NFA DINNER 2014 - Gattopardo Restaurant, Tras Street, Singapore (11/12/2014)
I was not sure what “NFA” stood for when Kevin invited me to join the group for this dinner. When he told me it meant “No F***ing around”, I knew that we were in for some serious wines. It was a great evening - good food, splendid company, and a range of very special wines curated by our host. Quite a few were very young, but served blind, we got a great glimpse into their potential. Thanks Kevin!
WHITE BURG
-
2007 Marquis de Laguiche (Joseph Drouhin) Montrachet - France, Burgundy, Côte de Beaune, Montrachet Grand Cru
A baby, and very atypical for 2007, but this was an extremely impressive wine. This had a sweet, ripe nose, with layers of buttery, creamy, nutty tones - almost like caramel biscuits - and then ripe apples and nectarines, honey and honeysuckle flowers, all shaded with a little whiff of mineral and gunflint. A very attractive, if rather primary and in-your-face at the moment. The palate started out a bit awkward, almost tottering out of balance with its sheer power and a really unusual ripeness for the vintage, but given a bit of air and time, it really started coming together beautifully. There was tons of substance here - it was grippy, mouthfilling, very big for a 2007, with a buttery, creamy attack and a midpalate showiing sappy flavours of nectarines and pineapples, backed-up by lots of spicy, minerally extract. With time, some perfumy truffle notes started developing as well. Again, it was all a bit in-your-face and certainly very primary, with the buttery weight and sweet ripeness making me think it might be a Batard-Montrachet. However, there was always a lovely line of acidity that kept the wine focus and decisive, if not exactly quite as precise as some of the best 2007s; and while the layered depth and sheer presence of the wine may have been very apparent, it was also held itself together with an effortless strength and balance that made it easy to drink. I think it was probably the finish that was the most impressive in that aspect. It was long, seamless and energetic, winding its way through the back-palate with a graceful balance and effortless power. Here, complex little nuances of exotic spice and flinty mineral nestled amidst citrusy lemon and kumquat notes, with the bright 2007 acidity finally making itself felt towards the end. Still a baby, this probably has the chops to go on aging for just about forever, and needs at least 5-6 before being anywhere near approachable. However, all things considered this should come good earlier than most Montys, and when it does, it should be brilliant. While I also think it will always be one for those who like their Burgs with a bit more flesh and opulence (not my usual style by the way), it is very impressive indeed. (95 pts.) -
2008 Domaine Fontaine-Gagnard Montrachet - France, Burgundy, Côte de Beaune, Montrachet Grand Cru
Like chalk and cheese compared to the 2007 Drouhin Marquis de Laguiche Montrachet that we had alongside, but no less impressive. While that was all voluptuous flesh and (surprisingly) opulence, this was more your classic young Montrachet - refined, minerally, almost a bit austere, with its power cloaked in a great sense of structure and focus. Of the two, this was probably more my style. Both wines will be similarly long-lived I think, but I think this will take quite a bit longer to come around. It was certainly very tight on first pour, with the nose only slowly creeping open into beautifully complex, nuanced bouquet. It was more subtly attractive, yet somehow even more layered than the Drouhin, with little drifts of dried earth and mushrooms, faint honeysuckle scents, little accents of wood spice, all playing against a backdrop of plump white fruit shading into sweeter pineapple aromas, and a touch of candied almonds running on behind. A great nose. The palate was so very young, but there was a no-nonsense sense of Grand Cru quality throughout. On first pour, it was still tight, still primary; but as it opened up, it just completely enveloped the palate with layers of subtle white fruit edged with more of those sweet pineapple notes, which were then infused with warm spice and honeysuckle flowers. There was nice weight and depth, if not quite as much as the Drouhin, nor indeed what would expect from a Le Montrachet - I thought this might have been a Chevalier instead. However, it was certainly full and layered, with the beautiful acidity and great precision of the wine perhaps making it seem lighter than it actually was. Great finish too, with lemony notes speared through mushroomy earthy tones and some toasty, slightly bittersweet mineral hints at the finish. Little bittersweet hint. There was something absolutely intriguing and complex about the wine, but it was still a bit ephemeral, rather buried under the more primary notes. This is still a little disparate, a little less than perfectly integrated too, and clearly it needs more time to come together. I would say 8-10 years at least. But even then, it was very, very good indeed. (95 pts.)
RED BURG
-
2006 Jacques-Frédéric Mugnier Bonnes Mares - France, Burgundy, Côte de Nuits, Bonnes Mares Grand Cru
Very good, but not mindblowing, this was very much a Bonnes Mares crafted with Chambolle leanings. In other words, a very Mugnier type of wine. It had a lovely, perfumed nose, with bright scents of red cherries and raspberries and sweet wilted flower aromas touched with little touch of exotic spice and hint of funky earth. Some secondary orange peel and menthol notes that drifted out with time actually made the wine smell a bit older than its 2006 vintage. The palate had a lovely melting feel to its attach, with a delightful flush of red cherries and berries and some lovely fragrant spice couched in deceptively soft tannins. I say deceptive because there was actually quite a grip below that, with iron-ny mineral and fine, firm tannins popping up past the midpalate and leading into a long finish seasoned with spice, mineral and a twist bittersweet herb. Not the most complex, but nicely interesting. This is drinking surprisingly early for a Bonnes Mares, but even then, I think needs 7-8 years more at the very least. It should integrate a bit more, open up and take on a bit more nuance. Beyond that, while the balance is decent, I am not sure it has either the depth or fruit or the sprightliness of acidity to be a super long-haul wine. (93 pts.) -
2008 Domaine Comte Georges de Vogüé Bonnes Mares - France, Burgundy, Côte de Nuits, Bonnes Mares Grand Cru
I liked this very much. Unmistakeably Vogüé in style, and quite nicely showing its terroir - this is one of the few wines that I could guess correctly. I thought this was a step-up from the more open and immediately charming 2006 Mugnier Bonnes Mares that we had alongside. Its nose started out with an unusual whiff of malt honey tones. This more or less hang around in the air throughout the time I had the wine in the glass, but it did cede way to lovely notes of rich, ripe, red and blue fruit - blueberries I thought - flecked with a little toast spice. Still clearly very young, but already nicely attractive. The palate had that marriage of broad shouldered strength with noble purity that I like in the best Bonnes Mares. It was marked by the clean, fresh and wonderful integrated acidity of the vintage, which gave a lovely clarity to its nicely round blue-fruited character (blueberries at the forefront again, with black cherries chasing behind), this time met with deeply buried notes warm spice and a toss of earth that went past the midpalate and into the long, nicely complete finish. It was hard as nails at first right here at the end, with strong, structured grip, but opened up quite nicely with shades of blue fruit and lots of fragrant spice drifting out from amidst the tannins. This was a wine of terroir, with the Bonnes Mares character showing through a subtle sense of power and structure, yet there was always a lovely elegance to the wine that made it so pleasurable even in its youth. A cool, classy wine, and one that will reward a lot of patience yet. I would give this another 10 years, maybe even more. (94 pts.)
RIOJA
-
2005 Artadi Rioja Viña el Pisón - Spain, La Rioja, La Rioja Alavesa, Rioja
Neither of the pair of the Riojas on this flight were to my taste (I prefer more traditional styles), this even less so than the 1999 Benjamin Romeo Contador that followed. But I must admit that they were both quite impressive. I would wait 20 years on this wine though. It was huge. It started out with a massive nose, with tons of ripe black fruit and sweet, vanilla oak and balsam wood aromas at first. I thought it was a young Priorat with a nose like that. Some meaty, umami, earthy notes started coming up with time, and it was only a little menthol hint that crept out at the edges of the bouquet that then nodded towards Tempranillo. The palate was just as huge. Again, there was a reservoir of rich, ripe, black fruit - black cherries and berries - hardly Rioja in size and in its thick, creamy texture and extracted nature, but somehow there was a lovely purity and clarity to it all and a nice grippiness of structure, with well-integrated acidity and fine, powdery tannins woven deep into the texture of the wine. Thankfully, the palate was less one-note than the nose, with a light kiss of fresh mint and dill and a little drift of menthol cigarettes at the long, richly fruited finish showing a bit more Rioja character. There is honestly quite outstanding quality to the fruit here, and the winemaking, if you like style, is very polished. However, the wine needs much, much more time to shed the tons of baby fat and to allow nuance and character to come out. At the moment, it seemed to me like an exercise in showing-off how much can be eked out of a modern Rioja more than anything else. High on points, but not really that high on enjoyment. 93+ (93 pts.) -
1999 Benjamin Romeo Rioja Contador - Spain, La Rioja, Rioja
This was another monster of a Rioja, coincidently made by the guy who was responsible for Artadi’s wines until 2000. The resemblances were there to the 2005 Artadi Vina el Pison that was served alongside in its extremely modern styling. Thankfully, this had the benefit of more age on it, so that it actually tasted like a Trempranillo. It had a lovely nose, far less alcoholic and jammy than its younger cousin. Here, cedar and fragrant wood spice aromas framed big notes of ripe black cherries and berries chased by a nice meatiness and some menthol, mint and tiny hint of dill. Quite a lovely nose - I could smell this all day. There was just a little drift of acetone in there, but it barely distracts from the overall attractive of the bouquet. The palate was very good, but very young. This was a big, alcohol-fuelled wine for sure. The attack opened with an absolute mouthful of fragrant spice - pepper and cloves and more - over deep reservoirs of ripe dark fruit. In spite of its weight and power, there was a lovely purity and finesse to the wine and such a graceful structure, with its velvety tannins and perfectly integrated tannins, that it drank really nicely. This is what really separated it from the Artadi for me. While both where not to my usual tastes in Tempranillo (let alone Rioja), the Contador was actually delicious, even compelling, where the Artadi was simply impressive technically but a bit difficult to drink. A matter of age maybe, or perhaps just different winemaking. In any case, this wine ended up nicely too, with a long finish, where the dark fruit was met by a nice counterpoint of earthier, meatier notes and bits of menthol and dill and a little woody kiss of oak spice. There was still a little grip of tannins right at the back. All in all, very good indeed, and it has its best years ahead of it too. This should be a great wine to drink with a hunk of meat in say 6-7 years’ time. (94 pts.)
BORDEAUX BLEND
-
1970 Château Mouton Rothschild - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
It was a relief to return to old, old school stuff after two alcohol-rich, turbo-charged modern Riojas, and I enjoyed this wine very much even though it was not the strongest of Moutons. It was very alive though, and very typical - I actually called it a Mouton from a less than great vintage, but guessed mid-1980s or early 1990s. It had a mature nose, with funky notes of damp earth, old tobacco and some meaty inflections showing some age. This were met by a core of sweet cassis and blackberry fruit met with some floral notes, a bit of menthol and that typical whiff of cedar wood. A nicely pleasant bouquet, very classic Pauillac. The palate was clearly a bit on the thin side for a first growth and lacked some complexity for something of this age, but it was still pretty satisfying. The tannins had softened into a velvety robe, and fresh juicy acidity enlivened very friendly notes of black cherries and cassis, with a flush of warm spice and tobacco showing in a surprisingly long finish. This was quite yummy in a gentle, charming way. One of the more enjoyable wines of the night I thought, probably because it was one of the rare few that was perched towards the end of its drinking window rather than being far too young. Lovely art by Marc Chagall on the label by the way. (92 pts.) -
1986 Antinori Solaia Toscana IGT - Italy, Tuscany, Toscana IGT
Another very enjoyable wine - I liked this just a bit more than the 1970 Mouton that we had alongside. This was clearly a Bordeaux blend built in a different style, with a rich nose offering sweet, sunny aromas of dried cherries and blackberries wed to shades of earth and brush herbs and bramble, with just that little hint of rubbery menthol notes at the side. The sunny disposition of the wine made quite a few of us think Super-Tuscan from the get-go. The palate took on the same theme, showing sweeter dark cherry notes along with more mature flavours of sour plums and orange peel, all touched with a little woody tobacco note. There was a delicious purity and clarity to the wine in spite of its sunny character, with juicy, tomato-ey acidity bringing a fresh balance to proceedings. Good, long finish too, still nicely chewy with fine tannins, and with a nice drift of more wood and tobacco and a twist of dried fig peel - this was all very charming, and drinking very nicely indeed. A nice wine, quite at peak. I would not hold it for much longer if I had any. (93 pts.)
CDP
-
1995 Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins - France, Rhône, Southern Rhône, Châteauneuf-du-Pape
Great stuff - one of the best CdPs I have had in a long time. Although on a different flight from the two Bordeaux blends, this rounded up the trio of wines that were drinking best on the night. Even then, I felt this deserved a good 3-4 years more in the bottle. Nevertheless, it was certainly very enjoyable indeed. It had a beautiful, beautiful nose; super complex, with notes of oolong tea and gentle glow of red cherries and raspberries along with warm earth, a little meaty notes and drifts of fragrant garrigue, lavender and mint opening up into a perfumy, floral backnote. A subtle, gentle, yet very arresting nose - a world away from the high-octane fruit bombs that followed. Wow. The palate had clearly masculine shades to it, with a firm backdrop of meat and mineral and a sinewy structure that traced the length of the wine. However, there was also great purity and a clarion clear feel to it that brought to mind Burgundy as much as the Southern Rhone, with its beautifully fine notes of dark cherries and blackberries showing lovely depth, yet without any perception of weight. On the midpalate, these were met by notes of wild garrigue and bramble and more of those smoky tea notes picked up on the nose, than a curl of cigarette smoke and fine, spicy notes wound around a backbone of stony mineral as the wine glided into a long finish. There was something profound about this wine, especially with the way the whole complex package came together so effortlessly. I really liked this. There was still a bit of that lean 1995 grip to the tannins right on the back-end, and a bit a sense of restrain at certain points, suggesting that the wine will improve in the coming years. I think there is no harm drinking it now, but if you are looking for peak, I would wait a little more. (95 pts.) -
2003 Domaine du Pégaü Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée da Capo - France, Rhône, Southern Rhône, Châteauneuf-du-Pape
2003 was the vintage of Da Capo (so named because it is meant to be symphony of all 13 varietals of CdP) that Laurence Feraud said she liked the least when we visited Pégaü a few years back - even though Robert Parker had anointed it with a perfect 100 points. I can see why - the heat of the 2003 vintages comes out enough for me to have guessed it as a 2003 Da Capo, and it may have lacked some of the juicy moreishness and balance of the greater vintages - but boy, I still thought that this was a superb wine. The nose was a shock to the system after the subtly fragrant 1995 Henri Bonneau Cuvee Celestins that precede it. This was big, rich and intense, with wafts of dried plums and dried prunes, and sweet dried cherries, with a halo of dried flowers and earth and garrigue floating on behind. Lovely stuff - very Provencal somehow and, while bold and assertive, still miles away from the in-your-face explosion of fruit and alcohol that was the 2010 Clos St Jean Deus ex Machinae - the third wine in the flight. The palate, as one would expect after such a nose, was ripe and powerful, with sweet flavours of dried plums and dried cherries, shading into prunes at time - all showing a bit of sur-maturite. Yet even with that over-ripe feel, there was always a clean enough balance to keep the wine feminine and floral at the same time, so that it seemed to glow with a sunny sweetness rather than being confected or spoofily fruited. There was just so much complexity coming out from amidst the fruit as well - hints of meat, a little kiss of warm, fragrant spice, sprigs of garrigue - just layers of detail as the wine powered into a long finish. The only thing that keeps this from being a great wine is the nagging sense of vintage on it, and the tannins just being a bit too drying right at the finish - this are, perhaps, things that even time will not cure. It is a great wine however, and still very much on its aging curve. It is quite a bit more forward than the Henri Bonneau, although (like the former wine), I would also give it another 3-4 years before trying again. (95 pts.) -
2010 Clos Saint Jean Châteauneuf-du-Pape Deus-Ex Machina - France, Rhône, Southern Rhône, Châteauneuf-du-Pape
I was not a fan of this wine. Impressive in its own way maybe, hence the decent score I put down, but it was still far, far too young to drink - even after sitting in a decanter for 5 hours. Put next to an elegant 1995 Henri Bonneau Cuvee Celestins and a compelling 2003 Pegau Da Capo, this just seemed big and brutish and way over-the-top. It had a huge nose - big and rich and ripe, dripping with blackberries and plums and prunes along with a shadow of chalk and sandy mineral notes and a little stalky green hint, chalky. sandy mineral. If anything, the palate was even bigger. It filled every crevice of the mouth with thick, creamy textured notes of big black fruit. Super-primary, super-ripe, soaked in alcohol. Wow - this must be one of the most powerful, intense wines I have had in a long while. Thankfully, the great quality of the fruit along with an impressive structure of mouth-coating tannin and decent acidity just about kept it balanced and age-worthy, rather than being a syrupy mess. Still though, this was huge and, to my tastes at least, just a little spoofy. One could barely recognise the CdP in it. The finish was not fantastic either. It had great length and power, but there was something a bit bitter and medicinal nestling amidst the fruit. I might be biased, because this was obviously very well-made, certainly polished, with great fruit quality and a certain purity to it, but it is definitely not my style. It needs decades in the bottle though, and I would be interested to see if how it develops over the years. (93 pts.)
A SWEET END
-
1905 Pérez Barquero Montilla-Moriles 1905 Solera PX - Spain, Andalucía, Montilla-Moriles
This was a real treat, and a very sweet one at that! From a solera laid down by Pérez Barquero in 1905 of mark the foundation of its Bodega, the wines averaged some 80 years of age when these very limited bottles were released. In the glass, this showed a deep reddish brown colour with an orangey glow on the rim. I thought the nose had a lovely complexity to it, with rich aromas of treacle and molasses, raisins and dried figs all infused with a nice spiciness. As with any PX, the palate was thick and viscous. However, while not exactly zippy, this had enough acidity to keep it balanced. Good thing too, because it had an amazing depth and complexity to it, with layer after creamy layer of raisins and plums and dried prunes, and then treacle and molasses, caramel biscuits and chocolates - it was almost impossible to plumb the depths of the wine as it coated just about every part of the palate with rich, moreish flavours. The long, creamy textured finish ended with just a twist of woody herb. There was so much going on here that it was a bit hard to describe. I probably would have appreciated just a touch of more freshness on it, but this was a special wine - by far the best PX I have had. (95 pts.)
Posted from CellarTracker
