Comparing the St-Jacques vineyards

Some of us seem to need a theme to use as an excuse to get together and drink wine. We’ve wanted to look further into the St-Jacques vineyards for some time, one thought comparing all of the Clos St-Jacques producers’ wines. But in casting around for an idea, we decided to put that one on hold, and this time around decided to try to compare the various St-Jacques vineyards. They are all right next to each other, but have somewhat different exposures and soil types as I understand it. Clos St-Jacques rows go top to bottom on the slope, whereas Estournelles is limited to the upper portion, and Lavaux to the lower, and can be somewhat cooler sites, depending upon the year. In surveying what we had, the best option was to do all Jadot wines and use 2005. A 1999 Jadot Clos St Jacques was thrown in to round things out. Wines were double decanted 2-4 hours before the tasting.

Wines tasted were:

2005 Jadot Gevrey-Chambertin Estournelles St-Jacques
2005 Jadot Gevrey-Cambertin Lavaux St-Jacques
2005 Jadot Gevrey-Chambertin Clos St-Jacques
1999 Jadot Gevrey-Chambertin Clos St-Jacques

(other wines included before and after-- 2014 d’Angerville Aligote, 2010 PCYM Chassagne Caillerets, 1999 Ramonet Chassagne Morgeot (corked), and 2003 Eitelsbadner-Kurthauserhofberg(sp?) Auslese)

I was a little worried that the 2005’s would not be ready, particularly as the Jadot’s for me can be a little lackluster earlier in life. On our first run through it seemed that my fears might be borne out–the wines, while enjoyable and not closed down, seemed very much the same–like they had just applied different labels to bottles of the same wine. Over time and with further air, the wines differentiated somewhat.

The wines all had a similar typical Gevrey cherry/rust/underbrush profile, and the 2005’s all had fairly remarkable fruit density and depth, still quite primary. The Estournelles was a little brighter, higher toned wine with more red cherry and a bit lighter on it’s feet (one taster preferred it as it “tasted more like Pinot Noir”). The Lavaux had darker cherry fruit, plums, and some woody underbrush, and was a bit closer in character to the Clos St-Jacques. The 05 Clos St-Jacques was concentrated, darker, more reticent, a bit brooding, with underlying dark cherry, iron, same underbrush with a few pine needles thrown on top. A little more evident oak than the others.

the 99 Clos St Jacques did not have the same concentration as the 2005’s, and was a bit reticent, but with time blossomed some dark berry, plum, cherry fruit. Some secondary character is beginning to show. I think it may be in a bit of a transitioning phase. Still very enjoyable.

In sum the wines are very similar. In a riper year like 2005, the value play in my mind would be to go for the Lavaux. I do wonder how this might change in a less ripe or warm year.

I am a big fan of Estournelles.

Also a big fan of Estournelles! Cool and with thin soils, the wines can be ethereal and perfumed, with lovely filigree structure. In LSJ the soils are deeper and it’s warmer, south-exposed but with a cooling evening breeze down the Combe. LSJ is highly morcellated and there are lots of tiny parcels. CSJ is a little bit more sheltered, more coherently divided between producers, and obviously easier to sell, too. These are all climats that are favored in most vintages, due to soil hydrology and exposition, but in cold years, especially if there’s a big crop, Estournelles might further from the margin of ripeness. But I think differences between how the vineyards are planted and cultivated, and how the wines are made, far outweigh any distinction between three sites that are, as you observe, located very close together, with soils that are variations on a theme rather than radically distinct.

This sort of tasting can be humbling to those who naturally bias towards the more expensive wine. Not that Jadot CSJ is pricey in the world of CSJ.

I sometimes think that the element of terroir that most separates CSJ from the others is a healthy dose of oak. I’m looking at you Rousseau!

William, what do you mean by “filigree structure”?

mtia

likely a laciness like seen in Latricieres Chambertin.

Just that the tannins tend to be quite fine and acids quite high, so the wines are generally structurally delicate and precise. The opposite of a structurally muscular, chunky, imposing wine.

William, thank you for chiming in this thread. I appreciated your original response and then this clarification. Your comments also illuminated some prior drinking experiences for me [cheers.gif]

1 Like

This was mostly my take the first time through the line up, but pretty soon the Estournelles separated itself and was clearly a different animal that more oak wouldn’t I think have changed.

I’m curious about this comment Alan, I find Chambolle “lacy” do you find Latricieres also “lacy” like Chambolle?

We are lucky to have William around here. This is an interesting discussion.

Jadot’s 2005s from CdN are nowhere near ready to drink, not even village wines so this was very brave of you to try. [cheers.gif]

Original Clos St Jacques, before 1850, was just bit bigger then Estournelles and it contained only the upper part.
Screen Shot 2019-09-18 at 10.29.55 AM.jpg
In 2016 vintage bottom part suffered from frost, so wine is mostly from the upper parts so this would be the vintage to compare Clos st Jacques with Estournelles.

Leo–you are correct, but that’s what we had to compare. I would much rather have done 93’s or earlier.

Interesting thought on the 2016’s.