Went to a friend’s house Saturday night with two other couples where we had a bevy of wonderful wines.
We started with a 2006 Taittinger Comte de Champagne. This was a wonderful wine with both fruit and secondary flavors. Nice acidity. Probably still too young. I think this will continue to develop well for a while.
Pierre Morey Montrachet 2002 - Perfectly mature wine. If anything I would have drunk this a few years ago. Wonderful flavors and complexity but probably a bit lacking in fruit. It had a wonderful creaminess in texture. A real treat.
We next did a mini vertical of Chateau Margaux blind. We knew the wines were left bank 1st growths from the 1980s, but not which first growth or which vintages. We pretty quickly went to Chateau Margaux as the property. It was easier than I would have thought. The wines did not have the types of flavors of Haut Brion or Lafite and did not seem big enough to be Mouton or Latour. I felt that if I was wrong, the only other wines it could be would have been Latour. But, it certainly seemed like Margaux and we were all right. Of the four wines we tasted, wines one and three were clearly the best (they turned out to be the 1986 and 1982 respectively). Wine four was the weakest - an excellent wine whose only flaw was the company it kept (it was a 1988). Wine two was a 1983 - at least one person at the table liked this wine best, but I (and I think most others had it in third). Interesting how well the 1986 showed. A lot of people seem very down on this vintage these days but I think there are a lot of fabulous wines in the vintage. Interesting also that I thought the 1982 was superior to the 1983. When these wines were young, 1983 was considered a better vintage in Margaux than 1982. At least for Chateau Margaux and at least this night, I did not find this to be correct.
Next came a 1999 Chateau d’Yquem. This vintage was kind of panned (at least relative to other vintages of Yquem) when first released, but I have always enjoyed this wine and Saturday night was no exception. I like the acidity of this wine, which provides a nice balance with the richness and makes this a complete wine. Not as good as a 2011 I had about a month ago (I love the 2011 Yquem) but a very enjoyable wine.
We finished with two German wines from Staatsdomaine in the Nahe. The first was a 1990 Niederhäuser Hermannsberg BA and the second a 1989 Niederhäuser Hermannshöhle TBA. Both were outstanding German wines from a producer that made fabulous wines in the 1980s (and likely before that). The 1990 was surprisingly close in richness to the 1989, but not quite as rich and long as that wine. If you ever get a chance to taste 1989s from Staatsdomaine in the Nahe, take it. The wines are fantastic from Kabinett to TBA.
Then, last night our daughter came over for father’s day and we had a 2008 Stony Hill Chardonnay. Just an outstanding bottle of California Chardonnay. If you ever want to see what California Chardonnay tastes like from an old style producer who does not smother the wine in oak try this wine. It had sort of a creamy texture to it and no new oak flavors. It actually reminded me some of the Montrachet from Saturday night in flavor profile, but probably not quite as complex as that wine.
It did show well last time I had itat one of our SOBER dinners.It was served blind against the 1986 Rauzan Segla, and the Rauzan was the clear and unanimous winner
I haven’t had the 82 and 83 head to head, but have had them both separately. I felt that the ‘83 could have benefited from more age (or in the short-term more air) relative to the ‘82. Not sure if this explains your experience, but it was how I rationalized the 83 Brane Cantenac keeping pace with the ‘83 Margaux—that the Margaux would keep getting better for another 10-20 years.
I guess I am still learning about the proper age to drink Stony Hill (although I guess I will be doing so only with my stock on hand as they have sold out). Historically, I have tended to like them a bit younger rather than older (the few times I have had older have been much older than 11 years old), but given how much I liked the 2008, around 11 years old seems right for me.
As for the reds, I am really interested in seeing how well these age. I have one bottle left of the 2007 and am wondering when to drink it. I have had this wine a couple of times, and really liked it but thought it was too young. Other than this, I have only had young Cabs the two times I have visited the winery. I do have good feelings about their Cabs and think I am going to really like them with age.
I had the 1986 Margaux a year ago and it had a brilliant nose but was a touch austere in the mouth. I guess it just needed a bit more time to fully come round. Not sure if I missed it, but which did you prefer in the end - the '82 or '86?
Opened the first bottle of a case of the 86 Margaux a couple months ago. Drinking very nicely as you say.
The Nahe Staatsdomaine was one of the greatest in all of Germany for many decades, until the state sold it off.
The '83 and '86 Chateau Margaux have not lived up to top billing status at off lines I was in where they were featured. They were good, but were not always the best, nor even the 2nd best, during the dinners.
The last '83 Margaux I had in September last year tasted very youthful and fell in the middle of the ranking, bested by a bunch of 2nd Growth from 83s, 85s and 86s.
The '86 Margaux in another dinner, also austere, did not reach the heights of the '86 Mouton in another tasting.
January — I would have maybe called it “early maturity”. Similar to a ‘90 Beausejour Duffau consumed the same night, it was excellent but restrained in a way where it felt to me a more more years would improve it. The Brane Cantenec was singing right out of the bottle and didn’t let up over the course of the evening. I kept trying to introduce more air into my glass of Margaux, but it barely budged over a couple of hours.
I’ve bought bottles of both the ‘82 and ‘83 since then so may have to run my own head-to-head soon!