“Just!”

Of-course it was something of a week of spoiling ourselves – almost exclusively in the company of Marko de Morey and his wife, celebrating his 60th birthday. I’m not the biggest fan of conspicuous ‘trophy bottle’ pictures, but they are made to be drunk – and drunk they were 🙂
 

The 1990 Veuve-Cliquot was a much more oxidised style than is my preference, but was fresh and certainly complex, though for me personally, I stop short of saying ‘yum!’ The 2002 Albert Grivault Meursault Clos des Perrières followed, and that was a wine in great shape – a hint fat but layered complexity and super length. A really excellent bottle, and – yum! Then there was the 1993 Domaine Faiveley, Mazis-Chambertin, A surprisingly supple and easy wine – considering that it was a) 1993, b) Mazis-Chambertin and c) Faiveley that we were drinking, it was amazingly unstructured grand cru wine. The cork was almost completely soaked through with wine – perhaps this was the reason. Nice wine, but nothing of a), b) and c)…

Our second sitting began with the Taittinger, already a few years from release, and this was very tasty wine indeed. There followed our major disappointment – dark brown and totally oxidised 2001 Lafon, Meursault-Perrières – totally undrinkable – and before anyone asks, it was bought on release and removed from professional storage only 2 weeks before opening. The 2003 René Engel, Echézeaux was, however, very drinkable indeed – full, warm, not much tannin to speak of – a lush, ripe, opulent wine that shows the vintage far more than the domaine’s Grands Echézeaux of the same vintage. Lunch the next day allowed also the 2011 Clos Frantin, Vosne-Romanée Malconsorts – rather modest of nose but it rolls over the palate with ever-wider flavour and fine interest – a really good wine.

Our last sitting, and our ‘piece de resistance‘ began with 2001 Pierre Morey, Bâtard-Montrachet. If Marko had any trepidation following the performance of our last 2001, he didn’t show it – and neither did the wine! It’s still a very toasty-oaked nose and still with a trace of reduction – presumably the oak contributing to the dark colour, but there was clearly no oxidative aromas or flavours. The palate started great and just kept getting better – despite the oak, Super wine. and I’d say still a youngster. the 2007 Pierre-Yves Colin-Mory, Puligny-Champs Gains was light coloured, super fresh and beautifully penetrating. Perfect, young 2007 – I love 2007s when they are like this! PYCM was followed by the 1998 Roumier, Bonnes-Mares – simply a magical wine and probably the best I have drunk this year. The nose was dark-fruited, precise and with more than a hint of graphite-style minerality. In the mouth it was fresh, darkly-fruited wine of rare clarity and energy – simply fabulous. It was almost embarrassing how quickly the 4 of us drained the bottle! To finish, Jean-Nicolas’s 1998 Méo-Camuzet, Vosne-Cros Parantoux was a super drink, but one that struggled to hold its head high after the Bonnes-Mares; the nose was faintly lactic/bretty. The palate was much redder-fruited, riper-fruited, and whilst it had a very nice complexity in isolation, when paired with the BM, it seemed broad-brush and couldn’t begin to compare to the thrilling clarity of that wine. Probably we should have taken them in the reverse order – and yes, it was also bought on release and kept in storage like the Meursault-Perrières and Bonnes-Mares – but hey! I’m still not complaining 🙂

My first tasting in the post-Trump era was chez @gdangerville – I am now imbued with hope for the future…

— 🅱️ill nanson (@billnanson) November 9, 2016

Two from 2002 – first up – a little Romanée-Saint-Vivant:

The Domaine Charles Thomas (sometimes Thomas-Moillard) vines in RSV are now, of-course, exploited by Dujac – probably the style from here is now a little different!

This RSV is actually a big wine; clean and with good aromatic and flavour freshness, yet is dense and currently a little tight. The nose is clean and actually very pretty but you have to work to coax out the notes – that said it implies quite some mass – a silky mass too. The palate is similar; big, very silky and with a very impressive density and weight though nothing to tire the palate. It’s generally a tight but silky wine with lots of underlying material – modestly playing with the palate – I wish I had more of this than the ‘mountain of 1999’ that I have in storage – or maybe one day that will come round too… Still, this was a very enjoyable wine, indeed.

The Hudelot-Noellat Suchots, also 2002, has an exciting, open nose of sous-bois, spice and a modest fruit too – more engaging and exciting than the RSV, if ‘thinner.’ The palate comparison has a similar result – this is ‘thinner’ – but with energy and lots of engaging flavour – a super wine and easily the more interesting wine of these two, at least to drink today. In terms of apparent concentration, though, this pales when compared directly to the RSV – even a Charles Thomas RSV – the 1er vs grand cru levels are very obvious.

Two wines that were very much enjoyed and I would happily buy again – at the old prices!

A tasty set this weekend, and without being too flashy 😉

The 2011 Puligny from Au Pied de Mont Chauve (Picard) was right on the money, layered but fresh and intense – it drank perfectly over 2 days. The 2010 villages Nuits of Clavelier is tighter than it was 3 years ago, but then opens out very well in the finish – nicely complex and very testy – yum! The 1999 villages Nuits from Potel seems a wine for the ages – always open, always with a bubbling undertow of complexity – it’s currently terrific, but then it always has been! The Seppi Landmann riesling worked perfectly with fondue – what do you expect? 😉 Lastly there was the 2002 Auxey-Duresses 1er Les Grands Charmes from Henri Latour – this smelled gorgeous and silky. The acidity is a little higher than the last two from Nuits, but not enough to complain about. Just a compelling ‘ordinary wine’ or at least if price is your only judge. Also yum!

Sunday a walk through the woods with coffee at the end…
 

Believe it or not, on Sunday, there was no wine…

But Saturday allowed me to finish the 2002 Engel and the 2001 Clos de Tart, plus open the de Vogüé and the Mugnier. The Engel held up perfectly (stoppered and left at about 15°C overnight), and the Clos de Tart was just a little more yielding than on Friday – a beautiful wine but one for the ages – don’t return for at least 5 years! The Musigny was simply gorgeous, showing big aromas but given its sweetness of fruit and the lack of any hard edges, you might think a great 97 rather than a 98. The Mugnier was simply a great wine – for many years the Fuées has been my favourite wine from this domaine – and this 2005 did nothing to change that thought. You probably all know that I consider the epicentre of 2005’s outrageous quality to be Chambolle – and this wine certainly exudes greatness. The Engel is so different and ethereal, I can’t begin to compare it to the density of the 2005, but this Fuées bested the 98 Musigny, despite me savouring every drop of that 98!

Why not a run of vintages? 2010 to 2007…

The 2010 Rebourgeon-Mure, Pommard 1er Clos des Charmois was a very tasty wine, with all the delicacy and elegance that 2010 offers, yet it was a little subdued – at least vs others from the vintage at this producer. Tasty enough though.

The 2009 Chandon de Brialles, Pernand-Vergelesses 1er Ile des Vergelesses, hinted to the nose of the 09 Ramonet a couple of days earlier, ripe but, in this case, with only a suggestion of alcohol. The palate unfurls in a classy way and with super texture too. A very tasty baby this wine – very tasty!

The 2008 Paul Pillot, Chassagne-Montrachet Vieilles-Vignes (red!) started out a bit spiky – almost a hint sour in the mouth – both me and my partner thought so (lunch), yet in the evening it was much more balanced and tasty. Our palates or oxygenation? Still a good, workmanlike, bottle – just not a great bottle.

The 2007 Fourrier Morey St.Denis Clos Solon Vieilles-Vignes, frankly, performed like it always does; supple, nicely textured wine with layers of flavour. Not even a hint of anything complicated about this vintage chez Fourrier – at least with this wine. Really super – as usual!

These two wines have really changed their drinking positions in the time since their respective releases.

At the start, the 2009 was simply delicious; open, caressing and tasty as any Bourgogne has the right to be. To amplify that point, this may already be the last bottle of my case. By comparison, the 2010 was far from friendly as a youngster, having acidity in the ascendency and a seemingly sharp personality to match.

Today the 2009 is ripe and round, but the nose is less attractive with an impression of alcohol – still a gulpable wine, but lacking a certain class. The 2010 has transformed; it is still fresh, but balanced, interesting, and above all begs you to take the next sip – I honestly regret that I only bought 6 of these – which wasn’t my opinion 4+ years ago…

 Or rather, some malcontent vosnes, already gone to the dogs…

My last night in Beaune after our harvest was a meet-up with Marko de Morey, who had also finished his harvest.

A simple night with a trio of Vosnes, a big baguette, and a fresh Brillat-Savarin – what could go wrong?

Well, wine #1 was the 1998 Thomas-Moillard, Vosne 1er Malconsorts, and it stunk of brett – the nose said to both of us – DNPIM (do not put in mouth) – so having two more bottles, we didn’t!

Wine #2 is a favourite of mine, the 1999 Gilles Remoriquet, Vosne 1er Au Dessu des Malconsorts – pff! Totally corked!

Wine #3, could we make it 3 disasters in a row? or would, Nicolas come to the rescue? The 2002 Nicolas Potel, Vosne 1er Malconsorts had a rather understated but clean nose, and a welcoming and complex palate, a palate that seemed to slowly, slowly, get better and better – not full-power, but very tasty indeed – so we didn’t need cry into our last glasses!