TN: 1998 Trimbach Riesling Cuvée Frédéric Emile (France, Alsace)

WINE TALK
#1

1998 Trimbach Riesling Cuvée Frédéric Emile - France, Alsace (5/3/2016)
Spiced peach served atop a bed of steel with a dollop of unsweetened cream and lemon zest on top. Beguiling, stunning and delicious.

Posted from CellarTracker

#2

No peaches for me,-- apricots apparently-- but nice wine in recent experiences.

7/13–In Maine, with friends (who brought the CSH) and an anchovy and olive-oil poached melange of swordfish, monkfish, halibut and scallops over pasta. A direct “comparison” of the two top Trimbach rieslings from 1998. I kept some, as I always do, to really pay attention to the next morning. The fruit in the CSH I had hoped would come out of its shell more never did, making me conclude that it showed its best and was too lean for its own good. I have my opinions why in 1998, which was hardly a lean vintage in Alsace…and has continued to provide some great drinking from Trimbach, Barmes-Buecher and , particularly, Albert Boxler in a all grape varieties.


Trimbach Clos Ste. Hune 1998: very minerally nose, with lots of peppermint…very dry and lean (maybe a bit too lean?)…decent concentration, though overall a lean impression. A different wine from the CFE. CFE is more hedonistic, though no less class. Ultimately, a little too acidic for the fruit level, as mostly acidity is left on the finish, with some lime-like fruit. Don’t think this is a matter of more aging, as the wine had plenty of time to aerate, and the fruit decreased rather than came out the next day.

Trimbach Cuvee Frederic Emile 1998: fuller, more viscous and deeper fruit. At first seemed much more so than the CSH. Mellowed into an apricot, dry though fruity, slightly tropical riesling of great class and good length. Good fruit on the finish. Still could benefit from a couple more years in the cellar, IMO.

4/15: a repressed riesling that needed lots of aeartion and not serving too cold to show the classy kernel of fruit and some r.s. that has mellowed into dryness…this will be interesing to drink from now…it will last…that this is not an effusive wine. certainly a good wine, but Boxler is oh so much more personable. no hurry

#3

Every bottle I have ever had of Frederick Emile has been great regardless of vintage.

#4

You are a lucky man.

#5

Impossible - Brad Kane warned against buying this wine on release as it had a hole in the midpalate. Are you claiming he was wrong? [scratch.gif]

#6

Maybe he had a hole in mid-brain.

#7

Where exactly is the “midpalate”? I’ve been trying to figure that out for years and years…and until I do, I don’t use that term, as I have no clue what it means.

And, I never listen to “Brad Kane”…I vaguely recognize his name from postings here.

#8

I have always been impressed by the bargain-end Trimbach wines’ ability to age. I cannot remember if I ever had a CSH…probably a testament to my lousy memory, not the quality of the wine!

#9

Most Alsace wines can really age…at all levels…

You’d probably remember a CSH.

#10

Thread hijack . . . How long should I age a CSH? I have a 2002 that I bought about 5 years ago and I can’t decide when to open it.

#11

Thread hijack . . . How long should I age a CSH? I have a 2002 that I bought about 5 years ago and I can’t decide when to open it.

Had a 1988 last year. Too young.

#12

The big question is premox which has hit CSH much harder than FE.

assuming its good, i’d wait at least another 5 years and indefinitely after that.

I thought the 1995 i had last year was just entering its long prime drinking window.

#13

I seem to recall drinking a 1988 with you a couple of years ago and it was terrific!

#14

for the money and pleasure, FE is my choice. Been rearranging my cellar recently–yes, Maureen, finally–and I have a lot of this stuff. Are the 89 and 01 FE Vendages Tardives drinking well? Never had one.

#15

The '89 was fantastic about 5 or 6 years ago.

#16

The '01 CFE VT is delicious, but still very young. IMO the VT bottlings always drink well. It’s just a case of how mature you want them. In my case (I came to Trimabch later than some here) I am drinking the 2000 CFE VT because I am not confident in the vintage (and not just at Trimbach), and leaving the 2001s for later.

#17

The wine did have a hole in the midpalate on release and was an inferior wine to the’89, '90, '94, '95, '96 and '97 that preceded it, imo, which is what I said on its release. It’s entirely possible that it filled in with age, but, again, to my tastes, it was not the qualitative equal to many of the vintages that preceded it and was lacking in the middle.

Glad it wasn’t premoxed, as a number of mid-'90s FEs are and the '98 Hune is notorious for, as are many of the Hunes from the '90s starting with the '90.

Stu, you and I go back to '96 on the AOL wine Boards, though I only ventured into the Burg folder on rare occasions. You’ve been in wine long enough to know a wine has a beginning, a middle and an end. If you don’t know what a mid-palate is, I don’t know what to tell you.

#18

The '01 is delicious, but also variable. There were discussions about that on the various boards and at dinners at the time whether it was premox, or handling issues somewhere along the supply route. If you recall, the '01 was dumped on the market with the breakup of Chateau and Estates and could be had for $20-$25 at retail. I even paid $50 for it off the list at Convivio around '09/'10.

Btw, editing after, I’m talking about the regular '01 FE, not the VT.

#19

Alan, I see no reason to wait on the '89 CFE VT. It’s not going to fall apart (aside from normal bottle variation), but I don’t see it improving any longer. I haven’t had one for a while, but the last time I did it was majestic.

The '01 I’m not touching for a long while.

#20

I seem to recall drinking a 1988 with you a couple of years ago and it was terrific!

It was! But I still thought it would show better with a couple more years. [cheers.gif]