I love Left Bank Bordeaux and do not mind a hint of Pyrazine (Green Peppers). Therefore I am a fan of Sociando Mallet. 1982, 1985, 1990, 2000, 2001, 2003 and 2005 are all very fine “classic” Left Bank Bordeaux with the typical signature. Cassis, blackberries, pencil shavings, hint of bell pepper and sometimes unsmoked pipe tobacco.
I had high hopes for the 1996 vintage of this wine and bought a case. But unfortunately the Chateau did not that well in this vintage. The wine lacks mid palate and flesh, the tannins are slightly bitter, the acid is advanced, the aftertaste is dominated by iron and minerals. IMO the fruit was too unripe when harvested. This seems to be a general problem of Sociando Mallet because the best results of the Chateau are always in warm and sunny years. It seems that the Chateau has a pretty cold terroir. The 1986 Sociando Mallet came from a somewhat similar vintage – a year that was marked by an Indian Summer. But obviously the lack of sunshine during summer could´t be balanced by late sunshine in September and October. Or the people at the domaine harvested too early. 1986 Sociando Mallet was and is somewhat of a disappointment. IMO. I had 6 bottles and none gave me much pleasure. The best was an early one rather short after release. The last two seemed to be dried out. If no wonders occur this wine is already dead.
Unfortunately I see not much upside potential for the 1996 Sociando Mallet too. This is sad because other 1996 Left Bank Bordeaux are really superb. But 1996 Sociando is far away from the quality of the best vintages which can compete with top Crus Classée. I have had dozens bottles of the wine from various vintages to know this well. So “classicism” is not always another word for elegance and pleasure.
I bought a case on release too, and have maybe consumed 6-7. I’ve also had the wine a number of times when other people shared it. It seems like 2/3 of the time it is really good, and 1/3 of the time its underwhelming.
As you mention, I think the estate does best in the big, ripe years like 1990 or 2003. Still with the benefits of global warming, these cooler sites are all slowly improving as places to make wine.
Thanks for the warning.
That 1996 sounds too meager and tired, even for an ascetic like me.
Got none, and will not look for any.
(But I got two singles, '90 and '86.)
-Søren.
I appreciate honest posts like this. Many of us tend to not post detailed notes on wines we find mediocre. And when we do, we don’t include the level of detail about why we think the wine doesn’t satisfy. Describing wines we absolutely hate is easy, describing wines we just don’t like is sometimes hard. As a Sociando fan, I can learn a lot from notes like these. Thank you.
FWIW, I opened a 375 ml of the 1996 Sociando-Mallet last week and described it as “A bit simple, but still satisfying in a rustic way with black currant and bell pepper atop a core of fine tannin.” I liked it quite a bit better than the last 2000 I had, which I found totally dominated by pyrazines.
Re the 1996 Pontet Canet I released my case a few months ago, and I think it is now definitely in the zone, a year or two into its drinking plateau. Really old school and earthy. A better wine than the Sociando but well down the pecking order of left bank 96s and of other vintages of Pontet-Canet.
I remember a discussion with David Schildknecht on the old Parker Board about 1986 SM. He went into his cellar, popped a cork and was a bit frustrated too. I always thought the wine needed time, he also, well … . I never had a good bottle in the last 15 years.
Agree with Rainer (as usual) that 1995 Sociando is a better wine than the 1996. At most Medoc Chateaux it´s via á versa. The 1996 are better than the 1995 most of the time.
