Now the last thing I am going to do is launch into a monolog on the merits of Clos St.Jacques. This area has been covered really well by a number of writers who have walked the vineyards and got under the skin of this site. What seems to be accepted is that, along with Les Amoureuses in Chambolle, here is a vineyard that is Grand Cru in all but name.
This tasting was held at 67 Pall Mall and hosted by Jasper Morris MW alongside Jordi. The focus was the vineyard rather than producer comparisons so, with one exception that came about by a reserve being used, there was no same producer and vintage side by side. There were some lovely anecdotes and Jasper added very well to the tasting with insights and tales.
The "producers" roll call is a tricky one as barrels have been sold and deals done in the past. Now there are 5 owners who, significantly, all own a strip the length of the vineyard, this is so important as there are three soil types from "top" to "bottom":
Rousseau 2.21 ha
Esmonin 1.6ha
Bruno Clair 1ha (essentially the same as Clair Dau for notes below)
Louis Jadot 1ha
Domaine Fourrier 0.89 ha
The notes I have made on the wines are, as ever, written in a way I can relate to, I hope they may be of some interest. It is also nice to be writing a post where I have no agenda whatsoever. I always try to be honest but so often I have a bias, however hard I try not to. Wine is a people business and to think that knowing, or even wanting to sell, a particular persons wine does not have an effect is naive on my part.
None of the wines were double decanted, all just checked and poured. I think this is 100% the correct approach but it does mean that you find people's opinions of a wine (top, middle, bottom of the bottle) does vary:
1970 Clair Dau - A quite thick, cloudy, degraded colour. Soy and mushrooms, this has a slightly yeasty character. There is a shade of bacon about this and not bacon fat. Rustic and a little gloopy. Not much sweetness but nothing harsh. I feel this note comes across too negatively, it was a decent wine just fully mature.
1976 Clair Dau (magnum) - Developed colour but not too much so. Spicey, meaty, a little leathery, sweetness too, this is intense. It is a wine fully on the tertiary characteristics. Meaty and animal like. I liked it.
1976 Clair Dau (bottle) - This was fresher than the magnum, unusually, bricky and good with a long finish. Nice.
1978 Drouhin - Clean clear brown colour but finely precise. Poised and lifted on the nose, at its peak I imagine. Almost a note of coconut water which slightly reflected a feeling of a little overoaking. The aromas then became prettier and more poised, tea and pure evolved pinot notes. Good wine.
1979 Rousseau - A saline edge to this, a tiny bit of tangerine, mature, has a moreishly gritty (only a little) texture. Good right now. There is that Rousseau minerality.
1980 Clair Dau - Tea aromas, bricky, quite scrawny, has a dryness. On the palate this is, weirdly, much more masculine, rich and animal. Another wine that shows 1980 to be so much better than people might think.
1985 Fourrier - Slightly toffee'd, more texture to the palate here, very good if grippier and also grittier.
1986 Rousseau - A vintage where Jasper Morris noted it rained at picking time, and therefore some wines (the first picked) are rather better than others. Delicious in so many ways. Gentle, persistent and very fine. Red fruit shows well, the nose is stellar the palate also good but as can often happen it is not quite what the nose suggests.
1993 Fourrier - This has a markedly younger feel, more red/black fruit. Quite exotic in a a way, extrovert, in middle age if that, impressive.
1993 Esmonin - Easy to enjoy, not too grippy, lusher than many with almost a liquorice edge.
1994 Rousseau (magnum) - The vintage here is one that was nearly very good, growers being excited and then? It pissed down. This is super; saline, red fruits and balance, moreish and driven, superb nose, may be the weather shows in the mid palate, you could be very picky and say it is a little hollow but frankly I'd drink this whenever I could.
1998 Fourrier (magnum) - The quality of the grapes in 1998 was very mixed and required much sorting. Tea and oranges, this is light in texture and slightly divided the room, I was a real fan, it's a "drinkers" wine for sure. Very delicate but all the better for that.
2000 Jadot (magnum) - The inverted snob in me really wanted to like this. A very warm vintage. This is richer and cruder, a little heavier but somehow lacks class sadly, not bad but not clearly deserving of its place in this line up.
2002 Esmonin - A very sweet, slightly oaked and toffee'd nose here. Serious fruit as well though on both the nose and the palate, I find it a little covered in oak but many others didn't. If it integrates it could be quite something.
2007 Esmonin (magnum) - For me this was more driven than the 2002, it still had a marked cloak of oak but I would rather drink the 2007 now. There are elements of the easy enjoyment that this unsung vintage gives. This is a darker fruit character than I associate with 2007 but not the worse for it necessarily.
2008 Rousseau (magnum) - Just lovely. I almost feel I could leave it there. The 2008's I think will be a very pleasant surprise for many, it is a more classical vintage to my mind, very pinot, not lush, more focussed. There can be a grip too which I like (the Nebbiolo man in me may be?). Anyway back to this wine, its just very good, red fruit, grip the early hint of saline, very Rousseau. The room was, I sensed, half hoping that possibly Rousseau wouldn't dominate. Dominate may be too far to go but, as producer, it did show pure class.
That was the tasting done. I have one more note to add from a bottle that a customer and friend very kindly served a colleague and I last week. This was:
2000 Fourrier - Lovely bold but mellowed colour, pungent nose of all the right things, red fruit with a little mellow black fruit underneath, a tiny dash of spice...a complex wine in a lovely place, drinking well now but, to my mind, no rush at all. A lovely bottle to just drink, not showing the warmth of 2000, but may be a little of the richness that the season added.
So after all that tasting what are my thoughts on Clos St Jacques? Well I would argue the quality is definitely very worthy of Grand Cru. It is also true to Gevrey-Chambertin but without trying to be a look-a-like of the masculine "creature" that is Chambertin. Sure it isn't an easy wine to buy these days but to drink? All I would say is "yes please"...
A lot learnt...well done Jordi and Jasper
Showing posts with label Clair Dau. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Clair Dau. Show all posts
Saturday, 5 March 2016
Saturday, 18 July 2015
Magnificent luncheon at Medlar
So the Friday after the spectacular Rousseau at Riverside there was another wine feast planned. This time at the Medlar Restaurant in the King's Road. The group of five included two chaps - Betrand, the chief organiser, and Jordi - who have great cellars and love opening older bottles - both being expert in this area. The menu had been specifically put together and is below:
Crab Raviolo with samphire, brown shrimps, fondue of
leeks and bisque sauce
Cornish Turbot with Truffle Veloute, Pak Choi, Enoki, and Potato Galette
Salad of Confit Quail legs, Iberico Ham, Sairass Ricotta, Baby Green Peaches and Pea Flowers
Anjou Pigeon with Mint and Coriander Pesto, King Oyster Mushroom, Chargrilled Broccoli and Endive
Rare Grilled Ox Heart with Veal Sweetbread, White Asparagus, Pomme Anna and Confit Onions
48 month Gouda and 36 month Comte
English Strawberries with Prosecco Jelly, Mint and Lime Granita, Strawberry Sorbet and Meringues
So to the wines, which were splendidly served at good temperatures by the Sommelier Clement. We started with:
Dom Perignon Oentheque 1996, having had the "normal" 1996 Dom Perignon the week before this was interesting. I tend to prefer the normal bottling but this Oenetheque is good, more richness but not in a clumsy way, good toast, a lovely start.
The two whites we started with were any thing but aperitifs being terrific to follow through the next hour or so - Meursault Perrieres 2004, Coche Dury and Meursault Narvaux 2004, D'Auvenay. The D'Auvenay had one of the most expressively explosive noses I can remember. A whiff of bold reduction then a little toffee, then a very marked and persistent note of popcorn, both popped and unpopped. That sounds like a silly note but it is so precisely what the aroma was. A bold and masculine white. The Coche was wonderfully subtle, young, more taut than the D'Auvenay (almost impossible not to be) it developed really well. It was an unfair fight when they were opened, the D'Auvenay taking control, but an hour on it was almost the reverse - a terrific pair.Next we were having wines from possibly the other two big names in Cote d'Or whites. They were Chevalier Montrachet 1996 from Leflaive and Meursault Perrieres 1989 from Lafon. Sadly, as happens, they didn't live unto their predecessors. The Lafon was corked, it seemed fully mature but wasn't mildly corked so we moved on immediately. The Chevalier, which I have had a couple of times before, is a good wine. This bottle was a decent one if unexciting. It has a saline and salty almonds aroma, there was fruit but slightly bruised. Good length but just slightly missing a bit of "zip".
The next flight was a splendid trio:
La Tour du Pin Figeac 1961 had an orangey hint, mulled, bruised fruit, a little milky in texture, some tin. It was a little "murky" and impure, not bad for it but not perfect.
Cheval Blanc 1952 This was served blind and had come from parcel that also included 1948 which I have had before. Black fruit and saline, great intensity, there was a spice dimension as well, extremely good wine!
So with so many of the great names of wine already having appeared we still had a few to come.
Petrus 1966 and La Mission Haut-Brion 1966 were next on the "agenda". I had not had either before. The Bordeaux 1966's that I've had have been pretty special though. The Petrus was superb, so Petrus-like in character, extrovert and high-toned, succulent. There is something unique about Petrus, especially about it's texture and showiness. The La Mission was initially a little dusty and a shade metallic by comparison, but it got better, sweater and cleaner over time, there was a little smokiness.
Echezeaux 2007, DRC
Lovely elegant colour, some orange rind, spices, a dash of graphite, with time it actually got more dense. I love the purity of the gently made 2007's. Very pinot.
Bonnes Mares 1976, Clair Dau
I had not heard of Clair Dau before but I was quickly told it is what is now Bruno Clair. This was mature. Animal, good, a little soy, some green but good green. Balanced and complete, possibly missing the excitement of sweetness. There is that mature mushroom water aroma, good and interesting.
Chambertin Clos de Beze 1971, Clair Dau
This was initially served blind, it was a really exciting bottle, dwarfing the previous wine exactly because it did have the sweetness that older wines need to counter balance the complexity of age. Brown sweetness, leather and undergrowth - absolutely stunning.
From Burgundy we were off to Bordeaux:La Tour du Pin Figeac 1961 had an orangey hint, mulled, bruised fruit, a little milky in texture, some tin. It was a little "murky" and impure, not bad for it but not perfect.
Cheval Blanc 1952 This was served blind and had come from parcel that also included 1948 which I have had before. Black fruit and saline, great intensity, there was a spice dimension as well, extremely good wine!
So with so many of the great names of wine already having appeared we still had a few to come.
Petrus 1966 and La Mission Haut-Brion 1966 were next on the "agenda". I had not had either before. The Bordeaux 1966's that I've had have been pretty special though. The Petrus was superb, so Petrus-like in character, extrovert and high-toned, succulent. There is something unique about Petrus, especially about it's texture and showiness. The La Mission was initially a little dusty and a shade metallic by comparison, but it got better, sweater and cleaner over time, there was a little smokiness.
Two last bottles awaited us and both the enjoyment I got from them and the styles could not have been more different. Masuizumi 2008 Sake was, I am afraid, just not for me. It was served blind and I had no idea what it was. It was a little like hazelnut and white chocolate but with no sweetness at all, odd, I clearly need educating. Quinta do Noval Nacional 1967 was simply brilliant. I have had "Nacional" twice before, once it was also the 1967 and once the 1983. Both times I have been incredibly impressed. This tastes so young but not in a one dimensional fashion, it has developed but just at a snails pace. Dates and sweet spiced fruit, power but so graceful, I would put Nacional up there as a wine that any wine-lover has to experience.
It has been a very special lunch, lots of brilliant conversation and so many good bottles, very well pulled together from both a food and wine standpoint. Bravo and thank you!
It has been a very special lunch, lots of brilliant conversation and so many good bottles, very well pulled together from both a food and wine standpoint. Bravo and thank you!
Some pics for the Foodies!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
















