Chateau Musar 1995 Concentrated, almost agressive nose, clearly showing VA, redcurrant and plums. More fruit appears after a while in the glass and the VA blows off a bit. Again redcurrant on the palate, earthy notes and tobacco. There seems to be a lot of fruit, but it’s hiding a bit at the moment. Fierce acidity and extraordany concentration. Good and very interesting wine. Apparently it needs more age to bring the fruit out (according to the winery), so let’s try it again in a couple of years!
Chateau Musar 1997 Tried at ProWein, did not make detailed notes. Clearly in the same style as the 1995, although the VA was a little less prominent and there was more dark fruit on the palate, but also again lots of aged notes for a relative young wine. A step above the 1995, I liked it a lot.
-------------- For those in the Middle East: http://muscatdeli.blogspot.com
Posts: 1465 | Location: Muscat, Oman | Registered: Nov 26, 2002
Bought a few bottles of the'97 at Sainsbury's for 13 quid last year in London, Ronnie. Clearly a wine made in a "wild" style that could be hit or miss, but I quite enjoyed the vintage.
RR; I had my last bottle of '95 in Oct. of '05; it was moving between red/brown on the color spectrum but had lots of life. Sweet red fruits, mid-bodied. To your point, the nose at first was not good at all; w/a half-hour of decanting the harshness blew off.
I had a '96 last summer - very Bordeaux-like in appearance and flavor profile, lots of life left. The '97 is available here in Atlanta for around $35; I remember paying $24 for the '94 a few years back in Louisville.
"Actually, it only takes one drink to get me loaded. Trouble is, I can't remember if it's the thirteenth or fourteenth." -- George Burns
Posts: 3624 | Location: Alpharetta, GA | Registered: Nov 17, 2001
I have had the 1995 and 1997 side-by-side recently.
I have to say that most of the people around the table preferred the 1995 by quite a large margin. I have revisited the same two wines a few days later, with consistent notes.
Both need some time in the bottle before they can fully express their potential. Musar typically start to open up after 10 years...
I have also had the 1993 recently. The wine is a lot more complex than the 1997 and is probably equivalent in quality to the 1995, although in a different style. I will allow my remaining two botlles of 1993 3-4 additional years before I open them.
I think I preferred the '95 over the '97, but not by much. The '97 was tasted non-blind at ProWein, but I poured the '95 a few days before blind for Ronnie and several other friends. Taking advice from several TNs I came across, I had double decanted it about 4 hours before serving. It was my only bottle of Musar, but I will be getting more: this was quite a wine. It will be interesting to follow its development over the years.
Posts: 2203 | Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands | Registered: May 08, 2002
I had the '95 a couple years ago, and while it was "unique" I had a hard time connecting with it. The history of the property and what it's been through is interesting though.
So much wine.....so little time!!!
Posts: 6801 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: Jun 20, 2002
Originally posted by dr.darkrichandbold: I had the '95 a couple years ago, and while it was "unique" I had a hard time connecting with it.
Maybe you should try it again. Not only was it probably much too young (although I realize that it might how you taste a lot of wines), but one of the problems with Lebanese wines in general is that there is significant bottle variation, mostly related to the poor quality of corks.
If you still don't like it, try the 1998, it is a bit closer to what we are used to drinking then the typical Musar.
