More JPBrun

  • Thread starter Thread starter BJ
  • Start date Start date

BJ

BJ
For many of us the JPBrun blanc is a classic. However, somehow we'd missed several vintages. The 2016 is so good. Not Macon, not Cote d'Or, not Chablis, very much its own animal. Lush, fresh, vibrant, and alive. In my mind this steers a bit more naturelle than in the past. And cheap!
 
We drink a lot of this. So good.
Loved the ‘14.
There is a JP Brun sparkler around town too, Charme.
It’s blanc, different from the pink FRV.
 
originally posted by Marc D:

There is a JP Brun sparkler around town too, Charme.
It’s blanc, different from the pink FRV.

brun_sparkler.png
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
originally posted by BJ:
More JPBruna bit more naturelle

Brad, can you elaborate on what this means for you (since it is sometimes a euphemism for v.a.)?

This seems like it could be the start of a long conversation.

I don't equate natural wines with simply more brett or v.a., but they often do include them. The natural wines that I love tend to be those that don't have brett or v.a., but which simply have something else going on. I am not anything close to a chemist so it's more a matter of knowing it when I drink it, often relative to other wines. Often I think it's a combo of low SO2, wild yeast, and hands off winemaking. These are the wines served by places like Terroir or Verre Vole - you definitely know they are a breed apart, but they aren't bretty or v.a.-ey.

A know it when I drink it sort of thing.
 
originally posted by Marc D:
We drink a lot of this. So good.
Loved the ‘14.
There is a JP Brun sparkler around town too, Charme.
It’s blanc, different from the pink FRV.

OK...need to find that. I've had a white sparkling of his before, but this sounds new and maybe different.
 
originally posted by BJ:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
originally posted by BJ:
More JPBruna bit more naturelle

Brad, can you elaborate on what this means for you (since it is sometimes a euphemism for v.a.)?

This seems like it could be the start of a long conversation.

I don't equate natural wines with simply more brett or v.a., but they often do include them. The natural wines that I love tend to be those that don't have brett or v.a., but which simply have something else going on. I am not anything close to a chemist so it's more a matter of knowing it when I drink it, often relative to other wines. Often I think it's a combo of low SO2, wild yeast, and hands off winemaking. These are the wines served by places like Terroir or Verre Vole - you definitely know they are a breed apart, but they aren't bretty or v.a.-ey.

A know it when I drink it sort of thing.

I also prefer them without noticeable v.a. or brett (unless homeopathic amounts). OK, so for you this is something other than v.a. or brett, but you can't quite put your finger on it.
 
Yeah, but it is not minor. To me the clean naturelle style wines are very distinctive, wild and unconstrained. My best recent example was Julie Balagny's MaV compared to Roilette (which vineyards border MaV and I believe are quite close to the Balagny MaV vineyard). They were like siblings - one who lived on the northern California coast, maybe Humboldt County, smoked a decent amount of weed, listens to Pacifica, drives an old Ford van and grows their own food, the other a Seattleite who is a classic urban liberal, gives to good causes, listens to mainline NPR, and likes to sail in up the Inner Passage every summer.
 
Gotcha. Grateful Dead v. Peter, Paul and Mary. But interesting choice of example, because in anti-v.a. natural wine circles (a growing segment of the electorate) Balagny is known for being v.a.-prone.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Gotcha. Grateful Dead v. Peter, Paul and Mary. But interesting choice of example, because in anti-v.a. natural wine circles (a growing segment of the electorate) Balagny is know for being v.a.-prone.

That's me. Thank god we're big enough now for someone to pitch to us.
 
Back
Top