Is there somewhere on those 1998 Donnhoff labels where you are supposed to be able to see the day of the week [Montag, Dienstag, Mittwoch…]?
I thought that 2006 was a vintage where the picking date was critical. It would be interesting to correlate that date for each wine against the perceived results.
Anthony:
I very much agree, although I’ve been surprised that some wines I initially thought were just too overripe and low in acidity have turned out better than I thought. I don’t have a comprehensive list of when the producers harvested, though there are probably notes on some of that in the original Tanzer and Meadows tasting notes. I’ll check and see what I can find on some of the outliers.
I think part of what fooled me (and everyone else) is the amount of botrytis in the 2006s, which was completely rampant. There was so much botrytis that a couple of winemakers told me that it would have been impossible for them to make the wines by excluding the botrytised grapes (which usually exhibit a distinctly different color). They told me that if they had excluded the botrytised grapes they would have had to throw out a third to half (or in some cases more) of the crop harvested from given vineyards.
I know that I did not like the 1986 white burgundies at all when they were released either. This was another vintage with overwhelming levels of botrytis in virturally all of the vineyards. I disliked the wines so much on release, that I refused to buy a single bottle of 1986 whites (luckily, no one was selling white burguny pre-arrivals for that vintage). About 8 years later a few 1986 whites were included in a white burgundy tasting I attended. I was very skeptical and again was genuinely shocked that the wines were drinkable at that age. I found the 1986s I tasted (including Ramonet, Coche, Sauzet and Leflaive as I recall) were drinkable and could be enjoyed with a meal, although none of them were truly memorable.
the venue was amazing–Julian and Valentino, under the great direction of Don, did an amazing job. While I did not take notes, I really enjoyed the night and was glad to be invited. Once again, the risotto was incredible. I am not an uni fan and that dish fell flat. Happy to have brought the Dönnhoff and see it show so well.
Raveneau, Fevre, and Colin-Morey did quite well.
Howard:
There are definitely some things I have learned from now 11 years of studying this and 9 years of hosting these vintage assessment and premox check dinners.
First, the safest course, as you point out, is to buy wines only from producers who have the historically lowest incidence of problems. Here is the list we are talking about: Coche-Dury, DRC, Leflaive, Leroy/D’Auvenay, Raveneau and Roulot (except in 96, where there is some variability in oxidation rates.) Unfortunately, that’s also the list of the most expensive wines. There is one very interesting factor in common shared between Leflaive, Raveneau and Roulot. All of them leave the wine in wood barrels for only 12 months. The wines are then transferred to stainless steel (small stainless at Leflaive) for the final 4 to 6 months of aging. This technique is also now being used by some other (smart) producers including Domaine Olivier Leflaive and Jacques Carilllon. (Carillon provides 9-12 months in cask for village and 1er wines and then 3-6 months in stainless steel. Grand crus typically get one year in oak and then 6 months in stainless steel.) Considering that one of the problems that I think contributed to premox was extending the elevage from 11 to 12 months in oak to 16 to 18 months in oak, yes, I think Leflaive, Raveneau, Roulot, Carillon and Olivier Leflaive have all learned something that the rest of burgundy should be emulating.
Second, it’s key to completely avoid the producers who have performed consistently the worst over time from an oxidation perspective. Here we are talking about: Guy Amiot, Blain-Gagnard, Bonneau du Martray, Colin-Deleger, Coutoux, Droin, Fontaine-Gagnard, Gagnard-Delegrange, Jadot [starting with 2000 vintage], Jouard, Juillot, Matrot, Tessier and Verget. I generally refer to Bonneau du Martray, Fontaine-Gagnard, Jadot and Matrot as the four poster children of oxidation. With all of that said, there are some signs of potential improvement among the category of worst performers. Some producers who used to be on my list of the perennial worst performers have dramatically revamped their winemaking and now make much better more age-worthy wines. They’ve improved so notably that they are no longer on this list. Among the list of “graduates” from the school of hard knocks are Domaine Sauzet (starting with the 2000 vintage), Jean-Marc Pillot (starting with the 2000 vintage) and Domaine Montille (starting with the 2004 vintage). Those three domaines are dramatic proof that the causes/contributors to the oxidation problem can be isolated and resolved. I would also note in “hopeful department” that at two of the the last three vintages where we’ve tasted the Colin-Deleger Chevalier Montrachet, it was not oxidized. Domaine Tessier was taken over by the son Arnaud Tessier with the 2006 vintage after his father’s untimely death, and I’m told he has changed everything for the better. But I have not tasted the wines to determine that for myself.
I could write pages and pages about what I think the causes of premox are, and point to some specific evidence, but we don’t have the space here and lot of you may not be interested in the details. (For those of you are interested, see the Oxidized Burgundies Wiki Site here: http://oxidised-burgs.wikispaces.com/General+Discussion) Suffice it to say that I think the principal cause of premox was/is the deliberate adoption of new techniques and equipment by winemakers in the 1993 to 1995 time frame which were intended to produce softer, less harsh, more fruit driven white burgundies with deliberately lower sulfite levels and deliberately lower phenols (and in many cases, more new oak influence). The changes included widespread adoption of computer controlled bladder presses which produce much lower phenol levels in the juice put into barrels; lower SO2 usage at the crusher and in the bottle; widespread use of batonnage; the use of higher percentages of new oak barrels; and extending the elevage in wood from 11 months to 16 to 18 months. While there have been suggestions that the problems stemmed from declining qualities of corks, the use of peroxide as a cork bleaching agent and the use of a mix of paraffin and silicone as a substitute coating on the corks, there are no published studies which appear to corroborate the anecdotal claims and there clearly should now be some if the claims were true. While there does seem to be reason to suspect that many corks are less dense and more porous now than they used to be because of more frequent harvesting and the use of irigation techniques to produce cork, it’s also interesting that the category of best-performing producers (listed above) didn’t seem to have the same problems with their corks that were claimed by everyone else.
I would say that one of the best predictors of better longevity of the wines today is to simply look at the domaine’s public statements about premox in the past and whether they’ve published specifics about changes made in the winemaking process to try to deal with premox. If a producer simply pretends that they don’t have oxidation problems, or tries to blame it all on the cork producers, that’s a producer to avoid like the plague (e.g. Jadot, Bonneau du Martray, Fontaine-Gagnard and Matrot). Frankly, I don’t understand why any responsible retailer would offer or sell any of those particular brands given their premox track records (but sadly, as long as there is money to be made, retailers will sell the wines and figure the customers won’t know the difference.)
But when the producers will openly tell you that they’ve had problems in the past and that they’ve changed their techniques accordingly, that’s a great sign. What you’re looking for are specific comments about the techniques that have been changed, such as comments that
-they’ve changed their pressing techniques to press more quickly and vigorously to increase the phenol levels (or in one or two cases gone back to the traditional basket presses, like the ones that Coche still uses),
-they’re using considerably more SO2 (you generally want to see 35 ppm or higher) and actively monitoring the SO2 levels throughout the wine making process (a long-time Leflaive practice),
-they’ve largely eliminated batonnage or don’t use open-top batonnage,
-they’re using less new oak
-they’re allowing the wine to stay in wood for only 12 months and finishing the wine in stainless or glass-lined tanks.
Changes such as using unbleached corks, paraffin-only coatings (or uncoated corks) and either hand inspection or weighing of corks to eliminate low density corks are common sense changes that all producers should probably make as a precaution, but those changes, standing alone, are in all likelihood insufficient to significantly change the oxidation incidence of a producer who has had major problems in the past. There are also very expensive zero-oxygen bottling lines designed to reduce the amount of dissolved oxygen in the bottle, but the jury remains out on the effectiveness of this technology. Frankly, I’d feel more comfortable seeing fundamental changes in the chemistry of the wines going into to the bottle (through the techniques described above). While the use of substitute closures such as DIAM are growing, and the claim is that such closures have much more uniformly controlled oxygen permeability rates than natural cork, it remains to be seen whether the long-run performance of DIAM closures will be better than cork over an extended time period. Moreover, Bouchard and Fevre only began using DIAM with the 2009 vintage, so we won’t have a baseline for comparison until the spring of 2017. Here again, if the only known change of technique by a producer is the adoption of DIAM closures, I would not simply assume that producer’s wine will be problem free. If your original choice of techniques altered the chemistry of the wine going into the bottle making it more susceptible to oxidation, simply producing a better seal will not prevent the wine from oxidizing over time.
I’ve tried to post information on the changes in techniques for the various producers on the Oxidized Burgundies wiki site as I learn of the changes. http://oxidised-burgs.wikispaces.com/home#producers I would suggest using the producer listings as a resource, both to track the changes made by the producers, as well as to see comments from other people’s encounters with the wines “in the wild.”
Don,
Thanks for the great information. I can attest to your concern regarding Jadot. I bought a case of '06 Montrachet in late '11. Thankfully I drank through the first 6-pack in 2012 and those bottles were outstanding despite their young age. I tapped into the next 6-pack in 2013 and the first 3 bottles were clearly more advanced but still enjoyable. I pulled another bottle a couple of weeks ago and it was oxidized. I Coravin’d the remaining 2 bottles, one was fresh a daisy, the other very advanced. I wish Jadot would open their eyes and do something about this as it is a real problem.
Jonathan
Anthony:
I can’t give you the exact dates on each wine, but I can tell you the following.
The Ban de Vendage in Chablis was Saturday, September 16. This was the first time ever that it was BEFORE the Cote de Beaune. The Ban de Vendage in the Cote de Beaune was Monday September 18.
In Chablis, Fevre got permission to begin harvesting Les Preuses on 13th and finished on Sept 21.
Raveneau started on Sept 14th but I don’t know how long they continued.
Dauvissat begn picking on September 11th, but here’ no data on how long they continued.
In the Cote de Beaune, Henri Boillot, Roulot, Lafon and Arnaud Ente all applied for and obtained permission to harvest specified plots early. Boillot got permission to pick Clos de Moucheres on Sept 13. Roulot picked Boucheres on Sept 14 and apparently harvested Meursault Porusots early too. Here’s what I know about the rest:
Bouchard: picked starting the 18th
Coche-Dury: picked from Sept 18th-24th
Sauzet: picked from the 18th-25th
Colin-Morey: started picking on the 19th
Jean-Marc Pillot: started picking on 20th
Leflaive: picked from Sept 20-27
So, yes, it looks like the Leflaive Chevy was probably picked much later than everything else.
Don said :
…There is one very interesting factor in common shared between Leflaive, Raveneau and Roulot. All of them leave the wine in wood barrels for only 12 months. The wines are then transferred to stainless steel (small stainless at Leflaive) for the final 4 to 6 months of aging. This technique is also now being used by some other (smart) producers including Domaine Olivier Leflaive and Jacques Carilllon. (Carillon provides 9-12 months in cask for village and 1er wines and then 3-6 months in stainless steel. Grand crus typically get one year in oak and then 6 months in stainless steel.) …
I would like to add : J.M. Pillot.
Don - excellent notes and the producer list on how they are tackling premox is invaluable. I just saved that post as a word doc for future reference. I don’t buy much white burg, but now I have a great idea of which producers to avoid!
The late picking date (and poor performance across the board in 2006) for Leflaive is what started me on this line of thought. The next fun investigation would be to correlate picking date with biodynamic status of the vineyard.
Peter:
I checked out a couple of websites in French, and yes, you are correct. Since 2005, the Jean-Marc Pillot wines get 12 months in wood (with a maximum of 30% new) and then spend another 6 to 8 months in stainless steel before being bottled.
I’m absolutely convinced that that limited use of new wood, limiting the time in wood to 12 months, limiting or eliinating batonnage and using adequate SO2 levels makes a huge difference in avoiding premox. Prior to 2000 Jean-Marc Pillot had huge premox problems with the 1996 and 1999 vintages. 2000 was much better and there’s been no oxidation since that time.
Raveneau, Leflaive, Roulot, (Jacques) Carillon and Jean-Marc Pillot – those are all white burgundy brands that I buy in virtually every vintage, and I have little concern that any of them will oxidize prematurely.
Thanks to you…Don - I am a fan of J.M. Pillot.
Don,
Thanks for the great notes. It is good to know that the 06s are doing well. BTW, although I have done well with Leflaive, my friends in Europe avoid them due to high rate of premox. You gotta love Reveneau.
Fascinating read. Thank you for sharing your notes, Don.
As a lover of White Burgundies, I look to Don Cornwell’s analyses and perspectives
on the subject as an immense resource. His experiences and background on these
wines is without question nonpareil.
Having been burned with PreMox editions of these wines during the early and mid-90’s,
I am still buying them but have elected to drink my purchases of white Burgs much earlier than previously.
Hank ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
Don,
While my list mirrors yours with a couple of exceptions, are you getting concerned about anecdotal reports of premox with Leflaive ?
Yes Nick, I am. The advanced 2006 Chevalier in this tasting was unprecedented. I generally don’t taste Leflaive before they are 7.5 years old except in the context of either tasting a vintage on release or attending a periodic tasting where a younger vintage is served. I haven’t run into any advanced or premoxed bottles of Leflaive from the post-2006 vintages myself, but I have heard some of those anecdotal reports about premoxed bottles of 2007 and 2008 Leflaives. In one instance, my fiiends Geoff Troy and John Brincko experienced a couple of premoxed bottles at restaurants in France on their annual trip to burgundy, which I found pretty shocking. They did too, and they’ve been visiting Leflaive every year for many years.
I know that Eric Remy has acknowledged that some of the 2002s have started to show signs of premox. I experienced one bottle of 2002 Chevalier recently that was a bit tired (it’s hard to say “advanced” when the wine is 12 years old), but the 1996 and 1999 vintages I’ve had even more recently are still going strong.
The anecdotal reports of oxidized wines from the more recent vintages make me wonder if Leflaive has very quietly “fiddled with” their technique in ways that haven’t been publicly discussed.
I’m thinking the same thing Don. I think after 07 there was a stylistic change, the wines shifted (to me) a denser riper wine with less sulfur.
Isn’t that right around the time Pierre Morey left as winemaker?
Don,
Thank you so much for the detailed and well thought out response to my question.
Two thoughts - I would not be surprised if in a couple of years when you give someone the list of safe producers you add Colin-Morey. This is based your notes, the wiki and my own experience.
Second, your timing on the start of problems and the reasons made me think of something I have speculated about in the past to friends. I remember Parker giving absolutely huge scores to the 1992 Verget wines. I tasted a few and they were wonderful young. I wonder how much of the changed practices were the result of this in an attempt to make wines that would show better young and get high scores from Parker.
For me, my premox stategy is has been to go a bit lower end on vineyards for white Burgundy, with exceptions and drink the wines on the younger side. Of course, sitting still in my cellar are a couple of bottles of 1995-6 Verget wines and a couple of 2002 Jouan wines that I know are dead but I have just not been able to bring myself to open and face up to the fact that I just wasted money. The 2002 Jouans were amazing - one minute they were full of life and very good - almost the next minute dead.
Howard:
I think you have it quite correct for many producers. There’s little question that a lot of producers wanted those high scores and incredible praise that Parker was dishing out to Verget. They also wanted to please the restaurants that were suddenly buying a lot of white burgundy by offering them wines that would taste great young. But as everyone learned the hard way (or should have) you can’t have your cake and eat it too. Wines made with techniques that oxidize them faster and that therefor taste better at a younger age also die much sooner. Jadot for example very clearly changed the style of their white wines beginning with the 2000 vintage and they have admitted this is a conscious effort to make their white wines taste like a mature wine on release. See http://oxidised-burgs.wikispaces.com/Jadot