There was such a stark contrast in accessibility in the two wines. One was classic leflaive richness and the other one was almost “too clean” for leflaive with minerality and focus. If you’re a fan of Leflaive’s style, I would back up the truck on the 04 Pucelles. My single bottle but I will be hunting for more for sure!
2004 Domaine Leflaive Puligny-Montrachet 1er Cru Les Pucelles- France, Burgundy, Côte de Beaune, Puligny-Montrachet 1er Cru (1/16/2011)
Insanely good white burgundy. If you like your burgundy rich and concentrated with intense fruit then you’d love this burgundy. There is a nice balance of minerality and acid but not so prominent that it would draw in acid lovers. Definitely shows the vintage with the soft waxy texture and the borderline sweet apple fruit.
The length on this wine is so long that the richness just focuses into the center of your palate. If you give the wine time I can imagine that it expands to just envelop your whole palate with that rich concentrated fruit. (94 pts.)
2004 Domaine Leflaive Puligny-Montrachet 1er Cru Clavoillon- France, Burgundy, Côte de Beaune, Puligny-Montrachet 1er Cru (1/16/2011)
Smoky nose with light floral notes gathering on the back end but it needs a good hour or so to blow off the smoke to allow the purity of the nose to shine through. Incredibly tight wine on the pop and pour, not nearly as accessible as the pucelles which was surprising since Clavoillon tends to be the most forward vintage to vintage. The palate wasn’t very expansive at this point but there was a nice spine of minerality but without the exquisite leflaive richness. The palate was far more toned down , almost chablis like. Good but still so so young, needs quite some time to open up and be accessible. (91 pts.)
Pucelles is very special to me. Terrific terroir.
When I get a chance at a good price, I always jump on it.
Very close to Grand Cru to me and for the price difference a Leflaive I can afford. (In some vintages it really expresses as Grand Cru)
FWIW.
Good notes Charlie, last time I had the 2004 Domaine Leflaive Clavoillon, thought it tasted somewhat uncharacteristic of other vintages of the same wine. It was not as forward as you suggest, but also unexpectedly flinty and refined!
While the 1ers often perform at GC levels, am sometimes surprised how excellent the village level wines show too, recall a really good 1996 and 2004.
Was wondering why I couldn’t find this in the cellar, then I realized I had cleverly put it in long term storage, where all Leflaive Pucelles need to be…
I am not, and never been a big fan of their Clavoillon, (even though I always have to buy some to maintain my allocation) finding it usually the lesser of the 1’er’s…
I thought the 04 Clavoillon wasn’t forward at all. Certainly “refined” tho! I think our notes most likely match =)
and Paul: I agree to some extent. The 07 Clavoillon is quite nice. I like trying young pucelles due to its richness. I’ll be popping a 99 this Friday so we can see how that puppy is faring
Must admit I wasn’t thrilled by an '07 Clavoillon a few weeks ago (but that partially might be my bias) as I had pretty high expectations for the ‘07 1’ers’.
And as for the '99 Pucelles, I am not even sure where I put my last 2 bottles, as I buried them very deep, as they still seemed to need so much more time 18 months ago…
2007 Domaine Leflaive Puligny-Montrachet ‘Clavoillon’: Aromas of orange blossom, nougat and pure white peach. Rich and textured in the mouth but with excellent tension. Sappy fruits coat the palate and then some chalky minerals clean up the finish. It has excellent length and whilst complex and open knit now I suspect will be splendid in 7-10 years.
I didn’t take notes, and don’t remember all that much specifically about the wine (was one of 5 or 6 white burgs we opened on NYE), except that it was a bit generic looking, and didn’t really have the cut and length I was expecting.