2009 Lapierre Morgon - anyone?

I'm surprised at the above double-barreled parsing of Foillard as superior to Lapierre. They have branded my taste bud memories like Rosenberg & Iceberg, i.e., essentially indistinguishable. But I disprespect you guys' opinion too much to not take it into account, so I will.
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
originally posted by .sasha:
true, but this remark was of a very specific nature
Click to expand...

True. Are you wary of Vissoux in 2009? They are on my 'buy' list, too.
Click to expand...
I can't believe he hasn't gotten back to us, it's only 4 am there. Probably just finishing up his nightcap or something.
 
originally posted by Florida Jim:
originally posted by Tom Glasgow:
originally posted by .sasha:
originally posted by Florida Jim:
Vissoux, Vissoux, Vissoux, not necessarily in that order.
Click to expand...

Jim, do not buy the 09s untasted though.
Click to expand...
More insight please.
Click to expand...

Ditto?
Best, Jim
Click to expand...

I think I've spoken to you about this, not in 2009, but in other similar circumstances.

.sasha is my aborted twin fetus.
 
i've not sampled them yet, but tasters far more reliable than I have questioned continuity of style in 09, citing some fairly densely extracted stuff

you may still love them; i'm just saying you may want to taste before making an investment

there is, after all, plenty to choose from
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Bubonic morcellationI'm surprised at the above double-barreled parsing of Foillard as superior to Lapierre. They have branded my taste bud memories like Rosenberg & Iceberg, i.e., essentially indistinguishable. But I disprespect you guys' opinion too much to not take it into account, so I will.
Click to expand...
I lean pretty strongly in the Foillard direction myself on an absolute basis. It gets closer when you take price into account.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
I'm surprised at the above double-barreled parsing of Foillard as superior to Lapierre. They have branded my taste bud memories like Rosenberg & Iceberg, i.e., essentially indistinguishable.
Click to expand...
Hey, who you callin' iceberg?

originally posted by SFJoe:
I lean pretty strongly in the Foillard direction myself on an absolute basis. It gets closer when you take price into account.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It sucks that Foillard is priced right.

originally posted by Jay:
Fucking noobs.

1. Coudert
2. Brun
3. Tete
3.14 Foillard
Click to expand...

Surprised to see Tte so high. When they're good, they're good; but I've had too many underwhelming bottles.

I think Brun and Vissoux need a special category for the best basic Beaujolais. I wouldn't put either in the top three in Joe's absolutist sense, but I drink more of them than anything else.
 
originally posted by Cliff:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
I'm surprised at the above double-barreled parsing of Foillard as superior to Lapierre. They have branded my taste bud memories like Rosenberg & Iceberg, i.e., essentially indistinguishable.
Click to expand...
Hey, who you callin' iceberg?

originally posted by SFJoe:
I lean pretty strongly in the Foillard direction myself on an absolute basis. It gets closer when you take price into account.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It sucks that Foillard is priced right.

originally posted by Jay:
Fucking noobs.

1. Coudert
2. Brun
3. Tete
3.14 Foillard
Click to expand...

Surprised to see Tte so high. When they're good, they're good; but I've had too many underwhelming bottles.

I think Brun and Vissoux need a special category for the best basic Beaujolais. I wouldn't put either in the top three in Joe's absolutist sense, but I drink more of them than anything else.
Click to expand...

True - I was basing my list entirely on my buying patterns. And in case it isn't obvious Foillard is not intended to be in last place here :)
 
Very yummy.

09 Brun Morgon - much the same but a little less sauvage.

Both very young but hard to resist drinking now.
 
originally posted by Dan McQ:
09 LapierreVery yummy.

09 Brun Morgon - much the same but a little less sauvage.

Both very young but hard to resist drinking now.
Click to expand...

I had the 09 Lapierre last night and thought it was certainly very delicious but for my tastes it will be easy to resist opening more bottles at home now. It just seemed so primary and while I could sense underneath the deep flavors and textures I enjoy from Lapierre, I can imagine they will only become more apparent with time.
 
What is the seeming hang up with a wine being one-dimensional? If the dimension is fucking out of sight who minds the the other dimensions? I mean, not every wine is mean to be a flipping Icosahedron. What's wrong with a nifty little square from time to time? I think often the charm of Beaujolais is the fact that it can deliver primary aromas and flavors with a precision that's completely satisfying and complete.

What gives?
 
Fine point, Scott.

I think the comparison of Foillard to Descombes VV in Morgon at least is more illuminating than the Foillard/LaPierre comparison. The most interesting feature of both to me when they're on is a certain sort of palate sap, surrounded in the Foillard by more well-balanced and beautiful fruit and in the Descombes by more meat and herbs. Whereas I don't often find this sap in Lapierre; the really good bottles of Lapierre's ordinary Morgon seem to me to be most defined by superhumanly beaufiul perfume - good bottles are among the best smelling wines I know.

In other words I guess I buy the wines for different things.
 
I don't think of structure when I think of Lapierre. It's already unified...for better or worse. Lapierre makes textured wines. Baroque, if you come from certain circles.
 
In the cru bottlings, I've come to expect more than simple wine from a good producer. Simplicity in the Nouveau or Villages from the same producer can be the sought virtue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top