Three 1999 Hermitages

[Robert_Sand]

Semi joking but there are two wines that I judge people’s palate honesty. If they have a positive note for

1990 La Chappelle
1990 Vogue Musigny

I know they point chasing or label bias

I don´t care if you question my palate: all bottles of 1990 La Chapelle I´ve had so far weren´t less than stunning (bought in Germany upon release) - and there were at least 7, if not 8 bottles over 25 years!
No idea of other bottles that travelled elsewhere though …

To go back to the questionable 1979 to 2014 period: 1979 can be outstanding, but I had also one less convincing.
1980 didn´t impress me, but 1982 is fine, and 1983 “can” be outstanding, but I think there are different bottlings.

1985 is probably the best drinking LCh. at the moment, provided a perfect bottle.

1988 is very good, but 1989/90 shine above all vintages.
(TW: Jaboulet did not use much oak then - so “oaky” seems to be wrong)

1991 is also very good, but definitely lighter, fully mature, better drink up.
1995/96/97 are successful, but on a slightly lower level, I prefer the 1996.

1998 to 2000 are quite weak.

2001 is better again (they introduced the 2nd wine), and 2003 is outstanding imho, accepting the vintage characteristics.
I´m not a fan of 2004-06, and 2007 is the 1st vintage made 100% by Frey … the style shifted toward modern,
but 2009/10/11/12 are nothing less than great, though made in the new style and with a lot of new oak.
I can understand that some people dislike these stylistically, but the quality is stunning.
2015 is a great wine, rivaling the 1989, in need of many years.
(not tasted 2013/14/16… so far)

(is there a 2008 LCH? I´ve never seen one)

So to state that 1979 to 2014 isn´t a successful period is wrong imho.

Robert, I’m certainly not questioning your palate, but I think it’s also clear our palates are quite different; I’d have a very hard time drinking a “modern” Hermitage with a ton of new oak and calling it great. I stand by my statement, and I also think “not much oak” is relative

Jaboulet used no more than 25% new oak around 1990, often less, much less than most celebrated Bordeaux and Burgundies. After several years there is absolutely no oak detectable in these LaChapelles. With the Frey regime it’ s certainly different, but the quality of vintages 2009 and younger is hardly debatable - one may like the style or not. I would also prefer less oak, but I do not call a great wine “bad” just due to that.
I bought cases of old LCh, now I buy 2-3 bottles, also due to the price, but I won’t at all when the wines were bad.
Imho style is one thing, quality is another …

[Ramon_C]

I’m being a bit snarky, but I’m not really a fan of the hyped 89 and 90 either, and I had both again this past summer. They’re oaky boring wines imho.

Semi joking but there are two wines that I judge people’s palate honesty. If they have a positive note for

1990 La Chappelle
1990 Vogue Musigny

I know they point chasing or label bias

I don´t care if you question my palate: all bottles of 1990 La Chapelle I´ve had so far weren´t less than stunning (bought in Germany upon release) - and there were at least 7, if not 8 bottles over 25 years!
No idea of other bottles that travelled elsewhere though …

To go back to the questionable 1979 to 2014 period: 1979 can be outstanding, but I had also one less convincing.
1980 didn´t impress me, but 1982 is fine, and 1983 “can” be outstanding, but I think there are different bottlings.

1985 is probably the best drinking LCh. at the moment, provided a perfect bottle.

1988 is very good, but 1989/90 shine above all vintages.
(TW: Jaboulet did not use much oak then - so “oaky” seems to be wrong)

1991 is also very good, but definitely lighter, fully mature, better drink up.
1995/96/97 are successful, but on a slightly lower level, I prefer the 1996.

1998 to 2000 are quite weak.

2001 is better again (they introduced the 2nd wine), and 2003 is outstanding imho, accepting the vintage characteristics.
I´m not a fan of 2004-06, and 2007 is the 1st vintage made 100% by Frey … the style shifted toward modern,
but 2009/10/11/12 are nothing less than great, though made in the new style and with a lot of new oak.
I can understand that some people dislike these stylistically, but the quality is stunning.
2015 is a great wine, rivaling the 1989, in need of many years.
(not tasted 2013/14/16… so far)

(is there a 2008 LCH? I´ve never seen one)

So to state that 1979 to 2014 isn´t a successful period is wrong imho.

Good thing you know a thing or 2 ‘bout them wines.

Otherwise you’re nuthin’ but a point-chasin’ label-prejudiced you!

[Mike_Evans]

Semi joking but there are two wines that I judge people’s palate honesty. If they have a positive note for

1990 La Chappelle
1990 Vogue Musigny

I know they point chasing or label bias

I tend to agree with you on the Vogue, as I’ve never had one that was better than mediocre and some that were just plain awful. I don’t agree on the La Chapelle. I’ve had 1990 Chave and La Chapelle side by side several times over the past 25 years and, while I’ve preferred the Chave more frequently, it hasn’t always been my favorite and the decision has always been a close one. I’ve also had each wine separately on several other occasions and have found a lot more bottle variation with the La Chapelle than with the Chave.

[William_Kelley]

Thanks Alex. I had the 99 Le Greal last year, and I think it has quite a bit of life left. As for Jaboulet…to paraphrase Robert, I think the years between 1979 and 2014 were not successful ones for them.

You’re throwing out quite a few babies with your bathwater there… the 1980 is very nice, and the 1982 is beautiful! Probably the most underrated La Chapelle today IMHO. After they built the new winery, the style changed, but the 1988 is a serious wine. I am also a bit of a 1990-skeptic, having had a great bottle once, but mostly rather roasted, overripe examples, and certainly nothing that could be compared with '78 or, my post-61 favorite, the 1972.

I am always happy to keep drinking older vintages of producers I claim not to love until I’m proven wrong However, for some reason, I drank a lot of Jaboulet this past year, all without success. I had a 1997, the 89, the 90 and just this past month an 83 that tasted shockingly oaky. (I borrowed someone’s glass to smell it to make sure I wasn’t poured the wrong wine.) The 83 was poured next to an 83 Chave and it’s shocking that those two wines came from the same terroir.

Obviously, I have heard the 78 is spectacular and I’ve often joked that I’m willing to pretend to move my birthyear back a year if people will bring that, so I’m entirely open to changing my mind. But I’ve just not had a good one. I also freely acknowledge that this may be both bad luck, bad storage, bottle variation - etc. But to me, these bottles don’t taste corked, or head damaged or off - they’re kind of like Leoville las Cases - never ready. And the couple of 79s I’ve had were over the hill.

Yeah, I think that’s just bad luck… Though the LLC analogy is apposite in the sense that it’s a decade from full maturity. For a great vintage that’s also fully mature, I prefer the 1972.

The 1983 for me is not so much oaky as a bit roasted and overripe in profile, sort of the precursor of the 1990 stylistically. I like the 1982 much better!

[Greg_K]

You’re throwing out quite a few babies with your bathwater there… the 1980 is very nice, and the 1982 is beautiful! Probably the most underrated La Chapelle today IMHO. After they built the new winery, the style changed, but the 1988 is a serious wine. I am also a bit of a 1990-skeptic, having had a great bottle once, but mostly rather roasted, overripe examples, and certainly nothing that could be compared with '78 or, my post-61 favorite, the 1972.

I am always happy to keep drinking older vintages of producers I claim not to love until I’m proven wrong However, for some reason, I drank a lot of Jaboulet this past year, all without success. I had a 1997, the 89, the 90 and just this past month an 83 that tasted shockingly oaky. (I borrowed someone’s glass to smell it to make sure I wasn’t poured the wrong wine.) The 83 was poured next to an 83 Chave and it’s shocking that those two wines came from the same terroir.

Obviously, I have heard the 78 is spectacular and I’ve often joked that I’m willing to pretend to move my birthyear back a year if people will bring that, so I’m entirely open to changing my mind. But I’ve just not had a good one. I also freely acknowledge that this may be both bad luck, bad storage, bottle variation - etc. But to me, these bottles don’t taste corked, or head damaged or off - they’re kind of like Leoville las Cases - never ready. And the couple of 79s I’ve had were over the hill.

Yeah, I think that’s just bad luck… Though the LLC analogy is apposite in the sense that it’s a decade from full maturity. For a great vintage that’s also fully mature, I prefer the 1972.

The 1983 for me is not so much oaky as a bit roasted and overripe in profile, sort of the precursor of the 1990 stylistically. I like the 1982 much better!

I wonder if my “oaky” is your “roasted”, but drunk next to the seductive 83 Chave the 83 Jaboulet was notably uninteresting and one note. Also, as someone very clever once said to me, the amount of oak used in making the wine doesn’t necessarily determine how oaky that wine is.

On Friday night a few of us did a Zoom tasting of the 2018 Arnoux Lachaux 2018 village wines and the Corvee Pagets, and while I know based on the tech sheet the Corvee Pagets (or any of Charles’ wines) doesn’t have much new oak…it was pretty oaky. On the other hand, the Hautes Maizieres next to it was absolutely delicious with no traces of new oak.

[William_Kelley]

I am always happy to keep drinking older vintages of producers I claim not to love until I’m proven wrong However, for some reason, I drank a lot of Jaboulet this past year, all without success. I had a 1997, the 89, the 90 and just this past month an 83 that tasted shockingly oaky. (I borrowed someone’s glass to smell it to make sure I wasn’t poured the wrong wine.) The 83 was poured next to an 83 Chave and it’s shocking that those two wines came from the same terroir.

Obviously, I have heard the 78 is spectacular and I’ve often joked that I’m willing to pretend to move my birthyear back a year if people will bring that, so I’m entirely open to changing my mind. But I’ve just not had a good one. I also freely acknowledge that this may be both bad luck, bad storage, bottle variation - etc. But to me, these bottles don’t taste corked, or head damaged or off - they’re kind of like Leoville las Cases - never ready. And the couple of 79s I’ve had were over the hill.

Yeah, I think that’s just bad luck… Though the LLC analogy is apposite in the sense that it’s a decade from full maturity. For a great vintage that’s also fully mature, I prefer the 1972.

The 1983 for me is not so much oaky as a bit roasted and overripe in profile, sort of the precursor of the 1990 stylistically. I like the 1982 much better!

I wonder if my “oaky” is your “roasted”, but drunk next to the seductive 83 Chave the 83 Jaboulet was notably uninteresting and one note. Also, as someone very clever once said to me, the amount of oak used in making the wine doesn’t necessarily determine how oaky that wine is.

On Friday night a few of us did a Zoom tasting of the 2018 Arnoux Lachaux 2018 village wines and the Corvee Pagets, and while I know based on the tech sheet the Corvee Pagets (or any of Charles’ wines) doesn’t have much new oak…it was pretty oaky. On the other hand, the Hautes Maizieres next to it was absolutely delicious with no traces of new oak.

I think a sort of aromatic “creaminess” that evokes new oak can sometimes come from volatile acidity. I remember that first clicking for me in Henri Bonneau’s cellar (hard to find older barrels than there). And I think that, plus the roasted (in the '83 Chapelle, it’s really espresso roast/prune) aromas, are more likely the source of what I think we’re both talking about in this case than an appreciable percentage of new wood. But, whatever its source, we agree about the wine.

[C_Mc_Cart]

Had an '82 Chapelle a month ago that was outstanding. I can’t agree with the dates of '79 to 2014 being the slump for Jaboulet.
Have always enjoyed '82 & '85 with '83 being less consistent (I think might be dependent on which bottling run), but can show as well as either. I think post '94 or '97 began the slide. I know a few folks with great experience that believe the '03 will be great. Glad to still have some of those wines from the '80’s.

Charlie gave me the same grief a while ago on Instagram when I said '90 La Chapelle can be great, but hard to convince someone who hasn’t had a great one, that they exist. I do have the palate of a yak, of course.

[MikeL238]

I know it’s a thread drift, but anyone had '99 Bernard Chave Hermitage lately?

[Peter_Hirsch]

“Foursquare and Monolithic” is exactly how I’d describe 1990 Jaboulet “La Chapelle”. And the 1989 is just a little weak, not as firm as it should be given the vintage. I’ve done the blind tasting vs the 1990 Chave a number of times, it’s never close. Chave made an amazing and multi-layered Hermitage in 1990, Jaboulet not so much…