TN: Lafite and friends

Yesterday Denis and Tiffany hosted a great wine dinner, in large part to celebrate Al’s birthday. Based on prior discussions, we decided that the “main event” of the dinner would be a tasting of some Lafite Rothschilds, but we ended up opening a variety of bottles. Everything was tasted non-blind. Most were popped and poured, with the Lafites getting probably about 3+ hours of decanting before we got around to tasting them:

  1. 1996 Krug Champagne. I’ve had this Champagne before, and it’s been more expressive/open than it was last night. Lots of citrus and floral notes throughout, with some caramel and nuttiness emerging after the bottle had been open 20-30 minutes. But in the midpalate, the acidity really dominated the fruit, and overall the impression I had was that it was rather tightly-coiled at the moment. I think others liked this more than I did. About a “wow” for me last night, but I think this will be vastly better 5-10 years from now.

  2. 2007 Aubert Lauren Chardonnay. Very tropical and somewhat smoky, with some bubblegum sort of character emerging with aeration. Good, but not especially complex right now. A “yum plus” for me. I think folks read the label at 15.6% alcohol.

  3. 2007 Aubert Reuling Chardonnay. Similar to the Laurent, but much more citrusy and minerally in style, with more of a vanilla quality to the finish. Another “yum plus,” and I think the label was read at 15.8% alcohol. Neither Aubert really sang for me last night the way other Auberts have in the past—perhaps 2-3 years in the cellar will make a substantial difference.

  4. 1996 Serafin Charmes-Chambertin. A great Burgundy nose—tart cherry/cranberry, with definite underbrush (others said leather). Very good fruit/acid balance—nicely taut overall. The tannins are nearing resolution, and I suspect the wine will probably be mature (at least for my tastes) within the next 5 years or so. A “wow” wine for me.

  5. 2002 Dujac Charmes-Chambertin. A fun contrast to the Serafin. Obviously, much, much younger in profile, with more of a perfumy and somewhat tropical character. Not much in the way of earth or underbrush or mushrooms, etc. Obviously needs much more cellar time, although not a tannic monster—probably needs 5-7 years. A “yum plus” now, with potential for much more. For me, the Serafin was drinking better last night, especially with the food.

  6. 1988 Lafite Rothschild. And now on to the main event—three vintages of Lafite. Although the Lafite house style was evident, the three different bottles all showed quite differently for me. Initially, the nose was the best part of this wine—tobacco, earth, and tart blackberries—but the midpalate seemed rather lean and austere. This bottle seemed to evolve the most over the course of the evening. The fruit sweetened up and fleshed out with aeration, and by the end of the evening I think most of us had it as our #2 Lafite. Just slightly under the “wow” line for me.

  7. 1995 Lafite Rothschild. There was something very unusual about this bottle, and I’m still not sure if I can articulate it. Last night I thought maybe there was a camphor or black licorice quality that seemed to dominate. That may not have been the best descriptor, but I think most of us agreed that there was something “not quite right” about this bottle. Judgment reserved.

  8. 1996 Lafite Rothschild. I had the highest expectations for this bottle. I had tasted the wine close to release, and it was one of the most exceptional young First Growths I had ever tasted. This bottle was one I bought on release, and the fill was perfect. Even so, I was a bit disappointed—the wine just wasn’t as complex or seductive as I remember the wine being early on. It is possible that the wine is just in a somewhat shut down phase. In any event, putting aside expectations, there was a strong cigar/tobacco quality throughout, with blackberry and a bit of earthiness. It slowly emerged over the course of the rest of dinner, and ultimately I think it was the consensus favorite of the Lafites. A “wow” wine but I expected much more.

  9. 2001 Chateau d’Yquem. In my prior thread about more or less universally loved wines, this wine was mentioned by several people as an example. I’ve been lucky enough to taste it a number of times since release, and I’ve never had a bottle that failed to impress. Even one of our guests who admitted she usually didn’t care for dessert wines seemed to enjoy it quite a bit. Anyway, it’s still the viscous, tropical fruit bomb that it’s been in the past (she described it as “liquid crème brulee”)—honey, coconut, pineapple, vanilla, apricot, etc. Without a doubt the most enjoyable young Yquem I’ve ever tasted, and it still delivers. Will it ever shut down? I don’t know. For now, a “wow plus” with clear “ay carumba” potential with at least 5-10 years of cellaring.

While some of the wines didn’t quite live up to my hopes, the dinner that Denis and Tiffany created and served was amazing. I won’t go into all the details, but the tournedos with fresh-sliced black truffles and seared foie gras was beyond killer—one of the best home-cooked dishes I’ve had in 2009! And the cheese plate was especially outstanding, with the pungent creaminess of La Tur in particular hitting every high note. Yum, yum, yum. Many, many thanks to them for hosting this wine dinner and for serving such excellent fare.

Bruce

Good notes, Bruce. I tried the '96 Lafite at a blind comparative tasting of the '96 1st growths (plus LLC) on 29 June 2008. While they were all surely not mature, it was a very educational exercise. My notes on the '96 Lafite were as follows:

Wine D - Minty nose with ripe cranberry nuances over ripely sweet cassis. Broad and elegant mid-mouth with whispers of anise, tea leaf and violets hanging in the long black fruit finish.

After a while, I noticed unresolved tannins in the finish, but this is hardly surprising for a first growth this age. I jotted it down as the Lafite.

It was later revealed to be the 1996 Lafite Rothschild. It must have been a lucky guess since I don’t recall ever having bought a Lafite grand vin myself due to its astronomic prices; I used to drink my father’s bottles (memorable were his 1978s and 1979s). Luckier still was I for having been able to try this from generous Uncle David, the 1985 from NSF and, once, the 1982> ***** > at the house of Dapper D.

*****Tasted alongside the '82 Mouton, Margaux and Latour. I liked the Latour the most.

Thereafter, on 10th March 2009, I got to try a properly mature '83 Lafite - one that I actually enjoyed more than the '82 and '85, but, then, I had the '83 with 2 years more bottle age than the '82 and 4 more than the '85. My notes on the '83 were as follows:

1983 Château Lafite Rothschild - Again, from the Stockbroker, another 1855 1st Growth, this time from Pauillac. Very mature, and just a shade over the hill - hands down, the best red of the lunch.

What this wine gave up in perfumed allure to the '92 Margaux (a refined, suavely masculine Pauillac bouquet), the former more than made up for in the mouth with elegant balance and texture, deeply-veined, layered dark fruit, cassis, mere whispers of licorice, violets, tobacco and intricately woven sweet cedar. Not somber like the Ducru Beaucaillou, and not as earthy, though still expressive of its terroir. More living fruit in this.

Much, much nicer than than the '83 Lynch Bages and '83 Latour, in my opinion. Very likely the best '83 I’ve ever had, just edging out, to me, the '83 Palmer (though this comparison, I recognize, is tenuous at best since the '83 Palmer is a delicately feminine Margaux as opposed to this decidedly masculine Pauillac, however refined and suave the latter may be). Beautiful wine.

Bruce,

Thanks for your interesting and well-expressed notes.

I’m not rich enough to drink mature (or going on that way) Lafite more than once or twice a decade so I enjoyed the vicarious pleasure.

Best regards,
Alex R.