All posts from WLDG's Netscape interlude appear to have gotten deleted. This is a repost on request. Where I saved and kept old posts at all, please note these are "original" versions, possibly containing mistakes and/or typos I may have cleaned up on the net, plus in some cases using the "old" adjectival rating system. Sorry, no time to proof-read!
Hosted by local composer/conductor Gerhard Präsent, this tasting took place on December 17th, 2005, at restaurant "Im Fünften" in Graz, Austria. Thanks again Victor for taking me along and sharing a spot with me! As Gerhard said at the beginning, in his knowledge, this would be the most comprehensive Henri Bonneau vertical he had ever read or heard about. To be honest, not having heard about many to begin with, I would probably have travelled for any vertical of what can be some of my favourite wines in life! I am sure anyone who loves these natural-tasting, unartificial, almost archaic-styled wines would have.
First a few words on the format. It may be impossible for a host to please everyone equally, but I must say it is not since I last attended one of Dani Wrede's tastings in Zürich a few years ago that I witnessed such experience in what to the casual observer look like little matters. Serving a total of 31 wines (of which 27 by Henri Bonneau) plus a four course dinner in-between, starting at roughly 7 p.m., with everyone leaving the restaurant by a time when, sure enough, all other guests had left, but the staff still neither looked mad or unduly tired, that, folks, is a job well done! And yet, Gerhard managed to stimulate an atmosphere of familiarity, almost as if we had been sitting at his dinner table, with him and his charming wife presiding over a Saturday night's gathering amongst friends. In short, everything worked so smoothly, one could concentrate on the essential, i.e. the wines. I only wish I had had the time to say more than hello and good-bye to Gerhard.
I never counted, but overheard there were 16 "seats" (some shared). Wines were served in flights of four, in Riedel Vinum Series Riesling Grand Cru (same as Chianti) stems, great stems for critical tasting (perhaps better to analyse a wine's flaws if it is red, this is really best for whites when it comes to enjoyment), with the added advantage that samples of "only" half a decilitre will not look too modest (in reality, that is plenty of a wine except perhaps for the one or two favourites one would have liked to take to bed afterwards ;^)
Gerhard announced at the beginning of the tasting that he had decided to decant longer than all others one wine at 5 o'clock in the afternoon (as it turned out later, the 1995 Célestins served last amongst the reds) to show what extended airing could do to these wines. Obviously, he could not risk (nor had enough decanters handy, I guess) decanting all of the wines, some of which even he had never tasted before, equally long. Nevertheless, under different circumstances (i.e. other than in a comparative tasting), decanting each bottle of Bonneau according to its greatness and maturity level can only be recommended. But more on this my tasting note on that last wine.
To sample and assess 31 wines within a matter or hours is both fun and hard work. I am a notoriously slow taster and writer, thus cannot comment other than that I managed to taste every flight twice, sampling wines and taking notes first, then tasting all of them a second time, more or less leisurely (there was not much time to talk about the wines except agree on a TCA taint a few times). Rating wine numerically in a way I can relate to even years later, as strange as that may sound, does not take me much time at all. In other words, I know almost immediately whether I like a wine or not and how much, but it takes me a while to get a mental "picture" of it that will allow me to remember it (which, by the way, is the reason I have started taking notes, same as others keep a diary, which I do not, as after all, I am the kind of person who will not even take pictures when I travel, preferring to rely on memories of sound, smell, taste, vision – but I am digressing…).
As to corked bottles, never the host's fault of course, next time someone asks me what an acceptable percentage might seem, I might answer that 4 out of 27 is one to many (you will see why reading the tasting notes below). I am personally unhappy with every single TCA taint, but what can you do other than shrug? I overheard some people say that given the (enormous) cost of some of Bonneau's cuvées, corks of a quality similar to, say, Angelo Gaja's should be a matter of course, and I agree. Especially considering the obvious ageworthiness of these wines.
A little information on the wines: the most talked-about cuvée of Henri Bonneau is his Réserve des Célestins, the top of the crop in vintages deemed "bon" (good enough) by the master, from a 5.25 ha plot in La Crau, considered by many to be the prime spot for Grenache not only in Châteauneuf-du-Pape (where it apparently provides the hottest and most precocious micro-climate), but on the entire planet. His Cuvée Marie Beurrier, named after Monsieur Bonneau's aunt) is sometimes wrongly considered his second wine, which it may be in some years, but it is important to realise it usually contains the crop from a 0.75 ha plot further up north near Courthézon (plus selected material from La Crau in some vintages). All his wines consist of 80-90% Grenache, with the remaining 10-20% Mourvèdre, Syrah, Counoise, Vaccarèse, Cinsault and Clarette. He is known as one who does not believe in (extremely) old vines, and cultivates an average of 30-45 years-old ones. Upbringing is done exclusively in used (in fact almost incredibly old) oak, i.e. in differently sized old barrels, demi-muids and foudres.
There is a basic Châteauneuf-du-Pape in most vintages (exclusively in ones that do not live up to Bonneau's high standards) and there has been a Cuvée Spéciale twice so far (in 1990 and 1998, the latter not yet marketed), separately bottled lots of would-be Célestins that did not ferment dry (and yet, cannot really be referred to as dessert wines).
The lastest addition to Bonneau's portfolio (the total production averaging 600-18'000 bottles per annum) is the Les Rouliers, a non-vintage labelled "Vin de Table de France". The story goes that Bonneau produces and markets the wine for a neighbour who owns a parcel of old Grenache vines but, because he failed to produce wine at the time of reclassification, lost the right to Châteauneuf-du-Pape A.O.C. (note that in France, all VdT is non-vintage). The first vintage was 2001, served at this tasting as wine #4 in the first flight, and I have already seen offers for a 2002 as well. How one is supposed to tell the two apart, I do not know. All I can say is that I have had the 2001 three times so far and that it does indeed taste like a Châteauneuf (and a pretty good one at that), and we should consider ourselves blessed a wine made by the grand old master is available under 16 Euros (in what quantity I do not know, but since at least where I come from, one is usually "forced" to get some along with the "real stuff", let me tell you I have never been asked to buy anything to ascertain an allocation of something rare that made better sense to me financially, nor provided greater pleasure).
The one annoying aspect in buying wines of Henri Bonneau, apart from the virtual non-availability and/or steep pricing (unless, that is, one is lucky enough to be allowed to buy at cellar door), is bottle variation, because he tends to bottle different lots of the same wine "when the wine is ready" (with later-bottled lots potentially more concentrated and complex thanks to longer upbringing in barrel), but also because I am afraid he sometimes (or always?) bottles barrels separately even where the lot number on the label is identical. Note this last bit of information is no more than a guess of mine, and if I am wrong, I would be ever so glad to learn how all this (undeniable!) bottle variation is possible!
Of course, the wines served at this vertical came from different sources, some of the top wines I am glad to report from the very best available. The most gruesome story was that of the rare 1987 CdP that Ken had brought with him over the Atlantic and that turned out to be cork-tainted. Fortunately, the majority of wines showed or seem to have shown exactly as they should.
Flight 1
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape 1994
Wine #1 (#1 of 1st flight). Ruby with black reflections, medium orange at the rim. Piedmont Nebbiolo-like aromas of orange, rusty iron, mixed spices, some dried cherry. Sweet and racy on the palate, medium weight, racy tannin, again Piedmont-like, nice metal and mineral notes, if little depth and complexity of fruit. Still relatively youthful but no more than a mid-term ager. Falls a bit short of the Beaucastel, of which I had just had another bottle a few weeks before. Rating: 87
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape 1993
Wine #2 (#2 of 1st flight). Colour looks a bit fresher yet more transparent than the 1994's. Meatier and riper on the nose, with aromas of beef blood, dried herbs (including, perhaps, a touch of dried lavender), faint oak aroma here, of used oak, of course. On the palate blood orange, a bit more complex and deep than the 1994, fresh and racy, tannic, with bright acids. A wine with some attractive characteristics, but ultimately high-acid and my notes read "perhaps a bit old". Drink up! Rating: 86
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape 1996
Wine #3 (#3 of 1st flight). Yet lighter colour than the 1993, more of an orange hue. More iron and brown spice, even a top note of caper. Similar on the palate, some tobacco, a bit thicker on the mid-palate than the 1993 but also high-acid, actually even more so, even a bit mouth-puckering. Rated only a point lower than last time, but it has never been a fruity vintage of Bonneau to begin with, and seems to be getting yet more high-acid and tobacco-scented in a straightforward manner. Drink up! Rating: 86
Henri Bonneau Vin de Table de France Les Rouliers [2001]
Wine #4 (#4 of 1st flight). Some purple to the ruby-black here, a bit lighter at the rim, looks as youthful as it should. Burgundian on the nose, smokier yet also fruitier than the three "generic" Bonneau CdPs in this flight. Tight on the palate (note that other bottles I have had opened up nicely with airing), quite impressive in that it showed more structure, more tea-like flavour to the tannin and greater length than the previous three wines, and it was this one that did not stop improving in the glass. More serious and ageworthy, and, one could tell, from a way superior vintage. In terms of terroir expression there could be no doubt this is Châteauneuf-du-Pape. A steal at barely 16 Euros a bottle! Rating: 88+?
Flight 2
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape 2002
Wine #5 (#1 of 2nd flight). Pretty insipid for Bonneau, on approximately the same level as the Pégau in this abominable vintage, and clearly inferior to e.g. the Charvin. Rather transparent (the Pégau looks like a Rosé) ruby-black, watery rim. Sweet and lightly ethereal rowan berry (reminiscent of a super-light Rayas of yesteryear). This was the only Bonneau at the vertical that actually showed some of the garrigue (peppery-roasted Provençal herbs) one more often finds in Grenache-based CdP of other producers. Ripe berry character that I overheard someone refer to as "artificial-tasting", sweet, clean and not compressed as some 2002s are, some tannin, medium-short finish. Youthful, yet so light and simple, this did not seem to fit in. I was so perplexed by this wine, I still could not believe it was a Bonneau when several knowledgeable people told me they recognised it. Obviously it could not yet be the "pirate", as we suspected Gerhard would try to sneak in a more competitive wine and later. My rating, in hindsight, was probably generous. I just loved being reminded of that surreal rowan berry perfume from an era of Rayas now almost forgotten ;^) Rating: 83
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape 1987
Wine #6 (#2 of 2nd flight). Quite youthful, fresh and glossy black ruby, some pink at the rim. So badly corked I did not bother tasting it. A pity, because one could tell it would have been the most concentrated of the "generic" Bonneau CdPs. Poor Ken had brought this very rare bottle over from the United States, carefully holding on to it on his lap (or so the story goes) on a transatlantic flight, handing it over to Gerhard some time before this vertical to make sure it could settle… Rating: N/R
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Marie Beurrier 1991
Wine #7 (#3 of 2nd flight). A bit more evolved garnet-ruby-black than the 1987 generic CdP, with some watery orange at the rim. An altogether softer and meatier, fully mature wine, reminiscent of a Heitz Martha's Vineyard (of yesteryear), slightly broader (less focused) fruit with a malty mocha top note, lightly orangey tannin, possibly the most concentrated wine of this flight, certainly the densest with fruit, quite round and thick, tasty and long. Somewhat unusual Bonneau, more like a prematurely aged 1988 Beaucastel, but a success for the vintage. Rating: 90
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1980
Wine #8 (#4 of 2nd flight). When I asked Victor if this could be the 1999 MB (which in all fairness neither of us had ever had before), he agreed. When we were asked which wine was the youngest of the flight, it was just the colour that gave the 2002 CdP away. Other than that… The 1980 showed a more evolved ruby-black than the 1991 MB, even an orange hue and a larger orange rim. On the nose it combined soft fruit aromas with an intriguing crustacean top note, complex spice, roasted herbs and a little (used, as always!) oak. Attractive and fairly complex, this high-acid wine put an emphasis on precision and cut on the palate. The tannin quality, a matter of course in Bonneau's finest wines, was a bit simple, not bad of course, just a bit hard, verging on toughness, tasting of coffee and bitter cocoa rather than deep black tea. Other than that, this wine just completely belied its age, although in reality, it may well have been much better years ago and may now be showing signs of wearing out. The latter is no more than a guess as I had never had this before. I honestly thought it pretty amazing for a 23-years-old wine from a nondescript vintage, more than just "impressive for survival" (to borrow a phrase from an old friend, Cor Balfoort, whom we have not seen in quite a while). Rating: 90
Flight 3
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Marie Beurrier 1995
Wine #9 (#1 of 3rd flight). Medium-ruby-black, slight orange at the rim. Nice complexity of hot road tar, black cherry and blood orange on the nose. Smelled and tasted like a young Gaja (yes, comparisons to Nebbiolo and Rioja come up frequently tasting Grenache by Monsieur Bonneau). Some banana and tobacco leaf to the racy cherry on the palate, tannin with good cut, a bit higher-acid than other bottles (partly a function of the stem, I guess). Ultimately no more than medium-plus weight. While this bottle of 1995 MB was probably decanted much less long than others I have tasted, qualitatively it showed (at a point less than usual) as well as could be expected under the circumstances. I love it, even if other Marie Beurriers have been closer in quality to their respective Célestins (even bottles enjoyed over the period of hours did not come close to what the 1995 RdC laid open at this vertical). But maybe the 1995 MB has more upwards potential than some people say? Rating: 90
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Marie Beurrier 1992
Wine #10 (#2 of 3rd flight). Youthfully black ruby, barely any orange at the rim. Lovely mushroom aroma, a bit meaty, quite complex and seemingly "complete" on the nose. Thicker, richer, meatier, longer than any of the previous wines. Meaty yet uplifted by nice citrus flavour (almost rather than acidity!). What a lovely wine! When I ever see this on a restaurant wine list again, I will not make the silly mistake of ordering something more expensive yet less pleasurable again! Rating: 92
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Marie Beurrier 1997
Wine #11 (#3 of 3rd flight). More evolved ruby-black than the 1992. Some meat spice to the initially restrained nose. A bit softer and broader, less precise and higher in alcohol, and subjectively almost higher in acidity than the 1992, a bit less long. Having said that, this is not bad at all, getting sweeter in the glass, opening up some pipe tobacco, orange and violet. I have not had very many 1997 CdPs and so far have little sympathy for the vintage in the Southern Rhône (Northern Rhône is a different matter), but liked this example of 1997 CdP better than others (such as the gastronomic, somewhat light and tired Pégau and Beaucastel, the slightly mean and difficult-to-judge Marcoux Vieilles Vignes, or the fairly pretty Rayas). Rating: 91
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Marie Beurrier 1999
Wine #12 (#4 of 3rd flight). Ruby-black with a fairly large watery rim. A bit muted on the nose, made me wonder if it was ever so slightly corked, but no one else thought so. Muted on the palate as well but still impressive enough, with an asphalt note, soft brown spice, a touch of strawberry, citrusy acidity and some tar to the tannin, a certain potential was undeniable. Rating: 90+
Flight 4
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1992
Wine #13 (#1 of 4th flight). I am not suggesting the MB is better than the RdC, rather that it is less mature, thus needs more time in the decanter if opened now. The showing of the two 1992s was certainly one of the great surprises of this vertical. While Bonneau fans usually agree they are an extraordinary success, with the RdC perhaps France's greatest wine in this vintage, I would not have expected them to do so well in a comparative tasting. Nice, lightly evolved ruby-black colour, a bit more watery only at the rim. Best on the nose at present, initially a bit oaky and lemony, later opening up sweet fig and date aromas. Mouth-watering, initially high-acid and tannic, but juicy as well as citrusy, with a good, solid mouthfeel. Liqueur-like and a bit nutty, and very sweet with a little airing, yet seemingly more solid at the core, this did not stop getting more impressive in the glass. Ultimately perhaps no more than a wine of medium freshness and weight, perhaps a more Tawny Port-like expression of Châteauneuf in the long run, and yet, it deserves more time in bottle. A thirteen-years-old 1992 CdP with upwards potential? You bet! Rating: 91+
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Marie Beurrier 1988
Wine #14 (#2 of 4th flight). Ruby-black with a tiny bit more orange at the rim. Another wine with an Angelo Gaja-like cherry and tar nose (not the first time I saw similarities between wines from the 1988 and 1995 vintages either). On the palate less precise, more orangey, drier and tarrier than the very best, but structured and youthful in the manner almost of a traditional style Piedmontese Nebbiolo, with solid tannin but also a slightly oakier (not necessarily worn-out) finish. Thought this close to but not fully mature. Without knowing if this showing was representative (another wine I had never had before), I am not sure what I would recommend doing with remaining bottles. Perhaps some extended airing would already have done the trick? Note it did not evolve much in the glass during the 20-30 minutes it stood in front of us. Is the 1995 going to develop along similar lines? Rating: 89+
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Marie Beurrier 1989
Wine #15 (#3 of 4th flight). A brettanomyces top note here made it unusually difficult to tell how much the faint TCA taint took away from the performance of this bottle. In other words, it only dawned on me when the identity of the wines was revealed how unrepresentative a showing of 1989 MB this must have been (I had never tasted it before). Almost the same colour as the 1988, with somewhat more orange at the rim. A difficult nose, a tiny bit soapy (sometimes a sign of excessive volatile acidity), with a fresh cork rind aroma (often no more than a sign of superior concentration) in addition to a comparatively subtle TCA taint, and, on top of it all, strong "bretty" horse sweat (due to that unwanted yeast aroma and flavour deemed by many to be more acceptable in Rhône wines than elsewhere, so long as its "off" characteristics are subtle). On the palate quite tasty, fairly citrusy, with increasingly precise tobacco and fruit coulis complexity, but ultimately shortened to only medium length due to the TCA taint. This is where I secretly started praying there would be no more cork taints in this vertical… Rating: N/R [88?]
Domaine de la Vieille Julienne Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Classique 2003
Spontaneously and kindly offered by one of the guests to "replace" wine #15 of the vertical, the sadly corked 1989 Marie Beurrier. Blend of 80% Grenache and 20% Cinsault, Counoise, Mourvèdre and Vaccarèse, reportedly from a yield of just 15-18 hl/ha. Medium-deep purple-ruby almost to the rim. A strangely flowery wine that still appeared to contain CO-2, a medium-weight with liqueur-like raspberry fruit, a bit alcoholic, but still fresh enough, no tiredness to the ripeness à la 1997 here. Perhaps just youthfully disjointed? I am curious to taste more 2003s, as I cannot say I liked the few I have had so far, with the notable exception of Avril's Clos des Papes. Rating: 85+
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1971
Wine #16 (#4 of 4th flight). This apparently only arrived the week before the vertical and was so cloudy, Gerhard decided to filter it (I was glad to see he did not use a paper coffee filter, but some sort of fabric that at least did not seem to impart any aroma or flavour of its own). I am not convinced the cloudiness was due to the shaking of the bottle during transport, however. The various phenomena collectors refer to as "shock" (after bottling, transport, exposure to bright light etc.) may persist for days and weeks, but sediment visibly settles within hours and should not give a wine a murky-milky look. Victor immediately turned to me and asked whether this could have undergone secondary fermentation. Some sort of fungus/bacteria is what I would have guessed as well, from the look of this alone. Weird but not at all unattractive aromas of Teriyaki marinade, Madeira, minor horse sweat. Somewhat soapy-sweaty on the palate (not so bad really, a bit like some lesser vintages of old-style Heitz, another comparison that does not seem far-fetched with Bonneau, and that is hardly negative). Some sweetness, autumnal bee's wax to some dried strawberry and lemon. Nice enough tannin, medium length. This remained cloudy throughout and no particles whatsoever settled in the glass. Not a representative bottle, I hope, but enjoyable. Cannot be a bad wine if it showed as well as it did in hardly pristine condition. Rating: 88?
Flight 5
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1999
Wine #17 (#1 of 5th flight). Now this could be interpreted as a relative disappointment. I had only had this once before and loved it, but figure any 1999, whether one likes this CdP vintage in general or not (there is only a handful of wines I truly like, all closed at this stage), is bound to show under par in a comparative tasting. I am glad I did not go berserk and buy a lot at auction when I had the opportunity recently, not because I no longer believe in this wine, but because I would rather pay more or buy less bottles of a Bonneau from a riper, more hedonistic vintage. I understand some people prefer less surmaturité in their CdP than in a top vintage like 1998 (I like austere vintages, too, yet can find no wrong with surmaturité-picked Grenache, especially when it is firmly structured). If that is what one is looking for, vintages like 2001 would be more to my taste. What was hard to believe here was that the 1999 RdC appeared to have closed down so severely it seemed almost lighter than the 1999 MB! The RdC only just managed to show greater depth and character. Merely a medium ruby-black, one of the lightest coloured wines of the vertical. Coffee chocolate, a coolish-precise wine (which is what I liked about the first time when Erik served a bottle to us a year ago), not too weighty, with a soft tobacco leaf and a little tar top note, good tannin, perhaps lower in acidity than many 1999s. Rated five points lower than last time, it did not cross my mind I should recognise this wine. My best guess is that it should be locked away until it reaches age ten, preferably fifteen, and even then may be best appreciated away from comparative tastings (except, if anything, a 1999 CdP horizontal). Rating: 89+
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1998
Wine #18 (#2 of 5th flight). Close to 16.5% natural alcohol. Full ruby-black with fine mahogany-like gloss. Not one of those youthfully purple colours of other 1998s by other winemakers, Victor even said it looked a bit evolved, but this was one of a handful wines in the vertical with that furniture polish kind of gloss to the colour that in my experience, almost only great wines ever show. Certainly the 1998 MB looks less deep and evolved in direct comparison. Such a horrible cork-tainted I did not bother tasting the wine. Poor Gerhard! It would have been such a smart move to serve the two 1998s in the "wrong" order (that way, there could be no doubt as to the two cuvées being different or identical; even the most inexperienced wine drinkers will notice a step down from a better to a lesser version of a similar wine – and I seriously doubt there were any novices at the table). It was clear from the outset, however, that this and the MB could not possibly be the same wine (as some people on the internet have suggested, including ones who are trying to fetch higher bids at auction) as smelling the corked wine alone made clear the RdC is darker and fresher in colour, and higher in alcohol and glycerine. In addition, more than one trustworthy wine nut I spoke to who happens to have tasted both 1998s reported the RdC is (much) better then the MB (as indeed it should be). A pity that what should in all likelihood have been the third-best or so wine of the vertical had such a strong TCA taint. Having said that, I was glad – after the first shock – that most of the even rarer top vintages, some of which literally unique experiences, were showing at their best. Rating: N/R
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Marie Beurrier 1998
Wine #19 (#3 of 5th flight). This wine is starting to annoy me, as no two bottles of it appear to be the same (not least in terms of colour!). How could that be? It is said to have been bottled in extremely small quantity and marketed exclusively in Europe – if so, would that not exclude all likelihood of there being more than a single lot? A medium-plus, ever so slightly murky and somewhat evolved ruby-black, if with some gloss, and some orange at the rim. American hazelnut coffee top note (which, along with the colour, made me wonder if it might be the 1988 RdC, that is, until I took a first sip). Although there was some hinted-at depth to the aromatic profile, this really seemed deeper on the palate (normally a sign of relative evolvement), which was chocolatey as well as citrusy, but could really have done with more fat and thickness of fruit. Third and perhaps least impressive bottle I have had so far, although a lightly volatile, thus forward, approachable and perfumey one in France would appear to have had lesser aging potential. I am tempted to go back to that restaurant where Rainer and I enjoyed a bottle of almost Célestins-like structure as well as superior freshness, youthfulness and depth of colour, and drink up all that is left in their cellar. Rating: 91
Josef Pöckl Mystique 1997
Wine #20 (#4 of 5th flight). The pirate. It would obviously have been difficult to find a wine that tastes even remotely similar to Bonneau's Célestins, but Gerhard had a bottle up his sleeve that appears to be even harder to get. Cannot say I had ever heard of this cuvée before, but I noticed an appreciative hush and whispering among the natives when he revealed its identity at the end of the flight. Opaque purple-ruby almost to the rim. Aromas of marzipan, new oak banana and coconut. A very modern-styled wine, sweet, fat and dense with chocolate, banana and mint flavours. Impressively made, as can be seen from my score, but from a stylistic perspective I must admit I hated its guts, as it seems all surface with nothing underneath. Apparently this wine is not for sale, but only given to I missed gathering who (friends, special customers?). What would become of this with age I can only guess (I had so far only had late harvest stickies from Pöckl). It reminded me of a Pecchenino Dolcetto (the Mystique may be/tastes like a blend of local and French grape varieties) in that it may seem too young to drink for a number of years and then starts disintegrating? Rating: 87+/-?
Flight 6
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1985
Wine #21 (#1 of 6th flight). Lightly evolved ruby-black with a medium orange hue and more important orange rim than most wines. Tempting to say it looked its age, but blind tasting can be so humbling (the experience with something like the 1980 RdC is a perfect reminder of one's ignorance): without knowing how old the wine was, I was still at a loss whether to put down 94+ or ~95 on my score sheet ;^) Complex lemon, tobacco, orange, soft smoke, meat, meat spice, hazelnut coffee and faint Madeira aromas. Complex black tea-scented tannin, if with a suggestion of oak tannin as well, persistent and sweet on the finish, where a little tobacco ash note surfaces, and yet, this does not taste old but instead shows rare finesse and subtlety. Very tasty yet tannic, a wine that ideally could be a bit richer and smoother. And yet, given the choice, this would have been the one I would love to have with dinner (or lunch, or breakfast for that matter)! Rating: 95
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1986
Wine #22 (#2 of 6th flight). Quite dense-looking garnet-ruby-black. At first merely a bit muted on the nose, so lightly corked I decided to taste the wine (which I usually never do). Some dryness to the tannin yet still sweet, smooth, rich and round, quite deep and Burgundian, thicker on the palate than the majority of wines served before, some hazelnut coffee that reminded me of an earlier showing of 1988 RdC, very long (rare for TCA-tainted wine). What a well-stored, deeply-coloured and succulent bottle of 1986 RdC this would have been without the TCA taint! Thought it might be a corked 1988 RdC (but see there). Rating: N/R [93?]
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1988
Wine #23 (#3 of 6th flight). This was a déjà vu of a different kind. Rainer once told me about a bottle of 1988 RdC exactly like this one, tasted at the same restaurant where we had drunk an absolutely pristine bottle together, one that had hovered on a similar level of excellence, or close, to that of the 1990 and 1989 at this vertical. Of course the irony of it only dawned on me after the identity of the wines in this flight had been revealed. Medium-plus garnet-ruby-black with a medium watery-orange rim. A touch of burnt sugar and coffee to the aromas, and a bit of caramel to the flavours, which were otherwise deep and complex, nicely sweet, with good roundness and smoothness to the mouthfeel. Got continually sweeter in the glass, in hindsight at almost too quick a pace. I first mistook it for the 1986, then again wondered if it might be younger (hence the plus after my score), but it never crossed my mind it might be a wine I know. Could there be different lots shipped at the same time? Certainly Rainer's description of a "caramelised" sample of 1988 RdC, with that burnt sugar element detracting slightly (sadly, too much for a wine of such potential excellence) from the wine's freshness, fruit retention, subtlety and terroir expression. Reminds me of similar bottle variation with 1988 Rayas that all came from one and the same case, such things happen, it just seems unfortunate one seems to experience this more often with unartificial, natural-tasting top wines than run-of-the-mill plonk from the supermarket next door. Mind you, there was little to complain here per se (although to find a corked bottle of the 1986 showed as well or better was highly perplexing), but whenever you happen to know a wine and expect an equal performance from subsequent bottles – oh well, to be a fine wine addict is a tough life… ;^) Rating: 92+
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Marie Beurrier 1990
Wine #24 (#4 of 6th flight). Sound ruby-black with touch of garnet, merely a tiny orange rim. Not too open at first, giving away only aromas of soft brick clay (as in Haut-Brion and La Mission) and soft rusty iron. But sweet and glyceric in an autumnal way on the palate, even seemed a bit aged with touch of oak and fallen leaves, full body, long and juicy, with finely-grained ripe tannin. Needs to be put into a flight of Célestins to prove two things. First, that it will not fall short in terms of size. Second, that it does fall short in terms of finesse or the sheer nobility of terroir expression, albeit only slightly, and thus reminds me of the fact that my love for Bonneau's wines is not primarily based on their impressive, often breathtaking size. There are many big wines out there today, none of which evoke memories of love, childhood, nature, gourmet cuisine, animality or, quite on the contrary, the sensory subtleties of life. Then again, this still may in time. Rating: 93+?
Flight 7
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1989
Wine #25 (#1 of 7th flight). The most seductive nose of the tasting, this wine practically jumped out of the glass! Finally, the kind of stuff we had been waiting for. Lightly evolved ruby-black, good gloss, slight orange at the rim. Sweet asphalt and fruit, chocolate truffle, plus a virtual smorgasbord of finesse notes. Glyceric, sweet asphalt and cherry jam, a touch of tobacco that is nicely integrated, extremely long on the powerful yet satiny (for CdP) finish, mouthcoating aftertaste of great subtlety. One of the few wines Victor and I guessed right immediately, although we did not agree on which either of us liked better, this or the 1990 that followed it. The bottom line probably is that the two wines are more or less equal in overall quality, so that choosing one or the other seems a matter of preference. But while I would love to own a cellar full of both, picking a favourite would nonetheless be easy for me: it comes down to a choice between a fraction more power in the 1990 versus the 1989's gorgeous perfumey aromatics, astonishing (especially from a stem that does not exactly support any of these characteristics in a low-acid red) harmony, depth, complexity, terroir expression, sweetness and smoothness of texture, utterly uncommon subtlety and finesse in such a large-scaled CdP, and a seemingly endless finish and aftertaste. It is also true I am a "nose" guy and that characteristics such as a little more surmaturité and alcohol in the 1990 mean nothing to me. Even so, it is not that the 1989 is more evolved than the 1990, on the contrary I felt it is a deceptive wine because its exceptional balance and harmony will probably always make it appear ready, and yet, both wines are probably still on their way up. In an ideal world in which I would own cases full of either, I would perhaps drink a bottle of the 1989 every year or so but go easy on the 1990 and wait for it to fully blossom. Just fantasising, of course… Rating: 99
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1990
Wine #26 (#2 of 7th flight). Glossier and blacker ruby-black, minor orange at the rim only. Judging from the colour alone one would say this may have a fraction more long-term potential, but of course that is hardly an educated guess. Huge but well-integrated alcohol and a level of ripeness that includes such exotic aromas as faint dried tomato, coffee chocolate and a touch of tar. Thick, dense and rich on the palate, huge body and tannin. It might be tempting to suggest that some of the 1990's soil-driven terroir characteristics seem buried under yet thicker layers of fruit, but with wines as superripe as this, I have become more cautious making predictions in recent years, because in wines from exceptionally hot vintages these characteristics can be, even in near-perfect wines such as this, be ever so slightly "cooked out" and thus may never surface. Then again they may, what do I know? Nothing here suggests what I call roasted characteristics, not even that espresso-like top note. There is noticeable surmaturité here, that is all (nothing wrong with that in high-octane Grenache), so in short, it is yet riper and more broad-shouldered than the 1989, at the loss of some perfuminess, finesse, subtlety and harmony. Apparently you cannot have everything at the same time (unless the 1978 does? – I would sure love to know…). Whereas both the 1989 and 1990 seem potentially perfect, it is the more unyielding blockbuster-styled 1990 that demands more time. As I already said, in an ideal world… Rating: 98+
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Spéciale 1990
Wine #27 (#3 of 7th flight). The only bottling by Henri Bonneau I know on whose label an alcohol level as high as 16.5% is actually stated, as understatement seems to be the rule here. Another perplexing showing. Qualitatively this was certainly up to speed (as my blind rating reveals), but it was coloured almost identically to the 1989 RdC, and smelled and tasted more similar to the 1990 RdC than I would ever had thought possible. It even took me a minute or two to make up my mind and guess its identity correctly. No one else at the table thought that very difficult. It does smell sweeter and more raisiny (raisins soaked in Madeira), there is an obvious cocoa powder top note, but then, also a suggestion of eucalyptus. In addition, it does taste prunier than the RdC and ends with perhaps a touch more sweetness and warmth on the quite long finish. My hand-scribbled notes here read "A more evolved 1990 Spéciale? If so, what about the colour?" Bottles we have had barely three years ago had retained an almost opaque purple at the center and were incredibly Recioto-like, with a spectacularly thick coulis de fruit and almost blood sausage-like (blue pudding) density on the mid-palate, yet closer to perfection. Note there were people at the table who said this showed exactly the same as bottles they had recently had. Again, are there different lots or were the bottles we had unusually well stored? Not that I am complaining, of course, given the quality of showing we got. The (relative!) similarity to the 1990 RdC that night was really most unexpected. Rating: 97
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 1995
Wine #28 (#4 of 7th flight). The showing of this wine proved a point: as far as decanting time is concerned, the wines of Henri Bonneau can be treated much like Vintage Port, young wines and top vintages profit from several hours of airing, old wines and lesser vintages somewhat less. In principle I agree that what Gerhard Präsent did is the only sensible choice when one is serving a succession of in part unknown wines for a comparative tasting. When it comes to optimum enjoyment, however, every bottle of Bonneau should be treated as the unique individual it is. What I prefer doing is to have them over a period of several hours, right from the moment the bottle is uncorked and decanted, and watch each wine's evolution. Few wines go through comparable metamorphosis, so when one does have the time, it would be a pity to miss half the fun. In other words, it is entirely possible that a few wines in this vertical would have shown better with similarly extended airing, others maybe worse. The 1995 was certainly showing spectacularly well. Colour was a bit lighter than that of that night's 1990 Cuvée Spéciale, but glossier and livelier, a fraction more youthful. Dense aromatics are very sweet, with sweet pipe tobacco, a touch of ash, blonde and blood orange, stale bee's wax, mild alcoholic warmth. Candy-like texture paired with high alcohol, thick and glyceric. While not unduly evolved for its age, it almost seemed mature enough for consumption (a number of the other wines would have, with similarly extended decanting time, but careful, this is merely a function of Bonneau's barrel aging process and does not preclude wines from improving further in bottle, the early-mature character is part and parcel of the style, so to speak, and can be deceptive!). It was only on the very long finish that I noticed some underlying firmness, reminiscent perhaps of the 1992 RdC that only started to open up when we had to pour away our samples for the next flight. Although the alcohol here was of the sweet and warming kind and did not stick out in any negative way, I still felt it was another reminder that this is, after all, a young wine that only threw itself at us because it was aired much longer than the previous ones, not because it was indeed more advanced in evolution. Victor liked it so much as well, he noted: "May give the 1995 Rayas a run for its money!" I could hardly believe how much I loved this when the identity of the last eight was revealed. Five to six hours of airing are not too much if one decides to pull a cork on one today. Do not forget to give me call when you do ;^) Rating: 96
Finally, on to something slightly unpleasant. I hate having to add a complaint at the end, but since it is unrelated to anything our affable host or anyone in particular did wrong, allow me to mention it all the same.
To someone who considers himself, among other, a dessert wine lover, it is heartbreaking to be present at tastings where nothing more than old prejudices are being perpetuated (see below), to the extent that sweet wines are not to be taken seriously. I know that my great friend Albino would say, who cares, that way there is more of the good stuff for us, stop trying to convince people of things they are happy not to know. He may be right. Then again, we happen to know a number of vintners in person who make sweet wines of the kind that will make people drool and stammer half-finished phrases like "once in a lifetime experience" while clinging on to their glasses as if their lives depended on it.
There should be a rule, if not a law against anything less than dessert wines on precisely that level after a tasting like this. That is all I am saying. I am fully aware that generous guests with, I have no doubt, only the noblest intentions, had brought along what were announced by our innocent host as "dessert wine donations". That no one appeared to finish their glasses even though many of us had been spitting during the vertical tells almost the whole story.
What I find a pity is that this was by far not the first time I had been present at a tasting of great dry reds that ended with people agreeing on an apparent absence of virtues in sweet wines. Do not think I ever cared to rise to their defence in any of those situations. That would be like propagating frost in a public sauna. All that was needed was proof to the contrary. Unfortunately, I failed to bring some along. What is the lesson to be learnt from all this? That I should take a bottle of, for example, Tokaji Eszencia with me wherever I go, just in case? I know what Albino would have to say about that…
Zind-Humbrecht Gewürztraminer Rangen de Thann Clos St-Urbain 1995
I can hardly say to how many high-class tastings I have been where, at the end, either an Amarone was served with cheese with everyone (who apparently never drink Amarone in their lives) being surprised it was not sweet, or then some nondescript sweet wine, with everybody (who apparently have yet to taste a good one, as if there were not plenty out there) perpetuating their prejudice that in order for a wine to be truly enjoyable, it has got to be dry, and that all else is kids' or (depending on the prevalence of chauvinism) women's stuff. I was surprised I should overhear this kind of conversation in Austria as well, away from the table of course, after half-filled glasses had been politely left behind. And this in the home country of a number or truly memorable dessert stickies! What my dear friend Victor, whose politeness is virtually British, said tells the whole story. You cannot expect to ever hear a complaint from him. Instead, all he did was whisper something about having wanted to bring along F. X. Pichler's 1998 Gelber Muskateller TBA (in our humble opinion the greatest sweet wine this country has brought forth) but deciding against it, as a half bottle could not possibly serve everyone present. Right on the nail, pal! But on to the wine: this does not exactly fall into either of the two above-mentioned categories (and I shall stop ranting now), instead it is the kind of rarity (apparently only 450 bottles were made from a yield of 9.5 hl/ha) we should call ourselves blessed someone let us take part in tasting it regardless of the circumstances. And a highly rated wine (96 points) in winedom's most influential publication it is, too. Unfortunately, whoever said all of Z-H's Grand Cru bottlings contain high levels of residual sugar cannot have been referring to this one. Close to dry, this medium gold coloured, perhaps variety-typical enough smelling (some bitter grapefruit, feeble rosewater, yet less lychee) GT was certainly concentrated, but leafier, as well as more bitter and alcoholic than ideal (some bitterness and a full body can be expected in Alsatian Gewürztraminer, nothing wrong with that). Somewhat medicinal and steely-rough, and smokier than necessary given the little fruit, the acidity here was perfectly all right in balance but of little appeal (perhaps not underripe, but providing little flavour of its own). After the wine's identity was revealed, I kept wating for some of the volcanic soil notes to surface, but apart from that flinty smokiness, there was either no minerality to this or then no subtlety to that minerality. Even assuming this was in an "off" phase, which at age ten it may be, I cannot see it falling into a higher than the very good quality category (equalling 85-90, with me usually 85-88 points). From the perspective that the 1997 version ranks among the very greatest Gewürztraminers one could have the pleasure to drink (yes, that wine does contain a noticeable amount of residual sugar), the 1995 certainly did not do the producer much honour that night. The least one can say is that it was the wrong wine served at the wrong time.
Domaine de Fontavin Muscat de Beaume de Venise 2000
I admit my love for wines made from the Muscat de Lunel variety is almost exclusively restricted to some rare super wines from e.g. Tokaj, Germany, Austria and Italy, and that I rarely like the ones smelling of eau de vie or macerated tangerine blossom. Medium-pale strawy gold. Weird alcoholic-sweet apple and cinnamon aromas, less intensity of the same on the lightly hot and very simplistic palate. About good at best (roughly 80 points numerically speaking).
Domaine de Mas Blanc Banyuls Cuvée du Dr. André Parcé N.V.
Call me prejudiced if you like. Even though the average consumption of Vintage Port in our small Swiss wine circle has fallen well below a bottle a week in recent years (to a little less than half as much I am afraid), when a dessert style red is served, I will usually prefer something completely different, such as Recioto, to a fortified one from outside Portugal. Having said that, the wines of André Parcé once provided my introduction to Banyuls (no doubt to many other wine lovers as well) and thus remain a reference for the region to which all others are compared. Not the soap and dried tomato top notes of other Hors d'Âge bottlings I have had from him, more firmness (not by far of the Vintage Port kind!) and light Recioto-like fruit density at the core, with the kind of mushroom top notes that I thought vaguely reminiscent of Gantenbein's great 1997 Vin de Paille. Ruby-black colour of fair density, looking less evolved than most Parcés I have had. Round mouthfeel, easy to enjoy. Good length. Not the depth or complexity of a great Port, but let us remain realistic. About excellent (the 87 to 88 point borderline), perhaps not as ageworthy, but as on a similar qualitative level as Parcé's vintage-dated Banyuls.
Greetings from Switzerland, David.