TN: Vieux Telegraphe vertical - 8 vintages '95-'07

WINE TALK
1

VIEUX TELEGRAPHE VERTICAL - 8 VINTAGES '95-'07 - Vin Vino Wine, Palo Alto, California (10/30/2009)


I’m a fan of VT as one of the very reliable, more traditional CdP producers, and I really enjoy them once they have 9 to 10 years of bottle age, and the more age the better. The '83 is a particular favorite of mine. This tasting was a complete vertical of '03-'07, plus three earlier years, and it was interesting to see how the recent vintages are progressing, as well as to check in on the '00, '99 and '95. My favorite of the tasting was the '07, which I’ve had a few times now in the last few weeks, with consistent notes. The '04 is my next favorite of the recent vintages. As is generally true for VT, all the recent vintages were tight and not for popping yet, with the '00 being surprisingly tight and even closed down at the moment. The '99, which has been on a faster maturity track than most CdP vintages, was drinking fine, as was the '95. The '95 is showing quite a bit of maturity and tertiary tobacco characteristics already. Both the '95 and '99 had a fair amount of brett, which was not discernable on our younger samples. If you’ve got the '95, it’s time to start drinking, and the '99 can be enjoyed any time. The rest need to sit for awhile.


Posted from CellarTracker

2

Thanks for the notes Richard.

Did a much smaller similar tasting last year with the 97, 00, 03, 05. At that time the 00 for me was right in a sweet spot and the 03 was rather stewed. A recent 03 showed very very well however so I question some bottle variance with that hot vintage? The 97 was pretty tired and also rather bretty but still clinging. The classically styled VT is definitly one of my favorites in CdP.

3

I’ve got an even older vintage VT yanked for a Rhone dinner to come; will post notes as they happen.

Bruce

4

Great stuff Richard. What type of air did the wines see? VT can indeed be tricky upon youth and needs time imo and that of those I trust.

Also, what common elements did you find that resonated as VT? That’s something I always strive to find in verticals.

5

have had both the 1995 and 1998 VT this past year and preferred the 95.

6

Thanks for posting, Richard. There’s some similarity between your '00 note and mine (from about 10 months ago):

NOSE: rich dark red fruits provide the framework for ample spice and pepper notes; a secondary hint of Italian herbs brought-up the finish of this still-tight bouqet.

BODY: garnet color of medium depth; medium-full bodied; superfine particulate matter was suspended in the wine.

TASTE: more acidic than the '98 Clos des Papes; serious tobacco and dark raspberry flavors, as well as a complex earthy element; medium-long finish; well-balanced. A beautiful wine that still hasn’t hit its peak yet. I would hold for a few more years, or give a long decant if drinking now. This easily beat-out its '01 and '05 brethren which were also served blind at this tasting. Tied for my #3 WOTN.

B: 50, 5, 12, 17, 8 = (92 pts.)

NOSE: super-powered minerality is supported by raspberry, strawberry, and a light sage note. Surprisingly fresh.

BODY: garnet color of medium-great depth; medium-full bodied; clear (although some sediment was decanted-off before the event)

TASTE: cigarbox, wet cement; a bit alcoholic; tight fruits; short on the palate. This puppy still needs some time. Hold for at least 5 more years … this will improve.

B: 50, 5, 12, 15, 7 = (89 pts.)

NOSE: “dark smelling” – a bit smoky, and extremely tight.

BODY: ruby color of medium-great depth; clear; medium-full bodied.

TASTE: pronounced minerality; raspberry; tannic and a bit hot; a secondary hint of cigarbox suggests complexity further down the road; extremely tight. Everyone, myself included, was shocked when the bag was pulled on this one. This wine didn’t impress anyone tonight, and many don’t believe it has a bright future. I felt as if I detected some extremely shy complexity that is going to need years in the cellar to gain confidence … still, WS’s “95” is very confusing. Although a “good” wine, this may have been the consensus disappointment of the evening. Do not drink these now … hold for at least 10 years … and pray.

B: 50, 5, 11, 15, 7 = (88 pts.)

Posted from CellarTracker

7

The 2007 was awesome at the Wine Spectator Wine Experience 2 weeks ago.

Thanks Richard!

8

I went to the same shop’s tasting on Saturday. I also tried the 2007 VT Blanc that I thought was very good, although not a great bargain. But I liked it enough to buy a couple bottles.

It’s always difficult (for me at least) to compare mature and young vintages, but if I were to rank the reds in order of preference it would be 95, 07, 05, 99, 00, 06, 04, 03.

The 95 and 99 showed a bit of brett, but not objectionable to my palate and barnyard rather than bandaid. The 95 had more depth and complexity than the 99, although the latter was showing as well as I recall from recent tastings.

Of the younger vintages, the 07 was very primary but had everything it needs to age well. The 05 is a bit rustic and clumsy at present, but I think that will resolve. I liked the 00 less at first, but it seemed to keep improving over a hour, or so. The 06 may age well, but it was a bit understated compared to the others on this particular afternoon. The 04 bottle may have been a bit off, with sharp and greenish notes that didn’t diminish. The 03 was a bit volatile, porty, with cooked fruit and a lot of tannin. It showed better than a couple years ago, but still not appealing to me.

-Al

9

Had the 95 a few weeks ago and your note seems spot on. We had some lesser wines with it so it merited a higher score to most.

10

Thanks for the notes, I plan on opening a 1995 tonight so it’ll be nice to compare. I do love VT as a classical producer of solid Chateauneuf.