a rather special champers lunch.

[Ken Gargett]

a friend of a friend heard that i had never tried a particular champagne. only about three magnums a year are ever imported to australia so not easy. and to prove that there are some incredibly nice and generous folk in the world, she arranged a lunch for a couple of us. spectacular food, amazing house, great company, stunning champagnes. a brilliant afternoon. so much fun.

 

and bugger me if these things are not the correct way up in my computer but do you think i can get them that way on this forum!!!! apols. blame rob. 

[JohnS]

Simply wonderful, Ken. Images upright now too! ?

[Ken Gargett]

11 minutes ago, JohnS said:

Simply wonderful, Ken. Images upright now too! ?

thanks John. hugely appreciated. i really did try. 

[Bijan]

Once again a wine I must enjoy vicariously through your posts. Vintage champagne is rarer than hen's teeth here. And it seems a bottle would be more expensive than a box of Siglo III... Maybe someday.

[Ken Gargett]

1 minute ago, Bijan said:

Once again a wine I must enjoy vicariously through your posts. Vintage champagne is rarer than hen's teeth here. And it seems a bottle would be more expensive than a box of Siglo III... Maybe someday.

Bijan, i'm guessing that if you could find a magnum of the Henriot, it would cost between A$1,200 and $1,500. salon has gone into stupid prices. mine was the 99. i have had it for a long time so it would not have cost that much then (a few hundred i guess). winesearcher has the cheapest bottle today in hong kong, just under a grand. the cheapest 1988 is in the States and is about $1,500. but my mate who brought it would have had it for a few years as well. 

three stunning champagnes though. worth every cent (especially when it is not my cents, or at least, not all of them). 

[Bijan]

Thanks Ken. My birthday is coming up and having spent my cigar budget for 2021 and 2022 already, but on the other hand also expecting a very large tax refund soon, maybe I'll try to track something down.

[Ken Gargett]

Just now, Bijan said:

Thanks Ken. My birthday is coming up and having spent my cigar budget for 2021 and 2022 already, but on the other hand also expecting a very large tax refund soon, maybe I'll try to track something down.

you will not regret it! 

[BoliDan]

1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

a friend of a friend heard that i had never tried a particular champagne. only about three magnums a year are ever imported to australia so not easy. and to prove that there are some incredibly nice and generous folk in the world, she arranged a lunch for a couple of us. spectacular food, amazing house, great company, stunning champagnes. a brilliant afternoon. so much fun.

and bugger me if these things are not the correct way up in my computer but do you think i can get them that way on this forum!!!! apols. blame rob. 

Ken, I love your published works. You're a good writer, yet somehow your grammar, punctuation and capitalization, on posts, makes me curious if you hire University students to write the articles that you post.

Kidding aside,that looks like a lovely time. You have spectacular friends.

[Ken Gargett]

1 minute ago, BoliDan said:

Ken, I love your published works. You're a good writer, Somehow your grammar, punctuation and capitalization on posts makes me curious if you hire University students to write articles.

Kidding aside,that looks like a lovely time. You have spectacular friends.

Thanks BD. much appreciated. you obviously have no idea how little writers are paid. if i had to pay them, i'd go backwards! hands up guilty for the capitalisation. fell into a bad habit early days and never got out of it. but i would argue that the grammar and punctuation (caps aside) are usually in order - not perfect but better than most think. but you are far from the first to make the suggestion. i think the lack of caps gives it that feel, that everything is out of whack. 

and yes, i do think i have been very lucky in my friends. i can say that on this forum - rob won't even read something on champagne. 

[MrBirdman]

I want to hear more about that ‘88 Salon @Ken Gargett - has the energetic tension of Le Mesnil remained vibrant after nearly 33 years, or has it more settled into a tertiary maturity? I have to imagine that it’s only just peaked - the Le Mesnil from a classic-style, taught vintage. Thank you for sharing, and please post any additional tasting notes you have!

 

[Ken Gargett]

1 minute ago, MrBirdman said:

I want to hear more about that ‘88 Salon @Ken Gargett - has the energetic tension of Le Mesnil remained vibrant after nearly 33 years, or has it more settled into a tertiary maturity? I have to imagine that it’s only just peaked - the Le Mesnil from a classic, taught vintage. Thank you for sharing, and please post any additional tasting notes you have!

 

my first impression of the 88 was that i was a little surprised at how advanced it was. my first impression of the 99 was i was stunned at how fresh it was. both were glorious wines, as you'd hope. 

but then thinking about the 88, it is 33 years of age. it is entitled to have moved to that tertiary stage. 88 is my all time favourite vintage. just love it. and for me, the closest to it is the recent 2008. 

this was the best 99 from any producer i have ever seen. 

i have done all of these in much more detail for Quill and Pad so perhaps i should not say too much. editors can get a touch miffed, understandably, if you leak your stuff before they can print it. 

[MrBirdman]

24 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

i should not say too much. editors can get a touch miffed, understandably, if you leak your stuff before they can print it. 

Fair enough, I appreciate the preview. I’ve read much more about ‘88 than I’ve tasted, as it was long off the market by the time I reached drinking age. I was privileged to share in an ‘88 Dom - it was nearly a decade ago, and it was sublime.   Dried stone fruits, dried citrus peel, flinty goodness. I’ve come close to picking up some Dom Ruinart ‘88 at auction twice, outbid at my max at the last second both time. TBH, probably for the best considering the considerable bottle variation in old champagne. I think it’s because of their rudimentary understanding of disgorgement until this century. They thought the CO2 kept oxygen out while it was open. At least according to Fredéric Panaiotis  

I’m glad to hear you see similarities with the ‘08. They are so tightly wound even today, and opening each new 2012’s drives that home. The latter are so much more giving and open. The ‘08 Cristal, Dom, even Krug 164 have barely budged. More reason to leave the 2008’s alone and look forward to their potential. 

Thanks again Ken. 

[Ken Gargett]

Just now, MrBirdman said:

Fair enough, I appreciate the preview. I’ve read much more about ‘88 than I’ve tasted, as it was long off the market by the time I reached drinking age. I was privileged to share in an ‘88 Dom - it was nearly a decade ago, and it was sublime.   Dried stone fruits, dried citrus peel, flinty goodness. I’ve come close to picking up some Dom Ruinart ‘88 at auction twice, outbid at my max at the last second both time. TBH, probably for the best considering the considerable bottle variation in old champagne. I think it’s because of their rudimentary understanding of disgorgement until this century. They thought the CO2 kept oxygen out while it was open. 

I’m glad to hear you see similarities with the ‘08. They are so tightly wound even today, and opening each new 2012’s drives that home. The latter are so much more giving and open. The ‘08 Cristal, Dom, even Krug 164 have barely budged. More reason to leave the 2008’s alone and look forward to their potential. 

Thanks again Ken. 

88 Dom is a fabulous wine.

it is worth noting that when 88 happened, it made little impact, a little surprising as after 82 and 83 which were such big vintages, there was only the very tiny but fabulous 85s and the okay 86s. 88 was seen as so so. along came 89 and people raved. then 90 and they raved a lot more. for a long time, 88 was the ginger-haired stepchild of the trio. even in champagne, it was long ranked third. slowly people started to realise just how brilliant it was. a slow burner. now, many see it as the best of the three. though some cracking 90s. 

these days, there is such scrutiny that it is very hard for a vintage to sneak under the radar (2000 has to a degree) so 2008 was spotted early. anyone putting any 08s in the cellar are going to be very happy. completely agree with you on that. and yes, i love the 12s but i think we'll be drinking them before the best 08s. 

[Tstew75]

How were those damn Salons?!? 

[Ken Gargett]

6 hours ago, Tstew75 said:

How were those damn Salons?!? 

99 was stunningly good. never been the biggest fan of 99s but this was amazing. and 88 was mature but glorious. as much as i hate the price hikes it has seen lately, hard to argue. 

[westg]

Nice friends , sounds incredible .