WTN: Margaux 2004

...for the most part anyway:

Château Dauzac 2003

It did smell a bit weird but wasn't as freakish as many other 2003s. It did have some of the fabled sweet strawberry scents of Margaux discernible through the roasted and vanillary notes. The palate was opulent, but the tannins were balanced. Though fairly low on acidity, it was balanced. A positive surprise, but still not something I would buy for myself.

Château Giscours 2004

I wrote a long note on this here. This time: modern style nose, nicely savoury and herbal palate. I am really quite intrigued by this wine - it has so many elements that I really love, that I wish I had the money to get one to keep for a decade to see if it turns into my type of wine.

Château Palmer 2004

A lovely nose with the famously high percentage of Merlot well in evidence. Though the fruit is rather dark toned, the strawberriness I so often find in Margaux is also evident. There are some rather delightful herbal notes also. The palate is rather more extracted than I would hope, but flavorwise it is all I could ask for with its refreshing slightly green notes (i.e. not underripe) and nice acidity. Long and refreshing - a pity about the inelegant extraction.

Château Margaux 2004

The nose is very deep. It is very harmonious. It is very restrained and elegant. Unfortunately, at such a young stage it is also rather oaky. But I'll forgive that because of the glories underneath the oak and because young Bordeaux is almost always more oak-forward than I would like. The palate is elegant, light on its feet, refreshing with very pretty fruit. This is a very pretty wine and I wish I could afford it.

-O-

Otto: Thank you for your notes as I am a huge Margaux fan.
A newspaper here in DC (The Examiner) had an article on the 2004s today. The author called '04 a 'sandwich' vintage as it was sandwiched between the very nice years of '03 and the '05. The article clearly conveyed the author's opinion that the Ch. Margaux was the best of the lot but at a slightly lower price the Palmer was the better wine from a QPR standpoint.
Thanks again.
JP

[David M. Bueker]

Inelegant extraction? Palmer is one of the few '04s I have tried. Atleast to my palate there is nothing inelegant about it. I do agree that the touch of green (tobacco leaf to me) is nice. I find it to be a wine that was picked properly ripe and has the stuffing to last for years and years, evolving into classic aged Bordeaux.

Otto - I'm just wondering why more extracted than you would like turns into a pity? This is a wine to age. It needs some stuffing to do that.

Inelegant extraction? [...] Otto - I'm just wondering why more extracted than you would like turns into a pity? This is a wine to age. It needs some stuffing to do that.

I meant that it wasn't light on its feet despite having nice acidity and freshness. It seemed a touch overdone. And I really mean only a touch - if I had 92€ I would immediately go out and buy one as it is a very good wine. That is also the "pity" - I would like this wine to have both the stuffing yet the light-on-its-feetness as the Ch. Margaux. But maybe this is the reason the Margaux is almost twice the price.

-O-

[David M. Bueker]

I would like this wine to have both the stuffing yet the light-on-its-feetness as the Ch. Margaux. But maybe this is the reason the Margaux is almost twice the price.

Indeed.