1958 Chateau Latour, Pauillac, France

Description

• 10/27/2024 – TheThirstyArab wrote:91 Points

  Location Consumed: Protege Restaurant, Palo Alto
  Bottle Provenance: From own cellar, previously bought from Saulsbury Wine Store in London

  Tasting Notes:

  Having learnt from previous experience, decided to have the wine decanted in advance by the sommelier team. By the time my two dining partners had arrived at the restaurant, the wine had already been open for 90 minutes. Cork was in a similar position to the previous opening, with the added observation that this bottle had a lot more sediment.

  First sip was taken after two hours of decanting. The colour was a muddy clay red, unlike the first bottle, which had more deep red tones. The nose was open for business but utterly bizarre. The primary smell could only be described as botrytis, with a secondary note of leather (in stark contrast to last review) and no tertiary note. Drank the wine, and I was initially certain that this was way past its best – muted flavour, total absence of tannins and minimal fruit.

  The decision was made to wait the full 4 hours to see whether this could be salvaged. Colour improved, wine developed a light finish of spice, and the leather note became more pronounced on the palate. Tannins did not reappear, and fruit notes were a muddle of forest berries. Acidic balance was also off-kilter.

  Were this bottle to be taken at face value, it would be scored a 90-91. However, colour, relative mutedness of palate profile, and the slightly thinner mouthfeel suggested this might have been a flawed bottle. The joy and curse of drinking old vintages.

  PS. Upon further reflection, I decided to chalk this up to variation instead of a defective bottle. Therefore, score given that reflected experience.

  9/20/2024 – TheThirstyArab Likes this wine:94 Points

  Location Consumed: Willow Restaurant, Singapore
  Bottle Provenance: From own cellar, previously bought from Saulsbury Wine Store in London

  Tasting Notes:

  Initial observations from bottle opening are worth making, given the age of the wine. Got lucky with the bottle level, which was top shoulder even after all this time. Cork was soaked, possibly the product of a pair of flights in undeniably suboptimal conditions. The capsule and the top of the cork were coated with a fine white powder, which I am attributing to light capsule corrosion instead of tartaric acid.

  The initial sampling of wine led to some worries. Nose of the wine was almost nonexistent, the texture was very light (bordering on thin) and one really had to go fishing for pencil lead in order to find it. Lack of tannins was perceptible as well. Sommelier and I both agreed on gentle approach to decanting.

  The first proper glass taken after one hour, and the wine can only be described as revived. Nose evolved to a classic style Bordeaux – cedar wood and dark fruits at the fore, with a background of pencil shavings. Texture was noticeably improved, the win was no longer drinking thin, and the wine was exhibiting a finish (even if, at this stage, it was not noteworthy).

  Finally managed to start drinking the bottle properly after 2 and a half hours. Bouquet was now fully available, got the blueberry characteristic, though I simply could not find some of the leather notes that others have remarked upon. Flavour-wise, finally managed to get some black forest and hidden spices. Finish was as good as it was going to get, and fruit was managing to linger for a short period.

  Final remarks are that this bottle would have probably benefitted from even more decanting. It was drinking at its best after approximately four hours, so it might not be the best wine to bring to a restaurant. The nose reminded me of how great this wine was once, but the flavours were still enjoyable. Slightly past its best, but the fact there is fruit still there after so much time (in an OK vintage known for its lightness) is a testament to Latour’s process.

  12/4/2021 – Ravi Deshpande Likes this wine:92 Points

  Slight bottle stink which blew off quickly. Cork crusty with fine crystals (tartrate, I assume but never seen them on the top of the cork).

  Well balanced, faint fruit, still has good tannic structure. A little musky tertiary development but still solidly secondary. I understand this vintage was noted for being lighter as a result of replanting due to previous frosts (thanks @Snizzy).

  Enjoyable for sure, but I guess when you drink a first growth of that age you have all kinds of expectations.