WTN: 2006 Robert Arnoux Bourgogne Pinot Fin

WTN: 2006 Robert Arnoux Bourgogne Pinot Fin 12.5%
Ordered a sixpack of the 2005 after seeing a positive report from David B. Didn't notice the "no vintage substitution" box, so ended up with a sixpack of the 2006s...

Tasty cherry aroma with some green twigs and iodine. Very light tannins but good acid, from which this gets its grip (like a Barbera). Simple, well made, reasonably satisfying, would probably make most recreational wine drinkers quite happy accompanying a meal, but nothing special for the geek.

While drinking I was comparing it to some lovely Morgons I had recently. My impression that some cru Beaujolais taste like basic Bourgogne wannabes made me compare apples to, er..., pears, and got me thinking about whether I prefer, for the same $$, the highest expression of something modest (like a Gang of Five Morgon) or the lowest expression of something immodest (like a good Bourgogne). The Morgons gave me more pleasure than any Bourgogne I've ever tasted (including Lafarge, Bachelet, Leroy, etc.) so my interim conclusion tilts towards big fish in small ponds...

[b]and got me thinking about whether I prefer, for the same $$, the highest expression of something modest (like a Gang of Five Morgon) or the lowest expression of something immodest (like a good Bourgogne)

That's an interesting question, and one I guess I hadn't really considered. I think I would definitely have to say that I tend towards appreciating the higher expressions of something modest. I've never been blown away by a lower end burg or bordeaux or Cali cab or CdR, but I've fallen in love with some cru beaujolias, MdA's, Ruedas, etc.

That might make an interesting thread on it's own, if people were inclinded to give examples.

[David M. Bueker]

I completely understand your point, but after some serious contemplation over the last few months I come down right on top of the fence. I still see the two wines as very different. Top Beaujolais and high quality Bourgogne offer me different things.

I completely understand your point, but after some serious contemplation over the last few months I come down right on top of the fence. I still see the two wines as very different. Top Beaujolais and high quality Bourgogne offer me different things.

I'm with you, David (and I too have contemplated this question, Oswaldo). Though they are related beasts, there is still enough distinction between basic Bourgogne rouge and Cru Beaujolais, at least in their youth, that I don't see them as competitors with one another. One vaguely related question: does anyone think that the basic Bourgogne from a quality producer like Lafarge or Bachelet will last as long as a Morgon Cote de Puy from e.g. Foillard?

Mark Lipton

I'm tempted to agree with Oswaldo but then again a really good Bourgogne offers such free-wheeling fun, exuberance, and joy, much like Beaujolais, that I don't want to have to choose!

I don't find that many basic Bourgogne that impress me so I would favor the better Beaujolais Cru. However, if I were to come across the exceptional basic Bourgogne...

It is a really good question. I guess I prefer a top Cru Beaujolais, but I do enjoy good Bourgogne also.
Some of the ones named in this thread are at the level of Village wine, and more than just straight Bourgogne.
Lafarge, Roty Pressioner, Bachelet, and Barthod Bon Baton are closer to village Volnay, Gevrey or Chambolle in good years.
I would like to hear more about other's aging experience, the question that Mark Lipton asked.

Does "Pinot Fin" refer to a particular pinot noir subvariety?

-Paul W.

[David M. Bueker]

Does "Pinot Fin" refer to a particular pinot noir subvariety?

Yes

Does "Pinot Fin" refer to a particular pinot noir subvariety?

Yes

IIRC, it makes a particularly dark-fruited wine, which is certainly consistent with the house style at Arnoux and the style of that Bourgogne.