I am trying to find out the different between the Dauvissat, R&V, Chablis Les Clos and the Dauvissat, R&V, Chablis Les Clos [Camus Label] . I have been told that the Camus Label is a branch of the family that has the right to sell the wine under their label. I also found a link(included below) that is confusing to me regarding barrel time and that there is a difference between the two. Yet, I still have other people telling me there is no difference. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks.
http://oxidised-burgs.wikispaces.com/Dauvissat,+Vincent
From Burghound.
“Note: Because I often get this question I will add that the Dauvissat-Camus wines are 100% identical to those that appear under the Vincent Dauvissat label.”
I always thought they were the same wines, the domaine says that they are and critics repeat it, but if you search around Don Cornwell has a good argument for why they may not be, having to do with release dates and a bunch of stuff I’ve forgotten.
They’re certainly made by the same people, just a question of whether or not they’re the same barrels, same elevage, etc.
I certainly don’t know, just mentioning that although the official line is that they’re idential except for the labels, some people think otherwise.
Cheers,
-Robert
That sounds a lot like Domaine Matrot.
as a big chablis fan and student and one with his fair share of experience with dauvissat i have something to share.
first off i hope no one is actually confused about jean dauvissat and the “real dauvissat”.
now i know that burghound have said these wines are 100% identical and these days they might be, but i doubt this was the case in the past when i believe tanzer as the first critic mentioned the differences between them.
my own experience with tasting side by side wines from 04 or older (vineyard brand vs european version) shows differences. not a huge departure but enough to merit discussion and investigation. consistently the vineyard brand showed more fruity, young and polished qualities nonetheless still showing breeding and very much still worthy of attention.
i don’t like most of my chablis before 8-10 years of bottle age and as i mostly buy vintages like 04, 07 and 08 which need more aging before the magic comes out, i don’t have anything to offer on if there are any marked differences post 04.
my 2 cents.
the difference is about $20-40 per bottle.
alan
Hi Folks,
Allen is essentially right that they are the same wines, but with the caveat that a few of the cuvees are bottled at different times. For many years, Vineyard Brands, Vincent Dauvisssat’s US importer has asked for earlier bottlings of the wines to arrive in time for the Christmas season in the US the year following the vintage, so Monsieur Dauvissat has done an early bottling run of (some of?) their allocation in time to get the wines shipped into the US market early. The remainder of his cellar is generally bottled the following spring, and this includes the Dauvissat-Camus labeled wines. There was also a time a decade or so ago when the Dauvissat early bottlings were filtered, but the later-bottled wines were not filtered. I have heard from the US importer that their cuvees are no longer filtered, but I cannot confirm this. I do not know the origin of the Dauvissat-Camus label, but have always assumed it was a way of having another importer in the US carry the wines, as well as more than one importer in the UK market, as it used to be a lot more difficult selling Chablis (even for Domaine Dauvisssat) back in the day. I have never seen the Dauvissat-Camus lable except in the UK market and in Massachusetts, as the importer, Classic Wines used to have this label for that market. It is my understanding that all of the wines labeled as Domaine Vincent Dauvissat for the European market are bottled in the second spring after the vintage- as are all the Dauvissat-Camus labeled wines, whereas the Vineyard Brands allocation continues to have at least one bottling done the previous fall.
All the Best,
John
No price difference in the Seattle market. I have noticed a small $ difference online. It does seem like the R & V Dauvissat is less available here, but it is the same price as the Camus.
I’m already in receipt of my 2010 R and V Dauvissat wines in Seattle thru Vineyard Brands, although I haven’t seen Preuses or Clos (I wonder if they are being bottled later like they were last year). They only seem to come thru as a one time deal each year about this time. The Duvissat Camus wines show up a few months from now, as mentioned in a somewhat bigger supply.
John–do you know if the wines are in Stainless or neutral barrels before bottling?
Hi John,
I am not sure of every cuvee, as Vincent really prefers for folks (or at least journalists) not to wander around too much in his cellar, but all I have ever seen in the two sections that I have been invited into in the cellars is oak barrels. Usually a mix of the regular, 228 liter Burgundy barrels and the smaller, Chablis barrels called “Feuillettes” (though my spelling here could be way, way off, given that I speak “Franglais” rather than “Francais” and depending upon my hearing the name correctly during our conversation- corrections would be welcome of the proper name and spelling for these smaller barrels). I would guess that everything, even the Petit Chablis, is raised in barrel. There is actually a bit of newish oak used here (a percentage of new and some a couple of wines old) for the grand crus and the premier crus also- never a high percentage, but just a touch- with the remainder of the barrels nice and old- twenty to forty years on average I would guess from looking at the old beauties. Vincent Dauvissat is quite clear in his belief that the minerality of Chablis does best if allowed to blossom during barrel fermentation and elevage in wood, as it allows the wines to round out a bit in the mid-palate and not remain too piercing from the minerality. Same philosophy at Domaine Raveneau and with Patrick Piuze, who is also making utterly classic examples of Chablis in this same style.
All the Best,
John
Thank you everyone for the input. I am going to go with the Vineyard Brands import and try the Camus label later on. Would be interesting to do a side by side of this, though.
Thanks, John. that was my impression as well. so the assertion has been that wines held in neutral oak for 1, 2,3 months longer before bottling may actually be slightly different than those bottled earlier. Despite repeated assertions that the wines are “identical” or “the same”, which very well might be true, those asserting this have never addressed the bottling time difference (if in fact there is still a difference in bottling time).
I can’t argue with anything written above. But, I can fill in some gaps with information I’ve gleaned from talking to Vincent and seeing his wines as they are about to be bottled.
The Dauvissat-Camus label is just that a different label for the same wine…sort of. (“Camus” is Vincent’s mother’s maiden name.) He “created” the marque so that he could sell to different importers in the US (Classic, as John reports; I didn’t know they were in the UK, too.) Nothing more complicated than that. EXCEPT, that all that says is what’s in the bottle of Preuses, for example, is all Preuses, vinified at the same time. The length of the elevage (all in wood, some new) is variable. Though I"m not sure what the reason is, he does bottle much right after the vinification of the previous vintage, though more than half is bottled the next spring. I sense that what label a particular bottling gets depends on his commercial needs, eg, if he needs 100 bottles of the Dauvissat Camus, he does that and also ditto for the other label. (Vineyard Brands did get most of the early bottling, I think.) It is confusing, and Vincent says that all the wines are identical, which is true, to a degree. Some, though, have softened in barrel longer than others. How can you tell? You can’t. Does it make a big difference? I don’t know, as I have never tasted them side by side, and don’t have any interest in doing so, particularly.
I do think the early bottling does make more efficient use of his relatively tiny space,as he can’t really bottle most cuvees all at once. During a visit at Xmas 1999 or 2002 (I went both times), he was in the process of assembling for bottling. I’m pretty sure they were in fiber glass assemblage tanks, certainly not wood for that. What confused me at the time was that I tasted the same cuvee or cuvees that were in the tanks, in the same vintage, later that visit, in the elevage cellar from barrels. That’s when I got the whole thing explained to me, through my wife as a translator, as Vincent’s French is , for me, a little difficult to comprehend.
So, is it the “same”? I guess…and different, too, but not from the label, itself, but due to the unknowable bottling date. And, does that make a wine “different”? Well…
SK, thanks for raising this subject. However, as difficult it seems for many of us, me included, to pronounce some of the french words, so to it seems to understand the elevage differences and the labeling oddity here. One thing about this board…there is enough SMEs around here to sort all this stuff out. Sure is a nice perk.
Now, let’s get to drinking that 2000! Probably won’t be as piercing as drinking my 2008!
that’s quite interesting. For years (dating back to the 1990 vintage), I’d snag D-C at much better prices than R&V. Same thing with Bonnefond/Roumier Ruchottes Chambertin and Chezeaux/Ponsot wines, though the latter had Leclerc thrown into the mix . . .
alan
sitting here enjoying a really nice bottle of Dauvissat-Camus 2010 Forest and would love to know if anyone has any updated or more current infos?
the TL;DR version of the above is that there might be a difference in elevage and/or bottling dates.
thanks.
As has been mentioned Dauvissat-Camus has been a staple at Classic Wine Imports for a very long time. When Fred Ek, one of the former owners of Classic, was buying he had very strong long term relationships with a number of wineries particularly in France (he “discovered” and launched Guigal in the US market). When a winery we were working with decided for distribution reasons to go with a national importer Fred could at times convince them to stay with Classic on a direct basis with a different label.
A good example is Fournier in the Loire. They are distributed nationally under the Fournier label, including with Ruby in Massachusetts, but we sell the identical wine under the Celestine Blondeau name. Typically we are a price point lower than our competitors because we are buying directly from the winery.
Fred always told us the Dauvissat-Camus wines were identical to R&V Dauvissat. That doesn’t preclude an earlier or later bottling based on the commercial needs of the importer. I do know that I have been cellaring and consuming Dauvissat-camus wines for decades and they are terrific.
Ken Mason
Sales Manager
Classic Wine Imports
FWIW, that’s how Vincent has described it. He sees no difference. I see bottling date as a difference. But…I’d guess that some of both is bottled later…and the Haas version (V. Dauvissat) generally bottled earlier. But, more for commercial needs…of the importer and of Vinenct Dauvissat.
thanks guys.
Wouldn’t the wine be different if bottled at separate stages? Wouldn’t a month or two change the wine if its that much longer in oak?