I’ve had quite a bit of Magdelaine these last several years, ranging in vintages from 1966 to its final vintage, 2011. Had a 1982 just two weeks ago. Some of the vintages from the 1980s, generally speaking, are gorgeous and so perfectly ripe and mature. Not in danger of falling off any cliff. The ‘66 I had a couple years ago was exceptional for its fresh character while showing the full range of mature Bordeaux expression. And just so damn alive. I have also had a few 2000s recently, with really only one showing itself open while the other two being great but really more about potential. I felt that way about a recent 1995 as well.
So why am I rambling?
Despite the numerous notes on CT about this 2005 Chateau Magdelaine being open for business, at least for me, it is nowhere near ready for showtime. I decanted it for 2 hours, saving about 1/4 bottle for the next time, following it for several hours that first night. Finished the remaining 1/4 bottle tonight. It still has not budged that much. Yea, shows some more rounding and deeper fruit, but still rather primary. Love the structure of this wine - I’ve seen CT notes saying it’s low, medium and high acid. All over the map. I think the structure is just right, and pretty much what I expect from a vintage like 2005. The weight of the fruit, the acid, the tannins, all seem in balance, but not a wallflower. It is a 2005, after all. What we are not seeing yet, however, is exactly where this wine will go - it’s that primary still. I love the range of red, purple and black fruits. Some Indian spices and even a modest kiss of oak spice. Some dusty notes almost reminiscent of Rutherford Napa. I think this will be an excellent Magdelaine. I do not think you should open it now, unless of course, you happen to have a lot of it and wanna see where it is. I just grabbed six so did exactly that, even though I had sorta told myself recently, 25+ years on any Magdelaine. Even that 1995 needs a bit more time. Drinking as much as I have of the 1980s vintages, I feel pretty confident taking that position with my own stash. I’m sure I will break this rule as I am incapable of living by almost any self-imposed rule, but really, Magdelaine needs 25+ in most vintages. The only truly young vintage of Magdelaine that I have had and said, damn, this young wine drinks well now is 2011. I just ordered some more of that, too. And even that wine has miles to it.
If any of these vintages like 95, 00, 05, 09 and 10 develop - and I think that they will - like 1982, 85 and 86, my holding them for a very long time will pay dividends. Damn that 82 that I recently had was so gorgeous, drank it next to a 1982 Haut Brion. While the Haut Brion was in another class of wine, that Magdelaine was mighty fine in its own right.
I am afraid we will not see St Ems like this anymore.
PS. Tom Reddick had a solid retro recently on this Chateau, but did not have the 2005. A very worthy read to get some pulse on this Chateau.