Burghound Issue 53: 2012 CDN burgundy

[paul_clark]

@billnanson

I think Côte de Nuits 12 has one or two peaks that are higher than 10 but on average very similar quality. Cote de Beaune way better than 10 - so on average for me 12 is better because I don’t just buy from Vosne and Gevrey…
[…only talking reds…]

Edit: Anyone want to step-up and analyse the average BH CdN scores for 10 vs the same for 12?

Interesting perspective on CdB. You have my attention. Would you be willing to elaborate on where CdB triumphed in 12 and lagged in 10? I declined a chance to taste the 12’s at chez Lafarge out of respect for the small volumes. Now you have me thinking I should have indulged!

[billnanson]

I’m quite sure there will be a report before the end of Feb, Paul

[paul_clark]

I’ll keep my eyes on your site. Thanks Bill! Hope those '93s are treating you well in the mean time!!!

[paul_hanna]

@Barry L i p t o n

Anyone with experience on Chateau de la Tour Clos Vougeot Vielle Vignes?

Do you agree with his ratings on vintages post 99? 97 points for 05?

Had the '05, '09 and '10 all recently, they are all great, maybe 94-95 pts from me with upside.

The '09 is the most accessible of the trio at present, and yes, they will all live for a long time…

[Paul_H_Galli]

@Clinton Jang

@Barry L i p t o n

Anyone with experience on Chateau de la Tour Clos Vougeot Vielle Vignes?

Do you agree with his ratings on vintages post 99? 97 points for 05?

I tried the 2005 Vielles Vignes at Vin, Vino, Wine last November (2013). Allen must have gotten lucky, because what was poured in my glass was completely shut down, both aromatically and on the palate. It was still very primary, and more on the red-fruit side of the spectrum with some black fruits. It wasn’t particularly spicy on the nose and has definitely eaten all the oak it received. In terms of structure, I do recall that the mouthfeel was more velvety than silky and the balance impeccable, though I would caution that it had one hell of an acid spine that really kept the flavors in focus and firm (though not aggressive) tannins to boot. There’s no question that the potential for greatness is there, but my limited experience (I’m only 27) prevents me from accurately assessing whether or not this would justify a 97 point rating from Allen when it eventually peaks. In any event, it is extremely good and a lot cheaper that the 2010 Jean Morin (if you can find it), which I’m also looking forward to opening in the very distant future.

I also had the 2001 Vielles Vignes back in July 2011 and I recalled the nose as having a good dash of menthol to it. My experience with Chateau de la Tour is that they don’t make particularly seductive wines in their youth, compared to say the Clos Vougeot that Erwan Faiveley is making, but are nonetheless compelling because they demand a level of intellectual engagement and curiosity to appreciate.

Hope that helps.

Tasted the 2005 shortly after release.
One of my favorite 2005 Red Burgs.
Didn’t buy it because it was the most tannic Red Burg I’ve ever had (And I’m a codger).
The fruit level was up to the tannins, but truly, don’t touch for 25+ years!!!

TTT

[Ian_Dorin]

@Harry Gruber

@paul rosenberg

what are people hearing about the 2014 vintage?

A tad early, no?

never too early to start speculating a vintage, right?

It didn’t seem like Meadows was that bullish on '12, which is interesting to see.

BTW, count me in as a de la Tour fan. The Morin I’ve never had, but the CV and CV VV always show well in big tastings. I’m a big fan of the 88 and 90. If any one has any 91s, feel free to share

[frederik_boivin]

@Herwig Janssen

I tasted the 2012’s at a few domaines ( including DRC and Faiveley ) . I think Allen is right : because of the prices , it’s not worth going the extra mile to find these wines . The wines are expensive because quantities are down , not because they are so fantastic . Bernard Hervet from Faiveley told me they are deceptively good but lack mid palate concentration . They are for the mid term drinking . Imo , 2010 is the real deal , both for red and white .

The 2012 i tasted (barrel) were classic burg. I will buy even withe the steep prices.

[g.colangelo]

@paul clark

Interesting perspective on CdB. You have my attention. Would you be willing to elaborate on where CdB triumphed in 12 and lagged in 10? I declined a chance to taste the 12’s at chez Lafarge out of respect for the small volumes. Now you have me thinking I should have indulged!

Well, Paul, I wasn’t offered a chance to taste the 12s, but I insisted and could taste just one - the plain Volnay.
My impression was very positive: higher concentration than the 11s but very good freshness too.
By the way: I liked the 2011s chez Lafarge a lot.

[Nick_Ryan]

@Ian Dorin

It didn’t seem like Meadows was that bullish on '12, which is interesting to see.

He also claimed in an earlier issue that 2011 was better than 2009, at which point he lost all credibility with me.

[Peter_Chiu]

@frederik boivin

@Herwig Janssen

I tasted the 2012’s at a few domaines ( including DRC and Faiveley ) . I think Allen is right : because of the prices , it’s not worth going the extra mile to find these wines . The wines are expensive because quantities are down , not because they are so fantastic . Bernard Hervet from Faiveley told me they are deceptively good but lack mid palate concentration . They are for the mid term drinking . Imo , 2010 is the real deal , both for red and white .

The 2012 i tasted (barrel) were classic burg. I will buy even withe the steep prices.

Frederik. 2012 reds will only be released by SAQ in 2015 here in Quebec.

A friend of mine just e-mailed the Release Price for Jadot Musigny 2012 is around $ 930 whereas SAQ still have the 06, 07 and 2011 at around $ 600.

[Efrain_Rodriguez]

I’m surprised noone has mentioned Tanzer’s review of '12 Burgs that came out last night. His reviews are very favorable and a glance at the big names from the CdB compare very favorably with his reviews of the 2010 vintage.

“The 2012s are fuller and much more pliant than the 2010s, which tend to show great inner-mouth tension and less easygoing sweetness. For me, 2010 is a greatmillésime du terroir and a potentially very long-lived vintage, while 2012 offers more charm and early appeal…I suspect that over the next decade the 2012s will give more pleasure than the 2010s, and many Burgundy lovers will prefer them.”

[Nick_Gangas]

@Efrain Rodriguez

I’m surprised noone has mentioned Tanzer’s review of '12 Burgs that came out last night. His reviews are very favorable and a glance at the big names from the CdB compare very favorably with his reviews of the 2010 vintage.

“The 2012s are fuller and much more pliant than the 2010s, which tend to show great inner-mouth tension and less easygoing sweetness. For me, 2010 is a greatmillésime du terroir and a potentially very long-lived vintage, while 2012 offers more charm and early appeal…I suspect that over the next decade the 2012s will give more pleasure than the 2010s, and many Burgundy lovers will prefer them.”

The way I read this is 10 is a better vintage but I better think of something nice to say about the 12’s.

[Ian_Dorin]

@Nick Ryan

@Ian Dorin

It didn’t seem like Meadows was that bullish on '12, which is interesting to see.

He also claimed in an earlier issue that 2011 was better than 2009, at which point he lost all credibility with me.

Can you tell me which issue? I’d love to go and read that myself only b/c his response to 2012 was interesting, and short of what I thought he would say.

[YacobovE]

@Ian Dorin

@Nick Ryan

@Ian Dorin

It didn’t seem like Meadows was that bullish on '12, which is interesting to see.

He also claimed in an earlier issue that 2011 was better than 2009, at which point he lost all credibility with me.

Can you tell me which issue? I’d love to go and read that myself only b/c his response to 2012 was interesting, and short of what I thought he would say.

Beginning of 49, last paragraph on page 5

[paul_hanna]

@Nick Gangas

@Efrain Rodriguez

I’m surprised noone has mentioned Tanzer’s review of '12 Burgs that came out last night. His reviews are very favorable and a glance at the big names from the CdB compare very favorably with his reviews of the 2010 vintage.

“The 2012s are fuller and much more pliant than the 2010s, which tend to show great inner-mouth tension and less easygoing sweetness. For me, 2010 is a greatmillésime du terroir and a potentially very long-lived vintage, while 2012 offers more charm and early appeal…I suspect that over the next decade the 2012s will give more pleasure than the 2010s, and many Burgundy lovers will prefer them.”

The way I read this is 10 is a better vintage but I better think of something nice to say about the 12’s.

Yep,

Sounds similar to some of the the things they have said previously also about '07 and '11…

[Andrew_Nielsen1]

@paul rosenberg

what are people hearing about the 2014 vintage?

Millésime du siècle! You heard it here first.

[CFu]

@Nick Gangas

@Efrain Rodriguez

I’m surprised noone has mentioned Tanzer’s review of '12 Burgs that came out last night. His reviews are very favorable and a glance at the big names from the CdB compare very favorably with his reviews of the 2010 vintage.

“The 2012s are fuller and much more pliant than the 2010s, which tend to show great inner-mouth tension and less easygoing sweetness. For me, 2010 is a greatmillésime du terroir and a potentially very long-lived vintage, while 2012 offers more charm and early appeal…I suspect that over the next decade the 2012s will give more pleasure than the 2010s, and many Burgundy lovers will prefer them.”

The way I read this is 10 is a better vintage but I better think of something nice to say about the 12’s.

anytime I see “charm and early appeal” it makes it sound like a negative for burgundy.

[M.Twelftree]

anytime I see “charm and early appeal” it makes it sound like a negative for burgundy.[/quote]

just like when an english merchants says that its ‘a drinking vintage’, those words scare the shit out of me and my cellar!

MT

[Brady_Daniels]

I’ve been to three of the London EP tastings, so far. Quality-wise, I’ve been impressed across the board. I agree with Kevin’s earlier assessment of a combination of 09 and 10. Good fruit, good freshness, and plenty of structure. I think those who are down-talking the vintage are probably annoyed by something else, like say, the pricing.

As I alluded to in an earlier thread “Backfill Burgs, Baby!” I am buying very little of the big names. I just think they are too expensive for me, and many are highly allocated, anyway. I am not deluding myself into believing they will get cheaper.

I have been buying quite a lot of selected CdB wines, because they were amazing, priced reasonably, and supply is so limited. It is a case of buy now or never see them again.

Overall, I’m buying more than in 2011. Just different wines.

[paul_hanna]

@Charlie Fu

@Nick Gangas

@Efrain Rodriguez

I’m surprised noone has mentioned Tanzer’s review of '12 Burgs that came out last night. His reviews are very favorable and a glance at the big names from the CdB compare very favorably with his reviews of the 2010 vintage.

“The 2012s are fuller and much more pliant than the 2010s, which tend to show great inner-mouth tension and less easygoing sweetness. For me, 2010 is a greatmillésime du terroir and a potentially very long-lived vintage, while 2012 offers more charm and early appeal…I suspect that over the next decade the 2012s will give more pleasure than the 2010s, and many Burgundy lovers will prefer them.”

The way I read this is 10 is a better vintage but I better think of something nice to say about the 12’s.

anytime I see “charm and early appeal” it makes it sound like a negative for burgundy.

!00% spot on…lol.

I’m anti charm and appeal nowdays…