TN: La Persistance de la Memoire (June 5, 2018)

[Jayson Cohen]

Now that I reread this thread, let me reiterate how good that bottle of Huet was. The best of that bottling I’ve had and among the very best Huets period. The intensity and clarity of the flavors and minerality that are expressed because there is no botrytis are remarkable and refreshing (literally and figuratively).

 

[Jayson Cohen]

[Deleted duplicate post.]

 

[VLM]

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
Now that I reread this thread, let me reiterate how good that bottle of Huet was. The best of that bottling I’ve had and among the very best Huets period. The intensity and clarity of the flavors and minerality that are expressed because there is no botrytis are remarkable and refreshing (literally and figuratively).

That's good to know. I think I have a couple bottles of this, but I've had a disturbingly high corked rate on this wine.

2010 Roally was good, but not like this.

 

[Pavel Tchichikov]

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
Now that I reread this thread, let me reiterate how good that bottle of Huet was. The best of that bottling I’ve had and among the very best Huets period. The intensity and clarity of the flavors and minerality that are expressed because there is no botrytis are remarkable and refreshing (literally and figuratively).

96 le mont 1er? May be my wine of the year so far. NP-complete good.

 

[MLipton]

How does the ‘96 CdB 1er compare? My first bottle was corked to hell and back, so couldn’t really get a sense of its quality.

Mark Lipton

 

[Pavel Tchichikov]

originally posted by MLipton:
How does the ‘96 CdB 1er compare? My first bottle was corked to hell and back, so couldn’t really get a sense of its quality.

Mark Lipton

Amazing wine. But given that Jayson just called le mont "among the very best Huets period," you are putting anyone who is going to answer your question in a difficult position. But you already knew that :-)

 

[Jayson Cohen]

originally posted by Pavel Tchichikov:

originally posted by MLipton:
How does the ‘96 CdB 1er compare? My first bottle was corked to hell and back, so couldn’t really get a sense of its quality.

Mark Lipton

Amazing wine. But given that Jayson just called le mont "among the very best Huets period," you are putting anyone who is going to answer your question in a difficult position. But you already knew that :-)

Yes. My comment was not hyperbole, and to answer Mark’s question directly I don’t know any other comparison except maybe 1996 Clos du Bourg 1er Trie. I would call 1996 Le Mont 1er uncharted territory. To my taste I’m not sure Noel Pinguet ever made a better wine (that I have tasted).

 

[Brad Kane]

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:

originally posted by Pavel Tchichikov:

originally posted by MLipton:
How does the ‘96 CdB 1er compare? My first bottle was corked to hell and back, so couldn’t really get a sense of its quality.

Mark Lipton

Amazing wine. But given that Jayson just called le mont "among the very best Huets period," you are putting anyone who is going to answer your question in a difficult position. But you already knew that :-)

Yes. My comment was not hyperbole, and to answer Mark’s question directly I don’t know any other comparison except maybe 1996 Clos du Bourg 1er Trrie. I would call 1996 Le Mont 1er uncharted territory. To my taste I’m not sure Noel Pingiet ever made a better wine (that I have tasted).

Um, yeah. The '96s from Huet are great, but there's this '89 Cuvee Constance out there that Pinguet made, as well as all the other '89s...

 

[Jayson Cohen]

originally posted by Brad Kane:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:

originally posted by Pavel Tchichikov:

originally posted by MLipton:
How does the ‘96 CdB 1er compare? My first bottle was corked to hell and back, so couldn’t really get a sense of its quality.

Mark Lipton

Amazing wine. But given that Jayson just called le mont "among the very best Huets period," you are putting anyone who is going to answer your question in a difficult position. But you already knew that :-)

Yes. My comment was not hyperbole, and to answer Mark’s question directly I don’t know any other comparison except maybe 1996 Clos du Bourg 1er Trrie. I would call 1996 Le Mont 1er uncharted territory. To my taste I’m not sure Noel Pingiet ever made a better wine (that I have tasted).

Um, yeah. The '96s from Huet are great, but there's this '89 Cuvee Constance out there that Pinguet made, as well as all the other '89s...

I was waiting for you to chime in with exactly this. I stand by my comments. Notwithstanding how good ‘89 Constance and the specialty bottlings are.

 

[Pavel Tchichikov]

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
I was waiting for you to chime in with exactly this. I stand by my comments. Notwithstanding how good ‘89 Constance and the specialty bottlings are.

From another thread:

"This brings to mind a question. At what levels of sweetness do we best see the effects of terroir and conversely at which do we best see the effects of winemaking?

Mark Lipton"

 

[Jayson Cohen]

originally posted by Pavel Tchichikov:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
I was waiting for you to chime in with exactly this. I stand by my comments. Notwithstanding how good ‘89 Constance and the specialty bottlings are.

From another thread:

"This brings to mind a question. At what levels of sweetness do we best see the effects of terroir and conversely at which do we best see the effects of winemaking?

Mark Lipton"

Not sure this is where I would go. And as I think about it, I don’t think it is a question that (no offense) is well posed or can be answered. But that has never stopped any of us in the past on the wine boards!!

 

[Pavel Tchichikov]

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
Not sure this is where I would go.

You mean this is not where you'd go in comparing 96s and 89s from Huet? I agree; I was just having some fun.

It's been said by those infinitely qualified to comment on the subject that, with age, demi-sec is the "sweet spot" (LOL) for Huet. Hard to argue when you consider something like 59 LHL Demi as an example. If we are to treat this as an axiom, what is achieved in 96 in the sweet wines becomes particularly remarkable.

 

[Jayson Cohen]

A different question that may not be well posed or answerable other than personal preferences in general: whatever your definition of terroir is, does botrytis tend to block or dull it, or is it neutral, or does it enhance it, or does it depend on ....? And why? Let’s stick to Vouvray. I don’t have the answers but between the great 1996 and 1989 vintages, I tend to prefer the clean 1996 Huets and do think the complexity and integration of the wines shine without the botrytis in the 89s.

 

[Jayson Cohen]

originally posted by Pavel Tchichikov:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
Not sure this is where I would go.

You mean this is not where you'd go in comparing 96s and 89s from Huet? I agree; I was just having some fun.

It's been said by those infinitely qualified to comment on the subject that, with age, demi-sec is the "sweet spot" (LOL) for Huet. Hard to argue when you consider something like 59 LHL Demi as an example. If we are to treat this as an axiom, what is achieved in 96 in the sweet wines becomes particularly remarkable.

I agree with all this. And I am not infinitely qualified.

 

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
A different question that may not be well posed or answerable other than personal preferences in general: whatever your definition of terroir is, does botrytis tend to block or dull it, or is it neutral, or does it enhance it, or does it depend on ....? And why? Let’s stick to Vouvray. I don’t have the answers but between the great 1996 and 1989 vintages, I tend to prefer the clean 1996 Huets and do think the complexity and integration of the wines shine without the botrytis in the 89s.

A question that, were it answerable, would also apply to Coulée de Serrant under Joly stewardship and the terroir of Jean Thévenet's wines at Roally.

And that question would panhandle the more panoramic question of whether our devotion to unfettered terroir expression trumps sheer deliciousness of gulletary sensation. When the liquid meets the lips, do we remain committed to process integrity, or do our priorities make a traitorous and hedonistic switch to privileging the ends?

 

[Mike Evans]

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
A different question that may not be well posed or answerable other than personal preferences in general: whatever your definition of terroir is, does botrytis tend to block or dull it, or is it neutral, or does it enhance it, or does it depend on ....? And why? Let’s stick to Vouvray. I don’t have the answers but between the great 1996 and 1989 vintages, I tend to prefer the clean 1996 Huets and do think the complexity and integration of the wines shine without the botrytis in the 89s.

A question that, were it answerable, would also apply to Coulée de Serrant under Joly stewardship and the terroir of Jean Thévenet's wines at Roally.

And that question would panhandle the more panoramic question of whether our devotion to unfettered terroir expression trumps sheer deliciousness of gulletary sensation. When the liquid meets the lips, do we remain committed to process integrity, or do our priorities make a traitorous and hedonistic switch to privileging the ends?

Wouldn’t it be the terroir of either Henri Goyard’s or Gautier Thévenet’s wines at Roally or Jean Thévenet’s wines at Bongran?

 

[Jayson Cohen]

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
A different question that may not be well posed or answerable other than personal preferences in general: whatever your definition of terroir is, does botrytis tend to block or dull it, or is it neutral, or does it enhance it, or does it depend on ....? And why? Let’s stick to Vouvray. I don’t have the answers but between the great 1996 and 1989 vintages, I tend to prefer the clean 1996 Huets and do think the complexity and integration of the wines shine without the botrytis in the 89s.

A question that, were it answerable, would also apply to Coulée de Serrant under Joly stewardship and the terroir of Jean Thévenet's wines at Roally.

And that question would panhandle the more panoramic question of whether our devotion to unfettered terroir expression trumps sheer deliciousness of gulletary sensation. When the liquid meets the lips, do we remain committed to process integrity, or do our priorities make a traitorous and hedonistic switch to privileging the ends?

You set it up (i think) as a mutually exclusive dichotomy. They can coexist. They can interact even if set up as dichotomous. (Although I do hate the way the word “hedonistic”’s meaning has been twisted by the wine community to connote anti-intellectual and somehow disconnected from any thought. At least that’s how I understand it’s meaning to have been distorted.)

 

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by Mike Evans:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
A different question that may not be well posed or answerable other than personal preferences in general: whatever your definition of terroir is, does botrytis tend to block or dull it, or is it neutral, or does it enhance it, or does it depend on ....? And why? Let’s stick to Vouvray. I don’t have the answers but between the great 1996 and 1989 vintages, I tend to prefer the clean 1996 Huets and do think the complexity and integration of the wines shine without the botrytis in the 89s.

A question that, were it answerable, would also apply to Coulée de Serrant under Joly stewardship and the terroir of Jean Thévenet's wines at Roally.

And that question would panhandle the more panoramic question of whether our devotion to unfettered terroir expression trumps sheer deliciousness of gulletary sensation. When the liquid meets the lips, do we remain committed to process integrity, or do our priorities make a traitorous and hedonistic switch to privileging the ends?

Wouldn’t it be the terroir of either Henri Goyard’s or Gautier Thévenet’s wines at Roally or Jean Thévenet’s wines at Bongran?

Not familiar with Goyard, but the house style at both Thévenets tends to include some botrytis, afaik. I may misremember as far as the son, but it's been experience with the father's.

 

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
A different question that may not be well posed or answerable other than personal preferences in general: whatever your definition of terroir is, does botrytis tend to block or dull it, or is it neutral, or does it enhance it, or does it depend on ....? And why? Let’s stick to Vouvray. I don’t have the answers but between the great 1996 and 1989 vintages, I tend to prefer the clean 1996 Huets and do think the complexity and integration of the wines shine without the botrytis in the 89s.

A question that, were it answerable, would also apply to Coulée de Serrant under Joly stewardship and the terroir of Jean Thévenet's wines at Roally.

And that question would panhandle the more panoramic question of whether our devotion to unfettered terroir expression trumps sheer deliciousness of gulletary sensation. When the liquid meets the lips, do we remain committed to process integrity, or do our priorities make a traitorous and hedonistic switch to privileging the ends?

You set it up (i think) as a mutually exclusive dichotomy. They can coexist. They can interact even if set up as dichotomous. (Although I do hate the way the word “hedonistic”’s meaning has been twisted by the wine community to connote anti-intellectual and somehow disconnected from any thought. At least that’s how I understand it’s meaning to have been distorted.)

Indeed I did, based on what seemed to the implicit rhetorical question: should one favor botrytis if it improves the wine but gets in the way of terroir? If that's not the implicit choice, then the dichotomy crumbles.

By the way, most of my favorite hedonists are thoughtful, perhaps even including myself (though there is some controversy about that, on both counts), so such a dichotomy I wouldn't subscribe to.

 

[Mike Evans]

Oswaldo, Henri Goyard was the original owner of Domaine de Roally, and he and Jean Thévenet were friends with similar styles (as reflected by the exclusion of both Goyard’s Roally and Jean’s Bongran wines from the Viré-Clessé AOC when it was first created for exceeding the residual sugar limit). When Goyard retired, he sold the estate to Jean’s son, Gautier.

As to the botrytis question, I would argue that it can be a component of the terroir of a given place and in those cases not only would not be getting in the way of terroir but is actually an expression of the terroir. I’ve found that these discussions can be complicated by a tendency for those with a preference for wines that do not show botrytis to attribute that preference to a preference for transparency of terroir (please note that this is not intended to be an aspersion to any past or present Disorderly). There is a certain sameness to botrytized wines, just as there is a certain sameness to wines produced from semi-carbonic maceration, but in both cases it may be that they allow other aspects of terroir to express themselves.