This is a wine many wine lovers would not enjoy, I think. It is . . . slight. Gentle. It speaks in hushes. There is no rush of fruit. If the SQN I had at Thanksgiving (and enjoyed) is a jacuzzi of a wine, this is a soft breeze. Fully resolved tannin. The primary fruit – whatever existed at one point – has packed up and left for a retirement home someplace. What is left is sweet and tender as a kiss on the cheek.
Bought as a science experiment and it performed well above my expectation
I’ve got two 750s that need to be opened. Any experience with larger formats? Sounds like I should open them sooner rather than later.
I’m sure they would be lovely, and I see no reason to wait
I’ve never been a fan of older Beychevelle, as you stated I find all of their older vintages too gentle or lean for my taste. While I like what they’re trying for, they’re no Figeac.
Not a huge jacuzzi fan, though will admit it can be nice on one of those cold evenings, breeze coming off the lake onto the pool deck area. Otherwise, it sort of overwhelms the senses, spiking too much heat, the force too powerful and engulfing, with pungent chlorine sending my palate into shutdown, then I’m left dry, with a film coating my body. Tonight I just sat on the outdoor lounge chairs, 65 degrees, soft breeze, with a lovely 2012 Breton Franc de Pied. I would have enjoyed that Beychevelle, thanks for the note!
I had it from a 750 about a year ago and it was a killer wine, beautiful nose and not at all a lightweight, nicely structured. I was quite surprised, as my expectations were rather low. The bottle had perfect storage since arriving in this country after release.
IMO older Beychevelle can provide quite a bit of value
For example, I have had a few bottles of 1969 Beychevelle which while even particularly less concentrated than in better vintages, was within the last year or two still providing drinking pleasure, somewhat watery to be sure but still marked by red fruits, cedar, earth, some tobacco.
…and a '73 I had a few years ago still had a lot of primary fruit and was just a joy to drink. With '75 being such a brutally tannic vintage, it’s not surprising that the wines matured in such a lean, focused way. Do you think it was drying out Neal?
Have not taste the 75, but my general lack of enthusiasm for 1975 Bordeaux is going to be difficult to shake. That being said, Beychevelle in the 1960’s and 1950’s and possibly even before that, made incredibly strong wines that could rival every other producer in St. Julien, even Ducru Beaucaillou.
Same. “Only great bottles” and all that, but this wine can have a whole lot more going on than Neal’s bottle if it’s a good example.
Could be Neal’s experience is due to the 375ml format.
Maybe. I really liked the wine, which I thought I conveyed. It is just in that stage of its life where the fruit has turned into all-tertiary characteristics.
Thought being that in a 750ml it would still largely be the same as what you experienced but still with some kind of gentle red fruit remaining, as Beychevelle can have decades on.
I’ve got 3/4 of a case buried in a back corner of the cellar, after being disappointed the first four tries.
I guess it’s time to dig it out and see what remains after the tannins let loose their hold.
P Hickner
Which is fine, but there are fresher bottles out there that still have a good amount of fruit left in them.
Two questions: why general lack of enthusiasm for 75s?
Second, re: Beychevelle in 40s, 50s and 60s - in your opinion way is that, and in your opinion what has changed?
i’ll pipe in - the '75s were the most brutal young Bordeaux I have ever tasted - Graves probably did the best with the La Mission and Haut Brion really being the stars of the vintage - and I have had good luck with quite a few Right Bank wines. But the Medoc wines are still just coming out of their shell, with most of the lesser ones drying out along the way. I actually had some great luck with many Petite Chateaux over the years - especially when they hit 15-20 years of age. But 1975 was a disappointment for many Classified growths.
Sorry I missed your question, Thomas. A bdx has “dried out” to me when it has lost not only its fruit but the tertiary characteristics and leave the wine only with an astringency carried on the alcohol (and any remaining tannin). This wine was nowhere near that stage. It was very pleasant to drink and was really quite complex in its own way. I have 3 (or 4?) more 375s and while it seems likely that I will drink them all over the next year or so, I am in no hurry.
Compare this to the 83 Beychevelle I have been drinking, which have a substantial amount of fruit remaining and even some vestigal tannin to resolve. They are beautiful as they are and if I could find a case at a decent price I’d snap it up.
1975 Bordeaux wines are by their nature, hard, austere wines. They were offered a deal to exchange charm with tannin, and they took the deal 
Second, re: Beychevelle in 40s, 50s and 60s - in your opinion way is that, and in your opinion what has changed?
You can read more than you probably wanted to know about Beychevelle here: http://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/bordeaux-wine-producer-profiles/bordeaux/st-julien/beychevelle/
FWIW, today, Beychevelle is making really strong wines that are worth trying…
I remember the '82 and '86 were particularly good Beychevelles, tasted a couple years ago. Excellent fruit, depth, and balance. Haven’t had any recent vintages!