Popped ‘n poured. Light red color, minimal signs of age. The nose is, as a reviewer below says, totally entrancing. Initially, black earth, but it blows over quickly to reveal spices, cherry, liquorice, and this bizarre medicinal absorbine junior like minty note. Entrancing… The mouth is light but with muscle, chiseled but easy drinking, with a slightly woodsy, serious and muscular finish. Excellent wine, entering its prime with a good 5 years still to go, at least. 95 for for me, maybe more.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
2002 Burgundy Dinner (Chef Kang, MacKenzie Road, Singapore): This was quite nice tonight. It had such an entrancing nose, with lovely sweet red cherries and berries, perfumed florals, a touch of mint, a bit of bramble, and just a tiny hint of earth and meat. Lovely Gevrey character here. The palate had a bit of a sterner feel than the nose suggested, with a firm spine of chewy tannins running through otherwise pure, lifted flavours of red berries, cherries and just a little bit of spice and bramble, all this enlivened by a tons of lovely acidity. Delicious, and very charming, but just a touch firm and rustically structured, with those woody tannins hanging around the edges of the wine. This unfortunately gave the wine a rather four-square feel. Still though, this was very enjoyable, and clearly the best showing out of the 3 bottles I have had in recent years. If anything, tonight's tasting bodes well for the wine's future. I would leave it aside for another 4-5 years; it should be drinking even better then.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
All 9 Gevrey Grand Crus (Straits Clan, Singapore): Not a bad wine, but certainly not a great Grand Cru, especially for a strong vintage like 2002. The nose was tight and funky, with lots of meat and earth at the fore, some stony mineral, and then just some dark cherry fruit barely peeking out from amidst the more savoury, funky smells. It thankfully opened up with time, starting to show more dark fruited tones floating over that earthy base. The palate was hard as nails, not thinly fruited by any means, but coming across a bit lean and mean, with a layer of dark fruit draped over really firm bones of tannins, acidity, and then a line of spice and mineral, all trailing away into a rather hard finish. Not great at first, but this did open-up with time and food to show a touch more velvety fruit over its muscular core. In the end though, a wine that was decent, but far from great. Disappointing.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
This is my favorite wine tonight. It's interesting that it comes from a maker I have never heard of. Classic gevrey with sweet dark fruit, coffee bean, and tea. The structure of this wine what I really enjoy probably. Drinking well now (not a good sign for 02 grand cru but who cares). A balanced and elegant wine. 92+
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I needed something powerful yet elegant to follow a superb bottle of Grange des Pères and this fitted the bill very well. Quite full bodied, it showed dark savoury Pinot fruit with an ivy touch, minerals, smooth texture, good depth and acidity and firm but ripe tannic backbone before a decently long finish. Still quite primary in character with, I guess, plenty of life left and good potential for evolution. Excellent.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Rich, ripe, blue/purple fruit profile. Young. Quite plush and deep on the entry but a bit spiky on the back end with a dry finish and some alcohol burn showing through.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Lovely. 2 hour decant revealed an expressive nose of roses. Lovely mineraity and a round long finish. Not a blockbuster but a fine example of why burgundy is so wonderful.
In fact I had an "anti-burgundy" wino try this and they loved it.
Wish I had another bottle
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
A bit disappointed that this was a taupenot and a strong vintage too. At best a good 1er Cru with mature fruits and mushrooms and truffles. Good but not impressionable.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
2012 - Hi, Jonathan! (Paradise Pavilion @ MBFC): Alcohol :: 13.5% The color is cloudy, garnet which is weird for such a 2002. Condition problem? The nose was pretty expressive and complex with perfume red flower intermixed with cherry cola, blackberry fruits, earth and wild meatiness. On the palate this is definitely a power house. Structure, powerful but with mouth coating tannin that is quite rustic. A wine that built to age but I can't find any finesse nor purity in it. According to my friend, Merme's style should be more feminine and elegance. Thus, something wrong with this bottle?
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Jonathan visits Singapore (Pavilion Paradise, MBFC): This was another pretty good yet rather disappointing wine, especially given the strength of the vintage and how good the past few bottles of the domaine's Mazoyères that we have had have been. It perhaps shows how far they have come over the past 8 vintages or so. The nose here was a bit strange, with a very funky ring to it, almost like a mix of wet leaves, damp cloth, dusty earth and a little manure. Only after awhile could I get past that to distinctly prettier aromas of cherries and plums. The palate was a bit better. It was certainly a lot cleaner in feel than the nose had led on, with some pure flavours of dark fruit - blackberry and black cherry I thought - leading into minerally, limestone inflected finish, with a nice spicy length at its tail. Somehow though, for all its pleasing qualities, the palate seemed a bit dumbed down, lacking both the depth and complexity, and even the vibrancy that I have come to associate with Taupenot-Merme's Mazoyères-Chambertin. It did seem a bit more rustic and less elegant than usual as well. If anything I would have pegged this at the level of a decently good 1er Cru. It was difficult to tell if the wine would improve - it had a bit of the obdurate opagueness that still inflicts many 2002 Grand Crus, maybe even more than most - but it should be interesting to try this again in three to four years.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
1/29/2023 - DenverChevys Likes this wine: 93 Points
Showed beautifully. Lovely tart red fruits with a nice spice component.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/6/2022 - FabesMTL Likes this wine: 95 Points
Popped ‘n poured. Light red color, minimal signs of age.
The nose is, as a reviewer below says, totally entrancing. Initially, black earth, but it blows over quickly to reveal spices, cherry, liquorice, and this bizarre medicinal absorbine junior like minty note. Entrancing…
The mouth is light but with muscle, chiseled but easy drinking, with a slightly woodsy, serious and muscular finish. Excellent wine, entering its prime with a good 5 years still to go, at least. 95 for for me, maybe more.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/24/2021 - Tony Ling Likes this wine: 93 Points
7 hours upon opening serving into 薄はり葡萄酒器 (“Leaf” day):
Cherry cola, liquorice.
Extracted style in my view. Very much structured.
Improved with second / third pours. 93 points?
Second round: coffee, oak
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/16/2019 - Paul S wrote: 92 Points
2002 Burgundy Dinner (Chef Kang, MacKenzie Road, Singapore): This was quite nice tonight. It had such an entrancing nose, with lovely sweet red cherries and berries, perfumed florals, a touch of mint, a bit of bramble, and just a tiny hint of earth and meat. Lovely Gevrey character here. The palate had a bit of a sterner feel than the nose suggested, with a firm spine of chewy tannins running through otherwise pure, lifted flavours of red berries, cherries and just a little bit of spice and bramble, all this enlivened by a tons of lovely acidity. Delicious, and very charming, but just a touch firm and rustically structured, with those woody tannins hanging around the edges of the wine. This unfortunately gave the wine a rather four-square feel. Still though, this was very enjoyable, and clearly the best showing out of the 3 bottles I have had in recent years. If anything, tonight's tasting bodes well for the wine's future. I would leave it aside for another 4-5 years; it should be drinking even better then.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
11/6/2018 - LFCHALA Likes this wine: 94 Points
Special wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/11/2018 - Paul S wrote: 90 Points
All 9 Gevrey Grand Crus (Straits Clan, Singapore): Not a bad wine, but certainly not a great Grand Cru, especially for a strong vintage like 2002. The nose was tight and funky, with lots of meat and earth at the fore, some stony mineral, and then just some dark cherry fruit barely peeking out from amidst the more savoury, funky smells. It thankfully opened up with time, starting to show more dark fruited tones floating over that earthy base. The palate was hard as nails, not thinly fruited by any means, but coming across a bit lean and mean, with a layer of dark fruit draped over really firm bones of tannins, acidity, and then a line of spice and mineral, all trailing away into a rather hard finish. Not great at first, but this did open-up with time and food to show a touch more velvety fruit over its muscular core. In the end though, a wine that was decent, but far from great. Disappointing.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
11/30/2017 - Burgnick Likes this wine: 92 Points
This is my favorite wine tonight. It's interesting that it comes from a maker I have never heard of. Classic gevrey with sweet dark fruit, coffee bean, and tea. The structure of this wine what I really enjoy probably. Drinking well now (not a good sign for 02 grand cru but who cares). A balanced and elegant wine. 92+
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/14/2017 - eboracum Likes this wine: 93 Points
I needed something powerful yet elegant to follow a superb bottle of Grange des Pères and this fitted the bill very well. Quite full bodied, it showed dark savoury Pinot fruit with an ivy touch, minerals, smooth texture, good depth and acidity and firm but ripe tannic backbone before a decently long finish. Still quite primary in character with, I guess, plenty of life left and good potential for evolution. Excellent.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/11/2017 - Levantine wrote:
An intense nose dominated by spices
On the mouth a bit o hard work, lacked roundness and suaveness
Acidity dominates and sandy tannins
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/5/2015 - DAN BAILEY wrote:
Rich, ripe, blue/purple fruit profile. Young. Quite plush and deep on the entry but a bit spiky on the back end with a dry finish and some alcohol burn showing through.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/28/2014 - Pcrage wrote: 92 Points
Lovely. 2 hour decant revealed an expressive nose of roses. Lovely mineraity and a round long finish. Not a blockbuster but a fine example of why burgundy is so wonderful.
In fact I had an "anti-burgundy" wino try this and they loved it.
Wish I had another bottle
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/5/2014 - FamilyLarsson wrote: 91 Points
Kraftfull och rustik med inslag av stjälkar. Väldigt gott
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/22/2012 - Alex H wrote: 86 Points
A bit disappointed that this was a taupenot and a strong vintage too. At best a good 1er Cru with mature fruits and mushrooms and truffles. Good but not impressionable.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/9/2012 - Sleepy Dave wrote:
2012 - Hi, Jonathan! (Paradise Pavilion @ MBFC): Alcohol :: 13.5%
The color is cloudy, garnet which is weird for such a 2002. Condition problem? The nose was pretty expressive and complex with perfume red flower intermixed with cherry cola, blackberry fruits, earth and wild meatiness. On the palate this is definitely a power house. Structure, powerful but with mouth coating tannin that is quite rustic. A wine that built to age but I can't find any finesse nor purity in it. According to my friend, Merme's style should be more feminine and elegance. Thus, something wrong with this bottle?
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/9/2012 - Paul S wrote: 91 Points
Jonathan visits Singapore (Pavilion Paradise, MBFC): This was another pretty good yet rather disappointing wine, especially given the strength of the vintage and how good the past few bottles of the domaine's Mazoyères that we have had have been. It perhaps shows how far they have come over the past 8 vintages or so. The nose here was a bit strange, with a very funky ring to it, almost like a mix of wet leaves, damp cloth, dusty earth and a little manure. Only after awhile could I get past that to distinctly prettier aromas of cherries and plums. The palate was a bit better. It was certainly a lot cleaner in feel than the nose had led on, with some pure flavours of dark fruit - blackberry and black cherry I thought - leading into minerally, limestone inflected finish, with a nice spicy length at its tail. Somehow though, for all its pleasing qualities, the palate seemed a bit dumbed down, lacking both the depth and complexity, and even the vibrancy that I have come to associate with Taupenot-Merme's Mazoyères-Chambertin. It did seem a bit more rustic and less elegant than usual as well. If anything I would have pegged this at the level of a decently good 1er Cru. It was difficult to tell if the wine would improve - it had a bit of the obdurate opagueness that still inflicts many 2002 Grand Crus, maybe even more than most - but it should be interesting to try this again in three to four years.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/7/2007 - espia wrote:
MDH: not vy impressed
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment