Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: TN: the Canon canon (1952-2006)

  1. #1
    DaleW Guest

    Default TN: the Canon canon (1952-2006)

    Yesterday afternoon I hosted a vertical of Ch. Canon. OK, maybe not
    the wisest plan, since I had a midday speech at a church in Scarsdale.
    But despite my lack of prep time, recordbreaking heat on May 2nd, a
    demanding hound, and a few off bottles, we actually had a very good
    time. Kudos to all the participants for their vinuous contributions,
    and their willingness to help in kitchen and with dog!

    One reason I wanted to do this was Canon has a reputation for having
    stayed quite traditional, so looking at older vintages would give one
    an idea of how younger vintages might age (for chateaux that
    drastically changed style over last 10-20 years, who knows?).

    As people arrived and I fussed with last minute prep, we enjoyed the
    NV Andre Clouet Champagne Brut. Or at least I enjoyed it. Apples,
    yeast, and a little topnote of ginger. Full without being coarse. B+

    I had some cheeses, pate, smoked duck breast, and sausage on table. We
    started in on the Canon.

    2006 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    Young but fine, lovely black cherry and cassis fruit, fresh, nice
    length. I might look for this. B++

    2005 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (decanted for few hours, then back to
    bottle for few more)
    Tight, tight, tight when opened. Tight, tight when put back in bottle.
    Tight when served. Big ripe wine, but just not showing much. Revisit
    in 20 years. B+? For current drinking B-/C+

    1998 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    Great nose, a melange of earth, coffee, bandaid, and black fruit.
    Medium bodied, nice mouthfeel, maybe a bit short on finish, but that's
    a quibble. B/B+

    1990 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (double decanted an hour before dinner)
    Smelled a bit advanced when opened, by dinner time showing old.
    Cassis, espresso, and a more pronounced bandaid aroma. Consensus was
    this had seen some heat at some point. This bottle, C+ (I've had
    better)
    (surprisingly, a sip several hours later was a bit better)

    1989 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    This is more like it. Fresh ripe dark fruit (some felt jammy),
    leather, mocha. Elegant, balanced, firm. A-

    1986 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    Corked. Some commented they thought there was a good wine underneath,
    but I didn't go poking around.

    1985 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (opened but not decanted an hour before
    before dinner)
    I was fussing with grill and didn't write anything down, but this was
    one of my faves. Complex, elegant, pretty. A-

    1983 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (opened an hour before before dinner,
    cork was sawdust, decanted and covered)
    This was from same California store as the '90. Don't think I'll be
    buying Canon there anymore. Fried. Too bad, I enjoyed this at an 83
    vertical last year. D


    1982 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (opened an hour or so, decanted shortly
    before serving)
    Firing on all cylinders. Great length, class. Mark commented "1st
    growth quality". Lovely wine, classic St Emilion. A

    (OK, so embarrasing story. I thought I had lined up bottles in order,
    with backups (for those where I had backups) to one side. I had
    brought up what I thought was 70 and 75, but as John was opening he
    said "we have 2 1970s?" I had capsule off one bottle, good timing,
    retrieved the 75. Close call)

    1975 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    Probably most controversial wine of the night. Some found it dirty,
    but to me the light barnyard notes were well within tolerance level.
    Still some tannins, burly sort of St Emilion, with black plum, cassis,
    leather, and barnyard. B+

    1970 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    This was the one initially opened, though it actually was supposed to
    be a backup. Pretty advanced, cassis and leather, with air some
    ashtray. B-/C+

    1970 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    So we opened the other one. Aha, now THIS is more like it. Dark
    fruits, cherries, coffee, herbs, cumin. Complex, elegant, complete. A-

    1966 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    Cigarbox, leather, some red fruit hanging on. Maybe a bit past prime
    (midshoulder bottle), but I found quite enjoyable. B/B+

    1952 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    This is amazing youthful for 58. Solid giving dark fruit, tobacco,
    earth/ferric notes, menthol. A-/A

    Really solid showing overall, and I will continue to look for young
    and old Canon. Lots of character.

    We passed around 2 cheesecakes Ramon had brought, plus a berry tart.
    There were 2 wines to finish

    2001 Darting Durkheimer Nonnengarten Rieslaner Auslese
    Lush, tropical, apricot botrytis notes, plenty of acidity to balance
    the fat. B+/A-

    2008*AJ*Adam* Riesling Spatlese*(Mosel)
    I neglected to note vineyard. Nice, zippy acidity, bright fruit. I
    liked but didn't find this exciting, but placement suffered- sure this
    would have shown better pre-meal or by itself, tough to be paired with
    a super rich Auslese. B/B+, probably deserves better.

    Fun day/ evening, thanks all


    Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an
    excellent*wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I
    wouldn't*drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I
    offer no*promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of
    consistency.**

  2. #2
    DaleW Guest

    Default Re: TN: the Canon canon (1952-2006)

    On May 3, 9:48*am, DaleW <Dwmi...@aol.com> wrote:
    > Yesterday afternoon I hosted a vertical of Ch. Canon. OK, maybe not
    > the wisest plan, since I had a midday speech at a church in Scarsdale.
    > But despite my lack of prep time, recordbreaking heat on May 2nd, a
    > demanding hound, and a few off bottles, we actually had a very good
    > time. Kudos to all the participants for their vinuous contributions,
    > and their willingness to help in kitchen and with dog!
    >
    > One reason I wanted to do this was Canon has a reputation for having
    > stayed quite traditional, so looking at older vintages would give one
    > an idea of how younger vintages might age (for chateaux that
    > drastically changed style over last 10-20 years, who knows?).
    >
    > As people arrived and I fussed with last minute prep, we enjoyed the
    > NV Andre Clouet Champagne Brut. Or at least I enjoyed it. Apples,
    > yeast, and a little topnote of ginger. Full without being coarse. B+
    >
    > I had some cheeses, pate, smoked duck breast, and sausage on table. We
    > started in on the Canon.
    >
    > 2006 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    > Young but fine, lovely black cherry and cassis fruit, fresh, nice
    > length. I might look for this. B++
    >
    > 2005 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (decanted for few hours, then back to
    > bottle for few more)
    > Tight, tight, tight when opened. Tight, tight when put back in bottle.
    > Tight when served. Big ripe wine, but just not showing much. Revisit
    > in *20 years. B+? For current drinking B-/C+
    >
    > 1998 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    > Great nose, a melange of earth, coffee, bandaid, and black fruit.
    > Medium bodied, nice mouthfeel, maybe a bit short on finish, but that's
    > a quibble. B/B+
    >
    > 1990 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (double decanted an hour before dinner)
    > Smelled a bit advanced when opened, by dinner time showing old.
    > Cassis, espresso, and a more pronounced bandaid aroma. Consensus was
    > this had seen some heat at some point. This bottle, C+ (I've had
    > better)
    > (surprisingly, a sip several hours later was a bit better)
    >
    > 1989 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    > This is more like it. Fresh ripe dark fruit (some felt jammy),
    > leather, mocha. Elegant, balanced, firm. A-
    >
    > 1986 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    > Corked. Some commented they thought there was a good wine underneath,
    > but I didn't go poking around.
    >
    > 1985 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (opened but not decanted an hour before
    > before dinner)
    > I was fussing with grill and didn't write anything down, but this was
    > one of my faves. Complex, elegant, pretty. A-
    >
    > 1983 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (opened *an hour before *before dinner,
    > cork was sawdust, decanted and covered)
    > This was from same California store as the '90. Don't think I'll be
    > buying Canon there anymore. Fried. Too bad, I enjoyed this at an 83
    > vertical last year. *D
    >
    > 1982 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion) (opened an hour or so, decanted shortly
    > before serving)
    > Firing on all cylinders. Great length, class. Mark commented "1st
    > growth quality". Lovely wine, classic St Emilion. A
    >
    > (OK, so embarrasing story. I thought I had lined up bottles in order,
    > with backups (for those where I had backups) to one side. I had
    > brought up what I thought was 70 and 75, but as John was opening he
    > said "we have 2 1970s?" I had capsule off one bottle, good timing,
    > retrieved the 75. Close call)
    >
    > 1975 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    > Probably most controversial wine of the night. Some found it dirty,
    > but to me the light barnyard notes were well within tolerance level.
    > Still some tannins, burly sort of St Emilion, with black plum, cassis,
    > leather, and barnyard. B+
    >
    > 1970 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    > This was the one initially opened, though it actually was supposed to
    > be a backup. Pretty advanced, cassis and leather, with air some
    > ashtray. B-/C+
    >
    > 1970 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    > So we opened the other one. Aha, now THIS is more like it. Dark
    > fruits, cherries, coffee, herbs, cumin. Complex, elegant, complete. A-
    >
    > 1966 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    > Cigarbox, leather, some red fruit hanging on. Maybe a bit past prime
    > (midshoulder bottle), but I found quite enjoyable. B/B+
    >
    > 1952 Ch. Canon (St. Emilion)
    > This is amazing youthful for 58. Solid giving dark fruit, tobacco,
    > earth/ferric notes, menthol. A-/A
    >
    > Really solid showing overall, and I will continue to look for young
    > and old Canon. Lots of character.
    >
    > We passed around 2 cheesecakes Ramon had brought, plus a berry tart.
    > There were 2 wines to finish
    >
    > 2001 Darting Durkheimer Nonnengarten Rieslaner Auslese
    > Lush, tropical, apricot botrytis notes, plenty of acidity to balance
    > the fat. B+/A-
    >
    > 2008*AJ*Adam* Riesling Spatlese*(Mosel)
    > I neglected to note vineyard. Nice, zippy acidity, bright fruit. I
    > liked but didn't find this exciting, but placement suffered- sure this
    > would have shown better pre-meal or by itself, tough to be paired with
    > a super rich Auslese. B/B+, probably deserves better.
    >
    > Fun day/ evening, thanks all
    >
    > Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an
    > excellent*wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I
    > wouldn't*drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I
    > offer no*promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of
    > consistency.**


    just went home to gather recycling, the Adam is Hofberger

  3. #3
    Anders Tørneskog Guest

    Default Re: The Germans, was TN: the Canon canon (1952-2006)


    "DaleW" <[email protected]> skrev i melding
    news:[email protected]...
    > There were 2 wines to finish
    >
    > 2001 Darting Durkheimer Nonnengarten Rieslaner Auslese
    > 2008 AJ Adam Riesling Spatlese (Mosel)


    I've generally found that the pairing of a rich Auslese to a young Spätlese
    is almost always to the disadvantage of the latter... :-)
    Adam, a small Riesling-only estate and a newcomer (since 2000), is well
    respected and this Spätlese was classified as "Excellent" last year, i.e. at
    85+ points, with a note of "needs more time" and a drinking window of
    2010-2015
    Darting, over 5 times bigger and with a great variety in grapes and
    products, holds a somewhat lower level in general - I have no notes on this
    wine, but based on other vintages and the estates level I'd guess a little
    below 85 points.

    Darting wines are rather more low-priced than these of Adam by the way (over
    50% lower, I see from lists - the price of the 2005 Huxelrebe TBA was
    21EUR - ridiculously low for a 90 point wine...)

    fwiw, Anders



  4. #4
    Mark Lipton Guest

    Default Re: TN: the Canon canon (1952-2006)

    Fascinating notes, Dale. Congrats on assembling just a large vertical.
    Now I know why you've been buying lots of Canon at auction in recent
    years! ;-)

    Mark Lipton

    --
    alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.cwdjr.net

  5. #5
    Godzilla Guest

    Default Re: TN: the Canon canon (1952-2006)

    On Tue, 04 May 2010 00:11:04 -0400, Mark Lipton wrote:

    > Fascinating notes, Dale. Congrats on assembling just a large vertical.
    > Now I know why you've been buying lots of Canon at auction in recent
    > years! ;-)
    >
    > Mark Lipton


    I used to use my Nikon all of the time, but when the digital age took
    over, I switched to Canon. ;-)

    Godzilla

  6. #6
    DaleW Guest

    Default Re: The Germans, was TN: the Canon canon (1952-2006)

    On May 3, 11:49*am, "Anders Tørneskog" <sredna.goksen...@i2c.ten>
    wrote:
    > "DaleW" <Dwmi...@aol.com> skrev i meldingnews:[email protected]...
    >
    > > There were 2 wines to finish

    >
    > > 2001 Darting Durkheimer Nonnengarten Rieslaner Auslese
    > > 2008 AJ Adam Riesling Spatlese (Mosel)

    >
    > I've generally found that the pairing of a rich Auslese to a young Spätlese
    > is almost always to the disadvantage of the latter... :-)
    > Adam, a small Riesling-only estate and a newcomer (since 2000), *is well
    > respected and this Spätlese was classified as "Excellent" last year, i.e. at
    > 85+ points, with a note of "needs more time" and a drinking window of
    > 2010-2015
    > Darting, over 5 times bigger and with a great variety in grapes and
    > products, holds a somewhat lower level in general - I have no notes on this
    > wine, but based on other vintages and the estates level I'd guess a little
    > below 85 points.
    >
    > Darting wines are rather more low-priced than these of Adam by the way (over
    > 50% lower, I see from lists - the price of the 2005 Huxelrebe TBA was
    > 21EUR - ridiculously low for a 90 point wine...)
    >
    > fwiw, Anders


    I don't think of Darting as among my favorites, but they are generally
    good quality for the low price. This is probably my favorite Darting
    I;ve had (think it was $16-20 bucks on release). Realize pairing
    wasn't ideal, but this was brought by a participant (Salil, used to
    post here) who wanted me to try. Probably should have done at
    beginning, but had already started Champagne.

  7. #7
    DaleW Guest

    Default Re: TN: the Canon canon (1952-2006)

    On May 4, 12:11*am, Mark Lipton <not...@eudrup.ude> wrote:
    > Fascinating notes, Dale. *Congrats on assembling just a large vertical.
    > *Now I know why you've been buying lots of Canon at auction in recent
    > years! ;-)
    >
    > Mark Lipton
    >
    > --
    > alt.food.wine FAQ: *http://winefaq.cwdjr.net


    Some of wines were mine, but everyone but one late addition furnished
    at least 1 bottle. Luckily the 82 was great (I had my bottle as
    backup).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32