Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

Tasting notes, varietals, grapes - anything related to wine
Message
Author
User avatar
billnanson
Posts: 1445
Joined: October 22nd, 2010, 11:08 am
Location: Bern and Beaune

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#151 Post by billnanson » June 13th, 2018, 1:28 am

Kevin Harvey wrote:Bill,
It sounds like my sensitivity is similar to yours. I cannot finish a glass that shows this awful character (chemical not “green” to me). Most recently I couldn’t drink an otherwis nice grower champagne over the weekend.
FWIW sensitivity to this compound is not related to tasting acuity. Some of the best tasters I know are blind to it.
Indeed Kevin - it's like a trigger point - at a certain (low) level, as noted, it's just another element of complexity, but at a certain threshold for me it is as bad/undrinkable as if the wine is corked.
Karl K wrote:Bill, can you explain why you taste it more in Gamay? Just easier to detect in that grape, or more prevalent with it for some reason?
Nope, can't explain, though it's certainly more prevalent (but well below my 'gag' threshold) and whilst I saw it a bit more in 14 than in 15 and 16, the fact that wines show it in those latter vintages too, implies to me that phenolic ripeness might not be 100% the driver...
Nathan V. wrote:
Alan Rath wrote:
Howard Cooper wrote: Fourrier said in an interview with Levi Dalton on I'll Drink to That that he did not think ladybugs is the cause.
There is just no excuse whatsoever for them not to know this. Too easy to compare pyrazines in ladybugs with what's in the wine and know for sure.
It's because the ladybug thing is a red herring. I don't know any vignerons (not that I'm best friends with any in Burgundy) that think 2004 was ladybugs.
Red herring or red bug? So you ignore completely the link I gave you to the academics who research this and say LBT (lady bug taint) is real? Rather you say (paraphrase alert) 'I don't know any vignerons but I'm right' on one hand, but you imply that everything else is unscientific on the other. Ask Thomas Bouley, Charles Lachaux, Nico Rossignol, David Croix amongst, many, many others what they think. There are, of-course, many other vignerons that don't believe it (though can't propose another mechanism) too - balance in reporting is important.

Science is easy - you come up with a hypothesis and then test it - until then it remains a theory. Before the 2011 vintage Jean-Marie's theory - which he also explained to me - was no better, no worse than mine, just different. His explanation did not pass the test of 2011 - so far mine did. As a professional scientist until concentrating on writing since 2013, I will simply wait for the next, better, theory than mine and I will happily jump ship to that - that's what science is. Whatever it might sound like, I will only back the LBT theory until there's there's a demonstrable other mechanism. Your version of 'science' (on my reading!) simply says that LBT doesn't exist - is that not inflexible and unrealistic?

If you want me to come up with with the 'proof' because it's my theory, no problem, give me $100k and I'll do all the GC-MS work myself - because I can :) Otherwise ask the academics who I linked...
Last edited by billnanson on June 13th, 2018, 1:40 am, edited 2 times in total.
Burgundy Report - online since 2002...

A Songeur
Posts: 1028
Joined: April 27th, 2010, 6:45 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#152 Post by A Songeur » June 13th, 2018, 1:31 am

Opened Bouley Volnay les carelles 2011 and it was delicious, still primary but not Greenies detected. A very good bottle.
In my book, there are tainted 2011s but problem no where near 2004 and the wines are better.
Antoine

Robert Panzer
Posts: 2139
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 8:17 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#153 Post by Robert Panzer » June 13th, 2018, 5:29 am

As someone who was certainly on page one of the original discussion, I feel that time in bottle has vindicated my overall impressions, that we are talking about one of the shortest growing seasons on record, with understandably marginal physiological ripeness, aka grape pyrazine.
It was proposed by proponents of the bug theory that, just like with the '04s, the "bug pyrazine" would bloom in bottle. "Beware, the monster will come harder in the future, oak is hiding it for now" was a prognostication. (not a direct quote, but that appeared to be the global idea).
I have witnessed quite the contrary, with little to no mention of ladybugs/harsh chem weirdness both in cellartracker notes, notes posted here, and experiences with wines in bottle, including 20 some tastings of the full horizontal 2011 production of different growers.
The poster child early promoters of the bug thing (Bill, Kevin etc) are still on that wagon, although it seems that Mr Bill has retracted his far more broadly sweeping original diagnosis to now being reduced to "25%" for those with a vibrating table. I have only seen a backtracking/narrowing of scope rather than an expansion of the bug theory, which doesn't jive with the original call.
Note once again that this thread hasn't been touched in five years, whereas one would think that it would have been repeatedly drug out by outraged and disgusted consumers of 2011s if such a vast problem existed.....nope.
I very much appreciate the dialogue, with individuals' experiences allowing for data points.
The "mixed bag" of opinions is understandable and welcome.
In my opinion, which is formed from my direct experience harvesting at 11 estates in 2011, with the wines and discussions with the growers with whom I work, I think it is an age old question, not a new fangled one-off: there have always been and will always be pyrazines in wine, ALWAYS.
Does bug pyrazine exist? Of course, the science is clear, with the Ontario example being the most prolific. (incidentally, when I googled the ontario ladybug taint, there was a wine-searcher article about it, with one responder to the article.....Mr Bill!!, with a link to his site....)
How much in any given vintage and to whose perception threshold is certainly a big fat ?.
I have much respect for Bill and Kevin as very experienced and passionate wine lovers.
I am comfortable agreeing to disagree.
One question, though, Bill: Nico's 2011s are splendid wines, and he knows it. Did he really say that he thinks ladybugs are in the mix for his own estate, or at other estates...? I encourage you to be careful when putting names out there in defense of your vision.
Like many impassioned arenas, there is more to discuss than the slivers that we touch upon here.
I T B - Down to Earth Wines

Robert Panzer
Posts: 2139
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 8:17 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#154 Post by Robert Panzer » June 13th, 2018, 5:36 am

One anecdotal point with regards to zee bugz comes from a discussion that I had with the Mugneret Gibourg sisters (and team) about '04.
They don't at all believe in the ladybug thing, attributing the pyrazine element to the residual stress of '03s historic heat, disabling the vine's ability to regulate its life juice, aka sap, or sève. No sap, no ripeness.
To reinforce the point, they all recalled how the number of ladybugs in '03 was far greater than '04, with one story about how they were crawling all over the winery walls during vinifications and early elevage. Yet no one is discussing the '03 ladybug issue in Burgundy.
This is but one data point.
I T B - Down to Earth Wines

User avatar
billnanson
Posts: 1445
Joined: October 22nd, 2010, 11:08 am
Location: Bern and Beaune

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#155 Post by billnanson » June 13th, 2018, 5:47 am

Two points Robert:
1. No, I did not say that any of those winemakers have buggy wines in 2011, only that they believe that the bugs to be the root cause of the problems of 2011 and 2004, and because of that they were extra exigent/vigilant and detail concious in that respect in 2011 - their wines are a testament to that. Please don't YOU put false words in my mouth...
2. Half of what you say re M-G is roughly the same theory that JM Fourrier had about 2004 - re 2003 heat-stress, but doesn't fit with 2011. The other half - and I questioned dozens of producers re 2003 and bugs the last time you raised the point - because 2004 was my first harvest and I can't personally comment - all said that 'there were none and that the sisters obviously confused 2003 with 2004.' Take from that what you will - they are not my words. But if you have photos, or can get them, that would be a very interesting talking point as what pyraziines I've ever noted in 2003s are very different beasts to 2004 and 2011...
Burgundy Report - online since 2002...

Nathan V.
Posts: 1748
Joined: November 9th, 2009, 11:47 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#156 Post by Nathan V. » June 13th, 2018, 9:02 am

billnanson wrote:
Nathan V. wrote:
Alan Rath wrote: There is just no excuse whatsoever for them not to know this. Too easy to compare pyrazines in ladybugs with what's in the wine and know for sure.
It's because the ladybug thing is a red herring. I don't know any vignerons (not that I'm best friends with any in Burgundy) that think 2004 was ladybugs.
Red herring or red bug? So you ignore completely the link I gave you to the academics who research this and say LBT (lady bug taint) is real? Rather you say (paraphrase alert) 'I don't know any vignerons but I'm right' on one hand, but you imply that everything else is unscientific on the other. Ask Thomas Bouley, Charles Lachaux, Nico Rossignol, David Croix amongst, many, many others what they think. There are, of-course, many other vignerons that don't believe it (though can't propose another mechanism) too - balance in reporting is important.

Science is easy - you come up with a hypothesis and then test it - until then it remains a theory. Before the 2011 vintage Jean-Marie's theory - which he also explained to me - was no better, no worse than mine, just different. His explanation did not pass the test of 2011 - so far mine did. As a professional scientist until concentrating on writing since 2013, I will simply wait for the next, better, theory than mine and I will happily jump ship to that - that's what science is. Whatever it might sound like, I will only back the LBT theory until there's there's a demonstrable other mechanism. Your version of 'science' (on my reading!) simply says that LBT doesn't exist - is that not inflexible and unrealistic?

If you want me to come up with with the 'proof' because it's my theory, no problem, give me $100k and I'll do all the GC-MS work myself - because I can :) Otherwise ask the academics who I linked...
Sorry, I haven't had a chance to read that paper yet, but I printed it out and will get to it as soon as I have the time. I don't know that I'm right, I just think that the ladybug thing is a matter of fact and until those facts are produced I don't see it as particularly compelling based on what I know and have heard from people on the ground (which is incomplete and is probably less than you). If you do not agree that the burden of proof rests with the more complicated theory that there was a ladybug infestation bears the burden of proof rather than the simpler theory that it was just a bad vintage then I fear we are at an impasse on that front. I think that since ladybugs would leave some kind of chemical signature in the wine, then that needs to be isolated in order for it to be true. If that happens, I'll gladly accept and move on. kshin crushing bugs and providing anecdotes about how they smell relative to wine doesn't count as real evidence to me, but I have no problem with him making decisions that way. We all have heuristics that we use to operate that aren't exactly scientific.

If I had $100K to spend on scientific investigation, this would be way down the list. I'm fascinated with the mutability of vegetative material, especially with old clones (petite serine, pinot fin) in massale plantings.

Again, thanks for the link and the civil discourse. For my part, I promise that my mind is open to changing (and incidentally, what sort of work did you do previously?).
ITB-ish.
V = V a n der g r i f t

k s h i n
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3866
Joined: August 17th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#157 Post by k s h i n » June 13th, 2018, 10:15 am

Nathan V. wrote:crushing bugs and providing anecdotes about how they smell relative to wine doesn't count as real evidence to me, but I have no problem with him making decisions that way. We all have heuristics that we use to operate that aren't exactly scientific.
Let's replace LBT with TCA, would you still say that practice is not valid?
Kevin
ITB - I may be offering some of the wines that I drink and post TNs on.

User avatar
Paul H Galli
Posts: 3540
Joined: July 1st, 2009, 2:55 pm
Location: Monterey Peninsula

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#158 Post by Paul H Galli » June 13th, 2018, 10:31 am

I suspect the culprits of 2004 are a combination of the following:
1) LOUSY 2004 vintage. [barf.gif]
2) Higher than average natural pyrazines.
3) Additional Ladybug pyrazines.

IMO, the 2011s are better wines.
The 2011 D'Angerville "Fremiets" is quite nice. (and Bill N likes this wine too)

TTT
Opinot, not Oporto...

k s h i n
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3866
Joined: August 17th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#159 Post by k s h i n » June 13th, 2018, 1:00 pm

Paul H Galli wrote:IMO, the 2011s are better wines.
The 2011 D'Angerville "Fremiets" is quite nice. (and Bill N likes this wine too)

TTT
I believe most of us agree that the 11 is a much better vintage and some are quite enjoyable.
Kevin
ITB - I may be offering some of the wines that I drink and post TNs on.

Nathan V.
Posts: 1748
Joined: November 9th, 2009, 11:47 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#160 Post by Nathan V. » June 22nd, 2018, 11:53 am

billnanson wrote:Nathan - that is exactly empirical evidence - I think you mean the scientific evidence :)

I'll leave the GC-MS work to these people:


You don't believe, so others have to disavow? And presumably these people should stop their work at the same time?

"All wines have pyrazines, it is the relative amount in the mix of hundreds (thousands?) of other organoleptic compounds." Actually, to my sensitive nose, this type of pyrazine is very rare, outside of the two vintages under discussion, I do get hits in red burgundy, but significantly less than one in a hundred samples - that's why it's so easy for me to spot - having an inbuilt dislike for something makes it very easy to find. Swap to gamay and I see it far more often - maybe 3-5% of the time, but normally on a very modest level where it is more an extra note of complexity than something that dominates...

Craig G - same taint, but yes, on a much lower level. I might find many 2011s 'irritating', but my reaction is modest compared to a lot of 2004s. It's like before somebody explained coked wines to you - you would drink it but not enjoy it - but once you recognise what it is, not only can you not enjoy it, you can't even make yourself drink it - you become sensitised. That's 90% of 2004 reds and a much more modest proportion of 2011s for me...
Bill, I finally got around to reading that article. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 6918303089 and I'm not sure why you think this article has anything to say about the issue at hand (aside from that, I have nits to pick about the statistical analysis). Just from the abstract:
Journal Article wrote: "No specific aroma compounds were identified in the GC-O study of green wines, however the wines contained significantly higher levels of fusel alcohols. The interaction between isoamyl alcohol and the anthocyanin-derivative fraction and/or tannins is suggested to be involved in the formation of green character in red wines.

...

Cluster analysis (Supplementary material 7) showed that equivalent aroma fractions from wines 1 (low green score) and 18 (high green score and the highest for vegetal aroma) are plotted very close together, indicating that they present similar aroma properties. The exception is F9, which for wine 1 is mainly sweet and floral, while alcoholic and solvent-like for wine 18. However, the GC-O analysis of these fractions did not show any difference in the aroma zones of both fractions and no relevant compound with vegetal aroma in the green wine (wine 18).

Most surprisingly, the GC-O screening of the samples (wines 18, 39–42) showing vegetal notes did not reveal the presence of any outstanding differences in the aroma profiles of non-green wines (wines 1 and 19) (data not shown). A remarkable difference was, however, that green wines seemed to have smaller GC-O scores in fruity esters and slightly higher scores in fusel alcohols. The significant higher levels of fusel alcohols, was corroborated by quantitative analysis, as summarised in Table 4.

...

4. Conclusions
The green character is a multivariate character associated to both aroma and mouthfeel descriptors such as vegetal, astringency, green and dry tannins.

Although a direct link between chemicals and sensory perception has not been yet established, wine fractions containing small anthocyanin derivative pigments (<tetramers) and tannins with higher degree of polymerisation (average of decamers) seem to be the most important non-volatile drivers imparting astringent-related sensations. Similarly, fractions containing anthocyanin-derived pigments resistant to SO2 and precipitating with ovalbumin seem to be related to stickiness (called dry tannins by experts), while tannin fractions seem to be responsible for dry sensations (called green tannins by experts).

The interaction between isoamyl alcohol and the anthocyanin-derivative fraction and/or tannins is suggested to contribute to the green character and to enhance it in red wines. These three elements apparently explain the sticky and dry character, but cannot explain vegetal odour nuances related to the green character. Besides, the intensity of green character is demonstrated to be wine-dependent and it is suggested to be masked by woody, oxidation and/or ripe fruit aromas present in oaked aged red wines.
In sum, they can't identify any compounds that positively identify "green notes" in wine. The closest they get also requires "under ripe" tannins. It has always been my conjecture, and that of vignerons I've spoken with (not nearly as many as you), that it was the toxic mixture of under ripeness of everything with elevated alcohol that doomed this vintage from the start. So I guess we're back where we started.

Anyway, nice to know that I can still read and (mostly) understand this literature after so long away.
ITB-ish.
V = V a n der g r i f t

Travis Scott
Posts: 107
Joined: September 19th, 2014, 4:43 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#161 Post by Travis Scott » June 22nd, 2018, 1:42 pm

Conceptually, GM is the exact inverse of a fetish. Like an "antifetish."

You have a few people who can't get it up if stimulus X or object Y are absent.

You have a few people who can't get it down (a sip of wine) if stimulus X or label Y are present.

Then you have 7.59999 billion people who love unadorned, uncomplicated sex, and would happily slurp down cup after cup of 04 red burgundy at a BBQ party, or even swirl and sip it out of a fancy glass at the table.

Only question for the market is, how many of the 7.59999 billion are buying 04 red burgundy vs. how many of the 10k aren't buying it?

User avatar
Greg Pierce
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1787
Joined: June 1st, 2009, 3:35 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#162 Post by Greg Pierce » June 29th, 2018, 7:00 pm

FWIW, I had a 2004 Chevillon Vaucrains last night that was (1) delicious and (2) had no trace of the "green" (whatever it's cause) aspect that many 2004 burgundies have been afflicted with.

Yes, I can recognize the "green" character. Indeed, Chevillon's wines were the "poster child" (for me) for the unpleasant aspects of the 2004 vintage. Upon initial tasting of the 04 Chevillons I bought, I despaired of ever enjoying them.

Between John Gilman's argument that the "green" aspects would diminish with age, and my general antipathy towards reselling wine, I kept them, hoping Gilman was correct. So far, he has been -- at least with the 2004 burgundies I've drank in the last couple years.

User avatar
A. So
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2965
Joined: July 19th, 2011, 7:58 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#163 Post by A. So » June 30th, 2018, 4:54 am

Greg Pierce wrote:FWIW, I had a 2004 Chevillon Vaucrains last night that was (1) delicious and (2) had no trace of the "green" (whatever it's cause) aspect that many 2004 burgundies have been afflicted with.

Yes, I can recognize the "green" character. Indeed, Chevillon's wines were the "poster child" (for me) for the unpleasant aspects of the 2004 vintage. Upon initial tasting of the 04 Chevillons I bought, I despaired of ever enjoying them.

Between John Gilman's argument that the "green" aspects would diminish with age, and my general antipathy towards reselling wine, I kept them, hoping Gilman was correct. So far, he has been -- at least with the 2004 burgundies I've drank in the last couple years.
Interesting. The 2004 Chevillon Vaucrains is one of the most disgusting wines I've had in recent memory. It was served to me double blind and I instinctively identified it as 2004 red Burgundy without thinking about it. I guess it's another example of varying sensitivities.

And it was a "sound" bottle.
エaイdドrリiアaンn (93 pts.)

k s h i n
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3866
Joined: August 17th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#164 Post by k s h i n » June 30th, 2018, 6:41 am

A. So wrote:
Greg Pierce wrote:FWIW, I had a 2004 Chevillon Vaucrains last night that was (1) delicious and (2) had no trace of the "green" (whatever it's cause) aspect that many 2004 burgundies have been afflicted with.

Yes, I can recognize the "green" character. Indeed, Chevillon's wines were the "poster child" (for me) for the unpleasant aspects of the 2004 vintage. Upon initial tasting of the 04 Chevillons I bought, I despaired of ever enjoying them.

Between John Gilman's argument that the "green" aspects would diminish with age, and my general antipathy towards reselling wine, I kept them, hoping Gilman was correct. So far, he has been -- at least with the 2004 burgundies I've drank in the last couple years.
Interesting. The 2004 Chevillon Vaucrains is one of the most disgusting wines I've had in recent memory. It was served to me double blind and I instinctively identified it as 2004 red Burgundy without thinking about it. I guess it's another example of varying sensitivities.

And it was a "sound" bottle.
Based on my observation, a lot of folks either don’t know what the 04 taint is or can’t tell. BTW, if tasted blind, some amateurs will do better than the pros.
Kevin
ITB - I may be offering some of the wines that I drink and post TNs on.

Laurent Gibet
Posts: 1044
Joined: May 1st, 2010, 9:48 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#165 Post by Laurent Gibet » July 24th, 2018, 8:42 am

Rousseau Chambertin Clos de Bèze 2004 - 30 june 2018 : ?
Like for the botlle tasted last year, confirmation of LBT, for an unkind very rooty (gentian like) expression ...
www.invinoveritastoulouse.fr

User avatar
John Morris
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 17665
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
Location: Gotham

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#166 Post by John Morris » July 25th, 2018, 2:07 pm

A. So wrote:
Greg Pierce wrote:FWIW, I had a 2004 Chevillon Vaucrains last night that was (1) delicious and (2) had no trace of the "green" (whatever it's cause) aspect that many 2004 burgundies have been afflicted with.

Yes, I can recognize the "green" character. Indeed, Chevillon's wines were the "poster child" (for me) for the unpleasant aspects of the 2004 vintage. Upon initial tasting of the 04 Chevillons I bought, I despaired of ever enjoying them.

Between John Gilman's argument that the "green" aspects would diminish with age, and my general antipathy towards reselling wine, I kept them, hoping Gilman was correct. So far, he has been -- at least with the 2004 burgundies I've drank in the last couple years.
Interesting. The 2004 Chevillon Vaucrains is one of the most disgusting wines I've had in recent memory. It was served to me double blind and I instinctively identified it as 2004 red Burgundy without thinking about it. I guess it's another example of varying sensitivities.

And it was a "sound" bottle.
How long ago was this? Just curious.
"English doesn't just borrow foreign words, it stalks languages down dark alleyways, knocks them over and then rifles their pockets for new words." -- @Another NPC on YouTube

User avatar
A. So
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2965
Joined: July 19th, 2011, 7:58 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#167 Post by A. So » July 25th, 2018, 2:09 pm

John Morris wrote:
A. So wrote:
Greg Pierce wrote:FWIW, I had a 2004 Chevillon Vaucrains last night that was (1) delicious and (2) had no trace of the "green" (whatever it's cause) aspect that many 2004 burgundies have been afflicted with.

Yes, I can recognize the "green" character. Indeed, Chevillon's wines were the "poster child" (for me) for the unpleasant aspects of the 2004 vintage. Upon initial tasting of the 04 Chevillons I bought, I despaired of ever enjoying them.

Between John Gilman's argument that the "green" aspects would diminish with age, and my general antipathy towards reselling wine, I kept them, hoping Gilman was correct. So far, he has been -- at least with the 2004 burgundies I've drank in the last couple years.
Interesting. The 2004 Chevillon Vaucrains is one of the most disgusting wines I've had in recent memory. It was served to me double blind and I instinctively identified it as 2004 red Burgundy without thinking about it. I guess it's another example of varying sensitivities.

And it was a "sound" bottle.
How long ago was this? Just curious.
December 2017
エaイdドrリiアaンn (93 pts.)

User avatar
John Morris
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 17665
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
Location: Gotham

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#168 Post by John Morris » July 25th, 2018, 2:11 pm

OK. So time does not explain the difference between your impressions and Greg's!
"English doesn't just borrow foreign words, it stalks languages down dark alleyways, knocks them over and then rifles their pockets for new words." -- @Another NPC on YouTube

User avatar
P@u1_M3nk3s
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1633
Joined: June 7th, 2009, 2:14 pm
Location: El Cerrito CA

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#169 Post by P@u1_M3nk3s » July 25th, 2018, 8:07 pm

Earlier this year a friend opened a 2004 Gevry. The other three tasters couldn’t seem to perceive the ashtray flavors I was getting. (That’s what the green meanies taste like to me.)
Cheers,
Paul

User avatar
Craig G
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 15596
Joined: March 6th, 2011, 10:57 am
Location: Town of Cats

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#170 Post by Craig G » July 25th, 2018, 8:17 pm

My impression is that there are two axes: How much you detect, and how unpleasant that aroma is to you. In my experience the 2004 Chevillons have had the most obvious GM signature of any wines I’ve had. They are very easy to pick as 04s in vertical tastings. But I haven’t found those aromas to be all that unpleasant, at least not to the point of not wanting to drink my pour. It’s clear that some people are totally put off by these aromas.

My experience is only from tastings with 40ml pours, so perhaps drinking a bottle with a few other people would grate on me more.
“You need to look down to the bottom shelf where they keep the Fighting Cock” — Corey N.

C. Gle@son

James Billy
Posts: 1027
Joined: November 10th, 2016, 6:53 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#171 Post by James Billy » July 26th, 2018, 4:03 am

Will those 2004s ever blossom into things of beauty or always be 'tainted'?

User avatar
Josh Grossman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2746
Joined: August 30th, 2017, 11:26 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#172 Post by Josh Grossman » July 26th, 2018, 9:00 am

James Billy wrote:Will those 2004s ever blossom into things of beauty or always be 'tainted'?
I only have one bottle from each vintage, respectively and am holding on to them in hopes that they might turn into something good in 20 years:
2004 Simon Bize Corton-Charlemagne
2011 Domaine Denis Bachelet Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Cru Les Corbeaux Vieilles Vignes

Am I waiting in vain?

User avatar
A. So
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2965
Joined: July 19th, 2011, 7:58 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#173 Post by A. So » July 26th, 2018, 9:12 am

Nothing really wrong with 2004/11 whites. Some pick up green (myself included) but it doesn't bother me the way it does in red wine.

I think Bachelet is a terribly overrated producer anyway, and the heavy hand+bad vintage would incline me to consign or somehow get rid of that bottle.
エaイdドrリiアaンn (93 pts.)

User avatar
Josh Grossman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2746
Joined: August 30th, 2017, 11:26 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#174 Post by Josh Grossman » July 26th, 2018, 9:58 am

A. So wrote:Nothing really wrong with 2004/11 whites. Some pick up green (myself included) but it doesn't bother me the way it does in red wine.

I think Bachelet is a terribly overrated producer anyway, and the heavy hand+bad vintage would incline me to consign or somehow get rid of that bottle.
Thanks, I bought it way back in the day when I was trying to figure out what all the fuss was about for Burgundy and, at this point, had never tried a Nuits 1er or grand. I looked at the WineEnthusiasts vintage chart (which still has '11 ranked as 91 which is the same as '12 or '06) before I bit...

Hey everyone, I have a really wonderful Domaine Denis Bachelet Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Cru Les Corbeaux Vieilles Vignes available that I'll be happy to sell for only $95--lowest in the USA [rofl.gif] just kidding
Last edited by Josh Grossman on July 27th, 2018, 10:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

k s h i n
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3866
Joined: August 17th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#175 Post by k s h i n » July 27th, 2018, 9:41 am

P@u1_M3nk3s wrote:the ashtray flavors I was getting. (That’s what the green meanies taste like to me.)
That is a very good descriptor. I might add mixed in NZ SB to the ashtray.
Kevin
ITB - I may be offering some of the wines that I drink and post TNs on.

User avatar
Marcu$ Stanley
Posts: 1205
Joined: November 1st, 2010, 3:31 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#176 Post by Marcu$ Stanley » July 29th, 2018, 3:30 pm

A. So wrote:Nothing really wrong with 2004/11 whites. Some pick up green (myself included) but it doesn't bother me the way it does in red wine.

I think Bachelet is a terribly overrated producer anyway, and the heavy hand+bad vintage would incline me to consign or somehow get rid of that bottle.
unlike human females, ladybugs detest chardonnay and only frequent the finest red grapes.

k s h i n
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3866
Joined: August 17th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#177 Post by k s h i n » July 31st, 2018, 9:34 am

Marcus Stanley wrote:
A. So wrote:Nothing really wrong with 2004/11 whites. Some pick up green (myself included) but it doesn't bother me the way it does in red wine.

I think Bachelet is a terribly overrated producer anyway, and the heavy hand+bad vintage would incline me to consign or somehow get rid of that bottle.
unlike human females, ladybugs detest chardonnay and only frequent the finest red grapes.
Actually the whites were affected as well. In 2004, it is more noticeable than the 2011 just like the reds.
Kevin
ITB - I may be offering some of the wines that I drink and post TNs on.

User avatar
Josh Grossman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2746
Joined: August 30th, 2017, 11:26 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#178 Post by Josh Grossman » July 31st, 2018, 10:23 am

Marcus Stanley wrote:
A. So wrote:Nothing really wrong with 2004/11 whites. Some pick up green (myself included) but it doesn't bother me the way it does in red wine.

I think Bachelet is a terribly overrated producer anyway, and the heavy hand+bad vintage would incline me to consign or somehow get rid of that bottle.
unlike human females, ladybugs detest chardonnay and only frequent the finest red grapes.
https://youtu.be/yvZCfXQ9GOM

Kelly Flynn
Posts: 1092
Joined: March 14th, 2018, 11:12 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#179 Post by Kelly Flynn » July 31st, 2018, 1:32 pm

Maybe I'm the philistine on the thread, or maybe I've just been lucky, but I have had very good experience with 2004s in recent years at the Grand Cru level, including Ponsot and Dujac CDLR, and Perrot-Minot Chambertin CdB. All were in a nice evolutionary spot IMHO, and all were also from mag, FWIW. I know what green is, and thankfully it just wasn't there.

k s h i n
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3866
Joined: August 17th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#180 Post by k s h i n » July 31st, 2018, 2:52 pm

Kelly Flynn wrote:Maybe I'm the philistine on the thread, or maybe I've just been lucky, but I have had very good experience with 2004s in recent years at the Grand Cru level, including Ponsot and Dujac CDLR, and Perrot-Minot Chambertin CdB. All were in a nice evolutionary spot IMHO, and all were also from mag, FWIW. I know what green is, and thankfully it just wasn't there.
Ponsot and Dujac are two of the worst offenders in 2004 FWIW.
Kevin
ITB - I may be offering some of the wines that I drink and post TNs on.

User avatar
paul hanna
Posts: 4910
Joined: April 28th, 2010, 10:14 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#181 Post by paul hanna » July 31st, 2018, 5:07 pm

'04 Ponsot CDLR - bleh.

One of the very worst of the '04's and just a bad wine in general.

User avatar
Larry Link
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 553
Joined: August 13th, 2010, 10:42 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#182 Post by Larry Link » July 31st, 2018, 5:18 pm

paul hanna wrote:'04 Ponsot CDLR - bleh.

One of the very worst of the '04's and just a bad wine in general.
+1, the Ponsot CdlR from 04 is borderline undrinkable.

Karl K
Posts: 1247
Joined: October 29th, 2016, 10:01 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#183 Post by Karl K » July 31st, 2018, 5:35 pm

I did have 2004 Drouhin Griotte recently and I do not recommend
K a z a k s

User avatar
P@u1_M3nk3s
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1633
Joined: June 7th, 2009, 2:14 pm
Location: El Cerrito CA

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#184 Post by P@u1_M3nk3s » July 31st, 2018, 8:27 pm

k s h i n wrote:
Marcus Stanley wrote:
A. So wrote:Nothing really wrong with 2004/11 whites. Some pick up green (myself included) but it doesn't bother me the way it does in red wine.

I think Bachelet is a terribly overrated producer anyway, and the heavy hand+bad vintage would incline me to consign or somehow get rid of that bottle.
unlike human females, ladybugs detest chardonnay and only frequent the finest red grapes.
Actually the whites were affected as well. In 2004, it is more noticeable than the 2011 just like the reds.
IIRC Jeremy Holmes had a good descriptor for 2004 whites - dried flowers? I do get dried vegetal matter on all the 2004 whites I've had, varying by bottle even for same vineyard/producer. Never had one though that was repulsive like some of the 2004 reds. Haven't touched any Raveneau yet - hope those are fine!
Cheers,
Paul

User avatar
Larry Link
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 553
Joined: August 13th, 2010, 10:42 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#185 Post by Larry Link » July 31st, 2018, 8:36 pm

P@u1_M3nk3s wrote:
k s h i n wrote:
Marcus Stanley wrote:
unlike human females, ladybugs detest chardonnay and only frequent the finest red grapes.
Actually the whites were affected as well. In 2004, it is more noticeable than the 2011 just like the reds.
IIRC Jeremy Holmes had a good descriptor for 2004 whites - dried flowers? I do get dried vegetal matter on all the 2004 whites I've had, varying by bottle even for same vineyard/producer. Never had one though that was repulsive like some of the 2004 reds. Haven't touched any Raveneau yet - hope those are fine!
Herbs and dried flowers are good descriptors for 04 whites. I'd recommend that you sell your 04 Raveneaus. Send me a PM with what you have and I will do you a favor and buy them all. [cheers.gif]

User avatar
P@u1_M3nk3s
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1633
Joined: June 7th, 2009, 2:14 pm
Location: El Cerrito CA

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#186 Post by P@u1_M3nk3s » July 31st, 2018, 9:08 pm

Larry,
Cellartracker says I have three wines in 4 bottles worth $1,194. Tempting! But these will be opened by me. [berserker.gif]
Cheers,
Paul

User avatar
Larry Link
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 553
Joined: August 13th, 2010, 10:42 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#187 Post by Larry Link » July 31st, 2018, 9:19 pm

P@u1_M3nk3s wrote:Larry,
Cellartracker says I have three wines in 4 bottles worth $1,194. Tempting! But these will be opened by me. [berserker.gif]
Smart move. I opened an MdT and a Butteaux from 04 last year. They were intense, but on the high acid side of the spectrum. I'm still hanging on to a few myself, I believe they will be very long agers.

Jürgen Steinke
Posts: 1197
Joined: September 30th, 2009, 6:28 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#188 Post by Jürgen Steinke » August 1st, 2018, 4:30 am

I had two bottles of 04 Lumpp Givry 1er Cru Crausot recently with the obvious taint (ashtray) but various amounts of it. One bottle was actually undrinkable while the other was better but still not that good. FWIW. IMO 04 whites are better than the reds. Most reds I had were amongst the worst Burgundies that ever found a way into my glass.

James Billy
Posts: 1027
Joined: November 10th, 2016, 6:53 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#189 Post by James Billy » August 1st, 2018, 5:33 am

Agh! Ashtray? Reminds me of one of my Burgundies......a 2011 :(

k s h i n
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3866
Joined: August 17th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#190 Post by k s h i n » August 1st, 2018, 6:51 am

P@u1_M3nk3s wrote:IIRC Jeremy Holmes had a good descriptor for 2004 whites - dried flowers? I do get dried vegetal matter on all the 2004 whites I've had, varying by bottle even for same vineyard/producer. Never had one though that was repulsive like some of the 2004 reds. Haven't touched any Raveneau yet - hope those are fine!
FWIW, I know a few serious white burgundy collectors who love the 04 whites. Although I am not a big fan, the 04 whites are much better than the reds. The taint note is more herbal like SB with only a hint of ash/metal. Lately I also get mint. I don’t know much about wine making but perhaps less skin contact reduces the taint.
Kevin
ITB - I may be offering some of the wines that I drink and post TNs on.

User avatar
Paul H Galli
Posts: 3540
Joined: July 1st, 2009, 2:55 pm
Location: Monterey Peninsula

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#191 Post by Paul H Galli » August 1st, 2018, 7:59 am

Jürgen Steinke wrote: Most reds I had were amongst the worst Burgundies that ever found a way into my glass.
This...

TTT
Opinot, not Oporto...

Kelly Flynn
Posts: 1092
Joined: March 14th, 2018, 11:12 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#192 Post by Kelly Flynn » August 1st, 2018, 10:50 am

Ponsot and Dujac are two of the worst offenders in 2004 FWIW.

'04 Ponsot CDLR - bleh.

One of the very worst of the '04's and just a bad wine in general.

+1, the Ponsot CdlR from 04 is borderline undrinkable.


Well, alrighty then.

Can bottle variation ever be a positive rather than a negative?

Barry L i p t o n
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3053
Joined: November 8th, 2009, 8:59 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#193 Post by Barry L i p t o n » August 1st, 2018, 11:31 am

The best descriptor of 2004 Pondot CDLR - pickle juice

User avatar
paul hanna
Posts: 4910
Joined: April 28th, 2010, 10:14 pm

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#194 Post by paul hanna » August 1st, 2018, 8:03 pm

Kelly Flynn wrote:Ponsot and Dujac are two of the worst offenders in 2004 FWIW.

'04 Ponsot CDLR - bleh.

One of the very worst of the '04's and just a bad wine in general.

+1, the Ponsot CdlR from 04 is borderline undrinkable.


Well, alrighty then.

Can bottle variation ever be a positive rather than a negative?
I think that there is bottle variation, some bottles seem better than others, and some may (with more age), actually even turn out ok - but the Ponsots have all been bad, and i had a case of them, so I have had it a number of times....unfortunately.

User avatar
John Morris
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 17665
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
Location: Gotham

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#195 Post by John Morris » August 1st, 2018, 8:24 pm

Barry L i p t o n wrote:The best descriptor of 2004 Pondot CDLR - pickle juice
What do you mean - vinegar or dill? Those are the two, very distinct elements in pickle juice.
"English doesn't just borrow foreign words, it stalks languages down dark alleyways, knocks them over and then rifles their pockets for new words." -- @Another NPC on YouTube

User avatar
Josh Grossman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2746
Joined: August 30th, 2017, 11:26 am

Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#196 Post by Josh Grossman » August 2nd, 2018, 12:51 pm

John Morris wrote:
Barry L i p t o n wrote:The best descriptor of 2004 Pondot CDLR - pickle juice
What do you mean - vinegar or dill? Those are the two, very distinct elements in pickle juice.
I mean I personally like my Burgundies to taste like half sours.

Gaudissabois Johan
Posts: 60
Joined: April 22nd, 2020, 2:07 am

Re: Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#197 Post by Gaudissabois Johan » May 16th, 2020, 1:43 am

Friends,

The greenness in the 2004's could only be found after a couple of years. It was not there in barrel....But those who put the 2011's on the same level have not yet tasted them. I haven't detected any "greenness" in any of the wines I tasted. Some were maybe a bit underripe. I had sublime bottles of the 2011 vintage. In 2004 almost all of the bottles were afffected although, in spite of that, some were rather good. I liked the CLOS de TART. As I stated before, I am not any good at tasting blind but whenever 2004's were offered blind I immediately recognized them. And I had top wines from the vintage. This is not the case in 2011. it is a pity so many of you gave up on them. I had sublime LES SAINT GEORGES (both Chevillon and Thibault Liger Belair), great Richebourg (liger Belair). a wonderful Grands ECHEZEAUX by the virtually unknown ROBERT SIRUGUE. A good CLOS-St- Jacques by BRUNO CLAIR. All of them recently. I willl be tasting a lot more in a recent future . I'll keep you posted.

SINCERELY JOHAN

PCLIN
Posts: 1471
Joined: August 3rd, 2013, 9:45 am

Re: Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#198 Post by PCLIN » May 16th, 2020, 1:54 am

I love the ‘11 Fourrier GC VV so much that I already finished the full case! The wine has not even reached maturity yet!
Chiu Lin

User avatar
dcornutt
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 10346
Joined: February 12th, 2009, 4:19 pm

Re: Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#199 Post by dcornutt » May 16th, 2020, 4:39 am

James Billy wrote:
July 26th, 2018, 4:03 am
Will those 2004s ever blossom into things of beauty or always be 'tainted'?
Anyone with some 2004 La Tache they want to dump? Same with 2011.
DON Cornutt

"Before you eat or drink anything, carefully consider with whom you eat or drink rather than what you
eat or drink,because eating without a friend is the life of the lion or the wolf." Epicurius

User avatar
Marcus Dean
Posts: 1527
Joined: May 31st, 2017, 4:45 pm
Location: Auckland Noo ZEEEEland

Re: Critical of the Critics - 2004 & 2011 Red Burgundy

#200 Post by Marcus Dean » May 16th, 2020, 4:56 am

La Tâche was one of the few winners in 04, 2011 is a different kettle of fish all together.

Post Reply

Return to “Wine Talk”