TN: Second Zoom tasting – Chave Hermitage

Greg_K · May 25, 2020, 2:24pm

stylistic change to glossier/ more new oak/ riper. They aren’t Guigal Lala level oak/ripeness but it’s a shift from the more classical style of the Gerald led chave. It’s not a vintage thing, it’s not like 04 was the only non ripe vintage since 1999. 07 is pretty comparable to 04 and it’s a really soft plush wine.

My view as well. An 04 and 06 I had recently were still showing a lot of oak, while the 98 I had recently wasn’t showing oak at all despite still being a massive wine.

In regards to the 06, someone posted on CT “Fermented in steel tanks and open oak vats. Aged in used oak barrels, focus on fruit and terroir.” I may contact the main to verify.

There used to be a lot of folks who complained about new oak in CDP that Bob loved. Unfortunately, there was no oak at all. I check CT, there are 138 TNs of the 04 Chave, only two found oak, one from the 07 and the other from the 12. There are 94 notes on the 96, only three found oak, the last in 2013.

2004 Domaine Jean-Louis Chave Hermitage - France, Rhône, Northern Rhône, Hermitage (2/23/2018)
A lost Friday afternoon gathering – Raveneau and Chave Vertical (Blacksalt, Washington DC): Beautiful classic Chave nose displaying fresh cherry, raspberry, blackberry, lavender, rose, perfume, tapenade, black pepper, a hint of charred rare steak and limestone. Medium concentration, finely layered subtle red and black fruit, silky and fluid, perfect amount of acidity and mineral, a medium to long cherry and black pepper driven finish with a hint of tapenade at the end. I drank this next to the 05 in 2013 and the impression remains the same. It feels almost light compare to the 05 in concentration yet it is no less expressive in nose. This is a classic Chave hermitage that has reached the youthful peak. My educated guess is that this will develop like the 83, becoming very Burgundian in another decade. If you are a lover of Jamet, you will also love this. (94 pts.)

2004 Domaine Jean-Louis Chave Hermitage - France, Rhône, Northern Rhône, Hermitage (7/7/2013)
Another lazy Sunday dinner with La Las, Chaves, Chapelles, Rayas, Plume and Celestins (The Grill Room at Capella Hotel Georgetown): A mini vertical is always educational and this was served along with the 05. Noticeable difference in concentration but the flavor profile is very similar. Fresh crushed blackberry, raspberry, wild flowers, white pepper, limestone and earth. Medium concentration, silky palate, integrated tannins and good length. It is ready to go in terms of the palate expression but the fruit is still very youthful, ie it hasn’t achieved the Chave typicity of burgundian red fruits, charred steak and garrigue. Need to decant for two hours minimum but possibly four. (94 pts.)

2004 Domaine Jean-Louis Chave Hermitage - France, Rhône, Northern Rhône, Hermitage (5/22/2012)
Eating a nice piece of humble pie, 2008 Bionic Frog vs 2004 Chave Hermitage (Capital Grill at Tysons corner, VA): Drank along with the 08 Cayuse Bionic Frog. Pop and pour, the nose is sweet but tight. The palate displays dense sweet fruits, noticeable minerality and bright acidity but seems a bit clumsy. I am convinced that this is the 08 BF with the initial rating of 92. We decide to decant and with an hour of air, it gets more expressive; cherries, candied cherry, smoked meat, blood and tapenade. The palate displays impressive concentration, chewy and dense but with nice lifting acidity. There is also noticeable structure underneath the sweet fruits. If I were to use “context”, this is an awkward adolescent phase where some tertiary flavors are emerging but the fruit while still dense and sweet is no longer fresh. It will take another five to ten years bring back the balance and harmony. I love Chave and hope that this will outshine the BF but not so on this night. (94 pts.)

Posted from CellarTracker

Chave clearly uses some new oak. I think we may have different tolerances for new oak, which is fine - I don’t mean it makes Chave a bad wine, just that there was a stylistic change which has made it a different wine that I like less.

Let’s put it this way - if you like Guigal, I can see how you would like the new style of Chave. I do not like Guigal and find new oak in Syrah very distracting.

Craig_G · May 25, 2020, 2:49pm

Jeff Leve says 10-20% new oak. According to Parker’s original Rhône book, Gerard Chave first experimented with new oak with one barrel of the 1985, so there is some change. 20% new oak might be noticeable early on but I doubt if it would show as oaky over time. It’s like Bertheau in Chambolle - does anyone complain about the new oak there?

We did a small tasting of 1995, 2000, 2001 and 2004 a few years ago and as far as I can remember nobody noticed oak in any of the wines. My notes and one other set I looked up for that tasting mention nothing about oak. In that case all four were good but the 1995 and 2004 showed the best. The comparisons we noted between those wines were mostly about maturity.

Whether the wines are more modern in some other way I’m not sure. Some might be softer and more lush but that was true of some vintages in the past.

CFu · May 25, 2020, 5:00pm

I’ve held the same wine for almost two months at home and they taste just as good as the first one.

I’ve had no problem shipping to other as well. There have been doubters but once they try it the doubt goes away.

But I Siphon the wine with a tube so aggregation of the wine initially is limited. Please see the link shared below for all the answers to your questions

Alan_Rath · May 25, 2020, 6:26pm

Siphon could be a good idea for an older wine with a fair amount of sediment. The one time it was my turn to do this (6 bottles), I just poured carefully, directly from the bottle into each vial, no funnel. If you are careful not to tip the bottle back as you move to the next wine, it’s essentially the same as decanting. I don’t think it gets appreciably more air than siphoning would, without the hassle. Either way, it’s proven to be an excellent method of sharing wines between people! Most of us think the wines continue to improve after pouring that we pour an hour or so early, before tasting, that’s how well they seem to hold in the vials. Now, we’ve only had one day between pouring and tasting, and I always store mine in the fridge overnight for a little insurance.

Greg_K · May 26, 2020, 3:04pm

Jeff Leve says 10-20% new oak. According to Parker’s original Rhône book, Gerard Chave first experimented with new oak with one barrel of the 1985, so there is some change. 20% new oak might be noticeable early on but I doubt if it would show as oaky over time. It’s like Bertheau in Chambolle - does anyone complain about the new oak there?

We did a small tasting of 1995, 2000, 2001 and 2004 a few years ago and as far as I can remember nobody noticed oak in any of the wines. My notes and one other set I looked up for that tasting mention nothing about oak. In that case all four were good but the 1995 and 2004 showed the best. The comparisons we noted between those wines were mostly about maturity.

Whether the wines are more modern in some other way I’m not sure. Some might be softer and more lush but that was true of some vintages in the past.

Again, different people have different tolerances for oak in different wines. I have a low tolerance for oak in syrah, and for me, I did notice the oak in the 2004 and the 2006 when I had them last. I’ve found Chave’s winemaking style since 99 has changed enough that it’s not quite “Chave” to me, but that is a personal opinion. Others disagree, and that’s totally fine.

Also, to be clear, my argument is not “new oak is bad!”, because a lot also depends on the winemaking. Mugneret Gibourg uses up to 75% new oak on some of their 1er crus, which I’m happy to buy (though I generally wouldn’t open them young). It’s a combination of factors - i.e., winemaking.