MEDIA

Back The Fine Wine Experience Richebourg and Romanée-Saint-Vivant Dinner

Published on 30 July, 2018

by Linden Wilkie 

A side by side comparison of two of Vosne-Romanée’s top grands crus vineyards is quite an indulgent treat. While it allows for a certain evening’s worth of wallowing in liquid luxury, it’s also quite educational. Amongst the village’s grands crus are four monopoles – La Romanée-Conti, La Romanée, La Tâche, and La Grande Rue – all superb. But the nature of a monopoly is that only one domaine’s interpretation reveals its terroir to us. Richebourg and Romanée-Saint-Vivant meanwhile have multiple owners, therefore multiple interpretations in viticulture, and winemaking which collectively – especially when tasted together – give us a rich picture. This evening in Beijing we presented seven Richebourg and six Romanée-Saint-Vivant wines across three vintages. We selected 2007 and 2000 as both are rather open, fragrant, ready young(ish) vintages, and 1995 because it was almost the opposite (full yet austere) but beginning to open up and drink well. Fortunately, all our bottles showed well. So, the question on my mind this evening was this: would a side by side comparison support my existing thoughts on the personalities of these two vineyards, and would I (and the group at the table) have a preference for one over the other? Put simply Romanée-Saint-Vivant is known for delicacy, femininity, seduction and perfume, while Richebourg is known for power, explosiveness in youth, intensity, and sumptuousness – “an iron fist in a velvet glove”. Both are known for complexity, harmony, suppleness and length. These two vineyards unequivocally deliver at the grand cru level. So, what did these 13 bottles reveal?

 

 

2007 Richebourg, Domaine Jean Grivot 93

Fine colour of mid depth; an expressive, fine nose, regal, yet reserved at first; supple, yet firmly structured, with a cool expression, red fruit and fine minerality, not especially concentrated but nicely expressive. With another 45 minutes in the glass, it grew more open and complex with a cool mossiness coming into the aromatics. Continued to improve in the glass.


2007 Romanée-Saint-Vivant, Domaine J.J. Confuron 93 

Bright and clear with some evolution of colour; an open, spicy nose, a touch exotic after the Grivot Richebourg just before it; fleshy, with good mid-palate concentration, lush texture with a caressing feel, some oak interrupts the finish a little. With air this became even more lush and flowing, with a great class of fruit, depth and length. It worked well with the roasted foie gras with Puy lentils – the richness of the wine was evident with this dish.


2007 Romanée-Saint-Vivant, Domaine Robert Arnoux 93 

Clear, mid-range colour; a very fine nose, detailed and aromatic; supple, caressing, soft, there are sous bois notes, tea and spice amongst the red fruit, followed by a long, smoky/spice infused finish. Elegant and pure, this wine is really lovely. 2007 Romanée-Saint-Vivant, Domaine Sylvain Cathiard 93 A mid plus depth of colour; this wine has a great nose – sweet, spicy and alluring; fleshy on the palate, the most velvet and concentrated of the four 2007s, it flows lush and long, pure and immaculately made. This wine has a richer tone than the other three, perhaps less ready an RSV than the Confuron or Arnoux, its only demerit in my mind was a touch of alcoholic warmth at the finish, that none of the others exhibited.

 

 

Etienne Grivot was really hitting his straps by the time of the 2007, and the high quality shows. The firmness felt judicious and in line with Richebourg’s slower evolution in bottle compared to RSV’s. It continued to improve in the glass even after two hours.

When the 2007s were offered young on wine lists in France, I would often choose them over ‘superior’ young vintages like 2005, 2008 or 2009 because they had youthful appeal. It’s not an especially ‘deep’ vintage, and few offer real concentration, but as of 2018, if I was choosing a wine at grand cru level from the second half of the 2000s, I would still opt for 2007 – the vintage offers a lot of pleasure. May to August were too cool and dreary for the vintage to have ever offered greatness, but a fresh and sunny September – with north winds to help deal with rot – delivered success. Sugars rose rapidly at the end which is why some feel plump, if not especially deep.

The 2000 vintage in the Côte de Nuits shares with 2007 an earlier drinking appeal, though it is typically richer, denser, and more often shows a little alcohol warmth on the finish. Flowering was early, but July was cold and stormy and produced some mildew issues. August however was hot, and then September cool with the Côte de Nuits grands crus picked from 15th September. The overall result was a big, soft-styled crop. Overall 1999, 2001 and 2002 are superior, but you can be pretty sure a good 2000 will be open, ready, and delicious.

Our 2000 flight pitted quality giants Domaine de la Romanée-Conti and Domaine Leroy toe to toe in both grand cru vineyards. They were served together with 2000 Domaine Hudelot Noëllat’s RSV. (My colleagues Mike Wu and Sora Chan arranged the order and the service, so I got to play blind tasting with these too.)

 

 

[‘A’] 2000 Romanée-Saint-Vivant, Domaine de la Romanée-Conti 93

Fine light garnet ; a fine, spicy, open nose, sweet with a touch of earth ; a really elegant wine on the palate, not especially rich or powerful, but wonderful elegance and effortlessness.


[‘B’] 2000 Richebourg, Domaine Leroy 96

Mid depth, some colour evolution; a super, spicy, sweet, soaring, open, mature nose greets you when you get even slightly near the glass; lush, with oak and grip and tea notes, sweet raspberry, grenadine, pomegranate on the palate, the grip is fine-textured but certainly there, followed by a sweet long finish. There is real depth to this and a clear step up from ‘A’.


[‘C’] 2000 Romanée-Saint-Vivant, Domaine Leroy 94

Fine hued deep garnet, mature rim; a rich, glossy, spicy nose, sous bois, candied fruit, with just a whiff of VA adding to the sense of lift on the nose; concentrated, fleshy with a fine velvet texture, some oak and glossiness, but covered by real effortless concentration. This wine is very good, very satisfying, with amazing depth. It is fully ready, and after two hours in the glass I felt it had just enough sappy richness to cover its bones.


[‘D’] 2000 Richebourg, Domaine de la Romanée-Conti 95

Fine hued light garnet; a fresh, spicy, floral nose, plenty of Vosne-spice here ; elegant, spicy, sweet, svelte and elegant with a spicy ethereal finish, lovely natural concentration, melting depth conveying subtle detail. With another hour or so in the glass a fine mossy note emerged, the palate seemed to grow plusher, with a fine, long finish. Super lovely wine just at the beginning of its drinking life.


[‘E’] 2000 Romanée-Saint-Vivant, Domaine Hudelot-Noëllat 92

Bright and bricked-through mature garnet; a fresh nose, lively, still young with a subtle yet alluring nose, fine and sweet; fine, fleshy, a more youthful expression of fruit with fine details, a majestic sort of wine, reserved yet very fine and long. A dip comes at the end though where it is a little firm – it’s not as refined as some in this flight, but the concentration is there.

 

 

This flight was very interesting, especially served blind. Is it significant that I scored the two Richebourgs higher than the three RSVs? It’s widely acknowledged that DRC’s RSV has been their big improver this century. There are beautiful examples prior to that, but the benefits of the work done by the domaine were felt later than the 2000 vintage. But it felt significant to me that I also preferred Leroy’s Richebourg to their RSV.

Indeed, at the end of the night I asked everyone around the table the question, “which do you prefer, Romanée-Saint-Vivant or Richebourg”, everyone raised their hand for Richebourg.

The stylistic difference between Leroy and Domaine de la Romanée-Conti also came through. Generally speaking the DRCs come across with more subtlety but less power than Leroy, and with perhaps just a touch more harmony on average. On the other hand Leroy’s wines have incredible depth, concentration, purity and that elusive little tingle of thrill. These are of course generalisations. By 2000 Lalou Bize-Leroy and her team had tended toward more subtlety than is found in her first three or four vintages (1988<). 

Interestingly, what those four wines have in common is a between high and total use of whole bunches (the opposite, as we know, to Jayer’s approach). In all four wines there is a subtle but unmistakeable contributory element from the stems – an airy tea and florallike note.

The 2000 Domaine Hudelot-Noëllat was very good, but outclassed in this flight. (To be clear, I’m actually a fan of these older wines from Alain Hudelot’s long tenure, especially in the ‘80s and ‘90s, and today his grandson Charles van Canneyt has lifted the bar very high indeed at this domaine).

It’s worth noting too that Domaine de la Romanée-Conti, aside from having sole proprietorship of La Romanée-Conti and La Tâche, is also the largest owner – by far – of both RomanéeSaint-Vivant (5.29ha of 9.3ha) and Richebourg (3.51ha of 7.4ha). This majority ownership provides a number of advantages – managing vineyard work and picking over a large number of rows within a small geographical area; the homogenising / blending of expressions from a wide surface of the vineyard’s terroir during vinification and élevage; higher mass giving better thermal control during winemaking; the luxury to de-select certain parcels or barrels from the final blend, and so on. It is not just for the reason that the domaine does its work well that DRC offers something of a standard, or model, for the expression of these two vineyards. And to taste the two DRCs together is to see conformity to the model idea of these two grands crus.


1995 Richebourg, Domaine Hudelot-Noëllat 93

Mature appearance; a rich nose, spicy and wild, with sous bois notes and leather; concentrated, sweet, grippy textured, complex, really old school in style, and a really long finish. Delicious. This Richeburg is really honest, pure and satisfying.


1995 Richebourg, Domaine Anne Gros 93

Very clear, bright and noticeably deeper coloured ruby; a plummy-sweet, pure nose, fresh and radiant with potpourri; lush, sweet, candied violets, dark cherry and plum – the fruit expression is vibrant and pure, firm but velvety tannin. This wine is modern, pure and straight, with impressive fruit / acid tension. It is still so young. Impressive.


1995 Richebourg*, Domaine Méo-Camuzet 95

An evolved colour, a touch turbid; an open, spicy nose, sous bois, mature; an absolutely superb palate that took some time to really get going, fleshy, concentrated, with huge class, subtlety and length. An impressive Richebourg. (Never judge a book by its cover, never judge a wine by its colour!).


Richebourg consists of two lieux-dits – Les Richebourgs, and Les Verroilles-ou-Richebourg, with the latter further up the slope on thinner soil and closer to the cooling influence of the nearby combe, and adjacent to the Cros Parantoux vineyard. DRC’s holding is made up of 27% Les Verroilles; Anne Gros’ is 100% Les Verroilles; and Méo-Camuzet’s is 86%. (Domaines Leroy, HudelotNoëllat, and Jean Grivot are all 100% in Les Richebourgs)**. In practice, is the difference discernible? Suggestibly, sometimes. Cros Parantoux might be seen as an extension of this transition from Les Richebourg to Les Verroilles, from richness, through to something more minerally-driven and tight. However, the contrast between Richebourg AOC and Romanée-Saint-Vivant AOC is stylistically more appreciable than the subtle differences we might detect within Richebourg. The stark stylistic difference between say Méo-Camuzet and Anne Gros is far more appreciable still. While 1995 has always been a sleeper in any case, these three ‘95s showed once more that Richebourg is a relatively late riser in comparison to Romanée-Saint-Vivant. At the end of the dinner, going back through the wines, the Grivot Richebourg was still improving. My conclusion therefore, somewhat ironically, is that on most restaurant wine lists, faced with a choice between Romanée-Saint-Vivant and Richebourg, all things being equal I’d choose the former… unless the choices on offer are properly mature, in which case the latter. Either way, a good problem to have! A big thanks to our Beijing-assembled guests for contributing so much to the discussion on these wines this evening, to the Rosewood Beijing for the fine dinner, and to the team – my colleagues at Fine Wine Experience for always bringing an A-game. **For in depth information on the terroir, maps, and holdings of these two grands crus, I would recommend Allen Meadows The Pearl of the Côte, a highly detailed resource.