The wife and I have been invited to another couple's house for dinner on
Saturday, next. Having had a few bottles with the couple, I know their
preferences in Wine (other than dessert) tend toward the bold and
massive. I picked the current vintage Cotes du Rhone (Guigal), for
pre-dinner. A 1999 Guigal Hermitage for the robust food (She's from
Hungary, and her dinners tend to be lots of meat, lots of spices (kinda
the way I like it <g>), and a 1995 Sauterne, Chateau Malle, for dessert.
Have any of you tried the 1995 Sauterne's yet? Any thoughts? I was (was)
confident in the dessert wine choice, but I have had a friend tell me
that the 95's were, a bit less than spectacular. I'm a bit more sanguine
about the Hermitage, at least there's a lot of meat to ameliorate some
of the tannin.

TIA,

Da' Bear

In article >, Da' Bear
> writes:

>1995 Sauterne, Chateau Malle, for dessert.
>Have any of you tried the 1995 Sauterne's yet? Any thoughts? I was (was)
>confident in the dessert wine choice, but I have had a friend tell me
>that the 95's were, a bit less than spectacular.

Ok, so they are less than spectacular. I much preferred (speaking Sauternes in
general not specifically de Malle) '97, and probably the '96 & '99 too. But
unlike say the '91s and '92s. they weren't diluted. Probably drinking as nicely
as they're going to right now. I'd say it's likely to be a good - though not
spectacular- dessert wine.

Not trying to be unhelpful. Just want to point out that the overall quality of
a vintage in a region doesn't :
1) neccessarily translate into a good or bad wine for a particular bottling
2) neccesarily mean it's the best for drinking right now. I'd rather OWN a
classified Bdx from from a highly rated vintage like '95 than '94, '97, or '99,
but at moment it would be my last choice for drinking now.
3) you gotta drink those babies sometime!

I was in a restaurant couple weeks ago as a nearby table ordered a bottle of
Brunello. "It's a '97, best vintage...blah blah blah" the guy ordering was
saying. Without getting into the quality of the vintage (I like it better than
RP but less than Suckling), I haven't heard anyone who didn't think most '97
BdM were both tannic and shutting down. Ordering in a restaurant, with no
opportunity to decant in advance? Not me!

I'd serve the '95 and enjoy!

Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

"Da' Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> The wife and I have been invited to another couple's house for dinner on
> Saturday, next. Having had a few bottles with the couple, I know their
> preferences in Wine (other than dessert) tend toward the bold and
> massive. I picked the current vintage Cotes du Rhone (Guigal), for
> pre-dinner. A 1999 Guigal Hermitage for the robust food (She's from
> Hungary, and her dinners tend to be lots of meat, lots of spices (kinda
> the way I like it <g>), and a 1995 Sauterne, Chateau Malle, for dessert.
> Have any of you tried the 1995 Sauterne's yet? Any thoughts? I was (was)
> confident in the dessert wine choice, but I have had a friend tell me
> that the 95's were, a bit less than spectacular. I'm a bit more sanguine
> about the Hermitage, at least there's a lot of meat to ameliorate some
> of the tannin.
>

My question would be the Guigal CdR for a pre-dinner wine. It is rather
thin and sweet, might not a nice sparkling wine set the stage in a
better manner?

pavane