Prior to visiting his domaine, I met Frédéric Mugnier in Singapore for the Paulée de Meursault charity event organized by Dr. NK Yong.
Mugnier, a former oil engineer in his 50s was born in Geneva but raised in Alsace. Up to the year 2000, Mugnier had to work as a part-time airline pilot to supplement his income from his 4-hectare estate vineyards in Chambolle-Musigny. All this took a decisive turn ever since the lease of the large parcel of land in Nuits-Saint-Georges 1er Cru called Clos de la Marechale (9.76 hectares) expired and was returned to the Mugnier family from Faiveley in 2003.
In the 1950s, Frédéric’s father, Jacques-Frédéric Mugnier, for family reasons leased the entire Château de Chambolle-Musigny estate (where the current domaine resides), along with Clos de la Marechale to Nuits-Saint-Georges négociant Faiveley for a period of 28 years. Initially the Chambolle vine were farmed by Faiveley, but was later passed on to Bernard Clair from Marsannay. In 1978, when the lease expired, Jacques-Frédéric Mugnier decided to regain control over his 4 hectares Chambolle-Musigny vineyard from Bernard Clair but agreed to extend another 25 more years lease to Faiveley for Clos de la Marechale. Frédéric Mugnier took over the domaine in 1985 and eventually regained control over Clos de la Marechale vineyard in November 2003.
Mugnier reminded me of another famous wine personality, Larry Stone (Master Sommelier and restaurateur of the famous San Francisco Restaurant Rubicon). Both gentlemen tend to be shy and at times seem to have difficulties in expressing themselves. Yet these are undoubtedly very intelligent individuals and once the subject of wine is brought up, their latent intensity and passion would soon take over.
Mugnier has a very simple approach to raising his wine: let nature do its work and simply stay out of the way. In several occasions he told me, “You cannot possibly add anything to what the vineyard already has; you can only remove from it.” His goal is to fully allow his vineyard to express itself without man-made, artificial or superficial alterations. “The quality and uniqueness has already existed in the vineyard. A good winemaker (he refuses to call himself a winemaker but would accept to be called a vigneron, as he thinks he is simply the servant of his vineyards) is to be able to express those quality and amplify them.” Allen Meadows of Burghound once said, “The greatest winemakers in Burgundy are those that are humble before their vineyards.”
Mugnier is a firm believer of old vine. Majority of his vines were planted in 1968, save for his Bonnes-Mares, most of which was replanted in 1980 and 1987 (however one-third of it were planted in the 50s). He is not a great believer of biodynamic as he argues against some of the practices, such as the use of copper spray to treat oïdium (powdery mildew) which was permitted yet ironically no other synthetic chemicals were allowed. To his knowledge, copper sulphate does more harm to the soil than many synthetic sprays and most biodynamic domaines tends to spray double the dosage he would typically choose to use. Although his vineyards are not organic, Mugnier does not use weed killer, industrial fertilizers or insecticide, and only applies copper sulphate when is absolutely necessary.
Mugnier, a former oil engineer in his 50s was born in Geneva but raised in Alsace. Up to the year 2000, Mugnier had to work as a part-time airline pilot to supplement his income from his 4-hectare estate vineyards in Chambolle-Musigny. All this took a decisive turn ever since the lease of the large parcel of land in Nuits-Saint-Georges 1er Cru called Clos de la Marechale (9.76 hectares) expired and was returned to the Mugnier family from Faiveley in 2003.
In the 1950s, Frédéric’s father, Jacques-Frédéric Mugnier, for family reasons leased the entire Château de Chambolle-Musigny estate (where the current domaine resides), along with Clos de la Marechale to Nuits-Saint-Georges négociant Faiveley for a period of 28 years. Initially the Chambolle vine were farmed by Faiveley, but was later passed on to Bernard Clair from Marsannay. In 1978, when the lease expired, Jacques-Frédéric Mugnier decided to regain control over his 4 hectares Chambolle-Musigny vineyard from Bernard Clair but agreed to extend another 25 more years lease to Faiveley for Clos de la Marechale. Frédéric Mugnier took over the domaine in 1985 and eventually regained control over Clos de la Marechale vineyard in November 2003.
Mugnier reminded me of another famous wine personality, Larry Stone (Master Sommelier and restaurateur of the famous San Francisco Restaurant Rubicon). Both gentlemen tend to be shy and at times seem to have difficulties in expressing themselves. Yet these are undoubtedly very intelligent individuals and once the subject of wine is brought up, their latent intensity and passion would soon take over.
Mugnier has a very simple approach to raising his wine: let nature do its work and simply stay out of the way. In several occasions he told me, “You cannot possibly add anything to what the vineyard already has; you can only remove from it.” His goal is to fully allow his vineyard to express itself without man-made, artificial or superficial alterations. “The quality and uniqueness has already existed in the vineyard. A good winemaker (he refuses to call himself a winemaker but would accept to be called a vigneron, as he thinks he is simply the servant of his vineyards) is to be able to express those quality and amplify them.” Allen Meadows of Burghound once said, “The greatest winemakers in Burgundy are those that are humble before their vineyards.”
Mugnier is a firm believer of old vine. Majority of his vines were planted in 1968, save for his Bonnes-Mares, most of which was replanted in 1980 and 1987 (however one-third of it were planted in the 50s). He is not a great believer of biodynamic as he argues against some of the practices, such as the use of copper spray to treat oïdium (powdery mildew) which was permitted yet ironically no other synthetic chemicals were allowed. To his knowledge, copper sulphate does more harm to the soil than many synthetic sprays and most biodynamic domaines tends to spray double the dosage he would typically choose to use. Although his vineyards are not organic, Mugnier does not use weed killer, industrial fertilizers or insecticide, and only applies copper sulphate when is absolutely necessary.
Mugnier picks his fruits according to taste rather than trying to determine phenolic ripening from the grape stalks. He practices triage or sorting but emphasizes that it is best conducted in the vineyard, not in the cuvérie. He said, “If there were inferior or rot-infected grapes, it would have been too late to remove them once all grapes are mixed together with the healthier bunch.” He likes to bring in the grape at 15-degree Celsius. In the event that the subsequent grapes were brought in at a higher temperature, he would chill the grapes. He believes all his grapes must enter to the fermentation tank at an equal temperature. He also conducts various harvesting timing from his vineyard to obtain different degrees of ripening of fruits, a practice which provides him with the ability to work with a broader choice of components. Mugnier does not practice cold maceration, as color is the least important factor to him. “We are making pinot noir here, not syrah,” Mugnier succinctly states.
Since 1989 Mugnier began fully destemming his grapes. All primary fermentation takes place in temperature-controlled stainless-steel tank or wooden vat. Each parcel of vineyard is treated separately and assembling of the wine (assemblage) is done only prior to the bottling. Only 20% new wood is used here, and the remaining is made up of 2-3 year-old barrels. When asked why specifically 20%, Mugnier replied that it was practical and economical to recycle the barrel – otherwise, he is prepared to go even lower. He emphatically expressed that he disliked the taste of oak in his wines and the reason for the use of oak was mainly for storage and further refining of his wines through slow contact with oxygen.
One peculiar practice he conducts is that he treats all his wines equally. From the humblest villages to the most highly prized grand cru, they receive the same exact treatment in the vineyards and in élevage: same vinification, same amount of new and used oak for aging. As stated earlier, he does not care about the color and weight of his wines. Even in less superior vintages, he would not alter the raw materials by applying enhancement techniques such as cold maceration, saignée, adding pressed wines, or lengthening the aging. “If there is a problem or deficiency in the vintage, there is no reason to hide them. That is the character of the year and the wine should reflect the vintage. That is what makes wines interesting.” His approach echoes the practices of old when the church and aristocracy owned all Burgundy’s vineyards in the eighteen-century. The monks treated all vineyards regardless of crus in the same precise manner. Over time, the superiority of some vineyards was revealed, contributing to what we now know of as the present ranking or cru system. It is of no surprise that Mugnier is now making one of the purest and most honest wines of the region. I agree with Meadows’ comment that Mugnier’s wine is not for everybody, especially not for those who look for lush, wood-infused wines with early accessibility. “Mugnier’s wines often require the taster to come to them, or at least meet them in the middle. They are understated, rigorous, precise, pure and delineated wines,” quipped Meadows.
When I told recalled to Mugnier that Meadows considered his wine was for the intellect, he responded emphatically to that statement and replied, “What I was trying to achieve here is to make simple wines which reflect its origin. The hardest thing to achieve in life is simplicity.” Jules Guyot (1807-1872) had once said, “The greatest of making good wine is of pristine simplicity and the best preceptor is traditional practice.” This statement accurately echoes what Mugnier believes in.
Day Four (November 17, 2005) – Domaine Comte Georges de Vogüé
Few domaines in burgundy share a historical significance like domaine Comte George de Vogüé where its roots trace back to over 550 years. (A case in point, the courtyard of the domaine was previously built by Jean Moisson, de Vogüé ancestors in the 1400s.) The domaine is today in the hands of Elizabeth, Baronne Bertrand de Ladoucette (also related to the Loire’s Ladoucette family), the only daughter of Comte George’s and her two daughters, Comtesse Gérard de Caussans and Marie de Vogüé. Following the death of Comte George in 1987, Elizabeth installed the new team, comprising Gérard Gaudeau who tended the vines (succeeded by Eric Bourgogne in 1996), François Millet who responsible the winemaking after the retirement of Alain Roumier and Jean-Luc Pépin, formerly from Joseph Drouhin, who takes charge of sales and marketing.
The domaine today owns 12.5 hectares of vines, out of which was a 7.2 ha plot of Musigny – which includes exclusive sole holding of Les Petits-Musigny (4.2 ha) – making them the largest owner of the 10 ha Musigny grand cru vineyard. Other owners of what Allen Meadows calls “one of the most gifted pieces of dirt in burgundy” includes illustrious names such as Frédéric Mugnier, Jacques Prieur, Joseph Drouhin, Pierre-Julien Hudelot, Daniel Moine-Hudelot, Domaine Ponnelle, George Roumier and Lalou-Bize Leroy. Besides Musigny, de Vogüé also owns 2.7 ha of Bonnes-Mares grand cru, 0.56 ha of the 1er Cru “Les Amoureuses”, 0.17 ha each of 1er Cru Les Fuées and Les Baudes, both of which due to the insignificant in size have been traditionally blended into the 1.8 ha of villages bottling. The estate’s only other premier cru (Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru) is exclusively made of younger vines Le Musigny grand cru vineyard and is therefore, according to François Millet, the best value wine of the domaine.
Perhaps my palate has evolved, or just that I have begun to understand burgundy better these days but I have recently displaced my long affection of burgundy grand cru Richebourg with Le Musigny. The taste of 1998 de Vogüé Le Musigny is still lingering long and clear in my memory. The subtle yet haunting sweetness, the concentration, unmatched breed and depth, yet so exclusively balanced… Richebourg might have the same deliciousness, richness and generosity, but the sappiness, purity, minerality, and the blissful balance of acidity are not apparent with Richebourg. I am not sure if all Musigny would taste like de Vogüé’s – as my experiences are limited – but what Allen Meadows describes as the hallmark of this unique grand cru which is “richness without weight” clearly found in de Vogüé Le Musigny is both rare and exclusive. François Millet later told me that the domaine’s parcel of Le Musigny, which includes the entire southeastern of Le Petits-Musigny could well responsible for the elegance found in de Vogüé Le Musigny.
Meeting François Millet was also one of the highlights of this trip. He came across as a very serious person in his business, a private person and a man with few words but never lacking wisdom. I enjoy chatting with him and he was extremely honest and generous in sharing his knowledge and experiences. When asked how he would compare or distinguish Le Musigny from Bonnes-Mares, he gently replied, “Bonnes-Mares has always been considered an outsider of Chambolle-Musigny. It loves to be provoked and can at times turn out quite differently.” I completely agree with Millet at this point, especially when you start comparing the Bonnes-Mares from de Vogüé and Frédéric Mugnier – you would even think they come from different communes! Millet continues, “Bonnes-Mares in de Vogüé always has a purple hue, not that we practice cold-maceration, (which improves anthocyans, or natural organic chemical compounds responsible for purple color in grapes and wines) but it’s just always that way. Unlike Musigny or Les Amoureuses which are often marked by red raspberries, Bonnes-Mares tends to show more intense black fruits. Bonnes-Mares is often more forthcoming, showy, with obvious weight, structure, power and, at times, a touch of rusticity. Musigny, on the other hand, is more subtle, more silky-smooth and edge-free. It needs very little interference from man and if it is done carelessly, it would simply lose its unique qualities. It is like someone walking on a tightrope between cliffs: any mistake along the way and the consequence is irreversible.” He further added, “You need to search for your own definition for Musigny. As soon as you’ve found it, it would be unmistakable.” Of all writers, I think Clive Coates has the essence right, “ Musigny at it best is perfumed and silky-smooth, not rugged and masculine. The tannins are there, but they are supple; the vigor is present, but the feel is essentially soft. A great Musigny is heaven in a glass!”
These are my notes of the barrel tasting of 2004 from de Vogüé.
The Chambolle-Musigny was marked by raspberries with hints of spices. The palate was both pristine and pure. Not particularly dense, instead it was quite delicate and sexy, with a supple feel. According to Millet, the month of August in the vintage was particularly problematic and challenging for Chambolle, with hailstorm and rain interference. Fortunately, the weather returned to dry and windy in September although some high-altitude spots in the vineyard was still threatened by hail. Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru “Les Amoureuses” showed more seductive perfume that this appellation is well known for, with spices, dark raspberries and rose petals that came across quite high-toned and confectionery. Interestingly, underneath the edge-free, silky palate, there was a good detail of minerality which came across almost stone fruit like. Besides, there was an obvious sappiness in this wine not found in the previous sample. The average vine age here is around 30-year-old and like other Amoureuses, which lies directly below Le Musigny, it consists of more limestone pebble as opposed to clay, which, according to Millet, lends a silky-smooth personality and finesse to the wine.
There is no question that, all de Vogüé’s wines carry a certain house-style that with some experience, one could possibly spot quite easily. It often has a lush, almost confectionery dark fruits element. The palate is usually silky and marked by seductively sweetness but equally there is good level of acidity that gives their wines the required energy and vibrancy. There was always a certain mineral quality too and most importantly, there is clear definition among the crus. All de Vogüé premier cru are treated with approximately 20% new wood and for grand cru, up to 40%. Interestingly, Millet preferred to show me the Le Musigny before his Bonnes-Mares. Clearly, Musigny recalled a similar fruit profile as Amoureuses, but in a more subtle way. The wine also came across as less showy, with more pronounced minerality, more obvious structure and a decidedly sound acidity. It was clearly a larger-scale wine. As I mentioned in previous issues, the stream-flow in burgundy commune has a deciding factor on where and which limestone would be found. Due to the stream known as Grône both Bathonian and Bajocian limestone co-exist in Chambolle-Musigny. It is particularly evident with Bonnes-Mares, which lies north toward Clos-de-Tart from Morey-Saint-Denis, which has more Bajocian influenced of clay and marl known as terres rouges. Going south toward Chambolle the soil becomes lighter in color, which comprises more of Bathonian oolite and fossilized oysters known as terres blaches. It is said that the influenced of Morey-Saint-Denis leaves a clear mark on Bonnes-Mares, with a more foursquare, muscular, structure and rugged frame. De Vogüé’s Bonnes-Mares, which comes from exclusively terres rouges soil showed an atypical style of the house, with more muscle, structure and to some extent, rusticity. There was a good level of purity in its red and black berries, rose petals as well as obvious earthy tones not found in the preceding samples. Also, the wine did not have as much sappiness and the acidity was less adequate than, say, the Musigny or Amoureuses. Nonetheless, this is a firm, structured and deep wine that needs plenty age to fully express its true potentials. (Specially edited by H.Hariyono)
The Chambolle-Musigny was marked by raspberries with hints of spices. The palate was both pristine and pure. Not particularly dense, instead it was quite delicate and sexy, with a supple feel. According to Millet, the month of August in the vintage was particularly problematic and challenging for Chambolle, with hailstorm and rain interference. Fortunately, the weather returned to dry and windy in September although some high-altitude spots in the vineyard was still threatened by hail. Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru “Les Amoureuses” showed more seductive perfume that this appellation is well known for, with spices, dark raspberries and rose petals that came across quite high-toned and confectionery. Interestingly, underneath the edge-free, silky palate, there was a good detail of minerality which came across almost stone fruit like. Besides, there was an obvious sappiness in this wine not found in the previous sample. The average vine age here is around 30-year-old and like other Amoureuses, which lies directly below Le Musigny, it consists of more limestone pebble as opposed to clay, which, according to Millet, lends a silky-smooth personality and finesse to the wine.
There is no question that, all de Vogüé’s wines carry a certain house-style that with some experience, one could possibly spot quite easily. It often has a lush, almost confectionery dark fruits element. The palate is usually silky and marked by seductively sweetness but equally there is good level of acidity that gives their wines the required energy and vibrancy. There was always a certain mineral quality too and most importantly, there is clear definition among the crus. All de Vogüé premier cru are treated with approximately 20% new wood and for grand cru, up to 40%. Interestingly, Millet preferred to show me the Le Musigny before his Bonnes-Mares. Clearly, Musigny recalled a similar fruit profile as Amoureuses, but in a more subtle way. The wine also came across as less showy, with more pronounced minerality, more obvious structure and a decidedly sound acidity. It was clearly a larger-scale wine. As I mentioned in previous issues, the stream-flow in burgundy commune has a deciding factor on where and which limestone would be found. Due to the stream known as Grône both Bathonian and Bajocian limestone co-exist in Chambolle-Musigny. It is particularly evident with Bonnes-Mares, which lies north toward Clos-de-Tart from Morey-Saint-Denis, which has more Bajocian influenced of clay and marl known as terres rouges. Going south toward Chambolle the soil becomes lighter in color, which comprises more of Bathonian oolite and fossilized oysters known as terres blaches. It is said that the influenced of Morey-Saint-Denis leaves a clear mark on Bonnes-Mares, with a more foursquare, muscular, structure and rugged frame. De Vogüé’s Bonnes-Mares, which comes from exclusively terres rouges soil showed an atypical style of the house, with more muscle, structure and to some extent, rusticity. There was a good level of purity in its red and black berries, rose petals as well as obvious earthy tones not found in the preceding samples. Also, the wine did not have as much sappiness and the acidity was less adequate than, say, the Musigny or Amoureuses. Nonetheless, this is a firm, structured and deep wine that needs plenty age to fully express its true potentials. (Specially edited by H.Hariyono)
No comments:
Post a Comment