Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post Reply
User avatar
Comte Flaneur
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:05 pm
Contact:

Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by Comte Flaneur »

On Wednesday we had a dinner at the Chez Bruce restaurant looking out on to Wandsworth Common. The purpose of the dinner was to conduct some scientific research. To determine if Angelus and Pavie deserved their promotion to first growth status...specifically to Premier status Grand Cru A in the St Emilion pecking order, to join the illustrious aristocracy that is Ausone and Cheval Blanc.

To commence to mark the 50th anniversary of his passing:

Cuvée Sir Winston Churchill 1996

Stern and taut initially, a wine with a fine line and backbone, it evolves nicely in the glass as it warms up and the fizz wanes, ending with an enticing honeyed complexity. 93

With rabbit lasagne and blanquette with tarragon and grain mustard

Ausone 1995

Does not show much on the nose, but it opens slowly over the evening with the emphasis on understated refinement and class. Still young but it has a good core of (subdued) fruit and should develop well. Coming back to it at the end of the evening it is svelte and refined, one of the best wines of the evening. If I owned this I would be patient because I think it will develop more complexity. 93

Cheval Blanc 1989

Also quite reticent at first, it slowly unfurls. It is quite brooding and dense still, but velvety and refined, with a solid core of discreet dark fruits and restrained power. Long, seamless and satisfying it is a very classy wine. The best is yet to come as it gains even more complexity and moves into its tertiary phase. 94

Angelus 1989

A more flamboyant and exuberant wine with some spices, mocha and plums. It is more impressive on the front of the palate than at the back end. I have had better bottles than this but the modest finish is a common theme. It tries really hard against its more languid flight-mates. 91

Pavie 1989

A wine wine to savour. A cardigan and slippers by the fire kind of wine. It is beautifully resolved and at is apogee. Not particularly intense, but nice and relaxed with fine mineral complexity. I would love to own a few bottles of this. 92

With Bresse pigeon with steamed wild mushroom brioche bun and shallot purée

Cheval Blanc 1998

This was marred by a weird nose, initially high-toned, then burnt rubber, then latrinal. Only at the end of the evening did it start to settle down and show glimpses of its majestic inner core. 90-93?

Angelus 1998

This was more tarted up with whipped cream on the attack. For those of you old enough to remember, think Herb Alpert Whipped Cream Tijuana Brass (google it). Superficially attractive but ultimately boring and uni-dimensional. The best bit is the bouquet. A show pony but also a one-tricky pony. 88

Pavie 1998

This started out well with an enthralling nose, dark fruits and feisty tannins. However it tasted metallic and tinny on the palate, and this became attenuated over the evening. It is better - and more interesting - now than the last time I had it, but I was concerned how it deteriorated over the evening. There was quite a bit of manipulation here in Perse's first wine at Pavie. Not sure where this is headed. 89

Figeac 1998 - mystery wine

Deceptively youthful this showed very well with a magical nose and a complex and lively palate with an array of fruit, cigar, spice and mocha notes. As with the Cheval Blanc 1989 the tannins are very fine. After a while it goes into a lull with some caramel notes. I think this will improve for 3-5 years but it is already outstanding. 94

With roast fillet of beef and sautéed sweetbreads

Ausone 1997

A very pleasant luncheon claret style, but it fell some way behind the 1995 - it lacks a bit of stuffing on the mid-palate - but is well-mannered and pleasantly unobtrusive. 91

Cheval Blanc 1999

Three of us had this recently and none of us were impressed, so we were pleasantly surprised last night by a beautiful wine, which is just beginning to blossom. It has a young colour and some unintegrated oak, but has wonderful dark fruits, earth, spices and truffles. 94

Angelus 2005

The 1989 is good, the 1998 is sailing close to the edge but this is off the reservation. Rather than strawberries and cream you get toffee sundae. This is thick, exuberant, extracted, and has too much of everything...except class and finesse. You wouldn't take this home to meet your mother and it is a wine which has been sexed up in the cellar. I doubt I could drink more than two glasses of this. But you CAN drink it, and there is an element of fun. 87?

Pavie 2005

Whereas the Angelus was opaque this sucked in the light. This had been opened for a day and the nose was giving nothing, neither was the palate apart from some very harsh tannins. It was thick and highly extracted. I was looking for something good to say about this wine and couldn't find it. This comes across as having been administered a maximum dose of steroids in the cellar. No idea how this will develop, but clearly the natural terroir has been obliterated by manipulation in the cellar. NR

With tarte fine aux pommes and toasted almond ice cream

D'Yquem 1988

Resplendent golden with apricots marzipan, crème brûlée and lemon curd. It is dense and powerful in the core but light on its feet and beautifully poised. One of the great Yquems. For me comfortably the wine of the night. 97

We took a vote for our favourite red wines. The Cheval Blanc 1989 was the clear winner. It was favourite for eight out of ten diners. The runner up was the Figeac, narrowly followed by the Angelus 98 and then the Pavie 89 which was favourite for the other two who didn't vote for Cheval 89.

No point in beating around the bush, in my opinion neither Pavie nor Angelus deserve to be ranked alongside Ausone and Cheval Blanc. They were competitive in the first flight of 1989s, less convincing in the 1998s flight and frankly ridiculous in the last flight. In my opinion these two have evolved into absurd - and cynical - wines. Based on what I have experienced their promotion is a travesty and a farce.

However I have to report that my view was by no means shared by my esteemed and illustrious co-diners around the table. Three thought Angelus's promotion was justified and one thought that Pavie's was.

A common theme with Angelus is that the exuberance on the attack flatters to deceive and lulls you into thinking that you might be drinking great wine. You are not, in my opinion.The 1989 is probably as good as it gets. Angelus is a boring wine to drink, and is a one trick pony. In my opinion. This I think reflects the fact that the terroir is not first growth calibre ( unlike Pavie). Lipstick on a pig if you like.

Pavie I think could be first growth material if the terroir was not smothered by manipulation in the cellar and bad winemaking. The 1989 showed us a glimpse of how good Pavie can be if allowed to express itself. Sure the 1989 Pavie could and perhaps should be even better than it is now. But the Perse era wines have no right to "A" status.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by DavidG »

Looks like I've got a lot of pigs to kiss... Oh well.
User avatar
Harry C.
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:00 am
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by Harry C. »

In these type discussions I always feel that Ausone gets a free pass. Who on this board has had a wonderful Ausone?
User avatar
Comte Flaneur
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by Comte Flaneur »

The 1976 and 1982 immediately spring to mind. The 1995 will be very good in time.
User avatar
AlexR
Posts: 2373
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:35 am
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by AlexR »

Ausone is out of my comfort zone (to say the least!) in terms of price.

I agree, Harry, that seen from a long-term perspective, the estate has hugely underfperfomred, and had sort of a free ride because of its traditional ranking.
I don't know enough recent vintages to comment...

With regard to my personal consumption, and seeing that Ausone - I believe - costs more than the first growths of the Médoc, I'd be far more inclined to go with the latter.

Alex R.
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by JimHow »

Great stuff Comte.
I'm curious how the 2000 Pavie is performing at the 15 year mark, I loved that wine the one time I had it back in the early 2000s.
User avatar
stefan
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: College Station, TX
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by stefan »

Great wines, Ian. It is interesting that of the '98s, only the Figeac impressed you.

IMO, Ausone is the most difficult of the wines that are generally considered to be first growths. Going back in time, I like the 1964 a lot. 1976, as Ian mentioned, is a classic Ausone. Maybe I will drink my last bottle of it this year. Ausone did less well in the 1980s than many estates, although 1982 and 1983 are way up there.
User avatar
Michael-P
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 5:49 am
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by Michael-P »

Comte:
Then you certainly won't like Napa......
Michael-P
User avatar
greatbxfreak
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:09 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by greatbxfreak »

ComteFlaneur,

Angelus 1989 uses to be beautiful wine rated by many winelovers between 95-98 points. I believe your bottle was off.

Harry C,

You're bit sarcastic. Actually I had a stunning 2011 Ausone few moths ago. I rarely drink Ausone, bottled one, but was lucky to taste 2011 version.
User avatar
Outlier
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 6:13 am
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by Outlier »

I wonder though if the test of whether Pavie and Angelus deserve the A ranking is more about it's current wines, from 2010 (or thereabouts) onwards. It's surely the wines latest/current performance on which the new ranking was judged. Quality has improved tremendously across the board in Bordeaux in the last few years, so perhaps Angelus and Pavie had a gap in quality that it has now closed. Judging older vintages, while fun and interesting, doesn't seem to be useful in throwing light on the estate's current quality. Just my 2 cents.
User avatar
RDD
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 4:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by RDD »

Angelus (L'Angelus as it was known)has greatly improved since 1985. It has a long track record now.
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by JimHow »

My experience with Pavie is extremely limited.
All I know is that I have LOVED the 1998 and 2000 vintages.
User avatar
JonB
Posts: 501
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 2:27 am
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by JonB »

The 2005 Angelus was my WOTN at the UGC tasting back in early 2007. For my tastes this isn't something I would drink every night, but I thought it was stunning at the time. I've been dipping into many 2005s, but not the bigger guns yet.
User avatar
Comte Flaneur
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by Comte Flaneur »

I personally like St-Emilion to taste like...Sr-Emilion. There is nothing recognisably St-Emilion about the 2005 Angelus. It could come from anywhere in the New World. If I want to drink that sort if wine I would look to California or Australia.
User avatar
RDD
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 4:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by RDD »

Comte Flaneur wrote:I personally like St-Emilion to taste like...Sr-Emilion. There is nothing recognisably St-Emilion about the 2005 Angelus. It could come from anywhere in the New World. If I want to drink that sort if wine I would look to California or Australia.
That is why I love Pavie MacQuin. You know what you're drinking, excellent St Emilion.
User avatar
pomilion
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 6:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Angelus and Pavie: the real deal or parvenus?

Post by pomilion »

JonB wrote:The 2005 Angelus was my WOTN at the UGC tasting back in early 2007. For my tastes this isn't something I would drink every night, but I thought it was stunning at the time. I've been dipping into many 2005s, but not the bigger guns yet.
Also my favorite at the Los Angeles UGC that vintage. Yes it was a large-scaled and intense wine, but with mind-boggling potential if you enjoy that type of wine. Haven't had it since though. Hope it fulfills its promise -- have a half dozen bottles I probably won't touch for at least another 10 years.
Comte Flaneur wrote: There is nothing recognisably St-Emilion about the 2005 Angelus. It could come from anywhere in the New World. If I want to drink that sort if wine I would look to California or Australia.
I've put "modern-styled," "parkerized" St. Emilions into countless blind tastings against New World wines, and the bordeaux are almost without fail easily identifiable as bordeaux. Maybe not your father's or grandfather's bordeaux, and maybe not bordeaux you personally like (which I totally understand and respect), but they nonetheless taste like bordeaux.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 12 guests