Unspecified disgorgement, from magnum. Super fresh and bright with good energy and plenty of white fruit. A little sweet but also lovely minerality. Delicious stuff, but I'm still not convinced that Ledru is worth the premium it commands for its story.

A fairly old bottle that is definitely tiring. Caramelly and spicy, but with still some freshness on the palate. Drinkable, but mostly a curiosity more than anything. Nothing at all like the 1975 Oenotheque that I had many years ago.

2008 disgorgement. Had to open another one from this case to see if the last experience was consistent. It's not. This bottle is gorgeous. The nose is intensely smoky (but that dissipates with some air) and you are left with brilliant freshness and minerality on the palate. Sure, it's not super complex, but the complexity that's been built up from aging has served this entry level wine very well.

There's something I like about this wine, but also something I don't quite get about it. The nose shows quite a bit of dough and bread, as well as a sweet spice thing that must be oak influence. The palate is broad and sweet; despite the zero (?) dosage, this has a lot of sweetness to it, likely from the excellent 2009 vintage. Shows a lot of pinot character as well, in terms of the mushroom notes on the back end.

Served blind as to vintage (the bottle shape is a dead giveaway). Clearly a riper, heavier wine, this lacks the electric energy of the 2007 and 2008. On the riper side, I felt like I had to decide between 2002 and 2006; given a bit more of the browning nature of the fruit here (and surprising sweetness), I ended up guessing 2006 as well (also I haven't had the 2002 in a very long time and would probably expect it to be a little farther along the developmental curve).

This is probably a lukewarm take, but this and the Taittinger Comtes de Champagne may well be the wines of the vintage. This has fantastic energy, almost scintillating from the acidity. The fruit is bright and clean, and the blanc de blancs expression is crystal clear here. A bit of pear and citrus, plenty of minerality; this is textbook champagne.

The nose is quite volatile and the palate muddy (surprise) and soyed. Not a sound bottle.

I suspect others at the table liked this more than I did; it was certainly a solid bottle of Bartolo, but I may have expected more given the grand reputation of the house (of course, that is more due to Maria Teresa's taking over). In any case, the nose is initially a little rubbery and reductive, and those notes don't really ever go away. There is a good mix of red and black fruit here, along with acidity that is more prominent than it needs to be. The tannins are still quite grainy; this shows a rustic edge.

Next to the Bartolo Mascarello, it feels as if this wine were 10 years younger. The black fruit is exuberant, sweet, and still quite primary. There are very few signs of aging here. I love the generous density of black fruit here, which may be the only nod towards the modernists in this wine (as this doesn't have any sensation of new oak). Great now, but this will only get better.

A textbook showing of this wine; consistent with my prior experiences. The fruit is more black than red, and is only beginning to develop secondary characteristics. There's a little bit of that stereotypical tar thing going on as well. The palate is still youthful, but with both fruit and tannin in abundance, it's clear this still has a long way to go in its evolution. Compared to what I remember of the 2000 of this wine, this is far less mature and nowhere as ready to drink. For now, I would probably prefer the 2000. For the long run, I'd put my money on this vintage.

A very classically styled nebbiolo with a fruit character that is very much in line with the vintage (more black than red and fairly stern). The nose is mostly fruit-driven, likely on account of its youth. The palate, on the other hand, has a slight medicinal quality that isn't off-putting. Very young, but it feels like this has more structure than fruit. I would not hesitate to open a bottle now; a concern with extended aging of this is that the structure outlasts the fruit.

Utterly gorgeous. This wine is all about the nose. It is so aromatically intense with its perfumed red (and black, in this case) fruit and of course that olive note from the whole clusters. I found the nose to be a bit better than the palate, but this wine is not lacking on either front. Silky textured, with very fine-grained tannins, there is still a lot of fruit to balance the acidity and structure here. This is a wine that will unequivocally go the distance. As always, an absolute treat to drink.

I just never luck out with this wine. This one was a little volatile on the nose. The palate was worse -- thin (as in lacking in flavour) and disjoint. The fruit that is there is stewed and not particularly pleasant. And as I remarked, this wine just tasted sour. Possibly heat-damaged?

I have to admit this really isn't the sort of wine I would generally like to drink (it's incredibly generous with its fruit) and there is a little bit of a balsamic character here. This is quite full-bodied and plummy, and I admit there's something a little "natural" about it too (though that might be from the volatility).

I've been itching to try this wine since I realized it was made; but I haven't found it for sale anywhere yet. This is an amply worthy successor to the brilliant 2010. More potential than anything right now, this feels clamped quite tightly (I got to it pretty late in the evening so it had probably seen more air than I would have liked). The fruit is more on the black side, but it is sweet and intense. There is a massive scaffold around which the fruit is arrayed, but today you only get a sense of scale. This will need many years to resolve, but the sheer amount of material here makes for a very convincing wine. I will be looking to put some of this in my cellar when it is commercially available.

This is an extinct producer now; at some point I'll have to do a little research about the backstory. But this bottle was fantastic. The nose was very 1996 with the tart (and now aged) red fruit and spice character, and at the same time there was the classic Nuits earthiness on the nose. The palate shows some of the taut 1996 character, but there is still plenty of sweet fruit to round it out. Very impressive, especially for the tough vintage.

This was, frankly, outrageously good. Archetypal red Burgundy, and Chambolle at that, with its perfumed red fruit. The palate is elegant and light, and while it is starting to pick up some secondary characteristics, this is still so clean and without any funky/barnyardy notes. The ripe red fruit has a sweetness that makes this all the more compelling to drink.

From magnum. Maybe it was because we had this at the end of the night, but it really freshened everything up for me. The nose is a little chalky and shows some white and yellow orchard fruit, but the palate is where this shines, with a bit of a chalky texture that rounds out the acidity on the palate.

From half-bottle. This is about as textbook botrytis as it comes. Almost over the top, but not really. The nose is honeyed and exotic with a note that evokes passionfruit, alongside the more obvious floral tones. Despite the sweetness and intensity on the palate, the acidity gives this so much lift. There's some sneaky minerality on the back end of this too. This is an incredibly intense wine, and while it's one of those where a little goes a long way, it also doesn't feel overwhelming.