Agree on both counts.
I don’t personally have concerns about the 08’s, but a number of posters have quoted winemakers comments that the wines were midterm wines that they didn’t expect to hold on for the long haul (this is not usually a concern that I have about burgundian vintages). I’m not sure that I agree but I was trying to contrast with 96, which is certainly a long haul vintage.
Jay and Dan,
How would you compare the '96ers to the '08ers? If I try a '96 today, how similar of an experience do you think that would be to having an '08 twelve years from now?
Ah, that makes more sense. If you say that '96s will easily go 50 years and '08s probably only 45 or so I’d probably agree. 
Improbably exact aging estimates RUS
Hi Stuart , this is a very interesting vintage . Right after bottling , I loved the wines from the best producers but then the wines closed down and became very acidic . I bought a lot and at a moment thought I was ’ stuck " with them , until I read the book from Jacky Rigaux : Millesimes en Bourgogne : 1846-2006 with comments from the great Henri Jayer .
Jayer said 96 was a great vintage in quantity and quality . But at the time of the vendage , there was sun and Northern wind for a long time , so the grape were " touched " by dryness ( secheresse ) as it did not rain enough . There were a lot of unripe grapes that needed to be eliminated . Those who did made great wines , others not . He compares it to 1937 : it took the best wines more than 25 years to open up .
But the best 37’s were excellent after that for a very long time .
I recently tasted a 1996 Domaine Leroy Gevrey Chambertin aux Combottes that was really good . I am going to wait another 5 years before I start opening up grand cru .
Me, too…Herwig. I think those '96s I’ve had and liked so much are just beginning their optimum drinking window. Some of them I’d had 1-3 years before, and I hadn’t thought them mature in any sense. So, I’m pleasantly surprised to find them really good now.
Grand crus…deserve 25 years in almost any really good vintage, IMO. At least to show what they have at their best. Based on what I’ve had…i am really looking forward to them in 5 years.
I don’t think I said (and don’t believe) that “acid mellows” (or that alcoholic wines mellow with age or aeration.) So, the acid is pretty much a constant. The tannins mellow out…and with age (or, in this case aeration, which simulates aging, IMO) and the fruit comes more to the forefront…so the entire package, the wine “mellows” out and the balance of fruit vs. the other elements favors fruit more and more…if the fruit potential is there. When I was tasting young and barreled wines in Burgundy, that was the main assessment I tried to make: “fruit potential”. I tried to do so by focusing on the finish…what was left at the end. ("96 was hard to evaluate in that way…and I will have to look at my notes to see what I wrote.) What I actually said, above:
But, at this point, I think with sufficient aeration (which is a must) the acidity is not as prominent as it once was…and the fruit is lively and not dominated because of the acidity…as the tannins have mellowed.
Interesting issue…i think.
To add one final note on this “project”, a less than thrilling Rousseau Mazis-Chambertin:
Usually my favorite Rousseau wine after the two Chambertins,
12/16: with rib roast. Pleasant though zippy and sl. acidic. Red fruits; really like cherry Luden’s. Finish not super long, which, to me, means concentration of fruit not up to level needed to balance the acidity.
Good the next day, but not really improved, just preserved. Don’t think age will be the panacea here.
To check back in 5, but…the others’ balancing fruit was better for the most part.
96 La Tache was quite beautiful last night. The fruit was gorgeous and fully balanced the high acid finish. Should only get better,but drank really well. I wouldn’t hesitate to open one on a flower or fruit day.
Mark, I thought the Jadot Clos Saint Jacques was really wonderful.
I would be surprised if 2008 comes anywhere near as good as 1996. My guess is that 2008, with some exceptions, will be more like 1998. This is not bad. I had a 1998 Mugneret-Gibourg Clos Vougeot this weekend that was wonderful.
Haven’t had any 96s recently that I can recall but at least for the Bussiere, I had that 2 or 3 years ago and it was definitely still too early then, lends support to your statement that the window is just opening Stuart. Thanks for summarizing the very interesting cross-section of wines that you noted.
Best,
Mike
I’d think 2008 would beat 1998 pretty handily if put up to a vote, especially if we’re talking about good 1er’s and GC’S. It’s more of a Burgundy lovers vintage, as I expect '13 to be.
Conventional wisdom seems to be that the weakness of '08 is in the village level or below, except for the high end villages (Roumier, Mugnier, Fourrier, etc. which are exceptional).
i think 08 has way more stuffing and structure than 98 does. If anything 08 is more like 01.
Had a bottle last month of the 1996 Fougeray de Beauclair Bonnes Mares that was excellent. That being said, I’ve had a number of bottles (Groffier and Mortet for example 1ers) that I found sour and out of balance. I would definitely consider myself an acid-centered drinker (Champers, Germans), but from my experience a significant fraction of 96’s have acid that is out of balance and shrill, and I don’t expect that to change.
Most of my experience with 08 comes from the Cote de Beaune - I’ve found them to be classic and very balanced wines, which will need a lot of time to come around. Much more consistent than 96 IMO - maybe the heights of 96 are stellar (I haven’t see those high heights yet), but overall, 08 seems much more consistent to me.
decided to pop a 1996 prieure roch clos des corvees tonight and it is showing quite well. the nose is as exuberant as leroy with smoke, stems and spice. on the palate there is super bright organic red fruits with nice savory development of sous bois, beef stock, and mushroom. the finish has a fine acidity and the tannins are nearly resolved. a very pretty wine to say the least.
This week, a 96 Comte Armand Pommard Clos des Epeneaux was excellent: fruit, earth, and light spice on the nose that continue with dark but bright fruit flavors in the mouth. The acidity is present but integrated and not excessive.
In December a 1996 JJ Confuron Romanee St. Vivant - super wine. Singing. Acid certainly there, but not as spiky as I feared at all. Lots of great fruit still. Drinks great in a relatively youngish way…no hurry.
Regarding the 2008 question, I’m with the supporters of 2008 reds. I don’t think the vintage is inferior to 1996 at all, especially at the PC and GC level from better producers. And I think 2008s are very much long term wines at these levels.
Cheers,
Blair