Oswaldo Costa
Oswaldo Costa
Half of each pair was drunk on day one, the other half on day two, on two pairs of nights. Was that so difficult to understand?
2007 Philippe Pacalet Chambolle-Musigny 13.0%
Pale as a Burg should be, and somewhat turbid (all were, to some extent). Comely aroma of crushed berries and violets, with the exotic spice overlay I associate with carbonic. Silky, with no trace of wood or excess alcohol. Very fruitful, with strong acidity, the two cleanly and clearly defined. Needs food to balance the acidity, especially on day two.
2007 Philippe Pacalet Chambolle-Musigny 13.0% 1er Cru
Same color, even finer aroma, adding graphite and a wilder pot-pourri of carbonic herbs. More chewy and dense, yet ethereal, with exquisite balance. Most pinous, and totally lovely, remaining almost unchanged on day two.
2008 Philippe Pacalet Chambolle-Musigny 12.5%
Rather closed on day one, with bashful traces of lovely red fruit, unmistakable pinosity, and an attractive metallic streak. Aroma definitely less carbonic, a difference possibly attributable to sleepiness. Good balance, a little lardy, considerable acidity. Needs food. More open on day two, but still reticent. Needs a few more years to reach a state comparable to the 2007.
2008 Philippe Pacalet Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru 12.5%
Also closed on day one, with an extra note of eucalyptus, slightly sturdier structure, coming across as more acid and tart than its humbler sibling. Needs food, otherwise acidity is too searing. More open on day two, showing a touch more complexity and stuffing than its humbler sibling, but just a touch.
Besides the overall lack of wood and restraint, I appreciated how the alcohol levels were similar in the Villages and Premiers. In other words, the greater complexity of the latter seemed entirely due to what's in the grapes, not what's added. The carbonic element of the 2007 may be an interference that a purist might not welcome, but the hedonist carried these nights, hands down. It was much less in evidence in the 2008s, where the difference between Villages and Premier also seemed slighter.
In sum, I rave about the 2007s today, reserve the right to rave about the 2008s tomorrow. I've been having a lucky streak of 2007s, seems like the vintage of the century to me. And there are a bunch of uniquely priced 2007 Pacalets available at Chambers right now. If you had any sense, you’d get some (I am not being paid for this).
2007 Philippe Pacalet Chambolle-Musigny 13.0%
Pale as a Burg should be, and somewhat turbid (all were, to some extent). Comely aroma of crushed berries and violets, with the exotic spice overlay I associate with carbonic. Silky, with no trace of wood or excess alcohol. Very fruitful, with strong acidity, the two cleanly and clearly defined. Needs food to balance the acidity, especially on day two.
2007 Philippe Pacalet Chambolle-Musigny 13.0% 1er Cru
Same color, even finer aroma, adding graphite and a wilder pot-pourri of carbonic herbs. More chewy and dense, yet ethereal, with exquisite balance. Most pinous, and totally lovely, remaining almost unchanged on day two.
2008 Philippe Pacalet Chambolle-Musigny 12.5%
Rather closed on day one, with bashful traces of lovely red fruit, unmistakable pinosity, and an attractive metallic streak. Aroma definitely less carbonic, a difference possibly attributable to sleepiness. Good balance, a little lardy, considerable acidity. Needs food. More open on day two, but still reticent. Needs a few more years to reach a state comparable to the 2007.
2008 Philippe Pacalet Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru 12.5%
Also closed on day one, with an extra note of eucalyptus, slightly sturdier structure, coming across as more acid and tart than its humbler sibling. Needs food, otherwise acidity is too searing. More open on day two, showing a touch more complexity and stuffing than its humbler sibling, but just a touch.
Besides the overall lack of wood and restraint, I appreciated how the alcohol levels were similar in the Villages and Premiers. In other words, the greater complexity of the latter seemed entirely due to what's in the grapes, not what's added. The carbonic element of the 2007 may be an interference that a purist might not welcome, but the hedonist carried these nights, hands down. It was much less in evidence in the 2008s, where the difference between Villages and Premier also seemed slighter.
In sum, I rave about the 2007s today, reserve the right to rave about the 2008s tomorrow. I've been having a lucky streak of 2007s, seems like the vintage of the century to me. And there are a bunch of uniquely priced 2007 Pacalets available at Chambers right now. If you had any sense, you’d get some (I am not being paid for this).