N Rhone Advice

G

George Parker

Location
Notting Hill, W2
Hello,

I'm in the market for another case of N Rhone.

Torn between the following

2017 Cornas, Casimir, Balthazhar
2016 Cote-Rotie, Burguad
2017 Cote-Rotie, Amethyst, Levet

They are all in the same price bracket. Longer the aging capability the better.

Thanks in advance.

George
 
You won't go wrong with any of those three. These are all old-school winemakers, which for me is a positive. The Burgaud would probably age longer than the other two by a small margin. Cornas is not Cote-Rotie obviously, so it depends which style of N. Rhone syrah you prefer.
 
David Mansfield said:
I think the sensible thing is to buy all the best vintages of Chave Hermitage and avoid the fecal Issue.
Click to expand...

Actually the aroma is not necessarily a bad sign, some may like it and maybe others have a different way of expressing the Burgaud aroma. I haven't had recent vintages so the style may be different. But it may be worth sampling the wine in question before committing to a case.

Secondly, don't think for one minute that Chave is without problems. Well-documented bottle variation in the 1978. Lots of musty issues 1979-1981.
Multiple cuvee questions 1982-1989++ (supposedly unified after the intro of Cathelin, but I have had variation on say 1991 and 1994 I don't understand). Gradually shift 1994 onwards culminating with alcoholic 2003, and the dull international oaky drift in the mid-00's. Current Chave may be fine albeit under a different higher octane, more modern context. :)
 
I couldn't resist checking in JLL (drinkrhone.com) on how he describes Bugaud.

1988 "Interesting nose – shows subdued blackberry, has reserves in it, can still do a spot of arm wrestling, since it has a slight local yokel air about it – there is mystery and black fruits in with paint stripper and a spot of Brett."

He quite likes the 2016. But I think it would worth trying a bottle before committing to a case, especially if you don't know what to expect. I would say the same for Guigal LaLa's. I probably wouldn't say that if one could get an allocation of Gonon from TWS or VT, as one has the luxury there of easy reselling (probably at a profit) if you don't like the first bottle you open. And I have a bit more faith in Gonon.
 
Last edited:
That Amethyste is a lovely wine, but it’s not as serious as the Burgaud. It’s Levet’s lighter, early drinking cuvée. Also much glossier, cleaner in style than Burgaud, even when we are talking 16/17.

This thread plus the Wimps notes are making me thirsty...
 
Paul Day said:
The sensible thing may be to save your money and not buy anything, or wait for something else.
Or maybe commit your money to sampling a bottle of each.
Burgaud used to be distinctively fecal, and I wonder if the the early wines he made in 1985 and 1986 (!!) have ever been bettered.
Click to expand...
The 2010 Burgaud is pretty good.
 
Since 2006 I’ve had Burgaud 11 times, 1988, 98, 99, 00, 01

the bottle I had of the 88 had a slightly farmyard aroma but it didn’t really mar the wine. No sign of it in any of these more recent vintages. As well as more of the 98 I also have 07 and 17 but not tried those.

It is a classic Cote Rotie. Perhaps the most important thing is that they only make one wine. No luxury cuvee at silly prices to cream off the best barrels. You get proper Cote Rotie.
 
Much as I hold you all in high regard, I rather feel Dr Day has traipsed into literary territory that Dr Strange commands with even more certainty and vigour than all of you put together. Just saying.
 
Paul Day said:
The sensible thing may be to save your money and not buy anything, or wait for something else.
Or maybe commit your money to sampling a bottle of each.
Burgaud used to be distinctively fecal, and I wonder if the the early wines he made in 1985 and 1986 (!!) have ever been bettered.
Click to expand...

Bizarrely I had the 86 three or four years ago and it was very good (not just for the vintage either)!
 
GuyD'nis said:
Much as I hold you all in high regard, I rather feel Dr Day has traipsed into literary territory that Dr Strange commands with even more certainty and vigour than all of you put together. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Actually this has always been my word association with Burgaud for better or worse. Maybe I should have used "sauvage" like Tanzer's 2001 description of the 1999 Burgaud: "Expressive, complex, rather sauvage aromas of blackberry, violet, bitter chocolate, mocha, leather, game and licorice, plus a suggestion of garrigue". But I seldom use "sauvage": possibly a bloody, wilder, exciting bottling of Chave 1990 would merit that (in a very positive sense).

I think I have only smelt one wine that really smelt of shit (in a bad way). In fact it was like a bad case of diarrhoea in a glass. That was a certain 1982 Burgundy tasted in 1990. Memorable for all the wrong reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top