FEED | SEARCH://
               Why Big Red Diary?
VintageDomaineWineCru
Reset
17 notes
2004 Mugneret Dr Georges, Gevrey-ChambertinApr. 2008
Medium, medium-plus colour. The nose starts with a waft of dark oak that is slowly replaced by cedar. It’s a short peak of green that slowly, but never completely subsides, filling out with soft, ripe and creamy fruits with fainter brûlée. The palate is well-textured, ripe and sweet. Initially the acidity is a little prickly – carbon dioxide probably as it fades and smooths. The finish is a very good one, again edged with cream. The green element has faded to the extent that it is no longer part of the flavour profile. I’m more confident now for the future – perhaps the next in 3 or 4 years…
2005 Mugneret Dr Georges, Gevrey-ChambertinApr. 2008
Deeper colour than the 2004. The nose more reticent but is deeper and with darker black-shaded fruits against a faintly sweet spicy gingerbread background. Starts narrow but really widens on the palate with inky, palate staining concentration. It’s rather mineral but very impressive – the structure is completely buried. An absolute home-run for this wine in 2005 – and it will need at least 10 years in the cellar – did I leave it too late for more bottles?
2004 Mugneret Dr Georges, Gevrey-ChambertinApr. 2007
This wine is lighter in colour than the domaine’s 2004 Vosne (that preceded it) – medium, medium-plus cherry-red. The nose is a little more reticent, slowly building a musky density with a mineral/cedar background, eventually some very smooth red fruit. The palate is also very smooth – you slip in almost un-noticed – the acidity is just about perfect, only slowly making your mouth water for more. Work the wine around on the palate and you notice the cedar/mineral element again and also there’s a little-tannin ‘grab’, otherwise they remain very well hidden. There’s a nice expansion in the mid-palate and a very understated but perceptible length. Today there is little about this wine that says it’s better than the slightly cheaper Vosne, and certainly it doesn’t show the same potential the 2002 did at this stage. Well made, and though that cedar thing is going on, it’s probably still a rebuy, but for (at least) the next two years or-so, I would reach for the Vosne in preference.
2004 Mugneret Dr Georges, Vosne-RomanéeApr. 2007
Quite a deep cherry-red colour. Right from opening this has a deep, forward nose that begs further sniffing; concentrated red and black cherry with just a powdery edge and an undercurrent of spice in a cinnamon/clove type of way. The palate is well-textured, concentrated and (for a village) very concentrated. The acidity is fresh but not racy and there are fine, well-covered tannins. Understated length finishes a complete village wine. Not even a hint of green – Excellent. Even on day two this has held together perfectly.
2004 Mugneret Dr Georges, Nuits St.Georges Les ChaignotsApr. 2007
Darker than the Gevrey that preceded it, and a shade lighter than the Vosne that preceded that. The nose is deep and dark, initially just a little monolithic, slowly it gives a peek of black cherry, cream, and faint coffee mixed with smoke. Seems to fill the mouth and has a super intensity to the mid-palate. Powerful and mouthwatering this shows a higher level of tannin than the Gevrey and it’s perceptibly grainier too – though certainly not misbehaved – it’s very well covered. The finish is longer with an edge of cream to the fine burst fruit. A super NSG.
2001 Mugneret Dr Georges, Nuits St.Georges Les ChaignotsDec. 2006
Medium-plus colour. Drunk directly after the l’Arlot Nuits (Les Fôrets); the nose is instantly more concentrated and fruit driven, edged with a Vosne-like spicyness. Again the palate is more fruit-driven and shows a higher level of tannins, but they are finer cut. A good finish too. Despite sharing a Nuits 1er cru label, this is a totally different wine to the l’Arlot, each will have their own followers. Today I would choose the aromatics of the l’Arlot and the palate of the Mugneret!
2001 Mugneret Dr Georges, Nuits St.Georges Les ChaignotsDec. 2006
Medium-plus colour. Drunk directly after the l’Arlot Nuits (Les Fôrets); the nose is instantly more concentrated and fruit driven, edged with a Vosne-like spicyness. Again the palate is more fruit-driven and shows a higher level of tannins, but they are finer cut. A good finish too. Despite sharing a Nuits 1er cru label, this is a totally different wine to the l’Arlot, each will have their own followers. Today I would choose the aromatics of the l’Arlot and the palate of the Mugneret!
2001 Mugneret Dr Georges, Nuits St.Georges Les ChaignotsSep. 2006
Medium-plus colour. Drunk directly after the l’Arlot Nuits (Les Fôrets); the nose is instantly more concentrated and fruit driven, edged with a Vosne-like spicyness. Again the palate is more fruit-driven and shows a higher level of tannins, but they are finer cut. A good finish too. Despite sharing a Nuits 1er cru label, this is a totally different wine to the l’Arlot, each will have their own followers. Today I would choose the aromatics of the l’Arlot and the palate of the Mugneret!
2003 Mugneret Dr Georges, Gevrey-ChambertinJul. 2006
I was very taken with this wine from 2002 – young vines Ruchottes-Chambertin – this, a little less so. The colour is quite deep with a little purple at the rim. The nose is very 2003 with ripe and deep fruit notes that eventually sharpen and darken – very faint coffee overtones too. The texture is almost good – with reasonable balance and, of-course, concentration. Not the very interesting length and complexity of its brother from 02, but its also a very primary showing. Quite a good 03 but I’d certainly buy the 02 in preference.
Translate »