[QPR (or the quality versus price paid ratio) is something I consider is often overlooked by the chain of hands that deliver bottles into the market, clearly it’s an important factor for the people at the end of that chain of-course. This diary entry started as a note on a single bottle with a great reputation, but a spiralling (upwards) price-point. It was good, but maybe not THAT good – I was forced to pull out a benchmark to compare…]

I often wonder who buys this Drouhin wine, particularly 2005 vintage onwards, it really is priced very high (for a Beaune 1er), like a Corton-Charlemange and more than most Puligny 1ers. I should occasionally step outside my fiscal comfort-zone to investigate, so here’s the ridiculously priced (90 swiss francs) 2005 version…

2005 Joseph Drouhin, Beaune 1er Clos des Mouches Blanc
Medium, medium-pale yellow colour. The nose is quite forward and displays both width and aromatic depth. Faint butter edges yellow fruit, and there’s a hint of torrefaction at the borders that adds a butterscotch note to the ripe lemon fruit. Very good texture, balance, and with an intensity that keeps growing in the mouth. There’s none of that warm fat that is typical of a Beaune blanc, and there’s a good burst of interest in the mid-palate. The flavours of the finish have a more mineral aspect and is very, very good. Overall, it’s a great package – every sip was savoured.
Rebuy – Yes but the qpr seems poor. Maybe I should pull out an 05 M&M Puligny Caillerets as a benchmark – it was only two-thirds of the price – game on…

2005 Mischief & Mayhem, Puligny-Montrachet 1er Les Caillerets
Medium, medium-pale golden. After the Beaune, the nose is certainly of finer fruit and of similar depth, though less wide. Hints of lanolin and a faint, creamy brioche too. Softer, silkier, just a little narrower on entry, but on super acidity it expands across the palate much more impressively. It’s also very long with a more savoury element than the last bottles. Interestingly, all the constituent parts favour the Puligny tonight, but the ‘team’ performance is not quite as together as the Beaune’s. The Beaune has nothing like the density of the Puligny, and surprisingly seems the more mineral. Day two this is very ‘together’ and the clear leader.
Rebuy – Yes

Overall I’d be very happy to have either/both in the cellar, yet there is only one winner from a qpr perspective, I did , just slightly, prefer the Drouhin on the night – maybe day 2 will be a different story…

[EDIT: Yes my allegiance changes to the Puligny on day two!]

It’s a while since I met up with Marc, so we decided to open a couple of ‘lunchtime’ bottles together.

I started at 7:30am by slowly easing out the cork from a 1972 Domaine du Clos Frantin Grands-Echézeaux – it smelled mighty fine. I popped in a stopper and then left it in a cool place for lunchtime. Marc’s approach was different, but just as effective: the 2005 Bouchard Pere Clos de Bèze was simply popped and poured. 80% of the way through the proceedings Marc suggested an interesting counterpoint – a 2004 Schubert Block B NZ pinot noir from the Wairapara.

1972 Clos Frantin, Grands-Echézeaux
A slightly porty fruit quickly, but not entirely gives way to beef, almonds, width and warmth – impressive and very complex. The acidity just has a hint of balsamic character, so probably best not to leave this for another 30+ years, but there is width and dimension on the perfectly textured mid-palate and it’s very long. This was savoured over about 3+ hours and it never faded. Super.

2005 Bouchard Pere er Fils, Chambertin Clos de Bèze
A precociously forward nose – it hits you before your nose even reaches into the glass. Ignoring the complex, spicy oak character – and there is a lot of it – the core of the nose is a trip through red, down to black fruit, lower down it is a mineral, coal-like effect. Very high quality indeed. Eventually it takes on coffee, chocolate and a subtle creamyness. This is just a little tighter and with less fireworks than last time, it’s lost a little of the buttery texture (a good thing!), but the frame and proportions of the wine are awesome. Perfect balance, mineral, multi-dimensional and long. It’s drinking fine now, but this will be more and more stunning as it develops – what price one of these when it nears its 40th birthday!

2004 Schubert, Block B Pinot Noir
An interesting counterpoint – gorgeously bright and enticing medium cherry-red colour. The nose is the weak part – it offers a lot of grassy, pyrazine type notes – a little coffee slowly adds to the mix. In the mouth this is rather good, particularly when you consider the company it is keeping today, there is density, good intensity of fresh fruit and very fine balance, there’s almost no tannin to find. There isn’t the complexity or length of the previous wines, but there are no ‘holes’. In its own right, this is a super drink.

Rebuy – Yes to all 3!

I already pcked my ‘house white‘ for 2010, but this is close in quality yet with a big advantage – it’s 60% of the cost. Hmm, next year could be tough!

2008 Louis Jadot, Bourgogne Chardonnay
This starts with that faintly sherbet note you often find on wines with less punch from the more marginal villages – think St.Romain. There’s a little faint oak note note that helps fill-out the aromas at the bottom and eventually a much more favourable core of yellow fruit. Above average intensity for the label, very fine acidity – then a surprise – a deep and clear extra dimension of flavour in the mid-palate; a little wood-derived vanilla cream; it’s a warm, Côte de Beaune type of flavour that would still – even at this regional level – distinguish the bottle from, for instance Chablis. The finish is a little more mineral and also holds-on reasonably well. This is very successful indeed.
Rebuy – Yes

There are plenty of reports, predominantly from the US, that Fourrier’s 2001s have their problems – in particular they seem to becoming more and more volatile. Well here’s one that I anyway didn’t like when I first tasted it (way back in 2004). But that bottle was reductive in character, rather than volatile – this (surprisingly), turned out rather nice…

2001 Fourrier, Vougeot 1er Les Petits Vougeots Vieilles Vignes
Medium ruby-red colour, still a hint of cherry-red. There’s a little herb and an undercurrent of red fruit – everything is quite tidy. In the mouth this is barely medium-bodied, very slightly acid-forward (but that’s its age) but smooth overall. A little tight, but not unrewarding. Actually far better than my first bottle of this some years ago…
Rebuy – Yes