Beaucastel Dinner (menu)

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
I was at the first day of the big decouverte de rhone tasting, yesterday. It is sadly not my impression that people have backed off oak. It is very much a thing of special cuvees, which, in some up and coming areas is a shame because it ruins their best wines. It does seem to be true that the lower down in the hierarchy s the AOC, the more likely oak is to appear. Sort of like the old line from the Maltese Falcon, the cheaper the gunsel, the gaudier the patter.
Click to expand...

oy. uff da. will you name names? please?
 
originally posted by robert ames:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
I was at the first day of the big decouverte de rhone tasting, yesterday. It is sadly not my impression that people have backed off oak. It is very much a thing of special cuvees, which, in some up and coming areas is a shame because it ruins their best wines. It does seem to be true that the lower down in the hierarchy s the AOC, the more likely oak is to appear. Sort of like the old line from the Maltese Falcon, the cheaper the gunsel, the gaudier the patter.
Click to expand...

oy. uff da. will you name names? please?
Click to expand...

Too many to mention. The new AOC cote de rhones village in town is Chateauneuf de Gadagne. Only two domaines showed wine--there are only six of them. IF it really is of interest, I'll report back after today.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by robert ames:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
I was at the first day of the big decouverte de rhone tasting, yesterday. It is sadly not my impression that people have backed off oak. It is very much a thing of special cuvees, which, in some up and coming areas is a shame because it ruins their best wines. It does seem to be true that the lower down in the hierarchy s the AOC, the more likely oak is to appear. Sort of like the old line from the Maltese Falcon, the cheaper the gunsel, the gaudier the patter.
Click to expand...

oy. uff da. will you name names? please?
Click to expand...

Too many to mention. The new AOC cote de rhones village in town is Chateauneuf de Gadagne. Only two domaines showed wine--there are only six of them. IF it really is of interest, I'll report back after today.
Click to expand...

i'm mainly just interested in knowing properties of note that have recently been devoured by the oak monster.

also, are you a consumer of lucien barrot chateauneuf? i've been trying for some years to get them into my basement as well as the restaurant that i buy for.
 
originally posted by robert ames:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by robert ames:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
I was at the first day of the big decouverte de rhone tasting, yesterday. It is sadly not my impression that people have backed off oak. It is very much a thing of special cuvees, which, in some up and coming areas is a shame because it ruins their best wines. It does seem to be true that the lower down in the hierarchy s the AOC, the more likely oak is to appear. Sort of like the old line from the Maltese Falcon, the cheaper the gunsel, the gaudier the patter.
Click to expand...

oy. uff da. will you name names? please?
Click to expand...

Too many to mention. The new AOC cote de rhones village in town is Chateauneuf de Gadagne. Only two domaines showed wine--there are only six of them. IF it really is of interest, I'll report back after today.
Click to expand...

i'm mainly just interested in knowing properties of note that have recently been devoured by the oak monster.

also, are you a consumer of lucien barrot chateauneuf? i've been trying for some years to get them into my basement as well as the restaurant that i buy for.
Click to expand...

I was trying to find up and coming places I didn't know about. If the wine was oaked, or for a number of other reasons, I forgot about it. My original point was that the lower down you go on the appelation prestige scale, the more likely you are to see oak. It's sort of like what Bogie said to Wilmer in the Maltese Falcon: the cheaper the gunsel, the gaudier the patter.

I used to be a regular buyer of Lucien Barrot. I haven't seen him anywhere since maybe the turn of the century. I know the estate still exists, has changed its name to Barrot et fils and is now run by his son (probably has been for some time). I have no idea about its current importation status. You could always just email the estate. I'm sure they would be happy to answer you. According to the Danish site, the email is dombarrotfils@aol.com.
 
jonathan--thanks for the lucien barrot info. jll confirms what you've mentioned. and from jll it sounds like nothing has changed with the changes in management. they are imported (at least to the west coast) by europvin, but europvin in the state of washington doesn't carry them, hence my stymie in procuring.

my question could have been more precise--i was wondering if barrot was a wine you were currently familiar with.

regarding your other note: finding oak in the lower rungs of the prestige scale stands a certain assumption i've used on its head. at that level i've always assumed that the wines couldn't afford the price of new oak.
 
originally posted by robert ames:
regarding your other note: finding oak in the lower rungs of the prestige scale stands a certain assumption i've used on its head. at that level i've always assumed that the wines couldn't afford the price of new oak.
Click to expand...
I think it's true within a single cellar -- expensive new oak barrel for the big wine, and 'second journey' for the little wines -- but Jonathan is saying that, e.g., Cotes du Vivarais makers feel they need to compete with Ch9 so lay on the wood.

Or chips, or boise, or something.
 
Not chips, since it isn't allowed by AOC regulations, for which the following of which still follows the cheaper the gunsel rule. But otherwise what Jeff said: the ritzier the cuvee and the lower down the domaine falls on the prestige scale, the more likely the gaudy patter. The more a domaine lives on its own reputation, the more the vigernon(e) can do as he or she pleases.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by robert ames:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
Amazingly, given the ex cave price, the Wine Searcher price I see for the Tourelles is $45=50. I wouldn't even consider it for that. One can still get Raapail Ay and Gour de Chaulé for $30 an St. Damien and Joncuas for well under that.
Click to expand...

jonathan--i've read in the past that st. damien is under the influence of cambie, which would make me think that it would not be your cuppa tea.
Click to expand...

I understand that it is a Cambie wine. There are a couple of others that are Cambie wines that I also like. I don't know what to tell you except that either he or I are not to be trusted.
Click to expand...

Several producers have mentioned they remain with Cambie due to his name recognition both here in the US and interestingly in France. You don't have to listen to what the consultant has to say when you are the one paying for his opinions...
 
I have heard that too. I also read in Parker about St. Damien that part of their agreement with Cambie was that he became the effective winemaker. That was a lot of years ago and sounds unlikely in any case. Peter would now more about that. I've been drinking the wines since their 01 (before Cambie) and they've seemed fairly consistent. Same with Domaines les Garrigues, which I've been drinking since the late 90s. But, short of being there when decisions are made, there's no way to know except by one's own taste.
 
We just had a '10 St. D Gigondas VV that was just OOT, an overripe mess. But maybe that was the vintage...

These notes are a bit dishearting. The old school southern Rhone vinification approach is so effective, it's beyond me why they would monkey with it. I think of modern wines like Clos du Caillou which I just can't stand and the idea most of the wines are heading in that direction is just depressing.

I honestly have not been keeping up that much and being surprised by what seems to be happening.
 
Brad, I've been more disappointed with the northern Rhone (Cote Rotie) wines, this despite formerly being a big fan of them.

Perhaps I need to revisit them, especially to reassess the relative pricing.

. . . . Pete
 
originally posted by Peter Creasey:

Brad, I've been more disappointed with the northern Rhone (Cote Rotie) wines, this despite formerly being a big fan of them.

Perhaps I need to revisit them, especially to reassess the relative pricing.

. . . . Pete
Click to expand...

based on your [unsolicited] recommendations of grenache-based southern rhones not dominated by wood, we await your observations with bated breath.
 
originally posted by BJ:
We just had a '10 St. D Gigondas VV that was just OOT, an overripe mess. But maybe that was the vintage...

These notes are a bit dishearting. The old school southern Rhone vinification approach is so effective, it's beyond me why they would monkey with it. I think of modern wines like Clos du Caillou which I just can't stand and the idea most of the wines are heading in that direction is just depressing.

I honestly have not been keeping up that much and being surprised by what seems to be happening.
Click to expand...

10, like 16, was a year that produced wines with good acid and tannins in the Southern Rhone. If you didn't like the St. Damien, it wasn't the vintage but the wine. Of course, very few Southern Rhones really have alcohol levels much below 14.5, even in the cooler years like 08 and 11 that many now seek out. 10 was not a cooler year. If you are still thinking of the Gigondases you drank in the 80s and 90s, the wine may no longer be for you.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by BJ:
We just had a '10 St. D Gigondas VV that was just OOT, an overripe mess. But maybe that was the vintage...

These notes are a bit dishearting. The old school southern Rhone vinification approach is so effective, it's beyond me why they would monkey with it. I think of modern wines like Clos du Caillou which I just can't stand and the idea most of the wines are heading in that direction is just depressing.

I honestly have not been keeping up that much and being surprised by what seems to be happening.
Click to expand...

10, like 16, was a year that produced wines with good acid and tannins in the Southern Rhone. If you didn't like the St. Damien, it wasn't the vintage but the wine. Of course, very few Southern Rhones really have alcohol levels much below 14.5, even in the cooler years like 08 and 11 that many now seek out. 10 was not a cooler year. If you are still thinking of the Gigondases you drank in the 80s and 90s, the wine may no longer be for you.
Click to expand...

Since we’re wading into these depths, what are your favorite recent vintages in the S Rhone, Jonathan?

Mark Lipton
 
So, since 00, in order of preference, with any two or three possibly changing next year or even tomorrow: 01, 10, 16 (or maybe 16, 10 since it's early on both of these)00, 04, 06, 15 (but this could go up or down, it's way early),, 05, 09, 08, 11, 12, 03, 07, 13 and 14. I think 17 is also a very strong vintage, maybe along with the 04s, 05s and 06, but it's really too early for me to have an opinion. I also have the feeling that 08 and 11 will, like 94, 99 and 04 for me be climbing the ladder some more. They are drinking great now and show no sign of premature aging. I don't consider 02 worth rating as it wasn't great when it came out and most are over the hill now. 07, given how oddly it is aging has the potential to go still lower. Charvin is turning out better than I thought it might. Pegau is not. The best of them, like the 03s are what they are for what it's worth. 13 and 14 may rank higher for me in a year or so. Right now, I'm not finding them to be showing much.
 
If the Beaucastel '16 is any indication, I agree with the accolade for the '16s. After a brief sampling, perhaps the best Beaucastel I've had, perhaps even better than '89 and '90.

But it's just one data point.

. . . . Pete
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
So, since 00, in order of preference, with any two or three possibly changing next year or even tomorrow: 01, 10, 16 (or maybe 16, 10 since it's early on both of these)00, 04, 06, 15 (but this could go up or down, it's way early),, 05, 09, 08, 11, 12, 03, 07, 13 and 14. I think 17 is also a very strong vintage, maybe along with the 04s, 05s and 06, but it's really too early for me to have an opinion. I also have the feeling that 08 and 11 will, like 94, 99 and 04 for me be climbing the ladder some more. They are drinking great now and show no sign of premature aging. I don't consider 02 worth rating as it wasn't great when it came out and most are over the hill now. 07, given how oddly it is aging has the potential to go still lower. Charvin is turning out better than I thought it might. Pegau is not. The best of them, like the 03s are what they are for what it's worth. 13 and 14 may rank higher for me in a year or so. Right now, I'm not finding them to be showing much.
Click to expand...

Many thanks. I bought heavily the '00, '01 and '04 vintages but since then have mostly spent my wine $ elsewhere. I do have '14 Pegau and Charvin and a few '08s as I thought they'd be good early drinkers a la '99s. I'm buying fewer vins de garde these days...

Mark Lipton
 
I stopped buying widely in stages between 10 and 12. In recent vintages I pretty much have only Charvin and Ferrand. I can still taste widely though at Printemps au Chateauneuf. Mostly I back buy stuff these days. At my age, I invest in the past.
 
Well, I have only 3 bottles of Chateauneuf, one each from 00, 03, and 05. No plans to buy more, of any age.

But thank you, in any case!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top