Last night, I got together with folks from the wine-pages board who were kind enough to welcome me at their picnic offline, which meant eating and drinking in the conference room of Alex’s office. A unique venue but really quite charming and convenient and somehow tolerated by Alex’s company. The standard of food was quite high. I understand in the early versions of these events it may have been stale bread and old sausages, but last night’s standouts included delicious homemade focaccia, delightful mushroom risotto, tasty tarts, and some unique Franco-Bulgarian dim sum-esque canapés, along with plenty of other treats.
Of course even better for me was the wine theme of the Loire. Although we started off-theme with the 1998 Schramsberg J Schram. My first exposure to this house and I found it quite pleasant. Plenty of sunny fruit supported by a slight underlying acid mineral spine. Nothing for me to complain about. Some asked me if I thought it might be slightly low in acid, and I replied ‘For my tastes of course, it’s from California after all. But despite that it’s still quite drinkable.’ This got a good laugh as people had been holding been critiques of the American wine out of politeness.
We would not all agree on the 1999 Didier Dagueneau Pouilly Fumé Pur Sang. Some of us (myself included) thought it was corked but others (including the man who brought the wine) thought that the musty cardboard smell disappeared at times to reveal the petrolly steely low-in-fruit wine that it usually is. Unfortunately we had no second bottle to settle the score.
Moving across the river we had the 2002 Alphonse Mellot Sancerre "Cuvée Edmond" and the 2006 Sébastian Riffault Sancerre Akméniné. Both wines are in the richer, riper, rounder style of Sancerre (which admittedly is not my favorite) yet they had very clear differences. The Mellot seemed very ‘well-made’ as it was rich and round yet not at all heavy or plodding (as I had been expecting from the oak marks). It had decent minerality and was only a bit soft. But if I drink Sancerre I want life, and this seemed dull. There was more energy to the Riffault, which was somewhat surprising because it was mostly about the toffeed honey. However, despite that richness there was plenty of complexity with appropriate herbal notes and a delightful tactile texture that made this one of the most interesting wines of the evening for me.
One last dry white was the 2007 Raats Family Original Chenin Blanc which was fresh crisp and respectable if not very exciting for me, although I saw some folks at the other end of the table enjoying glass after glass in an apparent effort to conjure up the outdoor grill-fest that this would go splendidly with. I will keep that in mind.
We started the red wine with 2005 Vacheron Sancerre Rouge Belle Dame and 2005 Ampelidæ P.N. 1328 VdP de la Vienne. Both were dark fruited and firm examples of pinot noir and offered an interesting mixture of positive and negative features. The Vacheron was prettier and easier although it had sour notes that seemed strange among all the dark gravely fruit and made me wonder about the quality of the fruit/terroir. Which were supposed to be good given the price. No? The Ampelidæ was unique, befitting its unique origins, and although it took me a bit of time to get used to the brett, once that calmed the wine seemed more focused and layered than the Vacheron. Dark, hard, deep, tight: I don’t think I would have identified this blind as pinot noir. Interesting.
I was looking forward to comparing the 2004 and the 1996 Baudry Chinon Croix Boissée. The 04 showed much more open and less tannic than I expected and at first I liked it better than the 96. It had all that fresh juicy fruit with layers of flavor and nice balance. In comparison, the 96 seemed a bit funky and vegetal at first, but after a few sips I warmed to its resolved, integrated, spicy and mature pleasures. I remember bottles from a few years ago where the acid was sticking out on these 96 CBs. But, if this bottle is any indication that need no longer be a consideration and they can now be approached without fear. Whether or not you want to wait for further evolution is a matter of personal taste.
The 2005 C+P Breton Bourgueil Les Perrieres was gorgeous as expected. Love the ripe dark but oh so clean and fresh flavors going on here. It was plenty firm and serious and had plenty pulsing underneath for the future. Yet, it was showing pretty well as I might have feared something more tannic and shut down. Perhaps a bit blocky and on its way towards a cranky stage, but it was not fully there yet. Hooray for us!
The 2001 Château de la Grille Chinon did not show very well next to the Breton and Baudry. It was pleasant and correct (it showed weeds!), but I don’t think anyone was very excited.
At this point we had all eaten way too much but were still trucking on like troopers, and luckily we had more wine to ease the pain! The 2004 Ampelidæ Le K VdP de la Vienne was yet another interesting offering. Apparently it is 100% cabernet sauvignon and there were some curranty notes to evoke the grape. But again, it seemed to speak more of its quirky unique origins as it was dark, firm, mineral, layered, confusing, and in need of more attention.
Which I did not have to give because we were now pouring the 1994 Mas de Daumas Gassac Rouge which was extremely minty and although the fruit was dark the wine was thin and piercing on the palate. Others had reported recent bottles showing well, but this one seemed to be still shut down. That said, it became friendlier and more harmonious once Plamen circulated his anti-tannin vanilla candies.
And since things were getting sweet, why not drink the 1990 Prince Poniatowski Vouvray Moelleux Clos Baudoin. This went well with the lemon tart and was refreshing after all the red wine. Nothing grand and I’ve never felt the need to buy these wines, but it had its loose bright yellow ripe juicy and dirty-mineral way about it. A refreshing close to the ceremonies. Or at least to the first round of the ceremonies before re-tasting the red wines…
Thanks again!
