TNs: 88 PLL, 96 Montrose, 02 d'Issan, 02 Leoville Barton

[Michael Malinoski]

Our regular tasting group gathered at Tom and Sandy’s a little while back to enjoy several tons of their home-cooked shrimp tempura and all sorts of other delicious goodies. They really outdid themselves in the kitchen on our behalf, and everyone brought great bottles of wine to match, so it was the usual festive and gluttonous evening all around!

Champagne:

1998 Pol Roger Champagne Brut Vintage. This is quite nice, with a wonderfully bright and energetic nose full of sunny lemon zest, chalk, herb, powdered mineral, smoke, toasted bread and yeast aromas. It’s finely-structured in the mouth, with gripping texture and yielding body to go along with zippy acidity. The end is bright and broad, with a nice mouthwatering quality and a smoky mineral-tinged tickle. This is really enjoyable right now, but there’s no rush to drink up, either.

2004 Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Champagne Brut La Grande Dame. This is more flowery and perfumed on the nose, with delicate and lilting aromas of white flowers, chalk, lime, white pepper, citrus peel and grapefruit. It’s similarly light and airy in the mouth--with soft tangy acidity, gentle fizz, a fairly open-knit texture, and flowery flavors of apple, citrus and mineral. It’s not especially concentrated, powerful or structured, but it feels rather deft, elegant and refined—a perfect choice for those craving delicacy in their Champagne.

2006 Pierre Gimonnet Champagne Blanc de Blancs Brut Fleuron. Served from magnum, this has a lot going on aromatically for such a young Champagne—showing off impressively-layered aromas of struck flint, graphite, dark toast, smoke, chalk, yellow apple and hints of blue fruit that have nice depth to go with a refined character. In the mouth, it feels substantive and solid—with a lot of smoke, matchstick, and graphite elements on the attack but richer apple, toast, spice and dark citrus flavors down low. There’s fine body and weight, but it’s still a bit coiled up at this stage, needing some time to fan out some more. It’s really rewarding to drink right now, but has a long life ahead and plenty of additional upside, in my opinion.

NV J. Lassalle Champagne Brut Rosé 1er Cru. The aromas of strawberries, raspberries, dark toast, toffee and wild herbs are a bit tamped down for me, but others seem more enthusiastic. On the palate, it’s full of caramel, copper, cherry, strawberry, toffee, mushroom and purple grape skin sorts of flavors that have some definite funky, foxy undertones running through them. It’s full-bodied and generous, vinous and interesting, but I find the funky streak very distracting, and I never really seem to be able to get past that to enjoy it as much as others at the table.

Red Burgundy:

2000 La Pousse d'Or Volnay 1er Cru En Caillerets Clos des 60 Ouvrées. There’s a delightfully beguiling bouquet to this wine--delivering layered aromas of red flowers, dried cherries, raspberries, powdered chocolate, tree bark, sassafras, autumn leaf pile, forest undergrowth, allspice and cracked nuts. It’s complex, seductive and sexy, yet intriguingly earthy and well-grounded at the same time. In the mouth, it has a carressing texture, great body and a lithe structure to go with pitch-perfect fruit to acid balance. There’s not a thing out of place here, and the dark cranberry, sour cherry, sassafras and funky earth flavors are drinking really nicely. All in all, it just provides loads of drinking pleasure at the current moment.

2006 Domaine des Chezeaux Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru Les Charmes. This is still pretty youthful on the nose, with sweet and direct aromas of dark cherries, soy, baked clay, warm brick and stripped pine branch. In the mouth, it’s pleasingly sappy-textured, pliant and smooth-sipping. The creamed cherry and red berry fruit flavors display real nice density and concentration, with well-balanced tannins in support. It has a very nice flavor profile that I enjoy, and I’d say it’s just starting to come into its early drinking window.

Red Bordeaux:

1988 Château Pichon Longueville Comtesse de Lalande Pauillac. Served from magnum. There’s just a wonderful bouquet to this wine, featuring absolutely lovely aromas of leather, horsehair, funky earth, green pepper, tomato plant, soy, cherry paste and red currants. It’s still decidedly virile from this format on the palate, with dark lush fruit flavors nicely offset by piquant green pepper, earth and savory animale undertones. It has tremendous length, fine body and a grippy, finely-textured finish. It’s perhaps a bit more muscled and manly than most vintages of Pichon Lalande, but it’s delicious and rewarding through and through.

1996 Château Montrose St. Estèphe. Served in magnum. Oh man, this is intensely dark, savory and earthy on the nose, but also loaded with black currant, blackberry, sexy spice and dark chocolate aromas—making for a mysterious and engaging blend of scents that just completely saturate the nasal passages. It demands your attention even more on the palate, where it’s powerful, directed and just pulsating with black currant and blackberry fruit flavors that are pure, creamy and delicious. There are some nice toasted barrel spice and savory earth notes in support, along with some big but well-rounded tannins and a solid backbone of structure. There’s plenty of grip and tons of stuffing, but I find it eminently drinkable and entirely delicious right now.

2002 Château d'Issan Margaux. Served in magnum. This is a bit more middle-of-the-road aromatically compared to the previous two wines, with cool but inviting scents of plums, blueberries, smoke, earth, rawhide leather, herb and grilled green pepper. In the mouth, it features nice flavors of blackberry, plum and earth. Although the texture is still a little sticky and the acidity is a bit dull at times, I find myself enjoying its easy-sipping qualities.

2002 Château Léoville Barton St. Julien. This is refined, cool and gentlemanly on the nose, standing at attention with aromas of granite stone, dark earth, black currant, black leather and toasted spices. In the mouth, it’s slinky, lithe and ropy in texture, with a stiff framework, taut acidity and muscled tannin surrounding serious black fruit and spice flavors. It’s quite good and classically-made, but not yet at peak, needing another 3 to 5 years for that, I’d say.

Sauternes:

2001 Château Suduiraut Sauternes. This is really impressive on the nose, showing amazing liveliness and vibrancy to the aromas of sweet apricot jam, peach preserve, nectarine, crème brulee, rock sugar and blackened orange peel. In the mouth, it’s crackling with acidic life and lift, showing great tension across the sexy layers of apricot, baked peach, orange marmalade and botrytis spice flavors. For all that, the texture and body are unctuous and rich, rising high on the juicy and perfectly-poised finish. This is just a stunner in all dimensions.

2003 Château Lafaurie-Peyraguey Sauternes. This is a deeper, slightly darker color, sporting a bolder and more unctuous aromatic profile of apricot, orange marmalade and Christmas spice scents. In the mouth, it’s richer than the previous wine—with luscious, sticky flavors of caramel, spun sugar, toasted spice, apricot and botrytis cream on a densely-packed frame. Although not as bright or precise, it’s rich and delicious, lots of fun to drink, and a rather fitting end to a wonderful evening.


-Michael

[robertgoulet]

Well done...wonderful savory notes!

[stefan]

Great wines, but shrimp tempura with Bordeaux?

I am surprised that the '88 Pol Roger Brut is still youthful. Even the 1990 is past its best.

[Michael Malinoski]

1998 on the Pol Roger, Stefan.

Tempura was just the first of many, many, many dishes, including mounds of Korean ribs and other more Bordeaux-worthy dishes that came later. But these shrimp are to die from, let me tell you!

Best,
Michael

[stefan]

Oh, sorry, Michael.

Korean ribs are great with Bdx.

[Comte Flaneur]

Super line up there Michael and evocative notes - 'sassafras' had me scrambling for the dictionary

[JimHow]

2001 Sauternes is spectacular.
I did not like the last bottle of 2003 Lafaurie Peyraguey, I thought it lacked balance.
That 2002 Leoville Barton sounds like my kind of wine, I'll hold off before cracking open my case.

[AKR]

It's been a crazy good decade plus for Sauternes. People have gotten blase about them.

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

I have a couple of the Montrose, and in 750, so it sounds like I should check in with one at some point. Also glad to see the 02 notes; though I have neither of those wines I have several like-tier others in fair quantity.

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

It's been a crazy good decade plus for Sauternes. People have gotten blase about them.

Count me among them. It seemed like the right thing at the time but I seem to have more than I will ever drink. Plus I can't say I've been too thrilled with the near-term evolution, as they seem increasingly flabby - even ones from racy ears if fine acidity to start. Maybe I must take the Stefan approach and wait, wait, wait for these to become entirely different.

[Blanquito]

It's been a crazy good decade plus for Sauternes. People have gotten blase about them.

Count me among them. It seemed like the right thing at the time but I seem to have more than I will ever drink. Plus I can't say I've been too thrilled with the near-term evolution, as they seem increasingly flabby - even ones from racy ears if fine acidity to start. Maybe I must take the Stefan approach and wait, wait, wait for these to become entirely different.

Yeah. I've been keeping close records for over 3 years now and I only open 16 bottles of dessert wine (of any type) a year. I enjoy them, I just rarely crave them. At the current rate, I've got enough dessert wine to last me for eons.

Plus, it's pretty easy to back fill Sauternes from '83, '86, '88-'90 for about the same pricing as current releases, so why buy the new stuff and have to wait decades?

[AKR]

Well of those older years, in the main, the only one I'd want now might be 88s. In the main I like the recent efforts better.

Periodically smaller 01s still show up at my local stores, admittedly ones I've never heard of, but when they are $30 still, after all these years, it does give the sense that ones doesn't have to hurry to buy these.

Even the better / best ones like Rieussec still go for $50-$60 years later in good vintages, albeit not the best ones.

I guess I should count how much / many dessert wine we consume. It's not much in proportion to rouge of course.

====

Just noticed there was a comment on 96 Montrose in large format -- any thoughts on how much longer it can go? I'd assume another few decades but have never had that year from a big bottle.

[Blanquito]

My favorite Sauternes vintage is probably 1986, at least for the 8-10 chateau that I focus on year after year in that region.

[Michael Malinoski]

Yeah, the Montrose was from magnum. I was worried it would be way too young from that format, but it was great. At the same time, it was clear that it can indeed go 15+ years in that format, easily.

I don't have a great sense of Sauternes vintages, but it's hard to deny 2001, it really is a fantastic vintage.

Michael

[AKR]

I like the 2001's probably the best but have not tasted recent years much, and without the benefit of the big UGC events, its hard to compare Sauternes side by side. They don't lend themselves naturally to a normal horizontal style dinner.

At least on the bright side, I don't get that much less enjoyment out of drinking a lesser Sauternes vintage, when compared to the very best. I guess in statistics speak I would say the dispersion of my utility is small. Wheras for red wines there is a much bigger difference. To wit: the SO tonite disagreed on my selection of dinner wine, and after a couple of sips, moved to a cocktail. Its hot here today, and a big vintage Rhone was not a good impulse. That doesn't happen with dessert wines here!

====

I'll be patient with my only 96 montrose mag.