Beaujolais visit: JP Brun & Brureaux

Saina Nieminen

Saina Nieminen
Domaine des Terres Dorées / Jean-Paul Brun

I have loved Brun's wines from the first time I tasted them. So the first thing we did after our plane landed in Lyon was to rent a car and drive to Charnay. I have sometimes heard Brun's wines criticized for being unpleasantly lean. I can understand the adjective but not the adverb - I think leanness can be a very positive aspect of wine.

8745006921_146f6c7d04.jpg
One possible reason that Brun's wines come across as lean and structured rather than sweet and easy and fruity is that he vinifies the wines in a Burgundian manner instead of with carbonic maceration. “Concrete rocks!” is something I can imagine Brun saying. He didn't use quite such words but he did become quite animated when talking about the benefits of concrete as opposed to inox. I wish I understood the winemaking process better but I've always found the most enjoyable part of wine to be drinking it, preferably with a plate of something unhealthy and fatty on the table before me and so I've never paid as much attention as I should have to the technical side, but apparently concrete lets in oxygen which is somehow beneficial. Perhaps someone here can explain?

8745009885_f47bff86b9.jpg
Brun explaining to Arto Koskelo why concrete rocks!

Anyway, after a quick tour through the cave, we had a tasting of practically everything that Brun makes:

Roussanne 2010 - nice, little bit neutral aromas, something strangely herbal going on on the nose; lovely freshness for the grape. Charnay is, says Brun, the absolute northern limit where Roussanne can be grown which, he thinks, explains why it is so fresh and light for the grape.

Chardonnay Classic 2011 a pure, unwooded, nicely appley style; rich compared to the 2010 that I go out of my way to find excuses to open, but also fun though in a less racy style. But less racy in Brunian terms still means pretty racy in general terms.

Beaujolais Blanc Vinification Bourguignonne 2011 obvious oak aromas on the nose, but not too much, I suspect, for most; good crunch and richness. I preferred the Classic.

Cuvée Première 2011 young vine Gamay: a fun, peppery, almost Syrah-smelling wine but with all the lean joy and purity I've come to expect from Brun.

L'Ancien 2012 everyone was talking about how 2012 was such a difficult year. It may have been, but the wines everyone presented ranged from perfectly fine to just lovely. Production may have been only 30-50% of normal, but quality seems to be good if you like a leaner, less sexy/fruity style, and many producers likened it to 2008 and/or 2010. L'Ancien was its usual wonderful self: lean but pure and very moreish. Perhaps not quite as ethereal and pretty as the 2010 but I liked it very much.

Côte de Brouilly 2011 a richer year than 2012 and everyone, including Brun, spoke of it as a good or even great year. This had an open aroma, quite spicy and bit Syrah-like; quite rich for a Brun. Great stuff and the only cru that was kind of open. I liked this very much though it was a bit different from my previous experiences of Brun.

Morgon 2011 more tannic than the CdBrouilly, but very good. It's grumpy now so it's difficult to say anything about it except that it seems very true to Brun's style and all the pieces seem to be in good places for this to hopefully become something nice in a couple years. Hold.

Fleurie 2011 exquisitely pretty; perfect balance though a rich year for Brun. I often seem to like Fleurie more than the other crus (and not just with Brun but in general). This is painfully young though it has ripe fruit, but it has already developed hints of the perfumed, peachy aromas that Fleurie can sometimes have. I shouldn't really enjoy a painfully young wine as much as I enjoyed this. But I guess in some instances everyone can have slight masochistic tendencies.

Moulin-à-Vent 2011 again a quite tannic wine akin to the Morgon, but I seem to have a bit of trouble with M-a-V: for some reason, I rarely find them charming (though wait until I write up my Yvon Métras notes, since there I finally found a superb example!). So it's perfectly nice, but still my least favourite of the Brun Crus.

Pnot Noir 2012 a wonderful cherry aroma; very pure, light but intense and savoury and I really loved it. Fresh and palate cleansing only open with people who appreciate structured Pinot.

Charme Blanc de Blancs (2010 though officially NV) quite a sweet aroma though a 100% Chardonnay extra brut bubbly; good richness and great bite, this isn't a harsh style of extra brut. I thought it was very enjoyable.

FRV 100 a Methode ancestrale bubbly - 30 g/l RS and 7,5% abv. Some might say it is just a sweet, simple bubbly but I thought as with Brun's whole range that it transcends all that one imagines from such sobriquets. Sweet, yes, but also with a nice acidic bite; simple and fruit-forward, yes, but also one that somehow invites me to become reacquainted with it. My first bottle, that I drank several years ago, I thought was ok but nothing interesting. Somehow, I still kept on buying it whenever I could and now it is one of my favourite bubblies.

We stayed the night at Les Hauts de Chénas, a little B&B type of place near the top of the Chénas hill the views over Chénas were pretty amazing.

8745011677_f625c241b8.jpg
They have a nice little restaurant were they make perfectly decent local foods. And the owner, Nathalie Fauvin, also makes some attractive wine. She is one of the few female winemakers in Beaujolais (though more have started making wine in recent years) and she made her first vintage in 2001 after inheriting the property. Her father used to make just one wine, simply labeled Chénas, but Nathalie has expanded the range slightly.

Domaine des Brureaux
Chénas Cuvée Coccinelle 2011 Fauvin was almost as keen on praising concrete as Brun! She likes the way that e.g. tartarates left on the cement give a continuity to the style year to year and she also appreciated the oxidation and feels that it provides better results than the completely sealed environment of inox. This was a pretty wine made from “young” vines of c.20yo, it is bright and fresh with the ripeness of 2011 showing, but it still has enough acidity to make this moreish. This isn't as exciting a wine as some others we tried this trip, but it was a perfectly decent Chénas.

Chénas Cuvée Tradition 2011 this was a bigger, darker, more sweetly fruity wine than the young-vine Coccinelle and is made from older vines (35-50yo IIRC). A more serious style but still made in concrete instead of oak. Nice!

Cuvée Séléné 2011 this was named after Fauvin's daughter and bears the further name “Le Vin au Féminin”. But there's nothing stereotypically feminine about this wine (and why does the human brain so often want to ascribe masculine or feminine traits to non-living objects?): it is aged in oak, but the oak is old so theoretically it shouldn't interfere with the wine. Yet I still wasn't so keen on this: I think I can smell a bit of oak, or at least something aromatically very like oak, and that detracted from my enjoyment because I am a very limited person and my sense of smell easily gets confused by such aromas that I'm not fond of. Anyway, not really a wine for me.

Chénas Cuvée Préstige 2011 this is made from over 90yo vines which makes it superdense. This is matured completely in old oak barriques but somehow it still smells a bit of oak. It is very rugged, dense and I'd like to say masculine though I just complained about humans ascribing gender to non-living thing. One this is certain: this needs age. And when this young, I really can't say if I will like it or not.

Cuvée Séléné 2009 a very sweet and ripe aroma, I still think I smell a bit of chocolate and spice and all things not so nice; rich. On the basis of these two vintages of Séléné, I'm not a fan of this bottling.

Chénas Cuvée Tradition 2007 We were the last people to finish eating at Les Hauts de Chénas so Fauvin came to our table to discuss the wines with us. We started talking about recent Beaujolais vintages and I mentioned that I've been quite fond of 2007s though they have not been universally praised. First, she explains that recent years have been very tough because there has been hail so often: her grandfather and father “never used to get hail,” she said, “but now I've had hail almost every year!” In 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2011 and 2012 she has lost huge amounts of grapes because of hail so yields have been tiny. 2012 was especially bad and she made IIRC only about 30% of her normal amounts. She then disappears and comes back with this bottle. It is a nice, slightly leaner style wine, not as voluptuous as the 2011 but with a really attractive balance between ripeness of fruit and raciness of structure. Nice! Fauvin likes the style of 2007, too, but she was a bit amused that I like it since most of her customers even the ones who ask for light wines prefer the big, sweet, rich styles (like the Séléné and such years like 2009 and 2011).

8745012631_dff4cd3d85.jpg
Sonic boom -device at Brureaux
 
originally posted by Otto Nieminen: I have sometimes heard Brun's wines criticized for being unpleasantly lean.

I think you're listening to the wrong people.

Otherwise, looks like a great trip!
 
Jean-Paul!

Nice work, Otto.

I think you do a fine job with concrete vs. inox. Concrete is modestly more porous (than zero for inox), but perhaps less so than wood (also depending of course on size and thus surface/volume ratio).

The Baudry moved to concrete from inox a few years ago and feel it makes a big difference--softer tannins, more approachable aromas. Other winemakers who work with more reductive varieties have told me that the incremental difference is too small, that concrete doesn't make a difference to them.

But maybe Steve Edmunds can comment, he is ITB (var. concrete), IIRC.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
But concrete v. inox and carbonic v. traditional are two entirely separate issues, right?
Sure.

I think any vessel that you can close could be used for a carbonic fermentation, but that is over quickly. Elevage in whatever material follows for months afterward.
 
The way Otto sequitured the sentences made it sound somehow related. Now, using traditional instead of carbonic, no matter how quick the fermentation, should affect the end result (and the Brun style) much more than élevage in concrete v. inox, no?
 
Piling on with thanks, Otto. Is M-a-V supposed to be charming? I had the same initial reaction to the FRV 100 and never got past the first bottle, but perhaps I should reapproach. Also opened a Pinot a few weeks ago and liked it at its level, would like to check it with a couple of years' age.

Cheers.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
The way Otto sequitured the sentences made it sound somehow related. Now, using traditional instead of carbonic, no matter how quick the fermentation, should affect the end result (and the Brun style) much more than élevage in concrete v. inox, no?

I would imagine so.

From my perch as the great winemaker of the Beaujolais, of course.
 
OK, so I can get behind a winemaker who can distinguish between beton and inox, and I don't doubt the explanation. But, as someone who is just learning to distinguish between large old foudre and non-wood, I do find the distinction somewhat recherché. I also don't know if concrete ages like wood barrels but if it does, one would think that age would lessen the difference even more.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
OK, so I can get behind a winemaker who can distinguish between beton and inox, and I don't doubt the explanation. But, as someone who is just learning to distinguish between large old foudre and non-wood, I do find the distinction somewhat recherché. I also don't know if concrete ages like wood barrels but if it does, one would think that age would lessen the difference even more.
I think it depends a lot on the specifics of cepage and terroir.
 
not sure if I got it right, but I thought Jonathan was talking about the aging of the concrete, along the lines of the aging of barrels, i.e., the neutralization of the "woody" character in barrels. I'm not sure smaller barrels ever really lose that. I aged lots of wines in puncheons that had seen more than 20 vintages, and I could still taste the wood. I think that foudres really do shed most of the woody notes, and become much more neutral over time. My sense is that wines soften a bit more in foudre than in concrete.

I'm making only one wine, at the moment, in concrete, which is Rocks and Gravel, and I'm learning a lot each season, with that wine, but I think what I'm learning has more to do with the vineyard (Unti) and the differences there from year to year, than it does with concrete, which seems quite reliable. I do find that wines seem fresher, from concrete, than from stainless, in the sense that they don't seem so bound up, and reductive. My experience is that wines can get shut down in stainless, and never quite open up again, if they don't get some air from time to time.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
The way Otto sequitured the sentences made it sound somehow related. Now, using traditional instead of carbonic, no matter how quick the fermentation, should affect the end result (and the Brun style) much more than élevage in concrete v. inox, no?

I should have put a paragraph break there, sorry! I need an editor to go through my texts before I post them.

Ian, I think all wine should be charming. Structured wines certainly can be charming and charm shouldn't be equated with softness or easiness or approachability.
 
Steve E. is obviously the expert here, but a couple of thoughts: when you talk about concrete, you must distinguish between epoxy-lined concrete (not that different from Inox IMO) and tartrate-washed porous concrete, a la Steve. And the big difference between aged oak and concrete, M. Other Prof, is that concrete imparts no tannins to the wine, something that even aged oak will do. Of course, that is also what fuels the presumpation that oak-aged wines are more ageworthy (assuming that those tannins ever fade/integrate).

Mark Lipton
 
I was talking, in my ignorance, about two things. First was the basic effect of wood (putting aside the large distinctions between barriques and foudres)and that of concrete and inox. The second was if age reduces the difference between concrete and inox (I don't know anything about science) as it does between new and old barriques. Steve may find that the barriques effect never goes away but I can think of a couple of CnPs aged in very old barriques--Bois de Boursan (certainly less than 100%) and Banneret (100% because he doesn't have much land and he doesn't like to lose wine to evaporation)--where one really doesn't taste barrique at all. Bonneau, one hears, also uses very old barriques, but the one time I tasted that wine, I found it weird in enough ways so that I wasn't focused on barriques vs. foudre, etc.
 
originally posted by MLipton:
Steve E. is obviously the expert here, but a couple of thoughts: when you talk about concrete, you must distinguish between epoxy-lined concrete (not that different from Inox IMO) and tartrate-washed porous concrete, a la Steve. And the big difference between aged oak and concrete, M. Other Prof, is that concrete imparts no tannins to the wine, something that even aged oak will do. Of course, that is also what fuels the presumpation that oak-aged wines are more ageworthy (assuming that those tannins ever fade/integrate).

Mark Lipton

Sure, though big old barrels don't contribute so much tannin. But I have the definite impression that concrete breathes a bit. Epoxy, I'm not sure at all.

Fiberglass I think is more like wood for porosity, no? Sort of wood without the tannins?
 
I've seen fiberglass variables in Italy, but heard people gasp in horror about them being too porous, and wines getting too much air, becoming tired, losing vibrancy, etc.
Everyone says concrete breathes some, who am I to argue? The wines aged in concrete have a little more edge to them than those raised in foudre, and way more, I think than wines aged in smaller barrels. And of course, there is no wood taste at all, which, for me, is one of the main points.
 
originally posted by SFJoe:

Sure, though big old barrels don't contribute so much tannin. But I have the definite impression that concrete breathes a bit. Epoxy, I'm not sure at all.

I'd expect the tannins contributed by oak to decay logarithmically with repeated exposure, the same as any other biphasic extraction process.

Fiberglass I think is more like wood for porosity, no? Sort of wood without the tannins?

You've got me there: I have no idea. I see that fiberglass containers are used for storing chemicals, but those have a polypropylene lining.

Mark Lipton
 
Back
Top