the hard Nuits backbone is covered by silky flesh that makes the wine a bit confusing–I think the Mugnier winemaking touch has blurred what I consider Nuits terroir–or is the hard Nuits “terroir” not really Nuits terroir?
Regardless, it is a surprisingly approachable 05 with deep red fruit, a fairly thick yet elegant wine that has a long future ahead of it.
Nice wine, but quite different from a lot of Nuits that I have had.
NSG made by a chambolle guy.
Hard one to know as the climat is a wee bit out on its own to the South. Certainly l’Arlot wines from near there can be silky, or used to be. It would have been nice to see the new Faiveley regime have a go at this though I expect they would not be too different to Mugnier. To me it sound pretty good.
A wee bit in this case is something like six kilometers. I see no reason to believe that Clos de la Marechale should closely resemble its northern neighbors. Well, okay, I see one reason. Faiveley’s version was pretty hard in its youth, so no doubt the hand of the winemaker impacts the final bottle, as it does for all wine.
Its more silkier because of the Mugnier signature. 2005 shows more intensity which is a vintage character. 2006 was more silky when last tasted.
Thanks for the note Alan, I have a bottle of this tucked away, gifted to me by staff which I hadn’t even thought about broaching for at least another 10 years, this note gives me all the encouragement I need to hold on til then.
I had the 98 Faiveley as my wedding wine back in 2004, and it was hard as nails. I expected the same of this, so it was my reason to hold, but the note encourages me that this is a wine that with the winemaker and the vineyard will reward patient cellaring.
That is pretty much what I was saying
I was just supporting your opinion, Mike.
Taste the Premeaux wines (monopoles) together, and they all have a very similar tannin structure - even Mugnier’s rendidtion - but his does seem only 6/10 on the volume scale versus most of the other producers’ 7-9/10! Clos l’Arlot starts with only a little more structure, than Mugnier, but becomes almost feminine (in this context!) by 10+ years. I find these southern (Premeaux) wines more structured than the more power-based wines found in ‘mid-south’ Nuits. North Nuits and the Vosne influence starts to come through very quickly…
that’s my point–what is signature and what is terroir?
And unfortunately very tough to know, as the two producers (Faiveley and now Mugnier) of this site both have very distinct signatures.
That’s why I’ve long thought the idea of “transparency of terroir” , touted by Burghound…is a silly one…and, in some ways “terroir” itself…can be over-credited for the character of a non-monopole wine. (with a monopole , at least, you have two candidates for the wine’s character: the winemaker and the terroir…and subdivisions galore like grape clone, elevage, vintage, etc).
The “terroir” is always a component…of any wine, IMO. But…just what that is is impossible to divine. Years ago, Philippe Engel…got some grapes from Gevrey, I think and sent some of his to that producer. They compared the two wines…and, as I recall, they were significantly different…when they tasted them. I never did hear much of the details, though.
Thanks Brady, with a lot more good info 
In regards to the terroir I think that Mugnier would be more sensitive to it than the old Faiveley regime, so we are seeing it as we should. It would have been interesting to have seen the wine under the new Fiaveley regime - post 2006 expecting it would be closer to Mugnier than the old regime. BTW here is my note on it from CT back in Oct 2012 “Very vibrant and youthful, dark penetrating fruit which is slightly candied at this stage, mineral and savoury nuances, firm but silky tannins, very clean and pure on the palate, long finish. Though a little disjointed at present it has great detail and is very well balanced. If you are a fan of 05’s this is great wine, to me enjoyable now though needs 20 plus years. I think it had great potential” I think it had the 05 vintage signature which I find exist in Mugnier, in fact most of their wines seems to be very vintage affected, a good thing. Cheers Mike
I am with you Alan.
Last week I opened a 10 and it is rather regular.
Loved the Romanee village from Confurot Coteditot more…
Hmm. Funny I’ve been thinking lately I wasn’t crazy about the 02 Chambolle I had recently.
This is a crazy day. But I totally agree with Stuart. I was having this exact discussion with a friend yesterday in regards to how much “terroir” is elevated in burgundy and over emphasized. When we discuss the most popular producers what everyone seems to love is the distinct producer signature on the wine. A discussion worthy of its own thread
I always thought the transparency thing was largely a nice, romantic way of saying “this is a wine made in the style that I prefer.” 
This was amazing on release. I had it recently too, seemed a bit closed and didn’t show well. I think it needs 5+ years…
when one tastes the wines of one vigneron where all were treated the same, terroir explains the difference.