We started out well with a nice Champagne, from a house I normally find a bit oaky and not bright enough, but the Krug 1995 was fine. Sure it is oaky, but it is harmoniously so and I feel that it will integrate with time. It is bright and expressive with a lime marmalade nose, figs, flowers and even a touch of petrol! The mousse is utter perfection. The acidity is divinely high. Though the fruit is rather shy at the moment, but there is lots of it. The aftertaste is interminable and surprisingly mineral. I liked it. Not enough to pay the price it goes for, but still - it was a dashed fine drink.
Then the troubles started. We had 11 wines half blind with one fully blind joker inserted.
The first wine turned out the be a wine that I have loved in almost all vintages I've tried, the Grand Puy Lacoste 2003. This wine was a freak, however. The nose was totally charred and roasted, there was none of the elegance and typical Pauillac character I usually find in this wine. The palate was also roasted, a bit dirty tasting, with a harsh finish - as if they tried to acidify and got in miserably wrong. Weird wine. I'll pass.
The next wine was little better. The Haut-Brion 2003 was perhaps the greatest disappointment of all since it is one of the top end Bordeauxs that I honestly would like to buy if I had the money. But this vintage I will pass. The nose is sickeningly sweet strawberry jam. Coupled with toasty oak, it makes for a decidedly unpleasant brew. The palate was quite a bit better: light (compared to the others), sweetly fruity, but not as badly roasted, almost flabby but not quite crossing that border. Unfortunately the noticable alcohol marred the otherwise fresh tasting finish. I'll pass.
Ch. L'Arrosée 2003 was even sweeter and more spoofulated smelling than the Haut-Brion! It was confected, chocolate ice-cream smelling, coconut juice. The palate was flabby, alcoholic, unbalanced, raisiny and utterly spoofulated. Not for me.
Malescot St-Exupery 2003 was an improvement upon the last, and is a genuinely well made wine - scent-wise anyway. It was a bit closed, but underneath it did have some nice Margaux-like red toned, sweet fruit, admirable depth, and though it was very oaky it wasn't vanillary. Unfortunately the charred character was noticable here also. The palate was rather light at first, but became harsh on the finish - as if they acidified and it went horribly wrong. I'll pass.
Greysac 2003 was at last a wine that smelled like honest left-bank Bordeaux: cassis, lead, savoury herbs, yet it also had fine fruit. The palate was sweet but well structured and fresh. Not a complex wine, but at least it smelled and tasted like what is expected from the area. I don't mind drinking this.
Bertineau St.-Vincent 2003 was confected, liqueur-like, too alcoholic, flabby, unpleasantly sweet and hot on the finish. I'll pass.
Latour-Martillac 2003 was very odd smelling: chemical, dirty, oaky, roasted and confected. The palate was weird: tart, light, sickeningly sweet, red toned, but with a fresh aftertaste. Not for me please.
Lagrange 2003 was like I remembered it to be from my previous experience with it: roasted, sweet, unharmonious with a chocolate ice-cream sweetness (I think last time I noted down banana-bread, but I guess what I have been after is a sickening sweetness). I'll still pass.
Clos de l'Oratoire 2003 was the biggest surprise of the evening. This is a wine I am seriously thinking of buying a bottle of. It is earthy, juicy, savoury with a fresh herbal lift - very open and complex and will seemingly develop well. The palate is rather low in acid like all, but is harmonious and retains a sense of freshness amidst all the copious fruit. The aftertaste is fresh. I thought this would have been the Haut-Brion as it is such an earthy and elegant (if that word can be used this year) style of wine. I am glad to say it is 10 times cheaper too!
d'Issan 2003 was a well made wine, but I just couldn't get past the roasted character of the fruit. It did have some true Margaux red-toned scents also, it was sweet but not confected. If I weren't so put off by the charred character, this would have been fine.
Dauzac 2003 was less to my taste: confected, espresso, roasted. The palate was light, juicy and sweet - too smooth. I'll pass.
The joker of the night was Faugères 2003 which in all honesty I found disgusting. The nose was port-like (and not even a good port at that) and blue toned and very simple and head-ache inducingly sweet. The palate was and acidless blob of smoothness and sweetness. The aftertaste burned more than whisky. Vile.
The dessert was a bit more in the right direction. Anselmann Huxelrebe Trockenbeerenauslese 1999 is not a good wine, but it was welcome after the previous freakish concoctions. It was very botrytised on the nose. The palate was very low in acid, had little freshness and there was no aftertaste at all.
At home with dinner I opened up Phélan-Ségur 1998. It's not a great wine, but it is after the Krug the best today. It smells like Claret. Yum. At last I'm smiling contentedly.
-O-