TN: 2002 Sérafin Charmes Chambertin

the 96 Charmes was my first Sérafin and it really turned my head. Tonight’s 2002 is no different–a fabulous wine with a long future. It’s got great density, a fabulous silky mouthfeel, perfect balance and great length. The fruit is black, multi-layered with great sève, one of the best Charmes I’ve tasted. The bouquet just powers out of the glass, complex and ever-changing, hinting at the greatness of the palate–and that palate has nothing out of place, oak not intrusive, everything just right. Grand vin, indeed.


Sounds geat. Sérafin is a producer Ive never tried before. Who would you compare them too?

I’d compare the Sérafin Charmes to an Arnoux Suchots but ramped up a bit–high praise indeed.

Thanks for the note, Alan. Wish I had some. I do have a few bots of '02 Cazetiers. Last year the '88 Cazetiers was flat-out gorgeous.

Berry, this domaine produces dense, concentrated wines and uses a lot of new oak, which the wines resolve ably as they age. Actually, the style reminds me a bit of Roumier, but more new oak showing in young wines. That Alan’s '02 is showing so well is yet another datapoint as to how precocious this vintage is turning out to be.

BTW, Serafin’s plot is all Charmes, no Mazoyeres, accorrding to Jasper Morris.

Thanks for the note, we really love his 96 and we might have to look for the 02 now.

have never tried these either and am intrigued, though curious about the oak - i see the 2006 is out there for a decent price.

lewis - burghound notes serafin’s charmes as: from 55+ year old vines totaling .29 ha with .125 ha in Charmes and the other .165 ha in Mazoyères. who is right?

One of the first Burgundian producers that I ever bought a full case of wine of, that being the '88 Gevrey VV. I think I still have a bottle or two left of that particular wine [cheers.gif] .

Yaacov, I have no clue who is right. I just checked Morris’ book to be sure I quoted it correctly, and I did. Morris says 0.31 ha, all in Charmes. Two other texts (Norman/Taylor and Coates) also quote 0.31 ha but do not distinguish betwwen Charmes and Mazoyeres… [scratch.gif]

Thanks for the note Alan. The only ones I have had are 96’s and I have a few left including the Charmes, it was the only vintage imported to NZ. I have been leaving them thinking they really need time. I remember quite a bit of oak but power to match, Arnoux style as you suggest…

I asked Peter Weygandt this same question over the weekend and according to him, Serafin is Truchot plus new oak. Having not tasted any Truchot (sadly I got into the game a bit too late), this comparison is one I cannot confirm nor deny. However, in the 1 1/2 years I’ve been working for him, I can say his palate is pretty much 100% spot on. And besides, who would know better than him?

If Sérafin’s wines are dense and dark, as mentioned above, those are additional qualities I wouldn’t associate with Truchot’s wines.

Perhaps I should have looked at the topic title and realized this is about the Charmes-Chambertin. My experiences with the 1ers have never been dark fruited, however the Charmes is a different beast entirely. So, my apologies as I asked the question in a very general sense, not specific to this bottle.

definitely not a producer for me

I can see why Peter made this comparison. Serafin wines usually have terrific aromatics (like Truchot’s). I don’t find the wines to be overly extracted/concentrated, but they definitely have noticeable oak that IMO integrates well over time. I’m fairly oak-a-phobic and put this producer at the upper range of what I like. I don’t think the Serafin wines capture the elegance and power without weight like Truchot’s wines do, though.

Berry, definitely not in the style of some of your favorite producers, but if you get a chance to try some of his better wines with some age on them I think you’d really like the aromatics and not get overwhelmed with the oak. The Gevrey VV, Cazetiers and Charmes are probably his best offerings.

Berry, the 1988 Cazetiers I had last year would definitely be a wine you’d like (TN here), but as Steven mentioned, these wines require some age.

Thanks for the note on the 2002 - been holding off trying the 2002 and was just thinking about popping a 1996 a week or two ago but didn’t end up doing so - though a 1996 Gevrey VV a handful of months ago was stellar. Glad to hear about the progression of the 2002.

Thanks for the note Alan. I’m glad it seems to be living up to it’s potential. I’ve got a couple of these but plan on letting them sleep for a bit yet. Despite the early appeal of so many of the '02s, I’m all for letting the Grand Crus age & do what they do best…