FEED | SEARCH://

when ‘white wine’ isn’t really the correct descriptor!

old-uns
I love the real, versus the ‘pretend’ fraying on these labels!

It’s certainly not worth giving ‘tasting notes’ to these wines, but they helped me get through 3 days of 18 hours, finishing the last Burgundy Report.

I bought a couple of lots at auction; bottles of 82 Sauzet Puligny (villages) and 1990 Maurice Chapuis Corton-Charlemagne. The two ugliest bottles (darkest colour) from both lots, I decided to open first.

The Sauzet was the colour of sherry and almost had the smell of it too – an initial sip was not positive. I waited 2 hours and, by magic, the oxidative note was only a 10th of the intensity with which it started – the colour remained dark. It actually tasted not bad now and had a nice core of sweetness from the fruit. I drunk the lot over the 3 days – it was completely stable after that initial 2 hour wait. I now look forward to those bottles of lighter colour!

The Chapuis had a very similar colour, a similar nose too. This also improved dramatically after 2 hours exposure to the air – but the level of oxidative flavour remained stronger than for the Sauzet. The wine is less sweet (despite the vintage) and more mineral. In combination with the nose I would describe it (still) as austere – I only managed about one-third of this bottle and I’m not sure if I look forward to the lighter bottles or not(!) anyway no point torturing yourself is there – the typing was enough 😉

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

Translate »
%d bloggers like this: