Some quite high tones, red fruit notes that are sweet and faintly alcoholic, but not overly so. In the mouth this is soft and understated, actually a bit too soft. The fruit is sweet enough and buffered with just a little tannin. Frankly I don’t have much engagement with this wine, though it seems friendly enough. As a Pommard it’s very simple and doesn’t seem a patch on the 2008.
This wine showed two personalities; day 1 it was a little non-descript on the nose; rounder and sweeter than the Guyon Chambolle but less impact or dimension – here was a club to the rapier of the Guyon. Day 2 and I’m much more impressed with this; the nose has opened with a slightly warm and sweet core but coupled to creamy flashes and top notes of violets – nice! There also seems a bit more depth to the palate, pretty, higher-toned red fruit and a slowly lingering finish on very good but not bright acidity. There is a hint of grain to the low-key tannin. If I’m totally honest, this cuvée can be a bit expensive, but here is a wine that rewards your investment – on day 2 anyway!
This has medium, medium-plus colour – relatively dark and young looking for a 10 year-old. The nose is showing some maturity with blood, iron, graphite – rare Chateaubriand. With time, there are faint oxidised notes which rather disconcertingly gives me the the overall impression that it smells more like Chianti than Beaune, but that’s short-lived, additional time builds a slightly musky base – seems more like burgundy now! Good acidity and a decent base of grainy, almost velvety tannin that appears in the mid-palate – hardly any astringency now. The fruit has a dark-red sweet-sour presence, but is well (sweet-sour) balanced. Medium length. I would say that this is approaching its plateau of maturity – another couple of years should do it – and given its relative power, it should hold there for at at lease a decade…
Medium ruby-red colour – already showing some older colour. The nose initially has none of the green 04-ness, though a little develops over-time, it is, however, on such a low level that it really is additive and makes from cedar at the top, down to its creamy edge at the bottom, with faint clove in the middle – a rather superior if not textbook Vosne nose; I’m very impressed. In the mouth it’s a long way from my expectation; there is only a hint of the ripe sweetness of the vintage, but the overall balance is reminiscent of a 1996 with it’s acid-forward stance. There is super dimension to the fruit too. This is far from an average ready-to-drink-now 2004 and very different to my 04 villages beau (from Mugneret-Gibourg), but this is an interesting mid-term cellar candidate – maybe 2 more bottles…
Medium yellow. The nose has very understated butterscotch and oak, swirling lifts out a little high-toned pear fruit. The palate is nicely concentrated and very well textured. The acidity is nice, as is the medium and a bit finish. Certainly a large step-up from the Bourgogne, but then so is the price (3x). Good wine, but not brilliant value.
No replacement 98’s so here’s the 99. Also quite golden in colour. The nose is deep, still showing a trace of wood, slightly creamy with a dense honeysuckle note. Gradually becomes more butterscotch. Smooth, slightly waxy and honied palate with good acidity and medium length. For me, despite no real faults the overall impression is a little heavy. Still it has good intensity and is already very tasty.
Medium, medium-plus cherry-red. The nose has deep and inviting red fruit with still a little ashy oak showing. In the mouth there’s good volume and forward but smooth acidity that continues to sparkle on the finish easily longer than 30 seconds. The tannins are well hidden and like the nose there’s still some oak showing, particularly on the finish. Very good villages but it would be best to wait for another 2 or 3 years for the next bottle.
You are using an outdated browser. Please update your browser to view this website correctly: https://browsehappy.com/;