Looking for some Levet/N. Rhone vintage generalizations

J

Jay Miller

Jay Miller
I'm about to buy some recent vintages of Levet and realized I have no idea of the general vintage characteristics of 2005-2009.

I was going to avoid 2009 on the assumption it would be riper but then I read laudatory notes here on Levet's 2009 Chavaroche. I loved Allemand in 2008 but I seem to recall reading that it was generally a weak year. But in what sense? The WA panned 2004 as being overly light and I loved the vintage.

So I come humbly, hat in hand, seeking wisdom.

After which I will, of course, commit seppuku for the crime of requesting a vintage generalization. No guarantees on when I'll get around to it of course. It may take a while. Seppuku, unlike hats, has not yet come back into fashion.
 
I'm a big fan - haven't tried the '08 yet, but I'm yet to have a bad wine from Levet.

2009 is quite ripe but I like the balance. But I'm just burying it for a while and not planning to revisit any time in the next decade or so, as it's very rich and rather structured now.

2007 and 2006 are much more elegant and not as ripe. I've had a couple of bottles of each young and they were amazingly accessible, particularly the '07 which is very pretty, floral, fragrant and drinking nicely now.

I suspect you'd enjoy the '07 and '06 quite a lot. If you'd like, I could bring a bottle of the '07 to Soul Flavors some time soon - still have a couple in the wine fridge here.
 
2005 is a warm, ripe vintage; wines are big and balanced (and will need time).

2006 was pretty and ripe enough but a little low acid.

2007 is a little less ripe than 2006 but has good acidity. Comrade Brezeme has previously expressed his preference for 2007 over 2006.

I have not drunk enough of the more recent vintages to have a good bead on them. Rumor is that 2008 is skimpy (but, of course, the good makers will do good), 2009 was big, don't know about 2010, and JLL is hinting that 2011 is better than 2010.
 
BK_vintage_generalizations.jpg
 
originally posted by Jay Miller:
Thank you Salil and Jeff! Do these observations apply to the Journaries as well as the Chavaroche?
Click to expand...
Those are just my experiences with Chavaroche - I've never had the Journaries.
 
If you're up for generalizations, I think you can assume Journaries will tend to show a bit more structure, toughness, and reticence than the corresponding Chavaroche. Since it hasn't been imported nearly as long I'm not sure how they'll compare at maturity, but we're talking about pretty elite terroir as you probably know (mostly La Landonne).

My own sense of the vintages is:
2005: was awesome, now closed. Most refined tannins.
2006: was awesome, now closed. Less structured.
2007: was awesome, now closing. Most personality, deceptively structured.
2008: not tasted.
2009: not tasted yet.

I am on record saying I think these wines transform with age more than almost anything else I can think of, and in an unpredictable way, so I'd ignore all the above and just buy whatever you can get the best prices on and put them where you can't reach them.
 
for questions of this nature, there is lots of good reading at drinkrhone.com. i've subscribed to it for 3-4 years now. it's great. for lots of rhone-y information from someone that has likes and dislikes reasonably congruent to the points of view respected here, he has no competition.
 
originally posted by robert ames:
for questions of this nature, there is lots of good reading at drinkrhone.com. i've subscribed to it for 3-4 years now. it's great. for lots of rhone-y information from someone that has likes and dislikes reasonably congruent to the points of view respected here, he has no competition.
Click to expand...

Here we go.
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
I find JLL valuable but not infallible.
Click to expand...

I have several editions of his books on the Rhone and I love them for the informational content. As has been discussed before, I find his reviews only so helpful as he seems to be more charitable than I toward less traditional producers.

Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by MLipton:
As has been discussed before, I find his reviews only so helpful as he seems to be more charitable than I toward less traditional producers.
Click to expand...
I find his reviews very... polite. One must read carefully to discern what he really wishes to say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top