2017 Domaine Auguste Clape Cornas: Ripe, rich and powerful. Fruits are dark and surly and there’s plenty of meat and earth. With air you get some engaging florals. It is a big and powerful wine but not heavy in the slightest. It is a wine of zero artifice, just pure expression of Syrah fruit from whence it came. Length of flavour is superb.
2018 Domaine Vincent Paris Cornas La Geynale: Highly perfumed nose of raspberries, menthol, earth, black pepper and smoky bacon. It is fresh and detailed in the mouth, with a high degree of elegance and great drive and persistence. The balance allows you to approach now with pleasure.
Wow, I always thought that if you drank a Clape that young you’d look like Daffy Duck after lighting an exploding cigar. Glad to know otherwise. Sounds lovely. And I’ve very much enjoyed the couple of youthful Geynales I’ve had. It’s a big step up from the 30 and 60, isn’t it?
More than that. They are fundamentally different wines. I view 30 and 60 as modern and Geynale as classic. Gaynale is a killer vintage. Now going to grab some 2018…
Is the Geynale built to age for a long time? I’m a wine novice and I’m still struggling to understand how you can make a wine modern/approachable young but also make it so it’s built to age. I’m trying to decide if I should drink my bottle of 2016 Geynale or hold for a few (10-20) more years.
I’m not a huge Vincent Paris fan, but yes, the Geynale (especially the 16) should age for 20 years without too much trouble. That said, 16 is a reasonably approachable vintage (it’s not as structured as 2010), so should be OK to drink now. However, if you want a vintage that drinks well young, I’d probably open a 17 which is a vintage that’s showing a lot of fruit and isn’t built to age nearly as well.
Paris is interesting as a winemaker as his 30/60 cuvees generally come across more modern and glossy, whereas his Geynale cuvee is generally more traditional in structure and profile. They are different vineyards, different vines. Would love to know whether there are any winemaking differences between the three cuvees, as there are things that a winemaker can do to make a young wine more approachable or come across more modern, such as, later picking of grapes for more ripeness and lower acid, more oak treatment (new versus old, more toast, longer aging, etc.), micro-oxygenation, etc.
I only buy the Geynale cuvee, it’s a pretty famous vineyard that Paris inherited from Robert Michel, I think in 2007. I have not yet tried the 2016, and doubt I will for 10 years minimum.
Interesting tid-bit from the distributor:
Next up are his Cornas Granit “30” and “60”, designations that refer to the gradient slope of the vineyards. The Granit 30 is concentrated black fruit in a relatively “consumer friendly” style – perhaps a bit more Syrah-ish than Cornas-ish- whereas the 60 is classic Cornas: dense, with aromas of kidney and iron, and a terrific mineral underpinning. Last in the range is very small amount of Cornas “La Geynale”, a blend of mostly Genale from the 1910 plantings he purchased from his uncle, along with 20-30% from neighboring Reynard. The addition of the “y” in Geynale is a nod to this unique blend.
Thanks Greg and Robert. I’ve had the Granit 30 and it was decent, though for the money there are a lot of other things I’d rather have. It was a 2016 vintage opened in 2019 - maybe I just prefer aged Cornas based on how I’ve heard people rave on the Granit 30+60.
I know a lot of people that really like the 30 and 60. These are well-made wines from good dirt. They just didn’t have that interesting factor to me, plus they are a bit glossy. The Geynale, which has stem inclusion plus superior terroir, keeps me going back to this bottling. That’s said, I put a few others well ahead of it.
