93 Wine Spectator
Red to brown center, orange edge. Seductive fruit and spice bouquet, with fleeting notes of cherry, kirsch and rose. Warm and spicy on the palate, elegant yet sumptuous, showing fine length and harmony. This turns more acidic and fragile after about an hour in the glass.--La T?che non-blind vertical. Drink now through 2012. ?BS
93 Wine Spectator
Red to brown center, orange edge. Seductive fruit and spice bouquet, with fleeting notes of cherry, kirsch and rose. Warm and spicy on the palate, elegant yet sumptuous, showing fine length and harmony. This turns more acidic and fragile after about an hour in the glass.--La T?che non-blind vertical. Drink now through 2012. ?BS
91 Robert Parker
Tasted at the La Tâche vertical at The Square. Having only encountered the La Tâche 1985 once from magnum, I was intrigued to see how it shows from bottle. To be honest, this did not live up to the billing and as far as anyone could tell (including Aubert de Villaine) there was nothing wrong with it. First, it looks far more mature than the aforementioned magnum from 2011. There are plenty of dried herbs and surprisingly (for such a precocious vintage) plenty of leafy red berry fruit that just lack the presence of the 1991 or the precision of the 1980. The palate is medium-bodied with a smooth texture. It is nicely balanced, but I was not the only one to remark on a lack of depth here, almost a predictable finish that does not seem to go anywhere despite allowing it to open in my glass. As a Burgundy 1985 it is satisfactory, but if I were paying the market price then I might defer. I wonder whether bottles are on the slippery slope and magnums holding up strong?
91 Robert Parker
Tasted at the La Tâche vertical at The Square. Having only encountered the La Tâche 1985 once from magnum, I was intrigued to see how it shows from bottle. To be honest, this did not live up to the billing and as far as anyone could tell (including Aubert de Villaine) there was nothing wrong with it. First, it looks far more mature than the aforementioned magnum from 2011. There are plenty of dried herbs and surprisingly (for such a precocious vintage) plenty of leafy red berry fruit that just lack the presence of the 1991 or the precision of the 1980. The palate is medium-bodied with a smooth texture. It is nicely balanced, but I was not the only one to remark on a lack of depth here, almost a predictable finish that does not seem to go anywhere despite allowing it to open in my glass. As a Burgundy 1985 it is satisfactory, but if I were paying the market price then I might defer. I wonder whether bottles are on the slippery slope and magnums holding up strong?