As I’m sure some of the rest of you did, I took a flier on this wine for $40 recently. Not a producer that is on most radar screens, but the price is right. I was hoping the wine would be decent, not flawed or poorly made. Beyond that, who knows?
So the wine tonight takes a couple of hours of air to show a pretty, typical Volnay nose. Midweight red fruits, clean, no overt oak although a slight pleasant spiciness on the palate. Initially I thought the wine might be a tad rustic or coarse, but with time this was not at all the case. It doesn’t really show any higher gears or higher level characteristics, though. Basically, this functions as a village volnay–a little disappointing coming from Caillerets, but for a 99 at this current price I guess it’s hard to expect more.
John, I’ve had this in a few vintages-while not at the top of the tree it’s usually a very nice, though indeed slightly rustic, bottle, and your note leads me to believe that this is just showing typical 99 dumbness. There are hardly any wines from this vintage for drinking now IMHO.
Thanks, Tom. It’s nice to find someone who has experience with this producer. I’ve had plenty of dumb 99’s, and am leaving most of mine for a few more years. This wine really didn’t seem dumb, as the nose developed nicely. Just seemed a little simple for a Caillerets. Hopefully you are right. I’ll be patient with the rest that I have.
On a related note I opened a 2002 Pommard Rugiens I picked up for $40. Massive levels of extract and tannin, good but not overwhelming acidity, extremely Pommard and at least ten years away from maturity. (But despite the density there are none of the classic signs of over-extraction here - and thus 2002 continues to impress me, more than 1999, and IMHO approaches 2005.) However, it lacks a bit of complexity and thus doesn’t reach the heights more expensive producers have achieved with this vineyard. But the price was certainly right for a wine with perfect provenance.
Has anyone had their 2005 Volnay (which is still available)?
Had another bottle of the Caillerets a week or two ago. slightly better than the first, but still a little simple. Certainly a pleasant, clean burgundy experience, worth the $40, but not to die for . I’ll save the others to see if a few more years help.
Well, this fell apart spectacularly on day 2, going from mostly justifies $40 to down-the-drain. This marks the second “not a rebuy” bottle I’ve had from an Envoyer-hyped direct import (after a deadly 1993 Ampeau). Bottom line is the marketplace is more efficient at discovering and distributing good wine than many think, beware the hidden gems…
I had a very bad run of corky bottles of 1993 Ampeau, but that vintage excepted they have made some fantastic wines over the years (and have been imported long before Envoyer came around).
Yes, but Envoyer - god bless them for their many very good finds - hypes a bit indiscriminately; so when you occasionally get a bottle that falls short, it gives you pause.
Right, I do some such research for all prospective purchases when I can’t taste myself. It’s dicey to vet some of Envoyer’s offers this way, though, because they are so good at digging up producers without long track records in US markets.
Interesting, Nick. I just had one of these recently. I decanted the wine and waited about 90 minutes. The nose was still quite tight, and revealed little. It was a decent wine on Day 1, but no great shakes. On Day 2, the nose began to show a little and the wine improved. Still, it was nothing to write home about. I would not, however, call it awful by any means. IIRC, Tom Blach wrote that this wine was a particularly inconsistent performer for him; he had some glorious examples and some really poor bottles. I’m wondering if the Envoyer wines are undergoing some bottle shock from the long journey to the West Coast. I’ve got a couple of these Auxeys left, so I’ll probably wait under 6 months before I try my next bottle. Although the color showed maturity, the bottle I had gave no indication of being over the hill.
Mine smelled like Clorox and had the consistency of baby food, so there you go. I haven’t thrown out the two bottles I have left yet, so in the interests of fairness I will open another soon and see what happens.
I’m starting on the second case of Volnay-Santenots and Beaune Clos du Roi -have six each left- and other than one corked example, I have nothing but good experiences. I will say however, that the Beaune can be extremely feral when opening and in general both need considerable time to shed reduction and generally show well; at least two hours.
I opened the 93 clos du roi this week and it was nice when first opened but within a couple of hours it was so funky I couldnt enjoy it anymore. The funk grew with air for me.
Yes, all 1993’s. I also have some 1995/1996 but try to hold off on those for a few years, considering how lovely my last 1985 was a few years ago. Anyway, if your bottles just arrived I’d give them three weeks to settle down and then open one, pour out a tasting measure and see if you like it. If it’s reduced, pour into a decanter and wait for it to subside. If it’s one of those funky ones, wait two hours minimum or longer if you don’t decant.
What Barry describes sounds like a defective bottle. I wonder if you poured it out or checked the next day? At this point it would indeed seem that there is some bottle variation for the Clos du Roi in 1993.