Finally a Musarathon was arranged in Finland, so of course I had to attend - it has been almost a year since my last Musarathon so it was high time for one more. These were decanted c.6 hours before the tasting started.
Chateau Musar Blanc 2005 - This was a lovely but very young example of white Musar. It starts out quite savoury in style with citrus fruit aromas. But it fleshes out with air and becomes typically waxy, honeyed and floral. White Musar isn’t really a high-acid wine but this year seems to have a nice relative lightness to it and a slightly higher acidity than usual. I must find more. 2003 - Oxidized. More so than it should be. Apparently some signs of seepage. The palate is more alive than the scent, but still, it is only a shadow of what it should be. 1999 - Lovely oxidative style, honeyed and waxy; rich, almost oily palate, though with a nice kick of acidity on the finish. Though rich, it is also lively and refreshing rather than cloying. Great stuff, but still young.
Chateau Musar Rosé 2008 - A painfully young rosé: it smells of watermelon. It is nicely structured and I think it will turn out really nice with a few more years. 2006 - An earthy style of Musar rosé; nice richness but that is countered by tannic grip. Nice! 2004 - Again a watermelon aroma; rich but racy, classic rosé. Nice!
Chateau Musar Rouge 2005 - A strange Musar in that the Cabernet lift is obvious! Usually I don’t notice any one grape dominating the aroma, but here there is an almost minty freshness to the aroma. Wonderful palate, relatively high acid, wonderful sunny fruit, interminable finish. It’s not a funky wine for Musar, but it is lovely. 2004 - A curiously tame bottle: sweet and ripe and sunny fruit but lacking all the nasty goodies that Musar is known for; lively despite the rich fruit. Tame, but I still liked it. 2003 - Now here we have a classic Musar in all its funky glory: I needed to glance at my shoes to see if I had stepped in something canine. I hadn’t. Lovely stuff. 2002 - The long decanted bottle was somehow off. Most didn’t think it corked, but it was obviously not what it should have been. The replacement, undecanted, was another tame and clean smelling Musar but had real bite and intensity on the palate. Great stuff though it desperately needed air (and, of course, age). 2001 - Great showing of this vintage: nice smelly aromas; rich, ripe and deliciously acidic; interminable. Classic style. 2000 - Aromatically and on the palate very similar to the 2001 except just not as good or intense. The 2001’s little brother. 1999 - Corked. 1998 - Quite a bit like the 2000 in being a relatively weak wine but still showing all the classic Musar qualities. 1997 - Corked. 1989 - Absolutely magnificent: good, classic dirtiness coupled with breathtaking, crunchy but sunny fruit. Wonderful intensity and length. Still young.
Wow! I’ve had scant few Musars. An '04 Blanc that it took me awhile to get my head wrapped around, and a '99 Rouge that was lovely (sorry to see that the '99 from your event was corked). A wine I’d like to learn more about, and the tasting you’ve documented looks like a dream venue for that. Thanks for the notes!
There is a lot of variation, both from bottle to bottle, from vintage to vintage, and from one taster’s perception to the next. It also depends a lot on how long a bottle is open. I can’t think of any wine that transforms so dramatically over the span of a day being open as Musar – sometimes it’s like you just tried three or four different wines before the bottle is done.
But when you get good bottles, and if you have an adventurous palate, few wines out there have as much personality and soul as Musar.
Mark, not an annual event but one to be arranged as often as possible! Funny you mentioned the '95 - it was impressive when young, but my recent experiences have been that it’s in a very grumpy stage. I was actually glad it wasn’t on show!
Jim, that’s a good start! The red 99 is great; the whites however are difficult for most, so I’m glad you did manage to wrap your head around it! Next what you should do is find a properly aged one, '89 or older.
K john, I’d describe them as generally deliciously funky instead of as brett bombs. I don’t think I’ve yet had a Musar that I thought was too bretty - though naturally tolerances will vary.
I had a glass of the 2006 Rouge, which apparently was a late release, the other day and it was very nice. It didn’t seem to have the funk/complexity/cinammon/spice bouquet nose yet, but a lovely palate. I think its 14% abv, but I could be disremembering. The store didn’t actually have any to sell though, it was just a bottle dropped off by their distributor for them to gauge their interest, so I left with a 2009.
The way Musar releases their wines into the market, like so many things they do, is strange to me.
Hi Arv
Yes the 2006 was being held back, with many of us expecting it might never be released. Seems to be selling at a premium over here, perhaps the volumes are more limited.
Hi Otto
Yes, you could hardly miss that event could you! Good to see Rose and Blanc represented, and I picked up some recently (2013 Rose & 2007 Blanc). Separately to those, I was instructed by the brains of the operation that we should get some of the Hochar pere et fils red as it had been a long time since we’d had some, so a half dozen of the 2012 picked up from Majestic. Whilst it was a little disjointed / spiky, the elements seemed there to enable it to come together well. Will leave it alone for 2-3 years before opening a 2nd bottle.
Thanks for the write-up, Otto; the '89 is the best Musar I’ve had. For Musar in general, I find the elevated v.a. more common, and often intrusive, than brett.
(Actually, I think that Musar lovers worldwide should take up a collection to buy them a refrigerated truck to transport the grapes from the vineyard to the winery.)
While I’ve probably not had as much experience with Musar as Otto, I’ve found the Hochar et Fils bottling to be a decent way to gauge the style…if I had a comparison I’d probably compare it to a high-quality Bourgogne or village level wine vs a Grand Cru. The jump in quality is REALLY worth the difference in money for me. So much so that I rarely even consider the Hochar et Fils. I don’t even like their lowest tier of wines…which is a far cry from their top bottling in my eyes.
Hi Arv
Echoing Kirk, yes it’s in a similar style and a good indicator for the vintage, but a little lighter, a little less complex and a little safer (or at least it was a decade ago, last time I recall us having one).
We enjoyed it enough for it to be WOTN at a tasting with our old tasting group, though rather embarrassingly 2-3 weeks later I failed to guess it blind at a big walkround event (I guessed Southern Rhone). Same vintage as well!
regards
Ian
I’ll go even further: I think that Musar has a wonderful and unique grape blend from a very distinctive terroir, but that the wines could be better (IMO) if so much of what takes place after the grapes are picked wasn’t so slapdash.
Funny you mentioned the '95 - it was impressive when young, but my recent experiences have been that it’s in a very grumpy stage. I was actually glad it wasn’t on show!