WTN: Musarathon

The place for all things wine, focused on serious wine discussions.

Moderators: Jenise, David M. Bueker, Robin Garr

WTN: Musarathon

Postby Otto » Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:09 am

Image

Finally a Musarathon was arranged in Finland! So of course I had to attend - it has been almost a year since my last Musarathon so it was high time for one more. These were decanted c.6 hours before the tasting started.

Chateau Musar Blanc
2005 - This was a lovely but very young example of white Musar. It starts out quite savoury in style with citrus fruit aromas. But it fleshes out with air becomes typically waxy, honeyed and floral. White Musar isn't really a high-acid wine but this year seems to have a nice relative lightness to it and a slightly higher acidity than usual. I must find more.
2003 - Oxidized. More so than it should be. Apparently some signs of seepage. The palate is more alive than the scent, but still, it is only a shadow of what it should be.
1999 - Lovely oxidative style, honeyed and waxy; rich, almost oily palate, though with a nice kick of acidity on the finish. Though rich, it is also lively and refreshing rather than cloying. Great stuff, but still young.

Chateau Musar Rosé
2008 - A painfully young rosé: it smells of watermelon. It is nicely structured and I think it will turn out really nice with a few more years.
2006 - An earthy style of Musar rosé; nice richness but that is countered by tannic grip. Nice!
2004 - Again a watermelon aroma; rich but racy, classic rosé. Nice!

Chateau Musar Rouge
2005 - A strange Musar in that the Cabernet lift is obvious! Usually I don't notice any one grape dominating the aroma, but here there is an almost minty freshness to the aroma. Wonderful palate, relatively high acid, wonderful sunny fruit, interminable finish. It's not a funky wine for Musar, but it is lovely.
2004 - A curiously tame bottle: sweet and ripe and sunny fruit but lacking all the nasty goodies that Musar is known for; lively despite the rich fruit. Tame, but I still liked it.
2003 - Now here we have a classic Musar in all its funky glory: I needed to glance at my shoes to see if I had stepped in something canine. I hadn't. Lovely stuff.
2002 - The long decanted bottle was somehow off. Most didn't think it corked, but it was obviously not what it should have been. The replacement, undecanted, was another tame and clean smelling Musar but had real bite and intensity on the palate. Great stuff though it desperately needed air (and, of course, age).
2001 - Great showing of this vintage: nice smelly aromas; rich, ripe and deliciously acidic; interminable. Classic style.
2000 - Aromatically and on the palate very similar to the 2001 except just not as good or intense. The 2001's little brother.
1999 - Corked.
1998 - Quite a bit like the 2000 in being a relatively weak wine but still showing all the classic Musar qualities.
1997 - Corked.
1989 - Absolutely magnificent: good, classic dirtiness coupled with breathtaking, crunchy but sunny fruit. Wonderful intensity and length. Still young.
I don't drink wine because of religious reasons ... only for other reasons.
User avatar
Otto
Musaroholic
 
Posts: 4058
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:07 pm
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Return to The Wine Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Mark Lipton, Patrick Martin and 9 guests