|
Wine: d'Armailhac -
Vintage:
1999
Region: France - Bordeaux - Pauillac
Varietal: Bordeaux Blend (Red)
|
|
| The nose is light, with hints of black cherries. There are more black cherries and blackberries in the mouth. The wine is strong in the front palate, rather weak in the mid palate, but has a decent finish. There is some bitter oak in the D'Armailhac and the tannins are still fairly aggressive. |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
| Notes of graphite in the nose, only modest evolution in the bouquet over 40 hours. Medium bodied by the appellation's standards. Tannins are present but not tough at all. Decanting helps, but don't fool yourself into thinking it's a real ager. It's a tad better than the 97 and the oak seems to be calmed down at this point. The finish is decent enough, 15 seconds. This is a good functional wine, best served by itself. I only bought two [they were great bargains at release] but don't plan on really saving the other. I agree with 87 pts. |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
| This wine has been reviewed many times before but I thought I would throw my two cents in. I ate at Maggianos Little Italy last night with my family. So of course I brought a bottle of Bordeaux. If only this wine had tasted as it smelled. Classic Pauillac nose but did not deliver on the pallate. Much like the other 99s I have tried, this was a little diluted although it was less noticable than the 99 GPL I had. I also found the acidity level to be a little high in this wine. The bottom line is it was a nice wine that if it had a little more concentration would have been a lot more enjoyable. |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
| Decanted three hours before dinner. The D'Armailhac cork was pink and there was no sediment. The d'Armailhac was a well mannered gentleman in character much like the little fellow on the label--the cassis is there. Though not unpleasantly acidic, it is more acidic than '98 Carmes Haut Brion (had the previous night), less tannic and smaller scaled. It was delightful with roti of pork au lait but lacked the stuffing of the Carmes. I don't think d'Armailhac will develop much more. A good buy at $20 each, but not a GREAT buy. |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
| Enjoyed this with a Delmonico steak at the Capital Grill in Boston, with a couple of Tufts Alums Class of 1993. A good to very good wine, but I've found that most of the 1999's I've tasted are all still unresolved (disjointed), and haven't really come together yet. We had the bottle decanted, which I highly recommend for such a young Pauillac. Great color, not as much oak as I expected, cassis/creme de cassis, a little red raspberry. 88-89+ points. Not as tasty as the 1995 D'Armailhac. I'd wait another year or two before opening a bottle. |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
| This was opened for five hours, then decanted for an hour before drinking. On first taste it has a strong burnt wood nose with a consistent taste. Quite bitter. With time, sweet red cherry flavors come out. Later there is an aroma of vanilla coffee beans. Our chemist son, stefanJr, says "maltol", whatever that is. stefan 87. stefanJr 87. Lucie 87. T 86. |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
| We didn't decant the 99 d'Armailhac, just popped the cork and poured. The wine showed a dark purple color and an inital nose of grilled meats and bell peppers. With time the aromas softened towards dark berry fruit and smoke. In the mouth the wine was medium bodied and balanced well between acidity, dusty tannins, a solid core of ripe fruit, and some judicious oak notes. The finish was medium, this wine is not a blockbuster, but it is a very well made wine that's already pleasing to drink. I have 11 left now, and I suspect that although the wine will probably last and evolve over the next 8 to 10 years, mine will all be gone long before then. Delicious! |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
| At a wine bar, this was poured from a bottle that was 2/3 gone, so I'm assuming it had probably been opened at least a day ago. The wine was a medium dark purple color, slightly fading at the rim. I got very little on the nose at the beginning, or even as the wine sat in the glass. What I did get was a soft ripe fruitiness like cooked prunes. I also got a bit of a vegetal aroma like stewed tomatoes. There was a bit of earthiness underlying this. The taste certainly provided more than the nose. I picked up primarily fruit flavors, cherry and blackberry, without much else that I could identify. It had a fair amount of acidity that tingled the tongue for 10-15 seconds after swallowing. The tannins were moderate, more subdued than I would have expected for a young wine. I thought the acidity was a bit too much for the rest of the wine, causing it to be a bit out of balance. It was enjoyable, but I would not give it more than 86-87 points based on my experience. A few weeks ago I had the 1997 vintage. At this point in time, it is more enjoyable than the 1999. Although I'm sure the 1999 may round out over the next 2-3 years, I do not think it has the stuff to improve much after that. |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
| Opened 10am, decanted 5pm, drank 6pm. Upon opening there was almost no bouquet, but when we drank it there was a huge fruity bqt. Our friend suggested this was pomegranate and we all immediately agreed after she suggested this. 10+ seconds on the finish with good acid and tannins, but not too much for such a young wine. After the first glass we could not have picked this as a bdx - it was more reminscent of the 97 CA cabs we've had. So we switched to a '96 Grand Puy Ducasse. (The GPD was completely closed down and dumb right now, by the way.) We went back to the WOM at 8pm - now this is a pauillac. We get some oak, herbs and pencil lead in the bqt and even some chocolate. We rate this an 89. |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
| Initially very tight out of the bottle this wine had opened beautifully after an hour in the decanter. It was showing so well after breathing that I think it wont need much more bottle age at all before its ready for regular consumption. Good dark ruby and a nose of typical Pauillac cabernet notably some lead pencil and black berries, the wine was medium bodied and a very pleasant finish. The only distressing thing about the wine was that by 4 hours after opening it was starting to taste rather flabby and bland. Perhaps this wine would be better consumed younger, or perhaps it'll close down in a few years. For now I think I'll score it 89+ with some concern about its long term devlopment. Even so its a good value wine and I'm glad I have more. I'll just have to watch how it evolves as I drink through the rest of my case. |
| Report Post |
|
|
|
We opened this and starting drinking immediately out of the bottle. Very harsh and woody on the first glass, but after that started to open up with a great berry nose. By hour 3, it had become the "Pauillac fruit bomb" that Parker describes.
A great value for a nice Pauillac. ($34 in Boston area). |
| Report Post |
|
Note! Use the "Report Post" link in each review to notify the administrator of duplicate or incorrect TN's to be corrected.
|
