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. — a year ago

Jean-Francois Pelletier

9.1

Good color. Muted nose at first but with a short decant, it started to show the dark fruit and leather notes that are typical of a good aged Bordeaux blend. Full body with a great balance. Long finish. — 10 years ago

with Frankie

Mandy Capehart

9.1

Excellent stand alone red! — 12 years ago

Conrad Green

9.7

A gorgeous entrancing nose. Roses and plum, floral notes. Quite subtle and polished. Glossy. Really delicious. Classy stuff. — a year ago

with Walker and David

Traci

9.2

💪👍 Big, bold cab. Nice. — 2 years ago

Alexander Vadas

9.2

Good structure and body - nose a little too ripe for me — 11 years ago

with Michael and Stephen

Gen

9.7

Very good for CA! — 13 years ago

Jay Kline

9.7

Presented double-blind. The wine appears straw in color with medium viscosity and, apparently, there lots of tiny bubbles so there are signs of gas, LOL. On the nose, the wine is developing with heady notes of ripe orchard fruit, red forest berries, marzipan, lemon curd, fresh brioche. On the palate, the wine is dry with high acidity. Confirming the notes from the nose. The finish lasts for an eternity. The texture is ever so creamy. Wow…well, I was drinking something special. Had to be Champagne. Maybe vintage? Maybe a tête de cuvée? The style was similar to Krug. Called Champagne from a producer like Krug. OMG…the 1996 Vintage Brut?! Sheesh…someone was feeling generous! Admitted, I don’t often get to drink vintage Krug (for many hundreds of reasons!) so my experience is obviously limited. However, there’s clearly no question in this being true to house style and, now that I know the vintage, this is showing why 1996 is so special. As others have noted, this is fresher than the 1995 I had some months ago (though, that was very special too) and had greater acid. I would like to think this provides a crystal ball for the 2008 vintage that is sure to follow a similar trajectory. Drinking very fine indeed, right now and should continue to do so through 2046…depending on how you like to drink your Champagne. — a year ago

Peter Collins

9.4

Really good. A little young but still good on the nose and light finish at the same time. Not incredibly complex but still intriguing. I could drink a LOT of this often. — 6 years ago

Alex in NYC

8.9

Barnyard, mulch on nose, pretty funky, sour cherry, blackberry, raisin, some spice, good, long, grippy finish — 12 years ago