"A taste of Libanon"-Tasting, Flight 1, Wine 3 (non-blind): Tasted alongside 2007 and 2003. The most open, developed and expressive of the three Musar white tasted. The wine was medium gold in colour, darker than the 2007 but lighter than the 2003. It offered dried stone fruit, wax, some honey, ethereal notes, smoke and some manure on the nose. On the palate, the wine showed Cognac-like flavours, bruised apple, nuts and a hint of caramel. The palate was very broad and a little astringent and bitter, and the wine only had average length. The acidity seemed lower that in the 2007 and the 2003, but the wine shared the classical, smooth texture of Musar's whites.
I have only tasted about 20 different Musar wines so far, reds and whites, and am hence not an expert on Chateau Musar. With my limited experience and based only on this one bottle from a merchant's private cellar, I preferred the 1998, 1999 and 2003 to this 1993. That said, some tasters rated this 1993 higher and preferred it to the 2003. (88)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Fine pale gold. Quite fine and elegant. This bottle was very clean, nothing musty at all. Lots of unusual flavours, things like red apples, light spices, tangerines, resin, custard and more. Good acidity. Great length. Lovely and quite unique.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Musar Maniacs part II (Pera SF): Diminished aromatics - muted and dusty. Weird nose - play dough, almond skin. There's a strange bitter flavor to this - like a tongue depresser (not corked though). High acid. 8.5-9, but maybe this is an off-bottle.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Just coming into its own - much better that 1994 and 95 - which means the whites take even longer than the reds before they are ready to drink. I would say the pleasure starts close to 20 years. This wine is deep and rich (blind could be a an incredible rose), linoleum, apples, sweet spices (like a mulled cider), nuts
Not impressive. Lots of coaxing and the nose showed a little something, perfectly lovely. But the palate over 3 or 4 hours was just not compelling. No definition, no grip, like mushy yellow apples and entirely one note. i believe in Musar Blanc and everyone at the table wanted it to be great, but it just wasn't. Some didn't even finish their glass, I noticed.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Not a good bottle. Musty and without vibrancy or detail. There obviously is good material here, but as one of my companions said "It tastes like it was made in a dirty barrel, it's not clean." Bottle variation, just part of the game.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Bright dark golden, good clarity, v poor soaked cork - disintegrated so had to be filtered. Closed, highly oxidized quality, upon opening, giving very little away. Decanted for 3-4 hours. Much of oxidized quality washed away, but still hint on fore-nose. Red apple, honey, cinder-toffee, caramel, hint of banana chips from oak, hint of freshness, yet also a slight dull, almost sickly edge. Poss v slight pineapple. Surprisingly definate predominant orange. Dry, medium bodied - promises velventine, viscous mouthfeel with appearance, yet fails to deliver. Mineralic, incipid start, which carries through along majority of pale palate, plus bitter edge to mid-palate, both of which dwindle on the finish, leaving definate honey and again orange, tart tatin, nectarine, butter, an edge of nuttines. Rhone-esque. Tannic backbone from skin-contact? Low, fairly unbalanced acidity. Long reasonably interesting finish. Obscure Nose: 85 Palate: 89
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
When opened, the nose is sweet and warm, almost like a dessert wine. After an hour in the bottle (not decanted, only opened, maybe this was a mistake?) the nose has changed considerably. It's now very complex with minerals, exhaust fumes, diesel, petrol, rubber, resin, vanilla and lots of other unknown spices. In a way it resembles an australian Semillon I had recently (Peter Lehmann Reserve 99), which surprised me with its Riesling-like nose. The palate is (in contrast to the red Musar from the same year) completely dry, but with lots of fruit. It's also fresh and acidic. The closest wine that comes to mind is white Rhône (Marsanne). Yellow apple, some liquorice root, an almost oily feel. Both the nose and the palate seems to constantly change over the time that we drink it. This makes it a very exciting wine; you never know what the next sip will be like. Bottom line is that this is a fantastic wine, totally unique in its style. Will definately buy again. And it has many years ahead of it.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
1/28/2019 - PSPatrick wrote: 88 Points
"A taste of Libanon"-Tasting, Flight 1, Wine 3 (non-blind): Tasted alongside 2007 and 2003. The most open, developed and expressive of the three Musar white tasted. The wine was medium gold in colour, darker than the 2007 but lighter than the 2003. It offered dried stone fruit, wax, some honey, ethereal notes, smoke and some manure on the nose. On the palate, the wine showed Cognac-like flavours, bruised apple, nuts and a hint of caramel. The palate was very broad and a little astringent and bitter, and the wine only had average length. The acidity seemed lower that in the 2007 and the 2003, but the wine shared the classical, smooth texture of Musar's whites.
I have only tasted about 20 different Musar wines so far, reds and whites, and am hence not an expert on Chateau Musar. With my limited experience and based only on this one bottle from a merchant's private cellar, I preferred the 1998, 1999 and 2003 to this 1993. That said, some tasters rated this 1993 higher and preferred it to the 2003. (88)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/23/2016 - cannym Likes this wine: 91 Points
Fine pale gold. Quite fine and elegant. This bottle was very clean, nothing musty at all. Lots of unusual flavours, things like red apples, light spices, tangerines, resin, custard and more. Good acidity. Great length. Lovely and quite unique.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/22/2016 - RajivAyyangar wrote:
Musar Maniacs part II (Pera SF): Diminished aromatics - muted and dusty. Weird nose - play dough, almond skin. There's a strange bitter flavor to this - like a tongue depresser (not corked though). High acid.
8.5-9, but maybe this is an off-bottle.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/24/2012 - sharonandroland Likes this wine: 93 Points
Just coming into its own - much better that 1994 and 95 - which means the whites take even longer than the reds before they are ready to drink. I would say the pleasure starts close to 20 years. This wine is deep and rich (blind could be a an incredible rose), linoleum, apples, sweet spices (like a mulled cider), nuts
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comments (1)
12/22/2011 - brooklynguy wrote:
Not impressive. Lots of coaxing and the nose showed a little something, perfectly lovely. But the palate over 3 or 4 hours was just not compelling. No definition, no grip, like mushy yellow apples and entirely one note. i believe in Musar Blanc and everyone at the table wanted it to be great, but it just wasn't. Some didn't even finish their glass, I noticed.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/19/2011 - brooklynguy wrote:
Not a good bottle. Musty and without vibrancy or detail. There obviously is good material here, but as one of my companions said "It tastes like it was made in a dirty barrel, it's not clean." Bottle variation, just part of the game.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/22/2010 - DLovedale wrote: 87 Points
Bright dark golden, good clarity, v poor soaked cork - disintegrated so had to be filtered.
Closed, highly oxidized quality, upon opening, giving very little away.
Decanted for 3-4 hours. Much of oxidized quality washed away, but still hint on fore-nose. Red apple, honey, cinder-toffee, caramel, hint of banana chips from oak, hint of freshness, yet also a slight dull, almost sickly edge. Poss v slight pineapple. Surprisingly definate predominant orange.
Dry, medium bodied - promises velventine, viscous mouthfeel with appearance, yet fails to deliver. Mineralic, incipid start, which carries through along majority of pale palate, plus bitter edge to mid-palate, both of which dwindle on the finish, leaving definate honey and again orange, tart tatin, nectarine, butter, an edge of nuttines. Rhone-esque. Tannic backbone from skin-contact? Low, fairly unbalanced acidity. Long reasonably interesting finish. Obscure
Nose: 85
Palate: 89
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/31/2007 - hoob wrote:
When opened, the nose is sweet and warm, almost like a dessert wine. After an hour in the bottle (not decanted, only opened, maybe this was a mistake?) the nose has changed considerably. It's now very complex with minerals, exhaust fumes, diesel, petrol, rubber, resin, vanilla and lots of other unknown spices. In a way it resembles an australian Semillon I had recently (Peter Lehmann Reserve 99), which surprised me with its Riesling-like nose.
The palate is (in contrast to the red Musar from the same year) completely dry, but with lots of fruit. It's also fresh and acidic. The closest wine that comes to mind is white Rhône (Marsanne). Yellow apple, some liquorice root, an almost oily feel.
Both the nose and the palate seems to constantly change over the time that we drink it. This makes it a very exciting wine; you never know what the next sip will be like.
Bottom line is that this is a fantastic wine, totally unique in its style. Will definately buy again. And it has many years ahead of it.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment