Magdelaine 1982-2010

[Musigny 151]

Joel e mailed me asking me about the Magdelaine tasting, and I realized I had not posted my notes.

Magdelaine Tasting 1982-2010


After a postponement, we finally put this together. It proved even better than expected, and I think many of those there, who had come just to support the charity, were dazzled by some of the wines.

Having championed them for so long, I felt a little like a proud father showing off his children. You will notice that there are no 100 point wines in this review and the range for correct wines is 93-98 points. That makes sense. These are wines from a superb terroir, beautifully made, and a throwback to the traditional wines of Saint Emilion. But they do take their place behind the two powerhouses of Saint Emilion, Ausone and Cheval Blanc. Ultimately the terroir is always going to win through; Magdelaine’s was very, very close but not quite there.

The question came up at the lunch why Magdelaine was so relatively inexpensive. John Gilman, who was leading the tasting, felt it was mostly due to how long Magdelaine took to come around. They are not easy wines off the bat; and it seems to take twenty years minimum to reach early maturity. They also are not great en primeur wines, and their initial lack of sexiness added nothing to their market appeal.

But the mature Magdelaines are marvelous, terroir driven, artisanal wines of great character and honesty, honest perhaps to a fault. As I, and others have said, the traditional wines of Saint Emilion are disappearing fast from the market, and I fear as climate change takes hold, we may be the last generation to really experience them.

Back to the tasting, which was done over a long lunch, and arranged in four flights, three bottles to each flight.

Flight 1
2010, 2009 and 2005.

The 2010 was far better than expected in this fairly hot, atypical Right Bank vintage. Alcohol was relatively high, but it was nicely integrated, and although the wine was of course way too young, it was so balanced that it was almost approachable. 95+

At first, I thought the 2009 might have problems, but it blew off some early funk. Rich, roasted fruit, a touch of violets, but not enough acidity to carry the wine, and it seemed a little ponderous. Not sure if this was a perfect bottle 90?

The 2005 was the most backward of all wines, with everything there but being held in reserve. I kept my glass for a couple of flights, and it began to blossom, but this is still a Magdelaine that needs ten to fifteen years. When it does finally mature, I suspect it will be one of the greats. My third place wine. 96+

A blind wine that turned out to be 2006. An off bottle, mature almost old. Nowhere close to a bottle I had in the last year. NS.

Flight 2
2001, 2000 and 1998

2001 is an overlooked vintage, but a good one. Although a little outclassed in this flight, it showed well, impeccably balanced, fine fruit, and a good finish. 93

2000 is a much more flashy Bordeaux year, and the wine had a little bit of that flash to it. The fruit was a little bluer, the palate quite powerful and there was a fair amount of leather and spice notes. Good finish. 94

1998 I love this wine, and it was my second best wine as well as the group’s. You may have seen young French’s note from a few days ago. My note is equally ecstatic; it is a remarkable wine from a remarkable vintage. 97

Flight 3
1996, 1995 and 1990

1996; Back to earth; the first wine in the least impressive flight. After a strange nose initially, which did blow off, it showed better over time but still seemed awkward and bitty. Rescued by a decent finish, it was still in the bottom tier. 89

1995
Iron fist in an iron glove. A bit of a brute. Took well over an hour to open, and when it did, it proved a very muscular version of Magdelaine. Some good fruit, but I question whether or not it will outlast the tannins. 92?


1990
I really liked the 1990. A fully formed young Magdelaine, quite rich, but the bright fruit and acidity, the beginning of some interesting tertiary notes made this quite memorable. I am pretty sure we will see a quite different take from Greg Kahn.
94

Flight 4 1989,1985 and 1982

1989 seemed less evolved than the 1990. Delicious, an extremely balanced easygoing wine. Pretty red fruit and essence of roses. Fine finish. 94

1985 Rare, because apparently somebody from the heavy metal group, Iron Maiden took a liking to it, buying much of the year’s production and serving it as his house wine. The man had good taste; the 1985 was the wine of the day both for me and also for the group. A really profound Magdelaine, incredible intensity, a floral and fruit perfume, leather and licorice. In a great place, unlikely to get better, but also not going anywhere soon. 98

1982 Magdelaine was an anomaly. By now I thought I got the estate pegged, beautiful fruit, florals and spice, but this one did not follow the pattern. There was a minerality to it, a more creamy texture, a little burst of flavor in mid palate. A riveting wine certainly, the group placed it third behind the 1985 and 1998. 96

[Comte Flaneur]

Thanks for the excellent notes Mark. No wonder we don’t see much of the 1985 around.

Are you doing another Magdelaine dinner with older vintages?

We are doing ours on Thursday with a few old Belair and some Belair Monanges

[Musigny 151]

Tom Reddick may do one, but having done two in the last week (a VCC Lunch) I probably will wait, and more likely do a different Right Bank.

[dstgolf]

Great notes and another envious tasting review.
We just finished our last 2005 bottle of a six pack a couple of weeks back that showed the best of the bunch to date. Your note sums it up pretty well with the first 5 pretty awkward and certainly drank way too young. I must say I was pretty disappointed in the first 5 but the last one made me realize how stupid we were drinking these so young as the final bottle was drinking beautifully but still on the young side. Fabulous nose, great length and deep dark fruit but tannins still very present. We all make mistakes on when to pull these from the cellar but I must say I really didn't know what Magdelaine was or why I bought this on release other than it was highly rated never having this Chateau before in my cellar.

[Nicklasss]

Nice report musigny 151, on that traditionnal Saint Émilion.

Magdelaine has surely not that much similar style Saint Émilion wines in the aoc. It has always been a wine that needs age to demonstrate it great side.

The 1976 that Comte Flaneur gave to MC for her birthday was just a great bottle of 1976, and a great Magdelaine.

I had also some 1995 in the past, and it was a bit like you described, needind 3 hours decanting to show something on.

In the past, i heard a rumor that the 1990 Magdelaine has already bested 1990 Petrus in a blind tasting...

[Blanquito]

My favorite chateau, my favorite wine really, each bottle I have left is treasured and I buy up the ever-dwindling offerings whenever I can.

They do take ages to come around, to really show their best I think these need 25-30 years (eg the 2000 is excellent now I find but it’s best days are still to come), I’m really only drinking 1990 and older.

Last January I won a pristine case of the 05 from HDH, which I won’t crack until 2030 probably. Prices have gone up a lot, as these used to be so underpriced, but they’re still worth the going rate at auction usually (retail prices really jumped the shark though).

[AKR]

I have heard some mention that their harvesting - which tended to be done as an afterthought since higher priority Mouiex properties got first dibs on the picking crews - was a factor that held them back over the years. No personal knowledge of that, but have read/heard/seen it mentioned a few times over the decades.

Nice notes and thanks for sharing.