Recent threads on both the 98 and 99 d’Yquem found them to be under-whelming, at least in regard to expectations. With the 2001 vintage of Sauternes, d’Yquem was 5X the price of both Rieussec or Suduirault, upon release. Anyone having had either the 2001 Rieussec or Suduirault knows that these are exquisite wines.(I was going to mention there respective numerical ratings, but didn’t want to incite a riot.) I’ve made this inquiry previously,(not here though) and some seem to think that the real qualitative difference between d’Yquem and other top Sauternes and Barsacs really only shows in a significant way with 40 or 50 years of aging. In order for this to be true, it would have to be from a strong vintage to begin with. All of this considered, I ask, is d’Yquem worthy of its lofty price?
Not even close as far as I am concerned, but it is individual taste. Drink (a good) one.
About 6 years ago, I had a 1 ounce pour of 2001 d’Yquem.
Yes
Not for me. It’s one of those (and there are a lot examples and not just in wine) wines that force you to pay an extravagent premium for a marginal uptick in perceived quality. Plus you pay for the pedigree and brand. Just me, maybe.
Nope
I recently had the 98 and posted my TN as i think you refer to. It was indeed a bit “underwhelming” if I can say that about a wine i rated 92 points. Its just i had a lot higher expectations, this being my first yquem. It was very delicous, but at 200$ or more for a 750 i felt that i paid for the pedigree indeed.
I have one more of those and i look forward to enjoying it. But considering i will only have the off vintages within my (stretched) budget, i have more or less decided to seek out the lesser Sauternes in the good vintages instead. Sometimes its just fun to taste a wine that is iconic, to calibrate your palate and have the experience. but merely considering the quality in the glass, and based on my sole experience, i would say no to your question.
As an example, i am able to buy a 750 bottle of Rieussec 2009 for 20% less than i paid for a half bottle of the 98 YQ. I am opting for that instead of exploring off-vintage Yquem further.
Easy “yes” for me but just my opinion. In great vintages such as 01’, 89’, 90’, Yquem can be a magical experience that stands out as one of the greatest wines to cross my lips. Even in “off” vintages such as 98’ I still thoroughly enjoy the wines but the question of whether or not it’s wortth the cost of admission is up to you. I just bought a case of 98’ for $90/bottle and to me it is worth it. It’s still Yquem and while some vintages may qualify as underwhelming, I’ve never had an Yquem I didn’t enjoy.
For anybody who even asks this question, the answer is NO … especially when meant to be drunk early.
Does a Stradivari sound 100 times as good as a fine new violin?
No.
Fortunately d´Yquem is not (yet) the price of a Stradivari … 
Seriously: there are many fine Sauternes/Barsacs easier affordable … the 5 to 20% higher quality (if at all, depending on the vintage) is certainly due to prestige etc.
Yes, IMX and IMO.
When tasted blind against other top estates in blind-ish conditions (you know the wines are there, but not exactly which glass), it is on another level in a way that few other wines are. The premium demanded is tough to swallow, but when I can, I do.
When I previously made this inquiry on another venue, I was open to the possibilities that there is something magical about the terroir (unique, one of a kind like DRC) and/or the winemaking. Unless one is über-rich or well connected to friends who are willing to share, it’s not likely to be possible to know from personal experience. Obviously, it doesn’t have to be 100% better, but I’m trying to understand what it is that makes it better at all.
yes
but I’ve had all mine as the result of the kindness of others so I didn’t have to pay the premium. If those sources went away I would save my money and buy the d’Yquem myself.
Inevitably, with a wine such a d’Yquem, you are paying a hefty upcharge for the wine’s trophy status. In great vintages, d’Yquem can be the superior dessert wine from Sauternes and adjacent regions. The 2001 d’Yquem is certainly one of the most spectacular young dessert wines I’ve ever tasted. But is it “worth” the price differential compared to other great 2001 Sauternes? It’s an extremely close call, but a tremendous amount depends on how much $$ one is willing to spend on a bottle of wine in the first place. In lesser vintages, I think the answer is no.
Bruce
For me (and I own a lot of d’yquem) I’d say no.
Two reasons: 1) There are a lot of pretty profound dessert wines out there that don’t ring in at $600. 2) There are a lot of really really good Barsacs and Sauternes that don’t ring in anywhere close to $600.
But who am I to tell you how to spend your coin?
D’Yquem’s texture is very unique. I had a horizontal blind of the 01 Sauternes where I rated the D’Yquem 100pts than the next highest was 96 or 97.
Having said that, if you are looking for QPR, the 86, 88 or 90 Climens are much better buy than the 98 D’Yquem.
Another yes, from an owner of a 6-pack of the 2001 in 750s.
I own a chunk of Yquem and sauternes in general as well. I feel that in the really great years, Yquem stands out (1988-90, 2001). That being said, I think in those years as well, the others (Rieussec, Climens, Suduiraut), for the most part, are on par with the Yquem.
Now, if I had to choose between an off-year Yquem or a superb year “other”, I’ll take the “other” over the Yquem, given the QPR.
For me, d’Yquem is just in a different league from other Sauternes. The only thing close IMHO is Climens and that is a totally different style. Whether you want to pay the extra for the d’Yquem is up to you (I generally don’t (buy more riesling sweet wines anyway)), but for me there is a much greater difference between d’Yquem and other Sauternes that between first and second growth Bordeaux, for example.
Maybe for the first time, I agree with Keith ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}