My use of the term “nobly rustic” has nothing to do with the wines being hard or questionably balanced. If you prefer, perhaps the French term “sauvage” would be a closer synonym for what I meant by “nobly rustic”. The only thing “hard” about the Mugneret '93s was figuring out what the hell Robert Parker was talking about back then. He still is off base about the vintage- or at least unwilling to admit he completely missed the call on the '93s out of the blocks. Out of barrel the '93 Mugneret wines were beauitfully balanced, transparent and aromatically superb, with an abundance of black fruit and ripe, tangy acids and well-integrated tannins. If Monsieur Parker had managed to taste them out of barrel, he might have had a better feel for their true quality and potential. After their bottling they seriously shut down- like most everyone else’s wines in '93 that nailed the vintage- and they continue to evolve gracefully and at a snail’s pace. Trying to handicap a structured vintage like 1993 after the bottling and immediatly after shipping- as Monsieur Parker did back in the day- when the wines were shaken and impossible to taste- was a dubious methodology from the outset and not an avenue likely to shed much light on the vintage, IMO. Like many top examples of the vintage, the 1993 Mugneret wines remain too young to drink at the present time, but they are simply still buttoned up behind their well-balanced structures and will no doubt be splendid in the fullness of time. If one is not patient enough to wait for great classic vintages to evolve, there are always other vintages to focus on. But to question the overall balance and style of the Mugneret wines from this epoch based on the comments of Monsieur Parker’s tasting of the '93 wines right after shipping in 1995 is not fair to the Mugnerets, nor to folks here who respect your palate and experience with the wines of the region. Rather than reiterate what Monsieur Parker thought of the wines at the time, it would be more interesting if you let us know what you thought of them in 1995 and what you think of the Mugneret '93s today.
Fair enough, John. (Though I don’t think of “rustic” as a compliment nor a style I’d seek out. But, I’ve never thought of the Mugneret wines as that anyway. In fact, since the daughters took over in 1988 they’'ve evolved to more and more finesse.
I tasted their '93s at the winery on July 4, 1996, with my wife and Christine and her mother. They were eager to know what I thought about them, and opened a couple that were in bottle: the Chaignots and the Ruchottes. They would have opened more, but…I think I discouraged that, as their waiting for my views made be feel a little uncomfortable. When the Chaignot was opened, I noted “coffee aroma; good acid and body, but “is there really enough fruit”? It was then that Christine took the bottle, put the cork back in and shook it like a pharmacist would, trying to make an elixir. She laughed and said her father always told them that was how to make a hard wine show something…and I’ve used that ever since. I then wrote “There’s fruit there, but not enough still?”. The Ruchottes was more expressive on the nose and had decent fruit, but I still questioned whether there was really enoought.” After the shake I found a “decent kernel of fruit, but still wondered if there was enough. After pondering it there, in front of everyone, for a pretty long time, I wrote that " I’m sure this really is excellent.” FWIW, John, I looked at the relatively few notes now on Cellar Trakcer, and they seem to find lots of structure and not much fruit. (I haven’t had any in the last 5 years, so …)
Ever since hearing about it as it was happening and tasting examples in the mid-90s, I have thought that 1993 hit some real highs, particularly in light of the horrid harvest conditions, but was very inconsistent and not that great on the Cote de Beaune. I still think that, and think it is only a really good vintage when viewing the “highest highs”. Some people really didn’t do too well. /b]
As far as the relative enthusiasm for the '90s and '91s in the market when the two vintages were released, I remember the 1990s being the much more wildly popular wines. As a merchant in those days, it was extremely difficult to sell the 1991s- even from folks like Rousseau, as the euphoria for the plush, seductive and opulent 1990s continued on unabated well into the selling season for the 1991 Burgundies. At least this was the case in the market here in NY at that time. The '90s were great out of the blocks and it was hard to champion the leaner, tougher and slightly green-edged 1991s when there was still a fair bit of 1990 red Burgundy around in the pipeline. It took the 1991s three or four years to start to blossom a bit in bottle- at which point folks started to look much more seriously at the vintage- or this was at least the case here in the NY market at that time. But, today, with the exception of Chambolle-Musigny, which was hit hard by hail in 1991 and nowhere near as successful as the other villages in the Cote de Nuits, I would much rather drink a 1991 than its corresponding 1990- from virtually anyone worthy of their mettier.
Vive la difference, as “they” say! I have really become more and more wowed by the 1990 vintage: had a Vosne Chaumes from Rion Monday and was really charmed…I do think 1991 always seemed good, if not really more than that. The extremly low yields made up for many other lackings. I’ve just never been wowed by any…save for the Rousseau Chambertins. 1990 has a much better batting average…in my mind. ![cheers [cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif)
Happy 2012…
Stuart
ps. I recently bought a couple of the Zalto Burgundy glasses. I had a Bordeaux glass for a y ear and a half that someone gave me, but it broke. I am really wowed by the Zalto Burgundy glass. Ridiculously overpriced, but…it focuses the aromatics and the wine hits the palate just right, I think. Anybody else have experience? You, John?