Dinner with Ch. Margaux 34, Palmer 59, Cros Parantoux H. Jayer 89, Nuits 1899 and other great wines.
I made a dinner by restaurant Ledoyen. I had delivered the bottles in their cellar three months ago, and had asked that the bottles would be put standing the day before the dinner. When I arrive to open the bottles at 4 pm, I see a team completely motivated as we had already made some great dinners together. The director, Pascal Simiand tells me that the sommelier who will pour the wines tonight has thought of this dinner during all his vacations. Patrick and Géraud Tournier, chief sommelier, have worked together with Christian Le Squer, the three stars chef, to create a nice menu.
I open the wines, and the Châteauneuf-du-Pape white has a very chemical smell which will disappear. I have put in this dinner a bottle which is the most emotional of the bottles of my cellar. The bottle, which is made of hand blown glass is very irregular, with a very deep bottom. The glass is very dark. The main label has been partially torn, and has only one word : ‘NUITS”. Only five letters to indicate what the wine is. And there is a very tiny label with only the year : “1899”. It gives me emotion as it is pure, beautiful and unknown as we will never know what is inside. When I open it, the smell gives me satisfaction, as I do not detect any definitive defect. I think the wine will be good. Being confident on the wines I had opened, I go for a walk in Paris. The streets are full with a very cosmopolitan crowd, as the nice weather is appreciated by tourists.
I wait for the nine people who come, mainly guests that I know already. There is an American amateur who has more experience than me about old wines, there is a wine producer who opens generously very great wines, and some people used to come to my dinners from various countries, Swiss, Italy and France. Géraud, the sommelier offers us champagne Laurent Perrier Grand Siècle that I find sweeter than the ones that I have drunk during summer vacations. It is very agreeable, and will prepare our mouths to the great champagne to come.
We go in the magnificent dining room and our table is nicely dressed. Here is the menu composed by Christian Le Squer : Sardines à cru, eau de tomates à l'huile d'olives / Araignée de mer décortiquée en carapace / Concentré de Cèpes crus et cuits / Jambon Blanc, Cèpes, Parmesan aux Spaghettis / Foie de veau en persillade, jus de fruits rouges acidulé / Pithiviers brioché de Foie Gras et Cèpes et truffes / Vieux Comté / Soufflé Ananas épicé. Everything in this menu was absolutely proper, except the veal’s liver, which did not match the star of the evening, a Vosne Romanée Cros Parantoux of Henri Jayer.
On delicate “amuse bouche”, we drink the Magnum Champagne Krug Vintage 1982 which is of an incredible height. A little creamy, wide but subtle, the champagne shines by its complexity. We have discussed for a long time about the compared excellence of Salon 1982 and Krug 1982. The preferences are different between the American collector, the wine maker and me, but it is absolutely normal as the two champagnes are very different (I had recently on a dinner Salon 1990, Salon 1988 and Krug Clos du Mesnil 1982 which showed me the great differences between Krug and Salon, Salon being more wild and pushing and Krug being more quiet and noble). The combination with the sardine is stupendous, but it is even greater as my friend wine maker says, when the sardine is combined with its cream. This champagne is made for gastronomy.
The first impression with the Chevalier Montrachet Bouchard Père & Fils 1990 is happiness. It is straightforward, full of joy, powerful, singing with a voice à la Pavarotti. It is probably as for the Krug at one of the best moments of its long life.
The Châteauneuf-du-Pape white les Cansonniers L. de Vallouit 1961 has a very complex smell. In mouth, it is the most puzzling wine, as no one has any reference. I love its enigmatic variations. On cepes, we could have had a red wine, but the experience that we make is a complete success. I adore such wines with which we explore unknown horizons.
By opening, I had been impressed by the smell of the Château Palmer, Margaux 1959, spectacularly frank and sympathetic. When it is served, it is generous. It is accompanied by the Château Margaux, Margaux 1934 whose nose by opening was more discrete. But now, the Chateau Margaux is impressive, all in charm, with a seduction made of subtlety. They are very different, and their opposition is exciting. The Palmer is more male, soldier, and the Margaux is more feminine and sexy. The too perfect cork of the Margaux indicated a recorked bottle, but we analysed it with the wine maker and we concluded that both Margaux, the 1959 and the 1934 were from an original bottling which gives a better taste. The whole table preferred the Margaux, but I had a real feeling for the Palmer too even if the Margaux was spectacular.
When one encounters a legendary wine, one expects a lot. The smell of the Vosne-Romanée Cros Parantoux Henri Jayer 1989 makes me nearly faint. It is so extraordinary to smell such a precise construction of fragrances. In mouth, it is obviously an immense wine, but, let me say, I was expecting John Wayne, and I found Mickey Rooney. Great actor too, but not a sacred monster as John Wayne. The wine is subtle, smart, complex, and showing a perfect construction. But there is a little lack of power, and the grain of salt which would make it stupefying. The veal’s liver did not help it to shine either.
I see now appearing my beloved bottle, the Nuits 1899. My pure love for it had pushed me to adopt it at the first smell when I had opened it, but the smell, which was not corked when I opened it, was now obviously corked. Is it due to the fact that I protected the wine by an extra cork that I thought would be neutral and was not, or was it that I did not notice it ? I do not know. By chance, the corked smell did not pervert the taste by a corked taste. And by another chance the association with the deep perfume of the truffle helped us to forget this bas smell, as the truffle played for the wine what the ammoniac does for the weight lifter. And if one accepts that a wine of 108 years is not complete but is a true wine, one enjoys its consistency and its still solid charm. Personally, really used to old wines, I enjoyed the testimony, as I can accept some incomplete aspects.
The Château Chalon Jean Bourdy 1934 comes from the greatest year for Chateau Chalon in the 20th century. The smell is immense. My joy is immense too. We have two Comtés separated by one year of age, and the combination is classically perfect. The wine maker of the Bordeaux region, who makes red and white wines, is less at ease with such tastes, which send me to Heaven.
I had announced that the Château Sigalas Rabaud Sauternes would be a 1918, but after a precise analysis of the cork which had wrinkles, it is a 1928. The “1” was a folded “2” on the cork. We are immediately struck by the absolute perfection of such a wine. It is the ideal Sauternes as one would dream. The complexity of aromas and tastes is unique. For my opinion, I see in this wine a broader complexity than in the 1928 Yquem. Yquem uses of other weapons of seduction, but I am completely in love with such imaginative Sauternes. The dessert is delicious, but the wine can live its life alone.
We have voted for the nine wines and the Nuits 1899 is the only one to have not got any vote. This is sad for me but it is normal as we were far from conventional tastes. I am still happy to have drunk this rare testimony of a perfect year in Burgundy (on December 31st, 1999, at 11:50 pm, I had poured a wine of just hundred years, to jump from 1999 to 2000, a Musigny Coron Père & Fils 1899, which still belongs to my top ten preferred Burgundy wines). Four wines have received a vote of number one, which is always pleasant of me as there is not a unanimous winner. The Sigalas Rabaud 1928 and the Château Margaux 1934 had three votes as first, the Krug 1982 and the Chevalier Montrachet 1990 had two votes as first. The consensual vote would be :
1. Chateau margaux 1934
2. Sigalas Rabaud 1928
3. Krug 1982 and Chevalier Montrachet 1990 being equally voted at rank three.
My vote has been : 1 – Sigalas Rabaud 1928, 2 – Château margaux 1934, 3 – Chevalier Montrachet Bouchard 1990, 4 – Château Chalon Bourdy 1934.
I have a great admiration for the talent of Christian Le Squer. I would select the ham, the sardine and the cepe as the stars of the menu. But the atmosphere in the place and the motivation of the team deserves applauses. It was so friendly.
To drink great old wines when so many advantages are put together is a real pleasure.
[/url]
Seriously though; some fine notes and a rather lovely dinner.