TN: 3 Syrah/Shiraz 1997

Dinner with Christian and Remo on Monday night. Served these blind but not double blind, needless to say, they had no problem guessing which is which.

Chapoutier Ermitage Le Pavillon 1997
Healthy purple-ruby-black. Soft multiple types of pepper, fresh meat as well as cured, spices, fresh prune, cherry, soft red beet, forest berries, blackberry, minerals. Sound alcohol. Relatively tight tannin, faintly grainy, not noticeably oak-induced, and yet, sweet pink marzipan flavoured. Nice metal note to the acidity. Surprisingly fresh, very racy. Balanced. Elegant, but I could hardly believe it when Remo called it light. Sweeter and fruitier with airing. Holding up much better with airing after 12 hours in the open bottle than the Chave, fuller-bodied, ageworthier, but also a bit warmer with alcohol. Nice for the vintage, but I had expected this to be as good or better than the (in hindsight more structured and intense, if less fruity-youthful, round and smooth) 1994. Rating: 93+/94

Jean-Louis Chave Hermitage 1997
Medium ruby-black, soft orange at the rim. Sweet undergrowth and tree bark, wet forest floor shortly after the rain. Horsey sweat. A touch of ginger to softer, initially sweeter, more Burgundian/expressive red fruit subtlety. Very complex, the most character of the three, as Remo noted. Top notes of olive and curry spice mix, faint hazelnut. Rustier iron to the minerality. Tea-like tannin. The most finesseful and longest on the finish and aftertaste. As much as I have always liked the 1997, but exceptionally for Chave, it was at its finest in its approachable youth. Seemingly bound to become sweatier and drier with bottle age, it should still continue to age well enough in bottle, most likely keep for many more years but I do not believe it will improve. The most oxidized of the three after 12 hours in the open bottle (which I kept in the cool cellar over night), a bit disappointingly so, but the terroir expression remained the most impressive. Rating: 93-

Jasper Hill Shiraz Heathcote Georgia's Paddock 1997
A wine I had not had in ten years, and whose artificial acidity spike I have always disliked, but of which I was recently told it was drinking well now. I guess it is, still youthful yet with minor tertiary characteristics. Nearly opaque plummy ruby-black the colour alone would have given away its provenance. Minor CO2 bubbles and flavour, which took some time to blow off. The jammy-sweet fruit came across as rubbery-petrolly and slightly heavy in direct comparison to the Northern Rhnes. Attractive, lightly gamy beef top note. Softly dark chocolatey tannin, not too oaky. The artificial-flavoured acidity is not awful, but remains a problem Christian, who initially liked this wine best of the three became increasingly convinced, about when he was halfway through his second glass, it would cause an upset stomach if he drank any more of it. The 15.5% alcohol adds to the stodginess. While I had to save a glass each of the two Northern Rhnes so I could retaste them the following day, we hardly finished half of the bottle of the Georgias Paddock. It showed rather better after 12 hours in the open bottle, with more integrated sweetness, and most of the CO2 blown off. When I poured the remaining small samples to Patrick, Eddie and Ralph 24 hours after the cork was pulled: glyceric, lightly viscous sweet chestnut, dark chocolate, heavy (violet?) florality and grape peel, and a top note of cherry coke (verging on artificial, but adding a little freshness to the slight overall heavy-handedness). Nutmeg and cinnamon oak. A bit one-dimensional and short, Patrick said, who liked the wines fruit. Rating: 90-/89(-?)

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

J'ai gch vingt ans de mes plus belles annes au billard. Si c'tait refaire, je recommencerais. Roger Conti
 
Interesting notes, David. Any thoughts about the differences in wine making/terroir which could have led to the different results in those 2 Rhones?

Re - OZ: I also find that several hrs (or overnight) aeration time tends to bring better integration with most shiraz that have a bit of age on them....and, to me, that often includes more pleasurable, rounded acidity. (Speaking mainly of Barossa and McLaren Vale here.) Must admit that because of the usually overblown fakey fruit, chocolate, etc. I've found in so many, there are very few shiraz's from this region that I can tolerate anymore. (Exception: Clarendon Hills '97 Piggott Range Syrah is one I wish I had a whole lot more of.) And I've lost the will and interest to start over researching cooler climate OZ versions.

PS - Minor C02 seems unusual....it's not a sign of refermentation?
 
originally posted by Joel Stewart:
Interesting notes, David. Any thoughts about the differences in wine making/terroir which could have led to the different results in those 2 Rhones?

The Chave is a blend of fruit from parcels in several Hermitage vineyards, whereas the Pavillon is a single-vineyard bottling (Pavillon is a parcel in the Les Bessards cru, one of the top-rated sites - Chave usually includes some Les Bessards fruit, too). Both wines have recognizable terroir expression year after year, so both producers must be doing something right, but it's true that Chapoutier has a more modern style. Early vintages could be reductive, which I do not think they still are, but it remains a less oxidative style for sure. I do not know enough about the Chapoutier style (admittedly because for many years, I couldn't really warm up to the style, and didn't care to know), so cannot really compare, but it seems to me it has improved in recent years (the wines have elegance and finesse in addition to power, and appear to age very well, if almost invariably slowly). Perhaps the most important aspect to know about Chapoutier is that the wines tend to be squeaky-clean and pure, and very polished - not what old-time Rhne lovers like me grew up with. The Chave style appears to have changed only slightly in the direction of more fruit-forward wines (with greater purity and less hard tannin) that in general have a primary phase in which it at least makes sense to pull a cork in most vintages - hard to tell if modern Chave Hermitage is going to age very differently, though.

Not sure if this is very helpful? I'm sure what transpires from my notes in recent years is that while I've always been a Chave fan, my perspective on the Chapoutier single vineyard selections has been changing somewhat from respect to appreciation.

originally posted by Joel Stewart:
Re - OZ: I also find that several hrs (or overnight) aeration time tends to bring better integration with most shiraz that have a bit of age on them....and, to me, that often includes more pleasurable, rounded acidity. (Speaking mainly of Barossa and McLaren Vale here.) Must admit that because of the usually overblown fakey fruit, chocolate, etc. I've found in so many, there are very few shiraz's from this region that I can tolerate anymore. (Exception: Clarendon Hills '97 Piggott Range Syrah is one I wish I had a whole lot more of.) And I've lost the will and interest to start over researching cooler climate OZ versions.

The 1997 Clarendon Hills come up in discussions in our "winelovers' cycle" again and again (such as at Victor's housewarming party a couple of weeks ago) as one of the (probaby the) most "European-/Rhne-styled" portfolio(s) of any Australian producer ever. I tend not to mention my own buying habits in my tasting notes too often (= "to each his/her own taste"), but you're really referring to why I have given up on so many wines. Jasper Hill's 1997s, albeit relatively speaking a favourite Aussie producer at the time (I much prefer their rare Emily's Paddock Cabernet Franc/Shiraz blend, however), whose latest release we get to taste at a trade tasting every year (still by far my favourite way of making buying decisions), was in fact the last vintage I bought. The wines have become bigger, but certainly not more digestible over the years.

originally posted by Joel Stewart:
PS - Minor C02 seems unusual....it's not a sign of refermentation?

Been wondering about the same, especially given a bottle of 1996 Armagh not long ago that I'm still convinced had refermented in bottle. It's utterly shocking that this should be possible with wine stored as coolly as the Jasper Hill was (not entirely sure about the undrinkable Armagh). These wines do tend to be sugary, no doubt about that - whereas more recent vintages may be drier (safer?), they're even higher in alcohol. Can't say one makes me happier than the other.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

J'ai gch vingt ans de mes plus belles annes au billard. Si c'tait refaire, je recommencerais. Roger Conti
 
Back
Top