Welcome again to our Wine Berserkers Weekly Burgundy Appellation Tasting Series. We had a great discussion with Clos Vougeot, things should be even more interesting with this week entry: Vosne-Romanée, with the wines of Flagy-Echézeaux included. As always, lets have fun and keep the discussion rolling!
Also, the thread will stay as a sticky until Monday to let Sunday posts have some time to be discussed.
Santé ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
As a reminder, a link to each week can also always be found in the Wine 101 section.
Thanks again to Ray for setting these up each week
Ok, to chime in, five TN from my Vosne-Romenée Grand Cru tasting 2+ years ago:
1985 Richebourg / Jean Gros (1 cm fill)
quite full red ruby with hints of orange, full and soft on the palate,
chewy and mouthfilling, touch of acidity but nicely balanced, even so
perfectly that it seemed a bit “unspectacular”, I liked it a lot more than
the group, 94p
1990 La Romanée / Bouchard Pere & Fils
deep red colour, quite powerful, deep robust nose of red and black
berries, not totally mature but accessable, structure present, very intense
and lingering, 95+p
2002 La Romanee / (Vi)Comte Liger-Belair
deep dark ruby with purple reflexes, very homogenious colour, an ocean of fruit, structure hidden, very intense and mouthfilling, great length, improved in the glass, got more and more complex, 99p
1947? Richebourg / Grivelet 3.5 cm
„deepest“ colour (in the last flight) which still was quite bright, but saturated, sweet nose of red fruits, a touch of mushrooms, quite substantial, outstanding balance, very satisfying and long, 95p
The seller assured the vintage to me, but the label was almost unreadable (except R…OURG), the capsule read GRIVELET, the cork wet and dark as the hell, however, the tasting confirmed IMHO the vintage: what else should it have been (ok, perhaps 1949), it was obviously a great vintage and great vineyard – and a bottle with excellent fill.
1915 Tache-Romanee / Chevillot 6 cm
lightest colour of all, a bright golden-red, developed a fine nose of mature red fruits, spices, cloves, animalic components, piquant acidity, but still in balance, excellent grip, must have been a great wine decades ago, but still alive and satisfying, 92p
Very heavy old looking bottle, very old original unreadable (unbranded?) cork. I think it is a negociant bottling (although the label read „Chevillot – proprietaire - BEAUNE) from the original „Les Gaudichots“-vineyard that in 1935 was joined with La Tache to Grand Cru status. The original 1.4 ha-La Tache was a monopole of Liger-Belair sold in 1933 to DRC. 1915 was a great vintage, however the fill was less than perfect … but who else has ever seen a bottle of this … I don´t doubt the originality a second.
(if interested I can post the report about the whole tasting)
Gerhard - Marc Chevillot was a negociant and longtime owner and chef at the (Grand) Hôtel de la Poste in Beaune (for a longtime considered a great restaurant). Subscribers to the New Yorker who have digital access to older editions online and those who have the discs of the New Yorker can access an article in the July 15, 1933 New Yorker that describes a meal at the Grand Hôtel de la Poste.
I’ve had a 1937 (or was it 1934? – it was some years back) Clos de Tart that had Chevillot’s name on the label and said “Propriétaire à Beaune.” I think that in those days it was intended to mean that he owned vineyards in Beaune.
Thought I’d add my notes from a splendid dinner from last year.
An Adelaide based collector and friend (I will call him Bjorn Richebourg for the sake of anonymity), has been planning a Richebourg dinner for several years and last night he pulled off what was perhaps the best flight of wines I have ever encountered. Bottles were sourced from Beaune, The U.S and Australia and Bjorn had agonised for weeks over the best way to present each flight. The flights were indeed perfect and 14 of us had a leisurely 6 hour meal to work through each bracket with plenty of time to watch wines unfold and discuss the performance of each wine and flight.
One Richebourg Producer, Three Vintages.
2005 Anne Gros Richebourg: A blast of kirsch punches into the nostrils followed by baking spices, sarsaparilla and liquorice. It is big, rich and chewy but not heavy. The wine has seen plenty of oak but all the rich fruits have gobbled up every skerrick leaving a wine of very good harmony. A pleasant waft of violets blows through the wine.
1998 Anne Gros Richebourg: Blunt and rather mute at first but breathed up to be the best drink of the bracket. It’s restrained and compact emitting faint floral whiffs along with some earth and red fruits. In the mouth it is compact and linear with good finesse and highly perfumed fruits. It builds, seems to gain weight with air and really fans out in the mouth once swallowed.
1996 Anne Gros Richebourg: Slightly oxidised with an aroma that is more advanced than it should be and plenty of earth and soy. It has the piercing spine of the vintage but the fruits in the mouth are muddled and tinged by too much caramel. I suspect a sound bottle would be quite delicious.
Two Richebourg Producers, Two Vintages
2006 Gros Frere et Soeur Richebourg: The oak pokes out a bit and the whole package starts off demure and simple. It builds and takes on some cardamom spice and dark fruits. It is chewy and a little chunky with plenty of underlying muscle.
2001 Gros Frere et Soeur Richebourg: The oak here is also somewhat resinous but plays in the background. There’s a strong spicy, smoked meat lift on the nose and some pretty floral notes. In the mouth the fruits are lively and of a red persuasion and there’s an enticing bed of geological matter.
2006 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Richebourg: A clear step up in class. This wine is frustrated, it has so much to offer but it is bound up so tightly in a kinetic ball of minerals. There are some beautiful floral notes with anise and smoked meats. It has great proportion and purity delivering a flavour punch without being obtrusive or overt. The finish is the true peacock’s tail and this is as good a young wine that I’ve drunk over the past year.
2001 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Richebourg: There’s a lovely cool fruit feel to this mineral infused Burgundy. Some smoked meats, beef stock and violets grace the nose whilst the whole package is all about lacy texture and finesse in the mouth. There’s some underlying sinewy muscle but this is quite feminine in style for Richebourg.
Three Great Vintages
1990 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Richebourg: Sweet, youthful, complex and spicy. A wine of great shape and drive with an intoxicating thread of Indian spices. Far from ready, but with impeccable balance, a true joy to drink.
1985 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Richebourg: Fairly developed on the nose with aromas of soy, hoisin, mushroom and beef stock. Sweet, vinous and lacy in the mouth. There are some coffee notes sneaking in and it is just a little blurry, lacking the definition I had expected. I suspect our bottle was not in perfect nick.
1978 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Richebourg: Stunning aromatics of soy, freshly tilled earth, blood, violets and sweet fruits. Its liquid velvet as it hits the palate, lapping around the gums delivering a silky umami hit to every crevice of the mouth. It has perfect poise and shape and finishes with such authority, leaving the most wondrous, sensual impression once swallowed.
Amuse Bouche Or Abuse Mouche
Bjorn was concerned at how these two from less heralded vintages would show. He was also alarmed that Michael Broadbent had inferred that only two of the Domaine’s wines were released in 56 with Richebourg not being one of them. A letter from Aubert de Villaine allayed all fears as he noted ‘’I think what Michael Broadbent means is that Romanee-Conti and La Tache 1956 were the only to be presented at a tasting and went on to explain that all the crus were bottled in 1956, except for the Echezeaux’.
1956 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Richebourg: So here’s a wine that has some traits not dissimilar to 2004 (was there a ladybug plague of 56?). It has green notes of basil and mirepoix with some liniment, mahogany and mushrooms. It is quite an intriguing wine as it lacks power but is lacy, delicate and ethereal with surprisingly good length.
1936 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Richebourg: Correspondence with Aubert led us to believe that this wine may have been made from pre-phylloxera vines, he asked that we inspect the cork and if the words ‘vigne francais non reconstitutee’ were present that this would be confirmation. The condition of the cork allowed us not to inspect anything legible but the wine was superb.The wine looks bright and energetic and has an intoxicating bouquet of cumin, cardamom, cinnamon, chestnuts and earth. In the mouth it is the texture that is striking, it is silky but thick (almost in the way that an oyster is), with the most beguiling tapestry of fruits, florals and earth. It was a wine that keeps offering up different smells and flavours and it is such a treat to drink.
Richebourg And Neighbours, Same Vintage
1998 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Romanee-St-Vivant: Floral and sweet with crystalline red fruits. Lacy and fine in the mouth working within a fairly narrow channel at this stage. Beautiful, fine acidity to the finish, will never be a blockbuster but is a delicious, refined RSV that works on fine structure and aromatics.
1998 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Richebourg: Quite obstinate and the definite thorn between two roses in this bracket. A little reduced but breathes up to show some raspberries, minerals and meat although remains quite unyielding. There is density here and it is balanced, I suggest we caught it at a grumpy moment.
1998 Domaine de la Romanee Conti Romanee-Conti: Super refined and elegant and a wine that demands to be approached rather than showing off. There are so many gorgeously pretty things going on including raspberry and pomegranate fruits, ginger, sweet earth and minerals. The palate is a kaleidoscope of paisley and pastel things and as is the case with Romanee-Conti, it is a wine of perfect shape. There are no hard edges, not a hair is out of place yet it beguiles with all sorts of unobtrusive elements that collectively form near perfect wine.
Yay, finally my drinking coincides with the burgundy weekly theme. I can’t compete with the fancy wines everyone else posted about, but I did just happen to open this a few nights ago:
Posted from CellarTracker
Holy Toledo, Jeremy! I think my TN of a lowly Grivot '02 villages will have to wait for a while, after a lineup like that!
1995 Arnoux Vosne-Romanee AOC: this is still a little cold, but showing very nicely with a gratin of yukon golds and some morels we found yesterday in the Wenatchee National Forest. Good acids, and pure cherry fruit. First pour showed more secondary characteristics, but now the fruit is moving to the foreground. I look forward to watching this develop over the evening.
MUCH better than yesterday’s 1995 Michele et Patrice Rion Chambolle “Les Cras,” which should have been drunk 3-4 years ago.
I hope we will generate a lively discussion of the hallowed climats of Vosne-Romanee, so I’ll throw out my personal (and very amatuer) classment of the crus…
First division grand crus (roughly upper half of all red grand crus):
Romanee-Conti
La Romanee
La Tache
Romanee-Saint-Vivant
Richebourg
Grands Echezeaux
La Grande Rue (some will surely disagree)
Second division grand crus:
Echezeaux
Quasi-Grand 1er Crus:
Cros Parantoux
Malconsorts
Top 1er Crus (roughly top 20-25% of all red 1er crus):
Gaudichots
Beaux Monts
Petite Monts
Suchots
Other 1er Crus:
There are eight other 1er crus, with honorable mention to Brulees, Chaumes, Reignots, En Orveaux. There should not be any “ordinary” wines from Vosne-Romanee 1er crus.
BTW, last week’s post on Vougeot is here… http://www.wineberserkers.com/viewtopic.php?p=315697#p315697" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A couple of quickies from memory last week.
'91 DRC Richebourg-
This is drinking really well now. It is more elegant than the LT and shows more nice floral stemmy complexity. Overall it is lovely, balanced, very complex and outstanding.
'91 DRC La Tache-
This is much bigger and still slightly brooding. Still there is awesome depth allied with great spicy complexity. The stems here are less evident but this packed and stacked with all of the good stuff. Amazing.
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the notes.
If you had but one bottle of the '91 La Tache, when would you pop it ?
Josh,
It is just entering its drinking window so while i might open one now, I think it will be even better in 2-4 years.
I wouldn´t say “First division grand crus” is roughly upper half of all red grand crus … better the upper third … (which are 10-11 out of 31 …)
Reg. La Grande Rue and Grands Echezeaux:
LGR has the potential I´m sure to be first division but under the present ownership it ISN´T ! Even the best vintages from the past 20 years (1990, 1999, 2002) are clearly behind the top-Richebourgs and RSVs … not to speak about the others …and some vintages are failures (1991).
GE: for me it is something like a “Top”-Clos Vougeot … often lacking the finesse and exotic aromatics of the other GCs, but with a certain fullness and chewy quality … also very much depending on producer … NO, not first devision for me …
please edit the typo: Cros Parantoux !
on the same level as Malconsorts there is Aux Reignots !
Liger-Belair, S.Cathiard and Arnoux all produce great wines from this lieu-dit !
Also: “Aux dessus de Malconsorts” is also entitled to 1er Cru (but perhaps not as good, the wines can even be labelled as Malconsorts …)
Top 1er Crus:
Les Gaudichots YES, even capable of GC-level
Beaumonts YES
Suchots PARTIALLY, depending on producer and parcel on the lieu-dit which is the largest in VR. Arnoux has the best situated parcel on top … but there are such weak examples, too, so I wouldn´t classify it as Top 1er …
Petits Monts: not IMHO … there are outstanding examples (Liger-Belair, but even his is definitely behind his Reignots …), but also mean ones …
Chaumes is one of the softest, fruitiest 1er Crus … the best I have tasted comes from Liger-Belair, Arnouxs is getting better, but is nevertheless his least exciting 1er Cru … and there are many disapointing examples …
En Orveaux: even Cathiards is FAR behind his Malconsorts and Suchots, Mongeard-Mugnerets is never top notch …
Another very good 1er: Clos des Reas !
My classification of Vosne 1er Crus:
(those in paranthesis beween two categories)
Top quality, sometimes on GC-level:
Cros Parantoux
Aux Reignots
Les Malconsorts
(Au dessus de Malconsorts)
(Les Gaudichots)
Excellent quality:
Les Beauxmonts
Aux Brulees
(Les Suchots)
Very good quality:
Petits-Monts
Clos des Reas
(Les Chaumes)
Ok, but sometimes disapointing quality:
En Orveaux
Les Rouges
La Croix Rameau
There shouldn´t be any ordinary wines in Vosne … but sometimes there ARE !
Gerhard
Generally agrees with Gerhard on this classification. Ref Petits Monts, I had a disappointing 1999 by Potel recently, and ref Suchots, I had a decent 2003 Cacheux. More generally, I am (unlike Gerhard) a Grivot fan across the range (although not the Richebourg that I have never tasted) and regularly have the Bossieres (village)
while I enjoy reading the tns from tastings awhile ago, I’m hoping to see notes from recent consumption in this thread - so rather than digging in your data bank, please dig in your cellar!
Here are a couple from a tasting at a friends.
1996 Hudelot-Noellat Vosne Romanee Les Suchots
Medium concentration.
The nose is floral and shows some red fruit but is not generous as I would have expected.
The palate is very stern and wound up. Not a lot of length. Not sure what this will become. I got to explore it for well over an hour and a half.
1995 Hudelot-Noellat Vosne Romanee Les Beaumonts
Medium concentration.
An effusive gorgeous nose. Focused core of intense red fruit. Spice. A real purity too.
The palate is generous and shows big mid palate filling red fruit. The finish is magical.
This is incredble!
Alright, so does anyone have any favorite producers to go to for village level Vosne-Romanée?
2007 Vosne-Romanée “Clos du Château” (Monopole) - Domaine Louis-Michel LIGER-BELAIR
medium red, but saturated, sweet nose of red berries, violets and toast, highly elegant, and complex, really mouthfilling, long, 90p
(the 2002 and 2005 are mind-blowing - unfortunately the price level is also 1er Cru …)
ok, again from a tasting in late April … but tonight I´m going to open something from my cellar …
Agree with Gerhard here. I like this 2007 quite a bit.
2007 Rhys Pinot Noir Home Vineyard–spicy version of a Malconsorts…