After being shut down at Quince in our bid to bring in three Burgs, we made our way to the relatively new restaurant Nua in North Beach for a red Burgundy and whatever dinner with the usual suspects.
First up was a 2006 Vacheron Sancerre, extremely young and primary, but literally bursting with intense mineral and citrus flavors, a great way to get those taste receptors firing on full power. I am not sure this will ever develop in to a particularly complex wine, but I imagine it should drink very well for quite some years.
Next up was supposed to be a 2004 Saint Romain from Domaine Germain Pere et Fils on the recommendation of Sharon Bowman, but they had just sold out the day before. So we opted for a 2005 Weingut Bründlmayer Riesling Zöbinger Heiligenstein, which I thought was drinking beautifully already, with nicely balanced soft fruit and acidity on the palate and a delicately nuanced floral nose. As a follow-on to the brisk acidity of the Sancerre, this provided a nice transition to the more complex aged red Burgundies that came up next.
Next up was the 1990 Nuits St Georges shootout. Paired against the 1990 Faiveley Nuits St. Georges les Chaignots was an Ambroise Nuits St. Georges les Vaucrains. The Faiveley was showing very well, better in my opinion than a Hospice de Nuits NSG les St Georges Cuvee G. Faiveley from a couple of nights before. On the nose, notes of soy and mushroom, with delicate red berry aromas and a touch of saddle leather. A touch of oxidation seemed to lurk there, but never intensified, and the bottle showed as well with the last drop as it did at the beginning. Deeper, more powerful on the palate, with a higher level of tannin and minerality as well, was the 1990 Ambroise Nuits St Georges les Vaucrains. Very fresh and pure red berry aromas on the nose, just slightly blacker in character than the Chaignots, this just kept getting stronger and stronger with time in the glass. This should continue to improve with bottle age.
We also included a 1985 L. Latour Mazis-Chambertin, but it was oxidized, the red fruit on the palate seriously faded. A second bottle with the same provenance showed exactly the same oxidation, leading us to the following alert:
--------------------> CONSUMER ALERT <---------------------
Better pass on these...
As a substitute, we ordered a 2001 Fornacina Brunello di Montalcino off the list. Maybe not much of a match for the older Burgundies we were drinking, still this was showing quite well, with impressive depth and structure on the palate and surprisingly expressive nose of violets.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Tasting at Nua
A group of six convened at Nua Restaurant in the North Beach section of San Francisco to sample various Burgundies. The wine service was spectacular for our group, and was matched by some top-notch cuisine that paired very nicely with the older and younger Burgundy fare being tasted.
First up were two white Burgundies that did nothing to allay my fears that I am becoming too uncritical with age. Both beautiful wines in my opinion, but quite different in style. The 2000 R&V Dauvissat Chablis la Forest was pale straw yellow in color, with a surprisingly delicate nose of quinine, finely comminuted rock dust, and a touch of white flower just beginning to emerge. The quinine was there on the palate as well (got my malaria treatment), merging nicely with the delicate mineral character on the finish. Not a blockbuster wine, in fact quite feminine and elegant in style, I thought this was great. The second bottle was the more full bodied 1999 Remi Jobard Meursault les Genevrières, distinctly darker in color than the Dauvissat Chablis, and with intense mid-palate flavors of citrus and apples lifted by the racy acidity. Faint tropical fruit notes show on the aromatic finish, along with an oxidative note (which nobody else at the table commented on) that remained in the background. Absolutely delicious wine. Tough to choose between these two wines (if you had to), both performing very nicely in their own different styles.
Next up were the reds, including a 1996 Arlaud Clos de la Roche Cuvée Unique, which started out spectacularly with a cascading nose of ripe red fruit. The palate was a bit less impressive, showing the slightly excessive acidity and austerity of some of the 1996s. Most also thought this wine did not hold up so well with time in the glass, as the ripe red fruit on the nose faded and the oak treatment and volatility of the wine moved to the foreground. By the end of the glass, I thought the oak treatment was excessive and the wine suffered as a result.
Next up were three Clos Vougeots: the 1990 and 1993 Anne Gros Clos Vougeot and the 1998 V. Girardin Clos Vougeot. The 1990 Anne Gros Clos Vougeot le Grand Monpertui showed an expressive but slightly volatile nose dominated by dark fruit and minerals. On the palate, the dark fruit presents itself in a slightly acidic, austere package that is not exactly what I expected given the general characteristics of the vintage. This should improve with further bottle aging, but the wine suffers a bit in comparison to the depth and roundness one finds in the 1993 Anne Gros Clos Vougeot le Grand Monpertui, the WOTN for most (maybe all) of the tasters present. Here we find another step up in both concentration and balance, with smoky spice notes, forest floor, and dark chocolate emerging on the slightly reserved but very pure nose dominated by black fruit. This wine held up beautifully with time in the glass, but really needs another five years or so to develop more fully. But the depth and incipient complexity are all there. Great stuff! Less impressive to my mind was the 1998 Girardin Clos Vougeot, which showed a sort of rough, grainy texture when first tasted, almost suggesting that it had not yet worked off all of its CO2. This black fruit-dominated wine improved with time in the glass as the rough edges faded (due to the loss of CO2?), but the mid-palate depth and balance was simply not there IMO, although some of the tasters ranked this as their 2nd wine of the night. Still, this might improve substantially with some additional age, so maybe final judgment should be reserved.
Last up among the red Burgundies was a 1990 Hospice de Nuits Nuits St. Georges les St Georges Cuvée Faiveley. We never did figure out whether this was really a Domaine wine, or negociant, but it showed quite well, with an impressive, very pure nose of red and black fruit and the most tannic profile of any of the wines we tasted. The concentration on the palate was noteworthy, but in a distinctly different style from the almost creamy, smoky 1993 Gros Clos Vougeot. With the Faiveley NSG les St Georges, the black and red fruit presents itself in an almost stern if not quite austere style, and in the end one has the sense of a sort of schoolmasterly style of wine that delivers the goods in a less than easy, forgiving fashion. Did this need more bottle age to show its stuff, or is it really just a mid-level wine?
First up were two white Burgundies that did nothing to allay my fears that I am becoming too uncritical with age. Both beautiful wines in my opinion, but quite different in style. The 2000 R&V Dauvissat Chablis la Forest was pale straw yellow in color, with a surprisingly delicate nose of quinine, finely comminuted rock dust, and a touch of white flower just beginning to emerge. The quinine was there on the palate as well (got my malaria treatment), merging nicely with the delicate mineral character on the finish. Not a blockbuster wine, in fact quite feminine and elegant in style, I thought this was great. The second bottle was the more full bodied 1999 Remi Jobard Meursault les Genevrières, distinctly darker in color than the Dauvissat Chablis, and with intense mid-palate flavors of citrus and apples lifted by the racy acidity. Faint tropical fruit notes show on the aromatic finish, along with an oxidative note (which nobody else at the table commented on) that remained in the background. Absolutely delicious wine. Tough to choose between these two wines (if you had to), both performing very nicely in their own different styles.
Next up were the reds, including a 1996 Arlaud Clos de la Roche Cuvée Unique, which started out spectacularly with a cascading nose of ripe red fruit. The palate was a bit less impressive, showing the slightly excessive acidity and austerity of some of the 1996s. Most also thought this wine did not hold up so well with time in the glass, as the ripe red fruit on the nose faded and the oak treatment and volatility of the wine moved to the foreground. By the end of the glass, I thought the oak treatment was excessive and the wine suffered as a result.
Next up were three Clos Vougeots: the 1990 and 1993 Anne Gros Clos Vougeot and the 1998 V. Girardin Clos Vougeot. The 1990 Anne Gros Clos Vougeot le Grand Monpertui showed an expressive but slightly volatile nose dominated by dark fruit and minerals. On the palate, the dark fruit presents itself in a slightly acidic, austere package that is not exactly what I expected given the general characteristics of the vintage. This should improve with further bottle aging, but the wine suffers a bit in comparison to the depth and roundness one finds in the 1993 Anne Gros Clos Vougeot le Grand Monpertui, the WOTN for most (maybe all) of the tasters present. Here we find another step up in both concentration and balance, with smoky spice notes, forest floor, and dark chocolate emerging on the slightly reserved but very pure nose dominated by black fruit. This wine held up beautifully with time in the glass, but really needs another five years or so to develop more fully. But the depth and incipient complexity are all there. Great stuff! Less impressive to my mind was the 1998 Girardin Clos Vougeot, which showed a sort of rough, grainy texture when first tasted, almost suggesting that it had not yet worked off all of its CO2. This black fruit-dominated wine improved with time in the glass as the rough edges faded (due to the loss of CO2?), but the mid-palate depth and balance was simply not there IMO, although some of the tasters ranked this as their 2nd wine of the night. Still, this might improve substantially with some additional age, so maybe final judgment should be reserved.
Last up among the red Burgundies was a 1990 Hospice de Nuits Nuits St. Georges les St Georges Cuvée Faiveley. We never did figure out whether this was really a Domaine wine, or negociant, but it showed quite well, with an impressive, very pure nose of red and black fruit and the most tannic profile of any of the wines we tasted. The concentration on the palate was noteworthy, but in a distinctly different style from the almost creamy, smoky 1993 Gros Clos Vougeot. With the Faiveley NSG les St Georges, the black and red fruit presents itself in an almost stern if not quite austere style, and in the end one has the sense of a sort of schoolmasterly style of wine that delivers the goods in a less than easy, forgiving fashion. Did this need more bottle age to show its stuff, or is it really just a mid-level wine?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)