Chris Sipes cracked open his Jacquart 1996 Champagne which exhibited a charming toasty nose infused with subtle hints of almond/nuts followed by a refreshing medium-bodied palate û the vivacity of the 1996 vintage is in evidence. There is slight oxidation here and most concluded that if you have this wine, drink up now. Like Chris Bublitz, I dig Champagnes with slight oxidation; I like the nuttiness as long as it is not in your face. With the Jacquart, it was not. Good stuff.

There followed the corker number one: the Dom Perignon 1996.

Happily, the third Champagne of the evening - thanks to Dave Zimmerman - shined as a strong contender for wine of the night:
Krug 1996.
A pure nose infused with citrus and red apple, crispy red apple, and a taut, linear yet exciting palate with plenty of focus. With each sip, and with more time in glass, it got more complex: I ended my share with distinct pear notes in my mind and soul. Terrific Champagne with many years to go.

We started with a pair of 93s from Kevin Shin. The Bouchard Pere & Fils Beaune Clos de la Mousse 1993 gave off a slight whiff of Burgundian earth, with touches of the chaussette mouillée, but I dug it. It endeared me actually. The palate was smooth and supple, lacking the structure to make it serious, but what the heck: it was enjoyable Old World Pinot, and I could have easily nursed the bottle à but I was driving later, so not a good idea. Thank goodness for the crachoirs provided by the efficient staff at Dino. Yes, folks, we were spitting out.

In between the bubblies, Ken Brown shared with us a wine that seemed a bit caramel like to me. With more time in glass, even after we put the bottle on ice, it became more pronounced, and a detriment. Sadly, we are talking about William Fevre Grand Cru Chablis Les Clos 2004. Some citrus like zing on the mid palate, but it was rather offset by this butterscotch aspect which reminded me of a caramelized Halloween apple: a sign of over-quick evolution. Considering that the night before, Neal Mollen and I drank a perfectly fine William Fevre Grand Cru 2004, I am left scratching my head about premox …

I preferred the next wine Kevin brought: a more robust, darker colored and “masculine” Bouchard Pere & Fils Nuits St George Clos St Marc 1993, which had a deeper nose to match the tone of the wine: you could already feel that this wine was going to offer more substance, and it did

Many thanks to Maureen for the Bachelet Gevrey Chambertin 1er Cru Corbeaux Vieilles Vignes 1996, which exhibited spicy depth on the nose with a meaty palate on the attack, but more linear and rather tightening on the mid palate and into the finish. The nose, which grew more complex and fine with time in glass, seems to promise many good things, but the wine is perhaps too young to deliver those goodies today. Interestingly, this reminded me of the Haut Bailly 1998 the night before with Neal Mollen, whose nose was magnificent but the palate was just a bit austereà for now. This should sing in a few years

It was easier to enjoy Chris Bublitz’s LaFarge Volnay Clos des Chenes 1996, which has a less subtle yet pleasing nose followed by a richer and more hedonistic palate. It may not possess the racy quality of the Gevrey, but certainly invites drinking pleasure, ready to consume today without hesitation.

Our lips were then watering with the prospect of the Groffier Chambolle Musigny Les Amoureuses 1996, but Randy’s contribution was corked.

What followed proved to be my other candidate for wine of the night, and probably deserves this honor: the Berthau Chambolle Musigny Les Amoureuses 1996, which seduced me into a blissful state of near euphoria. Smooth and refined, with beguiling notes of faded rose: very floral and feminine and, yes, sexy. But with substance, folks. I would go back to it and ponder that wine should taste this good all the time. Sadly it does not, but we can enjoy occasional treasures such as this. Huge thanks to Maureen for opening a second bottle from her BYOW stash after the Groffier proved to be corked.

Ken’s Louis Jadot Chambolle Musigny Les Amoureuses 1996 was thicker in comparison, even a bit harder. I would go back to it and get very impressed: “I love this,” I wrote in my notes at one point. It has such body and substance. But then, it seems to lack grace. Some postulate that in 5-10 years it will sing. Perhaps, but today it was much more foreboding and less feminine than the Berthau. That said, the Jadot seems also to have more layers and more substance to it, albeit with just a slightly tough component. And I do not think that the Berthau is necessarily on a faster evolutionary track, because behind all its feminine charm, the wine also shows substance.

We were all looking greatly forward to the Louis Jadot Clos de la Roche 1996 which Chris Sipes brought, but it was corked.

To end the reds on a high note, Randy opened his Louis Jadot Clos de Beze 1996 which I thought at first to win the wine of the night honors because of its spherical grace. The nose was a mixture of cinnamon and cherry, with a giving palate that was complete: integrated tannins, harmonious balance of alcohol and acidity and fruit and a smooth, uncomplicated lingering finish. But upon further tasting, and comparison with the preceding wines still in glass, I feel like the Berthau overshadowed it. It also seemed to lack the power of Jadot’s Les Amoureuses. But a complete, lovely wine it was.

Chateau Raymond-Lafon 2001 should have been, as Chris Bublitz said, opened 8 hours in advance. I had it popped and poured. Still, the nose was lovely: orange peel and creme brulee with plenty of zip on the youthful and tight if promising palate. I am glad to have more of these.

Kevin’s half bottle of Graham’s Vintage Port 1990 exuded notes of dark chocolate liqueur and a palate all in finesse. A perfect match for the chocolate ice cream based dessert I ordered (time for the usual resolution of more exercise and diet in the coming year)...