Barolo Cannubi San Lorenzo-Ravera Vertical - Beppe Rinaldi

There is a sort of sibling feeling to this particular evening in the form of this - Brunate - Le Coste vertical. In reality this tasting was planned first and the other evening queue barged. We were 8 people, Eric (who had done all the hard work) myself and six wine lovers. The venue was a repeat - Medlar Restaurant. Chris Delalonde and the team doing a great job as ever. The upstaors room there is a real asset 6-12 people with lots of space.

Champagne to commence as we all assembled. Delamotte Blanc de Blancs NV En Magnum was a terrific start…this magnum having been disgorged in 2014. There is a easiness but also a freshness, good purity and just elegant drinkability about it.

The menu was a nice compact choice, as above, I went as below:

Spicy tomato nahm jim marinated stone bass with prawn tempura, avocado, coriander and cucumber

-

Sautéed gnocchi with white onion purée, eryngi, wet walnuts and homemade fresh ricotta

-

Roast hake with squash raviolo, violet artichokes, roast lettuce, walnut and marjoram beurre noisette and pesto

-

Cheese

We actually started the dinner with a white of Eric's. I have had Miani a few times and it has to be one of the great whites of Italy.

Miani Friulano 2008 - A cracking wine. I think if I were to have had to guess blind then I may have been in serious dry white Bordeaux country. There is a lovely waxy texture and a nose of dried gym socks (one's own socks before this is seen as negative!). The fruit is more yellow than white. Mellow maturity but no lack of drive. Spot on now.

And so, it was time for the meat and drink of the evening. This wine is a blend of two vineyards - Cannubi San Lorenzo and Ravera made from 1993 to 2009. From 2010 it is essentially called Tre Tini as it now includes some Le Coste from what was the Brunate-Le Coste before there was a ban on more than one Cru name appearing on any label (see the other post for a little more info here). For better pics and some data on the wines do see Ken Vastola's site Finewinegeek - Rinaldi. All these Barolos (excepting the 1961) wines were opened around 3pm and gently double decanted at 5.30. The flights are more in vintage style that pure age range, this seems to work better - especially, in my view, for wines from Piedmont and Burgundy.

Flight 1 – Barolo Cannubi San Lorenzo-Ravera - The warmer vintages

2000 – This had a very heady initial richness that quite quickly degraded into a bruised nature. There was a little mushroom quality, some iodine and smelling salts. The shame was that the palate had none to the quirky (not necessarily positively so) nature of the nose. It faded quite quickly. I’d be intrigued to try again.

2003 – A good surprise here, good richly intense red cherry fruit and good energy, no sense of the heat other than in a good depth. A good, quite bold structure with good grip. There is a slight lushness but this is kept in check on the palate. A good wine that is starting to peak.

2007 – As with the 2003 this was a good surprise. The fruit character was again around the red cherry area but with more vigour and freshness. This has a good future, I don’t think it will close down, it is what it is and is all the nicer for it. A good wine with which to introduce someone to this estate. Very consistent with other bottles I have had. 

Flight 2 – Barolo Cannubi San Lorenzo-Ravera - Some classic vintages

2008 – I keep my love of 2008 as an underrated Barolo Vintage very badly hidden. It is a cracking year, it might not have the verve and all-rounder status of 2004 and 2010 or the uncompromising nature of the 2006s but it has typicity and charm in spades! This wine has a persistent tenderness, the fruit combines red and black with saline and earth, very Nebbiolo. It is a wine that is very balanced, very happy in it's skin. A long future and an elegant one. If you see it, buy it, but dont miss out on trying a bottle soon.

1996 – I find 1996 in Europe almost always has a strictness, an acidity and a sternness, not necessarily a mean nature but certainly a lean one. This is no different. The nose has a slight tar and toffee character and whilst the feel of the wine on the palate is true enough there is a lack of fruit. It may well makes great “old bones” as they say  but the contrast in lack of charm with the 2008 is stark. May be I am being harsh.

1999 – Was a very good example of classically proportioned Barolo, in third gear maturity-wise, some brown fruits and degradation to go with enough deep red fruit. Saline and frazzles come through. Not a waste to drink now but no rush. Good good wine.

Flight 3 – Barolo Cannubi San Lorenzo-Ravera - Classicism with flare?

This was going to be 2001-2004-2006 but the 2001 was not perfect so we went for 2004, 2005 and 2006 with Eric then generously adding the 2009.

2004 – This was always going to have a task on its hands to come close to the Brunate - Le Coste 2004 of the previous tasting. It was very good, nice vigour and drive – good young red fruits with some black in the background. Very well balanced, still primary, “splendid” appears a few times in my notes. I’d be sitting tight for 5 years before trying this again. Just as it should be. V.nice!

2005 – Saline and dark cherry, a really odd note (not negatively so) of cool sausage meat. I have found wet raw steak a useful note at times. Good acidity and a good wine, simpler than the 2004 but almost equally enjoyable on this night. Not to be overlooked.

2006 – A deeper wine, a more savoury wine too, a line to the 1999 possibly? There is a sense of leather and tobacco and tar, not a fruit wine, there are hints to the Monfortino style. Properly uncompromising and all the better for it. Splendid.

2009 – It was good to have this here as it is almost the polar opposite of the 2006. Fruit and red fruit at that, juicy, lighter, fresher. I think this is a nicely tender and unpretentious portrayal of a tricky vintage. There is an easiness about the wine. Leafy and fresh.

Once you're in the the flow of things...

Wehlener Sonnenuhr Kabinet 2007 – Eric had brought this along as a refresher and it worked well. I remember “demolishing” a case of Prum’s Graacher Himmelreich Kabinet 2007 some years ago – it seemed to almost drink itself! This was the same, extrovert but fresh…delicious

Barolo 1961 Rinaldi – It was very generous of Edward to have brought this along. An amazing bottle before you even get onto the contents, 720ml and hand blown, extraordinarily heavy. The wine was fully mature as you’d expect, rich but ferrous with a iron and stones feel, the texture carried the wine. There was a sense of fruit rather than fruit itself. Fascinating. A wine from another era!

And that was that...with these two tastings done I feel I know the estate and the wines better. I will continue to buy them and to drink them whenever I can. I feel the younger vintages (2007 onwards) will last and age well but ceratinly repay exploration early as the balance is superb! For instance a bottle of this wine from 2011 recently was gloriusly vigourous.

Keep up the good work Beppe and family!

-

Spicy tomato nahm jim marinated stone bass with prawn tempura, avocado, coriander and cucumber

Sautéed gnocchi with white onion purée, eryngi, wet walnuts and homemade fresh ricotta

Beppe Rinaldi...Brunate-Le Coste a vertical...

The first of a few posts I hope to nail today, a rather large, but good, backlog has built up. I was pretty knackered when this dinner came around but I was equally excited by both the prospect and the chance to see some of my very favourite wine folk - Eric, Mr Burns, Column, Mr Rafferty (jnr) and my favourite, but sadly on sabbatical, pumpkin chef!!

The venue was the Medlar Restaurant which is seeing a lot of action these days including these events. It came about through the wish to drink some Rinaldi, or Azienda Agricola Giuseppe Rinaldi to give it is full name, wines! Eric kindly co-ordinated this with Chris Delalonde at Medlar and everything was in place for a fun evening - expectation dangerously high.

To start, and after Burnsie had insisted on hugging everyone (is he really English), we had 
Louis Roederer Cristal 1999. It was an amusing choice as I had only been saying in the office that day that of the prestige Champagnes it is the one I see served least at wine dinners. It was mellow and a little honeyed but not OTT at all. More biscuity than nutty and with some citrus. If you had to be critical it could do with a dash more verve and length but that really is nitpicking, lovely.

Predictably we then all had the Crab Raviolo, Medlar's signature dish that has to be had. Alongside this we had Puligny-Montrachet 1er Cru Les Referts 2011 from Francois Carillon, here comes the usual bias warning but this is "a point" right now I think, in common with a lot of white Burgundy 2011s. A slight whiff of reduction  then easy yet rich fruit and lemon driven energy, a little spice on the finish...these two led us to the "work" at hand.

There are very few estates that I fearlessly buy totally "blind" - by this I mean I would buy more of these these Rinaldi wines than I can afford, at any chance I get. This doesn't mean to say they are all brilliantly faultless and perfect - wine isn't like that and arguably isn't meant to be. However, if I think of the top ten producer labels that lift the spirits immediately then this is one (others include - Soldera, Conterno, Coche, Rousseau, DRC, Chave etc - must do that list one day). I have only visited Rinaldi once but it was memorable in the extreme. Beppe's views and manor is well documented and long may it last. There will be a follow on to this post when we look at Barolo Cannubi S.Lorenzo-Ravera next month. The Rinaldi estate makes brilliant: Langhe Nebbiolo, Dolcetto, Barbera and Freisa but the focus tends to go to the two Barolo which I tried to explain at the end of the post here. Essentially from 2010 you can't have two Crus on the same label so in crude terms.

Barolo Brunate-Le Coste (65% Brunate and 35% Le Coste) has become (from and including 2010) Barolo Brunate (85%Brunate and 15% Le Coste) and...

Barolo Cannubi S.Lorenzo-Ravera (a blend of the two named Crus, sorry I don't know the rough balance) is now Barolo Tre Tini (a blend of Cannubi S.Lorenzo, Ravera and the remaining Le Coste that now can't now go in the Brunate).

To add some confusion there have been vintages when a Brunate alone has been made and also quite often the magnums have been pure Brunate (*see notes at end of post for clarity with thanks to Ken Vastola). Right, enough facts...the wines. We attacked them three by three, deciding not to work by age but my vintage type, often a more fun and logical way to do things.

Flight 1 - Brunate-Le Coste - The Warm vintages

1997 - A predictably more evolved and less pure colour than the others in the flight. Saline and deep fruit with some cucumber-water (sorry but I know what I mean). Spice and cherry fruit, deep, a shade powdery in texture which somehow works. Good. Perfect now, will last but in 5 more years will be old and whilst in 20 years it'll be interesting there is, for me, no real upside - enjoy now, degraded hedonism.

2003 - A little more cherry here and an almost candied note (that Monprivato and Cascina Francia both have in 2003 as well). There is a glycerol character here. If I had to draw a parallel with another producer in another region for this 2003 it would be Rayas, there is red fruited, Grenache like purity. When to drink is very tricky. If I had 12 bottles (as if!) I'd have drunk three by now, drink a bottle a year for the next six years or so, hold three just to see.

2007 - Tight, focussed, very fine, a shade muted on the nose, brilliantly saline on the palate. I know this wine quite well, a splendid 2007, does not show "warm" at all. Much as I would want to own more of this than any wine in the flight the 1997 is the wine I would drink most of right now. This is a 2007 to buy if you can find it!

Flight 2 - Brunate-Le Coste - The "should be a bit open" vintages.

Brunate Riserva 1986 - Ok so one of the exceptions I mentioned above and a wine I have had, and loved, once before in magnum also with Eric. A clouded texture, some frazzles and red fruit, degraded sweetness followed by a little bitterness. The mid-palate is a little quiet but the finish is super, a little herbal green drive at the end. Lovely. At it's peak.

2000 - A bit of a brute. The only wine in the first two flights where I thought this would be good alone but not in this company. It's a good wine, savoury and a bit adolescent right now. I feel I am being harsh but there is just a little sweetness missing. I'd love to try this again in 3-5 years.

2004 - Superb and universally the "wine of the night", not that one is needed. Power and poise, drive and precision. Not ready to show everything but is appreciably good. My note says "what wine is all about". Bold in density and structure but in no way too much. The nose is just sublime and the palate follows through. Don't open for 5 years I recon because if you do you will just drink the bottles you have.

Brunate-Le Coste - "Classic or closed?"

1999 - Bricky, salt and orange spice, very serious, delicious, good astringency, already in third gear, may be a little more open than I expected. Nervously classical. Hold but try every two years.

2001 - In Piedmont I have found quite a few 2001s to be just that bit too serious, too heavy. This is not one of them though Eric was a little disappointed in it. Savoury, serious and dense. Tight, a slightly soupy structure but a good savoury Bovril like finish, a real food wine (aren't they all). I would take the same drinking approach as the 1999.

2005 - I almost didn't mention this, we figured there was some labelling error with this bottle. The juice was not Nebbiolo and was more like 3-5 years old. Nice but not Nebbiolo...

1998 - This bottle was opened at the beginning of the evening and put to one side as it was a shade disappointing but we drank it again at the end and whilst it is a weak link and, on this showing, a lesser wine than the 1997 it is still true to the Nebbiolo grape if a little prematurely aged.

We had a most bizarre Champagne to finish and clearly the level of conversation deteriorated rapidly but then that that was to be expected.

Conclusions, or what auditors always refer to as the "opinion piece". My feelings about this estate are unchanged...I will keep buying. There is so much character to these wines, a lack of compromise that I love. Is there more precision (in the same period of vintages), elsewhere in Piedmont? Yes for sure...but is better always actually better? The daughters are having more and more input and the precision is being refined. Recent bottles from 2008 and 2011 were simply stunning, moreish and intense without being in any way remotely a waste to drink now.

An iconic man? Yes. Iconic wines? They probably are but the thing is, I am not sure they want to be...drink them whenever you can.

------
*The labeling of Brunate with Le Coste  began with the 1993 vintage, when Beppe took over the winery from his father, Battista.  It was Battista  who (in the best vintages) bottled Brunate separately (and usually as a riserva) starting in 1964.  I think, but am not sure, that some Le Coste may have been in those old Brunates as well. Ken Vastola 
www.finewinegeek.com

Roulot...a good look...

From the moment this was inked in the diary, and thanks to MS for organising, I had been looking forward to it. The format was a tried and tested one...bring a bottle of a producers wine, Roulot in this case, and we can taste and discuss the wines before breaking for a glass of Champagne then drink the wines with dinner. A few of us had taken a red so that we could  move to those bottles once our "work was done".

The whole show was orchestrated in the upstairs of Medlar which as these posts show is a spot I am somewhat familiar with. I just wish it could be nearer work (Tower Bridge) or home (Muswell Hill) but it is worth travelling for.

Those assembled are an experienced and satisfactorily opinionated bunch from the trade. Many of them where at a few of the below tastings, done over the last few years:

Burgundy 2004 ten years on

White Burgundy 2010s

Two very different vintages

A fun crowd to be amongst, if demanding of wines. I am probably more easily pleased than a few but then that's just one of those things. We tasted the wines in six pairs. Squabbling as we went.

Roulot is not a producer I am overly well versed in. I know of it well, and of it's reputation, I have probably had six or seven of their wines but never done anything like this or visited. The Domaine is actually named Domaine Guy Roulot. Guy died in 1982 and Jean-Marc Roulot took over fully from 1989. This estate was, as far back as the 1970s, the main driving force behind bottling lieux-dits (non classified but specific plots) by themselves rather than everything that was not a 1er cru going into a generic Meursault Village as was the habit at the time. I have listed the Meursault holdings below. This seemed the most conclusive listing I could find, size, site, year of planting:

0.26ha  1er Cru Perrieres (1964)
0.16ha  1er Cru Boucheres (1980)
0.28ha  1er Cru Charmes (1942)
0.25ha  1er Cru Porusots (1959)
-
0.85ha  Tesson Clos Mon Plaisir (1961)
0.49ha  Tillets (1974)
0.26ha  Narvaux (1960)
1.03ha  Luchets (1948,'61,'74,'76)
0.95ha  Meix Chavaux (1929,'47,'57,'75,'83,'96))
0.67ha  Vireuls (1956)
-
Other holdings: Monthelie 1er Cru Champs Fuillots 0.19ha (1989), Bourgogne Aligote 0.77ha (1922,'96), Bourgogne Blanc 2.64h (1955,'88,'90,'92,'96,'99).

So on with the wines, which I have chosen to score out of 25, just to help set some sort of pecking order:

Meursault Meix Chavaux 2010 - Deliciously complete nose, very focussed and dynamic but with breadth too. Waxy, textured, white flowers, dashes of both spice and reduction but so complete, so moreish, slightly saline, very fine, long, excellent. 23+

Meursault Meix Chavaux 2011 - Very closed, almost muted nose then much broader and more extrovert on the plate, slightly apple fruit (not bruised apples!). The acidity and finish don't really match the nose. A couple of people wondered if this was a perfect bottle, certainly it wasn't corked. It struggled against the 2010 but I'd give it 18 on its own and on this showing.

Meursault Tillets 2009 - Salty, spicy, delicious, rich, quite decadent, generous green (ripe green) and white fruits...almost like a warm vintage but high class Chablis. Impressive. 20-21
  
Meursault Tesson Clos Mon Plaisir 2009, En Magnum - Lovely lovely wine, easy to enjoy, oily, waxy, long and persistent, a wine to make you smile, ripeness and just a hint of gold and sun. 21-22

Meursault Tesson Clos Mon Plaisir 2006 - Butter and lardons, a little lactic and creamy, nuts on the finish, very 2006, gourmande and generous. With the right food this could be a lot of fun, Drink soon though. 18

Meursault 1er Porusot 2009 - Clearly this domaine did very well in 2009. Citrus and zesty energy, lemon rather than lime. Still quite primary and I think there is more to come here. Be excited to own this. 20-21

Meursault Vireuls 2008 - This was very much an '08 to my mind, that dry honey character, old school style, lanolin and wax, cheesecloth, moreish though and my overriding impression was that I could have drunk a lot of it...always a good sign. 20

Meursault Tesson Clos Mon Plaisir 2008 - Toffee'd notes, rich, quite broad, slightly over-dry on the palate, good but more evolved. A little rancio character. Drink. 19-20

Meursault Vireuls 2007 - Zip, inviting and very '07 in character, nice focussed length, very pure, some citrus, a little muted. More to come. 20

Meursault Tillets 2007 - Apple acidity, lovely palate has an even more '07 crispness to this. An intense wine, may be tense is actually a better word for this. Serious, grown up. Long-lived for sure. 21

Meursault 1er Porusot 2011 - Good crisp drive to this, citrus and then some toastiness but all very restrained from its youth. Generous in flavour on the palate, a little green spice, lovely now but clearly quite some future to this. Very good. 22

Meursault Boucheres 2011 - Just a level behind the Poursots but that's no real criticism, moreishness to the fore, long...my adjectives were clearly used up by now but this was a good to very good wine. 20-21

There was one last Roulot and that started dinner after a glass of good Champagne, the name of which I stupidly did not take down, and that was Auxey-Duresses 1er Cru 2013, this was a pure, open Pinot with red fruit to the fore, pretty but not with great depth, simple would be too harsh.

Conclusions: The Roulot tasting was fascinating. There were only two wines that I felt disappointed a little and those were Meix Chavaux 2011 and Tesson Clos Mon Plaisir 2006 neither of which were bad and drunk in insolation with food would have been decent bottles but this was not that format. Two out of ten in white Burgundy at the current time, reasons for which I am not getting into now, is a good showing. The general consensus post-tasting was that there weren't quite the highs people had hoped for. I can see this argument and the wines are expensive (we're in the £100-200 a bottle range) but two or three things hit me. Firstly, these are drinkers wines rather than show off wines, very little reduction and new oak so youth is not necessarily going to show them at their very best where age will add layers to the undoubted purity and drive that exists as a real strength. With food I loved them a notch more. Secondly, the one 2010 - Meix Chavaux 2010 - we had was stunning. Thirdly, the 2009s way outperformed the general perception of the vintage. Both these points are interesting in my view. 2010 is seen as an exceptional vintage with only a few 2005s, some 2012s and then 2014 rivalling it in my view (comments please). The 2009 "victory" is something that more and more producers seem to have done, those that picked early and made sure the winemaking was understated have clearly excelled in a vintage many perceive as three or four star for the whites. Anyway, I now feel I know what to expect and that Roulot is very much worth ageing. The finest white Burgundy producer not to have Grand Cru? If you look back to the 2004 post mentioned at the start then you'll see the note below which I hope helps my point about maturity and time:

2004 Meursault Tessons Clos de Mon Plaisir, G. Roulot

A little bit of brine on the nose, a tight and taut wine. I expected more of the 2004 whites to be like this. Very impressive. There was a grapefruit core with a long finish that had a very classical “proper” profile. Some people were less excited but I thought this had real class. 18.25 (out of 20 then)

Time now for the food and having gone off piste last time I was at Medlar I made sure to return to the straight and narrow and had the Crab Ravoli with several of the whites, it was absolutely perfect with the Meursault Tesson Clos Mon Plaisir 2009 which was convenient as that was the only magnum!.

The Medlar signature - Crab Ravoli

I then pretty much insisted on a blind red which was Contrada Porcaria 2012, Tenuta di Passopisciaro. 100% Nerello Mascalese from on Etna it seemed to go down pretty well. I almost hoped there would be more divided opinion but may be we were tired from squabbling over the whites. Pommard 1er Cru Clos des Epeneaux 2006, Comte Armand followed which was sturdy, in a proper way, a little funk from youth, some spice, a wine to leave a few more years but a good one. Nuits-Saint-Georges 1er Cru Les Chaignots 2010, Domaine Georges Mugneret-Gibourg is one of the very best NSGs I have ever had and certainly shows the vintage, simply delicious, if you don't like this sort of wine then red Burgundy is not for you. Purity combined with density, delicious. Echezeaux Grand Cru 2012, Domaine Coquard Loison-Fleurot was lovely too, sadly my note only extends about that far. More intense and tight now being a 2012, a vintage it'll be fascinating to follow, good good wine. Finally Flor de Pingus 2009, this might seem like an odd choice but it fitted in well at the end. I think the quality and structure of Flor means that other than at age 2-4 years it is best left for ten years, certainly the 2006 is a beauty now. The 2009 showed class in a slightly muted way.

A cracking evening all round, generous bottles and a lot of fun...what next for this group?

Just a lovely evening…Medlar with five bottles...

This was a splendid Thursday evening a couple of weeks ago. Mr Magnum had organised a dinner for two of his merchants to meet. I always like meeting others in the trade, it's one of the things that sets the wine trade apart. I guess we all compete but really, and especially in this scenario, we agree more than anything. This chap (I am still trying to think up his potential "blog name" - may be that is for next time) has some lovely wines in his quiver none of which directly clash with those I work with anyway…

The venue was Medlar Restaurant which I have always enjoyed, if you've not been you should go, it features quite large on this blog, most recently with this 1996 dinner. It was apt therefore that Mr Magnum kicked us off with Bollinger RD 1996. This bottle being disgorged (Chris Delalonde the sommelier misses very little!) in 2006. It is a wine that is already on the developed spectrum in terms of the mellow, savoury, yeasty and serious aromas but this does not mean it won't age, it will. If a wine can be both young and tight and savoury and evolved at the same time this is it. Could I drink it every day? No, but then I don't have to stress about that. As a change of pace, serious, Champagne it is delicious. 

From there, and as the food arrived, we set about a (predictably) delicious Meursault 1er Cru Charmes 2007 from Pierre-Yves Colin-Morey (PYCM to those in the know). Our fellow diner brings the wines in (so that's his cover blown). I was delighted (and lucky) to visit there once, anonymously as a guest of a customer, during a very special trip to Burgundy. Pierre, it is no secret, is doing some brilliant things and I am delighted to have started buying a few of his more humble bottlings. This Meursault was tight, refined, younger than 9 years but totally true to what 2007 should be, a focussed driven wine. There was a little reduction (which you'll know I love) and an almost total balance. On this showing there is more to come but then I'd drink it again tomorrow if I had some. Spot on.

We stayed in Burgundy for Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Cru Les Cherbaudes 2005 from Fourrier. The 2005's in Bordeaux are generally opening out, albeit slowly, there seems to be much less consensus in Red Burgundy. Some remain as muted as ever and others are showing their class. This is more the later than the former. The palate is still a shade meaner than it will be but in all other regards it was delicious. A nice fragant and inviting red fruited nose with the darker fruits in the backbone behind. The finish was a little saline (love it!) and had a severely moreish quality. Delicious wine, may be 2-4 years from peak but then it depends how you like it.

Soldera 2008 was the first of my bottles. I love this estate, I am biased as I get to visit a fair bit (we work with the wines in Asia but not here). It is a magical place and the wines I think sit slightly outside anything else. They certainly, to me, sit apart from Brunello as a whole. There is a persistent elegance that, to my mind doesn't exist in Sangiovese anywhere else. The 2008 is the last but one release and people often assume that young Sangiovese is unapproachable but that is not the case here. Red fruit elegance with a saline and wet meat mineral quality, it is a wine in balance that you can drink now or in 20 years (same could be said of all the above).

The last red was Barolo Brunate-Le Coste 2008 from Guiseppe (Beppe) Rinaldi. This estate is one of those who's wines I simply can't resist (whatever my financial state). It is grippy and savoury but with a terrific intensity of pure yet slightly degraded darker fruits and a good acidity. It was the one wine you "should" rather than "could" definitely be more patient with but what the hell. For those non Barolo-obsessed you won't, from 2010, find this label as the "powers that be" have decided that you can't have two Crus ("Brunate" and "Le Coste" in this instance) on the same label, why? Who knows. So the estate now make a Barolo Brunate (at least 85% Brunate with the rest Le Coste - so a similar wine!) and the other Barolo being called Barolo Tre Tini which has the previous other Barolo wine, Barolo Cannubi S.Lorenzo-Ravera (two crus again), with the remainder of the Le Coste holdings, so again not vastly different. I have had the 2011s and they are predictably stunning.

What a splendid evening, good food, good service, cracking company and deliciously vibrant, lively wines... 

A "1996" dinner…two decades on

A note came round, a couple of months back, about the idea of a dinner to drink some 1996's. The logic (as if one is needed) being that for the majority of those who might come along would have started in the wine trade around the time that the 1996's, in most regions, were released. We ended up as eight people which is probably a good number for sharing a bottle. I did a brief sum and recon we had about 150 years of wine trade experience amongst the group. For another version of events have a look at this blog from a regular vinous sparring partner of mine, the often contrary Mr Fowler - Vinolent.

The venue was the, always good, Medlar Restaurant which does good wine service and is open to these sorts of evenings in the spacious room upstairs. Several of this group had been involved in the below dinners and tastings before.

Two very different vintages 2001 Grand Crus and 2003 1er Crus

Burgundy 2004 ten years on...

White Burgundy 2008s - 1er and Grand Crus

White Burgundy 2010's

So 1996: I was half way through a Sport Studies degree and already with Mrs H, it was a good year from memory. Winewise it is one of those vintages that seemed to be good everywhere. The point of difference from other "all rounder" vintages like 2001 and 2010 is that in 1996 the Champagne was top notch which certainly can't be said of 2001 or 2010.

The Menu, well what I chose, is below:

Crab Raviolo with Samphire, Brown Shrimps, Fondue of Leeks and Bisque sauce

Rump of Lamb with Gnocchi, Pied Bleu, Wild Garlic and roasted Baby Gem

Cheese - comte

Chocolate Pave with milk ice cream, peanut brittle and salted caramel

The format: Wines were served blind, mostly in pairs chosen by the sommelier. The fact that we knew the vintage highlighted to me that when I taste blind I try to assess age first, of course rather pointless in this scenario but almost unavoidable.

Having just mentioned Champagne that was were we started with two superb and wonderfully contrasting wines. Bollinger Vieilles Vigne Francaise Blanc de Noirs 1996 and Taittinger Comtes de Champagne Blanc de Blancs 1996 were both exactly as you might hope from a Blanc de Noirs and a Blanc de Blancs. The Bollinger, I'd never had VVF before and may never have it again, was the drier and more intense of the pair, nutty with a saline and sherried character, it reminds we of top notch white Rioja in the fruit character but then has a classy texture and gorgeous mousse, this is a serious wine. The seriounesss of the Bolly is contrasted by the openness and easy enjoyment of the Comtes. This is less dry, more floral and a little more citrus, delicious. The Bollinger continued to evolve in glass and to me is a food wine. The Comtes slid down a treat. It was a fabulous pair to kick off with.

Only one white Burgundy showed itself which I guess is understandable. The one we had was Meursault Tessons 1996 from Pierre Morey, the bottle was in good shape. A lovely nose of reduction with a little ripe citrus in the background gave way to a more unctuous and slightly less refined palate but still a good one. This was in great shape for what it is, technically at least, a village wine albeit that Tesson is a pretty top end Lieu dit.

The second white we had was a unique bottling - Pinot Gris Hommage a Georgette Trimbach 1996 from Trimbach - which I have not managed to find out a lot about but can only imagine was a one-off tribute to the named. This was good, certainly not bone dry. The fruit character was apples, pears and a little apricot to start that then as air got in there there was a definite lychee character. This was delicious with that typical Alsace Pinot Gros character of weighty spice. A flexible wine to serve at almost any stage.  

We then had the first of several full on pairs of blind reds. First we were in Burgundy via a conversation where we tried to convince ourselves we might be in the northern rhone.

Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru Les Cras 1996 from Ghislaine Barthod was a little stalky with a note of cheesecloth maturity. This is a quite stern wine, not offering flirty Chambolle fruit, more like Gevrey in character. It was good but possibly a shade lean. The other wine was Clos Vougeot Grand Cru 1996 from Grivot, this was richly pungent and much more dense, a good example of Clos Vougeot character. A shade reduced but in a good proper way. A nice pair without either suggesting, as seems to be the case, that there is a lot of sweet fruit about 1996 red burgundies.

Bordeaux was always going to figure strongly in this tasting. The next pair turned out to be Ducru Beaucaillou 1996 and Leoville Barton 1996. Sadly the Barton was the only bottle on the evening that was not quite right. It was not corked but was very muted and a little metallic, a shame as it's a good wine when bang on form. The Ducru was very good, rich, full, quite lush and juicy, a little volatile (no bad thing in my book) and with a good bit of Iron to it. It tasted how I imagine the Ducru's made today will taste which is good. I was a big fan.

Dalla Valle Cabernet Sauvignon 1996 went up against the Flor de Pingus 1996 that I took. This was an interesting pairing the Dalla Valle was/is not an estate I know at all. The wine was bold, quite glycerol without being over the top, an edge of tarry savoury character. The Flor was a better balanced  wine (the general view, not just my bias) with a little more poise, nobody got it as Spanish. I have had it a few times before and since and it's a lovely wine.

And so to our last pairing. I think consensus had it that Pichon Lalande 1996 was the wine of the night. So classically left bank in nature, gunpowder, dark fruits, some saline and lovely deep but balanced texture. The wine it was "up against" was the Dunn Vineyards Howell Moutain Cabernet Sauvignon 1996 which had a deep power about it some of the tar of the Dalla Valle as well as licorice and a slightly syrupy feel. It was good and would have been all the more lovely if not up against the powerful grace of the Lalande.

Whilst we had a nice squabble over the wines we drank a bottle of Latour a Pomerol 2009 which slightly suffered by comparison with more mature wines but is good from the previous tastings I have had if not quite at the level of the 2010. In fact 2009/2010 became one of the main discussion points. All in all, and from this small sample, 1996 remains a good all round vintage for the serious wine lover.

I just want to thank everyone for their generous bottles and Mike for organising the evening so well. What next?

A "must have" - the Crab Raviolo with Samphire, Brown Shrimps, Fondue of Leeks and Bisque sauce

Medlar...the gang has finally done the big three...

There are quite a few restaurants that have become wine trade haunts over the years. I'd like to think it is a good sign when the wine trade like a restaurant, it tends to mean that the food is good, the service unstuffy and the attitude to wine and corkage a positive one. About a year ago a group of us decide to have impromptu dinners at three of the most popular restaurants that fitted this bill. Namely Zucca, Trinity and Medlar. Thursday just gone was the final leg at Medlar. I had been once before but that was just after it opened. As the team arrived it was time for a glass of Manzanilla, such a good way to start on a warm and slightly muggy evening.
The real action started with two contrasting white Burgundies Puligny Montrachet Les Combettes 2008 from Sauzet and Puligny Montrachet Folatieres 1999 from Leflaive. Both were showing well. The Sauzet showing a good dollop of that Combettes richness, I often think Combettes has the weight to be a Grand Cru. This was a lovely expression, not too big but starting to drink really well, refined. The Leflaive I was excited about as I have had a lot of joy with Leflaive 99's. There was the "struck match" reduction and quite a generously serious nose, this was a little more evolved than Pucelles 99 is at the same stage, dense and complex but not too heavy, delicious.
From white Burgundies we were onto a pair - Trotanoy 1997 and Dominus 1987 - that made a lot of sense together as they are made by - under the control off - the same man, Christian Moueix. Now it is often said that Dominus is a Bordeaux-like Napa wine but actually that is something Mr Moueix has a bit (he is a very gentle yet firm man) of an issue with, he has always said Dominus tastes how Napa valley wines should. The Trotanoy had a bruised fruit character, good balance of fruit and savoury, poised. Just enough sweetness to make it very complete, perfect now, it is a good 1997, a tricky vintage for a Chateau like Trotanoy where masculine power is more the terroir's style. The Dominus was a gentle wine of real savoury complexity; iodine, inky spiced bovril and a little bacon, not frazzles yet, it was a soft wine on the palate and very graceful if possibly starting to fade a little, a fun pairing.
Over to italy now, Barbaresco Asili Riserva 1996 from Giacosa was arguably the wine of the night. Just such a gentle yet firm and proper nose, the right amount of clean fruit and bruised loveliness, alluring, thrilling and almost so good to smell you didn't need to drink it. The palate though had grip and a more 1996 shape about it. The question, as with almost all serious wines in northern Europe made in 1996, is will the structure ever soften enough to allow the fruit "over the top"? Who knows but this was stunning. Brunello di Montalcino 2001 from Sesti was good, intense, rich with black fruits this wine has a way to go, an exctiting future. It was good to have it along side the Giacosa as it was so different that it did not suffer by comparison.
With some cheese and then pudding we had a couple of sweeter wines. The Hocheimer Domdechaney Rielsing Spatlese 1997 from Kunstler was evolved soft and seriously enjoyable, I drink a lot of Mosel and need to remember to get some Rhinegau. It was spot on now. The Raymond Lafon 1989 was rounded and slightly rancio in style, a dense and not overly subtle sauternes it did the job nicely. We didn't really get too geeky with the food but the three courses, we opted for the two starter tactic, I had were very good:

 - Sea bream carpaccio with sauce vierge, cucumber, seaweed purée and a tempura prawn.
 - Crab raviolo with samphire, brown shrimps, fondue of leeks and bisque sauce.
 - Under blade fillet with café de paris snails, salad, triple cooked chips and béarnaise.
With Dinner done it was round to the Sporting Page for one last drink and a cigar. Three smokes were fired up: Partagas Serie D No4, Partagas Short and a Bolivar Royal Corona. The Later was the one I smoked, rich if a little under filled, after so much good food and wine it was nice to have a smoke with some decent body and not too much complexity....until next time!