Interested to get the board’s collective wisdom on the changes in Bordeaux over the years and which are for the better and which might either be subject to some reversal over time or might mark a change to something fundamentally different.
The thought arose after tasting a few +/-15 year old Bordeaux recently and finding them markedly different from the 15 year old bottles I would have been drinking in the mid-to-late 1990s.
On the positive side:
- Today’s wines are cleaner. Gone are the days of Cordier funk.
- They seem to be more likely to arrive intact (not having been mistreated on their route to retail).
- Most drink well from release and they generally seem to rarely close down the way they did 20 years ago.
- There’s a lot more correct, quality Bordeaux to chose from at every price point.
On the other hand (and, some of these comments are a matter of opinion):
- The wines are, as a rule, a lot riper. This may be ‘global warming’ or, in many cases, it may be later picking… but, the wines definitely lean riper — particularly for more modern producers.
- Owing to the higher ripeness, its harder to find pyrazines / green notes in the wines. For many if not most people, that may be regarded as a positive. I’m not so sure — but, that’s a personal thing.
- Owing to the higher ripeness, the tannins are rounder and the wines often don’t have the same ‘grip’
- Oak treatment is more aggressive and more producers make up for a lack in aromatic complexity produced by the riper fruit with oak and toast.
I think this trend started in earnest with the Right Bank 1998 vintage and built up from there. These wines are getting older and it seems like we should be able to make a list of those that fall distinctly into one category or another to start to make some judgements. I don’t have a strong opinion other than to say I’ve had a number of +/-15 year old Bordeaux that don’t seem to be evolving the way I would have expected (for example) a 1985 Lynch Bages to taste in 1998. Many, while perfectly tasty, are just that — tasty but rather monolithic and lacking much in the way of developed aromatic complexity one loves in Bordeaux. Others, like a recent bottle of 2001 La Tour Carnet, fare worse when the toasty oak hangs on longer than the fruit and becomes disjointed in wine (IMO).
The 1996 Leoville Barton is drinking fantastic right now. Aromatically, it is a bomb. It is rich and full, having put on a great deal of weight in bottle. I bring this up because, in the early to mid-2000s, I debated getting rid of it. The wine seemed to always be in a shell. It was lean and closed both aromatically and on the palate for a number of years. That’s not something you typically see with the more modern / riper / oakier style. I similarly mentioned the 1994 Grand Puy Lacoste, which went through its own evolution (it’s a lesser wine but it went through no less a metamorphosis).
I am sure they exist — but, can anyone draw reference to some of the more modern wines that have matured to develop more traditional and less oak-driven aromatic complexity with age? Do others find that some of the very highly toasted wines have issues as they get older as described? Or, am I inferring an issue from a limited sample? What are some modern day wines we should start to follow to make inferences about how changes in winemaking show up with extended aging?
Curious what others think here.
Cheers.