As many of you kind followers on this Blog know your scribe is one of the biggest supporters of fresh local Dungeness crab. The natural sweetness of the meat is uniquely fantastic so it is IMHO best served quite simply prepared as not to detract from that pleasure. Also fascinating is to find your perfect white wine to match and enhance the crab. Big fan of pairing top Premier or Grand Cru Chablis as hard to beat except perhaps the luxury of a quality balanced chardonnay but not one too heavy or oaky.
Usually a keen locavar eater supporting the local producers we do as a special treat indulge with friends once a year in a king crab dinner. Always a lot of fun to compare the differences between Dungeness & King. These king crabs are monster size seafood that easily weigh 8 pounds but bigger ones come in around 10 that are even better for more “meat”. Mostly we have enjoyed those coming in fresh from Alaska but also remember tasting while in Chile the delicacy of Patagonian Southern Red King variety. We had admired over the years each Spring the excellent service at Fortune Garden at 1475 West Broadway in Vancouver BC (now closed) with photos from April 4, 2019 showing the excitement of having these king crab and their tasty preparation. This year on August 17 we moved to the highly regarded Dynasty Seafood Restaurant at 777 West Broadway for a new king crab experience. What a delightful surprise of outstanding culinary preparation this turned out to be! A large 10 pounder we were told had arrived live from Russia via Norway and was truly other worldly. Not at all stringy but so delicate and naturally sweet. Remarkable! The steaming technique used together with finely chopped non invasive best garlic in the legs and knuckles only enhanced this so delicious experience. The best yet. It turned into 3 courses in order of legs, knuckles, and rice all splendid with Champagne plus fresh local Synchromesh 2018 Riesling Storm Haven Vineyard. What a way to celebrate a big occasion in your life during these difficult continuing days of Covid-19. Still need to indulge and celebrate once in a while. Highly recommended.
Answer: I am sure many of you just use an all-purpose glass for all your wines. There now so many good choices out there to serve the purpose including several from the Riedel Vinum series or Spiegelau Universal. I am fortunate to have quite a wide choice of glasses to use. Here is a photo of just seven of them that get a lot of use starting from the left:
1. Champagne tulip (not a flute) for Sparkling – especially Champagne.
2. All-purpose – especially good for whites or Chianti style
3. Bordeaux style wines (though for very old bottles prefer a smaller glass)
4. Syrah style wines
5. Pinot Noir – especially younger New World
6. Zalto versatile one for best Burgundy and Piedmont
7. Gigantic Riedel one for younger aromatics
Also
like using the new Zwiesel Sensory one designed by Roberto Conterno of
Giacomo Conterno winery similar to the Zalto but with a wider bowl base
accentuating the aromas. Excellent of course for Barolo!
La Commanderie de Bordeaux Vancouver Branch held a tasting-dinner carefully organized for 30 members at the Blue Water restaurant on August 10, 2020 under strict pandemic logistics. They always serve Bordeaux wines at these events with the theme this time a so-called “House of Mouton”. We started appropriately enough with NV Champagne Barons De Rothschild Brut a fresh cuvee of 60% chardonnay & 40% pinot noir with some blended reserves in the blend. The first flight was a 3 vintage vertical of their fifth growth Pauillac property of Chateau Clerc-Milon, a mystery wine second flight, and a third flight of 3 vintages of the famous Mouton itself. A fun game developed of try to identify the blind wine with each member around the table asked in turn for their opinion of what it was. Opus One was an obvious thought as it is a joint venture of Mouton & Robert Mondavi with their first vintage 1979 released in 1984. However in the reality of the situation it was a much more difficult thing to do. Your scribe second in line luckily but bravely blurted out “Opus One from the nineties” despite background knowledge that our Bordeaux cellar didn’t have California wine, hard to find bottles of older vintages of top quality ones, and such were very expensive. For example at Benchmark Wine Group one bottle of Opus One from the nineties if available is currently in the US $400+ range (1997 is $455). However, the popular choice suggested around the table after me was definitely Bordeaux from the eighties and probably another vintage of Mouton or perhaps another Clerc Milon, d’Armailhac or different classed growth Pauillac. Amazing how many excellent tasters were influenced in their tasting opinion by what was expected likely to be served in the surrounding circumstances of the occasion. Interesting factor.
The wines with some brief impressions:
CLERC MILON:
1986: Dark with some lovely open cedar cigar-box notes. Nice richness but somewhat atypical with more accessible softness than most 1986 Pauillacs are showing plus rather elegant.
1995: Palest maturing rim of the flight shows better bigger cabernet fruit in a richer style than expected for this vintage more like the twin 1996.
1998: Very dark for youngest in the flight. Concentrated with more cassis black currant notes and contribution of some petit verdot (3%). No rush with lots here to develop for a vintage that often favours the Right Bank. All three wines rather good paired with smoked bacon wrapped around that halibut.
MYSTERY WINE BLIND – OPUS ONE 1997:
Thicker glycerol tears or legs on inside of glass. Powerful mocha herbal menthol notes developed on bouquet. Very ripe rather roasted cabernet sauvignon of softer styling blend (82/8/5/4/1 cabernet sauvignon/cab franc/merlot/malbec/ petit verdot) showing more sappy weight on the palate. Delicious truffled cannelloni matched this wine well.
MOUTON-ROTHSCHILD:
1983: Maturing pale rim with depth. Smokey stylish classic bouquet. Good underlying acidity with admirable clean grape selection showing. Elegant, long, and complex. One of the best 1983 Pauillacs (with Pichon Lalande) even with those rather difficult August mildew conditions in the rainy vineyards. Surprise and Wine of the Night. Under-rated!
1989: Dark look. Always prefer this year over their 1990. Cedar and developing already. Less body and complexity than hoped for. Certainly not in the classic 1986 or delicious 1982 ball park. Have had better bottles of this year.
1995: Very young and dark. A bit closed in still but good deep intensity of fruit. Dense attractive Pauillac styling has length for sure with an excellent future ahead. Impressive. No rush. Got to admire also the innovative trio presentations of Wagyu beef so perfect with this flight.
Question: I read your Blog dated June 24 about the differences between pinot noirs from the Russian River and the Sonoma Coasts. What would you say the difference is between Pinot Noir from the Willamette Valley in Oregon and Sonoma Coast/Russian River Pinots? I am planning an event to contrast the OR Pintos from the CA Pinots.
Answer: Will be an interesting comparison. Both Oregon and California are changing rapidly with the benefit of older vines planted in the right spots and the influence of climate change. There are some unique best places being found and developed for pinot noir in both states. For example on the Sonoma Coast quality producers like Littorai are able to achieve just enough rich ripeness (but not too much) to balance out that good fresh underlying acidity. Some don’t reach the same complexity picking grapes too early that are slightly under ripe or too late overripe. Difficult to get everything perfect. Look at the excitement being generated by amazing pinot noirs from Santa Rita Hills. In Oregon you have pinot noirs that are lighter more delicate and fragrant than the denser fuller riper richer ones in California. However there are lots of exceptions to that overly general rule. Good to remember that California has higher temperatures, fewer daylight hours, and a longer growing season while Oregon has cooler temperatures, more daylight hours, but usually a shorter growing season before the Fall rains arrive. Additionally climate change is really affecting Oregon with the last 5 years seeing the warmest increased temperatures on record during the growing season. Over 62% of the grapes grown in Oregon are pinot noir. This presently can be a big benefit for them in achieving perfect phenolic ripeness but also an added pressure to harvest earlier. The best way to explore the fascinating differences between the two states is by tasting the specific bottles you actually open and studying them. Please report back on the findings.
This new reality is certainly cutting back on the feasibility of holding memorable wine events that were much more easily done in the good old days. However this didn’t stop a wonderful couple of Burgundy collectors from carefully orchestrating one last month at their home featuring treasures from their cellar with the theme of Richebourg Grand Cru red Burgundy. Smartly and safely socially distanced with a superbly catered dinner in 3 separate rooms at large tables of only 5-6 persons at each. How comfortable relaxing and thoughtfully done.
What an indulgence to try 17 different spectacular Richebourg in one evening. Almost too much of a good thing but yet an incomparable education on this most important non-monopole in Vosne-Romanee. There are references to this great domain going back to 1512 but presently has 8.03 hectares divided into 2 main lieux-dits or parcels of more northernly cooler Les Verroilles ou Richebourgs with rows planted to run north to south of 2.98 ha and southerly Les Richebourgs of 5.05 ha with east-west rows on 255-295 metre slope with clay, pebbles, sand over hard limestone. Originally it was referenced that the former was only a Premier Cuvee and the latter the Tete de Cuvee but Rodier promoted both and they were unified in 1924. The question remains as to whether they in fact are of equal quality. Also as to whether Les Verroilles may continue to improve with this northern aspect due to continuing climate change.
This occasion provided the rare opportunity to compare 8 vintages of Meo-Camuzet (M-C) with 7 from Domaine de la Romanee-Conti (DRC) with 2 bonus choices for comparison of 1999 Domaine A. F. Gros with .6 ha (open elegant more delicate finesse than expected for the vintage + well managed tannins) and 2005 Thibault Liger-Belair .55 ha (dense powerful smooth tannins classic needing more time) with a main dinner course of perfectly paired Coq Au Vin with duck fat frites.
The main focus of our delightful wine study was the difference between the Richebourg M-C of .35 ha nearly all of it in Les Verroilles with DRC largest holding of 3.51 ha (with Leroy second at .78) divided between Les Verroilles 1 ha & Les Richebourgs 2.5 ha. Another major difference was the winemaking techniques of stems or no stems. The legendary Henri Jayer who made the first M-C in 1985 (his last 1987) was a strong supporter of 100% destemming (felt wine “confected” using stems) with some beautiful vintages produced including that 1985, 1978 & 1959. His successor Jean-Nicolas Meo has continued this method though cleverly experimented in 2009/2010 with adding back some riper stems for whole bunch during fermentation achieving added structure and finish but felt the wine lost some charm. On the other hand DRC are big advocates for whole bunch fermentation and 100% new oak with their own casks. Let’s look at your scribe’s brief impressions:
MEO-CAMUZET RICHEBOURG:
2014 – Loads of fresh fruit with balancing acidity all so young and correct. Patience needed.
2012 – Lovely charm with freshness a surprise for the vintage.
2010 – Cool aristocratic classy fruit with firm structure shows excellent promise indeed to become a classic. Whether experimental stems used or not – still a wonderfully balanced Richebourg.
2009 – Shows full riper “sweetness” and spice of black & red fruits with lower acidity but still an impressive seductive beauty to cellar even though is approachable earlier. Taste experimental stems used for added structure in this hot vintage?
2008 – Some developing bouquet of chocolate-coffee. Deep clean fruit helped from northern winds has more acidity to hold it with further aging. Opened up as aired and warmed up to become rather accessible already.
2007 – Lighter quite cool year stylishly fragrant and more tender supple for an earlier drinking plateau of an elegant vintage better with food.
2006 – Dark colour. Surprisingly bright and almost sumptuous ripe cherries. Like the lively balance and open charm to make a memorable bottle to enjoy while waiting for those 2005 to come around.
1995 – Further developed in an earthy spice ready to drink manner but lacks velvet texture because has some of those drier tannins of the vintage. Ready.
DOMAINE DE LA ROMANEE-CONTI RICHEBOURG:
2007 – Very light and controversial year for DRC. Lacks depth. Reminds of the old leaner fantastic elegant bouquet and flavours of those three-packs from the property of the sixties from off-years? Evolving quickly.
2006 – Also light but more precise. Some rounder richer notes. Approachable. Showing already brilliantly complex tonight. Note both 2006 & 2007 much lighter and mature looking than same vintages of the deep bright M-C.
2005 – What a difference here! Much better intense generous fruit. Still stern but some underlying distinctive Asian spices peeking through. So much potential and probably ultimately the best wine of all these for sure.
2004 – Delicious exotic surprise here. Open ready amazing complexity with some violets but mostly herbal tea with wild cherries. Finish goes on.
2002 – Paler than expected but lots more of that unique DRC exquisite flowers, spice and exotica on the nose. Still so structured with no rush. Will still develop a better smooth texture with more aging as loses tannins. The textbook example of a powerful Richebourg style.
1998 – Different with an unusual caramel sweetness that makes it quite ready for drinking. Variable year but hoped for more weight and pure fruit. Approachable but a puzzle.
1996 – Reductive and funky at first pouring. Blew off to show some purer fruit elegance. A bit stemmy from those whole bunches and not together at this time. Prefer it over 98 but has some of that usual 1996 tannic hardness. Would try it again.
What a Richebourg Masterclass. Interesting discussion among the knowledgeable attendees about the showing of diverse styles. Many preferred the easier more bright fruit vigour of the fresher M-C. Some liked the muscular power and tannic structure plus unique bouquet of DRC – especially in 2005 but also 2002. We were all amazed about how Richebourg from M-C and DRC can be so different in their styling of this most special terroir.
