This is very subjective I know, and it is hard to line up one region against another but what is your best vintage ever? On my shortlist would be 2001 for Sauternes/Barsac, 1996 and 2002 for Champagne and 2016 for Piemonte. But my top three are:
1999 Red Burgundy: The perfect year. Huge crop, brilliant quality from top to bottom. So much perfume coupled with depth. The 1999 Romanée-Conti is probably the best wine I’ve ever had and the 1999 La Tâche might be the second best.
2002 Clare Valley (Riesling): A cool year but a brilliant one. The wines are so precise and full of character. This was at a time when the region, on mass, switched to screwcap. There are so many wonderful ‘02’s that are drinking in their prime right now under this perfect closure. Price of admission was so cheap, and still is.
1996 Piemonte: A time when there were certainly a lot of modern wines, but the classics absolutely shone in this year. Fabulous perfumes and structures. Exquisite balance. Enjoyable young, middle aged and now.
2001 in Germany for me. Truly epic collections from several producers; every single wine made by say, JJ Christoffel, Muller-Catoir, Fritz Haag, or JJ Prum is something incredibly special. (In Catoir’s case, not just the Rieslings - the Rieslaners and the Scheurebes were as memorable.) And a lot of smaller/lesser-known producers like Meulenhof also had amazing collections.
Along with the usual Bordeaux suspects–'82, '89, '90 ( I know, one of these is not like the others)–I would throw '04 Barolo into the ring. I’ve just never had a been one from any maker and most of my best experiences have come throw this vintage. I don’t drink as widely or deeply as some in this area–or any really, though I do ok–so I am certainly open to other views. (I have had better experience than with '01, which is also, of course, a fine vintage.)
Interesting, @Jeremy_Holmes that you would take '99 over '90, which I’ve always liked, but I’ve not had much Birgundy for whatever reason from the former.
Great topic Jeremy - a tale of our individual styles and passions ! My own rules for this are vintages are based on wines I have had and must be at least 20 years out of the vineyard ( or perhaps 19 ! ).
Burgundy - 1999 : uniform, abundant, transparent, perfumed and structured. 1999 La Tache is wonderful, Rousseau CdB terrific and underneath are so many delicious wines just coming into their own.
Bordeaux - 1982 : uniform, textured, perfumed, structured and just delicious. Mouton, Latour, Lalande all just so delicious, even sexy, and underneath so many surprises.
- invoking rule 3 2005 : uniform, perfumed, structured, pure and persistent yet still on the upslope.
Clare Valley Riesling - 2002 : just the best and still drinking beautifully with purity, poise and zest.
Port - 1963 : rich, fascinating, complex and in the best cases seemingly impossible !
Champagne - 2002 : balanced, richly fruited, chalky, sunlit and persistent.
Brunello - ask me in 15 years.
Mosel - who cares, they are all lovely in the right hands !
Barolo - ask my grandson in 50 years.
I don’t have as much experience with some of the older vintages, but these standout. Especially 2001 in Germany because that was right when I started drinking German wines. But more broadly, the scale of these epic vintages seems less likely to be repeated in the world of climate change.
I think on balance we benefit from more ‘good’ years, and the lows are not as low, which is probably a good thing. But is it somehow less ‘interesting’ that vintage variation is less dramatic. Do recent climate change wines have less dramatic vintage character?
Germany - 1971 followed by 1990 (2019 may become the next one)
red Burgundy -1999, followed by 1978 and 2010
White Burgundy - 2014
California Cab - 1978
Red Bordeaux - 1982 (nothing else has combination of quality and affordability (at least on futures)
Sauternes - 2001 (will 2016 be next)
I literally just clicked here to say 1998 Pomerol. Such high highs. Throw 1998 Magdelaine in this mix.