A Guide to Wine, Food & the Good Life


John Tilson • 10/6/14        Print This Post Print This PostComment Bookmark and Share

 A Complex Tale of Two Wines With a Window Into Premox


Recently I had an opportunity to drink 2 older White Burgundies. The wines were: 1992 Joseph Drouhin Corton Charlemagne and 1999 Domaine Leflaive Chevalier Montrachet. They offered an interesting paradox into the current state of White Burgundy.

1992 Joseph Drouhin Corton Charlemagne
Oxidized and past its prime, this wine was nonetheless of some interest. With a deep gold color there was a perfume of toasted bread with some hints of toasted nuts and coconut. Rounded and lush, the fruit was barely noticeable under the robe of toasted bread and subtle toasted coconut flavors. Just a bit of crispness saved the wine, but clearly it was in an advanced stage of oxidation and on the verge of taking on a sherry component and a browning color. In short, it was tiring but still an interesting drink despite it not having much resemblance to White Burgundy. And, a half glass of the wine left overnight was actually a bit better the next day as was the other half of the wine left in the bottle. It was amazing as I would have expected the wine to deteriorate. So the wine was clearly advanced, but declining slowly.

1999 Domaine Leflaive Chevalier Montrachet
By contrast the Chevalier was a baby! The wine was decanted, but the sulphur traces never completely left the wine over the course of several hours. It was tight and crisp and the fruit and flavors were there, but the wine was backward and restrained and clearly not ready to drink. And, a small amount of wine left in the bottle had changed very little the next day.

What makes these two wines even more interesting is to consider the issue of premature aging of White Burgundies known as Premox (to read my most recent article on Premox click here). In the case of the oxidized Corton Charlemagne, it was better than wines in an advanced stage of Premox in that it still had some complexity (albeit not at all what you would seek to find in a less oxidized bottle) and crispness. Premox wines are not only dark in color, but have virtually no perfume or even a tinge of sherry and are flat and devoid of flavor. In advanced Premox there is a sherry like quality and very little fruit and beyond that a wine that is brown with no redeeming quality. All of this happens in a much shorter time than the age of these wines – 22 years and 15 years, respectively. In the case of the very youthful Chevalier, even at 15 years of age it was still not ready to drink even with decanting. Yet some recent vintages from Domaine Leflaive at 5 years of age are suffering from advance Premox. The youngest Premox Leflaive I have had was the 2008 which had Premox problems as early as 2012, but friends tell me that they are finding Premox in even more recent Leflaive vintages.

Storage may have been the problem with the Corton Charlemagne. I don’t know since it was not from my cellar. But, I also do not own this wine so it is entirely possible that at 22 years of age it is the natural evolution of this wine. It may have nothing to do with Premox. But, what I am pointing out is the great difference in the evolution of these two wines. The 1999 Chevalier is the exact opposite of the tired 1992 Corton Charlemagne. At 15 years of age it is younger, but it probably still needs another 5-10 years. Time will tell. But, contrasted with more recent vintages from the same producer that are already dying or dead, it is certainly curious to say the least.

Such is the state of White Burgundy today. Maybe it is wines such as the Chevalier Montrachet that caused the change in making wines that are more accessible at an early age? That is one theory. But, the reasons behind the Premox plague are many and varied. It seems like no one really knows for sure – maybe yes, maybe no. I have no idea. I have asked questions directly to the producers. There are a lot of different responses. Some even deny that there is a problem (to read my article Is One Winedrinker’s Premox Another Winedrinker’s Botox? click here). However, what I know and what every person involved with the buying, cellaring, and drinking of White Burgundy for the last 30 or more years knows, is that the wines are not aging in the same way as they have in the past. Routinely, we would wait 5-10 years to drink the wines and often keep them for 20 or more years. Over this time they developed a complexity and flavor that made them, for me, the greatest white wines in the world.

Today the 1982 White Burgundies continue to be some of the best I have in my cellar and there are also other vintages such as 1979, 1985, 1988, 1989, and 1990 that are over 20 years old and simply remarkable. Sadly, somewhere in the 1990s this all changed. But, what we do know today is that keeping White Burgundies for more than 5 years or even less can be a chancy proposition. Except for a relatively few legacy producers such as Coche-Dury, Raveneau, and Domaine Romanée-Conti and a few others, there is a huge risk in buying and cellaring the wines. Yet, it is very interesting and paradoxical to me that the price of new White Burgundies across the board are at all time highs despite the fact that recent history says that most will never age for an extended period. But, like everything, it is a matter of supply and demand. And, a lot of this is undoubtedly driven by new buyers. Some of the 100 point pundits, tasting the wines out of barrel, offer advice to keep the wines for 10, 20, or 30 years or more. Good Luck! Unless there is a change in the trend of the last 15+ years, most of the wines will never get to the historical point of full maturity. To me, there is no question that buying new White Burgundies to cellar has turned into a vinous game of Russian roulette. This has no appeal to me. Caveat Emptor!


Post a Comment

6 comments for “OLD WHITE BURGUNDY”

  • iel76 says:

    Sadly, I no longer buy older white burgundy, buying only on release. Sadly(again), I drink most of these whites earlier than I prefer in an attempt to avoid Premox. It’s a very sad state of affairs that everyone is complaining about, yet no solutions seem forthcoming. Hard to pour $100+ bottles of wine down the drain 🙁

    Hopefully, Californians will begin to learn how to make chardonnay with some acidity…

    • John Tilson says:

      I hear you. Old White Burgundy has been for most of my wine drinking life my favorite white wine. Today, with few exceptions, it is Russian Roulette. And, as I have said many times I do not like the odds in this game and do not play. So I now buy a lot less Grand Cru White Burgundy to age more than 5 years. That eliminates many producers from my list entirely.
      If you want to buy White Burgundy to drink young, try some of the small producer Pouilly-Fuiseés that I have written about. I buy and drink these regularly and they age very well for a period of five to ten years and are priced in the $20-$50 range. Also, try some of the small producer Saint Aubins, particularly from Pierre Yves Colin and his father Marc Colin.
      As for California Chardonnay, there is one very great one that I have been buying, drinking, and cellaring since the 1970s. It is Mount Eden. I have them back to the early 70s and have never had one that is over the hill! Also, check out some to the Central Coast Chardonnays. The ones from Au Bon Climat are gorgeous and can easily age for 10 years or more. I have those back to 1990. And, also try the new producer Chardonnays from the Central Coast like Chanin, Tyler, and Bien Nacido. I think these wines are brilliant and have the potential to age and improve over an extended period. Most other California Chardonnays are for me too oaky, too alcoholic, too sweet, too flat, too fruity, or some combination of the above. Some of the ones I like the least are the ones with big numbers. The ones I like have some crispness and acidity and are balanced. There is hope. Stay with the Undeground.
      In Vino Veritas,

  • BRZ says:

    It’s truly astonishing that so many are still buying white Burgs given the disdain the producers obviously have for their customers. I and many collectors poured many wines down the drain as a result of premox. Retailers took some heat, but the producers did what? Nothing! Did they apologize for selling an inferior product? NO, in fact with rare exception, they did not even acknowledge there was a problem. That’s bad enough but premox is still a problem and the producer base (again with some notable exceptions), has yet to fix it.

    In any other market, consumers would refuse to buy the product which would send an immediate and effective message to the miscreants foisting defective products on the public. But I guess white Burgundy consumers are essentially afraid to upset the ‘Gods’ of Burgundy.

    For my part, give me white Bordeaux.

    • John Tilson says:

      Thanks and well said. You are echoing what the Underground has been writing about for the last several years. But, you are also right that it has been mostly ignored everywhere which is sad. Some of the 100 point pundits even to continue to recommend aging some White Burgundies for decades. One small problem, some of the ones that they recommend for this extended aging are dying in as few as five to ten years.
      So you have to be careful or just decide to drink your White Burgundies within the first few years. For me, I am careful. I buy a lot less wine from a lot less producers. Mostly the ones I buy are aging well. And, I still have my old great ones from the 70s and 80s. But in the 90s the game changed. Since then it is Caveat Emptor. Geez, I feel like I am in Napa Valley!
      In Vino Veritas,

  • Blake Brown says:

    Great article, especially your remarks regarding the state of Burgundy today.
    It was interesting to me to get your feedback on the 92` and 99` on the following day. I would not have expected the 92` to be “a bit better”. The wine had good provenance since 2000, but I can`t speak to that before then.
    Here`s to drinking what we like and liking what we drink.

    • John Tilson says:

      Thanks Blake.The Premox issue was something that the Underground has been covering regularly for years. I would like to say that it is getting better, but as of now, I have no tangible evidence that that is the case. The 92 is too old for premox, but it was definitely past its prime. Provenance maybe or maybe just the wine. Hard to say unless there are several bottles that are tasted from the same source that have been kept perfectly since inception. Sadly, this is often not the case.
      Yes. It is the Underground motto:”Drink what you like & like what you drink”.
      In Vino Veritas,

  • Post a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published.