Meursault vs Puligny - Rajat Parr

Going through Rajat Parr’s new book: “Atlas of Taste”, he talks about Meursault vs Puligny and I quote:

“In the past Meursault was the plump one and Puligny the lean and mineral one. That seems to have shifted; today, Meursault is the vision of straight line minerality with lemon cream. Puligny now seems more opulent with more body and more flesh.”

Do you all agree? If so, does this has to do with producers style? With Roulot, Coche, Jobard etc in Meursault making chiseled wines. Or is it due to climatic/ soil changes over the decades thats showing in the wines?

Oh and the book is terrific btw, highly recommended.

Generalizations rarely work, but I would generally agree.

House style, or intention, can often trump location.

This.

when was Meursault plump? My experience goes back only a few decades but I can’t remember that generalization ever holding

Lemon cream, or as I put it lemon custard, is and has always been a signature of Meursault.

I wouldn’t describe Puligny as opulent or fleshy, in general, though some mature examples are opulent e.g. ‘96 Leflaive.

As others have noted here producer has a huge amount to do with this.

I’d also add that with more hot vintages we wil see characteristics changing.

FWIW I greatly enjoy wines from both Meursault and Puligny and would be equally as excited to drink one from an excellent vintage and producer.

This

Would be nice if he specified a time frame

1980’s?

1960’s?

I have only spoken to Raj once but I got the impression he doesn’t like to be bound by details, preferring instead to make a big general impression.

Like this quote.

Those who know him better please correct me if I am off base.

Well, I don’t know Parr, but you are doing to him exactly what you accuse him of doing with the excerpted (i.e. taken out of context) quote from the book.

I’ll bet Raj tastes a lot more Burgundy than I do, but I’d be hard pressed to substantiate any kind of generalizations. I’d love to be able to point to certain characteristics of the different regions, and say they are this or that. But heck, I can’t even generalize across (for example) all the Chassagne of PYCM, or all the Meursault of Roulot, let alone across different communes.

Isn’t that the old saying about the commune? Much in the same way of Gevrey being more broader and richer while Chambolle more ethereal.

Heard the same in Pommard vs Volnay or Barolo vs Barbaresco. But I could be off, perhaps such a tale never existed.

The question is if you hold the producer the same, does it hold true comparing a Meursault vs a Puligny?

Yeah. The initial point on Meursault and PM back when sounds like a generalization along the lines that Clive Coates used to make sometimes, which were usually qualified and not meant to be taken as universal truths (even if/when they were wrong). I’d like to read Parr’s quote in context myself before drawing any judgments. I might see him tomorrow at Racines and will see if conditions are right to bring this up.

I would tend to agree that many Puligny GCs are quite opulent - say even cf the 90s. But many village and 1ers continue to be lean, taut and minerally. I would also argue that given appropriate bottle age, many Meursaults still become relatively opulent. Roulot is very lean when you drink it young for example, but quite generous with (say) 10 years.

I actually can find a way to appreciate and agree with the excerpt.

Didn’t mean to be harsh; would be glad to know Raj better.

Probably would have interesting conversations.

Drank with Raj once, very impressed with his knowledge of wine (Burgundy) and would say his palate is top level.

I know, that’s why I quoted him. I would trust his palate and his take on this subject seriously.

The context was when tasting blind on how to identify the village.

Generalizations are helpful only to a limited degree. Given differences between producers and vineyards within a village, and aging effects, for repeatable success in blind tasting I think you’d need some past experience with a few different vintages of the wines being tasted. And a good memory. Practice, practice, practice.

Or luck.

I would agree so far as 15-20 years ago the differences (between Meursault, Puligny and Chassagne) were more obvious than today.
Fact is that today more top vinemaker are in Meursault than in PN and ChM … and often the house style is more typical than the Village the wines come from …
20 years ago I had a quite clear idea about the characteristics of Ms. PM ChM … and 2 out of 3 wines I´ve usually been right.
Now I´m right maybe 1 out of 3 times … and my experience has not diminished …

David, I was referring to the context in which Rajat Parr mentioned it. I suppose the book was written for the somm audience.

I am not interested in blind tastings, I was just curious when I came across the remark.

I opened a 2014 Moreau-Naudet Chablis Montmains last night and the lemon cream/custard note came through on that bottle in spades

Gerhard,

Good to hear. I suppose it’s the winemakers signature than any climatic change.