A couple of weekends ago, a few of us gathered at a friend's house for a single blind tasting of “mid-priced” 2004 Bordeaux and some steaks on the grill.
We knew which wines had been selected for the tasting and we knew they would be served in flights that roughly organized them by commune, but we did not know the order of the flights, nor the order of the wines within the flights.
Most of the bottles were opened 24-48 hours in advance and left undisturbed at cellar temperature. The Pomerol and St. Emilion were opened about 12 hours in advance.
It was a very interesting tasting, with a few clear winners, and it helped a great deal to get a handle on some ‘04’s worthy of buying (and in some cases, cellaring for a while).
Flight #1:
2004 Chateau Clairefont Margaux. I believe this is the second wine of Prieure-Lichine. Well, it opens a bit musty and dusty on the nose, but soon evolves to reveal very distinct aromas of pine resin and NZ Sauvignon Blanc cat pee. Pattie was the first one to notice this and soon it was all any of us could smell--weird and very undesirable. In the mouth, it is quite angular and austere. Also, it is rather dilute and rough-hewn. Simply put, it is not good, and it is not ever going to be good. Dump it down the drain.
2004 Chateau Prieure-Lichine Margaux. This wine opens with dusty red cherries and soft raspberries on the nose, along with a notable whiff of dried cedar chips. It is nicely sappy in the mouth, with cassis and red fruits on the attack and chalky, moderately aggressive tannins wound up toward the back. There is a nice, seamless texture and medium amounts of body, with just the faintest hint of alcoholic warmth. It is on the elegant side of things, but still fairly primary at this young age. There is good length to the finish, with smoke, spice and solid acid drive.
2004 Chateau Brane Cantenac Margaux. At first, this wine smells so much like the previous wine that I was convinced they must be related. Slowly, though, a number of nuanced differences emerge. To begin, the nose becomes a bit higher toned, with a sense of greater depth and density to the aromas of briary berries and saw dust. With time, it turns a bit sweeter, with blueberry and crème de cassis notes. In the mouth, it is bigger, more tannic, more tightly-wound and generally more serious than the previous wine—probably more age-worthy, as well. Despite this, it is not too big, nor too meaty, though it has greater density to the mid-palate than the other wine. Flavors of powdered chocolate, cherry and cassis lead to a surprisingly easy-going finish with very good length.
Flight #2:
2004 Chateau La Lagune Haut Medoc. Sweet red cherries, raspberries, plummier elements and something like a nut paste make up the pretty bouquet of this offering. In the mouth, it is rather approachable right now, with manageable tannins. It is decently-fruited, but the crisp structure and fairly high acidity lead the way. It is a bit on the lighter, more sprightly side, but a nice easy drink for the short term.
2004 Chateau Smith Haut Lafitte Pessac-Leognan. Initially, there is a dirty whiff of brett, which does seem to fade somewhat after a while, and then later actually seems to add a layer of complexity. Beyond that, there are blackberries, some rubber, blueberries, chocolate and a sense of liquid minerality on the nose. On the palate, it leads with an attack of cool dark fruits, dark chocolate flavors and abundant yet subtle tannins. It is not especially intense in the mid-palate, but does richen toward the back, where the tannins, acidity and alcohol all seem to lie in wait. The finish is persistent, but shows an echo of alcohol still poking out.
Flight #3
2004 Chateau Branaire Ducru St. Julien. This wine opens a bit wild, with lots of brambly fruit, garrigue and dust on the nose. Later, it mellows a bit to reveal blue and purple fruits and a creamier sensation. The fruit is rather cool and crisp in the mouth, with fresh blueberries and plums. It holds together nicely through the mid-palate and adds in a sprinkle of woody spices on the finish.
2004 Chateau Lagrange St. Julien. Definitive aromas of dried eucalyptus and green pepper are primary on the nose upon first pouring and sniffing. Cherry cream and cassis fruit aromas do grow with time and air, however. Right from the start, this wine is very easy drinking in the mouth, showing a solidly smooth and seamless texture to go with red currant and bright cherry fruit. It displays medium body and a rounded yet crisp personality, with fine-grained but abundant tannins.
2004 Chateau Leoville Poyferre St. Julien. There is very good depth to the nose of this wine, with a baby fat sweetness to the dark plum fruits that meld nicely with rich coffee, mineral and spice aromas. Of all the wines to this point, this one definitely has by far the greatest palate presence, with more depth to the mid-palate in particular. It is big and rich all the way through from attack to finish, and it is a bit teeth-staining, with a wall of rich, plush tannins to contend with. There is a decent squirt of acidity, though, as well. Overall, this is well put-together and should be a solid ager. Nicely done.
Flight #4.
2004 Chateau La Gaffeliere St. Emilion. Similar to the previous wine, this has nice depth to the bouquet. In this case, the aromas include rich plum, melted chocolate and some toasty herbs. This is a relatively rich, low acid wine that still shows solid balance and drive. It features dark fruits and some savory elements in a plush package that shows good length and lush, pleasing tannins. This is quite likeable and should drink well for some time.
2004 Chateau La Grave a Pomerol Pomerol. The nose here is soft, generous and pretty, with gentle red fruits that turn a bit darker with time in the glass, taking on some coffee notes along the way. In the mouth, it is quite elegant and pure-fruited, with the sappy red fruit right up front. The tannins here are rather gentle, and overall this is an immediately pleasing offering that should reward over the short to medium term.
Flight #5.
2004 Chateau Clerc Milon Pauillac. This wine probably saw more air time than any other wine in the line-up, yet still comes across as tight. There are dark plums, blackcurrants, incense and green tobacco notes on the nose, but they take some coaxing to reveal themselves. It is similarly dark and tight in the mouth, but does show a balancing juiciness, good body and good structure—boding well for further development in bottle. There are some smoky tannins and a touch of astringency on the decent length finish. Don’t drink now—let this have a good rest in the cellar.
2004 Chateau Pontet Canet Pauillac. This has a very, very nice nose that is deep with mineral, cedar, coffee, framboise, dark caramel and tar oil aromas. It follows that up with solid richness of flavor on the attack, a bigger-styled mid-palate and sweet ripe tannins on the dark espresso roasted finish. It has excellent structure, and just seems to be at an overall higher level than the other wines sampled this night.
2004 Chateau d’Armailhac Pauillac. The final wine of the flight also shows a very appealing nose. Here we have creosote, sweet blueberry and blackberry and a sort of savory set of aromas that over time pull in darker fruit, brine and new leather notes. It is solidly-structured in the mouth, with dark berry fruit and dark chocolate flavors framed by fairly elegant tannins. It has good length, but does seem to narrow and tighten up a bit on the finish. A solid showing.
With dessert:
1971 Chateau Rieussec Sauternes. The color is that of dark iced tea. The nose is delightful, with every swirl of the glass seeming to bring in more complexity and layering of aromas. My notes include references to spicy botrytis, maple sugar candy, citrus skin, over-ripe apricot, candied grapefruit and furniture polish. It has a lovely viscosity in the mouth--especially in the mid-palate, where flavors of light maple, dark honey, lime pith and browned yellow fruit are in abundance. Yet, it is not heavy at all and it shows outstanding balance. The structure is actually somewhat lithe and the sweetness is far from overdone. For all its richness, it still feels precise. The finish is long and lingering.
At the end of all this, six of us chose to vote on red wines of the night. Final tallies:
2004 Pontet Canet: 11 points (3 first, 2 second place votes)
2004 Poyferre: 7 points (1 first, 2 second place votes)
2004 Lagrange: 4 points (1 first, 1 third place vote)
2004 Brane Cantenac: 4 points (1 first, 1 third place vote)
2004 La Grave a Pomerol: 4 points (1 second, 2 third place votes)
2004 Smith Haut Lafitte: 3 points (1 second, 1 third place vote)
2004 La Lagune: 2 point (1 second place vote)
2004 La Gaffeliere: 1 point (1 third place vote)
-Michael
)