1990 Jaboulet 'La Chapelle', with Chave, Allemand, and Ramonet Batard

A 60th birthday for a Rhone loving friend. All bottles got 3-5 hours of air except the Allemand which got 2 (and the Batard, which got none.)

1996 Ramonet Batard–oxidized.

2001 Ramonet Batard-- Luckily the perpetrator brought a back up bottle. Fairly rich, with the hallmark somewhat resiny smoke of a Ramonet Batard. Very nice but wouldn’t keep it much longer as it gets a certain waxiness after 2 hours.

2007 Allemand Cornas ‘Reynard’–Young, dark, rich, raspberry/black olive. While young, it’s welcoming and enjoyable. Much better with the food. surely will be better in 10 years.

2001 Chave Hermitage–Good density and fruit, still tastes like young syrah. A pleasure, but hasn’t hit the full stride that Chave will with age, and really hasn’t begun the transition. Unless you have a big supply, I’d hold off, and I’d guess it would be another 10 years.

1995 Chave Hermitage–Doesn’t have the density of the 2001 (but that certainly isn’t a liability), and is in mid transition to mature Chave. More perfume of earthy dark berry. A pleasure. I’d personally give it another five years.

1990 Jaboulet Hermitage ‘La Chapelle’-- Inky, serious but not heavy or thick wine. Meaty, black olive, leather, dark black raspberry-ish fruit lingering in the background. A remarkable, fascinating wine that is still too young (there is a theme here, isn’t there?). A great experience, but I think will be even better in 5-10 years.

1885 Reserva Velha Barbeito, Malvasia Madeira–Well, I guess there’s no way I can claim that this one is too young. Dark bronze, rich orange peel, great complexity. Very intensely alive. These wines are remarkable. (1885 was the year the Statue of liberty arrived, the year Dr Pepper was patented, the year the Dow was started).

Tis the season for Rhone I see.

We had that 90 La Chapelle a few months ago. I slow ox’d it for 12 hours and it was still so young. I would guess 10-20 more years on that bad boy.

I´m tasting the 1990 La Chapelle for 24 years now - always fascinating, always immensly impressive, always too young (even in halves) - but always sooooo gooood to drink.

This wine will outlive me …

Right–I’d love to follow it from here. The host has about three bottles left, and I hope he continues to share. Too bad the estate wasn’t able to maintain the same quality and winemaking style in subsequent years.

To be fair:
The 1990 La chapelle is IMHO the very best Lch. Jaboulet has ever produced (with the possible exception of the 1961 which I had unfortunately never the chance to taste).

The 1978 is a great wine, but nevertheless a step lower.

In between 1979, 1982, 1983(?), 1985, (1988), 1989 were fine successes, and afterwards 1991, 1995(less), 1996(more) and 1997 are outstanding again.
The slip began after the sudden death of Gerard Jaboulet in mid 1997 … 1998/99/2000 were disapointing, 2001 was better.
I do think the 2003 is again a fine wine, but in the character of the (hot) vintage …

Then the company was sold …

You also do not get vintage conditions like in 1990 every 2nd year …

Good point about vintages Gerhard, and interested in your take. That said, there’s maybe 3-5 vintages between '78 and '90 where the La Chapelle is as good or better than Chave. Since then, you could make a case for the '97 but pretty much nothing else. That suggests to me that La Chapelle used to be “right up there” (in second place) but is now (and probably since 1997) nowhere near.

Excellent summary of the vintages, Gerhard. I’ve had most of the La Chapelles since 1978 and agree with everything you wrote.

An Aussie sommelier in San Francisco once told me La Chapelle is a wine that fraudsters love to relabel and sell. I wonder how many fakes I’ve had, I’m sure there have been a few.

Rauno,

I enjoyed the '88 more than Chave’s '88.

I’ve not had the comparable Chave 85, but the la Chapelle from that year has been exceedingly good, and a little closer to mature than the 1990.

Also to Rauno and Ed (above):

I do think the 1985 La Chapelle is slightly superior to the 85 Chave - if you´ve got a fine bottle.
I also do think 1983 Chave is better than 83 LCh. (and the latter shows a lot of bottle-variation).
In 1982 it might be on par - or a matter of taste (both are fine) … the same for 1988 - and also 1989 (Chave might have the edge).
The 1987 LCh. is too lightweight, while Chave is very good.

While the 1990 Chave is great - LCh 90 is unbeatable …

1991 Chave may be the best drinking Chave at the moment … exceptionally complex and seductive.
91 LCh is very good though.
94 Chave is fine, LCh good.

Chave 93 is better than 92, but both are for drinking up. (LCh 92 is mean, 93 not made).

Both 1996s are outstanding.
I think 97 LCh is superior to Chave 97 (the former quite youthful, the latter mature).
1998-2000 LCh not worth the money (but 99 is not a bad drink for 25-30 bucks).

2001 LCh is very good again, Chave is outstanding.
Both 2003s are great wines - but in the style of the vintage, and Chave is a 99-100p wine.

Jaboulet has been sold to Frey in 2006 - and the vintages 2004-06 are a transitional stage.
From 2007 onwards the style has totally changed … but the quality has risen, 09 and 10 being outstanding.

Thanks for the note. I still haven’t had a bottle of 1990 La Chapelle from the ones I bought on release that I thought were close to maturity yet.

Bruce

Bruce,
I´m usually the first to recommend waiting further on a bottle when not really mature …
BUT - if you haven´t tasted the 90 La Chapelle for a longer period - and if you´ve got more than 2/3 bottles … you should try one over the next year(s) - it´s simply too impressive and enjoyable …
(but give it a lot of air … 1st Audouze for 5 h, then decant for another 5 h …)

A five-hour Audouze and a five-hour decanting involves a lot of advance thought/preparation.

Bruce

I had two 90 jaboulet LC on consecutive nights. One was pop and pour and another was opened in the morning. Both were still so young and unyielding.

Two separate cellars if anyone was wondering

Young - yes … but not necessarily unyielding. The last 90 Lch I had was (3 months ago) a bottle carefully prepared over a day by a good friend (from his cellar) - and it was not only impressive but also highly enjoyable !

On the vinous board, several folks were suggesting pop and pour on a 1990 Chave, using the time-worn concern about destroying the nose and aroma of the wine by decanting, esp double decanting. I told them I thought they were mistaken, and unless they had 12 hour tasting events, very probably missing the best showing of the wine by denying it adequate air. The same old argument lingers, with folks convinced on either side.

What sort of difference was there between the pop and pour vs the bottle that got air?

I had the 90 La Chapelle 10 years apart and it hadn’t budged one bit. If it’s ever ready to drink I will certainly be too old.

I sold half of the case I bought when it was originally released, and stored in my cellar, precisely because I decided I was too old for this wine. I had some friends over to try a bottle before deciding to sell the 6. I decanted it at noon. We first tasted it around 7 and it was still closed. We had our last glass around midnight and it was just starting to open up. I can easily see predicting a great future for this wine, but I really don’t know if I’ll be around to see it.

Thanks for the notes John.

We had the '94 Chave next to the '86 last week. The '94 is certainly in that transition stage like your '95. The '86 was delightful, starting to show some tertiary nuance.

Boy, do I remember the '86 Chave, supposedly an “off” vintage. In the late '80s the wine was virtually dumped in NYC…like $10/bottle or something like that. Wish I had kept some, but…loved it so much then, I didn’t. Glad it’s “starting” to show some development at age 30.