2005 Chambolle-Musigny Les Amoureuses 1er Cru

Christophe Roumier, normally tougher on his wines than his clients are, describes his 2006s as "thinner in body than the 2005s but with very fresh fruit." Strict selection needed to be done in both the vines and on the sorting table due to the rot that appeared in the plots that experienced hail, he told me. In fact, the parcels affected by hail (parts of his Chambolle village, Clos de la Bussiere and Charmes-Chambertin) may have been a bit less ripe, but "it was not a big difference." Roumier noted that grape sugars in 2006 were in the vicinity of 12.5%, which he described as good; acidity levels in the grapes were average, though there was less malic than in '07 or '04. He prefers 2006 to 2004 for its charm. "The wines are more pleasurable, while 2004 is more serious," he explained. "And there's a big difference as you go up the hierarchy of vineyards in 2006," Roumier added. "At the cru level especially, the'06s have very good ageability." Roumier's top 2005 cuvees are magical; he ranks this superb vintage with his '02s and '99s. His scarce Musigny, of which a number of his luckiest private clients could snare a bottle or two, left the cellar at 200 Euros and was spotted on the Internet in late fall at well over $5,000. His top four 2005 bottlings are all stunning.

"What a vintner can only dream of," said Christophe Roumier about the 2005 growing season and harvest. "An ideal season and easy-to-make wines. In 2005 we got a rare combination of ripeness with freshness. The look of the crop was like 1990. The berries were small and loose and detached easily. The fruit didn't have the same extreme ripeness as 1990 but sugars were high and no chaptalization was necessary." As in 1999, 1996 and 1990, there were no disease pressures in 2005, Roumier added. Roumier vinified with 20% to 25% whole clusters, as the stems were ripe and healthy, and the slower release of sugar by the unbroken berries offered the advantage of extending the fermentations. Roumier feels that most 2005s will be attractive young. He describes the vintage as a combination of 2002, in terms of quality of tannins and acidity, and 1999, for its richness, flesh and blacker fruit flavors. "The 2002s are radically minerally and demanding," he told me, "whereas the 2005s hide nothing; they may always be tasteable but they will age for a long time." Incidentally, the basic Bourgogne here is a winner in 2005. (Diageo Chateau & Estate Wines, New York, NY) Also recommended: Chambolle-Musigny (86).