2002 Jacques-Frédéric Mugnier Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru Les Amoureuses- France, Burgundy, Côte de Nuits, Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru (10/28/2010)
This is so promising and will likely merit a higher score as it evolves down the road. Right now, very very elegant and pure with a lovely lacey texture and gorgeous red fruit and minerally flavors. 2 left. I’ll wait at least another 5yrs before I open blt #2. Wish I could afford to buy more of these but now out of reach. I can still afford the villages and Les Fuees cuvees though. (92 pts.)
I remember the '02’s on release…they were quite light in color and a bit one dimensional looking…having said that, I had the Musigny about a year ago, and it had put on a lot of weight and filled out, really needs another 10 years…but will be great.
Hard to say with regards to these 2 particular wines in a comparative drinking window, the '01 seemed more ready now (maybe more complete), but paradoxically will probably be the longer lived of the two, with great structure under the beautiful pure fruit…
I just think this is one (of quite a few) producers who made better '01’s than '02’s (at the top end)…the '01 Musigny is fantastic, and I have really liked the wines I have tried down to the Fuees. The '02 Chambolle is a better drinking wine though than the '01…
I find Mugnier wines are often relatively best in “lesser” vintages that are more terroir-driven, rather than ripe fruit driven. 1993, 1998 and 2001 really stand out. Had the Mugnier 2001 Musigny last weekend. Sensational.
Excellent wine, as was the whole lineup of Mugnier’s 2002’s.
It’s been over a year now, but we drank four of Mugnier’s 2002’s with dinner. Here’s my note on the Les Amoureuses :
“Lovely dark ruby in colour, extending out to the rim; aromas bring forth some sweet smoke, but also penetrating dark cherry fruit – floral notes coming up from short sniffs, as does some sweet licorice;
medium full body; coats the mouth with generous and deep cherry fruit; some oak, but it’s unobtrusive; excellent balance of acidity and tannins; rolls out to a very long finish with pure and clean cherry fruit.”
Hank
2002 Jacques-Frédéric Mugnier Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru Les Amoureuses- France, Burgundy, Côte de Nuits, Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru (10/27/2010) Wines with Nita’s Tasting Menu: Awesome nose of red fruit/kirsch with spice and earth. Very pretty but lacking complexity that will almost certainly develop in time. The taste gives structured red fruit with deep flavors of red cherry. Compact and less silky than I would expect. Turns almost sour on the finish with quite a bit of tannin, but still really great. Long finish. This is my first taste of this wine so I don’t have a lot of experience here, but I suspect it is somewhat closed down at the moment and will develop into a real beauty with another 5+ years in the cellar. (93 pts.)
I am not exactly sure what you are saying here, as I think most Burgundians would equate the greater expression of terroir with the higher quality vintage- plain and simple. Certainly, no one would (or almost no one) rank 1993 as a “lesser vintage” these days, as it is the consensus pick for the finest red Burgundy vintage between 1978 and 2005. I can think of no one with sufficient experience with the region, other than Robert Parker, who would suggest that the 1993s are anything short of legendary, and it is my distinct impression that Monsieur Parker’s less enthusiastic view of the vintage is simply a reflection of the relative awkwardness of the '93s after bottling, as this was a vintage he chose not to taste out of barrel (perhaps due to his litigation with Francois Faiveley at the time?) and was reduced to trying to get the read on the vintage once the wines had shipped to the US and were going through a particularly recalcitrant adolescence.
Freddy Mugnier himself will observe that he finds vintages that produce “more intellectually challenging” characteristics the most exciting for his own palate, and by this he most certainly means wines that are the most transparent and most reflective of their underlying terroir. In this regard, he certainly ranks vintages such as 1993, 1998, 2001, 2004 and 2008 amongst his very favorites of the last couple of decades, but I would not say that there is any correlation between his own personal preference for what sort of Burgundies he prefers to drink and his relative success in one style of vintage over another. Certainly he made absolute monuments in riper and more fruit-driven vintages such as 1999 and 2005, and in the fullness of time I would suspect that these two vintages chez Mugnier will be ranked amongst his greatest achievments. But you are absolutely right that he hit the ball out of the park in the '98 and '01 vintages.
Ed’s comments about the relative showings of the two vintages of Amoureuses- 2001 and 2002- is I think much more a reflection of the inherent qualities of the two vintages, rather than anything specific regarding Freddy Mugnier’s relative success in the two styles of vintages. His 2002s are very beautiful wines that perfectly capture the style of the vintage- very pure fruit combined with lovely spice and floral tones, captivating focus and balance and a most impressive succulence and bounce on the palate. If you look back at the various tasting notes on the '02 Amoureuses posted by folks in this thread, you will see that there is only one gentle mention of minerality in the notes, and most other notes focus on the fruit and floral side of this lovely wine. I drank the wine 18 months ago in Burgundy and found it also a beautiful expression of this fruit-driven vintage, but not on a par with the great vintages chez Mugnier. Like most of the top 2002s, it is a very, very satisfying bottle if not served alongside its 2001 counterpart!
At this point in the evolutions of the two respective vintages, I cannot think of many Burgundian vignerons who will state that 2002 is a superior vintage to 2001 for reds, as virtually everyone I speak to about the relative merits of the two vintages will state that they find the 2001s superior specifically for their greater expression of terroir vis a vis the 2002s. This is not to say that 2002 is not a very pretty vintage (almost all vignerons are quick to point out that they like the 2002s very much, as well they should, as many are truly beautiful in every aspect except for their expression of terroir), but no one I have spoken with in the region in the last couple of years would place the 2002s ultimately ahead of the 2001s. The '01s have just evolved in a beautiful and absolutely classic direction that allows each wine to scream out its respective terroir today, and by most measures, this is what constitutes a “great vintage” in Burgundy.
You may well be right in assessing 2002 versus 2001, John, i.e. that 2001 has a stronger expression of terroir, but from the perspective of a consumer, I really like the 2002’s
as a wine that I can enjoy now. Across the board, the 2002’s in my cellar are most enjoyable now, and many have some further cellaring potential.
Bottom line…consumers like me show their appreciation for the wines they enjoy drinking by laying these wines in and subsequently pulling the corks.
Alas, I no longer have any of Mugnier’s 2002’s in my cellar, but am enjoying several others.
Dave, you’re right does need another five yrs. Another fun nite. Thanks for bringing the Lafon, I really enjoyed that blt! The Cote Rotie was great too!
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
![[basic-smile.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/8/83717c74df9b0ce202453063bc4f11baf0ee6b8a.gif "smile"){kind=small}