This past weekend, we “used up” our stock of frozen Maine venison to make Stroganoff and kasha for a small group, ending with a very ripe “L’Amis de Chambertin” (a version of epoisses made in Gevrey) and a strawberry/rhubarb crisp… Though the food was good, the wines were astonishingly so. Particularly as I try to not “kill” too many older wines at one event, for many reasons.
1990 is a vintage that during my years of really paying attention to Burgundy, was the first “GREAT” vintage of the “modern” era, i.e, post 1980, when the Boomers started taking over family estates and changing things for the better : hygiene and concentration wise. (Of course, the climate has helped , too. Sadly, perhaps). After the great 1978 and the 1983s (a vintage of great highs and many mistaken perceptions of rot and other defects), 1990 remains, to me the best vintage between 1979 and 1998. I remember when it came out, having visited both during the growing season and right after the bottlings. I then calibrated what a “great vintage” meant to those who made the wines. (Some said that 1990 was the greatest vintage in their fathers’ lifetimes, too.) I realized then that they meant consistent, clean ripeness across the levels of the hierarchies; not the highest highs or best grand crus, etc.). I have more or less adopted those criteria.
I hardly ever do “tastings” or go to them , anymore. But, when I do I try to think of some interesting theme. Having 3 1990 Clos Vougeots, all bought at the estates, at the time, made me drool. So, I “killed” 3 of them; and the wines “killed” , too. I was pretty shocked at how close they were in quality and class. They were:
-
Rene (Phillipe) Engel.
Subdued and complex and silky almost “blue” fruits. Seemless, though not as nuanced as the Rion. Tons of fruit and delicious at almost 29. -
Daniel (Patrice) Rion
Very fruity and well balanced; long long finish of red fruits and chocolate; light and elegant. -
Chopin- Groffier
Very sweet-fruity black fruits. Lovely, delicious and regal. Tannins showing through a bit, so you know they’re there.
We served them totally blind, with socks over the bottles, and allowed our friends to guess a little what the common threads were. FWIW, I also, as I usually do, kept some of the wines in bottle for the next morning when my tasting skills are sharpest. I preferred the Engel both times, and the Rion next at the dinner, but…the next day the Rion and the Chopin –Groffier were in a dead heat for “place” and, the Engel was first by a nose (an average nose; not Jimmy Durante’s schnozz either.) What an experience!
And, with the cheese and to finish things off, a Rene (Vincent) Dauvissat Chablis grand cru “Les Clos” 1999, which was, perhaps the best wine of the night, incredibly. I found “mature” honeyed, oyster shell fruit right from the beginning and a depth of concentration I’ve never seen in a 1er cru Chablis. Long nice finish; and harmonious structure. Ready to go, but will last another decade. Wonderful to smell and behold.
When 1990 came out people were raving about the concentration of fruit and ripeness (with little overripeness) they were making. Critics/pundits were a bit skeptical, calling the ripeness “blurry” and the wines too fruity to become great. They did. And, they all seemed very Clos Vougeot, given that the vineyard’s wines are diverse, depending on location, exposition and maker. The fruit blurs nothing 29 years later!! In fact, the fruit levels, combined with the maturing elements of the wines now, are a joy to behold. Will other vintages be “better”? Do obviously ripe and succulent wines make for a great vintage if all else is there to balance the fruit? Probably. But, this is why I’ve bought and aged red Burgundy. What a payoff! “Great vintages” are that for obvious reasons: the great fruit and balancing structure. “Obvious” is not bad for greatness , IMO. And, those contrarians who look to neighboring vintages that are less “obvious” as “better” are in denial a bit. (1991 can’t compete; nor can 2001 compete with 1999, IMO).