Jenise wrote:Montrose? I still think so, but one has to qualify such remarks these days. So I'd say I thought so as of the 90 vintage, the last one I drank but for the '97 which was a bit too tired to judge by.
Are you saying you know of changes in style/management/direction?
Otto Nieminen wrote:Roederer Cristal 1999 12% c.150 euros
Light colour. Nice deep nose of ripe green apple, savoury yet fruity. The mousse is perfect - really! Very sweet fruit, but quite nice acidity as well. Give it a bit more age and it might come close to being of such quality as befits the price. (= Joke.) Truly, this is a very nice, elegant Champ.
Sam Platt wrote:Paul, I have been looking for a reason, other than the fact that I can't afford it, to avoid Cristal and now you've given me one. Why I wouldn't drink that stuff even if I could afford to... probably. Many thanks!
Jenise wrote:Otto, when did you have your '97?
Otto Nieminen wrote:I don't know of any changes in style or anything else, and I haven't tasted any older vintages, but some recent tastes (1997, 1999, 2000, 2001) have all tasted spoofulated to me.
Dale Williams wrote:Hmmmm, can't speak for the gazillion-point freakvintage 2003, but I think I tasted the 1999-2002 Montroses near release, and all seemed fairly standard young Bordeaux (in typical backwards St Estephe style) profile to me. Even the 1999 needs time. What young Bordeaux do you NOT find spoofulated, just to see what we're comparing to?
Dale Williams wrote:Ok, get on a plane. We're going to have to share some Bordeaux together to see what the hell we're talking about. I don't find Montrose more oaky than recent Gruauds (there I'm not a fan- I love old Gruaud, but after '89 not much that really excited me, though I thought '00 & '01 were returns to form) or L-Bartons (big fan) - I'd agree there's probably little new oak showing on even young VCCs, less than young Montrose. And I'd say Montrose is probably LESS oaky than Haut-Brion or LMHB, which I'm pretty certain use 100% new. To me oak is just part of young classified Bdx- the big guys have always used a lot. It's not the amount of oak per se that bothers me a bit about some of the newer wines - it's more the superlowacid/high Ph and superripeness that gets me. Wines I like a lot like the '88 LMHB, '89 Haut-Brion, '90 Poyferre, '92 LLC , '94 Trotanoy, etc all pretty much showed a lot of oak when young.
Dale Williams wrote:But Otto don't you think that cedary oak in particular is a sign of some bottle time? I've found plenty of cedar in the '94 Leo-Poyferre in the last year, but it was definitely a "toastiness" on release.
I agree there are different forms of oakiness - the Montrose doesn't bother me, but the heavy-char/malo in barrel of say Monbousquet can be distracting/offputting. But of course discussing different vintages tasted at different times can make agreement or disagreement a little pointless. So you just have to come to NY for an offline.
It seems less likely I'll get to Finland (though Betsy played there years ago and loved it). But who knows.
Enjoy your notes, as always.
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Rahsaan and 8 guests