In Thailand in April, The Fine Wine Experience, local co-hosts Terroir Expression, and Allen Meadows, had the chance to sit down at Villa Frantzen Bangkok as part of this year’s symposium, to go deep on the subject of Richebourg and Romanée-St-Vivant. 

This event reconfirmed for me my own personal feeling for the wines of Burgundy: that in the quality triangle between terroir, vintage and vigneron, it’s the vigneron that has the most impact. But before you come at me with your pitchfork for terroir heresy, let me qualify that assertion a little. If a vigneron works a village-level plot, a 1er Cru-level plot, and a grand cru-level plot, with minor exceptions we should expect the wines to also be in that ascending level of quality. No matter which domaine you visit, that’s also the order you’d taste from barrel. This is the orthodox view, and I’m no dissenter here. But between vignerons, quality, and also style can vary a lot. How much? Well, if we just focus on style here for a moment, I’d say enough that if I were to try to describe in simple terms the difference in expression between Romanée-St-Vivant and Richebourg – the subject of this dinner – there were examples of each served that would flip these descriptions around.

Just in the abstract, I’d describe Romanée-St-Vivant as having the greater potential for that elusive ethereal quality in Burgundy that can make us swoon, for it to be much more about fragrance than power, though as you swallow that serene sip, you notice how the intensity builds on the long and complex finish. Richebourg, to my mind, has more of a chassis, fine, tight-grained and mineral-laden tannin, upon which is upholstered a more velvety-rich fruit, that can tend a little darker in profile than RSV. 

It's easiest of course when we eliminate two points of the triangle, by comparing the same vigneron in the same vintage – the only difference remaining being the terroir. We did just that with Charles van Canneyt’s beautiful pair of 2010s from Domaine Hudelot-Noëllat, and my tasting notes for those are below (along with my notes on all the wines we tasted that evening). 

Is there a qualitative difference between Romanée-St-Vivant and Richebourg? I put that question to the participants at the dinner. Actually, to be clear, I asked “at the end of this dinner, do you have a preference for Richebourg, Romanée-St-Vivant, or does it depend on the vigneron and vintage?” It’s a slightly different question, but I think we arrived at the result I expected: 13 Richebourg, 10 Romanée-St-Vivant, 12 depends. Fairly split, in other words.

Allen gave us a deep dive on the two vineyards, and wines tasted. For details on the differences in terroir that might help illuminate the differences in the glass between the two, I’d suggest you read his (2010) Pearl of the Côte, a detailed study of the vineyards and wines of Vosne-Romanée. It’s long out of print, but findable if you search, and worthwhile if you do.

I’ll leave you with my tasting notes on the wines served, and attached you will find our current stocks of Richebourg and Romanée-St-Vivant. Santé!

All notes below, Linden Wilkie, 16th April 2024, Bangkok

1994 Richebourg, Méo-Camuzet
A last pour with some sediment. Sweet and spicy on the nose, clean and fairly fresh for its age, though clearly mature; sweet, plump and round on the palate, not a grand Richebourg, but this has a lovely flavour, supple tannins carrying a lot of sweetness. A gentle kind of wine.
90

1998 Romanée-St-Vivant, Joseph Drouhin
Fine ruby, and fresh still at the rim; a fine nose, jellied red fruit, some spices, this is nuanced and fresh, and pretty; a sumptuous attack, good concentration, the tannins are firm and a touch dry, but this defect is subtle, and it points to the vintage. A pleasurable fresh-tasting lovely wine, drinking well. As it opened up in the glass I noted a delicious bitter-spicy twist – like Italian bitters – piquing the red fruit, giving this an appestising and refreshing quality.
91

2000 Richebourg, Anne Gros
A fine-hued full garnet; a fine, sweet and open nose, nice fruit and spice, some opulence; fresh red fruit on the attack, a dark brown spice profile in the mix, a rounded mouthfeel and resolved sweet tannins, the lowish level of the acidity is noticeable, and there is evidently more new oak impact in this wine than the cousin’s example that follows, but it is well dovetailed in. Good concentration. A little peppery-cool element emerges with air. This is great to drink today and appears to be in a holding pattern that suggests no rush.
92

2000 Richebourg, Gros Frère et Soeur
Bright clear garnet; expressive and clear aromatics, red fruit, sous bois, a meaty-savoury element; sweet and fleshy on the palate, up front appeal, red fruit profile, a touch of demerara sugar – though there is none of the oxidation or tiredness that that might imply. This is resolved but vibrant. Not the length of Anne Gros’ example. 
91
My neighbour at the dinner says this has the aroma of Chinese medicine. I asked if she found this a positive or a negative. She says it is a personal thing, but for her this was a negative.

2006 Romanée-St-Vivant, Arnoux-Lachaux
A full solid garnet in appearance; fresh, classic, spicy nose, complex, still a lot of primary aroma, some slightly toasty oak; fleshy on the palate, with lovely fruit, a real mouthful of red fruit, forest berries, a little thickened in the palate by slightly coarse but not overbearing tannins, giving this a still somewhat youthful and unready feel. There is some oomph to this RSV. With an hour more in the glass, returning to it, the oak component gives a high-toast impression; there’s nice fleshiness on the palate, and the fruit is good, but not perfect it seems. It’s a bit bold and simple for this level, intense, but glossy. To be fair, it probably still needs 5+ more years in the cellar to both meld, and reveal what’s inside. But I’m not sure it will ever feel fully harmonious.
91+

2006 Richebourg, Domaine de la Romanée-Conti
Fairly solid deep garnet, clear in the glass; a higher-register to the nose, with spices that include turmeric, and a cooler, green mossy note sits gently on the red fruit, a touch of medicinal spice, this is a complex aroma; fleshy, quite a sexy expression, mid+ weight – some heft in fact, and some oak gloss sits in the background. At first I felt I detected a little dryness in the tannins, but it grew silkier in the glass. Still in need of some time – it is still a little brawny.
92

2007 Richebourg, Mongeard-Mugneret
Bright, very clear ruby; a lovely sweet aroma, a touch of umami savouriness; sweet, plump and fleshy, quite round on the palate, a touch of plum, perfect ripeness in the fruit profile, quite plentiful inner mouth aroma, that lingers. With more air, returning to the glass, this turned out to be the most successful example in the flight, with good fruit, a little coarseness coming from the depth of extraction, but there is depth to the wine, and the finish is pure and long. It’s an oaky, somewhat pushed style of Richebourg, but its all integrated, and it works.
92

2007 Richebourg, Jean Grivot
Fine-hued garnet; toasty, sweet-savoury, a bit reduced actually; fleshy-sweet on the palate, succulent, round, with a fairly easy texture, a nice plushness, long spice notes than linger. There’s a little leafy complexity here too. It doesn’t sing as the purest Richebourg, but overall it offers plenty of pleasure today.
91

2007 Romanée-St-Vivant, Domaine de la Romanée-Conti
Clear-hued fresh ruby appearance; sweet melting fruit on the nose, heady and pleasing; super delicious fruit, plush, though there is also a whole bunch stem note that – initially in the glass at least – comes across as a bit too unintegrated in its herbal-green taste. There is undoubtedly plenty of delicious fruit here, and this is a pleasure to drink, but I have a question mark over the degree to which the whole bunch character – which works well so often, but here offers an idiosyncratic distraction – will knit in the wine as it approaches its peak, which is not so far away.
92

2008 Romanée-St-Vivant, Arlot
Fine ruby, clear in the glass; lovely nose – wow!, ripe forest berries, musk and spice, super purity and freshness; supple, sweet, with good concentration and a melting feeling, subtle spices, impressive purity and concentration for a 2008. Coming back to this after the 2009 Cathiard, the lighter weight here is more evident by comparison, but within itself there is no feeling of lacking, and if anything it adds to the impression of an ethereal, pure RSV.
95

2009 Romanée-St-Vivant, Sylvain Cathiard
Fine clear garnet; a sweet exotic nose, melting, red fruit, some brûlée crust – but that is well-integrated and not dominating on the nose. Dark spices and a real exotic side; fleshy, melting, sapid, spices, glycerin, this has so much depth. It is both bright and energetic, yet also deeply melting, oozing, self-assuredly concentrated and layered. It doesn’t feel pushed at all. An amazing wine. Caught somewhat in the thrill of this wine I reflected that many compare a great examples of Rayas (Châteauneuf-du-Pape, pure Grenache) to Burgundy, but here I think the analogy works in reverse – in the best possible sense. The extra weight and glycerin is there, but it melts, there is minerality, as well as red fruit freshness. A superb, thought-provoking, but also hedonistic wine.
97

2010 Romanée-St-Vivant, Hudelot-Noëllat
Clear fine garnet; red fruit, a touch of mocha, a lot of Asian spices; fresh, sapid, pure and poised, red fruit and a long extension carrying a panoply of flavour and spice and interest. This is a superb RSV, elegant, and very pure, super fine, melting, poised, just a beautiful wine.
95

2010 Richebourg, Hudelot-Noëllat
Clear fine garnet; a fine, more resolved nose than the RSV, deeper, darker fruit; sweet, fuller in feel, there is more body here than the RSV, fine minerality, and a crystalline feel, super purity and zing from a fine spine of acidity. This is an animated, tingling wine, that has that ‘extra’ something, that leaves you feeling ‘wow’! Beautiful wine.
97

2016 Richebourg, Thibault Liger-Belair
Full garnet; lovely nose, fresh, deep fruit aroma, a touch of oak still, very young; fleshy, supple, pure, very full, yet not heavy – though it nudges the edge of ‘over’. Tasting, as we have, in chronological order, the impact of global warming is also felt here perhaps. Young, a bit furry still in texture, clean, good quality in need of further cellaring.
92

2016 Romanée-St-Vivant, Jean-Jacques Confuron
Fine clear garnet; lovely dark fruit nose, dark chocolate, confit dark cherry, a very modern nose; fleshy, succulent on the palate, quite ripe and full, admirably pure, though there is a sense perhaps a day or two earlier picking might have favoured it. The oak still needs time to better integrate. Overall though this works, the immaculate supple purity of fruit, buffed smooth and glossy, delivers a darker, more opulent expression of RSV, that has plenty of appeal in that style. Give this 5+ more years in the cellar.
93