Burgundy Vintages — 12/09/2007

< Show all Wine Notes

Following Tim Clarke's visit to Burgundy in May, these notes have been updated. First look at the 2007s shows many attractive wines. It is now a bit easier to form an impression of the 2006s and see where it is going. The evaluation of the great 2005s is unchanged. The 2004s are looking good, but for drinking rather than long ageing or investing in. The 2003s are very mixed, stylistically and in terms of their quality. The 2002s are very fine and hopefully are beginning to emerge from a dumb phase. Notes Revised Sept 2009.

2007 Another lovely vintage for drinking young. In fact drink these wines now in restaurants or wherever, and enjoy their seductive fruit and easy balance rather than chewing on the 2006s or drinking the great 2005s long before they are ready.

2006 The bare facts are that after a cold wet winter, spring was again late. Flowering was not interrupted by rain or frost and thus all was set for a bumper-sized harvest. However early summer was extremely hot and then August was rainy, overcast and cool. Such conditions normally call for crop thinning and it is likely that good producers did this. Ripeness was distinctly uneven at the start of the harvest and there was a fair bit of grey rot around. There was no Indian summer but the weather remained reasonably good for several weeks and that undoubtedly saved the year from disaster.

The harvest came in between showers in fairly ripe but in a very mixed condition - in the vineyard it looked pretty bad. In the early 80s this would have meant a bad year, perhaps not as bad as 84 but not much better. 2006 will look much better than this though, and this is down to the great strides that have been made since then - in the vineyard, in harvesting methods and in the cellar. With careful management very good wines have been made by some, it remains to be seen how good and by how many. Early tastings showed only a few were marked by rot or dilution, the 2006s look like reasonably good mid-weight wines, but they are now will they come out as vibrant, charming and delightful? What is certain is that they are closing up and will go through a charmless period. It may last some time.

Chablis had a much better year than the Côte d'Or, avoiding much of the high heat and rain. Chablis growers are very bullish about the 2006s. The wines look as though they will be more on the mineral side than the 2005s too, which is a good thing.
Beaujolais had a difficult year.

An issue of interest is whether those expensive sorting trays that many estates are using are a waste of time when dealing with a seriously rot-affected harvest of Pinot Noir. If the good and bad bunches are mixed up in boxes in the vineyard, however diligently you sort, rot and rot spores will get through into the wine. One grower I spoke to was adamant that the sorting had to be done in the vineyard: "Only pick what you would eat" he told his pickers. He ended up with a small harvest but one he could be proud of.

2005 A superb year throughout the Burgundy region producing dark coloured, structured vins de garde. The wet, cool, lateish spring was no bad thing as the warm summer that followed was extremely dry. As it was, the drought did not really affect established, producing vineyards very much if at all. There was a little welcome rain in early September followed by a hot spell up to the start of the harvest in the middle of the month to ripen the crop off very well. Weather remained fine and warm for the next month covering the whole harvest period. Whereas the 2004 had to be saved by diligent work in the vineyard and at harvest, the 2005 harvest was in perfect condition. It should be hard to find a poor 2005. From the great growers and top negociants the wines are quite brilliant, similar to the 2002s, but bolder and more brooding. They will be less approachable and less classically beautiful in their youth than those lovely 2002s, so hopefully more of them will survive to become great old Burgundy.

White Beaunes. A lot of the excitement has been concentrated on the Pulignys and Meursaults. Although these are extremely good, the real 'out performance' is with the Pinots.
Chablis is very good and rich. There was a little more rain here than in the Côte d'Or and one might hope that this would have helped retain 'typicity'. I'm not sure. 2005 Chablis may be a nice wine and technically well balanced, but where is the edge, the attack, the minerality? This is one area where the 2002s are definitely better than the 2005s.
Beaujolais Crus are superb. Enjoy them now or aged wine. Morgon, Moulin a Vent and Cote de Brouilly in particular can be aged for a few years to give interesting to spectacular results.

2004 A huge crop throughout the Burgundy region. After a poor, cool summer, there was a warm dry September allowing average to good ripeness with correct acidity. There had been problems with powdery mildew early in the summer and severe hail in the Cote de Beaune in August. Due to the fine, warm September there was not much rot around harvest. - The problems came more from yield, concentration and uneven ripeness. Those who did nothing to control the runaway yields will have produced pathetic wines. (This will be a bigger problem with the reds than the whites). However, in the Côte d'Or, especially on the Côte de Nuits, the great, the good and the diligent, (those who did control yields and harvested carefully) have wines with fine flavours that are typical of variety and appellation. They are drinking very well as young wines. The more of these wines that I tasted the happier I became, many of them are poignant reminders that a Burgundies do not need to be blockbusters, or to be old, to be delicous and delightful. The 2004 is preferred to 2003, (nor will the 2003s age better the 2004s in my opinion).
White Côte de Beaunes: Some of these look very good indeed.
Chablis looks very good and nicely typical.
Beaujolais crus were good and much more typical in style than 2003.

2003 A small year that was hot, hot, hot! - This has been hyped (because it had to be, because it was such a small year), but is not all good - proceed with caution. Many firms, including some of the larger ones and many of the average or under-performing estates, simply did not cope. It wasn't just the ripening season that was hot, the heat wave continued through the harvest. However, if we ignore the people whose fruit was roasted, whose harvests were chaotic or whose fermentations were 'boiled', there are some very interesting wines from small and careful producers or from very well equipped firms. The surprising and interesting thing is that these wines (especially the reds) turned out to be wines of terroir, reflecting the extremely low yields, and not wines of "global warming". Wines from previous very hot years have started tough and gone through long unapproachable phases and I suggest that many 2003s will not do this. Many growers when reading the year took note of the low acidity, judged that the wine should be made for early drinking and made easy drinking wines which were interesting and concentrated. Those who tried to make vins de garde stand the risk of their wines being unapproachable when young and tasting burnt or roasted when the fruit falls away.
You may also find some very good wines from outlying and cooler regions. For instance there was some very good wine made in the Hautes Côtes and in the Yonne. A strange year indeed when Bourgogne Irancy comes out as dark as a Hermitage!
White Côte de Beaunes are (or rather can be) rich and exotic, though they are probably for early drinking only.
Chablis is completely a-typical. Rich, fruity and concentrated; enjoy it while it’s young.
Great Beaujolais Crus. - Full, rich and even powerful. A good year to remember Morgon, Julienas, Cote de Brouilly, Fleurie et al. Will they age? Possibly, but if I am going to age Beaujolais Crus I prefer to do this in a very good year, rather than just a very hot year.

2002 A superb year. A problem free spring was followed by a fairly cool summer finished by a sunny September with cool north winds. Initially many thought it as better in white than red, but this opinion has been revised, it is just as good in red as white. The wines throughout the Côte d’Or are beautifully balanced and picture perfect, indeed it was difficult to make anything other than a good wine. Don't miss the top wines, especially from Vosne-Romanée, Morey St Denis, Chambolle and Gevrey. Buy at any price and love it!
White Côte de Beaunes have a perfect acid balance with fine, well defined flavours. Some of these wines are quite sensational. - Not just Puligny, Meursault and Chassagne, don't forget Beaune, Pernand and Corton. Especially, do not forget Corton.
Chablis is absolutely wonderful. If you still can, buy some Grand Cru and Premier Cru and squirrel it away for a few years. Regular village Chablis from good growers is drinking beautifully already.
Beaujolais Crus. There was quite a bit rain at harvest time. Skip this year, do not attempt to age or bother to drink it if offered it in restaurants.

2001 A good year overshadowed by the hyped year that preceded it and the excellent year that followed it. When young these wines were not that exciting, in particular the aromatic, charming villages didn't have much aroma or charm. Some wines seemed a bit lacking in delicacy. Perhaps for this reason, I preferred the bruisers this year, the villages where I am not looking for delicacy anyway. I think of this as a good year for the powerhouse villages, Pommard, Gevrey and Nuits St Georges, rather than for the charmers like Volnay and Chambolle. Prices are rather good. As the wines age softer fruitier characters are appearing, perhaps the Vosnes and Volnays will have their revenge on me!
White Côte de Beaunes seem less interesting, but some are very good.
Chablis is good but not excellent.

2000 Hyped as a 'classic year', (because it was the millennium and was a classic elsewhere in France), no, this one generally missed the mark. The defining moment was when, just a few days into the vendage, the Cote was lashed by storms and the harvesting had to abandoned for several days. After the rains stopped, this was never going to be a great year. Though there are exceptions, most of the reds are fairly dull and have aged rapidly without distinction. Yes, the very good producers have done better than this of course. In my opinion 2000 is the least interesting year for Red Burgundy since 1994 (or perhaps even 1984 although standards of winemaking and in the vineyard have improved enormously since then).
White Côte de Beaunes: seem to be better, but there is little reason to buy these when fabulous wines such as the 2002s and 2005s are available.
Chablis slightly under performed again.

1999 A large crop saved from being unripe following the cold August by a hot early September, then let down again by rain during harvest. Some of my favourite domaines, who are diligent relatively early pickers, will have missed most of the rain.
However taking the region as a whole there is the danger of dilution, though fortunately not of bad flavours from rot.
The reds seemed attractive and certainly had early charm. Everyone says they will age very well too. Maybe.
White Côte de Beaunes were pretty good.
Chablis slightly under performed.

1998 Spring frosts struck the whites on the Côte de Beaune cutting yields. Temperatures fluctuated wildly through the growing season with a generally hot August followed by a generally wet September. There was localised hail damage and quite a lot of mildew around and some rot. The resulting wines?
The reds: Many are much better than this catalogue of disasters would lead us to expect though some basic (and some not so basic) wines simply lack fruit. There were enough hot and clear days in late September to dry the grapes, and the careful harvester made attractive wines which are turning out to be very good indeed.
White Côte de Beaunes: Some are very ripe and almost tropical. (They should probably be drunk young).
Chablis likewise, but with slightly less excitement.

1997 Good, and, though there was a little mildew around, the harvest was generally clean and fairly ripe. The young reds were charming and round, with attractive “red fruit” flavours. They drank very well when young. We are now into the ‘medium term’ and I fear that they are about to turn, and that when that easy charm goes, that there will be nothing behind it. Drink up. The top reds should still be delicious.
White Côte de Beaunes: The whites were better. Top whites from the Côte de Beaune are good and can still be kept.
Chablis was more average.

1996 Very Good, though a little in the shadow of 95 in reds when first released. The wines are medium structure, earlier drinking than 95, (and a lot beefier than 97, though not quite as initially charming). The 96 reds are holding up very well, and I imagine that people will continue to be surprised how well they compare to the great 95s for many years to come. Top wines will be emerging form a closed phase now-ish.
White Beaunes are superb, concentrated and mineral, as the cool harvest conditions helped to conserve acidity. VG for long term aging, so begin to drink now or keep.
A truly great Chablis year. Regular Chablis should still be drinking well and the Grand Crus and top 1er Crus are just coming right. The acidity is beginning to fall away revealing beautiful flavours.

1995 Very, very good. When young the reds were well coloured, very structured, with lovely aromas wafting above a dark brew of tannin and acidity. This is not the best kind of year for early drinking, but is a great keeper. These wines are now are emerging, showing lovely well defined characters. The best still have a very long way to go.
White Côte de Beaunes: Very good, very good acidity, very long life expectancy!
Chablis likewise.

1994 OK, but pick your grower with care. After a humid summer there was a very hot spell in early September then rain at the beginning of the harvest. These far from ideal conditions resulted in uneven ripeness and rot, leading to high acids and dullness in many wines.
White Côte de Beaunes: will be better than reds.

1993 This was a pretty good year coming after a couple of slightly dodgy ones so was very welcome. There had been problems with hail and quite a lot of rain in the summer so there was some rot and mildew around. The harvest was redeemed by a lovely September, then let down by intermittent rain at harvest. The wines have good colour and nice flavours on the whole. They are fairly well structured and have now emerged from a long tough unapproachable period.

**1992* Another somewhat iffy year. There were some very dilute reds around. Anyone who ever overproduces, did it this year. Good growers made pleasant wines for the medium term. Top wines are drinking now, others may be past it already.*

1991 After a run of good years, one that was not so good. It started to rain at the beginning of the harvest and then it never stopped. Anyone who picked quickly was OK and had the chance to make pretty good, balanced wines. The late pickers (i.e. many of the famous producers) were a bit washed out though.
Whites were better than the reds, on the whole.

1990 A classic. A hot dry year delivered a large ripe very clean harvest. So it was very good for the Vignerons'. bank balances! Good growers made excellent reds which are holding up and drinking really well.
White Côte de Beaunes: VG but some whites lacked grip.
Chablis was VVG though.

1989 This was a hot year with a glorious autumn. It was acclaimed as the classic white Burgundy year, perhaps because the reds were a bit more problematic. When young many reds compared unfavourably with the 88s seeming soft and dilute, but there were lovely favours around and this should have warned us, - it was a very good red year too. It developed fairly quickly and top wines are still drinking well.
The whites. How have those so called ‘classic’ whites held up? They seem less good in retrospect. Actually many didn’t age that well, being a bit too rich and fruity and without the structure for it all to hang on. The 1990s certainly look a lot better now.

1988 A very good year for reds, being pretty well free of problems. When young they showed very well, being powerful rich and full, with good colour. It seemed they would develop very well but after an unapproachable closed phase, many revealed unclassic roasted flavours. They could drink well in old age?
White Côte de Beaunes: It was not quite as good for White Burgundy.
Chablis too, was good, though not wonderful.

1987 Another difficult year, but for the opposite reasons as 1986. In this case a cold and wet summer was followed by a lovely September giving a nicely ripe crop that was then spattered with rain through the harvest. Again unlike 86, this one was underrated rather than overrated. Reds were on the light side, but had good aromas and balance making them on the whole much better than the 86s.
Whites were not as good as the reds, generally speaking.
Chablis was ‘typical’, it seemed acid and charmless when young, but aged pretty well.

1986 A difficult year: A huge crop was first roasted by summer sun then subjected to September rain and humidity. Rot was rampant by harvest time. As the harvest started so the weather turned warm and dry. Those who had the courage to wait and could afford to do selective harvesting and then "bleed" the surplus juice off the skins, made some fine wines. The vast majority however made diluted wines tainted by rot. Some were OK and drank well when fairly young, but many reds went quickly from harsh and ungainly to vacuous and alcoholic, then shot. Many growers rather forlornly tried to hype their 86s, saying they preferred them over 85!
Whites were good, but were not quite as good as people said they were; some seemed rich when young but did not in my experience age as well as 85s.
I didn't get much joy from the wines of this year, maybe I drank the wrong ones.
Chablis was good. The best is peaking now but is well short of 1985 in interest.

1985 A real great in red. Some thought it would be too soft to last, but locally it was correctly identified as a keeper. The tannins were round, seeming soft but actually firm, likewise it wasn't that high in acid, but much of this was ripe tartaric acid giving the wines great structure. It was, unfortunately, a small year (and one surrounded by less than wonderful years) and it was nice young, so it sold out quickly and even disappeared off restaurant lists. The best is probably holding up well, - a very good bet if get the chance or if you had the foresight.
Surprisingly it was not quite as good for White Burgundy from the Côte de Beaune.
Chablis, though not quite perfect, was very good and concentrated. The best is peaking now.

1984 Not a good year, but it was better than elsewhere in France, though tarred by the same brush. The crop after a pretty miserable year was pretty unripe. The was a little rot but thankfully not much saving the year from being dreadful. The reds were a weak lot, but good estates made OK wines for early drinking. Côte de Beaune whites were unmemorable.
Chablis was poor.

1983 This vintage was over praised, it was ripe but there was rot, much of it following hail damage. The summer was very hot and it looked like the reds would be good. However, when the initial fruitiness fell away many were left as unbalanced and astringent, and some had strange 'roasted' notes. While the many were frankly unpleasant, there were some good reds around from good or lucky producers.
However it was a classic year for White Burgundy.
Chablis was good too, even the best will have peaked by now.

1982 Although much of the rest of France has a triumphant 82, for Burgundy this was just a very big year that was spoilt. Many reds of the reds would have been dilute anyway, but the issue became a serious problem with rain during the crucial weeks before harvest, followed by blisteringly hot weather as the over-sized crop came in. In many cases growers and negociants couldn't handle it.
Whites were fat, soft and attractive from the Côte d’Or, but Chablis was unclassic and rapid aging; now long past it.

1981 Reds lacked concentration and flesh, and are now long past it. Whites were better, especially in Chablis and could still be interesting.

1980 The reds from the Côte de Nuits were pretty good. Côte de Beaune whites were more average. Chablis I don’t remember.

1979 There was serious hail damage on parts of the Côte de Nuits. Reds were a bit light, most are drunk or vinegar long since. Very good whites - could still be drinking. Likewise Chablis.

1978 Good reds and whites. Fully mature now. Drink up.

1977 Dreadful reds. Whites were buoyed up by high acidity and could still be drinking.

1976 A hot drought year. Reds were high in extract, some were roasted and slow to develop and some never did open! Top red wines could still be drinking. Whites were fruity and alcoholic, lacking acidity.

1971 A great year in both red and white. Grand Crus and Premier Crus, from both the Côte de Nuits and Côte de Beaune, could still be drinking. (The reds are a better bet than the whites). Burgundy this old is a chance, but even on the off-chance of something fabulous, perhaps one you should take.

1966 Another great, old year.

Tim Clarke

See all tours to Bugundy

© Arblaster and Clarke Wine Tours. All rights reserved. These notes may not be copied in whole or in part without express permission.