In this case there’s a little minerality and musk added to the perfume. Very, very fine tannin plus an extra dimension of flavour in the mid-palate. Broad in the finish with a little cherry-stone.

A similar fruit profile on the nose, augmented with fresh, slightly more floral top-notes. Clearly the mouthfeel has more gras (fat), width and innate complexity. Wide, complex, fresh and very faintly long. There is more than a hint of minerality here too. Additional complexity comes through on the nose with a range of herbs and spices that compliment the fruit. I liked this very much.

Medium colour. Fine and very complex aromatics – very lovely mix of fruit(s) and faint torrefaction. Intense, plenty of velvet tannin and great dimension in the mid-palate. The flavour lingers really well. I seem to ‘click’ with this in most vintages, and frankly, this is almost worth the price of entry, even at 185 swiss francs!

High-toned, complex and delicate aromatics – quite engaging. More concentration and tannin than the ‘villages’, but there’s really and extra dimension of flavour in the mid-palate. Excellent, but also overpriced.

Medium-plus ruby-red colour – right to the rim. The nose starts dense, very tight and quite deep. Time reduces the depth and gives this a wider and redder complexion, though more patience – about 2 hours from opening – and it’s has a coffee aspect coming through and certainly a finer aspect. The palate is also rather dense, quite fat and very well textured, it’s also very, very long, but that length is heavily oak-driven, slightly bitter and not so nice. Two hours in the glass does nothing to improve the finish, nor impart some complexity. My summary (so far) is drunk too young and currently showing too much oak on the finish.

Similar in colour to the 2001 villages Chambolle. The fruit shows a much deeper aspect on the nose and still a trace of oak. The palate also offers a step-up in density vs the villages and an extra creamy edge to the beautifully presented fruit. To match, there’s a little extra structure with more forward tannins. Not so lacy but certainly more serious. Very good wine, one day.

Just a little darker than the 2000 villages Chambolle. The nose is deeper, but significantly tighter. In the mouth, instantly lacier and spicier with an immense step-up in complexity – high-toned fruits invade the back of the palate. Late tannin grab with a really impressive length – I’d buy this in a shot.

I’ve had two bottles of this wine from one source before, and on both occasions there’s been a rather muddy, indeed soupy aspect to the wine – disappointing would be a fair descriptor – particularly when factoring in the price. This wine, direct from the domain, is completely different. For a start it’s much fresher and does without the cooked plummy-fruit aspects of the previous wines. There’s not the purity and focus of the ’93 village Chambolle but neither is this an archetypal 1997 as it still offers good freshness. It’s nice, complex and shows some density. It’s an interesting and good wine, but possibly the weakest of all these wines, at least in terms how they all perform within their respective categories.

Medium ruby with just a little amber. The nose is relatively young showing with slightly baked fruit – not much complexity, though given time you do find a pure red cherry note pushing through. The palate is rich and dense with primary fruit, plenty of velvetty tannin and almost good acidity. No fireworks on the finish but there’s a subtle length. Good, but at this stage quite primary and not showing good value – we’ll see!