When I first got into Bordeaux you could buy nice Bordeaux to go with your dinner for $15-20…moderate alcohol, not in-your-face, pleasant, charming stuff with good typicity.
With Bdx prices having stopped their long climb, exchange rates getting back in line, and a string of “lesser” vintages those days may be here again. Picked up a 2012 Cantemerle for $28 at Costco, and it was really nice. 13% alcohol, very vivid and lively fruit at this stage in its life. Good mix of red and black fruit – some of that characteristic Bordeaux cassis mixed with tart cherry overtones verging on cranberry. Just enough oak to remind you what you were drinking, but nothing excessive. Not too complex or earthy but excellent freshness. Had a solid midpalate while still being light and lively – had a SHORT finish which is a good thing as it wasn’t heavy and didn’t hang on the back of your tongue like an overextracted guest that has outstayed their welcome.
Would still like to see a few dollars knocked off that $28 price for a Haut Medoc in an “off” vintage, but Cantemerle is the very best of H-M and adjusting for inflation $28 would be less than $20 back in the 90s.
I always fancied Cantemerle - if maybe only due to the old nice black and white label (I do think the new yellow one is less pretty). Recent vintages are paler again.
I haven´t tasted the 2012, but 2014 recently was really promising and in the usual feminine style with nice balance (although far from mature).
Nevertheless I often thought that a bit more intensity and length would have been for the benefit (something YOU would not appreciate I guess) - I always think of Cantemerle as a light wine (maybe except the 1989 which is my fav. vintage).
I’m a huge fan of Cantemerle, have never found it to be a “light” wine by any stretch, but that of course is a matter of opinion. I personally think it tends to fall in the mid-weight category, except for 2009 and 2010 which are a larger-scale, but nice done style of Cantemerle. I went deep on 2014 given the vintage style, did not grab any 2012. Sounds like I need to remedy that. Thanks for the notes!
I have a 1983 in the queue, looking to pop it soon.
Maybe if we substitute “light” with “delicate” we´re closer to what Robert meant … it´s certainly not a powerful wine, it´s quite typical for Margaux which is not far away, but on the other hand I´m missing a bit of the finesse a fine Margaux posesses … (I´m talking about vintages from the 60ies to 80ies/90ies) …
nevertheless a very good chateau - and the best Haut-Medoc together with La Lagune …
In the grand scheme, I’m not sure I would consider any Bordeaux “light”. I guess I’ve had some mature, old school Righties that were more Burgundian and acid-driven, but on the Left Bank I’m not coming up with any examples.
I remember the 2005 as being a lot more tannic and thicker than this one. I didn’t much like the '05 when I had it actually, seemed to need aging.
I wouldn’t call this “light” either, more like midweight and graceful, but I can see how if your palate was trained to bigger new world reds you might. As I said in my TN this had a lot of red-fruited qualities, didn’t have any of the heavier black fruits like plum or fig, and it wasn’t heavy on the palate.
I double checked- I got the a case of the 05 for $28, I still have 11 left. Hope it comes around!
I have to say, I love this Chateau, having enjoyed wines from 1961-2003, but the 2009 and 2010 are unlike any prior vintages I tried young. The texture was creamier than earlier vintages and the alcohol higher. Maybe the 09 and 10 will end up even better than before, time will tell, but I get nervous when a Bordeaux estate with an admirable track record starts tinkering with the recipe.