Pale bright cherry red, with a broad paler rim showing pinkish still. Bright but slight, spicy cherry, nose. Fresh youthful and rustic, it makes me think of rolling in hay. Mouth entry is pure and sweet, but very small. Nice flavours – very fresh red fruit and spicy, bubblegummy, earth. The mid-palate shows good acidity and grip but no real size, and then it ends. Not quite clipped, but certainly short, though in a way that leaves you wanting more, rather than dissatisfied. Not a serious wine, but just the ticket for a picnic or a roll in the hay.
2006
2006 Clerget Christian Chambolle-Musigny
Medium, medium-plus colour, yet relatively deep for a villages Chambolle. Soft, but well-defined red fruit over a denser base – there’s a faint caramel edge that disappears as the wine warms in glass, some focus is also lost. Interesting; there’s a dense, concentrated, rather extracted core to the wine which has the merest trace of bitterness that makes the acidity seem a little bright – yet is mineral too. There is good texture from very faintly astringent but finely grained tannin. Relatively long finishing with an extra depth an dimension that normally indicates 1er cru juice. It’s not yet perfectly balanced, but it has plenty of character – keep it cool and it’s a winner!
2006 Ravaut Gaston et Pierre Ladoix Carrières
Medium, medium-plus colour. The nose soars with beautiful raspberry and blackberry notes – it’s a peach – or maybe that’s confusing! There is some sweetness of fruit, nice texture and a significant length, but to be honest after a number of successful vintages in my cellar, this one is rather ‘acid rich’ – and that’s before it loses its puppy fat! The tannin has the faintest astringency, but nothing amiss there. I easily managed to find something to enjoy here, but other bottles might be a challenge in middle years…
2006 Bichot Albert Beaune Les Champs Pimont
Medium cherry-red. High-toned perfume of crunchy cherry-fruit eventually a little creamy oak. There is good width and an edge of fat to the texture too. A creamy vanilla-oak barrel note runs through the core of this and into the mid-palate. Medium, slightly peppery tannin and a good length. For my taste this needs a little cellar time to both round out and to reduce the barrel flavour, but it’s ripe, sweet and tasty already today, and was a very good price.
2006 Bouchard Père et Fils Volnay Caillerets Ancienne Cuvée Carnot
The nose shows a width of creamy red fruit and perhaps has a rose-petal dimension too – really very pretty. Plenty of concentration, the tannin is slightly forward but of velvet texture. A good additional fruit dimension in the mid-palate with understated but balancing acidity. The flavour of the finish remains very barrel-influenced today, but is very long. Will be super.
2006 Bouchard Père et Fils Monthelie Les Champs Fulliot
This is a ‘domaine’ wine. Medium-plus cherry-red colour. There’s width and interest on this perfumed, high-toned nose – very pretty indeed, almost in a Volnay style. The texture has a slightly gravelly tannin as its base, but the balance is very, very good. There’s some faint licorice flavours in the finish from what is otherwise a red-fruit dominated performance. Oh and it’s quite a good finish too.
2006 Lignier Lucie et Auguste Clos de la Roche
A side-by-side comparison – neither holds all the aces. The L et A Lignier, though offering slightly less colour, is a clear winner in the aroma department – just a gorgeous expression of complex fruit – the Lignier-Michelot is good, but really can’t compete. Over the tongue, mirroring the extra colour, the Lignier-Michelot is a little more extracted and offers more ‘up-front’ oomph, from there-on it’s a long slow diminuendo. The L et A offers a different recipe; narrower on entry, bursting with mid-plate dimension and shows more length. No bad wines here, each offers a balanced performance and I’d certainly buy both again, but the relative proportions today would clearly be in favour of Lucie and Auguste’s bottle.
2006 Lignier-Michelot Clos de la Roche
A side-by-side comparison – neither holds all the aces. The L et A Lignier, though offering slightly less colour, is a clear winner in the aroma department – just a gorgeous expression of complex fruit – the Lignier-Michelot is good, but really can’t compete. Over the tongue, mirroring the extra colour, the Lignier-Michelot is a little more extracted and offers more ‘up-front’ oomph, from there-on it’s a long slow diminuendo. The L et A offers a different recipe; narrower on entry, bursting with mid-plate dimension and shows more length. No bad wines here, each offers a balanced performance and I’d certainly buy both again, but the relative proportions today would clearly be in favour of Lucie and Auguste’s bottle.