By way of introduction, i wanted to pose a beginner’s question about Burgundy (i know, terrible time to get the Burgundy “bug”). In tasting some red Burgs over the past few months, i’m struck by the spectrum of fruit flavors, from tart and/or sweet red fruit (strawberry, cherry) to dark, black fruit (blackberry, plum). Two quick examples: a 2013 Julie Belland Santenay Beauregard 1er cru possessed what i would characterize as obvious red fruit while a 2015 Louis Jadot Beaune Boucherottes 1er cru was endowed with chunky, black fruit.
What accounts for such a drastic difference? Are both wines above indicative of their respective village/vineyard (i have read that wines from Beaune are often chunky)? Are these house styles? Vintage variation? Clonal dissimilarities? Something else?
Assuming that this simplistic red vs. black binary is useful, and i suspect that it may not be, i’d love to read recommendations for both ends of the fruit spectrum.
Thanks in advance, and i look forward to becoming an official member of the community.
Hi Kevin and welcome. I’m far from an expert but will have a go. Firstly, I’d point out that taste and flavours tend to be very personal - what you might call cherry, someone else will call plum. You could both be wrong, but if you’re into wine it’s at least likely you’re consistently wrong
From what you described above, those characters are probably largely driven by vintage as well as site. You’re right in that one might say Santenay tends to be red-fruited and Beaune more dark-fruited (when compared to each other). But the red-black spectrum is also influenced significantly by ripeness (and, as a generalisation, Beaunes tend to be riper). 2015 was a warm, very ripe vintage whereas 2013 was not.
As recommendations, I would say you want to steer clear of 2015 to find the red-fruit flavours - perhaps 2013s and 2014s. If you find 2011s then these will tend to be red (and even green). I don’t know what you have available at reasonable price points, but try Savigny Les Beaune, perhaps Chambolle Musigny and of course Santenay. For the dark-fruited flavours, try 2015s as many of these will be quite ripe.
IMO, though there is overlap and “purple” in between (isn;t that what you get when you mix black and red? ) I usually FIND the black/red overall effect is pretty distinctive.I think of it most as a vineyard-determined character; but vintage can play a role on top of that (e.g., 2002, my second favorite vintage after 1983 and before 2005, had a sweet red fruit character that I found irresistable. Consistent with the vineyard being the main determinative, I think of Cote de Beaune wines as being “redder” and more “black fruited” wines produced on the Cote de Nuits (though not all).Maybe that’s why my favorite Cote de Beaune vineyard is Volnay-Taillepieds, which I most often find with black fruit character?
Rauno, i hear you about the subjectivity of taste. In fact, i’m very interested in the work of philosophers who explore this issue in wine, including Barry Smith, who has a thoughtful piece in a recent World of Fine Wine. To highlight your point, two professional reviews of the 2015 Faiveley Cazetiers disagree about the color of the fruit on the nose (red berry fruit vs. suggestions of darker berries). There must be countless examples of this, but this is a wine that i happened to be researching recently.
Stuart, i envy your tasting experience. If a vintage like 2002 is ‘red’ upon release, will it keep that profile throughout the course of its life? Do Burgs tend to exhibit more black or red fruit (or something else) as they age?
It sounds as if both vintage and village/vineyard are key. Is one a more reliable indicator than the other? I’m tempted now to taste the 2015 Belland Santenay Beauregard to see where it falls on the spectrum. Likewise, i’m curious if a wine like the Volnay Taillepieds, which Stuart says usually exhibits black fruits, tilts red in a vintage like 2002.
Alan, a blue-fruited Chambolle Bonnes Mares sounds utterly delightful. One day…
I saw George Carlin in Atlanta about 15 years ago. He started the show by taking out his notes and saying that he’s preparing for a big show in NYC and that he’s going to read through the jokes this evening (and that’s what he did!). Took some of the punch out of the punchlines.
For what it’s worth, the Court of Master Sommeliers tasting method would generally have you associate only red fruit flavors with Burgundy, not black nor blue.
Doesn’t soil play a part? For example, heavier clay-rich soils imparting darker flavours and more limestone-rich soils being more red fruited? I know these two soil types affect the power/elegance of a wine.
Climate, exposure and degree heat days obviously play a part.
If tasting blind and there’s predominant black or blue fruit I’m usually not thinking pinot noir but zin, light bodied Syrah, or something unusual.
For me, if I pick up cherry, strawberry, raspberries, rhubarb then I’m thinking PN initially. Even red Apple in the case of some deep end Anderson Valley PN.
Red cherry is really tough as it can show up in zin, PN, Grenache, etc.
But there are always many exceptions and having too many “rules” will surely be humbling after the reveal.
In that article he criticised throughout an earlier piece I wrote for WFW.
I don’t necessarily expect you to agree with me, but if you haven’t already, please at least read what I actually wrote, as Smith horribly misrepresented my views in several places. My article can also now be found online on the WFW website:
In that article I deliberately ignored Smith’s specific theory of flavour as an objective property, but as it seemed to be gaining some traction I addressed it later on my blog:
I am happy to discuss this further if you wish, but realise that this thread is probably not the place. Perhaps another thread on subjectivity vs objectivity if anyone is really interested?
Soil has to…but the soil composition, IMO, has more affect on ripeness, ie. alcohol levels and acidity levels in the wines than color. For instance, my favorite RB 1er cru vineyard…VR Beaux Monts (Beaumonts) is way up high and lots of limestone, etc…but almost always has a black fruited aspect…
I think it is exposition more than soil that determines…as a pattern year after year…
Steve, thanks for chiming in, and no, i have not yet read your piece in WFW (thanks for providing the link). To be clear, although i enjoyed Barry’s article and seek out academic musings on wine more generally, these philosophical debates around the subjectivity/objectivity of wine are not my bailiwick, so i cannot readily agree or disagree with any of the claims.
J Krauss, i don’t know enough about the Court of Master Sommeliers to be able to interpret your point about them not recognizing blue/black fruit flavors. Are you implying that this is a strategic decision by a traditional and unbending institution or that these are the top tasters in the world, and if they don’t recognize black/blue fruit, then that’s surely the way it is. Or maybe something else?
This is pretty spot on… i agree, the perceptions of red and black can be pretty destinctive, and I have a penchant for both given the right vintage, vineyard, etc.
Hi Kevin, glad to have you. Just want to add,there are still plenty of wonderful, affordable, and “findable” Burgundies out there. Just had a beautiful 2015 Trapet Marsannay last week. A smashing wine for 42 beans.
vintages tend to show characteristics in one or other directions (or in between) … so I would generally call 2013 more red fruited, and 2015 (much) more dark/black fruited …
certain vineyard sites (or villages in general) also show tendencies to the one or other fruit colour … so - just for instance a Bonnes Mares is much darker fruited than a Musigny or Echezeaux … a Pommard is darker fruited than a Volnay …
some winemaking techniques - e.g. cold maceration - lead to darker wines which can give the impression of originally darker fruits (even in more red fruited vintages) … they same with (high toasted) new oak …
So the final result is (usually) a combination of several reasons …
Vielen Dank, Gerhard. This breakdown is very useful. I’ve purchased some 2015s because this happened to be the new vintage as my interest in Burgundy took off, but it sounds like earlier vintages, including 2013, may have more of a desirable red-fruit profile. Time to back fill. I’ll also be keeping an eye out for wines from Volnay, Santenay, Savigny-les-Beaune, and Chambolle. Any other villages (or vineyards) that are typically driven by red fruit flavors/aromas?
Kevin,
just fwiw … it´s an endless debatte if 2012, 2013 or 2014 is the better Burgundy vintage …
I personally prefer 2014 (very slightly) to 2012, and 2012 to 2013 …
and all to 2011 …
2013 is a vintage for acidity lovers … which was quite high throughout and almost always is quite noticable, not my preferred style … although there are many fine wines in 2013.
2012 was more fruit-foreward (in its youth, really lush and sweet), but with excellent structure which only was in the background initially …
2014 has a very nice balance between the two … more classic, with a certain charm …
for backfilling I would prefer 2014 to ´13 (if available or affordable) …
) I usually FIND the black/red overall effect is pretty distinctive.I think of it most as a vineyard-determined character; but vintage can play a role on top of that (e.g., 2002, my second favorite vintage after 1983 and before 2005, had a sweet red fruit character that I found irresistable. Consistent with the vineyard being the main determinative, I think of Cote de Beaune wines as being “redder” and more “black fruited” wines produced on the Cote de Nuits (though not all).Maybe that’s why my favorite Cote de Beaune vineyard is Volnay-Taillepieds, which I most often find with black fruit character?