By far the most rounded, suave, and pillowy-textured of the three St.-Julien oldies tonight. Again, the fruit flavors are apply and cidery. But here it's not offering much else. Points for plushness, but the 1914 was much more interesting, as was the '22 Talbot. N.B. - This was actually Gruaud-Larose-Sarget, from a brief period the estate was split in two.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
soft, beguiling volatility of great elegance in delicately fruity nose; marvellous silken, glossy texture; still powerful, chewy fruit with great grip, but more developed and less concentrated than the 28; enormous length
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Followed the 1981, 1961, 1928. Oldest presentation of the group but barely bricking; another perfect bottle. Elegant in the manner of 1961, good chewy fruit though without the density of 1928; terrific grip on back palate; enough VA to provide interest but not too much to detract. Great length, goes on and on. They don't make them like this any more. Could last a while but unlikely to improve.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Bern's. Well, finally a bad bottle. Not that we were looking for one but it had to happen sometime when you are drinking wines this old. It just didn't have any gas left. Fading fruit, a touch oxidized and very light in color.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Professional reviews have copyrights and you can view them here for your personal use only as private content. To view pro reviews you must either subscribe to a pre-integrated publication or manually enter reviews below. Learn more.
11/14/2015 - Keith Levenberg wrote: 88 Points
By far the most rounded, suave, and pillowy-textured of the three St.-Julien oldies tonight. Again, the fruit flavors are apply and cidery. But here it's not offering much else. Points for plushness, but the 1914 was much more interesting, as was the '22 Talbot. N.B. - This was actually Gruaud-Larose-Sarget, from a brief period the estate was split in two.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/26/2010 - logos Likes this wine: 93 Points
soft, beguiling volatility of great elegance in delicately fruity nose; marvellous silken, glossy texture; still powerful, chewy fruit with great grip, but more developed and less concentrated than the 28; enormous length
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
1/26/2010 - Vinomane wrote: 96 Points
Followed the 1981, 1961, 1928. Oldest presentation of the group but barely bricking; another perfect bottle. Elegant in the manner of 1961, good chewy fruit though without the density of 1928; terrific grip on back palate; enough VA to provide interest but not too much to detract. Great length, goes on and on. They don't make them like this any more. Could last a while but unlikely to improve.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/16/2007 - G SQUARED wrote: 80 Points
Bern's. Well, finally a bad bottle. Not that we were looking for one but it had to happen sometime when you are drinking wines this old. It just didn't have any gas left. Fading fruit, a touch oxidized and very light in color.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/13/2007 - BradE wrote:
Tampa Part II: 47 Cheval, 47 Petrus, 20/26 Haut Brion, 28 P Clement, 26 GL, 59/82 Lafite, 53 Latour, more...: Was it that we were on bottle 19, or that it was 2am, or was it a poor bottle? You call it, but the 26 GL seemed a bit tired to me. Amazingly, this was the only old bottle from Bern's cellar this weekend that wasn't stunning in quality. A bit cloudy, a bit tired. Time to call it a night.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment