1996 red burgs

WINE TALK
1

I have gotten the itch to try some of my 1996 red burgs lately, to see if they are EVER going to come around…and by come around I mean become wines that I very much enjoy drinking. Although I have had a few over the past year or so that seemed to have enough fruit to stand up to the acidity, a few recently have been disappointing to me. Linear, a bit too austere, not much in the mid-palate in terms of weight or depth, and of course that firm acidity. More like something you experience because you know it will be intellectually good for you, not as a source of great enjoyment. A 1996 Vogue Musigny last night was a case in point.

I am unable to tell if these wines are still closed in, and at some point several years from now will blossom into truly lovely and more enjoyable drinking experiences, or whether I am seeing a pretty accurate indication of where these wines are headed…nicely transparent expressions of terroir in a relatively lean and austere style. That they will never come close to what the 1993 red burgs achieve in terms of balance and “drinkability”.

I was wondering if any of you who have been following this vintage and dipping into their stash more frequently have formed any opinions as to where this vintage is going and when it’s going to get there!

2

Great question. I’m interested in what folks have to say, but don’t really have any recent data points to add. The wines were so appealing young, and I just have to believe that beauty still exists in the bottles. I’m eager to learn from others, but my starting opinion is many lower 1ers and getting there now, while grands cru and top 1ers need a few more years. I’m approaching mine pretty conservatively, as I only have a few cases in total, I think about five.

3

Pretty much the same impression as Lewis here. Some bottles I had were fantastic, some just not quite there.

The last bottle I had was a Cathiard NSG Murgers - still very tight and austere.

4

I wonder if 08s will go into this purgatory

5

I think they will to some degree, hopefully not as long or deep as the '96’s…

I have run across a few good '96’s in recent dinners, but they still seem to be pretty much in a holding pattern. Personally, I’ll not open any of mine for a while yet…

6

For me the 96’s are and will probably always be a “firm” experience with a typical “hot” tannic burn. For me I see no point in further maturation as I cannot see them improving.

7

Anthony,
just taste a fine 1978 today … flirtysmile (if you don´t see any potential for improving … )
That doesn´t mean all 1996 are good/excellent/fine (as always) … but the the top- wines will be singing in another 10-15 years.

I very much doubt that the 2008 vintage (as a whole) will ever be in the league of 1996 - but there are certainly some great successes which will be fine in 10 to 20 years.

My impression very often is that “some” people simply don´t have the necessary patience for great Burgundies … what doesn´t please immediately - or at least after 5-6 years - is pretty soon a “failure” … [scratch.gif]

( Ok : pileon )

8

Well,

The '96’s are 15 years old now after all…waiting another 10-20 years more is, and will be for most, a pretty big call still…

9

Paul,
I simply don´t think that most Grand Crus and the better premier Crus are “mature” … ok, some are accessable, some still closed (and seem tart) … but only some Village wines are in a good drinking state …
(just IMHO)

10

I recently tasted 3 Nuits St Georges 1ers from 1996 side by side and they seemed to be in different points concerning maturity. Those were:

1996 JJ Confuron Nuits Boudots that was just about mature and drinking nicely, although still on the young side
1996 Grivot Nuits Boudots that was drinking relatively well, but felt in need of a few more years of aging
1996 Meo Nuits Murgers that was quite closed and seemed to be in need of several more years of aging

I also had a 1996 Jadot Chambolle Amoureuses last december that felt quite primary still and I predicted it might need another 15 years to mature.

For me the performance of these particular wines follows a predictable pattern where the Confuron should be the first to mature and it just about has now. The others are simply not yet ready. I don’t know what will happen to the majority of the 1996s, but I’m not too worried about my limited amount of those bottles.

I also had the 1988 Vogue Chambolle Amoureuses recently that represents another high acid vintage. It was drinking great, felt very young and had an unbelievably energetic palate with powerful complex fruit. If the 1996s will have that same kind of energy and fruit 8 years from now, I’m really looking forward to it.

Cheers,
Ville

11

I agree.

Not sure though if having to wait 25-35 years is going to be worth it to see if they are going to be great though…

12

Thanks Gerhard, I respect your experience and will keep a few of the better 96’s with “remember Gerhard” tagged on them.

13

Nice idea ! [dance-clap.gif]

14

Well Paul, what´s the alternative?
Buying only vintages like 1997, 2000, 2007 … or buying 1985, 1978, 1971, 1969 at auction … or buying only Village wines …
or drinking 1996 too early to really enjoy ?
[grin.gif]

15

My notes reflect that some of the villages wines that I’ve had over the last couple of years have had surprisingly good transformations from what they were in years past: acidic monsters. So, I am hopeful in general.

Coincidentally, but out of the same curiosity, I opened a Daniel Rion 1996 Chambolle “Beaux Bruns”, a wine from the villages portion of that vineyard. I decanted it through a coffee filter, as I hadn’t prepared it by standing it up. It really threw tons of mud. I suspect that Patrice never filtered it (and maybe never fined it either). It was closed at first, with a bit of a concerning burnt rubber smell, which I made my wife smell, too, though she didn’t find the “rubber” smells. I left it in open decanter for 7-8 hours and the aromas became more charming, though the wine is certainly zippy.

The revelation came at the table, though, and I suspect that this is the key to appreciating 1996 reds. They are not “tasting” wines, but wine of “cuisine”, i.e,. they really require hearty and appropriate food to show their beauty. I had made a sausage/chicken gumbo the day before. It was based on a very dark roux and was unintentionally (though not unwelcomed) a bit on the spicy side…before adding file powder at the end. (Frankly, it was a little rich to eat in great quantities; maybe that’s what gumbo is about? At least Cajun gumbo.) Anyway, I was busy opening some oysters before dinner for our sons (the older one was home from college) and getting the gumbo served to look lilke I knew how to present it…I am always impressed with a well presented gumbo. So, I wasn’t really paying attention to the wine much, and had mid-to-low expectations, anyway. During my first few sips with the gumbo, I exclaimed: “Wow, this wine is great with this!” It was fruity and warm and friendly and the acidity, I think, carried the fruit to the finish and came through loud and clear, in a delicious Chambolle way. It probably lasted a good long time, too, though I wasn’t really paying attention. My wife agreed (she doesn’t always; and, she has lots of experience, though much less interest). We even made our college son try a wee bit. He has low interest in wine, but said he saw what we were talking about. The younger son, a junior in high school, was already drinking fruit juice, so…

Anyway, armed with this very pleasant surprise, I am left with the opinion that , with the right food-- and aggressive aeration-- the '96 reds are starting to come around and really show their character. While not likely as versatile as more subdued vintages, I suspect that the refreshing acid zip will be useful and appealing, though not for tasting without food. After all, though, that’s what I/we really buy and age such wines for, right?

16

I wonder if there is a spread between the communes. The CM and MSD I’ve had have been showing very well, highlighted by a Barthod CM 1er a few weeks ago which was as lovely as could be. On the other hand, VR, GC and NSG have been generally been tight, raw and downright not enjoyable at all with two bottles of Arnoux Reignots being poster children for this.


A.

17

FWIW:

some notes on '96 villages wines from the last couple of years:

3/10:…'96 Hubert/Romain Lignier (it was he making the wines then) Chambolle villages. I am generally leaving the '96s alone and feel that some will never have the fruit to match the acidity even after 20 years. The Lignier was delicious, with strong acidity, but not intrusive… great black (cassis and cherries) fruit and a nice long elegant finish. Better the next day, for sure, but nice after 4-5 hours of aeration. Still a bit primary, but on the verge. .a food wine for sure with the zip.

Georges Mugneret Vosne villages ‘96:

7/09: I think we tasted one last summer, too…but no notes…
this wine is ok, but is marked by puckering acidity; decent fruit…not a real pleasant wine at this point. Will it ever be good??? who knows…with air, the acidity became more pronounced. I’d say not to touch another til end of 2011 and then serve with fatty foods…meat, etc

10/10: acidity galore at first…then it toned down after a day in open decanter and became more noticeably tannic and pleasant with lots and lots of nice choc cherry, spicy fruit on hand to dominate the finish. This is really fine wine…great VR villages. Just don’t touch any until 2016 at the earliest, and provide plenty of aeration and serve a little cool and expect a lively acidity. Yum…quelle surprise!

3/09: Chevillon Nuits 1er “Perrieres”: chicken parmThis wine was opened and decanted very little and showed it. It wasn’t showing much at first. The next morning/day, it was lovely, earthy , some sediment and fruity with refreshing, rather than shrill acidity. I think it will peak in 2-3 years…and hold plenty thereafter. The acidity…seals the fruit.

Daniel Rion Vosne villages:

10/08: w/ some southern, buttermilk undercooked :slight_smile: fried chicken this wine was delicious and lively and wasn’t aerated tons; last minute. I guess we got it on the “ebullient” side…a poster child for popping and pouring. -

9/10: calmed down; lovely. red fruits and some herbs…lively; not aerated more than 30 mins…of necessity…similar to that great fried chicken dinner. :slight_smile:, but it seems this wine is now reliably good…
)…
(my kids still give me crap about the 10/08 dinner…where I did undercook some fried chicken…which isn’t very appealing; I subsequently visited New Orleans and, after a great meal at Dooky Chase have now switched to their recipe…and have had no problems and only success…thankfully [thankyou.gif] )

18

Not many recent data points, but the 1996 Lambrays was a beauty back in November.
Gawd, it was lovely. 1996 Clos des Lambrays: A Beautiful Red Burg and Some Other Goodies Last Night - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers

19

Actually, I like '06 a lot…A vintage that is still drinking well, and I think will keep doing so without ever really closing…

'98’s are also generally drinking well now, and '00 usually doesn’t fail to at least be very enjoyable. Many '02’s and '01’s are also approachable, although they will no doubt go further.

Having said that, I would also rather drink a comparable/same '93, '99 or even an '05 than almost every '96 I can think of now, closed/far too young or not…

20

I have been trying '96s over the last year or two. No doubt some are still too structured to enjoy but others are performing beautifully. I’m not surprised by that result; 15 years from the vintage is a nice time to start on an open-knit vintage like, say, 1985, but for a very structured vintage it’s not nearly long enough. But if they need 25 years, the good news is that we don’t actually have to wait 25 years for them - we just need to buy them now from people who have given up on them, and wait 10. They’ll definitely be ready before any '05s and '08s (and we’ll probably be having this conversation about '05s in 10 years).