2024–A Difficult Year

VINTAGE SUMMARY:

“The rain it raineth every day”—William Shakespeare, King Lear, Act 3, Scene 2

I came to Burgundy prepared to write off the 2024 vintage as a washout. What I found was considerably more complicated. The word that the producers used most often to describe the vintage was “difficult,” and the harvest, particularly in the Côte de Nuits, was tiny. Yet despite the considerable challenges of the growing season, there were amid the dross some very good wines, and others that will at least provide good near-term drinking when they inevitably turn up in the next few years on restaurant lists. 

Before getting into more detail, I would summarize the critical facts about this vintage as follows:

–The flowering was badly affected by cool, wet weather and a significant portion of the potential crop was lost to coulure and millerandage.

–Both during the spring and well into July, it rained constantly, promoting mildew. These conditions called for near-constant spraying (especially frequently for those who practice organic or biodynamic viticulture), yet the muddy conditions often prevented tractors from entering the vineyards.

–Even with diligent treatment, the resulting crop losses were substantial, sometimes dramatically so in the Côte de Nuits. Yields were somewhat better in the Côte de Beaune, particularly for the whites, but still well below average.

–The weather during late July and August was generally sunny and warm but not hot, which allowed what was left of the crop to mature reasonably well. While the rain returned at the beginning of September, there a period of good weather beginning around September 10^th, which allowed the harvest to take place in good conditions.

–Fermentations generally went relatively smoothly. However, the reds were often light, tempting some producers to over-extract, while others, fearful of the wines being too fragile, treated them very gently and avoided extended maceration, sacrificing density and complexity in the process.

We visited 54 producers over the course of 3+ weeks. A handful declined to show their ‘24s either because of the small quantities, or because they believed the wines were not yet fully integrated (in addition to a small but growing number who now show wines only in bottle). Most, however, were more willing to share barrel samples than we had feared given the tiny quantities, and we easily tasted enough wines to draw some conclusions (even though some wines we normally taste were missing, either because they were not made, or were made in quantities too tiny to allow tasting, or were combined into a single 1er cru or Village cuvée). That said, as I have written before, barrel tasting is an art, not a science, and it is affected by many factors, including changes in the weather. (November has become notably warmer in recent years, but the last week of our trip the temperatures dropped sharply, and the wines we tasted after the drop had firmed up noticeably.)

Sometimes it is clear what the future is likely to bring for a given wine, good or bad, but in 2024 there were many wines that I felt needed more elevage before they could be fully judged, and even most successful producers were more inconsistent than usual. Also, there was an unusually sharp division between producers who thought that the wines would benefit from some additional elevage and were planning to bottle later than usual, and others who believed that the wines should be bottled earlier than usual to preserve what freshness they had. Given this diversity of elevage and bottling strategies, I believe that this vintage is likely to show much more variation than is typical between how the wines tasted in barrel and the final bottled wine, and only time will tell which of these approaches to elevage will be the more successful. 

In sum, the wines are quite inconsistent—not only from producer to producer, but often within a given producer’s range. Success was possible, but often elusive. And while the whites were quantitatively more abundant than the reds, and had a higher percentage of successes, there was still a lot of inconsistency within most ranges. What I did see was that often, for both whites and reds, the wines at the top of the quality hierarchy—the grands crus and top 1er crus—tended to perform relatively better. And while some areas may have lost more crop than others, I did not find any villages that were particularly successful–almost every producer we asked in the Côte de Nuits thought his village had suffered more than most. 

Outside the Côte d’Or, though, Chablis was far harder hit, and there will be very little wine. The opposite was true to the south: the Côte Chalonnaise, and particularly the Mâconnais, got progressively less rain; while we did not sample many wines from either of the latter two regions, generally one would expect to see larger crops and less inconsistency.

Finally, to get to the bottom line: unless there is an external market collapse, prices will still be high for the ‘24s, given the small supply. Those who buy their favorite producers every year will see their allocations cut way back. There are definitely some good surprises within the vintage, and it should not be dismissed out of hand. I also expect further changes in many of the wines from barrel to bottle, and it is always possible that with time the vintage may perform better than initially expected (or worse). And there are at least some whites that I think are worth seeking out. Nonetheless, given the high prices, quality variation, and tiny quantities, it is hard to say that there is much of anything, particularly in red, that is going to be a “must buy.” 

To give a little more detail, the winter was wet though relatively mild, leading to an early budbreak at the end of March/beginning of April. Later in April the weather turned very cool, but while the Côte d’Or largely escaped any damaging frosts, Chablis was not so lucky, experiencing a significant mid-April frost, and it was further devastated by hail at the beginning of May, leading to loss of nearly the entire crop in that region. (There were also some local hailstorms in the Côte d’Or during the season, but none that did widespread damage). However, May and June were very wet in the Côte d’Or, and this negatively affected the flowering, which proceeded slowly during the first half of June, with attendant coulure and millerandage. (This was true particularly for the pinot noir—the chardonnay in the Côte de Beaune, flowering earlier, fared somewhat better.) During this period, and through late July, mildew was an omnipresent problem, requiring incessant treatment. This was complicated by two factors: first, for those practicing organic and biodynamic farming, the approved sprays are contact sprays, which wash off with the next rainfall, and thus require constant re-treatment; second, the incessant rain made a muddy mess of the vineyards, particularly in the lower-lying areas, and often tractors could not get through, necessitating spraying by hand. Those who used non-organic sprays fared somewhat better, as those sprays are absorbed by the plant and thus provide longer protection. A few producers abandoned organic practice as a result. Nonetheless, constant vigilance was still needed, and the mildew, which usually first appears on the leaves, sometimes simply attacked the grapes directly. During this period, there was rain almost every day, with only brief respite. That said, generally the temperatures were normal, even if there was little sunshine.

The weather finally cleared in late July and véraison began, though irregularly. As August was sunny and warm (although without extreme heat), the small number of remaining grapes were largely able to reach ripeness, albeit still with some irregularity. Rain returned at the end of the month, and in the first week of September, but then cleared around September 10^th, with cool dry weather settling in in time for the harvest to begin in earnest. Given the smaller crop, the harvest proceeded relatively rapidly, which was a good thing as rain returned on the 22^nd, followed by a few dry days before rain again returned on the 26^th. Fortunately, botrytis did not develop, and although there were some reports of oidium during the growing season, this did not become a major factor.

While maturities were irregular–even sometimes within the same row–and sorting was a necessity, the grapes affected by mildew had largely fallen off in the vineyard or fell off easily on the sorting table (though not entirely, as one producer pointed out, and we occasionally it seemed as though some dryness in the wines could have resulted). Today, stem inclusion has become widespread, and most producers we spoke to who keep stems had not backed off their use in this vintage, though a few did. 

Fermentations generally went quickly, although some producers with partially filled tanks had difficulties keeping the fermentation temperatures up. Alcohol levels, while below those of recent hot vintages, were generally above 12^o, entirely reasonable by historical standards. Chaptalization, though not universal, was common, usually to increase the alcohol by a half degree or so, sometimes up to one degree—though some producers said they chaptalized primarily to prolong the fermentation rather than to increase the alcohol level. Unfortunately, some producers, concerned by the fragility of the grapes, treated them too delicately and wound up with thin, unbalanced wines, while others viewed the same factors as calling for more extraction than usual, and ended up with overly tannic, also unbalanced wines. The right line between the two was not always easy to find.

While there was a good deal of malic acid initially, typically this was converted in the malolactic fermentations, which mostly (with some exceptions) took place normally. 

While many producers followed their standard regime, more than a few cut back on the use of new oak barrels, fearing that the oak influence could easily become exaggerated in this vintage. The biggest divergence, however, was over the length of elevage, with significant numbers of producers believing that the wines should be bottled early, and others believing the wines would benefit from more extended elevage than usual.

It is difficult, given the heterogeneity, to describe the style of the wines, but to venture a few general comments: they are on the lighter, leaner side, and while the acidities may not be unusually high, they can often (particularly among the whites) read as if they are, given the lack of covering fruit and density. Of course, this is quite different from the rich, ripe fruit flavors of recent hot vintages, and the better wines reflect their respective terroirs, but this doesn’t mean the vintage is “classic” (as some have started to describe it). What they too often lack is balance, and most are not particularly dense or complex either. There are exceptions of course—more often among the whites–that transcend the limitations of the vintage.

What do the producers themselves think? More than a few stated that they liked the vintage, believing that after all the travails, the wines had turned out to be pleasurable. For others, though, it was a different story: one grizzled veteran of more than four decades of harvests said these were the worst vintage conditions he’d ever seen. Another producer, after remarking that she was depressed by being in the cellar and couldn’t wait to see the vintage bottled, sold and gone, was asked if she thought she might eventually come to like it better. Her response? “Pfffft!”

_______________

RED WINES

Côte de Nuits Producers:

Domaine de la Romanée-Conti. Bertrand de Villaine characterized 2024 as a “beautiful Burgundian vintage.” The harvest started on September 18^th, though with some stops and starts. He noted that the domaine had increased its percentage of year-old barrels in 2024 and used slightly less than 100% stems. He also told us that the domaine will build a new winery starting next year, projected to be done in time for the 2027 harvest. It will include a refreshing area where the grapes can be cooled during warm harvests. He also said that, going forward, the domaine intends to hold back more of each vintage initially. 

While not on the same level as its top vintages, this was a successful if tiny vintage at the domaine. The Corton only produced 4 hl/ha, and was already in tanks, so we did not taste it. The Echézeaux showed the stem influence prominently, and had some nice spice, with strong tannins. This was about to be moved into tanks not long after our visit. I liked the Grands Echézeaux better than my colleagues; on the palate, notwithstanding a slight reductive note, there was a great sense of the terroir; it had a medium body, slightly prominent tannins, and a super-long finish. The Romanée St.-Vivant had a slightly reduced nose but also notes of dark cherries, spice, and stems; this was an elegant wine, though it also had some strong tannins, and it had an even longer finish than the Grands Echézeaux. For me, though, the best wine in the range this day was the Richebourg. There was no Véroilles in this wine in ’24, though whether or not that made a difference was hard to tell. Much of that section of the vineyard is being replanted and there was no significant crop from the rest of Véroilles. The nose was floral and extremely pure, with cocoa and stem notes. While there was some power in the mid-palate, what distinguished this cuvée was its amazing mineral purity. The tannins were still strong, but refined, and the finish was bright, transparent, and incredibly persistent. La Tâche was not far behind, with a complex spicy nose, stem perfume, a strong mineral presence, and fine balance–slightly lighter than the Richebourg perhaps, but with more refined tannins and a finish of black raspberries, pepper, coffee, cocoa, and spice. Bertrand said that the tight tannins will last a long time and sees this as a characteristic of the ’24 vintage. The quantities for Romanée-Conti were closer to normal than for any of the other cuvées. The wine, which had been moved into 350l and 600L barrels to finish its elevage, was not yet quite knit; there was some reduction on the nose, and the acidity seemed slightly prominent; I was not yet seeing the spherical quality that makes this wine unique, though it may come in time—betting against RC is usually not a good idea. 

Domaine du Comte Liger-Belair. Louis-Michel said he was happy with his wines in this vintage, though overall, he said, the vintage was very uneven. He lost 80% of total production, though the vineyards higher on the hill were relatively less affected. There was a second sorting after the wines were destemmed (no stems were included in any of the wines in ’24). The wines had been racked and assembled when we saw them. Some cuvées were combined (Colombière and Réas were included in the Village Vosne-Romanée, the Chaumes, Brulées and Croix Rameau were combined in the Vosne 1er Cru, and the tiny harvest of white grapes was included in the red Nuits Clos des Grands Vignes) while others just produced small quantities. 

I did find more inconsistency than normal here. That said, there are a number of successes, even if ’24 is not at the same level as the best vintages from this domaine. Among the wines we tasted, the Vosne Clos du Château had a pure mid-palate and a creamy, almost silky texture, if a slight dryness at the end, and the Vosne Suchots (not a cuvée Louis-Michel normally favors), with a deep spicy nose, a bright, open middle and a silky textural element after, was a complex wine with an extended finish and still a bit of tannin to resolve.  The Vosne Petits Monts, where the losses were less devastating, was excellent (we saw some quite good examples of Petits Monts this trip): the nose was a bit reduced but the wine had great purity on the palate, impeccable balance, a creamy texture and refined tannins. The Vosne Reignots was another wine I liked better than my colleagues, with a low-key nose that gave hints of great depth, notes of cassis and café crème on the palate, an excellent sense of presence and (if one may be a bit anthropomorphic), a great sense of self-assurance. The best of the premiers crus was the Vosne Malconsorts, with a nose that jumped from the glass, a pure minerality, cocoa notes, red berries, and a complex, silky, and intensely long, driven finish with refined tannins. Then, as usual, the La Romanée stole the show, with a touch of reduction on the nose that did not hide its complexity and elegance, an open and pure entry, a beautiful mid-palate showing red fruit and limestone that was also quite elegant, and a deep, spicy finish with highly refined tannins. 

Domaine Denis Mortet. This was our first visit and was among the more outstanding ranges of reds that we saw in this vintage. Arnaud said that for the premiers and grands crus, he now partially destems (keeping the pedicels, which is painstaking labor). The wines had not been racked, and a few did show significant reduction, including the Chambertin, but most were accessible. (Arnaud also noted that the Mazoyeres had been sold by its owner and so was no longer part of the stable of wines.)

The Gevrey Mes 5 Terroirs, a workhorse of the domaine from sites on the northern slope of Gevrey, was highly perfumed (50% whole cluster here), pure, and had a delicate finish. The Gevrey 1er Cru, which had more component vineyards than usual because of the low yields, was also excellent, with good lift, minerality, balance, and a spicy long finish. The Gevrey Lavaux St.-Jacques had a beautiful pure color and was deep, meaty, and spicy, with cocoa notes; it was richer and heavier than the prior premiers crus, with excellent balance, and was bright, pure, floral, and complex. The Clos de Vougeot had a nose of blackberries, cocoa, and perfume, with some significant but refined tannins and a long finish. The Bonnes Mares (a metayage, on white soil, from 80 year old vines) was impressive, showing red fruit, perfume, excellent presence and tension, and some serious but refined tannins–a focused and persistent wine. The Clos de Bèze was also excellent; with a nose of stems and limestone, it was achingly pure on the palate and had power at the end and refined tannins. Best of all (and Arnaud’s favorite wine) was the Mazis-Chambertin, with a large percentage of pedicel. This had notes of red fruit and spiced grilled meat on the nose and the palate was pure and minerally, with excellent mid-palate density and refined tannins—a wine of great finesse. Going forward, the Mazis will most likely be released late.

Domaine Dujac. Jeremy Seysses said that the domaine was among the late pickers in 2024. They had eschewed a cold soak and gone directly to a quick fermentation, with light extraction. He also noted that his father had been seriously ill and was in the hospital during the harvest, and after considerable soul-searching, he had decided to return to 100% whole cluster for this vintage (and also for 2025). The wines here were among the best of the vintage. While we did not taste the entire range, there were a number of standouts. The Gevrey Combottes and Vosne Malconsorts were both reduced and somewhat unforthcoming, though with excellent potential, while the Charmes-Chambertin had a lovely, perfumed nose, strawberry fruit, and fine balancing acidity, and the Echézeaux showed somewhat darker fruit and an open, transparent palate, with a pure fruit note in the back that was extremely enticing. The Clos de la Roche had excellent texture and energy, a strong stem influence, brightness and purity, and soft tannins. At least on this day, the Clos St. Denis was even better; it had a silkier texture and even greater complexity than the Roche, along with great balance, freshness, and persistence. The Bonnes Mares, though, was best of all: it had a purity and precision that made one forget all the prejudices about this vintage, plus power, bright red fruit, a silky texture, and refined tannins on a long, terroir-driven finish.  

Domaine Duroché. Because of the small quantities, we tasted fewer of the ‘24s than usual. (The Gevrey Village will be a blend of four cuvées, including the regular Village cuvée, the negociant Village cuvée, Le Clos and Champ.) Most of what we saw though, was excellent, particularly at the higher levels. The regular cuvée of the Lavaux St. Jacques was soft and charming, with a pure mineral finish, while the Vieilles Vignes cuvée was still more complex: full of red fruit, with coffee and spiced meat notes, it was developing a velvet aspect and had ripe tannins. The Clos de Bèze had a discreet nose of nutmeg, coffee, meat, and strawberries, with a minerally intensity and power developing on the palate and an open, slightly dry, minerally finish. 

Domaine Comte Georges de Vogue. This domaine continues on the comeback trail, with a fine showing in this difficult vintage. This past summer estate manager Jean-Luc Pepin, one of the great ambassadors of Burgundy, retired, and winemaker Jean Lupatelli took on a much broader portfolio, becoming regisseur. Harvest began on September 16^th and lasted 6 days, with a crop that averaged 8 hl/ha. Still, Jean said the grapes they did harvest were beautiful, and not much sorting was needed. They considered themselves lucky because they were able to fill tanks for both Musigny and Bonnes Mares. The Bonnes Mares nose was a bit subdued on the day we visited, but it showed intensity and power on the palate, and had excellent complexity and density; the wine seemed unfinished as yet but has several months of elevage ahead. The Chambolle Amoureuses had a nose of complex red and black fruit, with the oak still prominent for now, but the wine was balanced, calm, and elegant. The Musigny had an elegantly delineated nose that included black fruit, citrus, and mocha notes; on the palate, the texture was quite fine, and the mineral underpinnings showed through; although the tannins were still prominent there was ultimately excellent delicacy, indeed an almost evanescent quality on the long finish.

Domaine Hudelot-Noëllat. Charles van Canneyt said that the small yields saved the vintage, and that he felt it was a much better vintage than ’21, more comparable to ’01. No stems were used in ’24, and he plans to do a slightly shorter elevage than normal, bottling in January. In general, he felt the vintage had delicacy, balance, freshness, and purity. As with many of the domaines we visited, the results here were less consistent than usual, but there were nonetheless several successes. Among them was the Bourgogne Pinot Noir, which had creamy, dense blackberry fruit and good concentration and balance; this should be a real value, if you can find it. The Chambolle Village had more dark fruit than I expected, but a nice mineral balance and modest tannins, while the Vosne Village was deeply minerally, spicy, and dense. The Nuits Bas de Combe was earthy, with a citrus touch, coffee and cinnamon spice notes, and good density.  In the perennial faceoff here between the Vosne Beaumonts and Suchots, the Beaumonts seemed a bit burly in the mid-palate, while the Suchots stood out with its subtle minerally nose and, despite a bit of reduction, striking minerality, concentration, and purity—a wine very reminiscent stylistically of 2001, even if I didn’t see much else (here or elsewhere) to justify the comparison. The Romanée St.-Vivant had a deep and pure color, complex spice, and dark fruit on the nose, a fine terroir quality on the palate, and a persistent finish, but seemed not fully forthcoming as yet. While mine was a minority opinion, I nonetheless preferred the Richebourg, with its gamy nose, lovely spice element, refined tannins, and long, open, pure mineral finish.

Domaine des Chezeaux. This domaine is now owned by Charles Van Canneyt and his wife, Anne-Sophie. In 2024 the wines were made at Hudelot-Noëllat in Vougeot while the winery in Gevrey is under renovation. I found the wines for the most part quite attractive, including the Chambolle Charmes (a vineyard also owned by Hudelot-Noëllat; the two touch but the Hudelot parcel is only 0.2 ha while the Chézeaux is 0.65 ha). This was lighter-colored than the Hudelot, but I preferred it; it had sweet strawberry fruit and cocoa notes as well as good minerality and moderate tannins. Both the Griotte-Chambertin and the Chambertin need more time–both were reduced but had a silky palate texture and good transparency, with the Chambertin as usual showing more power. For me, the best in the range was the Clos St. Denis, which had excellent lift and density and a particularly fine and elegant spicy mineral-driven finish. 

Domaine Méo-Camuzet. Picking began here on September 20^th, and Tristan Méo said a sunny and windy week before harvest had allowed the maturation to finish. Yields were about 18 hl/ha on average, or about half normal. As elsewhere, there was some consolidation of cuvées, and the Nuits Boudots and Murgers will go into the Nuits 1er Cru. Apart from the Corton Perrières, all the cuvées were totally destemmed. As usual, we saw a mix of negociant and estate wines, with the higher level wines showing best, including the Vosne Brulées–while the 80% new oak on this cuvée hadn’t yet fully integrated, it typically does with time, and the wine was quite intense, with deep black fruit on the nose, lots of spice, and a coffee note, and with excellent clarity and brightness to the mid-palate. The Richebourg also exhibited fine purity and intensity, with refined tannins; it should be quite good in time, though will benefit from additional elevage. 

Domaine Bruno Clair. Arthur Clair said that he felt his wines had gained a lot from lees contact during the elevage, and he did not agree with those who thought the wines should be bottled early–though because of the wines’ delicacy, he did not want to rack them yet. As was the case many other places, a number of cuvées were simply too small to show, and the range was somewhat inconsistent, generally showing better at the higher end. That said, the Gevrey Village was quite fine–a pure example. The Gevrey Clos St.-Jacques had a particularly attractive mid-palate and was well balanced and soil-driven. The Vosne Raignots (the historically correct spelling, Arthur insists) is from a tiny 0.07 ha parcel that after replanting has been, since 2018, vinified separately. It had beautiful raspberry fruit on the nose, bright minerally acidity, and was light and charming, with an extra-long finish. The Clos de Bèze was still tight, with good density and a quiet intensity. The Bonnes Mares also showed well: it was elegant, with lovely cherry fruit, this was a lighter weight Bonnes Mares, but with charm and real terroir character, and a long open mineral finish. 

Domaine des Lambrays. Jacques Devauges said the domaine had used three sorting tables in succession in 2024, and that the grapes that made it through looked very good, which allowed the domaine to keep the usual percentages of stems. Average production here was 16 hl/ha. The range, as followers of the domaine know, has expanded considerably in recent years, and another new property was added in 2024: 0.3 ha of Clos de Vougeot, located above La Folie. Except for the Clos des Lambrays, all the wines had been racked into tank by the time of our visit, somewhat earlier than usual, as Jacques felt they had fully developed. As elsewhere, the range was inconsistent, and this was also a visit that took place after the weather had changed and many wines had shut down. Among those I liked best was the Nuits La Richemone, which had a charming spicy nose that was nicely perfumed and had a citrus touch; on the palate, it had good presence and lift–a surprisingly elegant Nuits with a super-long, enticing saline mineral finish. The Clos des Lambrays, still in barrel, showed the stem influence on the nose, along with sweet red fruit and a touch of champignons; on the palate it was pure, linear, and light on its feet in the style of older Lambrays, with real terroir character, while on the finish it had a bit more density and was saline and extremely persistent. 

Domaine Georges Mugneret-Gibourg. The news here is that the domaine had entered into a fermage agreement, just two days before our visit, for 1.4 ha of Nuits Village wines, including in Aux Allots, Charmois and a tiny part of Damode. In 2024, the Nuits wines—Au Bas de Combe, Vigne Rondes 1er cru and Chaignots 1er Cru, which produced an equivalent of 6 hl/ha—will be combined in a single Village Cuvée des Trois Climats. Because of the tiny quantities, we were only able to taste this and the Clos de Vougeot; both seemed to be still works in progress, and not quite ready to pass judgment on.

Domaine J.F. Mugnier.  Picking here began September 17^th, and the sorting took place in the vineyards. At a point, the domaine decided to stop adding copper to the soil, given how few grapes there were. The Nuits Clos de la Maréchale was showing good purity as well as earth and spice notes, while the Chambolle Fuées had a silky touch and fine minerality, though the finish seemed underdeveloped as yet. There was so little Amoureuses (1.5 barrels) that they had not decided what to do with it and were not showing it. The 2019 Musigny, to be released this year, was superb; “Freddy meets 2019” I wrote of this suave, complex, velvet-textured wine. 

Château de la Tour/Domaine Labet. Francois Labet said that his first vintage was the 1984, a no-star vintage that had begun with a cold, wet spring and extremely extended flowering, and that initially he had feared that 2024 would be a repeat of it. Fortunately, in 2024, unlike 1984, there had been a window of better weather in which the remaining grapes were able to ripen. The domaine sorted twice: first to put aside the best clusters to use whole, and then a sorting of the fruit that would be destemmed. The harvest began here on September 23^rd, and the result, he said, was a “very pinot” vintage, which he expects to bottle early. The Domaine Labet wines were generally well-made, if slightly dry in back; the best was the Beaune Clos des Coucherias, which had lovely aromatics that carried through the palate. Of the Château de la Tour Clos de Vougeots, I preferred the Cuvée Classique this year, which was spicy and full of fruit, with strong minerality, but more approachable than is sometimes the case with this wine. The Vieilles Vignes had more depth and density, and more structure, but will need a lot of time. There will be no Hommage in 2024.

Domaine Arlaud Père et Fils. Our visit came after there had been a dramatic shift in the weather, from unseasonably warm to quite cold. The cellars were cooling rapidly, and the wines in consequence often seemed tighter and less forthcoming, especially on the finish. At Arlaud, the ‘24s were quite reduced, and seemed to be in a transitional phase. That said, two ‘23s, a Clos de la Roche (93-94) and a Clos St. Denis (94), showed the quality of the winemaking here: in 2023, Cyprien Arlaud somehow managed to avoid the heaviness of this warm, ripe vintage and made wines of excellent balance, terroir character, and finesse.  

Domaine Faiveley. Erwan Faiveley said that ’24 was a strong white wine vintage, but the smallest pinot harvest they’d made, with 12 hl/ha on average but lower in some places: Latricieres-Chambertin, for example, only yielded 6 hl/ha. The reds were being bottled at the time we visited as Erwan didn’t believe they would benefit from an extended elevage. 

The whites (reviewed below) were quite successful, but the range of reds was, like many in this vintage, inconsistent. Among those that stood out were the Charmes-Chambertin, which had excellent aromatics that included red fruit, coffee, grilled meat, and a steely touch and was easy and charming on the palate; and  the Clos de Bèze, with a perfumed, floral note and strawberry fruit–there was power here, and spice, along with a bright aspect and good length. The Corton Clos des Cortons Faiveley, enjoying its 150^th vintage, was for me the best in the range, which notwithstanding a slight tartness on the finish, had wonderful balance, transparency, and density.

Domaine Ponsot.  Alexandre Abel said that the crop was 70-75% below normal, and smaller than in ’21. He noted that, from 2020, the wines made from purchased grapes are issued under the Maison Ponsot label rather than the domaine’s label. As with most domaines, the results here were not consistent. Among those I liked were the Morey Village, which had good density, a bright acidity and a very good sense of terroir; the Corton Bressandes, which was an easy drinking Corton that will be ready relatively early; and the Clos de la Roche (15 barrels in ’24, compared with 50 in ’23), which had forest floor and champignon notes on the nose, along with citrus and minerals, an open and easy palate with limestone, cocoa, and cassis notes and a bright limestone finish with ripe tannins.

Clos de Tart. The harvest began on September 17^th and produced about 13.5 hl/ha, a loss of 60%. Because of the disease pressure, the wine was almost entirely destemmed. Perhaps it will gain weight, but for now, the Clos de Tart seemed very much on the lighter side, though pleasant.

Domaine Trapet. The harvest here took place between September 20^th and 24^th. Except for Chambertin (30%), no whole cluster was used. However, the domaine did lots of pigeage and a long maceration. Whether this was a good decision, time will tell. In general, I felt the results were more promising at the grand cru level: the Chapelle-Chambertin had a touch of oak tannin but was otherwise rounded, ripe, and spicy, while the Latricières-Chambertin was more restrained than the Chapelle, denser and with darker fruit, a fine-grained wine, and though the oak showed more than on the Chapelle, it had a good terroir-driven finish with generally softer tannins. The Chambertin had a spicy nose, with cinnamon and coffee notes, citrus, and a creamy texture with more red fruit than the prior wines, soft tannins and a very persistent finish.

Domaine Berthaut-Gerbet. Amelie Berthaut admitted that she did not particularly like the ‘24s at this stage. Best here was the Vosne Petits Monts, which despite some reduction was dense, and developing a silky texture, with excellent fruit/mineral balance, and an intense, extended finish. 

Domaine d’Eugénie. Significant changes are afoot here. Winemaker Jae Chu, formerly at Chateau Grillet, has replaced Michel Mallard, who made the ‘24s. The domaine’s entire current white wine portfolio is moving to Domaine des Cabottes (although for reasons that are unclear Eugénie, as well as Cabottes, will get a portion of the Corton Charlemagne that formerly belonged to Bouchard). We were told that Eugénie will end up with the former Côte de Nuits properties of Bouchard, including Chambertin, Bonnes Mares, Echézeaux, Gevrey Cazetiers, Nuits Cailles and some additional Clos de Vougeot. We did not taste the ‘24s here, but Jae told us she is planning on significant changes in the vinification, including longer elevage, less whole cluster and less new oak, and is doing various experiments in the vineyards as well. The changes will certainly be welcome, as we were reminded when we tasted an ’09 Echézeaux; it may have been hard to make a poor wine in ’09, but Eugénie managed to do so. 

Côte de Beaune Producers:

Joseph Drouhin. As usual, we tasted a selection, though some of the wines we normally see were in too small quantities to warrant tasting. Overall, Véronique Drouhin said, their yields in the Côte de Nuits were about 4 hl/ha, and she noted the difficulty of trying to treat such an extensive estate against mildew on the same day. They were among the later pickers, though, and were rewarded: the Chambolle Village was perfumed, with sweet red berries underpinned by fine minerality; this was a really lovely wine, and especially so in the context of the vintage. The Chambolle Amoureuses had an enticing nose of blackcurrants, perfume, and spice, while the Vosne Petits Monts, with 40% stem inclusion, was perfumed and deeply spicy, with excellent depth on the palate and some polished tannins at the finish—a wine of great potential. The Musigny had an enticing, complex nose that included notes of strawberry and citrus, an attractive intensity in the mid-palate, and some strong but refined tannins—an excellent wine for the vintage, if slightly restrained by it.

Domaine Y. Clerget. Thibaud Clerget said he was energized by the challenge of this vintage, despite 70% losses and several cuvées that produced only one barrel, including the Volnay Mitans, Clos des Angles, Champans (even less), and Clos de Vougeot. The harvest began here on September 12^th, and Thibaud noted that his last treatment, which he felt had made a difference, had been in August, when some of his fellow vignerons had already left on vacation. The results here were very good, particularly in the context of the vintage. To begin, the Volnay Village was terroir-driven and the Volnay Carelle Sous La Chapelle, while slightly reductive, was light and charming. The Volnay Santenots was more serious: full, rich, and complex but with good lift and balance, if showing a little dry tannin at the end. The Pommard Rugiens was earthy and spicy, with an almost creamy texture, giving way to some strong but not overbearing acidity. Best for me was the Volnay Clos du Verseuil, which while usually fully destemmed was made with 50% whole bunch in this vintage; it had an intriguing nose and was full-bodied, with excellent lift and energy and only a little tannin left to resolve; where the Santenots was powerful, this was elegant and had an extremely long finish.

Domaine Michel Lafarge. Frederic Lafarge said losses had been in the range of 70-80%, but worse in the lesser appellations, with the premiers crus yielding about 13-15 hl/ha. This year, unlike in 2021, they expect to bottle the premiers crus separately. Frederic said that there was no vintage he thought was comparable, and noted that despite all the rain, the weather wasn’t cold, and the harvest was still relatively early by historical standards. Although the range was not entirely consistent and some of the wines needed more elevage, each terroir was very specific. The Volnay Village (which will include all ten parcels) had a charming strawberry nose and touches of cinnamon and blackcurrants; on the palate, there was good density and the tannins, while present, were modulated, with a nice mineral touch at the end. I particularly liked the Beaune Grèves, which had light sweet strawberry fruit on the nose, along with a touch of cinnamon, champignons, earth and minerals; the tannins were suave and the finish long if just slightly dry. The Volnay Mitans had notes of red berries and clove on the nose and an almost silky palate impression. Both the Volnay Caillerets and the Clos des Chênes felt as though they needed more time to come together, but the Volnay Clos du Ch. des Ducs was highly attractive, with dense spicy red fruit, cinnamon, and pepper on the nose, a similarly dense mid-palate suffused with red fruit, and polished tannins on a rich finish. 

Domaine Comte Armand. Both Volnays were very good, including the Volnay Village, which was nicely balanced between fruit and minerality, and the Volnay Fremiets, with power, complexity, modulated tannins, and a long finish. The Clos des Epeneaux was also showing well, with good tension, medium weight, an earthy sensibility and a terrific finish with bright red fruit and a sense of electricity. 

Domaine Chandon de Briailles. The losses here were substantial: in ’24 there will be no Savigny Aux Fournaux or Aloxe-Corton Les Valozières, and a single cuvée of Corton grand cru, to be called Trilogie Royale, will be made from their three grand cru vineyards. The Pernand Ile de Vergelesses needs to finish its elevage, but for now is dense and perfumed (from the stems), with excellent balance and line, while the Corton has a very pure minerality and is almost too intense but has a super-long finish and refined tannins; this too will need a lot of time.

Maison Louis Jadot. The whites (reviewed below) clearly outshone the reds at Jadot this year. Indeed, I found some of the reds were dominated by sweet fruit, more like ’23 than ’24 in character; for example, the Clos de Bèze was sweet, easy, and medium weight with a touch of coffee cream in back and a soft finish. The Clos de Vougeot, though, which may have benefitted from the fact that the lower section was completely lost to mildew, was more compact and better balanced, with plenty of sweet fruit but a bright mineral finish.

Maison Alvina Pernot. While mostly known for their whites (reviewed below), the maison’s Chassagne Clos St. Jean had bright strawberry and raspberry fruit on the nose, good weight, and a fine sense of terroir.

Bouchard Père et Fils and Domaine des Cabottes. We reported on schedule to the Bouchard cuverie in Savigny, where we had tasted the last few years from barrel, only to be told that this was now the home of Domaine des Cabottes, and that as our appointment was with Bouchard, not Domaine des Cabottes (which hadn’t existed when we made our appointment), we could not taste the latter wines—not that it would have mattered, as they were only showing the ‘23s, which we’d tasted last year. Instead, we were instructed to return to Beaune, where we would taste only the wines left behind at Bouchard. (“Cabotte,” for those not familiar with the term, is a small stone vineyard shelter.)

Back in Beaune, we were greeted by Mikael Baroin, the new Technical Director of Bouchard Père et Fils. He is excited and enthusiastic about his new charge, and  apparently unfazed by the fact that although 60 hectares of Côte de Beaune pinot noir vineyards remain in Bouchard, the flagship cuvées, Beaune Grèves Enfant Jesus and Volnay Caillerets Ancienne Cuvée Carnot, were transferred to Domaine des Cabottes, where they will eventually be made at the Château de Puligny. (The former Bouchard Côte de Nuits wines are now being made at Domaine d’Eugénie (see above)). While there were excellent reasons for giving up Bouchard’s negociant business the prior year, I have yet to talk to anyone outside the company who thinks these more recent steps are a good idea. 

At Bouchard, we again tasted ‘23s (some of which we had not tasted last year) and were told that next year we would taste both the ‘24s and ‘25s, reverting thereafter to a more normal cycle, but that going forward, Domaine des Cabottes will offer wines for tasting only in bottle.

Baroin is happy to focus on what he (rightly, in my view) believes are underappreciated terroirs in Beaune; he’s clearly talented and did a fine job with the ‘23s. However, the betting in Burgundy is that Artémis may be setting up Bouchard, together with its facilities, to be sold within a few years–there would seem to be little reason for depriving Bouchard of its flagship premiers crus if it were still to be kept in the family. And then there was the auction, in December, of many of Bouchard’s cellar treasures: was it to establish a market valuation for what remains? One can only hope that this venerable Burgundian institution will not disappear—or be reduced to the stature of a cabotte. 

WHITE WINES

Domaine Paul Pillot. As usual, there was a very fine range of wines here, though distinctly better at the top end. The wines were all still in barrel and had not been racked. Harvest began here on September 14^th, with average yields of 20-25 hl/ha. Thierry said the wines had more acidity than usual but were in a style he likes. The St. Aubin Charmois, Chassagne Village and Chassagne Mazures were all well-delineated, but things stepped up beginning with the Chassagne Champgains, which had a sweet lemon cream note on the palate, fine balance, and lively acidity, as well as the Chassagne Clos St. Jean, which was clean and pure with a floral, spicy nose, medium body, and a mineral finish. The Chassagne Caillerets, while slightly reduced on the nose, was massive but with strong drive on the palate, and had great intensity and concentration, The Chassagne Grand Montagne performed particularly well this year: it had a stony, pure nose with a floral underpinning, while on the palate it was bracing and pure and had great tension and energy, leading to a long mineral finish. The Chassagne Grandes Ruchottes was a bit of a puzzle: it seemed a bit heavy at this point and hard to evaluate, though typically it is one of the best wines here, and it may turn out to be again. As usual, La Romanée topped the list, with an extra degree of refinement; here the fine minerality was wrapped in a bit more flesh, resulting in a perfectly balanced, pure, and refined wine.

Domaine Marc Colin et Fils. Damien Colin made some of the most outstanding whites we tasted in this vintage. He began harvesting on September 19^th, and yields were 38 hl/ha on average; he said that St. Aubin, with less clay than Chassagne or Puligny, had had less incidence of mildew. Natural alcohol levels were between 11-12% and he did not chaptalize. I cannot say enough good things about these wines, beginning with the first St. Aubin served, a Village Cuvée Luce, which was pure, fresh and precise, and including  En Remilly, with notes of white flowers, limestone, and citrus on both nose and palate, excellent balance and a very long finish with notes of lemon peel, and En Montceau, from 70 year old vines, which had more sweet fruit, with pear, peach, and even melon notes, but also very precise minerality–Damien noted that its combination of both fat and minerals was somewhat atypical for St. Aubin. The best of the St. Aubins was the Chatenière, with a tense, driven minerality as well as flesh to round it out and particularly fine tension and energy. In Chassagne, the Chenevottes was spicy, with a lovely floral note and fine precision, while the Caillerets was open and pure, still developing in the middle but with a finish of remarkable purity and great finesse. All these wines were incredibly pure and terroir-driven, but among the premiers crus, the standout was the Chassagne Vide Bourse, with great lift, intensity, and power and a bright, lemony finish. The grands crus were similarly outstanding, with the Bâtard having a bright floral nose, sweet pear and lemon notes, plenty of ripe fruit and mineral support and a delicate, elegant finish. We concluded with the Montrachet, which displayed notes of honey, citrus, white flowers, spice, and limestone and had great presence, weight, and balance, plus an almost endless finish. An outstanding range in this difficult vintage!

Domaine Joseph Colin. This domaine made great wines in 2023, and generally very good wines in 2024. Joseph’s son Gaël, who has joined the domaine after completing his studies in soil science, said that the domaine had harvested first between September 14^th and 17^th, then stopped and finished most of St. Aubin beginning on the 24^th.  Average yields were about 40 hl/ha. He said the wines had seemed quite acidic at harvest. In general, all the St. Aubins were well made; my favorites included Sur le Sentier du Clou, which had a bright lemon note on the nose, was minerally and deep on the palate and had good tension; Les Frionnes, which beautifully reflected the underlying limestone and had very good length and balance; En Remilly, which had floral and citrus notes on the nose, a bit more flesh than its compatriots and a touch of cream, leading to a saline, minerally finish; and Pitangerets, which was similar to En Remilly but lighter, with more pear and apple notes and a bright saline finish as well. The Chassagne Caillerets was charming, while the Vide Bourse was particularly fine, with a striking clear limestone note and exceptional density (even if it was not quite as friendly and forthcoming as the brilliant Marc Colin version).

Domaine des Comtes Lafon. Pierre Lafon described ’24 as an “old school” vintage. Yields were about 25% below average, but smaller on the lower part of the slope, where the flowering had been poor. Harvest began here on September 8^th. While there were a few wines that I found slightly unbalanced, the upper part of the range was superb. The Puligny Charmes (a Village wine next to Meursault Charmes—the first vintage here was 2022) was very lemony, round, and balanced, while the Meursault Goutte d’Or was bright, clean, and minerally, with good tension. The Meursault Charmes was particularly intense, with butter, spice, and mineral notes, excellent drive and tension and a pure long finish. The Meursault Perrières was perhaps even better, and Pierre remarked that he thought ’24 was a Perrières year—it was intense and floral on the nose, with great depth, complexity, and layering reminiscent of a fine Montrachet. The Montrachet itself, harvested at 13^o on the 19^th after the rest of the harvest had ended, had great presence as well as a sense of purity and terroir, along with an exceptionally persistent finish. This could well be one of the best whites of the vintage.

Domaine Faiveley. Erwan Faiveley said that ’24 was a good white wine vintage, though in his opinion while the whites are fruity and pretty they are not deep and are unlikely to be long-lasting. This was indeed a good vintage for the Faiveley whites, and the grands crus performed especially well. The Bienvenues-Bâtard had a lively acidity, with excellent drive and tension; it was more powerful than typical for this appellation but carried its weight well and had a lengthy finish. The Bâtard was softer on the palate, almost as if it had changed places with the Bienvenues, but it had a deep minerally character. The Corton-Charlemagne had a light floral/apple quality, with great lift and balance and the floral line running through it; Erwan suggested a comparison to 2014 and in this wine I could see it, though it’s not a comparison I’d make generally.

Maison Pierre Girardin. For 2024, Pierre Vincent Girardin told us he’d used 100% new oak, with very light toast, and mostly 456L barrels, as he was very concerned about hygiene for this vintage. He said he’d sprayed 24 times during the year, and the mildew had been kept at bay. He began harvesting on September 14^th and said production was only 10% down. I found the range overall more inconsistent than his ‘23s were, with some wines still clearly needing more elevage (which they will be getting). Still, there were some excellent wines. I particularly liked the Meursault Perrières, which had a delicate perfume, good energy, power, and direction and a long limestone finish that also benefitted from a floral touch. The Corton Charlemagne “La Croix”, while somewhat reduced on the nose, was powerful and direct, with enough fruit to balance the intense minerality, and was highly attractive. The Bâtard-Montrachet had a pure floral nose, strong soil notes and great density, though it felt as though it needed more time to come together. Similarly, the Montrachet showed fine balance and harmony, and a very long finish, but was not as fully expressive as it seems likely to become with more aging. (Note: the Maison lost 80% of production in red in ’24 and has totally stopped buying from the Côte de Nuits as of 2025, as contracts were ending and renewal was too expensive.)

Domaine Pierre Vincent. The whites were harvested beginning September 16^th. Average yields were 22 hl/ha, but lower in some of the better vineyards. In general, the whites showed well here, beginning with a quite nice Bourgogne, which paired sweet pear fruit with positive acidity, and an Auxey Duresses les Hautés, which was intensely minerally up front, devolving into a surprisingly silky texture, while the Puligny Village also showed excellent terroir clarity and drive. Because there was only one barrel each of several premiers crus, we did not taste those. However, we did taste the excellent Corton-Charlemagne, the domaine’s flagship wine, which had a pure mineral nose, floral and pear hints, a creamy texture, and attractive freshness; this was a complex wine with a long finish. 

Joseph Drouhin. As usual we only tasted a selection from the Maison’s large range. Among the successes were an excellent Pouilly Vinzelles, with bright fruit and a creamy palate note– reflecting that the weather was much better in the Mâconnais (and Côte Chalonnaise) than in the Côte d’Or. The Puligny Folatières, Chassagne Morgeot Marquis de LaGuiche and Corton-Charlemagne were all well-made, if slightly lean, while the Montrachet Marquis de LaGuiche was a well-balanced wine, complex, with pear, almond and lemon notes, and even if it didn’t have the depth of the greatest vintages, it was a very nice Montrachet nonetheless.

Domaine Chavy-Chouet. Romaric Chavy was one of the few producers willing to essay a vintage comparison; he sees 2024 as a white wine vintage that will be slow to mature but made to last, in the vein of 2004 and 2008. 

The whites had very recently been bottled, which no doubt affected the tasting to some degree (the reds had just been racked and we did not taste them). That said, several of the wines were showing particularly well, including an especially attractive Bourgogne Aligoté that was pure, minerally, and very typical of the cépage but without the sometimes rustic, raspy quality that too often characterizes Aligoté (a comment that will no doubt not endear me to Les Aligoteurs). Romaric has devoted a fair amount of attention to his (relatively new) Maranges wines, and the Maranges Les Meurées had a pure, discreet, minerally and smoky nose that was quite attractive. The Puligny Enseignères showed a lot of promise but needs time. The Puligny Champs Gain was spicy and lemony, with good drive and purity, and the Folatières had excellent power and was also well balanced (though I slightly preferred the former). The Meursault Charmes had power and intensity, showing well for the vintage though not transcending it, while the Genevrières was bright, minerally, and full, with an excellent finish. My favorite, though, was the Meursault Clos des Corvées du Citeaux (the domaine’s monopole), with a fine nose of lime, minerals, cream, and spice hints; on the palate, it was full and beautifully balanced, with a long, pure finish.

Domaine François Carillon. Although the range did not transcend the inconsistency typical of the vintage, there were several very nice wines here, including the Puligny Clos du Vieux Château, a Village wine, which was well balanced and will make a fine aperitif; the Puligny Folatières, which had a light floral note, bright, sweet fruit, fine balance and a long, chewy finish, and the Puligny Perrières, which was complex and elegant, showed good terroir character, and finished with good tension and drive—while it needs to be said that this does not come up to the very best vintages of Perrières here, it is a fine wine in the context of the vintage. Also, François’s sons, Paul and Mathis, have begun making a few wines under the name Carillon Frères, including a particularly attractive Puligny Les Noyers Bret (a Village lieu-dit).

Maison Louis Jadot. In a difficult vintage, the Maison was I think more successful than it has sometimes been in recent, more straightforward vintages. Technical Director Frederic Barnier said that total acidity was high when the wines were picked but most was malic, and that the tartaric was not high, indeed the lowest level in the past 10 years. As is typical, the maison partially blocked the malos, and while I think they over-rely on this technique, in ’24 it seems to have worked very much in their favor. The Puligny Clos de la Garenne and Puligny Combettes were both excellent examples, the former minerally, dense, and spicy with a positive green apple touch and the latter with a light floral touch on the nose, some lemon cream, a pure center, and a long and fresh finish. The Bâtard-Montrachet was balanced and complex, with lemon and lime scents, white flowers, apple and pear notes and a finish that was attractive and minerally. The Montrachet was honeyed and sweet, but not overly so, with excellent body and richness, good freshness in the mid-palate, and an intense finish with spiced apple notes. The Corton-Charlemagne had a very different minerality but was also attractive, with good purity and energy in the middle extending into a coiled mineral finish.

Maison Benjamin Leroux. Benjamin said that the wines from the Côte de Beaune would not have ripened had they been a normal-sized crop, and that while the growing season was difficult the wines were easy to make and were not particularly acidic. He thinks it is a better white than red wine year, and while he produces a large range, of which we only saw a portion, I did agree that his whites were more successful, if still somewhat variable. Among the wines I particularly liked were the Meursault Blagny La Piece Sous Le Bois 1950 Cuvée (to be bottled in magnum only)—while the  regular cuvée was very good, this was a distinct step up and had a remarkable sense of purity, showing notes of white flowers, pear fruit, and light lemon, a silky mouthfeel and a pleasant softness in the back palate; this is a wine with time in hand. The Corton Grand Lolières was also quite attractive–large-framed and minerally but well-balanced and with a creamy element and a long finish–as was the Bâtard, with a pure nose showing lime, cream, white flowers, and minerals; this was powerful, with lots of fruit and citrus on the mid-palate and good length. 

Maison Alvina Pernot. The Maison lost 30-50% of a normal crop in ’24. . Philippe Abadie noted that they were not 100% organic in ’24 but fully converted in ’25. In ’24 the whites were gently pressed, were not racked during the elevage, and were bottled early, just before the ’25 harvest. Philippe called it a classical vintage for whites, which they liked. I found the results somewhat more mixed than in ’23, especially where they had received barrels in must in exchange for domaine wines (the wines they don’t farm are being phased out, as they receive more plots from Alvina’s father). Still, there were some distinct successes, which included the Puligny Clos de Noyers Bret, with a strong acid spine but also a creamy touch as well as citrus and spice notes; the Puligny Clos de la Jacquelotte (a lieu-dit within 1er cru Champ Canet), which was powerful and intense, but at no sacrifice of balance; and my personal favorite, the Puligny Pucelles, with a complex nose of spiced apples, sweet fruit, and limestone, showing fine purity and a creamy texture.

Domaine Alex Moreau. Alex said that the yields in ’24 had not been nearly as bad as in ’21 or ’16, and that they had harvested about 85% of a normal crop. However, he described it as a very inconsistent vintage, with picking decisions being quite important. Harvest here started September 16^th. I did find the wines somewhat on the lean side here, albeit with significant differences among the cuvées. Among the more successful wines were the Chassagne Maltroie, which was bright and crisp, appley but not tart, with a creamy sense in the mid-palate; the Chassagne Grands Ruchottes, which had a calm nose of spice and minerals–this was creamier and fuller than the others; and the Bâtard-Montrachet, which was bright and minerally, with excellent balance and complexity and a long finish. 

Maison Henri Boillot. The crop was 60% of normal and the harvest began September 13^th. While we only saw a sample of the vintage, a number of the wines seemed as though they had potential but needed more time to come together. The flagship Puligny Clos de la Mouchère started slowly but opened in the glass and was intense, spicy and precise, with a nice white flower character, though with the acidity showing through on the otherwise floral and persistent finish. 

Domaine Latour-Giraud. Jean-Pierre Latour was, as always, quite forthcoming. He lost about 2/3 of his production and said that while the sugars had matured, the acidity had stayed, and that he felt the wines needed considerably more elevage to achieve better balance. Most of the wines seemed in an uneasy stage at the time of our visit, though with considerable potential, and it seemed best to defer judgment until these are in bottle. 

A Few Other Whites, from Principally Red Wine Producers:

The Puligny Clos du Cailleret from Domaine des Lambrays mingled white flowers, sweet pear compote and stony notes, and was an easy, charming wine.

The Corton Charlemagne from Bruno Clair was intense, spicy and slightly leesy, with pear fruit, some wood influence still (which will integrate) and fine density in back—a wine that is still developing but seems likely to have a good future.

Domaine Ponsot produced some very good whites with good complexity, which showed a bright  acidity but were still balanced– particularly the Morey St.-Denis Monts Luisants, which had notes of deep spice, cream, and lemon curd and good intensity, and the Corton Charlemagne, which showed pure minerality on the nose along with pears and a floral note; on the palate, it was balanced, creamy, quite minerally and had a long finish.

While few people opt for Beaune whites, except perhaps for Drouhin’s Clos des Mouches, Domaine Labet’s Beaune Marconnets, which was spicy and minerally, with good purity and drive, was a delicious wine.

To close, a remarkably good Bourgogne Aligoté from Comte Armand, with varietal character but also far more charm than this varietal usually displays.

© 2026 Douglas E. Barzelay