JFL
Member
I have purchased quite a few 1er crus from the 2006 vintage in the following appellations:
- Beaune
- Savigny-les-Beaune
- Pernand-Vergelesse
I was wondering if other forum members had started tasting their wines from this vintage in some of these appellations. Are they just about ready?
J.F.
Hi JF
I would have started almost from day 1 ;o)
I suspect that you have one or two more years of enjoyment from these before they start to become a little harder. For 1ers I'd not expect them to start coming into their own before 10 years of age and be safely drinkable up to 20 years.
Cheers, Bill
JFL
Member
Thanks. Rather new to the world of Burgundy (although already completely enthralled!), so please bare with me Bill and other forum members!
I thought these appelations from the northern Côte-de-Beaune sector had a somewhat shorter lifespan than what you suggest. Is this, in the end, a question of personal preference? Or, instead, has the potential of the 2006 vintage to produce wines that will keep well been underestimated in your view?
Best,
J.F.
Hmm - well, without the spectre of 2005 I think 06 has a legitimate shout to being one of the best vintages of the decade - certainly in the Côte de Nuits, let's wait for 09 in bottles before awarding that (runner-up!) prize.
I'm not really into a shorter lifespan persperctive in this area, after-all they all nudge-up against Corton! Not an average producer or an average wine, but Pavelot's 2000 Savigny 1er Dominode is still a beauty of a young wine from a more forward vintage than 06 - and that's 9 years-old already, the 99 is simply not close to ready...
At least those are some of the benchmarks that help form my suggestion.
JFL
Member
Reading this again. As indicated previously, still quite new to Burgundy (been drinking Burgundies for 6-7 years). What would be considered infancide, in your view, Bill, for these appellations - in general and for the 2006 vintage in particular? Drinking them before they come into their own (10+ year mark)? Or drinking them at say, less than 3-4 years of age?
Merci.
JFL
Hi JFL,
I'm not really into the 'infanticide' label in most contexts - if a wine is drunk and enjoed, whatever its age, it has fulfilled its destiny - and many wines don't acheive that so bravo!
Whether it could have been 'better' (in whose taste?) at a different time is neither here nor there. Of-course if you drink a wine and it is tight, unyielding or only gives glimpses of it's potential - and you afterwards regret opening it - that could be described as infanticide. But different strokes for differnt folks...
I've found red Burgundies over the years to consistently surprise me by having a staying power longer than I expected. 1992 and 1994 I thought would both be finished within a decade, yet here they both are (although I don't think it's necessary to tempt fate by holding them any longer). Arguably, every other vintage from 1990 on is still on its upside (quite possibly 1991 has reached its peak, and one can disagree about where 1997 and 2000 will be going)! In the 1980s, 1989 has developed and held much better than expected, 1988 is still on the upswing, and 1985 has also held extremely well; 1983 has surprised, and even 1982 is still doing well -- a vintage that people originally thought was for 5, max 7, years out.
Certainly, Savigny, Pernand, and Beaune in good hands have very long aging potentials (witness an ineffable 1865 Beaune-Grèves Vigne de l'Enfant Jésus from Bouchard P&F that I had in 2006).
chambolle
Member
I'm always a bit nonplussed by these discussions of 'when to drink' or 'when will wine x be ready.' Ready for what? Puberty? College? Marriage?
For example, Bill says the '99 Savigny Dominodes from Pavelot is 'not close to ready.' I have a case of the wine in 750s and have consumed about half of it over the past few years, with quite a bit of pleasure. (I won't touch my magnums for a long time. But that isn't because I do not think they are 'ready to drink' -- it is because I buy magnums with the idea they will make great old bottles, so why drink them young, even if they may also be very enjoyable young?). The wine is fat and forward, very pleasant to drink, although also quite primary -- it clearly has many years to go before becoming a 'mature' bottle of wine but that doesn't prevent one from drinking it for what it is now.
Any bottle of Burgundy may go through a 'deaf dumb and blind' phase to some degree, from downright unpleasant to just not very exciting, but that is entirely unpredictable and a risk one takes whenever pulling a cork. If you buy into the biodynamic calendar, it might just happen because you've chosen to drink the wine on a root day!
But unless my gut instinct tells me I will be wasting a bottle (esp. if it is an expensive one and it is a wine I have very few examples of), I don't often think 'is it ready to drink?' I do wonder -- and cannot know until I try -- whether it will have something interesting to say to me. Most of the time, however, a bottle WILL have something to say, whatever its age.
I do agree with Claude that the notion of how long Burgundy will live seems to be skewed to the low side, even among those who drink Burgundy on a regular basis. I fear that is in large part a function of the Parkerization of the world. If you pick up a copy of Parker's big fat "Burgundy" book from the late 1980s (never revised, as far as I know), he estimates that virtually every red Burgundy at whatever level is good for a decade or less. Believe it or not, it seems a good portion of the world still looks to wrongheaded advice from Dr. P, even in areas he plainly knows virtually nothing whatsoever about or simply does not care much about, e.g., Burgundy and environs.
Having drunk with glee relatively minor wines from vintages like 1992 or 2000 with about 10 to 15 years of time in my cellar, I know damned well that what Parker and the Wine Expectorator and other pundits often say about Burgundy is wrong. But the tendency to think of the wines from the unfairly condemned "light" vintages like 92 and 00 as tender and ephemeral creatures is difficult to resist. If you've had a bottle of 92 Mugnier Musigny or Roumier Bonnes Mares or d'Angerville Clos des Ducs of late, you will know that 20 years or so means nothing in the life of a well made bottle of 1er cru or grand cru red burgundy, no matter what the vintage or the vintage's reputation for longevity.
I will guiltily admit that one driving factor for me in the 'when to drink' calculus is what I paid for the wine and how much of it I have. A lot of 2006 red and white burgundies have been sold at absurd discounts in the US -- the entire vintage having fallen victim to the 2005 frenzy and the economic crisis. So I am treating a lot of '06 1er cru reds as school night, grocery store rotisserie chicken salad and baguette wine. If it cost me under $25 or so a bottle, and if it is drinking well young, it's on the chopping block, even if I suspect it may be truly wonderful a decade from now as well. I will try to lose a few bottles of everything I own so I will have an opportunity to drink it with considerable age on it, but I would guess anyone who has a substantial cellar of at least a few thousand bottles is going to have a hard time looking at any affordable bottle of wine and thinking "gee, I'd better not 'waste it' by drinking it before it is ten years old."
Do not misunderstand me -- I'm not advocating against keeping wine to maturity. I like nothing better than popping a simple village wine that is 10 or 20 years old and finding a marvelous surprise inside - and I make sure to keep many, many such bottles around for a good long time so I can enjoy the experience of 'minor' wines at maturity. I just don't usually think "not ready to drink" when I gaze at a label, unless recent experience tells me the wine will likely be closed for business and not very pleasant. The mere fact that it may taste "young," instead of "mature," however, does not deter.
JFL
Member
Thank you for your insight Bill, Claude and Chambolle. Very enlightening.
A few additional comments: being relatively new to Burgundy, I'm not sure yet whether I prefer to drink them younger or at a more mature phase in their evolution (or both!).
What I do want to try to avoid, however, is drinking wines that have shut down or are structured in a manner that demands time for them to provide some level of pleasure (both sensual and intellectual). I know that experience is what ultimately helps the most in deciding when to take a pass when tempted to open a certain bottle.
My understanding is that three factors will play a key role in determining if a wine is likely to be shut down at a given point in time: the vintage (e.g. 2005 vs 2009...), the appellation (e.g. Pommard 1er cru vs Givry 1er cru) and the producer/négociant (e.g. Henri Gouges vs. Vincent Girardin).
If I had to restate my original question, I guess I would have been more upfront asking whether 2006 red 1er crus from Beaune, Savigny and Pernand were likely to be closed today.
Thanks again.
JFL
Joachim
Member
In the contrary, some days ago I had an absolutely lovely and amazing Beaune 1er Cru Marconnets 2005 from Bouchard, which was very accessible and open, yet with a lot of potential. Seems the only possibility is to try or to share your experiences with other wine fellows, to avoid these unpleasant surprises.
b0bj0nes
Member
I am new to the Burgundy report. Are there resources on the site where members share "current" drinking experiences with specific wines that might help inform my drinking? My latest 2005 experience was with a 2005 Domaine Chapelle Santenay 1er Cru "Beaurepaire". This is the wine that I found so closed down.
DieterAue
Member
I think there are no rules, you must try and hope for the best. Recently I had a 2000 Sentiers and a 2000 Hauts Doix from Groffier and they were delicious. Then came two Taillepieds from d'Angerville, 1996 and 1998, both were shut down, especially the 98(not the first from 98). I try to look at Notes from Coates for life expectations in his Burgundy Book, they have been quite accurate (not ever !) with the wines I had and were mentioned in his book. Generally I think that bottles are opened too early. Burgundy can live longer than expected, that is true, but I would not take it for granted in very mediocre or short-lived vintages like 94 and 97. Yes, even there are good bottles, but very few, and where should a lot of come from, when nature is not graceful? On the contrary you can still expect good bottles even from a village level from 99 or 02, so I had good En la Rue de Vergy 99 from Clair, 02 Piece du Chapitre from Tollot-Beaut or 99 Chambolle-Musigny from Fourrier.
Antoine
Member
I must confess I may have the wrong tasting buds. I opened recently Vosne Suchots 1er cru from both Hudelot Noellat and Domaine de l'Arlot and both were excellent and fully open for Business....yet 6 years old. A Potel Chambolle Fuees2006 (thanks Bill for your advice) needed a bit of time to open earlier in the year. So, I would not be too concerned about opening Burg 1er cru 2006 except for long to mature producers and wines
Joachim
Member
I had the following 2006 Village wines in a tasting two weeks ago:
Herestzyn Gevrey Cahmbertin VV
Roty Gevrey Chambertin Champs Chenys VV
Mugnier Nuit St. Geroges Clos de Fourches
Michel Gros Nuit St. Georges
All the wines were very open, generous and open for bussiness, the Roty clearly standing out as primus inter pares. Afterwards we had three 1998 Grand Cru (Girardin Chambertin Clos de Beze, Grivot Clos Vougeot, Sirigue Grand Echezeaux) which were much more close and tihgt. Okay, its 98 and Grand Crus, but still I was a bit surprised.
Joachim
Member
Thanks Bill, I wanted to post much more detailed notes, since this tasting was really interesting, but it seems just can’t find the time. To add something in short: We had a Michel Gros Clos de Reas vertical tasting as third flight, the vintages 1998, 2001 and 2002. The same picture here: While the 2001 and 2002 were really open and ready to drink (even if they were still in their youth, I might add) the 1998 was very wild and edgy. There also seems to be a change in the winemaking at Michel Grios after 1998 (anyone has more information about it?) but apart form that, surely 1998 is a stubborn fellow.
Sycamore
Member
Grabbed a 2006 Domaine Georges Mugneret Nuits 1er Les Chaignots out of the cellar this evening (meant to take a 2005, which probably would have been a bigger mistake...). Good, but better in 2+ years, methinks. Quite red-fruited, with noted acidity (both excellent); fleshes out with some time over the evening. Hits some high notes but always beckons with a promise of greater potential. We have 3 left, fortunately, and those will await a substantially later date.
I'm a fan of the '06s on the overall -- have enjoyed a wide range from, say, Barthod BR to Rousseau Clos St. Jacques. As advertised, they generally show their typicity of place quite well. There have been a few misses along the way as well, so I'm generally cautious about what/when to open, but by and large its a vintage I quite like.......
Joachim
Member
I agree! So far, I had really good experiences with 2006. To me, its a real round, warm vintage, but still keeping typicity. Someone could say "easy to drink", but not with the flatness of 2007, which has not too much depth imo. Heard an interview with Jean -Mar Fourrier, and he prefers 2006 to 2005. Might be changing in time, but still an interesting viewpoint.
Probably just depends when the interview was Joachim - remember most of the producers preferred 2006 once they'd sold out of 2005s ;-)
And in a few cases, notably at Nuits, those producers may well have been right.
Joachim
Member
Haha, might be the case, Bill. But this was much later anyway, when 2006 and 2005 were both sold out. It was the inverview which was posted here recently, where Jean Marc explained his interpretation of the 2004 taint.
Claude, do you have any special producers in mind? I have not enough tasting experience to make a competent comparison here, but I heard from many sides that 2006 came out very well in NStG - I reacted by stocking some more 2006 Chevillon, without tasting it so far.
Joachim -- Without going back and checking my notes, my recollection is pretty much across the board for the Nuits producers I visit -- Chevillon, Gouges, Chauvenet, Confuron, Faiveley, l'Arlot, as well as producers outside Nuits with Nuits holdings, e.g., Drouhin, Jadot, Mugneret-Gibourg, Méo-Camuzet, Rouget, Confuron-Cotétidot, Grivot, Clavelier, Arnoux-Lachaux, etc., etc.
Bear in mind, though, that this is a double-edged sword -- 2006 was especially good in Nuits (and Savigny!), but 2005, while very good in Nuits, was perhaps less strong there than in other villages, an observation that I think other reviewers also shared.
You must log in to post.
