Golden. The beautifully round nose retains a citrus bite. Medium bodied with a lovely, waxy, satin texture. There’s good length too – for a Bourgogne! Frankly this has a real Grand Cru nose and real density and interest in the mouth, it’s only from the mid-palate onwards that we have a diminuendo rather than a crescendo, but these are very young vines… A wine that could still be cellared and might yet improve but it’s compromised only by the very young vines.
Drunk directly after the 1999 Barthod Bourgogne Rouge. Medium ruby red. The nose is sweet red cherry with just a little extra secondary dimension. I remember that this was quite acidic on release but has padded out beautifully – if anything it’s now just a little fat. There is tasty fruit and a nice finish. Doesn’t have the extra dimension of a good villages, but a very nice wine in it’s own right – there’s no rush to drink these.
I remember my first bottle from this case, on release there was overwhelming sulfur on the nose, I took it back to the merchant as it was completely undrinkable – even 4 hours after opening – this was where I learned about bottle stink, but they still replaced the bottle! This second bottle didn’t start much better, perhaps worse, the sulfur has slowly evolved to hydrosulfite – that means very smelly cabbage. The palate manages to show just a little creamy length, but for me the dominating factor is the sulfur infused edge. Even on day two and despite the nose clearing up a little the palate was the same – perhaps worse as there was even a hint of oxidation. I’ll give this case one more chance this time next year – if it fails I’ll be looking for the merchant to take them back – potentially good wine spoiled by too much sulfur.
A big, heavy bottle. Deep ruby colour with very little fading. Starts with lots of depth but gradually a piercing red fruit note comes through. Fresh palate with really super, slightly creamy but also slightly saccharin length. Doesn’t have the fatness of the 1993 and it also has a slight grain to the tannin. This wine shows great balance and an ever-changing, in fact exciting nose, I’m looking forward perhaps another 3-5 years to a time when, hopefully, the palate will show as much interest as the fantastic nose and lose that slightly confected saccharin finish.
Medium-plus garnet, very little fading. The nose is sweet and meaty with a little ash and dried red fruits – more oak than I remember from the last outing. Muscle without fat, some grain to the tannin but melded to lovely ’96 acidity and again some earthy ash. Intense fruit and a lovely, slowly decaying finish. It might not be top-drawer, but it’s a very worthy Grand Cru.
Medium-plus ruby-red. From 12°C the nose starts deep, dank and woody with a touch of forest floor – much nicer than it sounds! As the wine warms in the glass, the fruit starts to take over, first it’s deep and plummy with hints of roast too. As the wine gets closer to room temperature the fruit gets ever more primary and and pure – beautiful red berry fruit – reminds me of the 99 de Vogüé Amoureuses of last week. The palate has just a little fat but is superbly balanced and beautifully round. There is almost a hidden density to this wine coupled with excellent fine tannin. The finish is very good but not quite a match to the rest. My best Musigny experience and a wine I absolutely don’t regret opening – wine of the year so far.
Medium-plus core of ruby only fading slightly at the rim. The nose starts with a little oak, slowly settling down to a dense red cherry fruit, slightly powdery but little else showing. The palate shows fine tannins that slowly build and very good acidity. Tightly presented, intense fruit, deep but still quite primary. Tasty enough now, but I’m really looking forward to tasting this again in another 3+ years.
Medium, medium-plus colour. The nose is fresh, slightly minty but just a little jammy – raspberry jam. On the palate there’s classic 96 fruit/acidity balance, in this case relatively sweet fruit. Not the depth or concentration of the Castagnier Clos Saint Denis that preceded it but the length is comparable. Anyway, this was a beauty.
You are using an outdated browser. Please update your browser to view this website correctly: https://browsehappy.com/;