2011 was a tough harvest in the Nantais. If you didn’t have Eben Lillie on your team you were pretty much sunk. Well, maybe not as bad as all that, but good growers who hand harvest had to discard 20-30% or more of their crops. If you can view the Chambers St. Wines facebook page, you can see some of Eben’s harvest pix and descriptions. At Pepiere, they had to do a substantial selection, but they harvested clean grapes. I can’t imagine how machine harvesters did. Luneau reported discarding 30% to gray rot.
We tasted at Luneau in their large, clean cellars. They smile a lot, those guys. Anyhow, the 2011 Pierre de la Grange VV was clean and open, without rot flavors. It had good acidity, but the unusually high fruitiness led to speculation in some circles that it might have been inoculated with yeast. This was denied by the young winemaker. If one were ever tempted to add SO2 to kill off indigenous microbes and inoculate with safe yeasts, this would be the sort of vintage for it. The 2011 Pierres Blanches is from a site with sand over schist, it’s lightly mineral, with a good crisp finish, totally OK. Clos des Allees (a VV site from schist) is always a sentimental favorite of mine, and it’s good in 2011, pretty classic. Good clean mineral nose, a medium finish with clean mineral acidity. The Terre de Pierre “Butte de la Roche” is from the serpentine hill described in previous reports. We visited it this year; it is a remarkable site above the seasonal marshes and bird sanctuary. It’s amazingly rocky. The 2011 was in an awkward state, just racked and cloudy. I’d reserve judgment. The L d’Or is a pretty classic version of this site over blonde granite (different from the other granites at Pepiere). It’s 12.2% and 4.1 g TA. I’m a bit puzzled why L d’Or always comes in with 20% less TA than Marc’s wines, for instance, I don’t fully get it. Something about the terroir. The 2011 is not the deepest or longest vintage, but it should put on more weight with more time in cuve.
The 2010 Terre de Pierre has a bit of color and also a bit of reduction. I found it to be in a slightly funny place right now, with almost a perception of sweetness on the finish, but it has good interest and complexity even if it is slightly plush for me. The Cru Communal 2010 Excelsior Clos des Noelles (a mica schist site, and they aren’t kidding about the mica) has been a year and a half on its lees and is developing a fair bit of richness and a leesy nose. It will have a long future, but maybe not at my house. The 2009 of the same has considerable continuity, but it’s significantly moreish. Deeper, longer, richer, a bit plush. They will bottle it in the spring, considering 30 months on the lees adequate.
We tasted some wines from bottle at their dinner. The 2010 Folle Blanche (=gros plant) was as good a version as I’ve had (not so many), simple, lean, tasty. I probably won’t buy it in NYC. The 2010 Pierre de la Grange has a nice nose and is a totally decent middle of the road Muscadet. The 2010 Clos des Allees has a great nose of rocks and a few lonely flowers, and great balance among mineral, acid, and fruit components. Lovely. The 2010 Pierres Blanches is richer but less mineral than the Allees. The 2009 from the serpentine butte is quite rich, but a funny mineral note sneaks in on the midpalate. Actually, it hits my tongue in the middle. An odd sensation. My note on 2010 L d’Or says, “now we’re talking.” Great granite nose, wonderful minerality, brilliant flavors. This will age for the long term, and is delicious now. The 2009 L d’Or was a good choice with the scallops (& roe) in beurre blanc; the richness of the riper wine was a good match. I’d probably use the 2010 more often at my table. The richness of the 2005 L d’Or crowds the minerality without totally overcoming it. It’s starting to get some complexity of age, but I prefer leaner years. The ’99 L d’Or is for me a more harmonious marriage of richness and minerals, a bit of celery in the nose, good long finish, aging well but zero rush to drink. 2007 Excelsior/Noelles is also the ticket for me, quite leesy now, but still rocky with good acidity and scrumptious umami. The 2006 is a bit soft by comparison, though still good. The 2003 has a curious toasty caramel nose, and roasted-skin melon phenolics substitute for some of the missing acidity. A noble effort, but I won’t be a buyer.
If you find yourself in that neighborhood, best to stay away from the Hotel La Louee on Rue Jean Mermoz. The walls are tissue-paper thin, the rooms are tiny, showers smaller still, and the wifi lets you down during your midnight work calls.
It’s always a joy and a delight to visit Genevieve and Marc Ollivier at Pepiere. Their partner Remi is taking a larger public role, though I explained to Marc that he should not plan on retirement. We had a good tour of the vines. You can always spot Marc’s patches, since he uses a higher pair of wires to bring the foliage up. He and the Luneau are almost the only ones that do this.
We tasted in the cellar. The Pepie Bulles is melon with some chardonnay and has less rs than last year. It’s only 3.5 atm, a Muscadet version of a Cerdon de Bugey, if you like. It’s open, fruity, light, and keeps its acid, having no MLF. We tasted through quite a few tank samples, but I’ll just give you broader impressions, since they will be blended. The regular Pepiere 2011 has good shell and fruit on the nose. It’s definitely a leaner vintage, but it’s good and clean. It certainly has the brine back. Reminds a bit of ’07 or ’01. Certainly crisper than ’09 or ’10. The two cuves of Clos des Briords were dramatically different. The younger vines came in at 11.8, with 5.8 TA, and great classic CdB. The second cuve, from the oldest vines was still fermenting into late December (vignerons almost everywhere in France reported fast, easy fermentations in this vintage), and it finished with a touch of rs. I explained to Marc that an accident like this had been the secret of Jess Jackson’s success, he could step up and make the big bucks, and that when he bought his second plane he could remember my words. He backed slowly away from me as I spoke, then broke and ran. He’ll assemble the two cuves and let them settle down, so the bottled version will likely be quite different. Marc and Remi feel that Gras Mouton moves faster and farther in cuve than their other wines and shows less typically early, so they prefer not to show it at this point. There may be a Granite de Clisson (just “Clisson” now, the AOC folks having decreed that giving the actual geology might be too informative to consumers) in 2011, he’s not sure, but the yields in Chateau Thébaud were too low to bottle it separately.
From bottle, the 2010 Pepiere is just great. It’s rounder than the 2011, but is a different beast than any cask sample. Classic vintage of the regular, much to my taste. The 2010 Briords is also quite classic. Marc is pleased with it. The Gras Moutons (but NOT “Grands”!) is naturally rounder and richer, given the site. My heart is really given to Marc’s granite wines, but this is worthy stuff. There is a Clisson in 2010, to be bottled late this year. The extra time on the lees have given it more glutamate-umami and more yeasty flavors. It’s a classic and I will be a buyer. There are now 10 winemakers making Clisson, Marc has 2.5 of the ~20 ha. Chateau Thébaud is smaller. All of Marc’s Pepiere could be Clisson, geologically, so in an imagined great vintage of the future there could be 4 or 4.5 ha going into the late wine. But he probably won’t—it is considerably more work in the vineyard and he wants to have a decent quantity of the regular. He probably would also prefer not to wait 3 years after harvest for an income, I’m thinking. These are the problems when you cultivate vast estates of more than 2 ha. Anyhow, the 2009 Clisson clocks in at the same big 13.2% as the 2010, but it is crazy rich and ripe. I find it slightly soft and will probably purchase only in subcase quantities. The Chateau Thébaud will be bottled in the spring (it is the granite typical of Briords, rather than the estate Pepiere lower down the hill toward the Maine. This 2009 has more minerality than the Clisson, and Marc wants it to have 30 months on the lees, but figured 24 was enough for the Clisson. Unusually, there is a “3” in 2009. They are so-designated because they get 36 months on the lees. These grapes are from both Clisson and Thébaud, and the wine is kind of crazy rich. I will certainly put a few away to see what becomes of them. At this point, I had to leave the excellent party to take a conference call that turned out to run for 2 hours, enough that I missed the vertical of older wines. You’ll have to refer to my older notes. But anyone who was there, how is ’97 doing?
I tasted 2011s and 2010s with Bossard, or rather I tried the 2011s at Bossard’s table at the Renaissance, and the 2010s with his newish (2-3 years) partner Fred. Fred’s card is quite something:
He seems to be a bit more commercially-minded than Bossard, to put it mildly, but he is a genial guy. I tasted their excellent 2010s with him. The Domaine bottling is slightly grassy, but good solid stuff. The ’10 Gneiss is round and long, but the finish is more linear to me. This now gets 12 months on the lees, it used to be 9. The Granite now gets 13 months vs. 10, it has broader shoulders and is quite powerful. Considerably more structure than the ’09. Fred seems to be the force behind their new wine, ‘Taurus’. It is from both orthogneiss and granite, and sees 10 months in vat followed by 6 months in 4-5 year old barrels. It is the best bottle of Muscadet done in wood that I’ve had, though in general I am not much for the concept. It isn’t vulgarly woody, unlike say the old Batard versions. You could taste the lees, of course, and also a bit of wood on the finish. I hate to be against progress and all, but I’m not sure that Muscadet needs important wines like this, when it could have delicious ones like the 2010 Granit. But maybe everyone wants all white wine to become something from the Cote d’Or in the end. Do they? Anyhow, the estate blog says that they had to ration Noma’s order, so I guess there will be some higher profile sales for them. Maybe it will age well. We’ll see. I wonder where it will be priced?
You can get a sense of the package here.
I tasted 2011s from Bossard and Landron, and they shared an odd note. These guys both hand harvest and did a major triage, so I hesitate to call it rot. I had meant to taste again with both of them to try to understand the wines better, but I didn’t get back. So maybe I can catch them again when the Renaissance show comes to NYC. I don’t offer notes at this point, sorry.
That’s it for the Muscadet.
We tasted at Luneau in their large, clean cellars. They smile a lot, those guys. Anyhow, the 2011 Pierre de la Grange VV was clean and open, without rot flavors. It had good acidity, but the unusually high fruitiness led to speculation in some circles that it might have been inoculated with yeast. This was denied by the young winemaker. If one were ever tempted to add SO2 to kill off indigenous microbes and inoculate with safe yeasts, this would be the sort of vintage for it. The 2011 Pierres Blanches is from a site with sand over schist, it’s lightly mineral, with a good crisp finish, totally OK. Clos des Allees (a VV site from schist) is always a sentimental favorite of mine, and it’s good in 2011, pretty classic. Good clean mineral nose, a medium finish with clean mineral acidity. The Terre de Pierre “Butte de la Roche” is from the serpentine hill described in previous reports. We visited it this year; it is a remarkable site above the seasonal marshes and bird sanctuary. It’s amazingly rocky. The 2011 was in an awkward state, just racked and cloudy. I’d reserve judgment. The L d’Or is a pretty classic version of this site over blonde granite (different from the other granites at Pepiere). It’s 12.2% and 4.1 g TA. I’m a bit puzzled why L d’Or always comes in with 20% less TA than Marc’s wines, for instance, I don’t fully get it. Something about the terroir. The 2011 is not the deepest or longest vintage, but it should put on more weight with more time in cuve.
The 2010 Terre de Pierre has a bit of color and also a bit of reduction. I found it to be in a slightly funny place right now, with almost a perception of sweetness on the finish, but it has good interest and complexity even if it is slightly plush for me. The Cru Communal 2010 Excelsior Clos des Noelles (a mica schist site, and they aren’t kidding about the mica) has been a year and a half on its lees and is developing a fair bit of richness and a leesy nose. It will have a long future, but maybe not at my house. The 2009 of the same has considerable continuity, but it’s significantly moreish. Deeper, longer, richer, a bit plush. They will bottle it in the spring, considering 30 months on the lees adequate.
We tasted some wines from bottle at their dinner. The 2010 Folle Blanche (=gros plant) was as good a version as I’ve had (not so many), simple, lean, tasty. I probably won’t buy it in NYC. The 2010 Pierre de la Grange has a nice nose and is a totally decent middle of the road Muscadet. The 2010 Clos des Allees has a great nose of rocks and a few lonely flowers, and great balance among mineral, acid, and fruit components. Lovely. The 2010 Pierres Blanches is richer but less mineral than the Allees. The 2009 from the serpentine butte is quite rich, but a funny mineral note sneaks in on the midpalate. Actually, it hits my tongue in the middle. An odd sensation. My note on 2010 L d’Or says, “now we’re talking.” Great granite nose, wonderful minerality, brilliant flavors. This will age for the long term, and is delicious now. The 2009 L d’Or was a good choice with the scallops (& roe) in beurre blanc; the richness of the riper wine was a good match. I’d probably use the 2010 more often at my table. The richness of the 2005 L d’Or crowds the minerality without totally overcoming it. It’s starting to get some complexity of age, but I prefer leaner years. The ’99 L d’Or is for me a more harmonious marriage of richness and minerals, a bit of celery in the nose, good long finish, aging well but zero rush to drink. 2007 Excelsior/Noelles is also the ticket for me, quite leesy now, but still rocky with good acidity and scrumptious umami. The 2006 is a bit soft by comparison, though still good. The 2003 has a curious toasty caramel nose, and roasted-skin melon phenolics substitute for some of the missing acidity. A noble effort, but I won’t be a buyer.
If you find yourself in that neighborhood, best to stay away from the Hotel La Louee on Rue Jean Mermoz. The walls are tissue-paper thin, the rooms are tiny, showers smaller still, and the wifi lets you down during your midnight work calls.
It’s always a joy and a delight to visit Genevieve and Marc Ollivier at Pepiere. Their partner Remi is taking a larger public role, though I explained to Marc that he should not plan on retirement. We had a good tour of the vines. You can always spot Marc’s patches, since he uses a higher pair of wires to bring the foliage up. He and the Luneau are almost the only ones that do this.
We tasted in the cellar. The Pepie Bulles is melon with some chardonnay and has less rs than last year. It’s only 3.5 atm, a Muscadet version of a Cerdon de Bugey, if you like. It’s open, fruity, light, and keeps its acid, having no MLF. We tasted through quite a few tank samples, but I’ll just give you broader impressions, since they will be blended. The regular Pepiere 2011 has good shell and fruit on the nose. It’s definitely a leaner vintage, but it’s good and clean. It certainly has the brine back. Reminds a bit of ’07 or ’01. Certainly crisper than ’09 or ’10. The two cuves of Clos des Briords were dramatically different. The younger vines came in at 11.8, with 5.8 TA, and great classic CdB. The second cuve, from the oldest vines was still fermenting into late December (vignerons almost everywhere in France reported fast, easy fermentations in this vintage), and it finished with a touch of rs. I explained to Marc that an accident like this had been the secret of Jess Jackson’s success, he could step up and make the big bucks, and that when he bought his second plane he could remember my words. He backed slowly away from me as I spoke, then broke and ran. He’ll assemble the two cuves and let them settle down, so the bottled version will likely be quite different. Marc and Remi feel that Gras Mouton moves faster and farther in cuve than their other wines and shows less typically early, so they prefer not to show it at this point. There may be a Granite de Clisson (just “Clisson” now, the AOC folks having decreed that giving the actual geology might be too informative to consumers) in 2011, he’s not sure, but the yields in Chateau Thébaud were too low to bottle it separately.
From bottle, the 2010 Pepiere is just great. It’s rounder than the 2011, but is a different beast than any cask sample. Classic vintage of the regular, much to my taste. The 2010 Briords is also quite classic. Marc is pleased with it. The Gras Moutons (but NOT “Grands”!) is naturally rounder and richer, given the site. My heart is really given to Marc’s granite wines, but this is worthy stuff. There is a Clisson in 2010, to be bottled late this year. The extra time on the lees have given it more glutamate-umami and more yeasty flavors. It’s a classic and I will be a buyer. There are now 10 winemakers making Clisson, Marc has 2.5 of the ~20 ha. Chateau Thébaud is smaller. All of Marc’s Pepiere could be Clisson, geologically, so in an imagined great vintage of the future there could be 4 or 4.5 ha going into the late wine. But he probably won’t—it is considerably more work in the vineyard and he wants to have a decent quantity of the regular. He probably would also prefer not to wait 3 years after harvest for an income, I’m thinking. These are the problems when you cultivate vast estates of more than 2 ha. Anyhow, the 2009 Clisson clocks in at the same big 13.2% as the 2010, but it is crazy rich and ripe. I find it slightly soft and will probably purchase only in subcase quantities. The Chateau Thébaud will be bottled in the spring (it is the granite typical of Briords, rather than the estate Pepiere lower down the hill toward the Maine. This 2009 has more minerality than the Clisson, and Marc wants it to have 30 months on the lees, but figured 24 was enough for the Clisson. Unusually, there is a “3” in 2009. They are so-designated because they get 36 months on the lees. These grapes are from both Clisson and Thébaud, and the wine is kind of crazy rich. I will certainly put a few away to see what becomes of them. At this point, I had to leave the excellent party to take a conference call that turned out to run for 2 hours, enough that I missed the vertical of older wines. You’ll have to refer to my older notes. But anyone who was there, how is ’97 doing?
I tasted 2011s and 2010s with Bossard, or rather I tried the 2011s at Bossard’s table at the Renaissance, and the 2010s with his newish (2-3 years) partner Fred. Fred’s card is quite something:
You can get a sense of the package here.
I tasted 2011s from Bossard and Landron, and they shared an odd note. These guys both hand harvest and did a major triage, so I hesitate to call it rot. I had meant to taste again with both of them to try to understand the wines better, but I didn’t get back. So maybe I can catch them again when the Renaissance show comes to NYC. I don’t offer notes at this point, sorry.
That’s it for the Muscadet.
