Ericsson

9.4

I love R Lopez de Heredia wines. Still made the way they were made hundred years ago. Wines for old souls who really appreciate timeless art and low intervention. — a month ago

Michael Dierberg

9.8

Tasting with a big fan of Rayas. Better than the 2010 and both bottles were so different than other CDP. This one more Burgundy, the 2010 closer to Bordeaux. Both very elegant. — 4 months ago

with JiaMin

Pinotman /// Andreas

9.0

Plenty of tannins left. 25bucks. Those were the days! 14%| Quite classic. Browne tinge. Needs at least 2-3 hours of air. Quite harsh and astringent. Roses, earthy and dusty, very dry. Hint of truffles. - Not super exciting at first (15min) so wait. Will last another 10 years - but i do worry about the fruit component if you need space in your cellar - i would suggest drink up. I will. Some folks tend to hype these wines i don’t - after all this is their most basic version with a large production volume. Total volume is 500,000 bottles a year at this cooperative. My guess they to make a lot of this one. — 9 months ago

Tom Kobylarz

9.4

Slow ox for 3 hours. Deep ruby, still ruby edges. The pronounced nose was loaded with spices, olives, smoke, smoked meat, anise, clove, peppercorns, mostly tertiary dark red fruits, dried crushed violets. The palate was med+ bodied, medium grain tannin were a tad chewy and grainy, an intense but elegantly persistent palate. A long, spicy finish showed subtle fruit with the tannins showing a touch grainy/chewy and not as integrated here. Still a beauty, though not sure the tannin will resolve at this point. — 10 months ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.4

2001 vintage. Sweet fill. Cork perfect (used a Durand) but more than a bit underwaxed so it was a positively Italian experience during the opening process. I trust those in the know completely understand what the hell imma talking about. Workout! Cork out in one piece and expected amount of sed. Medium body with overtures towards more. Blueberry, tobacco, plum and gravelly, wet earth impressions leading the charge throughout. Grippy tannins providing visible and raised guardrails during. A little editorial...the 2001's were generally emasculated/minimized after the supposed "vintage of the (which one?) century" in 2000. The 2000's have largely failed to deliver the anticipated goods whereas the "meh" 2001's (at vastly reduced prices from the 2000's) are rocking don't bother knocking now. Completely like the guy or girl that was always cute but totally caught fire after high school. A late(r) bloomer and completely underrated. This wine has an easy 20-spot of top-notch drinking ahead. 1.24.26. — 19 days ago

Nathan Renfro

9.4

Always prefer the Howell Mountain, but the Dunn Napa Valley I consider to be a great value, especially at the price these were a few years ago. Great fruit - black and red, minerality, graphite, pencil shavings, black licorice, great structure, nice finish. Solid all around and very nice for a ‘17. — 8 months ago

Doug Powers

9.2

From a Napa vintage that I recall as being so-so, this wine shows the Howell Mountain terroir without the normally harsh tannins that were characteristic of Dunn HM wines in the 1980s. But, honestly, this is really lovely, suave, red fruited, with a medium-long finish, and seems way younger than I expected from a 37-year-old Napa Cabernet!! — 9 months ago

with Jim

Jayna Fontenot

9.8

Smells supe light. Barely there honeysuckle, wisps of green apple. Tiny bubbles, fresh and clean and like if champagne were made of cloud. Delicious, and my first Dom! — 3 months ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.3

1996 vintage. Last tasted 5.8.25 (9.5), 9.29.24 (9.5) and 8.2.24 (9.6). Decanted with some sed and tasted after an hour. Solid cork and fill. This was the worst showing of the last visits with less tannic structure and slightly more richness. Tasted a bit more like their "Au Paradis" offering. Not totally dissuaded from picking up another few bottles for enjoyment in the few 5 years or so tho. Three out of four bottles surveyed were fabulous and this wasn't a total swing and a miss. 07.18.25. — 7 months ago

Jay Kline

9.4

It is customary for the wines of Chateau Musar to be released seven years post-vintage. However, in 2013, the decision was made to hold the vintage back. 2006 was unusual for two reasons. The first, were the cool climatic conditions in the Bekaa; the likes of which had not been seen since the 1950’s. There was a two-week period in winter where the valley was blanketed in snow and mild temperatures remained in effect throughout much of the growing season. The second was much more tragic: 2006 was a war year in Lebanon. On July 12th of that year, Israel and Hezbollah engaged in a bloody conflict that lasted (officially) a little over a month. Sadly, thousands of lives were lost. In 2017, eleven years after harvest, the 2006 vintage was deemed ready for release.

Poured into a decanter about 90min prior to service. The 2006 pours a deep garnet color with a near opaque core; medium+ viscosity with moderate staining of the tears. On the nose, the wine is developing with notes of black cherry, blackberries, black currants, tobacco, horse blanket, leather, some red and purple flowers, dried herbs and Eastern spices. On the palate, the wine is dry with medium+ tannin and medium+ acid. Confirming the notes from the nose. The finish is long and absolutely delicious. A triumph and perfect with lamb chops. Drink now through 2046+.

How Chateau Musar endures to make wines from the Bekaa remain one of the great examples of human grit and determination available in the world of wine. Frankly, it’s a minor miracle this vintage ever made it to the winery. — 9 months ago