Not bad. This had a very perfumed nose with honey and beeswax, floral orange blossoms, orange peel and kumquats, with quite a bit of dried fruit sweetness undergirding it all. There was a bit of earthy funk hinting at its age beyond that, but overall a nice bouquet. The palate had a very full attack, with beeswax and a swirl of honeyed tones drizzled over kumquats and orange peel, and then a fresher grapefruit and citrus acidity lift. It felt slightly thinner last midpalate and beyond, where it faded into a long linger of mineral and spice linger at finish, but otherwise, it was quite pleasing. Like many Alsace Pinot Gris of this ilk, it came across sweet at first, but ended up really dry, which also meant that it did better with food than without. Altogether a pretty pleasant wine. Time to drink-up though, this faded in and out of the glass over time, and did not hold-up all that well.

Objectively speaking, a solidly good wine, but I thought this lacked the finesse of a truly great Montrachet. It also came across clearly as a child of the warm 2005 vintage, which did not help its cause. The nose was a case in point - browned butter, popcorn, coconut and caramel liberally drizzled over spice and ripe stone fruits galore. A very rich, explosive nose that could well belong to a top Napa or Australian Chardonnay. The palate was equally rich, with a round, full almost oily textured mouthful of dried apricots, honey and almost a bit of treacle. This had tremendous depth and power, with just about enough acidity to keep it on the right side of balanced. It was really powerful on the finish too - sweet and sticky, with a dried mango and spice character to it. I was rather intrigued by this. Too big and burly for my usual tastes, but the Grand Cru power and intensity was clear. I would not wait to long on it though - I am not sure it has the structure to age in the long term.

This was a rather big and clumsy Burgundy. Decent enough to drink, but not great. It had a big, ripe nose, with lots of black cherries and dark berries, along with earth, herb and wood spice, along with a little dusting of florals. The palate had lots of density to it - almost Southern Rhone like in feel, with plenty of black cherries and blackberries and plums. It was only the clarity lent to the wine by its acidity and a fine 2005 structure that said Burgundy, otherwise I would have guessed Chateuneuf-du-Pape when served blind. Decent, but not great. This has put on weight over the last decade since I had a bottle, but not necessarily in a good way.

Probably the most interesting and enjoyable wine we had today, this had a beautiful nose, full of florals and spice, sweet red cherries and strawberries - all very perfumed - and then a waft of mature secondary notes, with meat and earth bringing up the rear. A lovely expression of Gevrey. The palate was lovely to drink as well. Neither the deepest nor strongest wine, but this was just so charming, with nicely full flavours of cherries and sweet red berries still going strong, and little bits of spice and meat on the midpalate and beyond. A very sound, nicely balanced wine even at its age. Quite a marvel given the vintage and relative obscurity of the winemaker. I enjoyed this.

I have had this numerous times over the past decade, and think it still needs time. It was pretty good, but still a little bit of a beast. The nose was a blast of glycerol at first, only opening up in time to show some sweet blueberries beyond all that alcohol. The palate was thankfully a lot better, with velvety tannins and soft acidity wrapped around a rather hedonistic mouthful of blueberries spice and eucalyptus unwinding into a long, full finish. Objectively a pretty good wine, but this felt just a tad awkward at the moment. Maybe its going through a phase - I am leaving my remaining couple of bottles aside for a few years at least.