Wine ( Devoted to the discussion of wine and wine-related topics. A place to read and comment about wines, wine and food matching, storage systems, wine paraphernalia, etc. In general, any topic related to wine is valid fodder for the group.

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to
external usenet poster
Posts: 35
Default Two Brouilly compared

Hello all

Last week I compared a 2003 DuBoeuf Brouilly to a 2004 Chateau le Chaize
Brouilly. Overall, I found the 2003 to have a lot more intensity, a
little complexity, and slightly more tannin. To me it was good. It's
been on my 'buy again' list for some time now.

What I don't understand is the 2004 Chateau le Chaize received decent
reviews, though it seemed to be unpleasantly light. Watery, little
flavor. Nose was slight. Are either of these wines considered standard
for a Brouilly, or are they both just 'different'?

In all fairness I know 2004 wasn't an excellent vintage, though the
reviews on the le Chaize indicated it was supposed to be good.

I was pleasantly surprised by the 2004, Joseph Drouhin Laforet
Bourgogne. For around $12 it was almost as good as burgundies I've had
at four times the price.

  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to
external usenet poster
Posts: 4,554
Default Two Brouilly compared

first the disclaimer that I've tasted neither wine. But a few
thoughts on Beaujolais:
1) I have friends who are friends with the owner (countess?) of the Ch.
de la Chaize. So I've had quite a few. But I can't say that any have
moved me. Usually competent, never exciting.
2) I'm personally no DuBouef fan either, but understand that a lot of
people really liked their 2003s.
3) One must remember there's no right or wrong as to personal
preferences. Most of the 2003 Beaujolais I tried didn't really appeal
to me. Sure, big ripe fruit for a Beaujolais. But *for my tastes*
(important to realize taste is NOT universal) maybe a little low acid,
and in the ripeness of the very hot vintage a lot of the personality of
the appelations, and even of Gamay, was lost - for my tastes. This
speaks to typicity, something some wine drinkers value, and others
don't (and I have wine friends in both camps).
4) 2004 is not the vintage that 2002 was. But for my tastes the better
wines are better than the 2003s. I'd encourage you (if available in
your market) to try 2004s from Clos de la Roilette, JP Brun, Diochon,
Thevenet, Tete, etc. One of the great things about Beaujolais is that
Cru Beaujolais from the top artisanal producers are generally just a
couple bucks more than the mass market wines, and virtually all under
5) I'll look for the Drouhin '04. It's often a good deal.
Thanks for posting.

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Turducken is NOTHING compared to this! Jean B.[_1_] General Cooking 15 20-02-2013 02:33 PM
[TN] '05 Descombes Brouilly Mark Lipton[_1_] Wine 1 08-04-2009 04:08 PM
[TN] '05 Brun Cote de Brouilly Mark Lipton[_1_] Wine 4 11-03-2008 09:43 PM
TN: Brun Brouilly and Cline Zin DaleW Wine 1 14-04-2006 05:24 PM
TN: Small Carnival Gathering (Brouilly, Aligoté, NZ Riesling, CdR) Jim Wine 35 27-02-2006 08:33 PM

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024
The comments are property of their posters.

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"