Chateau d'Yquem

Hi there and welcome to Wine-Searcher!

Today I hope I've got a really exciting tasting in store for you, because what I'm going to do is, I'm going to compare two vintages, two fantastic vintages, from a legendary estate - Chateau d’Yquem, in Saturnes, in Bordeaux in southwest France. The vintages I've got are the ‘89 and the ‘90. So, in terms of mature fully mature vintages, you'd have to go back to sort of 1929, 1947, 1949 to find vintages to rival that sort of quality. These were the last two of a run of three vintages from ‘88 through to ’90 that were quite spectacular for this estate. 

And I mean let's face it, Yquem has an incredible reputation and one that's been very hard-earned because Yquem was an estate that in 1855, when Bordeaux's wines were classified – some of Bordeaux’s wines were classified – Yquem was the one sort of singled out and was classified as Premier Grand Cru Classe Superieur. So this - the classification of Sauternes is actually separate from that of the Medoc - but while estates such as Haut-Brion, Lafite, Latour and Margaux were classified as Premier Cru (1st Growth) Yquem was Premier Crew Superieur. And it's an estate that was, at this stage and the stage it was classified, was in the hands of the Lur Saluces family - who had had the estate since 1785, as it had been handed into their family. These particular wines – one of the high points of the stewardship of this chateau by Comte Alexandre de Lur Saluces –Alexander is a wonderfully important figure, in the recent period, for the the development of Sauternes. A man who took over the running of his family estate, he came in 1968, guided it through some really quite difficult times for Sauterne and maintained it in that pre-eminent position within its appellation. He eventually retired in 2004 he'd been running the estate since 1996 for Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessey, who had bought the estate from his family - but at this stage it was entirely in the family’s stewardship - so this is these are two of the best vintages from that period.

Why is it Yquem so pre-eminent? Well, some of it is its fantastic location. It's a large – over 100 hectares, I believe – property on a hillside in the center of the Sauternes appellation and they have quite a number of different soil types, sort of from clay through to sandy soils, and that enables them to produce high quality wines in a variety of different climatic and weather situations. The reputation that the Comte, Alexandre, has had, has been sort of being completely uncompromising with regard to quality. If wines don't reach his standards, he hasn't accepted that they be sold as Yquem. There hasn't been, under his period there wasn't, a second wine at the estate for instance. The wine is incredibly heavily selected – for instance a glass of Yquem is reckoned to be the product of a single vine, whereas if you're making a red First Growth the corollary is that that would probably – that vine would probably – produce a whole bottle of wine. So really incredibly-intense work in the vineyard, going on there, to ensure that the concentrated wines are made. These are also wines made, of course, with botrytis which is a rot, which shrivels the grapes and so reduces the yield per vine. These wines are sometimes not produced in in years that/where the quality wasn't high enough. They then age. They age - they're fermented and aged in new French barrels – entirely, 100%, new French oak – so an expensive way of doing that. But also, Alexandre wouldn't release the wine until he felt it was ready. So, aging for 36 months in barrel means that these wines were never sold at that stage, en-premiere – because they simply weren't in bottle in time. That's been the level of/to which, Alexandre went to avoid those sorts of compromises in terms of quality.

So, let's have a look at these two wines. They’re two quite contrasting vintages - 1990 is probably easiest to talk about because the weather conditions were very stable. There wasn't too much rain… There was enough rain - and the rain was across the whole area – so that in August botrytis onset very quickly across all the vineyards. So, there was quite a large harvest of botrytis grapes, gathered under a short period – and the botrytis had happened early in the grapes ripening – which meant that the grapes retain their acidity, so you've got wines that have got, supposedly, some of the highest sugar levels that were seen in the region since the 1929 vintage – but yet had wonderful balancing acidity.

‘89 by contrast saw hail hit the vineyards in July and Yquem lost something like 25% of their crop at that stage – which actually, of course, meant that they were concentrating to… there was small/there were smaller yields and so they were getting more concentrated fruit. They then had a very hot period through until harvest and you get that sort of heat and plenty of sunshine and supposedly there's quite a ripeness in the style of the two.

So, let's try them shall we?

I'll start with the 89, as the older wine. if you look at it, it has a… let's say a burnished gold color there - almost touching towards the tawny, maybe not quite. If you smell it… and the aromas are initially quite restrained. There's a slight sort of wax polish/polished wax table note to it. As you look deeper actually there's quite a rich figgy note, sort of dried fruit. Maybe a touch of raisin or dried apricot.

Tasting it – unsurprisingly, there's a wonderful sweetness. There's a richness, a roundness on the palate and you've got that sort of dried-apricot, sweet, honeyed note there. Maybe tiny touches of nutmeg. There's quite a bit of warmth – the alcohol on this is slightly higher – the ‘89 is 13.5%. – it’s not incredibly high for Sauternes – but the 1990 is only 13%, so there's a there's a difference there. I can taste the warmth and richness of the alcohol slightly more than I can taste the acidity which is actually starting to cut in right at the finish and giving a lovely freshness so that the finish doesn't finish cloying although it's very sweet sort of rounded honeyed and those nutmeg notes are still there. 

So, for the 1990.

Let's have a look at that. I reckon the 1990 is a tiny touch darker, but there's not a lot in it. So again, that burnished gold with, maybe, a tawny hue. 

Smelling it - the aromas are very different, they're lighter, again the polish notes are there to begin with but then you get notes of sort of caramel. There are more high-toned orange-flower notes and then you're starting to get sort of candied-peel and marmalade notes coming in there. So greater complexity, more open at the nose for the ‘90. 

So, let’s have a taste there. And very different on the palate. I mean again very sweet, but - as expected - the acidity there is fresh. There's a lemony/mandarin/citrus note coming through there. Again, sort of honeyed. You've got that sort of slight apricotty touch - not quite so much dried apricot, there's some really fresh juicy apricot and mandarin notes there. The freshness carries on right the way through to the end. Almost hints of spice – nutmeg there. Not as broad, not as fat, more sort of linear. I mean the 89 had quite a long finish this is much longer - more lively. Again, I'm getting actually the caramel notes are coming back now at the end - but it's a clean caramel not a sort of a burnt sugar caramel. And that's absolutely delicious.

Myself, I think my preference is for the 90 but I could see arguments either way. I mean I think the 90 is more widely available and as a result perhaps slightly cheaper. I think 89 there was less produced. I mean both spectacular wines! I mean both wonderful concentration complexity and a long finish. 

But, yes - if you get the chance…Chateau Yquem – the pre-eminent of the Sauternes and yeah very much justified. Thanks very much - Cheers everybody!