Home > Wine Features > Rhône Talk 2006

Rhône Talk 2006

The Southern Rhône has seen a string of wonderful vintages since 1998, provided we overlook 2002 which, for Chateauneuf du Pape specifically, was a washout. On top of these recent successes, the 2004 vintage was released to some acclaim, and the prices of a few of the wines reflected this. With Bordeaux 2005 moving the bar for en primeur prices ever higher, and rumours of 2005 being another great vintage in the Southern Rhône, akin with 1998 and 2001 perhaps, it seems likely that we will see more expensive releases from this part of the world. Against this backdrop I recently discussed these two most recent vintages with two winemakers from the Rhône, before getting onto other nitty-gritty matters such as the influence of Parker, and the issue of super-cuvées, especially in Chateauneuf du Pape.

Bernard Tranchecostes and Thierry Caymaris are winemakers at two properties representing what are undoubtedly the Southern Rhône's most widely known and appreciated appellations, Chateauneuf du Pape and Gigondas. Caymaris oversees the chai at Chateau du Trignon, which has been in the hands of the Roux family since the late 19th Century. Since that time the estate has metamorphosed from a smallholding with self-sustaining polyculture to become one of leading domaines of Gigondas, with over 60 ha of vines, including 15 ha of old vines on the famed Dentelles de Montmirail. Bernard Tranchecostes, meanwhile, is winemaker at Domaine des Sénéchaux, another Roux property, the family having purchased this estate, which dates back to at least the 14th Century, in 1993. There are 28 ha of vines here, divided into two plots, one in Montalivet-Sénéchaux, the other in Revès-la-Nerthe, next to the vineyard of Chateau La Nerthe. Practices at both Trignon and Sénéchaux tend to be organic, with the use of herbicides replaced by ploughing. After careful harvest and vinification using indigenous yeasts and judicious use of wood, it is admirable that both of the finished wines are bottled with neither fining nor filtration.

Recent Vintages

I first posed the question of the 2004 and 2005 vintages; what are the characteristics of the two vintages, how do they differ, and how do the wines of Trignon and Sénéchaux differ in these two years? Note: I have reproduced Thierry's and Bernard's answers verbatim, save for minor grammatical corrections and expanding a few abbreviations, for which I hope they will forgive me.

Thierry Caymaris, winemaker at Chateau du Trignon (Gigondas), replied first. “For more than three years now Provence has suffered from a serious drought. Yields are lower and lower (down more than 30% for some plots) and the final alcohol in the wines is increasing (15.4% for our Gigondas 2004!). There was the same low level of rain between the 2004 and 2005 vintages and almost the same sun exposure. The main difference is the variation of temperature between nights and days in September. In 2005 the nights were cooler, a phenomenon which maintains acidity. It has resulted in a more balanced vintage with acidity and structure. The results are really characteristic with the whites, which need freshness in our hot weather! My opinion is that both vintages are gorgeous but I personally prefer the 2005. For Trignon, the 2005 is more powerful in structure but has the same level of alcohol. I think there is more potential for the cellar! But we have to wait the end of the year when the barrel-ageing will finish.”

It sounds as though both 2004 and 2005 have been extraordinary vintages for Gigondas; the 2004 and 2005 producing wines beyond 15% at Trignon, and it's interesting to hear that there may be more balanced wines in 2005 compared with 2004. Thierry is obviously looking beyond the appellation in which he primarily works here, as Gigondas does not have an appellation for white wines; the Trignon portfolio of vines includes some in Rasteau, Sablet and the Côtes du Rhône appellations.

Bernard Tranchecostes, winemaker at Domaine des Sénéchaux (Chateauneuf du Pape), then added his contribution to the 2005 vs 2004 debate. “2005 is more complex than 2004. The main difference is the maturity of the Syrahs. In 2005, the Syrahs have ripened in very good conditions in Chateauneuf du Pape. The final 2005 blend is more complex, with red fruits, like blackberries or cherries. The 2004 is a vintage for Grenache (while the Syrah was still green, we had to discard 50% of the production). The grapes were fantastic. The wines are full-bodied with ripe fruits and show a real typicity of the appellation (a terroir taste). So, which is the better of the two? Both are great, it depends on your taste!"

Bernard makes a very good point here. The rumours that I have heard emanating from Chateauneuf du Pape suggest that the wines of 2005 are very dense and rich, perhaps more in the vein of 2001, whereas those of 2004 are fresher, with more clearly defined acidity, but with lovely fruit and texture as well, sounding a little like an upmarket version of the 1999 vintage. Interestingly, this seems to be the converse of what Thierry described in Gigondas. But the most important point is that both are going to be very good wines, but which you prefer depends on your palate. If you attend the school of hedonism then I suspect you will prefer the 2005 in Chateauneuf du Pape, whereas those who yearn for freshness and balance will perhaps prefer the earlier vintage. This variation between communes and vintages certainly makes a mockery of the concept of applying a score to a whole vintage or region, a frequently encountered and yet very peculiar practice I think.

The Parker Influence

No matter which vintage, commune or wine you might prefer, however, there is one thing that seems certain. There are more and more people interested in the wines of the Southern Rhône, which has for many years been a source of great value wines, a description that is not so easily applied to the other great red wine regions of France. Nevertheless, Chateauneuf du Pape, more so than Gigondas, is now a world-renowned wine, and this is at least in part due to Parker's exultation of the appellation. I posed some further questions of Thierry and Bernard. Do they think this has helped or hindered the appellations? Has the wine making changed at all in response to this, and if so do they think the wines are better or worse?

Being of particular relevance to Chateauneuf, it was Bernard, from Domaine des Sénéchaux, that replied. "This question is quite difficult. I do not think Chateauneuf du Pape is only renowned thanks to Parker. Of course, he pushed the notoriety of Rhône wines in the USA and afterwards in Canada, the United Kingdom and eastern Asia. For more than thirty years he has been coming to Chateauneuf du Pape regularly, almost twice a year. It is one of his favourite appellations and a lot of people wanted to taste it in order to understand his preferences. But Chateauneuf du Pape was the first wine in France recognized as an AOC and was already famous in all Europe. The style has evolved in the mid-1980's mainly because of the Bordeaux influence of using new oak barrels. At that time, no barrels were used in Chateauneuf du Pape! Some producers have tried 100% new oak to take advantage of Parker figures. Nevertheless, producers are now coming back to the traditional foudres, 60 hl oak tanks. Actually, we have concluded that Grenache does not age well in little barriques! Some Syrah are still aged in barriques though. Robert Parker is also coming back to a more respectful sense of terroir."

To me it does seem that the wines of Chateauneuf du Pape have changed over the years, and the way wood is used during and after vinification is undoubtedly a very important part of that. It must be very tempting to alter winemaking practices in order to gainer higher accolades from the big critics, when points directly correlate with sales. Where this has really changed the face of Chateauneuf du Pape is in the introduction of the super-cuvées; these special bottlings typically feature a high-quality aliquot of the harvest, often subjected to more time in oak, quite possibly using the aforementioned small barriques. The frequently touted concern is that although this may yield a fabulously rich and concentrated wine, which can take a high score and thus sell at a high price (sometimes stratospherically so), it nevertheless must detract from the potential quality of the domaine bottling.

Super-Cuvées

There are, however, alternative concepts, and different winemakers take different approaches. Whereas some bottle a super-cuvée, potentially lessening the quality of their main wine, others may follow the Bordeaux model of putting lesser barrels into a second wine, thereby potentially pushing quality up. And some refuse to do either, bottling just one cuvée. I put the issue to Thierry and Bernard. Are they in agreement that a super-cuvée could lessen the quality of an estate's 'classic' wine? And which approach do they prefer, at Trignon and Sénéchaux?

The practice is not limited to Chateauneuf du Pape, but it is probably more widely recognised here than in Gigondas, and so Bernard was first to respond. “I love this question. Not a lot of people understand the importance of producing a single cuvée. At Domaine des Sénéchaux, we produce 10000 cases of our red Chateauneuf du Pape and that is all. When a tank does not show good results, we do not blend it and we sell it to wine merchants! We do not produce a special cuvée of 500 cases because if you remove the butter, only the milk remains! It is sure that the classic cuvée would be thicker and less expressive. Some producers produce a super cuvée only in order to reach 95 points from Parker or the Wine Spectator and to increase tariffs on their price list. Our single red cuvée from the 2004 vintage has reached 91 Parker points and we sell it under 15 Euros at the estate!”

Thierry Caymaris agreed. “It is the same approach here at Trignon. With 18 hectares of Gigondas AC vineyards, we produce a single cuvée (except special requests for important clients but it is not common). We think that a single final blend of all our plots of Gigondas gives very interesting typicity of the appellation but also typicity of the vintage!”

Fascinating responses, and I must say that I find these comments resonating very strongly with my own thoughts. We seem to have accepted the existence of these super-cuvées as the norm, and yet imagine how unusual the concept would be if extolled by a Médoc first growth or by a top-flight grower in Burgundy. And the practice seems even more extraordinary when you acknowledge the quality that can be attained at those estates producing single cuvées, a prime example being Clos des Papes, which I have rated very highly ever since I visited there in 1997.

My sincere thanks to Thierry Caymaris and Bernard Tranchecostes for their thoughtful responses, to Pascal Roux for allowing his winemakers time away to answer my queries, and to Régis Cimmati for setting this up. (6/9/06)