Thyme - Chicago
Tasted Sunday, July 17, 2005 by KenK with 1,028 views
An off-line with nine board members to asess the early qualities of the 2002 Red Burgundy vintage on July 12th. The only stipulation was to bring a wine costing about $50. In general, the group thought this was a very good vintage as the wines were generally well balanced with plenty of fruit, acid and tannins.
Soft leesy aromas of cream. On the palate, vibrant acidity, tart white fruits, somewhat austere and dry. Nice concentration with solid core of fruit, but tightly wound by acid. A bit angular for me needing time to intergrate. Others found this a clean wine with lots of minerals and ranked it much higher then me.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Nose: Smoky with beautiful bacon fat tone - rich and lush
Palate: Big wine with lots going on. Earthy entry with toasty element in concentrated soft lush style. Bursting with flavors of rich round apple fruit and some buttery notes. Nice balancing acidity under layers of fruit. Finishes with soft long toasty quality. Some found it almost to buttery and oaky, but I thought it well made and reasonably complex.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Group ranked it 91 points and WOTFlight.
Soft sweet cherry nose with oak, spice and some floral aromas.
Palate followed the nose closely with added depth of black cherry, toast, baking spices and nice backbone of acid and tannins. Most felt it had great balance and got better the longer it sat in the glass. Some with more experience than I considered this textbook young Volnay. Scores of the nine tasters ranged from 90-92.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Group ranked this 87 points w/range of 81-91
Rich ripe dark cherry fruit dominated the nose.
On the palate, lean dry black cherry fruit with tannic toasty finish. Most found this tight and lean with stemmy dry tanninic edge distracting from fruit. Maybe already shutdown, not much fun to drink right now, but seems age worthy. Question is will it improve?
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Group ranked this 90 points with broad range of 82-94, most clusted in 89-93.
Dense Blackberry nose with rustic edge
Dry cherry flavors dominate wirh peppery quality. Tightly wound with good underlying richness and toasty quality. Gained weight with time, but still quite hard at this stage. Some noted an herbal earthy quality that was described as harsh. "Seems like it was bottled yesterday" was one quote.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Group ranked this 88 points with a range of 80-92. Most scores ranges from 88-90.
Spicy cherry with distinct cinnamon character to nose
Nicely balanced with dry stony cherry that filled out in mid-palate. Great fruit density missing in others with solid finish. Has fruit, acid and tannins at right levels to expect bigger things down the road. I was the high score. Others found an herbal earthy quality and thought it was harsh, like it was bottled yesterday.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Group ranked 91 points in a range of 88-95, but with most 90-93
Earthy nose with a touch of anise, dark and almost brooding in style
Palate follows nose with dark earthy nuance, toasty with undertones of black cherry fruits and dry almost coarse, an old world style. Some felt this one was shut down, but had a great finish. Fruit was lacking, but lots of terrior.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Group ranked 91 points in range of 89-92 with an 88 and 96 thown out.
Huge and earthy nose with massive dark red fruits, very open relative to others in the flight. Big floral perfume aroma.
On the palate, light on its feet with lovely dry cherry lightly toasted with dry fruti finish. A modern style that had voluptous entry with somewhat harsh dry finish.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
My score was lowest of the group. The range of scores was 89-94 with most 91-93. Group rank was 91 points.
I got red cherry with carmel and toast on the nose with a hint of tea.
On the palate, soft, elegant style with nice dry cherry essence coated with minerals. Only concern was a dry finish. In reviewing my notes. perhaps I scored this one too low.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
My WOTN and groups WOTN. Group ranked as 92 with ranging scores from 90-97, but most 90-93.
Huge blast of concentrated dark cherries, eath and some barnyard notes a WOW nose.
Palate was also rich and concentrated with big soft cherry flavors in a very feminine style. The wine was simply singing to me with great depth, good complexity and amazing balance and long finish. Not sure why others did not like this better, maybe too much fruit and oak?
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Group ranked at 91 in wide range of 85-97. Most in 90-92 range
Nose was dominated by anise and smoky sweet dry cherry
Palate featured dry toasty component with lean dry cherries. Noted subtle complexities underlying the dominating features, which may speak to future nuances. Spicy finish of only medium length. Some found the nose intense relative to other wines, but other tasters found the palate very tight, maybe shut down.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Group Ranking 92 points and would have been groups' WOTN without my score dragging down the results. Excluding my score range was in a tight 90-94 band with four of eight giving 94 poiints. Below are my notes with group comments too. I suspected at the time, and continue to believe, my stem was not clean.
Nose: Tight with elements of dill and bird seeds
Palate: Dry and tart with herbal green tea quality some red fruit components buried underneath tons of minerals. Hard wine and seemingly shut down.
Group notes: Acacia flowers, very floral nose with well defined layers of complex fruit completely balanced by perfectly integrated acidity. Toasty, richly concentrated with many nuances.
I tried Jody's pour and I clearly had a different wine in my glass. I still do not understand what happend.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Nose of sweet flowers along with toasty ripe tropical fruits
Palate was rich and creamy with layers of peach, pinapple and pear. Nice balancing acidity and mineral tones keep it from going over the top. Finishes with long creme brulee sweetness. Still a puppy, needing time to gain some fine nuances, but all the components are there. The tremendous balance between the fruit and acid is best feature today. No group rating or notes.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Individual wines and tasters preferences were wide spread as the personalities of the wines and tasters were all unique. Perhaps the the vintages defining character is that even at such an early stage these wines had distinct personalities, but most shared common elements of solid fruit-floral core with tones of minerals and good acid levels. Tannin levels and ripeness along with oak levels and nuances differed
© 2003-24 CellarTracker! LLC. All rights reserved. "CellarTracker!" is a trademark of CellarTracker! LLC. No part of this website may be used, reproduced or distributed without the prior written permission of CellarTracker! LLC.
NV Krug Champagne Brut Grande Cuvée 92 Points
France, Champagne
Was served as a wecome wine. My notes read quite toasty, creamy and yeasty with fat mouthfeel and long rich nutty finish. Krug as Krug should be, although initially served too cold.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
1990 Joseph Perrier Champagne Cuvée Josephine 90 Points
France, Champagne
Very floral nose with bright hi-toned citric note. On the palate, toasty with great rich bright honeysuckle and apple fruit. Long elegant finish. Served with eel on brioche appetizer.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue