I’m not sure that Mr Clerc made this wine (Girardin?) I think the labels were actually kept for repeat buyers in the French restaurant trade. Quite pale colour. The nose is penetrating without being forceful – very nice. I find the palate quite oaky but the length isn’t in doubt. After the Truffière Charlemagne, this wine is a little light or could be lacy – you can choose your own descriptor. Evidently a very good wine, but doesn’t do enough for me to justify the price.
Medium colour. The nose is very red, raspberry and strawberry/cherry. Super acidity and very well mannered tannins. The fruit has intensity and length, the main impression is a wine that’s fresh and mineral rather than fat. Absolutely nothing rough about this wine, but could certainly do with a few years in the cellar to take on a little extra charm. Good wine.
Medium, medium-plus cherry red in colour. The nose is of crushed cherry and raspberries that overlay a faintly spicy, subtle coffee-bean base. The tannin seems to show a little more grip than the last tasting, but frankly (despite chewing on bread for the last ten minutes) I keep getting ‘Montrachet-flashbacks’ as I taste. The spicy palate is silken with excellent acidity and a tinge of oak on the finish that’s reminiscent of the Montrachet – unless that’s still the Montrachet! Clearly a pure and distinguished wine, but doesn’t show that joie de vivre that was so evident in January.
Medium, medium-plus colour. The nose shows in a more restrained way than January – a little powdery at first – slowly becoming vanilla-tinged red fruit with a shade of pepper. The palate is a model of understated power, well covered, finely grained tannins. The nose is now starting to unlock a little, still mainly red berries, but we’ve moved up a gear. A real smoothie and whilst obviously outstanding it’s not such a stand-out as the last tasting.
Medium, medium-plus colour. Again like the Malconsorts a very cold bottle that also takes some time to come round. The nose whilst reticent starts with a little oak that slowly fades to reveal a classic, slightly floral RSV of many dimensions. Warm it in the mouth and you start to see a little action, tightly wound concentration and beautifully covered structure. This was a wine that continued to improve over a long period of time. Another wine to wait for, but it will surely be excellent.
Unlike London, the bottles here consistently showed no ruby tones – virtually the same shade of medium, medium-plus cherry red as the other wines. Versus La Tâche there’s more obvious spice that goes together with a melange of red and black fruits. Given time in the glass there’s a higher-toned floral aspect. Sweet, concentrated palate that is a little understated, but continues to understate itself for over a minute on the finish! Slowly evolves a cedary aspect to the finish.
Medium, medium-plus cherry red colour. The nose is a little less extrovert than the Échézeaux. It starts with powdery red fruit – no raspberry – but moves on to give a deeper and sweeter black cherry aspect coupled with a little earth. The palate gives the impression of more density and a blacker tone to the fruit. The acidity is first class and that tannins show a velvet touch. On the finish this shows less like the Montrachet/Échézeaux with pure fruit lingering well. Whilst still a backward wine, this shows much better than in January and you can easily see that although it is a little less ‘flashy’ than the Échézeaux, it also has more potential.
Once more medium, medium-plus colour. The nose is surprisingly subdued, powdery red fruits, but after 15 minutes still didn’t get going. On the palate reminiscent of how the Romanée Conti showed in London, understated but very pure. Despite wonderful depth, very reserved indeed. No La Tâche fireworks this time, but impeccably balanced and very long.
You are using an outdated browser. Please update your browser to view this website correctly: https://browsehappy.com/;