WTN: Blonde on Brune

[David M. Bueker]

The 1995 Guigal Cote Rotie Brune et Blonde was always an enjoyable wine, but had never risen to any heights until last night. It started out as a very nice, properly configured, aged Cote Rotie, with all the requisite meat, leather & subtle bacon notes. I thought it was very nice. Afgter about an hour (and after some really good wines) I went back to it, and it had become even more of what it was, but also gained a harmony and depth that took it to another level. The leathery (not stinky, just leathery) element rose up on its own out of the glass & the bacon, meat & some lingering dark red fruit mingled to become of a piece. The way it matched the crispy pork shank (with bacon cream) just took it to another level.

This was a truly lovely wine from a producer I have unjustly ignored in recent years.

The 1995 Guigal Cote Rotie Brune et Blonde was always an enjoyable wine, but had never risen to any heights until last night. It started out as a very nice, properly configured, aged Cote Rotie, with all the requisite meat, leather & subtle bacon notes. I thought it was very nice. Afgter about an hour (and after some really good wines) I went back to it, and it had become even more of what it was, but also gained a harmony and depth that took it to another level. The leathery (not stinky, just leathery) element rose up on its own out of the glass & the bacon, meat & some lingering dark red fruit mingled to become of a piece. The way it matched the crispy pork shank (with bacon cream) just took it to another level.

This was a truly lovely wine from a producer I have unjustly ignored in recent years.

Glad to hear that it gave you lots of pleasure, yet I am too fresh from reading what Kermit Lynch wrote about Guigal (remember?) to wonder just how unjust you could have been...

PS: nice pun on Dylan

The way it matched the crispy pork shank (with bacon cream) just took it to another level.

Darn it... that's already got me hungry (with dinner a couple of hours away)! Pork, bacon cream and a good Cote Rotie sound like an amazing combo - and that Brune et Blonde really sounds lovely (although I'll say that about almost any Syrah that offers even a whiff of bacon in the aromatics ).

[David M. Bueker]

Oswaldo - I have read Kermit's book twice, and while what he said was interesting, he certainly has an axe to grind and an interest to serve. I take his comments with some very big grains of salt.

For those of us who haven't read the Lynch comments on Guigal - what is the controversy?

[David M. Bueker]

Salil,

Allow me to post one quote from Kermit's book. In reference to Guigal's LaLa bottlings:

"The public is very close to deciding a Cote Rotie is by definition oaky and alcoholic, and the next step is the rejection of the traditional Cote Rotie, which is not oaky or alcoholic. By no means do I blame Guigal for this state of affairs. He has great commercial instincts, and his oaky wines with their blistering alcoholic content are crowd pleasers. It requires talent to so enrapture the public and the critics."

He goes on from there. He actually sort of blames the critics, but it's a classic my tastes are good, your tastes are crap rant. Neal Rosenthal does the same kind of things about the wines he likes or does not like in his book, and Parker does the same kind of thing in the Wine Advocate.

As I mentioned elsewhere, we might as well talk about GMOs.

it's a classic my tastes are good, your tastes are crap rant. Neal Rosenthal does the same kind of things about the wines he likes or does not like in his book.

I don't see it that way. While Parker does an excellent and internally consistent job of defending his preferences, but solely on the basis of his taste, I understand Lynch and Rosenthal as defending theirs based on more than just that. To me, at least, they make a convincing case for taste grounded in tradition and "honest" wine making rather one biased towards what stands out in a professional tasting context (competitions or scores) that has little to do with how we actually experience wines in real life.

But more convincing than any theoretical position is simply any one of us liking something a lot, hence the usefulness (to me) of hearing about your experience.

David,

About Guigal: I've never had any of the La Las, but I have had older bottles of the Brune et Blonde relatively recently -- a couple of bottles of the '78 maybe two years ago, and the '83 a month ago -- in addition the the '98 and '99 within the past year. All were very good to excellent, not at all oaky (in spite of a reported 36 months in oak), and true to the appellation, IMO.

Last night I had Guigal's '99 St. Joseph Vignes de l'Hospice and the '99 Hermitage and both were very good, unoaky, and unmistakably Northern Rhône Syrah. A bottle of the 2004 St. Joseph Hospice last month was very ripe, almost S. Rhôney, and a bit oaky on the first night, so for me the take home lesson is to give your Guigals enough bottle age.

Given my limited experience, I can't say that Mr. Lynch isn't right about the top end Côte Rôties, but I'm very happy to have my modest stash of the B&Bs and St. Josephs. (and I'd kill to find a few bottles of the 1985 B&B.)

Nice note David. The '95 is a nice wine, had one maybe 2 yrs ago. I still have hope the '98 will become something similar one day.

[David M. Bueker]

I'm sitting on some of the '99. The '98 Hermitage is resting in the cellar as well. I may peek in on it soon though. I've got 4 bottles, and am trying to remain patient so that it isn't just good on the 4th Time Around.

[David M. Bueker]

Oswaldo,

I have never had a bottle of the La Las blind or young, so standing out in a blind tasting is not an issue for me. Also the few times I have had the pleasure the wines were not searingly alcoholic and they had absorbed the vast majority of their wood.