1959 Château Ausone- France, Bordeaux, Libournais, St. Émilion Grand Cru (4/21/2014)
Lightning in a bottle. A nose so intense it almost made me flinch before leaning back over to dive into its complexity. Its core is very ripe baked plum, but just like the great Cheval Blancs I’ve had it intermittently showed a redder-fruited side. Immediately after opening it complemented the primary notes with Northern Rhone-like notes of bacon and paprika; as the night went on it turned to espresso and Mississippi mud pie–not the familiar coffee and chocolate flavors that come from high-char oak, but something deeper with more personality. The leather and brown sugar notes in the background were consistent throughout. In the mouth it began very lightweight for its concentration, which had us commenting on its impressive restraint and finesse. It wasn’t quite making it to the back palate, though it lingered on the front and middle of the tongue for longer than any wine I can remember. With the help of some air and food, however, its texture became a new focal point, with a tannic experience I’d never had before: it was so grippy it felt like it refused to let go of the sides of the mouth, but without any hint of what is normally the accompanying drying sensation. By this point it offered a completely seamless journey from attack to finish and aftertaste. This has structure to spare, with invigorating acid alongside the remarkable tannin–I can’t imagine it will get better, but I also can’t see it getting worse for years to come. I couldn’t keep the cork out of my nose on the way home. It only takes one wine like this to remind me why I picked up this obsessive and expensive hobby. (96 pts.)
So yeah. Three cheers for Winebid here–I have no idea about the bottle’s provenance, though the fill was almost to the neck and the label was pristine. After dinner I brought the dregs of the bottle to fellow Berserker Corey Miller’s house to share, but sadly at the 4-hour mark it had started to sour and raisin. The cork still smelled electric; it’s a shame I dropped it on the subway platform.
The other wine served would probably have been just as much of a showstopper for most sophisticated tasters: 1989 Krug Vintage Brut Collection. I know nothing about Champagne, so I won’t disrespect the wine by attempting to offer an inaccurate note, but my friend said it showed brioche and caramel; I picked up some apple cider as well. The bubbles were so small as to be almost imperceptible–he described it as a “mousse”–and it tasted very fresh. But I think I’m still waiting for my Champagne epiphany.
Back to the Ausone. The only wine that I’ve ever reacted to like this before is Cheval Blanc; I guess I’m just a St. Emilion guy. There’s something I love about the combination of the lushness and fruit character of the Merlot and the structure provided by the Cabernet (Franc not Sauvignon, I know) that seems to me to provide the absolute best of Bordeaux–in comparison, the Medoc (this side of Pichon Lalande) can feel rigid and Pomerol sloppy.
I’m not really sure where to go from here with this producer though: the estate famously was asleep at the wheel from the mid-60’s until it was sold in 1997, and the wines since then are a) Rolland-spoofed b) too young and c) ludicrously expensive–good vintages over the past 15 years are trading in the four-digit Petrus range. I imagine that if I have a taste for mature, traditionally styled St. E, I should start gobbling up old Figeac and Canon. Any other suggestions of producers or vintages would be greatly appreciated.
I get it, that’s a revelatory experience! Thanks for sharing. I recently had a 1950 and 1955 Ausone, side by side, that hit me the same way. These wines are compelling, especially at this level of maturation. I cannot imagine how good the Ausone was from a stellar vintage like '59, but assume a notch above what I had.
Sadly for my palate, and wallet, I prefer these St Ems with the higher percentage of Cab Franc - Ausone, Cheval, Figeac. I just cannot afford them any more. I wonder if the Franc is what adds the structure to allow these right banks to age so wonderfully.
magnificent cork.
I had this wine on April 19.
Immense wine, very Saint-Emilion with an insistent truffle combined with a velvety delicatesse.
Powerful, invading, a truly great wine.
Bravo Dan for your report.
Concerning Krug 1989 it is a fantastic Champagne. One day you will have your epiphany and you will never abandon Champagne any more.
Great note on a legendary Ausone, but you are mistaken if you believe that they went into a slump in the mid-1960s, as the domaine continued to make brilliant wines in most vintages up until their sale. Their faded reputation during this period has more to do with the fact that some folks cannot taste… particularly a wine that starts out so structured as Ausone did back in its traditional guise, prior to its modernization of style under the new ownership. I have had world-changing bottles of '64, '66, '70, '76, '82, '83, '85, '89 and '90 since their “slump” began, and I have not tasted anywhere near as widely as I would like of Ausone vintages during this time frame, so I imagine that there are others ('61, '62, '71, '75, 88, '95?) that arer also stellar, but have not crossed my path. What you described in terms of your love for the textural exotica of the '59 as it blossomed with air is the profound influence of the terroir here at Ausone, which is the filet section of the Cotes section of St. Emilion, with its sublime base of limestone scree and fossilized starfish. Magdelaine, Belair and Canon are the closest here to this stunning base of soil, but no one would dispute that Ausone has the finest section on the hillside descending down from the town. It really is the Romanee-Conti of Bordeaux. Sadly, the new style does not properly highlight this unique and brilliant terroir, though the soil is still there below the predictable veneer of “cuvee de luxe” new wood and micro-oxygenation. Probably the best bet, now that Magdelaine has heard the tumbrils roll, is Canon for an approximation of that rush of terroir that the traditional, mature Ausones delivered in spades back in the old days. Canon is another property that is ludicrously underrated by most commentators on Bordeaux. You will not be able to scale the same heights as the '59 Ausone, but a great Canon at maturity is another sensational experience of why the Cotes in St. Emilion is the most magical patch of dirt in all of Bordeaux. It is a pity that the folks that own most of the vineyards on the slope here really do not have any appreciation for what they have and what they so often squander each year. Figeac, which was also brilliant in its own right, is cut from a far different cloth of soil and cepages, as it really has more in common with a wine like Cheval Blanc or some of its neighborly Pomerols (like VCC) than it does with the best of the Cotes section of St. Emilion. It was a great, great wine in its own right, but you will not find many similarities to your '59 Ausone experience plumming around with wines like '64 or '70 Figeac.
Not sure I understand your question, Glenn. I got the 1959 because it was a great vintage, a great-looking bottle, and 40% cheaper than the 1961 (which was also available). There were 8 bottles up originally (of which this one was in the best condition); now the only one left is a seeper.
Just wondering if 1959 held a personal significance Dan.
A few years ago I experienced the 1966 Ausone shining well beyond an off vintage Petrus, would have been my WOTY if not for a terrific SQN Dangerous Birds 10 months earlier. Then again I attended a Right Bank dinner in LA years ago, with no wines older than 1970, and thought CB showed better than Ausone nearly vintage. Only good old bottles.
None–I was born in 1982. It was a purely wine-based choice.
Well, despite John Gilman’s disagreement, the mainstream (and perhaps incorrect) view is that Ausone underperformed in the 70’s, 80’s, and early 90’s, before selling out (literally and figuratively) and going modernist. Cheval Blanc, by contrast, is like Latour renowned for its consistency. So the results of your Right Bank comparison seem pretty reasonable to me.
Here is my friend’s note on the 1989 Krug, which obviously does it the justice that I could never hope to at this stage:
KRUG SPECIAL COLLECTION 1989
A straw-like yellow predominates with a slightly darker, richer color at the edges. Very gentle bubbles, not quite yet the mousse of older Champagne but moving delightfully in that direction, like pinpricks of gently massaging Champagne “acupressure” on the palate. Some hazelnut, brioche, caramel, some marmalade on the nose. Creamy, and beautifully textured, maybe some white truffles emerging, a lovely rounding out after being open for some time (originally, nuanced yet light and delightful when opened). Some poached pears towards the lovely medium finish which still coats the palate with brio — wonderfully balanced acidity throughout this rich Champagne where the back palate sherry-like notes just give it backbone and further definition.
95 points (Disgorged circa 2000 and held in the Krug cellars in Reims before being released, as a Collection offering)
Look at that, even the seeper got taken (though it was down to $315 before premium last I checked). I believe the ones in good shape went for $350 and $340 before premium. I guess I wasn’t the only one who had an inkling of how good it might be…all the 1961’s are still there, but they haven’t budged from the original open price of $600 before premium despite weeks with no bids.
Why do you say that, John? The guy I drank it with is a very knowledgeable collector who had had the wine numerous times before–I bought it on his recommendation, actually–and he said the bottle was perfectly consistent with prior tastings. Personally, I don’t have a ton of experience with 1959 First Growths. However, I have drunk many lower-tier Bordeaux from the 1960’s that were still fresh and fruity, so I wouldn’t say it tasted disturbingly young. It had all the secondary notes that come from extended aging, and reminded me very much of the Cheval Blancs I’ve loved, so there was certainly appropriate appellation character. You can never know for sure, but it seems strange that someone would fake a 1959 Ausone and dump it for $350 instead of, say, a 1959 Lafite or Latour or Mouton or Haut Brion or La Mission that you could sell for 4 times as much.
Also, if that was a fake, I’d love to know what went into the bottle so I could buy it for cheap!
Yea I saw the 61’s and that’s just a bit much for me. $340 is a pretty sweet price, wish I’d seem them this weekend when I picked up some 78 BV Georges Latour bottles.
I ask because in some ways it describes all the wines that Rudy K fabricated that were drunk with pleasure by knowledgeable people. They were all fresh yet with lots of secondary development and great fills and usually pristine labels. He never served an off bottle!
As we know from the court files in Rudy’s case, he had formulas for Right Bank Bordeaux of that rough vintage. There was a Post-It on a bottle of California red in his kitchen that said (as I recall), “Pomerol - mid-60s” or something like that. (Sadly, the feds haven’t released notes or a list of the wines found at his house.) And Rudy and Hardy Rodenstock are only the tip of the faking iceberg.
I think you’ll find that there’s a huge amount of fakery beyond the first growth level, and Ausone had a superb reputation in that era, so it would be a natural to fake. I’m not saying it had to be fake, but I think any top flight wine of that age has to be viewed with a fair deal of suspicion, and particularly one sold on Winebid at a low price.
I don’t know the '59 figures, but Ausone was producing only ~2,000 cases a year in the 80s and '59 was a small crop. How many bottles do you think have survived undrunk and unspoiled more than 50 years after release? The odds of finding genuine bottles in perfect shape from an anonymous seller through an auction with minimal or no vetting are just inherently low. Given everything we’ve learned in the last several years, you can’t assume it’s genuine if you don’t know the provenance.
As for your friend’s take and past experiences, we also learned from Rodenstock and Rudy that the top names in the trade have been duped over and over.
