-
2010 Trimbach Riesling Cuvée Frédéric Emile - France, Alsace (9/22/2018)
From half-bottle, under DIAM5 (which I hope is not a reflection of how long it’s expected this wine wine will last – the best CFEs I’ve had have been 20-30 year wines). I will readily admit that CFE has never been my favourite in the Trimbach stable, as I find it generally broader and less tightly focussed than the unparalleled Clos Ste. Hune. In any case, this is one of the better iterations of (young) CFE I’ve tasted. The nose is so rich it almost implies sweetness, but that perception is thwarted when you taste the wine. This is incredibly dense and rich, with a thick, voluptuous texture that is above what is typical of CFE. The incredible thing here is the acidity – it’s far more intense and potent than any other CFE I remember. Tons of extract as well, and some tart fruit flavours (apples, predominantly) stand out on the palate. The alcohol on the finish does stick out a little, but it is abundantly clear this is a very, very large-scaled wine that has the requisite cut to balance almost everything out. Impressive stuff. (93 pts.)
Huh, that doesn’t sound like “classic” FE at all, at least not like the very classic 2001 and 2002 wines were like on release (piercingly mineral, not in the least dense, rich, or voluptuous). Alsace claims to be getting warmer vintage by vintage, making it more difficult to create those more classically lean/mineral wines. I have little experience with the CSH, but I’ve never heard it described as dense, rich, or voluptuous either.
CSH is always taut and powerful, but driven and focussed. I’ve never heard it described as voluptuous either (though 89 VT might be).
CFE is a rounder and less focussed wine. I was too young to try 01/02 on release, but they are definitely rounder and less driven than CSH. Honestly I’ve never seen the comparison between the two cuvées – CSH is vastly superior, even accounting for price.
CSH is superior if that’s what you want in a wine.
CFE is a much better value, and may be superior if you want something different.
I prefer CFE. Always have.
Irrespective of the qualitative argument, it’s worth pointing out that as climate change works its malevolent magic on Alsace (already a hot, dry region in what used to be termed good years, which is probably no longer true as the better years in much of Alsace are now the cooler ones that preserved acidity), CFE is going to suffer far less than CSH. The CFE vineyards are on a steeply angled slope/promontory subjected to a lot of sun but also a lot of wind and cool air coming down from the Vosges to help guide the ripening in a more balanced way. The Rosacker (whence the Clos Ste-Hune is sourced) is reasonably deep into the Vosges but much flatter and less exposed to wind currents, and also more likely to suffer adverse weather events. FWIW, ripe, dry, and forceful Rosackers are rare; the Clos is the Clos, at least in part, because it’s the beneficiary of risk. (Yes, that means I think most other vignerons are failing to exploit the site’s potential.) I don’t know if the era of “we didn’t make X this year” is on its way back…the last time was '94, wasn’t it?..but I wouldn’t rule it out.
how are the new single parcel wines looking relative to cfe and hune?
I’ve been impressed by them (and have liked them more than CFE), but haven’t had a chance to try the latest slew of releases though (12 Geisberg, 15 Schlossberg). I have also heard that there is a chance that there may be a Brand coming out in the future.
I found 2010 to be far more generous than 2008, which I thought was so austere as to lack pleasure, at least for the time being.
Then you had best avoid the 2007 CFE, which is bracing (and fantastic IMO).
We had the 2011 Geisberg a few months back. Found it slightly more plush and rounder than any young, or similar stage, CSH that I’ve had. Didn’t lack in complexity with sufficience in Trimbach’s petrol, acidity and mineral traits. Also as intense. Just as CSH, it was a step up over the CFE.
I didn’t find 2008 to be as extreme (though to my recollection it was also more austere than the 2007). The comparison between 2010 and 2008 rings true to me though.
I drank the 2011 Geisberg next to the 11 CSH, and that’s the same impression I found. However, the Geisberg didn’t have quite the same laser-like focus that CSH always has.
‘11 was not exactly a classic vintage. Rather warm, even for today’s standards. Or maybe reflective of the new standard.
I love, love 08–had it 6 times so far. Need to find some 10.
Do you have a note on 2008 Alan? We’ve got 8 cases in our warehouse, may need to sample some out.
Thanks, Kris
Adrian - what do you mean with “I hope is not a reflection of how long it’s expected this wine wine will last”? Do you mean DIAM5 is unsuitable for a couple of decades of aging?
I think they go up to Diam30 for long ageing wines.
If I remember correctly, a few years ago, while chatting with someone repping Eyrie, they mentioned that the Eyrie reserve bottlings had been rebottled with DIAM30, and they told me that the 30 indicated the number of years the cork was supposed to last. I tried to look for some additional information about the DIAM suffix, but couldn’t find any.
I remember some blurb about Diam, I think that there was some sort of guarantee for the number of years stamped on it, eg: Diam5 =5 years and Diam30= 30 years
OK, I found some more info via google, the oxygen transfer rate is controlled by the density of the Diam closure, so a Diam5 is less dense than a Diam10 etc, and Diam30 has the lowest oxygen transfer rate.