GRANDS CRUS vs. Premier Crus - what´s the difference?

WINE TALK
61

I agree with Jerry here.
To me it is about an extra dimension of intensity of flavor and length of finish. Many can have the balance and power of a grand cru but the grand crus have
an extra gear that you can many times discern. Easy to get fooled here when you are drinking Les Amoureuses or other premier crus that drink like Grand Crus at times however.

Like Jerry stated above, once you get into discussions of producers that don’t try to reach the real potential of the terroir, it gets difficult here. Better to have one producer that produces a full line of wines using the same techniques. That to me gives the best insight.

62

[thumbs-up.gif]

63

This is really difficult and the results will be surprising and shocking.

64

Jasper Morris wrote in his Inside Burgundy – 2010 - page 15 at the end of the paragraph Understanding burgundy:

((((Among the beautiful things in my life have been some wonderful bottles of burgundy. Not necessarily grands crus, not always great vintages – but wines which, from the first sniff, have demonstrated that the vigneron has done the best possible job with the grapes available from that vineyard, in that year.

Burgundy does not respond well to being put in the straitjacket. There are no set rules to making burgundy; there are no set rules to appreciating burgundy. It intrigues, fascinates delights, infuriates, disappoints, charms, enraptures and puzzles. Very like the life of a man, as long as it refrains from Hobbes’ definition – ’solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short’. This book aims at lighting the way towards bottles which are rick in flavor, delightful, civilized and long – and certainly plural.))))

65

Gerhard,

I know the theory of terroir well. Following this theory a Grand Cru should always be better than a village level wine. At least if both are from the same vintage and producer. Unfortunately it does´t meet my experience. Most wine lovers I know are searching for the extra dimension in a wine some described as an otherworldly moment. Many are ready to pay high prices for this special moment. But it can’t be found by buying wines from the top of the hierarchy only.

What is the formula of finding this extra in a wine? A bottle produced from a talented and really quality driven winemaker perfectly stored with zero flaws (cork etc.) opened at the perfect temperature filled in good glasses at its peak and in good mood. That will give me a thrill.

I still remember the modest bottle of 1985 Rousseau Gevrey Chamberlin we drank around the millennium with 2 friends. That was amongst the best bottles of Burgundy I ever had. Other Rousseau such as 1978, 1985, 1990, 1991 Chamberlin and Clos de Beze I bought and drank included. For reasons I explained above. To underline what I said we were so thrilled by the village level Rousseau that my friend went into his cellar and brought a 1985 Clos de la Roche from Rousseau to the table. For wether reason this bottle was not superior - it was not even at the same level. And it wasn’t corked btw.

I agree that Grands Crus are very often produced with more care because they will bring more money. At least this is true for many Domains and Chateau. But not for all. Rousseau i.e. behaved since a very long time as a top quality producer. And the entire family lived what is an established formula today. If you will know how quality driven a producer really is don’t taste his most expensive wine. Taste his least expensive. I did taste the entire line of a Domaine in a given vintage often enough to know the following: In lesser years the difference between the village level and the Grands Crus can be big. In reverse the difference will be way smaller in top years. And its not an insult if you like the village level Chambolle or Gevery better than a certain Grand Cru from a producer. This happened to me not only once.

66

I think you may be deluding yourself a bit here. By that rationale, how do we recognise the superior quality of Lascombes (2eme GCC) over Palmer (3eme GCC)? I didn’t attempt a definition because trying to do that would be like attempting to patch together a raincoat out of slices of Jarlsberg. It would be full of holes and would fall apart under scrutiny. Certainly, if you find “more complexity, more finesse, more intensity” in one wine over another, then the former is almost certainly of better quality; the GC/PC classification is irrelevant - it’s just a fiscally rewarding Red Herring.


What he said.

Also, cudos to Jürgen’s comments above!

67

Not necessarily - it depends on who selects the wines … and for what purpose / for what results.

I can easily select wines for a tasting where most/all Premiers Crus win over the Grands Crus … it just takes a good lot of Burgundy knowledge and experience … I can also do it the other way round …
But it is very hard/close to impossible t o find 6 Village wines delivering the thrill of top GCs …

(to all: don´t treat me like a green schoolboy who has to be tought about Burgundy … [swearing.gif] - that´s not appropriate after 32 years drinking and visiting the Côte …)

68

Gerhard,

I certainly don’t underestimate your experience. That’s not the point. I am absolutely aware as many others that you have tons of experience.

On the other hand – I would see the results of the blind tasting I mentioned anyway. Because many of certainties of mine were destroyed in blind tastings. Everybody who tastes blind often enough in different settings question the hierarchy sooner or later. And his abilities. That has nothing to do with talent, experience etc. Its natural. And to doubt the hierarchy is nothing bad at all. Its the opposite. Its democracy and enlightenment. Helpful and necessary.

69

I really regret having opened this thread.
An objective and serious discussion seems to be impossible here. To many stubborn points of view.

Apologizes …

70

Sorry too… a sad devolution. Robert the difference is lines on a map and good farmers. Men made up the tiers, and most, well intentioned. Add or subtract politics, weather, time/history, inheritance laws, technology, etc. ad infinitum. Grand crus and the wines that are not, but deserve to be, just take it to another level. Like when Arthur said, " Have you ever been on a yacht?, It doesn’t suck!" That’s what we all know it to be. A combination of terroir, farming and age will reveal what is/are the real grand Crus. When you really drink one, especially a whole bottle with a small group and some time. For me a true example is the 1955 La Romanee from Maison Leroy. Kelly Walker had a great note on this, that I basically fully concur with. Here is my note giving Kelly full credit, 'What a divine treat for my 41st. There is no way to improve on Kelly Walker’s words when describing this wine he said, …“On the palate I began to see paisley!”…

71

I will add, there is a great line from maybe David Schildknecht describing maybe a 2005 Musigny from D Leroy… “I had to draw a deep breath in anticipation of what would rise from my glass of Leroy 2005 Musigny, and in that moment Madame Leroy trenchantly observed that “it’s another world” down in there”…

I don’t mean to just use Leroy again. But the thought behind, “It’s another world down in there” is what a grand cru really is.

72

Not sure why you’re apologizing - or how you expected the answers to be different than they are. Actually, I think this has been quite a useful and civil discussion.

73

There is already some insight above to be found, but some people still don´t believe that terroir DOES matter.

If all other things are equal: the better the site the better the wine!

(that doesn´t necessarily mean all Grand Cru sites will give GC wine … (many don´t) … nor a 1er Cru cannot produce GC quality - some can, but far less often)
Sure also the producer is very important - but the cases when a Premier Cru of the same producer is better than his Grand Crus are rare … and Village wines on Grand cru level are even much rarer (please mention half a dozen!?).

74

One point that hasn’t really been mentioned (and I say this because we see a LOT of high end GC Burgs blind - and they don’t always look great) is that sometimes a wine can be a better drink, but still not a better wine.

What I mean is that a more open and approachable, more ready, prettier (this sort of Burg wins so often blind), more easy going, more “drinkable” wine often gets the points in any sort of blind tastings, but may still not be a better wine…(from a more qualitative perspective).

So a more complex, more structured, deeper/darker, more powerful wine (i.e. a GC) doesn’t always beat a more attractive, open wine (say a 1’er or Village wine).


My favorite example of this was when I served an '05 Rouget Vosne (village) wine 100% blind against 3 DRC’s (including a La Tache) and some other GC’s, and the Rouget took unanimous first place.

This doesn’t actually mean in the end that the GC isn’t the better wine - it is, it will be, and will (generally) show so in time…

75
  • 2… [cheers.gif] [drinkers.gif]
76

This is a great example. I wonder if the results were different if served single blind as the stem note would have given a good clue.

77

Paul, isn’t the problem here that the Grand Crus in your tasting are too young?

78

LOL. So you served a $300 wine made by Henri Jayer’s nephew against some DRCs and it won a blind tasting. I for one am not surprised! It seems possible to me that the $300 wine made by Henri Jayer’s nephew actually was the better wine – certainly based on pricing the market believes that Rouget’s wines have that potential regardless of terroir.

This seems like a data point for the idea that a great producer can make great wines on terroirs that were not traditionally classed as grand cru and that some of the GC/village distinction is about the level of care given and the production techniques used.

79

Its the usual explanation when a wine does´t perform as it should – too young. While this is sometimes true its not the rule. Most really outstanding wines from top of the hierarchy I came along showed their quality whenever you pulled a cork. Even when they were young. Examples for this are 1982 Latour and 1990 La Tache.

80

Too many variables ways …for enjoyments of burgundy wines. One of the many reasons why I am so fascinating by it.

Let go back to the basic : when to open your bottle is one of key …for enjoyment of drinking burgundy wines !!