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
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Henry,
#4 Rochester Graze sucked big time! You forgot to mention that they wanted to charge $40 per bottle for corkage, for the kind of pathetic stemware and lack of wine service, it was a sad joke! Easily the worst restaurant I've been to in a long while!
As for the wines, I'm new to Burgs but thought the Clos des Varoilles '02 quite good. Recent bottles of Burgs that impressed me were the Roty Charmes TVV '01, just awesome power and Lignier MSD VV '02.
A decent Burg costs too much, a half decent one still costs a lot. I prefer Piedmont Barolos and Barbarescos for now.....
Have you ever tried Clos de Tart '98? Any ideas if this is worth the tariff?
Cheers!
Oh yes. Enuff said about the disservice of Graze :-(
Clos de Tart 98 is well, not my cup of tea... Far too modern, extracted and in-your-face. I wrote some tasting notes on this wine in my Sept-25 posting --> http://burghead.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_burghead_archive.html
I can identify with the disappointments with some burgundies because really there are some really bad ones. But Burgs do not have to be expensive. The danger and most common mistake most winedrinkers make is to appreciate burgundy with the same yardsticks as other wine regions ('internationalization' of tastebuds -- very dangerous). I know it's hard to explain -- and I will try to share the contrarian philosophy of 'loving burgundy' one day -- but the soul of burgundy can be found from the most unglamorous bottle of Bourgogne to the best of grand crus, not to mention from the seemingly-rustic satellite appellations. All it takes is a little understanding. And this is why I always encourage my drinking buddies to always experiment widely with burgundies -- and some are beginning to see the point and more importantly beginning to find pleasures in this vast wine world confined in such a small region.
Oh yes, and de Varoilles is indeed pretty good. Let down that night by poor atmosphere and lousy stemwares. It has an honest earthy punchy slightly-rustic burgundy flavours encased in discreet elegance. Glad you enjoyed that!
Henry,
On man, teach me ;-)! Point me to the good stuff. You should do an article on what are the values in Burgundy, too much of a minefield for most of us!
So far I've tried and really liked the Rousseau style and d'Angervilles, these combined seemingly totally contrasting attributes of weightlessness and intensity so well. Quite different from the powerful style of Roty. Maume has also been quite interesting from their Lavaux St Jacques up.
Wines I find disappointing so far: Rene Engel Clos de Vougeot, had a few vintages, Dominique Laurent stuff is just awful, I don't get Mongeards......
Alex Chong
For value, as an example, Roty produces lovely, minerally Marsannays. His massive style works just fine on this rather citric food-friendly wines. Price tag? $50 thereabouts. Up north, there's also this little known villages of Fixin, and I've liked Gelin's premiers from here.
I would also go south and find premier crus from Jadot from Beaune and Volnay, and Ecard's Savigny-les-Beaune.
Bear in mind though that these are not the same 'sleek' wines cut out like d'Angerville or Rousseau... But they speak of Burgundy in an honest and tasty way, and are very versatile on the table too.
I understand your disappointment with Engel and Laurent, particularly the latter. For this kind of money, if you've had an Arnoux, I'm sure you'd be a far happier man.
Now enough of theories, and let's get on to practicals!
This is very interesting site... church article of incorporation http://www.online-games-6.info peugeot valve stem seal replacement Mature zoe
Excellent, love it! » » »
Post a Comment