Thank you for sharing. I imagine it would be hard to tolerate acids similar to 2015, as those were buffered by the generous ripeness and dry extract of that vintage. In any case, I am always excited to taste the wines from Christoph and Andrea!
…and conveniently for sale.
I know it seems Napa is often a “four letter word” on this board, but 2016 may be better than 2001, or 2013. Far better than the over-hyped 1997 vintage.
But it doesn’t mean they are wrong either.
I know Burgundy had low yields, but that does not necessarily mean low quality (although it likely means higher prices).
Not declared yet (will have to see the fate of the 2015’s) but there are rumors that 2016 will be declared by many Port producers. Douro wines may be good as well.
Absolutely correct Howard. I tried to imply that in my op, because I haven’t heard much regarding quality in Burgundy. I have only heard that yields were cut dramatically because of spring frost and there were rains during summer, but I didn’t get any peeps during autumn and as we all know, that can turn around a vintage entirely. Very happy if your post is meant to imply, that you have heard rumors of good/great quality!
Napa and Douro too? Wow, there all of a sudden seems no shortage of regions with ageworthy wines that have had a good/great growing season. Looks like I need to choose now, rather than have my decisions forced, which is just absolutely fantastic!
Same report I received when there in November.
One thing you might consider is how available the wines might be in the future. Even if Bordeaux has a vintage of the century (for the Nth time in N+1 years) its not going to be scarce rarity.
Some of the other regions you (or your child) might want to try later will be harder to find (even at full & fair prices) later. So if space or funds are constraints (at this moment), consider that aspect.
Good point Arv, thanks
Sounds interesting. What are you basing this on?
Yep, I’d be interested in hearing more. It’s always nice when there’s a good vintage…even if I drink less and less of these wines, there’s still room for some of them in my cellar.
Falkenstein was pouring a barrel sample of a Spatlese (not Trocken) at the RF main event that was damn good. Probably one of the best wines at the event, I would say.
Yes, in the fall people were saying it was shaping up perfectly, on the heals of a very good 2015. That seems to have been born out post-fermentation. I spoke to a Barbaresco winemaker today who said that she prefers the 2016 to 2015 because the vintage is a little cooler. Sounds really outstanding.
Any reports on 2016 in Rioja? What about southern Italy? Northern Rhone?
As mentioned in post 3, the Northern Rhône didn’t produce a multitude of legendary wines as in the previous year, but 2016 is definitely much better than the most dreary vintage of last decade, 2008.
My hope is for something similar in quality (and style) as 2012, but it’s too early to tell until the top critics have published their first impressions (in the autumn?).
Peter
Not sure about quality in Burgundy in 2016. Have not heard that much yet.
Heard from a few people now that there are some really fantastic '16 Red Burgs…quantity down, but quality in (some) places apparently very high, maybe as good or even better than the '15’s!
How about the growing season in champagne? I would say the likelihood of my daughter wanting to drink red wine would be slim to none if she’s anything like her mom. But champagne… no one can say no to that!
Of the regions that are dear to my heart (thus I am dialed into), I think that albeit somewhat heterogeneous (not uniform), tremendous tremendous quality in '16 will be found in Burgundy, the N Rhone, the Mosel, the Nahe.
As a gross oversimplification, we may be looking at something somewhat similar to 1990/1991 with 2015/2016. Granted, I never tasted those earlier vintages (I was 12 and 13 years old…), but from what I understand…