TN: 2005 Chateau Magdelaine, and some personal thoughts on when to drink this classic Chateau

I’ve had quite a bit of Magdelaine these last several years, ranging in vintages from 1966 to its final vintage, 2011. Had a 1982 just two weeks ago. Some of the vintages from the 1980s, generally speaking, are gorgeous and so perfectly ripe and mature. Not in danger of falling off any cliff. The ‘66 I had a couple years ago was exceptional for its fresh character while showing the full range of mature Bordeaux expression. And just so damn alive. I have also had a few 2000s recently, with really only one showing itself open while the other two being great but really more about potential. I felt that way about a recent 1995 as well.

So why am I rambling?

Despite the numerous notes on CT about this 2005 Chateau Magdelaine being open for business, at least for me, it is nowhere near ready for showtime. I decanted it for 2 hours, saving about 1/4 bottle for the next time, following it for several hours that first night. Finished the remaining 1/4 bottle tonight. It still has not budged that much. Yea, shows some more rounding and deeper fruit, but still rather primary. Love the structure of this wine - I’ve seen CT notes saying it’s low, medium and high acid. All over the map. I think the structure is just right, and pretty much what I expect from a vintage like 2005. The weight of the fruit, the acid, the tannins, all seem in balance, but not a wallflower. It is a 2005, after all. What we are not seeing yet, however, is exactly where this wine will go - it’s that primary still. I love the range of red, purple and black fruits. Some Indian spices and even a modest kiss of oak spice. Some dusty notes almost reminiscent of Rutherford Napa. I think this will be an excellent Magdelaine. I do not think you should open it now, unless of course, you happen to have a lot of it and wanna see where it is. I just grabbed six so did exactly that, even though I had sorta told myself recently, 25+ years on any Magdelaine. Even that 1995 needs a bit more time. Drinking as much as I have of the 1980s vintages, I feel pretty confident taking that position with my own stash. I’m sure I will break this rule as I am incapable of living by almost any self-imposed rule, but really, Magdelaine needs 25+ in most vintages. The only truly young vintage of Magdelaine that I have had and said, damn, this young wine drinks well now is 2011. I just ordered some more of that, too. And even that wine has miles to it.

If any of these vintages like 95, 00, 05, 09 and 10 develop - and I think that they will - like 1982, 85 and 86, my holding them for a very long time will pay dividends. Damn that 82 that I recently had was so gorgeous, drank it next to a 1982 Haut Brion. While the Haut Brion was in another class of wine, that Magdelaine was mighty fine in its own right.

I am afraid we will not see St Ems like this anymore.

PS. Tom Reddick had a solid retro recently on this Chateau, but did not have the 2005. A very worthy read to get some pulse on this Chateau.

I didn’t have Magdelaine on my “okay to buy” list but I must admit I caved and bought a mixed case of six vintages recently, including this 2005. The only one I had before was the 1992 which Tom and I had discussed in another thread.

Great thoughts Robert. A few points to add if I may.

One of the perils of buying Magdelaine in the US- or at least vintages from the late 90s and prior at a time when most retailers did not have cold storage onsite- is that the wine has never had a huge following here. And so very often bottles would sit out on store shelves for a long time before selling. And even in cases where retailers started to hold higher end bottles in cold storage, the price of Magdelaine was not sufficiently high to compete for that space in many instances. Point being- this plays out in many CT notes that strongly suggest heat damaged bottles.

Second- I think the fact Magdelaine is so incredibly complex, and shows a bit of that young, may give many the impression the wine is further along on the maturity curve than it really is. Along with Figeac, I think Magdelaine is truly of first growth quality when it comes to the degree of nuance it can show in time. I had to see that for myself in person- it would never have even occurred to me otherwise due to the sheer power of marketing and tradition (first growths, left bank etc. etc.)- and how that impacted my initial impressions when learning about Bordeaux. Magdelaine was not of much note in the critical reviews I was reading when I started collecting wine- even Broadbent only noted it rarely, though generally in favorable terms. The production could partially explain that- half that of Petrus. By Bordeaux standards, Magdelaine made very little wine.

The above is a combination of theory and anecdotal evidence, but it is the best I can offer.

In terms of what is drinking well now, IMHO the two youngest vintages of Magdelaine that are just starting to “unfurl” as I like to say (meaning coming out of hibernation and into the home stretch) are the 1999 and 2001. The 2006 showed quite well out of the starting gates, but in my most recent tasting of the wine (for which I have 4 notes), it is actually just now starting to shut down to some extent even as its secondary complexities begin to develop, and it may prove to quite a long-lived vintage. The 2007 is certainly drinkable and enjoyable, but I personally would rather let it get lacey and delicate like the 1992 at which point it should be showing even greater nuance than it does now. As for the very young vintages- I do agree 2011 is showing the best of them all at this point. It is a rather unruly wine- in a good way- but showing more of its inner core than the 08-10 vintages. (The 2008 was stunning at release but very much shutting down now.)

For older vintages, like you I am astonished at how consistently youthful and vibrant they are. A couple of years ago, a major Belgian wine operation auctioned off a large selection of its old stock, and I got a lot of Magdelaine in that sale- including 6 bottles of the 1987 for about $40 each all in. I opened one about a year ago in NYC at dinner alongside a 1985 Lynch-Bages, and it held its own beautifully. Not much is going to outshine 1985 Lynch-Bages at the dinner table (at least not for me), but the 1987 Magdelaine was in full cry without any signs of decline. And I would pit it against any 1987 first growth today. When I originally bought them, I assumed I would need to drink them up within a few years, but after that one tasting I will be spacing out the remaining bottles over at least the next 10-15 years.

I finally found a pristine case of the 1982 earlier this year. I have resisted opening one because of COVID and the desire to save it for when I can meet with others again, but you are really tempting me to open one now. It is one of the few great vintages I have not yet tasted.

Great ramblings, Robert!

I’ve been hunting down a few Magdelaines recently thanks to your rec. It’s not that I didn’t know it before, but it had rather gone under my radar - also, it’s fair to say that in my salad days I didn’t appreciate the subtlety in the same way I do now. I had a lovely 2004 recently which had a exquisite minty touch to it. It was a refreshing reminder of days gone by when I enjoyed St.Emilions.

Anyway, I had been meaning to ask you (and any others with ideas) - apart from pre-Rolland Figeac, which St.Emilions, if any, are made in that pre-Parker style? Are any still active? Also, have you tried Bel Air Monange?

Good question! And good luck!

To satiate that merlot thing, I go Pomerol. All day long.

I do like Chateau Corbin Michotte, a pretty unheralded Chateau in St Em that produces really classic, lovely wines. And for you, Julian, there is 30% Cab Franc in the cut. I recently had a trio of lovely 2004s, which had that minty top-note you mentioned in the Magdelaine (so does the 2011 Magdelaine). Definitely a more cool merlot fruit profile. Jeff Leve rates it in the mid-80s. . You may have better luck funding it over the pond, I do not see it over here that often.

Outside of Magdelaine, Figeac and Corbin-Michotte, I do not think that I own any St Ems. Now if I could afford Cheval Blanc . . . .

Thanks - I’ve never tried Corbin-Michotte - sounds good. I remember there was a polemic when it lost its CC status in 2012 - probably a badge of honour!

The Corbin Michelotte is an unapologetic old fashioned Saint Emilion. For my taste a little too gamey, but I can see it appealing to those with more of a taste for those flavors than I have.

Magdelaine is one of my favorite Bordeaux, and I have enjoyed a large number of them, buying when they were ridiculously cheap. Even as we discover them here in the US, and prices are on the rise, there are still some astonishing prices in the UK, $65 and $70 for off vintages, and even the 2005 is available at around $85. I just bought six bottles.

But as Robert points out, this is not a wine for early drinking. Its strength is the complexity that comes with cellar aging for at least twenty five years.

Thanks Mark - the trouble with Robert is that he has got Levet on the brain - there I was scratching my head wondering who on earth Levet was, now I see he has edited it and it’s Jeff Leve after all!

We tried a number of Belair-Monange at the Magdelaine vertical last year:

I would stay away and backfill Magdelaine.

Thanks Jayson, I had missed that thread last year for some reason and it answers my question perfectly. I suppose at some point someone will see the huge gap in the market and start producing wines like that again.

One of the tragic things about this is that they decided to dump Magdelaine just as the market’s taste was shifting in that direction.

Indeed, but I suppose they would argue that from a financial perspective, it has made perfect sense.

Did anyone try their Clos La Madeleine? The website (Clos La Madeleine | Moueix) makes a reference to Magdelaine, but the vinification suggests a very different wine.

Moueix just acquired it in 2017, so perhaps something to watch. Bouard was involved before, which means, I was out. Not a buyer of anything Bouard - at least not intentionally.

The fact that Moueix has acquired it does not automatically mean that it will be a traditional wine. Recent efforts are much more modern than they were under Christian.

I´ve had all vintages between 2012 and 2016 at age 2.5 - VERY modern, concentrated and with a lot of new oak.
Nothing to resemble Old Magdelaine.
Good wine, and certainly impressive for those who like the style

Tried the 2007 a few weeks ago based on recs of the board, think this really depends on what your looking for regarding optimal drinking window. I have no doubt that it will pick up complexity and secondary/tertiary notes with age and elegance in texture, but the fact that it’s pretty damn good already with nice Primary fruit remaining and the ability to stand up to a ribeye is no bad thing.

The last classification in Saint Emilion seems to have really changed the way Saint Emilion operates. To us wine lovers, we really don’t know or care if a wine is a Grand Cru Classe. But it represents huge amounts of money, social standing etc. So when Pavie and Angelus were promoted, it was a wake up call to several chateaux to up their game. Except upping their game meant following the examples of the two chateaux, richer, fatter wines and terroir became secondary.

The victims were some of the wines we love. Figeac, made close to the edge wines under the owner’s son in law. Lovely guy, making wines that often were barely ripe but capable of greatness.

Under new management, the wines are riper, but not overly so. Although I miss Eric’s wines, I think I will be quite happy with some of the current vintages.

Belair Monange was already in the works, when the Moueix family
asked the committee to remove Magdelaine from the classification, and combine it with Belair, creating Belair Monange. The idea was for BM to be the first Grand Cru Classe A in the Moueix stable. I certainly prefer the old Magdelaines, but that is because it is a wine that appeals to a certain palate.


Canon also began to modernize. Supremely successful as 2015 etc scored high. Again less happy with the new wines, although the 2016 will probably prove to be a better wine than the more vaunted 2015.

As Parker’s influence waned, some of the most extreme wines were beginning to be dialed back. Even Pavie. Global warming and the emphasis on physiological ripeness notwithstanding, I am cautiously optimistic.

Lol, I can’t even follow my own advice! Regardless, this is classic, delicious stuff. I ended up grabbing a full case, so can accept some early sacrifices. Damn is this beautiful stuff, like in the 95-point range. I won’t embarrass myself by disclosing to you all what I paired it with, just keep in mind that we have no power, no refrigerator, and are on hurricane rations for this third evening, lol. But if anything, I will remain civilized.

image960×1280 202 KB

A candlelit dinner with a decanter of Magdelaine - pretty cool I’d say! Glad to see that you’re OK and that your cellar wasn’t flooded! Hope they turn on the power soon.