Why Big Red Diary?
91 notes


1982 Duchet, Corton-CharlemagneJan. 2012
Deep golden hue. The nose started as an old (but correct) white does; interesting, a little diffuse but nuts an d a faint impression there may be some oxidation. In minutes it comes together, delivers more focus and adds a little caramel, some struck-match too. In the mouth, this is less sweet than the nose suggests – you even have the impression that there is a hint of tannic astringency. Quite long flavours and even a little more flavour development in the mid-palate. Certainly this is interesting and even a little rewarding but it will never be cosseting, nor ever was (probably) ‘great’.
2008 Dubreuil-Fontaine, Corton-CharlemagneApr. 2011
Thirty percent new oak here. The nose offers-up understated complexity. Not surprisingly this is both fuller and more intense than the 1er Cru. I find it very well proportioned indeed.
2009 Maume, Corton-CharlemagneMar. 2011
The nose is wide and quite interesting. In the mouth there’s both power and minerality.
2005 Bize Simon, Corton-CharlemagneJan. 2011
Deep, dense aromas – lack a big bag of children’s sweets. Full, round, very silky. A lovely mid-palate ‘growth’ of flavour. Just at the moment I’d look for the impression of a bit more freshness (I’m the same with most 05s), but maybe that will come as the density delineates. Clearly a wine to wait for.
1998 Guyon Antonin (Hyppolite Thevenot), Corton-CharlemagneDec. 2010
Deep colour. One sniff of the nose and I’m smiling; there are the lanolin aromas of an even older wine, and perhaps the merest suggestion of something oxidativebut it’s an interesting complexity – no more – so no complaints. Good acidity and nice intensity too – actually the flavour is very long too. There isn’t the seemless, smooth-ness of a very good vintage but this is a very nice drink. I don’t recommend the odds of taking a replacement bottle, but I’ll happily accept what this one offers.
2003 Bonneau du Martray, Corton-CharlemagneDec. 2010
A ripe but still quite mineral nose. Full on the palate – clearly there’s no raging torrent of acidity but this is nicely mouth-watering – and not just as an afterthought. There is density and real authority to the mid-palate flavours, would make a great match to many dishhes at table. This has no sharp edges at all – this balance indicates no rush to drink.
2002 Bonneau du Martray, Corton-CharlemagneDec. 2010
Wide and fresh aromatics with just a hint of herbs. There is lovely width, intensity and energy too – quite a silky texture. There is super mid-palate flavour. Yum.
2001 Bonneau du Martray, Corton-CharlemagneDec. 2010
The nose is wide and populated with seemingly ‘soft aromas’. Again, in the mouth there is width and certainly a softer packaging than the 2002 vintage. The acidity is the undercurrent that brings this together as a whole.
2000 Bonneau du Martray, Corton-CharlemagneDec. 2010
The first whiff is of an oak-based toasty bread, below is a very faint baked citrus note. Very mineral, very lovely width, and even a hint of plush-ness. There is a good mid-palate intensity that intersperses lots of complexity – a faint creamy brûlée lingers in the mouth, and for quite some time. Very good length and complexity, yet, an understated, underdeveloped wine. It is possible to get more enjoyment from a bourgogne today, but with much less to contemplate. The potential for excellent if it avoids too many radicals…
Translate »