FEED | SEARCH://
               Why Big Red Diary?

lafarge 2006 passetoutgrains l’exception

lafarge-passetoutgrains-exception-2006

Hmm, despite Claude underlying that Passetoutgrains (historically) should be kept a couple of years before approaching, I wouldn’t recommend it here. The 2009 version of this is jaw-droppingly gorgeous and I would drink it today without hesitation and equally feel confident that it has the quality to age – though probably retaining the perspective ‘but why bother waiting?!’* This, however, (and rather disappointingly!) really should have been drunk a bit younger.

2006 Lafarge, Bourgogne Passetoutgrains l’Exception
Medium-plus colour. The nose is fresh, slightly floral though bordering on a little volatile – but they are alcoholic tones rather than esters. In the mouth – wow – that’s dangerously close to ‘shrill’ – and that comes from a self-confessed acid-o-phile! The tannins are not totally sophisticated unlike the fruit that seems very high quality indeed. Despite looking askance with each sip, I have to say the bottle was easily drained so this wine is certainly not a total loss. The overall package is a let-down, and unless you are talking 20-years-plus, I don’t really see the acidity becomng seamless.
Rebuy – No

My wife gave me a dirty look when she tasted this one – I simply said it was ‘cheap’ – which dear reader, we know is not a word to really associate with Lafarge (I must have been talking generically about the appellation!). Her response after finding out that it was ‘a Burgundy’, was along the lines “well if you are going to buy cheap, why don’t you buy ‘proper’ cheap…!

*I see Berry Bros are listing the 09 as an en-primeur wine – at £10 each in bond – that’s not too bad I think, even if I wouldn’t want to save it…

4 responses to “lafarge 2006 passetoutgrains l’exception”

  1. Claude Kolm

    Actually, Bill, the “certainly true back then” comment you link to was meant to refer to the judgment that only in exceptional circumstances did BPT offer any value. Even so, the other part of the sentence said that BPT was better in its second year, not its fifth, which is what you were drinking. BTW, what was the temperature that you were drinking it at?

  2. Claude Kolm

    Bill — Lafarge treats his BPT differently from other producers that I am familiar with. Most bottle it very early (e.g., Bruno Clavelier’s is always in bottle when I visit the October or November of the year following the vintage), and I am sure that was even more the case back when the book was written. My comment that you link to was made without any consideration of Lafarge’s wine and of course was made in the context of BPT as it generally existed back then. In short, the comment was irrelevant to your experience.

  3. Tom Blach

    06 is not 99, but the 99 is certainly much more delicious now than it was in 2001.

Agree? Disagree? Anything you'd like to add?