New Years Drinks: Moët 2002, Charles Melton Rose of Virgina 2010
 |
| One lonely rosé |
I feels almost dirty choosing to drink Moët on NYE, as I really should be picking something slightly more charismatic really. A stack of Coles Vouchers led me to the local Vintage Cellars however, at which Grower Champagnes are rather thin on the ground. Still, this Moët was a happy surprise (and I like surprises) unlike the Melton….
Moët Vintage 2002 (Champagne, France) 12%
Proper Champagne this. Proper from the word go too, with a fine bead and entirely correct, bright straw colour to kick things off. The nose too is better than perfunctory, with a creamy overlay that suggests some judicious lees work, leading on to a dry, briny palate that is clean, correct and absolutely refreshing. It’s a palate that ticks all the boxes actually, with vintage Champagne length and a purity of line that keeps you coming back for a second glass (even on NYE, when a second glass is never enough). Correct, efficient and absolutely classy Champagne that will look even better with a few years bottle age. Yes. 18.4/94
Charles Melton Rose of Virginia 2010 (Barossa, SA) 13%
This is typically my favourite Australian rosé, or at least it was up until recently, built in a style that is hardly going to fit into the pale, dry and textural Rosé Revolution mould, but is normally a carefully made, joyful bowl of fresh Barossan red fruit.
I can’t say I’m taken with this 2010 version however, having liked it, but not loved it back in June and now following it up with a second bottle that looked frankly disappointing. The problem with this bottle is that it looked so one dimensional that you just couldn’t love it. That dimension is normally what is the strength of this wine – namely a freshness of delicious ripe red fruit. But this looked like the freshness boat had sailed, with the caramel hints of early bottle age dulling the crispness, not helped by a lack of natural acidity and only a wack of un-natural stuff on the finish. It looked sweet too, candied, fairy floss residual sugar sweet, which really surprises me as I always thought that ‘Charlie’ deliberately built this drier to avoid such characters (which just don’t seem to work in this wine).
In the end I (sadly) couldn’t finish a glass and had to resort to a cleansing White Rabbit too settle my nerves. A bad bottle? Perhaps, and maybe heat affected if anything, but that still didn’t quite ring true on the palate. Hmmm. 16.3/87
3 Comments
Seems to me a bit of variation with the '02 Moet & Chandon (and, it's true, it does feel a bit "dirty" drinking it). I thought it pretty good but rather generic and gave it 90/91+. I did think it a bit "perfunctory", especialy for $90 or whatever it cost. GW over there at TWF reported something similar with one bottle. The first that he tried sounded like yours.
I'm now in two minds about whether to put a couple of bottles away.
Glad to hear that you one the Champagne lottery on this occasion!!
MichaelC
Opening the bottle(s) on NYE I was praying, begging, willing it to be a good pair of bottles, and then breathed a big sigh of relief when everything came up well.
Your dead right MIchael, Champagne has become a seriously tiresome lottery these days.
I recall having a similar note to you in regards to the Charlie back round June, but back then I thought it might get better with a little time, just as the 09 did.
I haven't had one since June, but your note has generated enough curiosity in me to go out and find another bottle.
How's that? A 'disappointing' tasting note inspiring someone to go out and buy a wine!
Cheers,
Chris P