Medium-plus colour. Just seems a little cleaner and sweeter than the ‘89 and no surmaturité, though it’s quite dense. The palate also has quite some density, indeed it seems rather monolithic – long but quite primary. There’s plenty of tannin if you look for it. Over about 45 minutes in the glass I never felt that there was a moment where the wine blossomed, the nose remaining finer than the palate. Given the density and relatively primary aspect I would suggest waiting another 3+ years before revisiting.
Méo-Camuzet
1994 Méo-Camuzet Richebourg
Medium colour. The nose is understated but very wide, interesting and clean. The palate is fresh, actually a little racy and mineral with delicate red fruit and a lovely, impressive – yet suble finish. It never comes close to the concentration of the 1990 Chaumes, but it is complex, delicate and lovely with a finish that lingers and lingers. It’s hardly a performance you would expect from Richebourg, but it’s a lovely wine ready for plucking!
1995 Méo-Camuzet Nuits St.Georges Aux Murgers
(From Magnum) Medium-plus ruby-red. A dense and intense nose of meat, earth, blood and eventually red fruit – some of the effect is wood-driven, but it’s impressive all the same. Well-balanced palate of good acidity and relatively good texture for a ‘95 – the tannin is well-controlled. This is a very young wine that was never embarassed for density vs Dujac’s Clos de la Roche though by comparison was missing both complexity and a little length. A very young wine that definitely surprised on the ‘upside’.
2001 Méo-Camuzet Vosne-Romanée
Medium-plus ruby-red. The nose is wide but dominated by toasty oak – even after one hour this ‘mask’ hardly lifts, just a little mocha aroma develops. The palate has nice, soft texture and gives the impression of width – nicely detailed and quite complex, though doesn’t have the intensity of fruit of the Bichot that preceded it. Lovely acidity, slightly grainy tannin and excellent balance. I’m not the greatest fan of this style of aromatics, but this wine has a beguiling, if lightweight understatement. Stylisticly very different to the Bichot – which I slightly prefer – but equally worthy of cellar space; I’d be happy with a 3:2 Bichot:Méo mix.
2000 Méo-Camuzet Bourgogne Hautes Côtes de Nuits Clos St. Philibert
2002 Méo-Camuzet Bourgogne Hautes Côtes de Nuits Clos St. Philibert
The subdued nose starts with a waxy melon note with a faint citrus edge and proceeds to offer a deeper honey note that gains strength with time. Dry, good/good-plus length. Not fat, but rather slender and elegant is a good description. Lovely acidity. Though not overtly fruity, this wine shows a very pleasing (to my palate) crisply mineral style.
2001 Méo-Camuzet Bourgogne Hautes Côtes de Nuits Clos St. Philibert
Deeper yellow colour vs 2002. The nose is more developed, slightly nutty but retains the melon, citrus and honey of 2002. The acidity seems a little more pronounced on first tasting, but I decided it was actually a little lower acidity than 2002 – just less integrated. Again an elegant rather than fat style which has a little more length than the younger wine. For the four tasters on first tasting, this was the least favourite of the six wines. Overnight in the fridge showed a marked improvement with everyone enjoying on day two.
2000 Méo-Camuzet Bourgogne Hautes Côtes de Nuits Clos St. Philibert
1999 Méo-Camuzet Bourgogne Hautes Côtes de Nuits Clos St. Philibert
Pale gold. The nose is the first that offers an oaky note, some pepper too. A little fat – in the manner of 2000 but longer than that wine. Only slowly does the nose start to develop in a similar way to the other wines. Dense mid-palate fruit in a Meursault vein. I think that there could have been a little better integration of this mid-palate with the finish, but it’s a very good wine all the same.