, it was quite a structured wine (not hard).
Chateau de Fieuzal 2002 Blanc - Lemons and minerals on the nose. Honeysuckle on the palate with classy pencil shaving oak. This possessed great acidity though it appeared more on the lean side. The finish reminded me of a Chablis. Delicious food wine.
Domaine de Chevalier 2002 Blanc - Guavas, grapefruits and honeyed lemon on the nose. In the palate, this was a lot more voluminous and textured than the de Fieuzal, yet at the same time maintained a good sense of restraint and despite its obvious richness, the supporting acidity created that delicious mouthwatering effect. Impressive.
Laville Haut-Brion 1993 Blanc - Complex nuances of cloves, cinnamon and dill on the nose. This smelled like a fresh fino sherry. But what got me was the texture on the palate. This was a wonder: at once round, viscous and centric (enclosing toward the midpalate). Clean, bright, candied and caramelly, yet still structured and edgy. The bright exotic fruits were complicated with crushed rocks minerality. Special.
Geantet-Pansiot Gevrey-Chambertin les Poissenots 2002 - Crushed cherries, minerals and some raspberries on the nose. On the palate, decidedly red-fruited, bright and sweet. This had that earthy terroir-ish element and very much Gevrey in style plus an intriguing note of dark cherry skins. In fact, for a Geantet-Pansiot this was quite structured and somewhat tannic. Very good, in fact probably the best I've ever tasted from this house.
Lechenaut Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru 2002 - Floral nose combined with dirt and spices. This domaine certainly uses stems. Raspberry and crushed red fruits with a certain oaky structure which quickly blew off to integrate with the fruits when sitting in the glass. This possessed a subtle steely minerality too and for a Chambolle, it was quite a structured wine (not hard).
One-on-one Tuesday lunch with 3 samplers
Andy and I ordered our lunch at Jiang Nan Chun now headed by the new chef Steven Ng. Well, actually we did not order anything. Steven basically decided everything. Other than the good food and conversation, Andy brought a couple of wines to taste together.
I was hoping there'd be a Chablis this afternoon. Apparently Andy read my mind... Philippe Pacalet Chablis Beauroy 2004 had an unexpectedly rich (at least in the context of this vintage) nose laden with honeysuckle and peach. Richly golden coloured this was probably the most generously textured Chablis I've had to date but the palate bodes well with minerally, slatey, oyster shell-ish nuances highlighting the citrus flavours framing an intense midpalate. This was actually light and bracing in the mouth, with a lowish alcohol level (label read 12.5%) and a mouthwatering acid kick at the back. I like this very much. This is the second Pacalet white I've had and I'm beginning to get the sense that he's doing a marvelous job making very elegant and intense white burgundies.
The first red smelled of stems and spices, with a decided ashy edge. Initially this possessed the 'dirt' taste and some vitamins, meaty suggestion atop its raspberry and strawberry fruits. I guessed this must be a Cote-de-Beaune, which it was, but I was thinking along Beaune or Savigny due to its relative hardness. Yet it turned out to be Arnaud Ente Volnay Santenots du Milieu 1998. This wine could do with more sweetness and sappiness of fruits. And by the way, I had the leftover over the next two days and it did not put on more flesh. A good and honest wine, but for the vineyard, it really should have become more that what it was.
I decided to open up the third bottle (a spare bottle actually) and now we're talking Volnay! Red steely fruits with a formidable acid-framed spine, and now it had begun to show some bacon-fat oily aromas. In the mouth this was very pure and concentrated with no trace of heat nor heaviness. Very precise and cool (in fact almost minty) and finished with a whack of a grip. A classic 1996, and this was only a Marquis d'Angerville Volnay les Fremiet 1996. I say "only" because this was supposed to be his "simplest" premier cru. I shudder at the thought of what his Clos des Ducs would taste like in this vintage... (Btw, I tasted the leftover in the next 6 days and amazingly the wine held steady and was virtually indifferent till the end!) This is a knockout purist Volnay producer.
I was hoping there'd be a Chablis this afternoon. Apparently Andy read my mind... Philippe Pacalet Chablis Beauroy 2004 had an unexpectedly rich (at least in the context of this vintage) nose laden with honeysuckle and peach. Richly golden coloured this was probably the most generously textured Chablis I've had to date but the palate bodes well with minerally, slatey, oyster shell-ish nuances highlighting the citrus flavours framing an intense midpalate. This was actually light and bracing in the mouth, with a lowish alcohol level (label read 12.5%) and a mouthwatering acid kick at the back. I like this very much. This is the second Pacalet white I've had and I'm beginning to get the sense that he's doing a marvelous job making very elegant and intense white burgundies.
The first red smelled of stems and spices, with a decided ashy edge. Initially this possessed the 'dirt' taste and some vitamins, meaty suggestion atop its raspberry and strawberry fruits. I guessed this must be a Cote-de-Beaune, which it was, but I was thinking along Beaune or Savigny due to its relative hardness. Yet it turned out to be Arnaud Ente Volnay Santenots du Milieu 1998. This wine could do with more sweetness and sappiness of fruits. And by the way, I had the leftover over the next two days and it did not put on more flesh. A good and honest wine, but for the vineyard, it really should have become more that what it was.
I decided to open up the third bottle (a spare bottle actually) and now we're talking Volnay! Red steely fruits with a formidable acid-framed spine, and now it had begun to show some bacon-fat oily aromas. In the mouth this was very pure and concentrated with no trace of heat nor heaviness. Very precise and cool (in fact almost minty) and finished with a whack of a grip. A classic 1996, and this was only a Marquis d'Angerville Volnay les Fremiet 1996. I say "only" because this was supposed to be his "simplest" premier cru. I shudder at the thought of what his Clos des Ducs would taste like in this vintage... (Btw, I tasted the leftover in the next 6 days and amazingly the wine held steady and was virtually indifferent till the end!) This is a knockout purist Volnay producer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
