1996 Château Margaux

Community Tasting Notes (320) Avg Score: 96.1 points

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View AaronMaxwell's profile
  • Report Issue

  4/5/2024 - AaronMaxwell Likes this wine: 94 Points

  Drank over a few hours at dinner at Benu. Classic left bank nose, tons of floral perfume and barnyard. The body wasn’t as rich as other Margaux’s I’ve had. Very feminine and light, and thinking other posters were right that it might have needed much more air to really open. But nevertheless, this is delicious, and I’m just nitpicking.

  Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View RobinTeo's profile
  • Report Issue

  3/30/2024 - RobinTeo wrote: 94 Points

  The one with Old Bordeaux (Praelum): Quite unlike my experiences with 96. Then again, I have not had any first growths from 96. The opening bouquet on this was lovely, some sweet black plums, smoke, herbs and blueberries and while initially tightly wound on the palate, it opened up with good depth and strong fruit concentration on the palate alongside youthful exuberance - this will surely get better in another 10 years.

  Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View lltl2021's profile
  • Report Issue

  3/13/2024 - lltl2021 Likes this wine: 98 Points

  What a beast! PnP, enjoyed over three hours. Upon opening, still quite primary... Blackberry, plum. Some green pepper, slightly spicy, quite mineral. Cocoa, coffee, like a mocha. Layered flavor, evolving over the entire three hours. Forest floor and some tertiary note at the very end. Probably we finished up too fast. I think this can still develop.

  Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View Cailles's profile
  • Report Issue

  3/6/2024 - Cailles wrote: 95 Points

  Margaux Extravaganza: Margaux vs. Palmer vs. Brane over two decades (1996/2009/2015). Given the pedigree of the vintages, particularly for Chateau Margaux, expectations were quite high, but especially the last two vintages didn't live up to past performances (I've previously rated Ch. Margaux up to 100pts, Ch. Margaux 2015 up to 99pts, and Palmer 2009 98pts) at first. There were some overripe aromas that were too prominent and an uncharacteristic imbalance. Of course, Ch. Margaux and Palmer showed remarkable complexity and precision, but the balance was a bit off. Still, these are some good to great wines, especially on day 2 and with more air they got better and better. Ultimately, Ch. Margaux 2015 (96pts) was the winner with its unique aromatic profile, slightly outperforming the 1996 and 2009 vintages, both at 95pts. Brane and Palmer were a notch or two below, with the Palmer 2015 particularly affected by premature oxidation. I don't doubt the potential of these wines, given the many fine examples I had last year, but I wouldn't open them today.
  
  TN: Very complex nose with smoke, layers if red fruit, some dark berries, floral notes, herbs , and lots of minerality. Very complex and precise. Same depth on the palate where the red berries and more floral notes are even more prominent. Some layers of red fruit showed a bit chemical. Surprisingly, there was almost no tertiary development at first and only with time some tobacco and truffle notes came forward. This is a highly elegant and fresh wine, with a lot of aromatic intensity and an airy structure. Today it is still a bit too young but, in a decade, this could be close to perfection, the substance is there and so is the structural frame. I've had this before (rated up to 98pts) and this was the weakest showing so far.

  Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View Rounder16's profile
  • Report Issue

  2/1/2024 - Rounder16 wrote: 94 Points

  The nose is astonishing and has it all, but on the palate the wine is quite disappointing at the moment, still quite closed with brutal tannins. It will easily keep for another 50+ years.
  
  I would not open another bottle sooner than 2030+.

  2 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment

View all 320 Community Tasting Notes

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.