Garnet center, lighter edge. Attractive secondary aromas of pine needles, spice, and light red fruit. Elegant, silky medium weight, enjoyable earthy base. Discrete plummy fruit, clove, and the acidity of the year doesn't assert itself until the end, leading to a slightly rough finish. Better than (exactly!) a year ago, but nothing memorable. More at the level of an excellent Vosne Premier Cru, it left me wanting a little more.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Slightly cloudy ruby with minimal fading. Captivating nose with spice and some stems. Medium weight, very earthy but not as sappy as I would expect for this cru. Initially, the 1996 acidity juts out a bit, but with air, it is nicely folded in so that it doesn't leave a tart impression. The spice is definitely there, but the fruit never catches up in volume or sweetness. Overall, very good, not yet completely resolved, and better aromatically than on the palate. I think it's fair to say that this should be better.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Fantastic bottle. Dark fruit and spice. That mouthwatering line of '96 acid keeps things crunchy and vibrant. Refined despite good weight. Meadows says some bottles of this are great and others are fading...this one was great, but sadly my only one.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
A long Sunday lunch at Noble Rot (Wellington, NZ): A spicier, more generous, lovely floral bouquet. On palate, there was more volume and fruit weight. Silky smooth and very fine. The tannins spherical and fine grained. Detailed, spicy red berries with an iron core. Lovely acidity, nicely in balance and proportion. I would never have guessed that this wine was a 1996. Superb!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
1996 & 1999 Vosne Grand Cru Dinner (Holland Park): Slightly better than the last bottle I had last year. This was nevertheless consistent with my previous experiences with Confuron’s RSVs – always good, even very good, but somehow never quite hitting the heights of the very best wines this great vineyard can offer. This wine did have a very pretty nose though, with rich aromas of dark cherries and blackberries laced with earth and meat, spice and dried flowers. The palate was rather shyer, tighter, with fresh, chewy 1996 acidity and firm, powdery tannins forming a rather rustic frame for deep but still rather primary flavours of dark cherries layered over earthier, meatier tones. There was a nice strength and breadth to this though, which made it a pleasing mouthful. On the finish, some orange peel and then hints something flowery emerged. Altogether, a very nice wine, if just a bit more rustic than its peers, with the tannins standing out with time. It should continue to improve over the next few years though.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
This wine was a bit disappointing initially. Nose had pretty red fruit, blue fruit, plums and some oak. First 90 mins: Palate was a bit all over the place without precision. Nose was better than the palate. The fruit was slightly extracted with more time in the glass. After two hours, the wine opened up nicely with pretty red fruit and a better integrated oak. This is a wine that needs time. Its still too young. This wine impressed me with more time in the glass. 92+
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Vosne-Romanee Grand Crus for Michael and Peter's Birthdays 2015 (Gattopardo Restaurant, Tras Street, Singapore): Good but not great. I have always been a big fan of JJ Confuron's Romanee St Vivant; In my experience, they are an under-the-radar value proposition amongst the bigger names that exploit the vineyard, usually producing delicious wines that speak eloquently of the terroir. Unfortunately, while this was still clearly a "good" wine, it was somewhat disappointing, falling some way short of the usual standard I have come to expect from a Confuron RSV. It did have a lovely nose it must be said, very developed and generous, with deep draws of dark berries and plums alongside dried earth and herbs and spice, and some meaty, mushroomy nuances. It was the palate that I did not quite like as much. It felt just a bit disjointed and thinner than usual, with the bright acidity of the vintage sticking out amidst juicy flavours of dark berries and sour cherries. There was still quite a bit to like about the wine though. I found it to be just a little more rustic than the 1998 Hudelot-Noellat RSV in the previous flight, but there was a good blend of clarity and strength to it, with fine tannins that still gave a little chew on the midpalate giving it a nicely elegant shape. Good finish too, long and bright, with spine of mineral and lovely flush of spice giving the wine a nice strong end. This is one of those wines that seems to have just come out on the wrong side of the 1996 vintage, with the zip and brightness of the acidity coming across a bit tart rather than fresh. Unfortunate. It was a nice drink overall, but disappointing in the context of the maker and vineyard.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Played the game of "what is wrong with this wine" with a group of wine friends. The bottom line conclusion was heat damage (acquired at commercial auction, so caveat emptor). There was just nothing going on that that should have been there. Have four more bottles, so very concerned.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Red/brown color and dry dusty earth filled aromas make wine appear fully mature and older then vintage. A chewy dry dark fruit wine with nice spice and slightly rustic edge. Good, but not seemingly Grand Cru level. Very little Vosne character. Overall, a disappointing showing.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Tasted double blind, paired with what turned out to be the same wine form the 1990 vintage. i enjoyed this 1996 a great deal, finding lots of maturing red berry aromas and flavors with Classic Asian five spice and great textures. My only concern is this seemed a decade older than its actual age.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Acker Merrall 1996 Burgundy Dinner (L2O - Chicago IL): Lean and angular to start, not a good beginning. Red fruit on nose and palate, albeit simple. Didn't really show classic RSV spice tonight,just trace hints instead. Finish was somewhat harsh and awkward. I can't tell if this is just an off bottle, but it didn't display the great RSV spice and character I've learned to expect from Confuron, particularly in such a great vintage as 1996.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Popped and poured. Red cherry and dark baking spice (alot of cinnamon and clove) nose. Fruit forward palate, again mostly red cherry, with great spice throughout. Wonderful acidity and spice notes throughout. Firm structure and a medium plus finish. Quite nice and easily still has a great life ahead of it.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
1996 Burgundy Horizontal w/ Bob Macdonald (Minneapolis): Brief note: Tasted after the '96 La Tache, which didn't do this wine any favors. This came across as quite leafy and vegetal, with a palate of tart dark fruit and herbs. Judgment reserved.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Interesting. Red (not dark or light), medium to light bodied. Good up front red fruit, some spice, flowers, a reasonable finish. Good feminine pinot. For a 96, good, long life still ahead, decent acidity. For the the price, not a great value. Ignoring the price, and outstanding wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
10/16/2020 - drwine2001 wrote:
Garnet center, lighter edge. Attractive secondary aromas of pine needles, spice, and light red fruit. Elegant, silky medium weight, enjoyable earthy base. Discrete plummy fruit, clove, and the acidity of the year doesn't assert itself until the end, leading to a slightly rough finish. Better than (exactly!) a year ago, but nothing memorable. More at the level of an excellent Vosne Premier Cru, it left me wanting a little more.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/3/2020 - steinersing wrote: 95 Points
very attractive nose, floral. Good density and consistency. Showing well now.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/26/2019 - hprphf wrote: 93 Points
Zachy's 2019/10 - 2 (Le Bernardin Prive): Mature nose, clean broad fruit with RSV linear nuance. 93
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/16/2019 - drwine2001 wrote:
Slightly cloudy ruby with minimal fading. Captivating nose with spice and some stems. Medium weight, very earthy but not as sappy as I would expect for this cru. Initially, the 1996 acidity juts out a bit, but with air, it is nicely folded in so that it doesn't leave a tart impression. The spice is definitely there, but the fruit never catches up in volume or sweetness. Overall, very good, not yet completely resolved, and better aromatically than on the palate. I think it's fair to say that this should be better.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/27/2016 - Blair Curtis wrote: 95 Points
Fantastic bottle. Dark fruit and spice. That mouthwatering line of '96 acid keeps things crunchy and vibrant. Refined despite good weight. Meadows says some bottles of this are great and others are fading...this one was great, but sadly my only one.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/3/2016 - HowardNZ Likes this wine:
A long Sunday lunch at Noble Rot (Wellington, NZ): A spicier, more generous, lovely floral bouquet. On palate, there was more volume and fruit weight. Silky smooth and very fine. The tannins spherical and fine grained. Detailed, spicy red berries with an iron core. Lovely acidity, nicely in balance and proportion. I would never have guessed that this wine was a 1996. Superb!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/9/2016 - Paul S wrote: 93 Points
1996 & 1999 Vosne Grand Cru Dinner (Holland Park): Slightly better than the last bottle I had last year. This was nevertheless consistent with my previous experiences with Confuron’s RSVs – always good, even very good, but somehow never quite hitting the heights of the very best wines this great vineyard can offer. This wine did have a very pretty nose though, with rich aromas of dark cherries and blackberries laced with earth and meat, spice and dried flowers. The palate was rather shyer, tighter, with fresh, chewy 1996 acidity and firm, powdery tannins forming a rather rustic frame for deep but still rather primary flavours of dark cherries layered over earthier, meatier tones. There was a nice strength and breadth to this though, which made it a pleasing mouthful. On the finish, some orange peel and then hints something flowery emerged. Altogether, a very nice wine, if just a bit more rustic than its peers, with the tannins standing out with time. It should continue to improve over the next few years though.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/6/2015 - Burgnick wrote: 92 Points
This wine was a bit disappointing initially. Nose had pretty red fruit, blue fruit, plums and some oak. First 90 mins: Palate was a bit all over the place without precision. Nose was better than the palate. The fruit was slightly extracted with more time in the glass.
After two hours, the wine opened up nicely with pretty red fruit and a better integrated oak. This is a wine that needs time. Its still too young. This wine impressed me with more time in the glass. 92+
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/14/2015 - Paul S wrote: 92 Points
Vosne-Romanee Grand Crus for Michael and Peter's Birthdays 2015 (Gattopardo Restaurant, Tras Street, Singapore): Good but not great. I have always been a big fan of JJ Confuron's Romanee St Vivant; In my experience, they are an under-the-radar value proposition amongst the bigger names that exploit the vineyard, usually producing delicious wines that speak eloquently of the terroir. Unfortunately, while this was still clearly a "good" wine, it was somewhat disappointing, falling some way short of the usual standard I have come to expect from a Confuron RSV. It did have a lovely nose it must be said, very developed and generous, with deep draws of dark berries and plums alongside dried earth and herbs and spice, and some meaty, mushroomy nuances. It was the palate that I did not quite like as much. It felt just a bit disjointed and thinner than usual, with the bright acidity of the vintage sticking out amidst juicy flavours of dark berries and sour cherries. There was still quite a bit to like about the wine though. I found it to be just a little more rustic than the 1998 Hudelot-Noellat RSV in the previous flight, but there was a good blend of clarity and strength to it, with fine tannins that still gave a little chew on the midpalate giving it a nicely elegant shape. Good finish too, long and bright, with spine of mineral and lovely flush of spice giving the wine a nice strong end. This is one of those wines that seems to have just come out on the wrong side of the 1996 vintage, with the zip and brightness of the acidity coming across a bit tart rather than fresh. Unfortunate. It was a nice drink overall, but disappointing in the context of the maker and vineyard.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/20/2015 - WestJohnson wrote: flawed
Played the game of "what is wrong with this wine" with a group of wine friends. The bottom line conclusion was heat damage (acquired at commercial auction, so caveat emptor). There was just nothing going on that that should have been there. Have four more bottles, so very concerned.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/12/2015 - joshbryer wrote: flawed
Flawed. Burnt rubber and funky, dumped.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/7/2014 - KenK Likes this wine: 90 Points
Red/brown color and dry dusty earth filled aromas make wine appear fully mature and older then vintage. A chewy dry dark fruit wine with nice spice and slightly rustic edge. Good, but not seemingly Grand Cru level. Very little Vosne character. Overall, a disappointing showing.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/6/2014 - Burgundy Al wrote: 91 Points
Tasted double blind, paired with what turned out to be the same wine form the 1990 vintage. i enjoyed this 1996 a great deal, finding lots of maturing red berry aromas and flavors with Classic Asian five spice and great textures. My only concern is this seemed a decade older than its actual age.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/19/2011 - Burgundy Al wrote: 89 Points
Acker Merrall 1996 Burgundy Dinner (L2O - Chicago IL): Lean and angular to start, not a good beginning. Red fruit on nose and palate, albeit simple. Didn't really show classic RSV spice tonight,just trace hints instead. Finish was somewhat harsh and awkward. I can't tell if this is just an off bottle, but it didn't display the great RSV spice and character I've learned to expect from Confuron, particularly in such a great vintage as 1996.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/10/2010 - MatthewF wrote:
Popped and poured. Red cherry and dark baking spice (alot of cinnamon and clove) nose. Fruit forward palate, again mostly red cherry, with great spice throughout. Wonderful acidity and spice notes throughout. Firm structure and a medium plus finish. Quite nice and easily still has a great life ahead of it.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/18/2009 - Siggy wrote:
1996 Burgundy Horizontal w/ Bob Macdonald (Minneapolis): Brief note: Tasted after the '96 La Tache, which didn't do this wine any favors. This came across as quite leafy and vegetal, with a palate of tart dark fruit and herbs. Judgment reserved.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/1/2008 - cadamson wrote: 92 Points
Interesting. Red (not dark or light), medium to light bodied. Good up front red fruit, some spice, flowers, a reasonable finish. Good feminine pinot. For a 96, good, long life still ahead, decent acidity. For the the price, not a great value. Ignoring the price, and outstanding wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment