Champagne that IS too expensive

[jqmunro]

Here is the follow up post on a previous post about champagne... Would like to see what some people prefer for champagne on a special occasion. Maybe Ken can suggest some specific examples of vintages for Blanc de Blanc, Blanc de Noir and Cuvees. Also for Ken, how do you feel about the Salon 1996, 1995 offerings?

[havanaclub7]

Dom Perignon vintage 1996. Robert Parker scored the wine 98 points, two points shy of perfection. I have a bottle laying down right now and can't wait for the right occasion. It is, however, a little tough to score that particular vintage in stores right now. I think 1998 Dom Perignon is commonly available in the U.S. right now.

Also, I would recommend any Louis Roederer Cristal. In my opinion, Cristal is like drinking liquid gold. It's a bit more pricey than Dom Perignon, however.

[habanablue]

» Dom Perignon vintage 1996. Robert Parker scored the wine 98 points, two

» points shy of perfection. I have a bottle laying down right now and can't

» wait for the right occasion.

I've got a DP 96 Rose in exactly the same postion: laying down and waiting for the right occasion. 3rd Wedding anniversary coming up might be the right occasion!

[The Wise Old owl]

In the past couple of weeks, I've had a couple of bottles of '88 Krug. Krug is always very nice, and I'm a sucker for it, almost regardless of the vintage. However, truth of the matter is, I have come to prefer the Non (Multi) vintage Krug lately, perhaps because of the blend, but whatever the reason, the NV is always ready to drink, and it is one of the smoothest yeast bombs you'll ever find. Hard to compare the NV to any particular vintage Krug, it's just different. Another notable bottle recently was the Don Ruinart, also Full of yeast and mushroom/rotten forest floor flavors that I prefer. Cheaper too. If you are really looking for the Creme de la Creme, then pick up an "86 Clos Du Mesnil. Used to be available for around $450, the current release is a couple of hundred more. Clos du Mesnil is far and away the absolute finest I've ever been priviledged to try, and the '86 left the greatest impression. It's like ambrosia, decadent flavors of truffle, beef and stewed fig. This is not a champagne to waste on those who haven't yet developed a palate and appreciation for good champagne... Clos du Mesnil is my top pick... of all time! Now, back to my regularly scheduled PBR...

[Ken Gargett]

i guess price is all relative but i find it strange that some people who'll pay hundreds of dollars per bottle for reds object to paying anything like the same for the best champers. i think it is just as valid as a wine as anything. that was a general comment.

i grabbed all i could from 1996 and recommend everyone doing the same. 96 dom is a brilliant wine and i have a fair bit of that away. there are reported problems with corks for that vintage of dom but i have been lucky so far.

salon is a brilliant blanc de blancs. you can argue between it and clos de mesnil and don't neglect the fantastic taittinger comte 1996. toss of a coin.

krug? now we are talking. drank quite a lot of krug last year and, while i wa always a fan, walked away convinced that when it is good, it is the best (and by chance, was actually doing something on it before i checked the forum - unfortunately no samples recently). a few of us got together and bought a bottle of the 1928 krug collection at auction (that even made the press in london). it was amazing though starting to tire. it has always been regarded as the greatest champers ever made. i've heard the krugs say 1985 is next but, and i love the 1985 vintage, i'd go 1988. a truly brilliant fantastic champers. 1990 and 1995 also great but when 1996 hits the shelves, stand back. it should, on vintage and rep etc etc, be the best champagne for fifty years.

in australia, dom is on the 1999 vintage.

after 1996, there are a series of good vintages but the next great one looks like 2002, but it will be a few years before we see the goodies from it.

[skid11]

Ken what would you consider to be good Australian sparklings ? Are they good value for money ? How do they compare (if possible) with French champagnes.

I had read one of your reviews in the GT Wine magazine but I can't remember if you included Australiann styles in your article.

[Ken Gargett]

» Ken what would you consider to be good Australian sparklings ? Are they

» good value for money ? How do they compare (if possible) with French

» champagnes.

»

» I had read one of your reviews in the GT Wine magazine but I can't

» remember if you included Australiann styles in your article.

sitting in front of a bottle of yellowtail bubbles as we speak. yet to open it.

domaine chandon and even before them, the original yellowglen amde huge strides. pre those guys, it was carbonated sultanas and certain hangovers. hanging rock does some brilliant fizz and i have seen their best mistaken for great champers by experts. ed carr from hardys makes excellent fizz at all levels - everything from omni, banrock station, sir james, tigress, starvedog, arras and more. you might knock some of these as not great wines, fair enough, but they are excelllent value at their levels.

hanging rock for me.

[Taino]

I wouldn't understimate spanish and argentinian cavas or sparklings (not spankings!:-P )... if you know were to look for... pretty good for the prices.

[ELittle]

Crystal is a high priced champagne, nothing like it if you want to drop 300 on a bottle though. the fancy gold bottle is nice to look at.

[jqmunro]

Well I ended up with a 1995 Krug which was very good, but I'm not sure it was a 98 like WS says. I would put it more around 94. It had a wonderful complexity and crispness. Unfortunately there was little sparkle left and it took away from the mouthfeel. I also think that the Krug NV was a richer example. I guess I'll have to find a 1988 and 1996 bottle for comparison Ken, should not a bottle from 1995 still have most of its "fizz" intact?

Also had a bottle of Laurent Perrier Grand Siecle which was great.

[jqmunro]

Also picked up a few bottles of '96 krug for keeping... these should be nice in another decade

[havanaclub7]

» Also picked up a few bottles of '96 krug for keeping... these should be

» nice in another decade

Your Krug that lost its fizz....are you sure it wasn't fizzy or were your champagne flutes a little bit dirty? Even a thin film of residue will make your sparklers seem flat. Just curious because I have a 1990 La Grande Dame that I know is fine. I don't think a champagne that's only 12 years old should go flat.

[Ken Gargett]

» Well I ended up with a 1995 Krug which was very good, but I'm not sure it

» was a 98 like WS says. I would put it more around 94. It had a wonderful

» complexity and crispness. Unfortunately there was little sparkle left and

» it took away from the mouthfeel. I also think that the Krug NV was a

» richer example. I guess I'll have to find a 1988 and 1996 bottle for

» comparison Ken, should not a bottle from 1995 still have most of its

» "fizz" intact?

»

» Also had a bottle of Laurent Perrier Grand Siecle which was great.

problem with 95 krug is that it is so young, it really needs a decade. then you'll sail past '98'. ditto the 96 krug. given the tiny quantities and huge demand, even at $500 or so, it is almost impossible to get a bottle without either contacts or being a long term krug buyer. it is extraordinary but needs so much time. vinicide to drink it within the next deacde. tho i did try a sample bottle last week.

to be honest, i have a few 88s and i am in no rush. they also have years. will outlast 90, though that also exceptional.

re the 95 and bottles, totally agree re the dishwasher comments. almost certainly the reason (you might have jagged a poor bottle if you are unlucky). the dishwasher can kill fizz. if you have good champagne flutes, hand wash in hot water only if you can get away with it. any film left and kiss goodbye the fizz. you'll see it in restaurants often. you'll also often see one glass bubbling away from the same bottle that is dead flat to another.

[Claudius]

Here's my favourite champagne:

[El Presidente]

» Here's my favourite champagne:

»

»

Actually enjoyed two bottles Friday afternoon with friends on the deck.

Lovely French Champagne.

[Ken Gargett]

» Here's my favourite champagne:

»

»

these guys are focusing on a sans dosage style. in other words, a champagne with no sweetness at all.

where do they get their inspiration?

[jqmunro]

96 krug is readily available in the States.... I picked up a few for $250 a piece, and they are still available at that price point.

» » Well I ended up with a 1995 Krug which was very good, but I'm not sure

» it

» » was a 98 like WS says. I would put it more around 94. It had a

» wonderful

» » complexity and crispness. Unfortunately there was little sparkle left

» and

» » it took away from the mouthfeel. I also think that the Krug NV was a

» » richer example. I guess I'll have to find a 1988 and 1996 bottle for

» » comparison Ken, should not a bottle from 1995 still have most of

» its

» » "fizz" intact?

» »

» » Also had a bottle of Laurent Perrier Grand Siecle which was great.

»

»

» problem with 95 krug is that it is so young, it really needs a decade.

» then you'll sail past '98'. ditto the 96 krug. given the tiny quantities

» and huge demand, even at $500 or so, it is almost impossible to get a

» bottle without either contacts or being a long term krug buyer. it is

» extraordinary but needs so much time. vinicide to drink it within the next

» deacde. tho i did try a sample bottle last week.

» to be honest, i have a few 88s and i am in no rush. they also have years.

» will outlast 90, though that also exceptional.

» re the 95 and bottles, totally agree re the dishwasher comments. almost

» certainly the reason (you might have jagged a poor bottle if you are

» unlucky). the dishwasher can kill fizz. if you have good champagne flutes,

» hand wash in hot water only if you can get away with it. any film left and

» kiss goodbye the fizz. you'll see it in restaurants often. you'll also

» often see one glass bubbling away from the same bottle that is dead flat

» to another.

[winelover]

» 96 krug is readily available in the States.... I picked up a few for $250 a

» piece, and they are still available at that price point.

»

Is there a difference between say a 1996 Krug and a 1996 Krug Clos du Mesnil ?

(Think I've since answered my question with reference to wikipedia, which seems to say that the Clos Du Mesnil is made from chardonnay only).

[jqmunro]

clos du mesnil is a single vineyard champagne... named after the vineyard where the grapes are grown. Other krug, vintage or not, has grapes that are sourced from a number of vineyards.

» » 96 krug is readily available in the States.... I picked up a few for $250

» a

» » piece, and they are still available at that price point.

» »

»

» Is there a difference between say a 1996 Krug and a 1996 Krug Clos du

» Mesnil ?

»

» (Think I've since answered my question with reference to wikipedia, which

» seems to say that the Clos Du Mesnil is made from chardonnay only).

[Ken Gargett]

clos du mesnil is a small property bang in the best chardy district (mesnil). the property is a bit less than two hectares in total and all the grapes for this wine come from it, whereas the vintage buys grapes from varrious places, as well as using their own vineyards. it is right in the middle of the town. walk out the gates and you are in a village street and houses around all sides. there were about four clos champagnes for a while but more now appearing. philipponnat had clos des goisses, cattier had clos du moulin, there was another. it basically means vineyard within a walled off area. krug bought this one in '71 in think and then replanted it but no wine till the 79, i think. it was a cracker. 80 was less so, the 82 fantastic, 83 good, 85 brilliant, 86 an odd release, 88 anither brilliant wine. they released 89 before 88. i have not seen it but reports are good and 90, 95 and 96 should all be stunning. did see 95 and it was very young.

all blanc des blancs.

[Cam]

Okay, I'm quite an avid Champagne drinker (I'd say collector but I can't keep it for more than 15 years without drinking it). 1998 Dom Perignon is ok, but keep it for 5-6 years before drinking, Cristal is OK if you prefer sweeter Champagne, after the Russian revolution no-one liked it, as the sugar content was almost 30 percent. 1996 Dom Perignon is VERY good, the Rosé is good too if you like Pinot Noir, well red white wine . But if you really want a good bottle, I have a 1964 Pol Roger Winston Churchill Grand Vintage, depending on the year Bollinger is excellent as-well, just don't let people talk you into Cristal, Krug is good 1995-2000. 1998 and above keep for 5-6 years 14 degrees celcius and 60-68 percent humidity.

[winelover]

I've never tried champagne that is too expensive. Next year I am getting married though. I think anything with exorbitant vintage prices would wasted on me. Thinking about picking up either a DP or a Krug NV. I'm leaning towards the Krug NV, as I've heard great things. If any one has any views on the cheaper end of Champagne that is too expensive, then I'd be grateful. Cheers.

[Cam]

sure the Moet Grand Vintage Rose 2000, it's one of the best years in modern wine making and it retails for about 70 dollars or the Bollinger Brut, great drink from 2000-2004 drink now, 40-60 dollars a bottle!

[winelover]

» sure the Moet Grand Vintage Rose 2000, it's one of the best years in modern

» wine making and it retails for about 70 dollars or the Bollinger Brut,

» great drink from 2000-2004 drink now, 40-60 dollars a bottle!

That's great, but living in the UK, I'll probably have to pay the same number of dollars but in £'s Thanks anyway though.

[Claudius]

Regarding more reasonably priced (under 100 EUR) champagne, I've heard good things about the Jacques Selosse, particularly the Substance. It's from a very small domaine, but supposed to be of a paticularly high standard. Have you tried it, and if so, what do you think about it?