Pierre-Jacques Druet Bourgueil Grand Mont 1996: Rather a fading hue here, with more than a tinge of maturity too. Aromatically it has a rather old-school style, showing elements of burnt fruit, tinged with notes of green pepper rubbed over brighter blackcurrant notes. There is rather a substantial feel to it at the start, with just a touch of oiliness to the texture but there is a good depth of substance to it, although the flavour profile matches the aromatic character found on the nose. It holds up very well through the middle of the palate, but shows a more diffuse, sour-fruit style towards the end, where it feels long and sappy. I have to admit I'm not enamoured by this wine's rather sour and oily character. I can only hope that complexity and a firmer, tauter presence comes with time in the cellar. It will be interesting to see, but I'm not holding my breath. 14/20

Château Haut-Bailly (Pessac-Léognan) 1996: Great colour, showing maturity, but still in a dense, richly pigmented character. The nose is an absolute classic, iron-bound earth-tinged fruit, with a little roasted edge, autumnal undergrowth and tea leaves. It doesn't quite have the purity of the bottle I tasted at the château last year, and it has a rather more plump, full feel to it rather than the sweet brightness and pencil lead I noted then, but this is still aromatically very attractive and classically-styled. Bold and full, coolly-styled, with tea leaf and robust, earthy-mature fruit on the palate, rich in substance, but balanced and fresh. Typical maturing Graves, but still with a few robust traces of youth here; approachable now with a decant, but certainly still on the way up. A somewhat peppery finish. The tannins seem very harmoniously composed, the substance of the wine a little soft, nice acidity, just a little bit firm towards the end of the palate. Moderate length at best. Very attractive overall, with plenty of potential. 18/20

Domaine de Chevalier (Pessac-Léognan) 1996: A good colour here, not immediately very dense, but with a very promising maturity out towards the rim. Aromatically this is complex and showing lovely tertiary notes very typical of the Graves terroir, with hints of decay the first indication of this. Re-examination brings stronger suggestions, of an earthy and leafy undergrowth, invigorated with notes of dark, aromatic coffee grounds and even a roasted, toasty seam of fruit - which sounds more primary than tertiary but it doesn't actually feel that way on the nose. Very gentle and relaxed start on the palate, showing quite a firm composition that suggests this is still quite some way from really being ready. It has a rather modest presence through the middle of the palate, showing some bitter tobacco leaf nuances alongside a very stern layer of mature fruit. Some structure showing on the finish too, but also a little more texture here as well. With more time both elements build - it shows a little more welcoming flesh, but also more grip and bitter, savoury elements. Doesn't quite hold to the promise it suggested when tasted six years ago, but this still has more to give yet I think. 16.5/20

Château Cantemerle (Haut-Médoc) 1996: It's only fair that I immediately make clear that I tasted this wine non-blind, and that I have a certain soft spot for this wine, having bought a case many years ago now, at a time when I was much more used to buying the odd bottle here or there. This has a dark and mature hue, and the nose is similarly mature, with elements of roasted meat, violets, gravel and yet still, surprisingly, there are still hints of damson and blackcurrant. There is also a very wild and gamey edge to it, but it is subtle, and it is certainly the brighter, perfumed, seductively aged notes that dominate. The palate has remarkable energy considering its age, a fleshy weight at the start, a little touch of creamy cassis texture in the middle, and bright acidity and ripe, broad and velvety tannins too. Absolutely delicious, long and spicy. This still has years and years ahead of it. It is a testament to the ageing curve of Bordeaux, even from the 'lesser' classed growths. 17/20

Château d'Angludet (Margaux) 1996: About four years since I last opened a bottle of this, and I'm not half-way through the case yet. And despite the inroads I have made this, to my palate, still isn't quite ready; it's clearly false to automatically write off the wines of 'cru bourgeois' properties as being lesser affairs that must be drunk up early. This has a dark hue in the glass, with a matt rather than a glossy appearance, and little evidence of age in terms of its tone. The nose shows fruit at first, blackcurrants with a sooty tannic edge, with a dried, curranty seam running over the top given a little time. The palate starts off very lean, but give it a couple of hours in a decanter and it starts to develop some breadth. It never really shows any fat, just a well-judged texture with a savoury backbone and, underneath all this, quite a sharp structure still, the fine-grained tannins now having resolved considerably, but there is still a quite direct acidity giving it all a huge lift in the midpalate and keeping it bright and fresh, although with a sharp-sooty feel rather than anything more elegant. Certainly much of the austerity has faded in the last four years, and I could drink this now with pleasure. But it is still on the way up, for sure. 16.5/20

Château du Tertre (Margaux) 1996: This takes three hours to really open up, but it is worth the wait. In the glass this wine still has plenty of red pigment and a nice depth of colour, so there is certainly no great suggestion of age here. The nose is evolved, although it shows only early secondary development, nothing advanced or involved. There is even some really bright blackcurrant fruit behind it all still, a touch of cranberry too, although these fruits are not the most prominent aromas, as fresh scents of pencil lead, cedar, bay leaf and a little iron filing come to the fore. Lively flesh on the palate, not fat or modern but with enough flesh to fill out in the mouth, supported by plenty of savoury structural components, slightly bitter tannins which I like, and a lovely, fresh, stony structure underneath the weight of the wine. Overall this is very classically defined, pithy, and just at the start - for my palate - of its drinking window. It has decades ahead of it yet, though, as evinced by its tannin-infused and subtly fading finish. Very good indeed. 17.5/20

Château Gloria (St Julien) 1996: It is about six years since I last took a look at this wine, so it's about time I revisited it. It still has a huge amount of pigment, with a dark and matt hue, deep at the core with a maturing rim, but still with a dusty oxblood hue rather than anything more advanced. The nose is expressive and confident, with little nuances of blackcurrants and other dark fruits with a roasted tinge, an iron-filing firmness, and a lightly gamey, mushroomy layer on top. The palate is full and shows a superficial layer of suppleness, although underneath there is a firm, spicy, peppery, slightly stemmy structure which keeps the palate upright, bright and grippy, and although it does fade a little from this initial position. Stylish, quite cool in its presence, the tannins ripe but slightly sooty and well formed. A good finish, long and confident and savoury. A very good wine, lightly bitter at the end, and magnificent value. 17/20

Château Lagrange (St Julien) 1996: Definitely some development here, although it is over five years since I last - experimentally - opened one of these. Certainly all those primary aromas of coffee, caramel and other oak-related characteristics have long gone. The colour still has a claretty hue although with a dusty, mahogany tinge to it as well now. And the nose is much more secondary, showing notes of roasted fruits, gamey and bloody beef and highly aromatic hints of juniper berry and bay leaf. Rather light at the start on the palate, although there is a very restrained substance and tangible texture to the wine running through the middle of the palate, but nothing of the fleshy style that I think typifies more 'modern' Bordeaux. Defined, fresh, with a lovely roasted black berry fruit character here underpinning the more complex aromatics that were found on the nose. Plenty of firm and sappy tannin in the finish although nothing out of balance, so this seems approachable now, although I am sure there is more to come here - for my palate at least. But there is no need to shy away from opening one now, if you have more than a couple of bottles. 17.5/20

Château Talbot (St Julien) 1996: This wine has a deep and concentrated hue in the glass, with little sign of maturity against the dark backdrop. The nose starts off with firm elements that are clearly related to Brett, all animally and horsey, but then with more time in the glass some youthful claret characteristics come through, showing blackcurrant skins, and a violetty perfume. It is still dark and slightly earthy, but with a clearly defined flavour profile which includes some pleasingly lifted and quite aromatic tones. The palate shows the remarkable potential of the vintage on the left bank, because it is just full of substance, flesh, ripe tannin, tangible extract, flavour and acidity. There is a superb wine here, so stacked full of promise and yet also approachable thanks to the velvety ripeness of what tannins remain, and all that fruit substance. It has a savoury edge, with a bright, and acid-tinged fruit substance in the finish. Most impressive of all is the great presence it has, and thankfully there is so much going on here that the Bretty elements fade into the background with time, and for me certainly did not spoil the experience. I do think I may have scored a little higher if it were a little less equine at the start though. 17.5/20

Château Potensac (Médoc) 1996: A very dark, mature, but still a remarkably rich, claretty hue here. The nose stats off with a tinge of toffee, and a soft-focus style, but it tightens up nicely with a couple of hours in the decanter, It maintains a very taut and rather lean style though, showing stony black fruit, lightly perfumed, more so with time, with more intensity later. A firm and stony palate on entry, and this is maintained through the midpalate, with lots of dry tannin here, grippy with plenty of structure, the body of the wine fairly lean, giving it a rather bruising feel overall. An appealing austerity and reserve to the structure, with slightly more welcoming substance towards the end of the palate, giving a little flesh to the wine. A little substance and smoke here, but also with that firm, tight, bitter character. I'm not sure this has moved on much from my last tasting, and in fact seems a touch more disjointed. Time to drink up? For you, quite probably. But I've one bottle left, and I will hang on and see what happens to it. 16/20

Château Haut Batailley (Pauillac) 1996: Still a very dark hue. The nose is reserved but gently aromatic, secondary in style but firm rather than soft or evolved. There are aromatic elements redolent of tea leaves, and firm and leathery fruit, but this is tightly bound up and solid rather than anything more lifted or finessed. It gives a sense of dark, intense, concentration. It opens out with time, but remains dark and direct with a smoky edge. The texture is supple with a firm weight, with a rounded, polished, lightly creamed feel to it, over a good structure but with little real sense of integration. The tannins give a grip to the core of the wine although they remain very well covered, and the acidity seems finely balanced too. It is broad and dry but fleshy rather than dusty. Long and supple, with an approachable style, a fine texture with a lovely bite at the end, and overall a wine that is definitely ready to go. What it really lacks is great complexity or interest, but there are certainly some positives here. 16.5/20

Château Poujeaux (Moulis) 1996: A lovely hue here, dark but with savoury maturing tones coming in at the edges. The nose is just a stunner; early on after decanting it displays a rather linear, stony, upright character, just tinged with a little violet perfume, but within an hour or so it really opens up giving a real blast of crushed violet petals on the nose, still with a suggestion of sweet blackcurrant fruit in the background, but also with more organic tones, subtle nuances of mushroom, black tea and spiced black beans. But above all it is the solid composition that the aromas suggest that is most convincing, and this impression seems to be correct on the palate, which shows a very cool, detached, linear frame at first, and it maintains this through the midpalate even though it does reveal, from time to time, suggestions of the violet perfume seen on the nose. The structure begins to emerge as well, there being ripe but peppery tannins over the top of the wine, not detracting from the pleasure at all, but definitely saying that this wine has a long life ahead of it yet. Slightly sour, acid-tinged fruit in the finish, but this only serves to cleanse the palate right at the end, keeping the finish fresh and long. A hugely convincing wine, a real pleasure now and to come, and certainly of classed growth quality. 17/20

Château Larmande (St Emilion) 1996: A vintage that excelled on the left bank, but never achieved the same lofty heights on the right side of the Gironde, so I have only a few examples. This is one that I haven't tasted before. It has a good colour in the glass, showing a dusty maturity but still with many red tones running through the wine. The nose is the most enticing aspect of the wine, giving from time to time fleeting notes of coffee and iron, and behind this there lies a layer of black olives, and beneath that a rather full and sweet maturing fruit character. It certainly seems well composed, although the fruit does wander from a mature into a slightly more stewed character with time. Nicely textured at first on the palate, but then through the middle it relaxes and thins out, showing a more stretched, leaner character, with a slightly bitter-crunchy edge. It has rather an empty and slightly bitter feel to it here and towards the end. Nicely resolved tannin, giving a soft backbone, and certainly fresh acidity. But just a touch of burnt fruit too. A wine that reflects the difficulties of the vintage for the right bank. 14.5/20

Domaine des Perdrix Nuits-St-Georges 1er Cru Aux Perdrix 1996: A lone red Burgundy in this tasting; and what a shame it is solitary, because it pushes all the right buttons. Certainly a mature appearance in the glass, all red-toned but cut through with matt, oxblood hues. The nose is where the relaxation begins, the first impression soft, easy and pleasing, with mature and yet somehow crunchy fruit sitting completely at ease with scents of undergrowth, liquorice and game. There is a perfumed, bright character here, and yet I sense underneath it that there is also substance, a touch of meat to the wine, which I find reassuring. This is no featherweight. On the palate, good substance to it, engendering a broad, palate-covering character, with plenty of lift to keep it moving along, including a little volatility it has to be said, but not at the level I would find distracting. Slightly sour in the finish as a result, with some acidic fruits backing up the spicy, lightly meaty flavours. A fine effort which has done well in the cellar, still with plenty of flesh and length. 17/20

Chapoutier Hermitage Monier de la Sizeranne 1996: An attractive hue, dusty but certainly not mature, claretty with a tinge of oxblood, and a pale rim. The nose has none of the off-putting chemical notes found last time, and given appropriate time in the decanter it shows a gently expressive character, well reined in, with a very savoury flavour, with a little woody element in the background. There is none of the blackberry-bramble notes I enjoyed previously, this is all more tightly packed now, with a little game to it. There is a nice edge to it too, an unpretentious aromatic definition. The palate is supple and polished, nicely structured behind the substance, fresh too. Quite rounded and mouth-filling, with a gently chalky backbone of tannins and nicely balanced acidity. It all comes across as well judged, and although not exploding with flavour it certainly has an appealing presence in the mouth. Good grippy length with bite; this will go some time in the cellar yet. Not a patch on so many other Chapoutier wines I have tasted this year though; it really does seem to me that the négoce wines really are several steps below the wines from Chapoutier's own vineyards. 16/20

Jaboulet Hermitage La Chapelle 1996: This wine needed a couple of hours in the decanter before it really began to show its best, and seemed to improve all evening - maybe a 4-6 hour decant would serve it better. The nose eventually reveals a savoury character, with slightly high-toned fruit intertwined with notes of roasted meats, but all very bright and well-framed. And there's a fine, earthy, animally edge to it as well. Savoury and well-formed on entry, then showing a more stony edge through the middle, but always with that savoury, gamey edge all around it. A rather shiny acid backbone here, whereas the tannins seem to have sunk very well into the body of the wine. Medium-bodied, fresh, bright, with a crunchy berry fruit edge to it although these primary characteristics have very much faded now. A crisply defined finish, with a bright and vibrant length. Lots of acidity here, and then showing elements of cigar, black pepper and black olive. A warm and generous style gradually reveals itself despite that bright, savoury, sappy structure. This is a delicious wine which still has piles of potential; happily I will be able to explore that in the future with subsequent bottles. 18/20

Thierry Allemand Cornas Chaillot 1996: A dark hue, with plenty of red pigment, only early maturity. There has been plenty of development here; it is five years since I last opened a bottle. Aromatically it starts off rather animally and gamey, but these characters dissipate and the wine becomes much less expressive very quickly. And then, with about an hour and a half exposure to air it really opens out, showing smoky dark fruits with a lifted, perfumed edge. nuanced with little notes of bacon, green peppercorn and sage here too. All the unusual brothy, cabbagey and silage-like aromas first noted have gone (phew!). A lovely substance at the start, showing good grip through the middle, with a supple, fresh, bright texture. Darkly formed, concentrated but fresh, lively and with a savoury edge to the fruit. Full, supply textured but with substance beneath, nicely balanced and grippy, with a touch of tomato leaf in the middle and finish. A good wine to my palate, although admittedly there are many greener tones here that other drinkers might find displeasing. 16.5/20

Domaine de Baruel (VdP des Cévennes) 1996: Dark, dense but shimmering in the glass, certainly an appealing hue, although nothing like what the nose has to offer. Aromatically it kicks off with a rich, animally trace, which opens out into a broader, richer, savoury and gamey character. There is more to it than that though, as there is a perfumed edge to the fruit, all pansies and violets with a crystalline edge. On the palate it shows a fine substance, textured crystalline fruit, with a rich, savoury, gamey edge with notes reminiscent of spicy beef stock alongside the bright fruit. The peppery backbone is still here, a lighter more crunchy showing from the tannins in the background and a bright, fresh acidity right through to the finish. Definitely more focused than my last tasting, sappy, savoury and fairly long too. There is some Brett influencing the flavour profile here, but it sits well within the rest of the wine, and overall I think this really very attractive. The main downside is a rather coarse feel to the acids, perhaps related to that Brett. But it's a minor point for me. 16.5/20

Mas de Daumas Gassac (Vin de Pays de l'Herault) 1996: Quite a dark core here, and a red, dusty fading rim. The nose is certainly complex and displaying signs of maturity, not all of them greatly reassuring I have to say. There are notes of roasted meat and game early on, but these richer nuances soon give way to a slightly more shrill and high-pitched vein, as the wine opens up to reveal notes of oyster shell and cranberry alongside the tobacco, black olive and dry, woody fruits. I usually associate calcareous, crushed-shell notes such as these in red wines with more aged, higher-acid vintages, although the sample size on which I base this association is small I suppose. It does have to be said, there is also a little note of decay behind it all, rotting and ever-so-slightly fecal. Yes, there is Brett here, but thankfully it seems to be low-level. As the flesh of this wine has faded a little - it is five years since my last bottle, although the Brett may also be influencing the feel of this wine in the mouth - the acidity has become rather more prominent on the palate, and although there is still a decent, fleshy substance here there are also sharp red fruits, redcurrant, cranberry and even citrus tones, along with largely resolved tannins which only show their presence, slightly bitter, in the finish. Judging by the structure, I suspect this is near-ready, although in terms of flavour this bottle may be atypical; it has nothing like the clean and muscular character the last one promised. 16?/20

Marchesi di Grésy Barbaresco Martinenga 1996: Quite a good depth of colour here, still very fresh and rich, dark at the core with a dusty hue of early maturity at the rim. The fruit on the nose has a rather warm and soft focus feel to it at first, with a firmer slightly stewed edge coming in from behind. Alongside there are more subtle elements, a dry and woody character along with touches of coffee and violets. The palate is firm and substantial, with very bright high-toned nuances and through the middle of the palate there is also an increasingly forceful acidity. This sits with some firm, sappy, chalk-tinged fruit, well structured with good substance too. Overall this is a very firm and substantial style of wine. There are elements here that appeal, and potential for the future, but in all honesty I have never really found the pleasure that I would like to have found in these Grésy wines. Having said that, there is an appealing texture and tangible substance here which I rather like, and the promise of development with more time too. 15.5/20

Quinta do Vesuvio Vintage Port 1996: This is dark and nicely scented, with black fruits on the nose, especially plum, more than matched by a sweetly spiced sandalwood aroma. It is spirity too, but not in too dominant a fashion. The palate is beautifully composed, sweet and svelte at first, and it maintains this composure through the middle, despite slowly revealing more strength and structure from within its core. Although it maintains a very virile, straight and fleshy substance, this weight is more than balanced out by the tannic backbone and firm acidity of the wine. This has a lovely composition, the heat of the spirit only coming through in the very finish. Still youthful, but oh-so enjoyable! Overall this is long and sweet, not a complex wine it has to be said (at least not yet), this is one that is more soft and spicy in character, but there is still good substance and style here. 16.5/20

Chateau Musar (Bekaa Valley) 1996: A remarkably pale hue even for Musar, almost rosé as it is poured, a deeper red but still pale in the glass. The appearance might be low-key, but aromatically this is classic Musar, full of sweet and leathery spices, roasted gamey meat and dense, richly baked fruits. Fairly textured on the palate, with that trademark oily substance, backed up by a forceful layer of spice, and vibrant acidity. The palate is broad and, provided the wine is given time, it has a full and rich presence on the palate, far more than I seem to recall for this vintage of Musar. The fruits are baked, with a rich almost chocolatey yet sour edge thanks to the acid. Fascinating wine. I don't buy much (any) Musar these days, but this bottle proves this iconic wine can still provide plenty of interest - even in a 'lesser' vintage. 16/20

Penfolds Bin 407 Cabernet Sauvignon (SA) 1996: It is perhaps five years since I last tasted this wine; looking back at my note I rather enjoyed it. There has certainly been some evolution since then though. A massive amount of sediment first - the bottle was thickly coated inside. The colour now sings of maturity, although it retains a lot of deep red pigment at the core. The nose has some very mature fruit at first, full of notes of liquorice, iodine and with a rusty-earthy note in the background. Very nicely proportioned on the palate, composed at the start, with gentle flesh and a nice fresh acidity underpinning the meat of the wine. Remarkably full and velvety in terms of texture, a hangover from the extreme ripeness of the fruit I guess. There is a little tannin here still, but it is ripe and velvety, but the palate still has a remarkable grip. I realise that these days I focus on Bordeaux and the Loire, but this style - when done well - certainly still holds some appeal. This is very good, and a testament to the quality of even the middle-range offerings from Penfolds 15 years ago. 17/20

Penfolds Bin 389 Cabernet Sauvignon Shiraz (SA) 1996: A dark core to this wine, with a fading rim, although there is still a vibrant claretty hue close to the edge. Aromatically it takes at least a couple of hours to really open up, and as it does it shows the maturity of the Cabernet Sauvignon that seems to dominate at first, with elements of perfumed, maturing blackcurranty fruit. But this soon gives way to a more intense feel, the fruit characterised by nuances of balsamic and a little baked character to it as well. There are also little elements of rubber and warm stones. A really full but bright substance on the palate, grippy and structured, with a fairly biting substance. A little hint of oxidation here and there, although this never really seems to come through, and there are still some unresolved rather chewy-chocolatey tannins. Long and substantial. Not delivering the same elegant perfume as the Bin 407 though. 15.5/20

Cullen Cabernet Sauvignon Merlot (Margaret River) 1996: A dark and concentrated hue. There are some appealing elements of maturity, scents of violets, warm stones, rather soft and diffuse, with some squashed fruit, Nevertheless despite this slight lack of aromatic focus there is certainly a very expressive character here. Alongside the perfumed fruit there is a smoky, sooty and a rusty iron filing note which holds some appeal. The palate kicks off with a cream-tinged texture, before more fresh and crisp berry fruit comes in. There is also a slightly disparate acidity here as well, sitting quite distant from the substance and texture of the wine. It has a very distinct, green apple character at first, although with time the overall integration seems much more appropriate. There are some really appealing elements here - within the aromas certainly - but the structure here seems quite false, and the fruit seems at once jammy, and yet also with a rather green tinge at the same time. I just adored this wine six years ago; it doesn't seem to have held up well. This bottle may not be typical, although I see no particular faults here. 16/20