2008 Foillard Fleurie - This received a couple of hours of slow ox before I started drinking it. My sneak peak sip showed some stemy notes on the finish that have disappeared with air. At this point the aromatics are just beautiful with gorgeous floral perfume and a hint of wood. There is certainly no candied tutti fruity here. There was some reduction when first opened but its totally pure and clean now. The light to middle-weight floral flavors are finessed and beautiful with a lacy and gentle mouthfeel. With air some tannins are showing but nothing that keeps it from being drinkable. Love it. Very burgundian. This is how I like my young red wines.
The 2008 Cru Beaujolais have really been showing well lately, particularly those from Brouilly, Fleurie, and Morgon. It’s another case of a “great” vintage (2009) overshadowing an only-excellent vintage such as 2008. I’m hanging onto some 08 Moulin-a-Vents and some of the top Morgons for another couple of years, but for the most part, the 08s are probably not going to evolve much more than they have already.
This wine just got better with more air. Ive only had a handful of Foillards but Ive loved everyone. I’m motivated to start spending less on burgs and getting more of these elegantly styled Beaujolais.
Is Foillard worth the premium, especially since you can get Lapierre, Desvignes, Breton, and a lot of other Morgon producers for on average $10 less per bottle?
I am not trying to be glib, but the aggressive pricing over the past couple of years makes me want to know why this producer seems to have such a strong following, considering the number of excellent alternatives in the market.
The usual suspects from Kermit Lynch and Peter Weygandt. They seemed to have been put on closeout as soon as everyone hopped aboard the 2009 bandwagon so I snagged what I could here and there.
Probably for the same reason people will pay for DRC, Lafite, or Screaming Eagle when there are plenty of alternatives available for less money. The perception of it being “better” makes it worth the premium to certain buyers. Even at $50, the best Cru Beaujolais is probably a better value than a similarly-priced bottle of Burgundy, thus creating a market niche for the aspirational Beaujolais drinkers.
I asked myself the same thing last night. I don’t have tons of experience with the above but Desvignes and Lapierre are different in style right? Ive only tried Desvignes from 2009 and found it remarkable but it seemed more assertive while the folliards seemed more delicate. I’m willing to pay for diversity in style. As a burg ananlogy there is no way Chambolle is as a good as a deal as SLB but I want both styles. I often look at more than just absolute qualitive value but diversity of expression and distinctiveness too. If I found a producer that seemed to do what Foillard is doing for for 25% less, I’d probablly spend less on Foillard as a plan going forward.
I understand that. What I was asking was a question about Foillard’s particular style and what makes it more attractive than the competitors. For example, I understand Foillard makes his wine in a carbonic style similar to Lapierre. I was wondering what it is about Foillard that makes him stand out. The structure of his wine? The purity of his fruit? The minerality? Being truly representative of the terroir (especially with his Cote de Py)? And how does he compare with Lapierre, Desvignes, Breton, Bouland, and the many other Morgon producers.
For example, Desvignes Javennieres, which is a parcel within Cote de Py, is extremely structured and dense, requiring a long time to mature. In contrast, Lapierre, who I believe blends his Cote de Py grapes with grapes from other Morgon parcels, tends to make a wine that is more fruit forward and racy.
In other words, how would you describe Foillard’s style. I imagine it is similar to Lapierre, but I would like to know more.
Thanks. Would you say Foillard and Lapierre are similar in style? I am guessing just because I believe they both use carbonic maceration in vinification, which would lead to greater delicacy and more overt fruit than say the more Burgundian vinification style of Brun. (Desvignes uses semi-carbonic: what that precisely entails I do not know).
I hear good things about Chamonard. Eric Texier is a fan and believes they are truer to the terroir of Cote de Py. But, no first hand experience (and I have a feeling they are in a different style than Foillard and Lapierre).
I am surprised to read that either uses carbonic maceration. They seem very burgundian and not estery at all in way that say Thivin can be. Maybe it is the barrel aging. By contrast it seems as if Thivin bottles really quickly and never stores the wine in small barrels.
I havnt drank enough of either to really form an opinion but my small sample size would seem to suggest that Foillard produces a lighter style? I’d love to hear from others on this.
Im not sure I agree with the premise that Burgundian winemaking techniques always produce aggressive wines. Look at 2008 Clos de Lambrays or 2007 Drouhin Musigny. Could you imagine more delicate, finessed and silky Grand Crus? Pure carbonic maceration does seem to produce very fruity “estery” wines with less tannins but I don’t get that estery quality in Foillard. Esters break down easy so maybe the extra barrel aging there calms down the fruit exuberance?
I believe both Lapierre and Foillard are semi-carbonic. I think “semi-carbonic” basically means that the grapes are placed in a cold room to allow the indigenous yeasts to take over the bacteria before starting carbonic. For the carbonic, what makes it “semi-” is that the whole cluster are CO2 loaded for only 2 to 3 days until the vat is producing enough CO2 to maintain a CO2 rich environment. Both use whole clusters, old Burgundy barrels and punch the cap. I have drank far more Lapierre wines than Foillard so I am by no means an expert but I would say Lapierre is “flashier” particularly his Cuvee Marcel (the one with the Roman Numerals). Don’t know if either uses dry ice, I would guess not.
foillard’s wines are worth the premium to me. i enjoy his expression of gamay and, like Berry, think of them as burgundian in style - an adjective i don’t associate with any other beaujolais producer. there are, of course, classicists that think his style is too dense/heavy/forward, but sometimes adding density and weight to beaujolais can be a beautiful thing! however misguided it may be, i see buying foillard as an alternative to more pricey burgundy.
Have you tried Jean-Paul Thévenet? Ive only had the 2010 but I would put that bottling in the “burgundian” camp. It was a similar style to the Foillards.