Tuesday, January 28, 2014

Making a Case for Champagne at the Table: Dinner with Krug

Bruce Sanderson
Issue: December 15, 2007

Most people I know enjoy beginning a good meal with a glass of Champagne. But how many have tried serving different Champagnes with each course throughout the meal?

Though bubbly is most often popped for toasts or celebrations, fine Champagne makes a great match with food. I recently rediscovered this pleasure during a dinner at Aretsky's Patroon in New York, organized by sommelier Peter Konopka and Charles Curtis, director of wine and spirits education at Moët Hennessy USA. I was also reminded how well top Champagne develops with time.

Curtis and Konopka selected five different vintages of Krug—1996, 1995, 1976, 1961 and the 1986 from their single-vineyard Clos du Mesnil. Executive chef Bill Peet came up with some creative pairings, especially the dessert course, which he paired with the magnificent 1961. All the bottles came from Patroon's cellar. (The wines were served non-blind, and therefore the scores that follow are not official Wine Spectator ratings.)

I have tasted the 1996 (98 points on Wine Spectator's 100-point scale) several times this year. Firm and racy, yet with a creamy midpalate, it tasted of apricots and toast. A refined Champagne, it was served as an aperitif and was accompanied by a number of hors d'oeuvres. My favorite match was the Kumamoto oysters with Champagne-Asian pear gelée.

The first course was caramelized diver scallops from Maine over preserved lemon and herb quinoa pilaf with a caviar beurre blanc; it was paired with the Krug Collection 1976 (94 points). The hot and sunny drought year yielded a bubbly with big, robust aromas of toast, tobacco, coffee and gingerbread. It was still fresh, despite its obvious weight, and the finish echoed coffee and a candied berry note. The smoky, roasted elements in the Champagne matched the caramelized scallops, with a counterpoint from the preserved lemon, which picked up the acidity in the wine.

The next course featured a salad with a lightly baked goat cheese crottin and the Krug 1995 (96 points). Broader and more opulent than the '96, the '95 showed a lovely texture and vibrant finish. The goat cheese provided a relatively neutral backdrop that allowed the Champagne to shine.

This was followed by the Blanc de Blancs Clos du Mesnil 1986 (95 points) with spit-roasted heirloom French chicken stuffed with black truffle and truffle butter-and-foie gras sauce. On its own, the Chardonnay-based Clos du Mesnil was aromatic, showing tropical fruit, coconut, fresh chanterelle and woodsy aromas. It picked up candied berry and honey flavors. It was absolutely gorgeous up front, but lacked the length of the other vintages. Though not a bad match, this pairing was the least successful. The chicken dish was a bit strong for the Champagne. Nothing clashed, but there was no synergy.

The final course, on the other hand, was brilliant. Who would have thought of putting the Krug 1961, a dry Champagne, up against dessert? Chef Peet did, and it was an amazing combination.

The Krug Collection 1961 was magnificent. Dried peach, apricot and quince paste led off, followed by coffee, smoke, a blast of caramel and citrus peel flavors. Incredibly complex, rich and mellow on the palate, it lingered on and on. I rated it a perfect 100 points.

And the dessert? A maple financier cake. It had just a hint of sweetness, so as not to compete with the wine. Maple-glazed finger bananas and salted caramel ice cream worked with the flavors, texture and balance of the Champagne for a seamless match. The combination of the two was something greater.

The bottles of 1976 and 1961 demonstrated how well great Champagne ages. I have had the good fortune to taste mature Krug Champagnes on previous occasions. In April 2000, Rémi Krug and his daughter Caroline organized a tasting of mature vintages. All of the wines were poured from magnums shipped directly from Krug's cellars in Reims, France. The 1961 was part of that tasting, too. In a Krug retrospective (Collecting, June 30, 2000), I wrote: "The 1961 [97 points], powerful and intense, exhibited distinctive flavors of soya, beef bouillon, caramel, hazelnut and mushroom, and has plenty of life ahead."

With so many distinctive vintages and cuvées, Champagne has the diversity to carry an entire meal. I also have high expectations that the Krug 1996 will develop like the 1961. I hope I can keep my hands off the few bottles I have for another 20 years.

Senior editor Bruce Sanderson has been with Wine Spectator since 1993.

 

 

2007 Review: Champagne Vintages: 2007 Not a Good Year?

Region: Champagne
Grade: B-

If growers were able to take advantage of the maximum yield permitted by the Institut National des Appellations d'Origine, France's winemaking governing body, 2007 will be the largest Champagne crop ever. But with wine, as other things, size doesn't always matter. It was a difficult growing season with hot weather early on, followed by an extended stretch of rain, ultimately ending with an early harvest. So the relatively good wine quality—with relatively big volumes—that producers are now anticipating comes as more of a surprise than an expectation.

The weather in April was unseasonably hot. As a result, flowering occurred in May, about a month early, yet it was heterogeneous from one region to the next, and even from parcel to parcel within the same village. That was followed, however, by a cold, wet summer. There were several hailstorms mid-July, affecting more than 2,000 acres with 100 percent damage in parts of the Vallée de la Marne and Côtes des Bar. The lack of sunshine during the summer months set a record for Champagne. But on Aug. 24, good weather returned, along with a drying east wind. Many houses started picking by the end of August and finished by the third week of September.

"We had a fairly good harvest, at least unexpected after the poor summer we had. Globally, both quantity and quality were met," said Olivier Krug, director of Champagne Krug in Reims.

Yields across varieties were uneven as a result of the tough weather. The crop was very large for Chardonnay, but smaller for Pinot Meunier. The Chardonnay was affected least by the chaotic weather conditions, and was therefore the most consistent in terms of ripeness. The maturity of both Pinot Meunier and Pinot Noir were more varied as the varieties suffered from attacks of mildew and botrytis in several spots.

Producers reported that the potential alcohol is slightly below the average since 2002, yet the acidity in the wines is higher than normal—but nothing to worry about. "At first the numbers look high, but the proportions of malic acid are rather high [above 50 percent], so the wines will soften significantly through malolactic fermentation," said Benoit Gouez, chef de cave at Moët & Chandon.

Many producers said that it is too early to determine whether vintage Champagnes would be made from the 2007 harvest. The process of tasting the vin clairs (base wines) began in October. Once the selections and final blends are made, the yeast and sugar will be added to begin the second fermentation in bottle.

"It has not been easy this year," reflected Richard Geoffroy, chef de cave at Moët & Chandon's Dom Pérignon. As a growing season, he called 2007 "very emotional."

—Bruce Sanderson

 

2010 Review: Champagne Vintages: 1995...1996...2002...what?

Champagne

Growers and producers are describing the 2010 growing season as a dramatic vintage that had the Champenoise fearing they’d never see rain at one moment, awash in it the next and harvesting fast and furiously when the time came. For those who were quick on their feet and practiced severe sorting and selection in certain cases, the results look promising. But there’s certainly a wait-and-see attitude as producers look toward their winter tastings after the first fermentation.

Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon, technical director at Louis Roederer, describes 2010 as, “A year of contrasts, if ever there was one.” That reflects both the ever-changing weather and the different approach needed for Chardonnay versus the Pinots (Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier).

The year began with a very cold winter and cool spring, followed by dry and warm weather in the early summer—conditions favorable for healthy development of the grapes. But as the summer continued without any rain, some vines began to suffer from hydric stress, stopping the fruit's maturation.

Then the skies opened up on Aug. 14, and the region received, “About three months of summer water in three days,” says Jean-Remy Rapeneau of Champagne Charles de Cazanove. That kick-started the maturation process. Berries grew rapidly, and some burst, triggering the development of botrytis in some cases. The rain also continued on and off until the start of harvest on Sept. 13. “It was a race against time to bring the grapes to peak ripeness before they spoiled on the vine,” says Lécaillon. Harvest began with pickers racing to bring fruit in, selecting only the healthy fruit, when necessary, with additional sorting later.

“The watchword for this harvest was sorting,” says Benoît Gouez, chef de cave at Moët & Chandon. “Fortunately, weather conditions improved, for a full week of gloriously dry, cool and windy days. The evolution of botrytis stopped, the bunches affected had been dried, and the maturation continued to progress at a fairly high speed.”

The sorting and selection reported by many growers was mostly limited to the Pinots—Pinot Noir, a thin-skinned grape, and Pinot Meunier, a grape with tight clusters—both attributes that make the grapes more susceptible to botrytis. Pinot Noir fared better than Meunier, but overall yields for both were down considerably, as much as 50 percent by some reports.

The success story of 2010 is clearly Chardonnay, a grape that holds its own against botrytis. Didier Gimonnet of Champagne Pierre Gimonnet & Fils, whose vines are 98 percent Chardonnay, happily reported that they left only 10 percent of the harvest behind in the vineyards due to selection. “I am really confident about the 2010 wines,” says Gimonnet. “I think 2010 could be like 1995.”

For Chardonnay, this may be the case. But for the Pinots it will be a matter of blending parcels in order to find balance, or relying on a higher amount of Chardonnay to add ripeness to this vintage’s crisper Meunier. “The blending and the talent of the winemakers are the key elements to produce Champagne at its best [in 2010],” says Rapeneau.

—A.N.

 

2011 Review: Champagne Vintages: 2011 Not a Good Year?

Champagne

With a long and storied past, producers in Champagne probably thought they had seen it all—until 2011 came along. “This was an atypical year, the likes of which we have never seen in Champagne,” said Régis Camus, chef de caves for houses Charles and Piper-Heidsieck.

The bizarre nature of 2011 was its extreme variability. The growing season started rapidly, with extremely warm weather in April and May. The result was an early flowering—about three to four weeks ahead of the normal schedule. This timing put 2011 on par with the very hot 2003 initially, according to Jean-Baptiste Cristini, export director for Salon and Delamotte.

But the weather shifted gears in June, and for two months temperatures were lower than average and rain came regularly. The summer’s rainy weather saved what could have been another 2003 for Champagne. Nonetheless, producers were happy to see warm weather return in August. And despite cooler conditions during summer, some producers started picking as early as Aug. 19, the earliest date in the region’s history. Most began a few days later, ruining vacation plans for many people.

Unfortunately, the weather at harvest was unpredictable. “Right at the beginning we were lucky to have some sun, then the rain set in, which reduced the potential alcohol content and slowed down—and even stopped—the harvest," said Jean Rémy Rapeneau of Charles de Cazanove.

These variable conditions meant that maturity varied greatly from plot to plot. Rapeneau said they checked maturity levels every day, adjusting their plans for the next day at the last minute based on the results and ultimately picking in a pattern that was the opposite of any previous harvest. This variability extended to quality as well, at least among the Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier. “I saw beautiful Chardonnay everywhere, [but the] Pinots were more contrasting. Even in the same village, a lot of differences,” said Alice Paillard of Bruno Paillard.

Paillard believes the variability of the Pinot and other factors may have resulted in a great deal of selection for many houses, leading to smaller-than-expected reported yields. The Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne (CIVC), Champagne’s trade body, set yields at 12,500 kilograms per hectare, but several houses indicated lower yields of about 10,500. While the quality of 2011 may not be sufficient to declare a vintage—producers are waiting to see—it should provide a fine base for the region’s non-vintage wines.

A.N.

 

2006 Review: Champagne Vintages: 1995...1996...2002...2006?

Region: Champagne
Grade: B+

Producers in Champagne speak with enthusiasm about the 2006 vintage, largely due to a growing season full of contrasting but well-timed weather changes and excellent conditions during harvest. Although most producers are hesitant to declare that a vintage Champagne will be made from 2006, all are pleased with the quality they have seen thus far.

The weather in April and May was mild, with an unusual amount of rain, but sunny weather and higher-than-average temperatures during June promoted excellent flowering. A few thunderstorms at the start of July resulted in isolated hail damage in certain parts of Champagne, but otherwise the month was one of the hottest and driest on record, helping the grapes ripen quickly. The weather took a dramatic turn in August, with three rainy and humid weeks worrying growers.

"At the very end of August most of the early summer promise [in the vineyards] was about to disappear," said Olivier Krug of Champagne Krug, "when both the sun and heat came back for three weeks, leading to a marvelous crop."

Frédéric Panaiotos, enologist at Veuve Clicquot, said that this "nearly perfect" weather during harvest "resulted in an excellent ripening process." The grapes attained optimal physiological maturity and developed a good balance between ripeness and acidity. Chardonnay in particular did very well, although both Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier were picked with minimal botrytis, which was sorted out.

After initial tastings of the 2006 base wines, Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon, technical director at Louis Roederer, said, "Early tastings are highly promising, showing clean aromas, rich fruit and a finesse and balance rarely seen at this early stage."

Overall, consumers can expect that the 2006 vintage will be an important component in high quality non-vintage wines for the next several years. "Even if I find it too early to say whether it will be a vintage year or not for Krug," said Krug, "I can already say that 2006 will be a very pleasant year to blend. It is indeed a year of character."

—Alison Napjus

 

2009 Review: Champagne Vintages: 1995...1996...2002...2009?

Region: Champagne

Champagne's 2009 growing season got off to a difficult start. After a cold winter, the rainy spring helped recharge groundwater reserves, but June saw a long, difficult flowering, particularly in the Côte des Blancs, caused by cool nighttime temperatures. That led to inconsistent ripening at the end of the season, but this is less of an issue in Champagne than other regions, due to the typically gentle pressing of the grapes and lack of maceration with the skins.

The wet spring led to outbreaks of downy mildew, forcing growers to use treatments to stop its spread. There were also isolated thunderstorms accompanied by hail and mudslides on June 14 and July 3 in the Marne Valley, notably in the village of Aÿ.

August debuted very hot and dry, and stayed that way all month. "We could almost say that Champagne had its first really fine summer since 2003," said Frédéric Panaiotis, chef de cave at Ruinart. "Little rain, lots of sunshine, which, combined with the early budbreak, resulted in grapes ready to be picked early September."

Picking began in earnest during the second week of September, and most growers and houses were finished by Sept. 30. Dominique Demarville, chef de cave at Veuve Clicquot, began with Chardonnay, but waited on the reds. "From my point of view, the grapes were ripe enough regarding the level of sugar and acidity, but not homogenous, due to the inconsistent flowering," he said. "Tasting the grapes a few days before, we decided to delay the picking."

From all reports, the grapes were healthy, with good levels of ripeness balanced by fresh acidity. Ruinart's Panaiotis pointed out that the numbers looked similar to 2008, but the weather patterns during the growing season were completely different, with '08 ripening at the very end, just before harvest.

"Because the summer was dry, the grapes were healthy: No oïdium (powdery mildew), no botrytis," said Pierre Gimonnet, proprietor and winemaker at Didier Gimonnet. "And when it is healthy, that is real quality—very pure flavors."

Yields ranged from 8,000 kilograms per hectare (about 3.5 tons per acre from an old-vine parcel damaged by hail in Aÿ and harvested for Deutz) to 14,000 kg/ha (6.2 tons/acre), depending on grape variety and region.

Though 14,000 kg/ha was the maximum yield in the vineyard, this year the Comité Interprofessionel du Vin de Champagne limited the amount that could be bottled as Champagne to 9,700 kg/ha for growers and 8,000 kg/ha for houses. The remainder, up to 4,300 kg/ha can be set aside as reserve for future years. This policy effectively manages supply and stabilizes prices in a year that has seen sales of Champagne drop by as much as 50 percent.

Whether 2009 is a vintage year or not has yet to be decided by most houses. Régis Camus, chef de cave of Charles and Piper-Heidsieck, likens the young vins clairs to those from the 2002 and 2004 vintages.

Gimonnet noted that, "In the past, our grandfathers and fathers produced one exceptional vintage per decade. This millenium is amazing: 2002 is exceptional, then 2006 and 2008 could be exceptional. So we think we are not credible if we are saying 2009 could be exceptional too."

B.S.

 

2004 Review: Champagne Vintages: 1995...1996...2002...2004?

REGION: Champagne
GRADE: A
This year's bumper crop, which producers estimated was twice the normal size, set an all-time record. Due to high yields and the number of acres planted, "2004 is the largest harvest in Champagne history," said Daniel Lorson, spokesman for the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne, the region's regulatory body.

However, producers do not expect quality to suffer. "Not only [is] the maturity there, but also the acidity is high, which is a great necessity for us in Champagne," said Bruno Paillard of Champagne Bruno Paillard, adding that he believes that 2004 is vintage quality.

The Champagne region suffered no major spring frosts, and the cool summer was followed by warm, sunny weather in September that produced healthy, ripe grapes. "We have nice, satisfactory sugar and alcohol levels," said Philippe Court, director general of Taittinger.

Moët & Chandon's enology director, Phillippe Coulon, expects the quality of Chardonnay and Pinot Meunier to be good to outstanding, but he and Court said the Pinot Noir berries ripened unevenly within the bunches, requiring strict sorting.

--Jacob Gaffney and Bruce Sanderson

 

2012 Review: Champagne Vintages: 1995...1996...2002...2008...2012? [WS]

Champagne

The good news: Fair weather in late August and prior to harvest was the Hail Mary pass that gave this vintage a fighting chance.

The bad news: Yields for the year are down as much as 40 percent for some Champagne producers.

Picking started: Sept. 10

Promising grapes: Pinot Noir

Analysis: For the Champenois, 2012 reads like the trials of Job, with frost, hail and disease plaguing the region’s vines. “In July we were so gloomy," said Richard Geoffroy, chef de cave of Dom Pérignon. "Then the whole thing went, ‘Wow!’ We came from nowhere. [But] at the end of July I wouldn’t have bet a cent on [this vintage].”

The weather turned around in mid-August—warm sun allowed grapes to ripen, then cooler weather during harvest helped to preserve the health of the grapes. Ultimately, the frost and hail that reduced the crop earlier in the year meant the harvested grapes often showed better concentration. Although most producers report at least 20 percent lower yields—and often it’s 30 to 40 percent—the grapes that were harvested were generally healthy, with good levels of acidity balanced by ripe sugar content and flavors.

A.N.

 

2008 Review: Champagne Vintages: 1995...1996...2002...2008?

Region: Champagne
Grade: B+

Part of making wine is waiting to see what cards Mother Nature will deal. The 2008 vintage in Champagne was very nearly a bust, until an ace was dealt in September and two weeks of beautiful weather at harvest provided a winning hand. It was not an easy vintage, but producers are optimistic overall.

The growing season got off to a rocky start in spring, with cool and wet weather that promoted the spread of parasites and mildew. Some producers were constantly on watch for mildew but avoided it. Others were dogged by it. Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon of Louis Roederer Champagne called 2008 "The battle between man and mold, [requiring] almost superhuman effort on the part of the growers" to stamp it out.

The weather in June also caused problems with flowering. "June was hot and cold, oscillating between 90° F and 55° F," said Jean-Baptiste Cristini, of Champagnes Salon and Delamotte. "This caused fragile flowering and fertility." As a result, yields were slightly lower than recent years, particularly in Pinot Noir, and clusters were generally smaller, with thicker skins.

July and August brought cool and cloudy weather, with some rain increasing the risk of mildew again. "The lack of sun inhibited the maturity of the grapes somewhat," said Stanislas Henriot of Champagne Henriot. Producers were worried as harvest approached. Fortunately, things quickly changed for the better. "We witnessed a minor miracle," said Henriot. "Incredible weather returned on the eve of harvest and stayed with us throughout."

Harvest began around Sept. 15 for most growers and was marked by dry, sunny and windy days combined with cool nights. Hervé Deschamps of Perrier-Jouët reported that the sunny and windy daytime weather helped concentrate the sugars and promote physiological maturity in the grapes, while the cool nights provided good protection for the natural acidity necessary for high quality Champagne.

Although this year was a challenge for many producers, it saw a return to a growing season and weather more typical of a northern winegrowing region. Yields vary from village to village within the region, but average 14,000 kilograms per hectare (roughly 5.57 tons per acre). Growers and houses that made more than the maximum 12,400 kilograms per hectare (4.94 tons per acre) are allowed to keep the additional yield—as much as 1,600 kilograms per hectare more—as a reserve for use in future vintages.

As always, producers are hesitant to say whether or not 2008 will be a vintage year, as most will not begin tasting their vin claires until early next year. But in general, there's a sense of optimism. Even if it is not a vintage year for every house, it is sure to be a solid contribution to non-vintage Champagne for several years to come.

A.N.

 

2013 Review: Champagne Vintages: 1995...1996...2002...2008...2012...2013? [WS]

Champagne

The good news: On the heels of the excellent 2012 vintage, 2013 doesn’t compete in overall quality but it’s solid; technical analysis—acid, sugar and potential alcohol levels—suggests that vintage wine, or at the least a high-quality addition to non-vintage bottlings, will be possible.

The bad news: The entire vegetative cycle and harvest was about two weeks behind the past decade’s norm because 2013’s cool and rainy spring delayed budbreak and flowering. That slow start caused multiple challenges.

Picking started: Sept. 24

Promising grapes: Chardonnay was the healthiest of Champagne’s three grapes in 2013, and early tastings suggest structure that can support quality wines with the ability to age. In some areas, Chardonnay yields were down about 15 to 20 percent versus last year’s crop—a result of millerandage and/or hailstorms early in the season—but the loss of berries early on meant that the vines had more nutrients and energy to give to the remaining fruit.

Challenging grapes: Although neither was a disaster, both Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier proved more difficult. Because harvest began later, it went through October and into cooler conditions, making selection necessary in parts of Champagne to sort out mildewed Pinot grapes.

Analysis: Champagne’s 2013 was defined by a cool and rainy spring, which saw vines flowering in late June and early July instead of the more typical timing of early- to mid-June. This left vines in a more fragile state when heavy rains and hailstorms struck during the summer months in some parts of the region. Significant crop loss occurred in these areas, with estimates of as much as 30 percent in the Côte de Blancs.

Cool weather during flowering also promoted millerandage, where grape bunches develop berries of varying sizes and maturity, making it more difficult to harvest whole bunches with full physiological maturity. And with one of the latest start dates for harvest in the past 20 years, determining when to pick was a critical decision. Depending on location, certain grape varieties required more time to reach maturity, but as the harvest went on the threat of cooler temperatures, more rain and mildew was greater.

Blanc de blancs made entirely from Chardonnay and Chardonnay-based blends will be the safest bet in 2013, and although producers are not exclaiming for 2013 as they did for the outstanding 2008 or 2012 vintages, most seem pleased with the overall results. “Compared to the rest of France, someone must be watching us upstairs,” said Frédéric Panaiotis, chef de cave of Ruinart Champagne.

A.N.

#ChampagneVintage

How to Really Understand Wine [WS]

Hint: You want depth, not breadth
Matt Kramer
Posted: November 19, 2013

Tweet

38

A fellow came up to me at a party, introduced himself, and asked for a bit of advice. He wanted to become a wine writer, he said. And he was wondering if I had any advice about how to proceed.

This was hardly the first time I've been asked such a thing, and my advice is always the same: Forget it. Try something else. I explained to him, as I have to others, that wine writing is a limited line of work with few opportunities. I recited a litany of drawbacks.

You likely already know his response: He was undaunted. This was what he really wanted to do. He had to try, he said.

Well, who am I to dissuade someone from his or her dream? Passion and perseverance are wonders to behold and I for one have no desire to deter anyone from pursuing a dream, however unlikely the possibility of success.

Most aspiring writers focus on the practicalities of getting their work published and paid for. This is understandable, of course. But it's not what's important.

What really matters, I asserted, is actually understanding wine. This is fundamental to any of us who are passionate about wine, never mind whether you want to write about it.

This business of understanding wine is different, surprisingly so, from simply being exposed to it. All of us, in the beginning, want nothing so much as the chance to taste (and drink) as many different wines as possible. How else can we know whether we like Cabernet Sauvignon or Merlot or Pinot Noir or Malbec? How else can we know whether the high praise for this producer or that district is justified?

There's no getting around this fundamental need for broad exposure. It's essential. But here's the thing: Exposure isn't understanding.

Allow me take this one step further by saying that too many wine drinkers confuse the two. They think that tasting something—being exposed to it—suffices. But wine isn't radiation. Exposure alone doesn't penetrate.

So what I said to this aspiring wine writer—and I think it holds true for all of us who love and pursue wine—is that you have to narrow your scope in order to increase your depth. You have to seek the kind of understanding that can only come with a different kind of exposure, one dedicated to grasping details that can only be absorbed by diving deeper.

Let me give you an example. You say that you love Burgundy. (Me too.) You also say, with reason, that Burgundy is both complicated and expensive. That it's hard to really get your head around it. And you're right, of course. The same may be said for nearly any region or district that delivers not just numerous wines but ones with a seemingly infinite variety of flavors and details, such as Barolo and Barbaresco, Napa or Sonoma, Australian Shiraz and so on.

I believe that the best way to understand Burgundy is not to flit from one village to another, like a butterfly savoring the nectar from this flower and that.

Rather, I think that you'll achieve a deeper, more resonant understanding of Burgundy by concentrating your attention on just one village. (I nominate St.-Aubin for this, by the way.)

This may seem counterintuitive. How can anyone better understand a place as variegated and complex as Burgundy, with all those vineyards and idiosyncratic producers, by confining oneself to the production of just one village?

The answer lies, I believe, in the dimensionality of the knowledge you will acquire. Let's say you decide that St.-Aubin is the ticket. It's a small district, with a manageable number of growers, most of whom achieve high quality. Both red (Pinot Noir) and white (Chardonnay) are grown. Prices are affordable. It's also a higher-elevation village, which means that the wines are more creatures of finesse and delicacy than of dramatic power and depth.

So you taste, comparing vineyards and producers as well as, inevitably, vintages. You acquire a sense of intimacy, a knowing expectation. Pretty soon, the character of St.-Aubin's best vineyards, such as En Remilly, which grows only Chardonnay, becomes recognizable, trumping the "personality" of the producer's winemaking style.

Finally, and importantly, you visit the producers. St.-Aubin is a small place. It's off the beaten tourist-track. Its growers will welcome you, especially when you tell them of your quest to grasp and truly understand the distinction of their place.

They will take you through the vineyards, telling you about clones and rootstocks, the effects of elevation, the literal lay of the land, which has pockets of pooling cool air or ideal drainage. Not least, you will hear about the differences in exposure and soils, the combination of which usually explains why Pinot Noir is grown here, Chardonnay over there.

Not least you will taste as you've never tasted before, with focus, acuity and purpose, connecting dots that you previously didn't know existed. Soon, you discover that what you like diminishes in importance as you seek to better understand the legitimacy of each vineyard site. Producers will love explaining this to you, recognizing your sincere desire to understand what is, effectively, their life's work.

Then, after all this, you move on to taste other Burgundies. All of a sudden, everything clicks into place. When you taste grands crus (St.-Aubin has none) you will know in an instant—really know—why that vineyard is a grand cru. You intuit instantly if a wine has finesse (a strong suit of St.-Aubin's wines) or if it's a bit coarse or merely fruity.

Everything you learned in that one small village is extrapolated—and properly so—to the larger universe of Burgundy. You will taste deeper and better. Above all, you'll understand in a way unavailable to you from set-'em-up-and-knock-'em-down exposure.

Anyway, that's what I said to my would-be wine writer. What I described could—and should—be applied to all sorts of wine locales, anywhere in the world where fine wines of real distinction are produced.

I could only say that it worked for me—and I think that it will work for you, too.

 

A Second Look at the New Vintages of Dom Pérignon

Another opportunity to taste the new releases: Brut 2002, Rosé 2000 and Brut 1996 Oenothèque

Posted: Jul 8, 2010 11:45am ET
      

It's always a pleasure to sit down and talk wine with Dom Pérignon's chef de cave Richard Geoffroy. But when he brings the new vintages, including 2002 and 1996, it's a must.

On a warm day in late June, we met at Nobu in Tribeca to revisit the new vintages I first tasted with Geoffroy this past February.

It was immediately apparent that the Dom Pérignon Brut 2002 ($150) had opened substantially since my initial look at it, showing richness, but also depth and power. The Pinot Noir component dominates the blend, as evidenced by the dark berry tones and an undercurrent of mineral, which is backed by a firm structure (95 points, non blind).

"[The] '02 [vintage] was not as easy as you think," explained Geoffroy, obviously pleased with his new baby. "There were issues of ripeness, like overripeness."

In addition to the Brut Cuvée Dom Pérignon Oenothèque 1996 ($350), there was a bottle of Brut Cuvée Dom Pérignon 1996, from the original disgorgement in 2002 (2003 release) for comparison. Unfortunately, the Brut 1996 was slightly corked. However, it revealed more mature, oxidative aromas and flavors of toast, mushroom and coffee, with a linear finish that may have been compromised due to the cork taint.

On the other hand, the 1996 Oenothèque (disgorged 2008; to be released in September 2010) was fresher, more youthful and reductive, offering citrus and mineral notes matched to a creamy texture that lead to an expansive finish (96, non blind).

As good as these new cuvées were, it was the Brut Rosé 2000 ($350, available now) that was a revelation. Salmon-colored, it featured berry, citrus and mineral aromas and flavors, with an initial roundness offset by a chalky feel as it glided to a long, smoky finish (92, non blind).

Geoffroy, who noted that 2000 was "not a great vintage," said his purpose is to provide one interpretation of the vintage. "We really went for it in '00," he added. "We changed a lot of parameters."

Those parameters, coming ten years after Geoffroy assumed responsibility for D.P., consisted of focusing on the terroir and better ripeness for the still red wines.

In the vineyards, the team dropped fruit and looked for ideal phenolic ripeness as opposed to sugar ripeness only. In the cellar, they revisited the method of pigeage, or punching down, by using new equipment for a more gentle extraction and racking off the skins earlier to avoid harsh tannins.

These parameters allowed Geoffroy to approach the blending differently, adding a higher percentage of still red wine than in past rosé cuvees. Now, the rosé has no less than 20 percent still red wine, mostly from vineyards in Aÿ, but also Bouzy.

The food at Nobu was impressive and several dishes paired beautifully with the Champagnes. I particularly enjoyed the Washu beef, a hybrid of Wagyu and Angus, rare and thinly sliced with the Rosé 2000, the sea urchin with the opulence of the Brut 2002 and the miso black cod with the 1996 Oenothèque.


Monday, January 27, 2014

Cause for Celebration [WS]

High quality and lower prices make Champagne a good choice for the holiday season
Bruce Sanderson, Alison Napjus
Issue: December 31, 2010

With the economy still in a sluggish mood and spending habits cautious, perhaps the holiday season will bring better news and reason to celebrate. If you like Champagne, though, you may not need an excuse, because there is much to enjoy right now.

We found plenty of terrific Champagnes from among the diverse styles currently available in wineshops and restaurants. Bone-dry or sweet, white or pink, entry-level or top-of-the-line, this year's crop of bubblies offers something to suit every taste and wallet. Of the more than 325 Champagnes tasted since our last report ("Champagne's Bubble Bursts," Dec. 31, 2009 - Jan. 15, 2010), nearly two-thirds scored an outstanding 90 points or higher on the Wine Spectator 100-point scale, a remarkable achievement. (A free alphabetical list of scores and prices for all wines tasted is available.)

The overall excellence of the current offerings can largely be attributed to Champagne's consistency and dedication to quality. As a general rule, winemaking across-the-board in Champagne is meticulous, detailed and technically adept. More than in any other region in France, grapegrowers and producers work together, adhering to regulations-overseen by the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne-that govern all aspects of production.

The weak economy may be helping to hold down prices, as we discovered from the number of well-priced labels in this year's tastings. In the non-vintage category, the most affordable outstanding Champagne is Domaine Chapuy's Brut Tradition NV (90 points, $32), which offers a firm, chalky texture with a savory edge. For just a few dollars more, the Paul Goerg Brut Tradition NV (91, $34) is intense and precise, while the G.H. Mumm Brut Cordon Rouge NV (90, $35) is elegant and focused. And still less than $40, Vranken's Brut Demoiselle Téte de Cuvée NV (92, $38) combines freshness with spicy flavors.

While a good non-vintage Champagne offers a consistent house style by blending multiple vintages together, vintage Champagnes express the character of a particular year. If you're looking to up the ante without upping the price too much, there are several good choices among the vintage bubblies in this report. The best value is from Louis Barthélémy, whose 2002 Brut Saphir rated 95 points with a retail price of only $45. This rich wine has the power and intensity that are the hallmarks of the excellent 2002 vintage.

At the pinnacle are 11 Champagnes scoring in the classic range (95 to 100 points), nine of which are vintage-dated. Piper-Heidsieck makes an impressive showing with a trio of 95-point wines: the 2002 ($275), 1999 ($275) and 1988 ($375) vintages of the house's Brut Rare bottling. The two classic-rated non-vintage bottlings are from perennial top Champagne house Krug: the Brut Grande Cuvée NV (95, $179) and Brut Rosé NV (95, $289). Each of this year's top wines not only shows layer upon layer of flavor and complexity, but also the impeccable balance and textural finesse that mark the best Champagnes.

Another notable new release is the Moët & Chandon Brut Cuvée Dom Pérignon 2002 (95, $160), which is rich and smoky, yet graceful, unfolding its candied citrus, honey and coffee flavors on a refined texture. Chef de cave Richard Geoffroy hit all the marks with this '02, capturing the character of the vintage and the essence of Dom Pérignon's finesse and reductive style. "It's structured and very complete from start to finish," he notes. "But then there is the classical dimension of toast and smoke and complexity."

The wealth of high-scoring wines from Champagne is not the only thing that will have consumers in good spirits; there has also been a decrease in prices in many instances. Of the nearly 160 wines where direct comparisons could be made with last year's report (in addition to the non-vintage cuvées tasted each year, newly disgorged bottles of the same vintage-dated wine are also reviewed annually), more than half have lower prices this year. In some cases the drop is fairly small, but for the majority of these 80 wines prices fell by 10 percent to 20 percent.

Part of this trend may be the result of retailers discounting wines to attract consumers in a still struggling economy. But more likely it represents fluctuations in currency value, since the pricing for these bottlings was negotiated earlier this year when the dollar was stronger. Terry Theise, who selects and manages a large portfolio of Champagne for a national distributor, agrees, "The dollar rates earlier this year were certainly favorable, and we based our second-half-of-the-year prices on the better exchange rate."

This bodes well for bubbly prices in the short term, but unless the dollar strengthens again prices could increase in the first half of next year. "If the dollar remains weak, there will surely be dramatic increases after the first of 2011," Theise adds. With this in mind, the best advice for consumers is to stock up now.

Among the vintage wines on the market, 2002s and 2004s dominate supply right now. This is a good thing, since 2002, rated 94 points overall, is the best recent vintage since 1996, at 96 points. It's hard to go wrong in '02; the wines are structured by firm acidity, but nicely fleshed out by richness, with layers of ripe flavors. Of the 28 wines we tasted from the vintage, 26 rated 90 or more points.

Benoît Gouez, chef de cave at Moët & Chandon, cites his reference points for 2002 as 1982, 1975 and 1964, all rich, complex vintages. Moët's long, refined Brut Grand Vintage 2002 (93, $NA) will be released in the spring of 2011. Two 2002s from small growers, the delicate, lightly smoky Gaston Chiquet Brut (93) and the racy Chartogne-Taillet Brut (92), are reasonably priced at $60.

The 2004 vintage, rated 90 points, delivers wines that, while not as bold as the 2002s, have plenty of acidity and focus; their vibrant character shows promise. In our tastings, two affordable bottlings stood out: The bracing Philizot & Fils Brut Millésime (91, $41) and the creamy Nicolas Feuillatte Brut (91, $46).

Among older vintages, the best 2000s and 1999s offer balance and finesse, despite the challenges faced by growers in both growing seasons. The '99s, which typically have lower acidity, are aging beautifully, already showing some of the secondary roasted nut, honey and coffee notes that are enjoyable in older Champagnes and give them a "drink me now" appeal. Look for the alluring cardamom and cumin notes of Alfred Gratien's deft Brut 1999 (93, $94) or the fine texture of Vilmart's mouthwatering Brut Coeur de Cuvée 1999 (93, $302/1.5L). In the $50 to $60 range (entry-level prices for vintage Champagne), good examples include Charles Ellner's zesty Brut 1999 (91, $55) and Brut Séduction 1999 (93, $60), which shows coffee liqueur and hazelnut overtones.

Ellner also made one of the top 2000s in this report, its almond-laced Brut (93, $55). Equally impressive for its harmonious, silky texture and grapefruit, apple and graphite flavors is the Pol Roger Brut Champagne 2000 (93, $100).

Though Champagne, which is located about an hour and a half northeast of Paris, is a single appellation, it comprises four distinct areas: Montagne de Reims, Vallée de la Marne, Côte des Blancs and Côte des Bar, also known as the Aube. Most houses make a range of styles, relying on the region's three grapes, Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier, from one or more of the four areas.

For example, blanc de blancs Champagne is made from 100 percent Chardonnay, primarily grown in the Côte des Blancs region, and accounted for about a fifth of our tastings. Two highlights are the full-bodied Pierre Peters Brut Blanc de Blancs Cuvée Spéciale Les Chétillons 2002 (94, $100) and the seductive Ayala Brut Blanc de Blancs 2002 (94, $70).

Rosé Champagne also made up a significant portion of our tastings, consisting of nearly a quarter of the labels. These wines most often blend a small amount of still red wine to add color, resulting in a wide array of hues, from pale salmon to cherry-berry pink. A smaller amount of rosé Champagne gains its color through a short period of skin contact during fermentation, a method known as saignée.

Veuve Clicquot's 1985 Brut Rosé Rare (93), full of coffee, treacle and dried cherry flavors, offers a fascinating look at how well a fine rosé Champagne can age-and it's a surprisingly affordable $110. Charles Heidsieck's elegant Brut Rosé Réserve NV (93, $75) is always a solid bottling, while the vinous Brut Rosé Rose Top NV from Heidsieck Monopole (92, $45) offers consistent value.

Given the celebratory nature of Champagne, it has a natural place during the upcoming holiday season. What better gift to unwrap than the foil on a fine bottle of Champagne? But with plenty of high quality bottlings available this year, often at more affordable prices, maybe it's time for Champagne to make a more regular appearance on your table and in your cellar.

Senior editor Bruce Sanderson and senior tasting coordinator Alison Napjus collaborated on this report.

The Tapestry of Champagne [WS]

It's all in the details for these benchmark sparkling wines
Alison Napjus
Issue: December 31, 2011

A fine Champagne illustrates the art of blending. The chef de cave weaves together a variety of different base wines-hundreds in some cases-to produce the final bottling. Each base wine has its own strength and character, yet the finished product is seamlessly integrated. Champagne's beauty is truly not skin-deep.

In this sense, the wines of Champagne are a metaphor for the region as a whole. Behind the outward face of high-end bottlings, luxury and glamour lies a tightly knit community of farmers, vintners, marketers, businessmen and others, each performing a distinct role in creating the world's preeminent sparkling wine region. This is the tapestry of Champagne: individuals dedicated as a group to preserving the region's traditions and honoring its past, while also ensuring Champagne's success well into the future.

It's a complex balancing act. Small growers work alongside and with the big houses. They tend a mix of Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier vines, planted on rolling hills that give way to the dramatic gradients of coveted vineyard sites. And the region's 84,000 acres under vine encompass an extremely diverse mix of soils and microclimates, from those at the northernmost limit of wine production to the more southern area of Aube, which enjoys a warmer continental climate well-suited to ripening the fickle Pinot Noir grape. This diversity is on display in the wines, and exploring the many styles is surely the most approachable and enjoyable path to understanding this unique region.

Since our last report ("Cause for Celebration," Dec. 31, 2010 - Jan. 15, 2011), I have reviewed more than 350 wines in blind tastings in our New York office. Few wine regions can consistently boast the across-the-board quality of Champagne, with this report finding 10 wines earning classic scores (95 to 100 points on Wine Spectator's 100-point scale) and the vast majority of the remainder, 90 percent, receiving scores in the outstanding range of 90 to 94 points. (A free alphabetical list of scores and prices for all wines tasted is available.)

The 10 wines at the pinnacle come from four producers; both vintage and non-vintage, all are currently available. Perennial leader Krug strikes again with this report's highest rating, 98 points, for its 1998 Brut Blanc de Blancs Clos du Mesnil ($849). This wine is beautifully crafted, an exercise in finesse and balance, and has only improved since its initial release in 2009.

Impressively, Krug earned five additional classic ratings this year. Two of the wines are also from the elegant 1998 vintage: the focused Brut (97 points, $279) and the powerful Brut Blanc de Noirs Clos d'Ambonnay (96, $2,549), made entirely from Pinot Noir from Krug's 1.7-acre Clos d'Ambonnay vineyard. The rich and aromatic 2000 Brut Blanc de Blancs Clos du Mesnil joins the Brut at 97 points ($979), while the house's two non-vintage cuvées each earned 95 points. The Brut Rosé NV ($299) is firm and mouthwatering, while the Brut Grande Cuvée NV ($169) partners power and grace. Sharing the spotlight with the Krug bottlings, Henriot offers its beautifully balanced Brut Champagne Cuvée des Enchanteleurs 1998 (95, $199) and Ruinart its Brut Dom Ruinart 2002 (95, $130), the latter harmonious and lacy, made from 100 percent Chardonnay (although not labeled as blanc de blancs).

Not least, one of the region's top grower-estates, Vilmart & Cie, received 95 points for both its 2000 Brut Cuvée Création ($141) and 2002 Coeur de Cuvée ($153). Vilmart's Laurent Champs utilizes 228-liter Burgundy barrels, two to four years old, to ferment and age his base wines for these high-scoring Champagnes. Over the past decade, Champs' vintage Champagnes have almost always been outstanding, but this year's releases show that he has really found the sweet spot in balancing the distinctive richness and exotic spice character that the oak imparts.

The 2002s from Ruinart and Vilmart illustrate the strength of this powerful vintage, whose top wines typically show fine balance and intense acidity partnered with ripe fruit and rich texture. For many producers, the year is the current release in the marketplace.

Other standouts from 2002 include more affordable offerings such as Philippe Prié's well-cut Brut 2002 (93, $59) and the rich Brut Vieilles Vignes from Le Brun Servenay (94, $90). At higher price-points are Bollinger's subtle-textured Brut La Grande Année (94, $125), an oak-fermented and oak-aged blend of the house's best barrels from 2002, and Perrier-Jouët's Brut Blanc de Blancs Fleur de Champagne Cuvée Belle Epoque 2002 (94, $350), a lively and graceful wine. Hervé Deschamps, chef de cave at Perrier-Jouët, attributes its success with the vintage to a windy period prior to harvest that concentrated the grapes' ripeness and acidity.

Along with 2002, the bulk of available vintage Champagne comes from 2004, another excellent year. After a cool, wet August, this vintage was saved by near-ideal weather during harvest. The resulting wines consistently partner ripe fruit with good, balancing acidity, making them approachable from the get-go. As an added bonus, the year produced a banner crop in Champagne, one of the largest in the past couple of decades, so there should be plenty of 2004s to go around.

Among the 2004s currently available, seek out Piper-Heidsieck's rich and toasty Brut (94, $75), the top-scoring '04 in this report. At 93 points, several grower-estates produced distinctive offerings, including L. Aubry Fils' vibrant Brut Le Nombre d'Or Campanae Veteres Vites ($68), made from Champagne's ancient varieties of Pinot Blanc, Pinot Gris, Petit Meslier and others; Pierre Gimonnet & Fils' subtle Brut Paradoxe ($88); and Pierre Moncuit's finely meshed Brut Blanc de Blancs ($60). And three of Champagne's larger houses stood out for their outstanding examples in 2004, also at 93 points: Drappier's Brut Grande Sendrée ($86) is a vibrant, toasty version; Veuve Clicquot's Brut ($75) is refined and graceful; and Taittinger's Brut Rosé Comtes de Champagne ($220) is a rich rosé well-suited to food.

While vintage bottlings are often the pride of a house and a highlight for any Champagne lover, it is the non-vintage bottlings, which are more widely produced, that some argue are the better judge of a house's or a grower's overall character.

The majority of the blend for most non-vintage Champagnes is based on two to three recent vintages, mixed with some percentage of "réserve" wines from older-sometimes much older-vintages. The goal of the chef de cave is to produce a consistent style for his non-vintage Champagne from year to year, despite the variety in the characters of the vintages going into the blend. Although the base years may differ depending on the resources of a grower or house, many non-vintage Champagnes currently available at retail and in restaurants are based primarily on the 2008, 2007 and 2006 vintages, in varying percentages. This is promising, because while 2007 is a somewhat variable vintage, both 2006 and 2008 are excellent years.

This promise has been realized in the results, with 87 percent of the more than 230 non-vintage wines I reviewed receiving scores of 90 points or higher. Of those wines, several were notable for their balance and refined textures, often offering good value for such high quality.

On the heels of Krug's 95-point non-vintage wines, Gosset stands out for its Extra Brut Blanc de Blancs Celebris NV (94, $208), a beautiful Champagne with fine definition and detail. At just a notch below, 10 wines in the non-vintage category received scores of 93 points, representing a mix of different styles-brut, brut blanc de blancs and brut rosé-and a variety of houses: Henri Billiot & Fils, Bollinger, Diebolt-Vallois, Alfred Gratien, Charles Heidsieck, Henriot, Jean Laurent and Piper-Heidsieck. Among these estates, Henriot made a particularly well-priced bubbly, the fresh and juicy Brut Souverain NV ($50), while sister-houses Piper-Heidsieck and Charles Heidsieck delivered a one-two punch with the former's vinous Brut Rosé Sauvage NV and the latter's finely woven Brut Réserve NV, both at $55.

Other terrific values include two bottlings available for less than $40, the focused Brut Blanc de Blancs Réserve NV from Guy Charlemagne (92, $39) and the creamy Brut NV from Nicolas Feuillatte (92, $36). Also worth searching for are Ayala's Brut Majeur NV (92, $40), firm and minerally, and G.H. Mumm's rich, flavorful Brut Cordon Rouge NV (92, $40).

Like many Old World wine regions, Champagne walks the fine line of preserving a storied past while maintaining relevance and position in the modern marketplace. Two success stories stood out to me during a visit to Champagne earlier this year as illustrative of this balance.

Veuve Clicquot showed its market savvy and foresight when it recognized, in the late '90s, the growing interest in rosé Champagne on the part of various demographic groups and in the Asian market. After several years of development, the house's response was to reintroduce to their lineup, in 2005, a non-vintage rosé Champagne.

"Veuve Clicquot almost invented the category, in 1775," explains Cyril Brun, a member of Veuve's winemaking team, but the house's focus for many years and even into the 1990s was on the vintage rosé. At that time, he says, "It was hard to make a consistent style of non-vintage rosé-we needed less swings in nature, and [the ability] to keep reserves of red wine in order to apply the same philosophy of winemaking to the rosé non-vintage as to the regular non-vintage."

To answer these needs, in 2006 Veuve Clicquot renovated and expanded a red-wine production facility located in Bouzy, where the company owns almost 70 acres of prime Pinot Noir vines. Dedicated to the production of still red wine, made from only the best red grapes, to be used in rosés, the facility represents a considerable yet highly worthwhile investment for the company. Today, Veuve Clicquot's Brut Rosé NV (91, $64) is second only to its ubiquitous yellow-label Brut NV (91, $51) in terms of availability, and is well-placed in the still-growing, trendy rosé market.

While these results are already measurable, those of another recent investment by Veuve Clicquot-the purchase of 30 large oak foudres in 2007 and 2008-have yet to be seen. The 7,500-liter and 5,100-liter new oak barrels are intended primarily to ferment and age the wines for Veuve Clicquot's vintage Champagnes, but will be used for its non-vintage wines in years that the house does not declare a vintage.

Like two kids in a candy store, Brun and chef de cave Dominique Demarville get excited when they walk among and talk about their barrels. The 2008 harvest was the first to go into the barrels, which Demarville says add further complexity to their blends: "More diversity in the wines, more choices-and two sizes to allow us to diversify even more."

Compounding that diversity is the uniqueness of each barrel. "Each foudre is a personality and has its own character. This is a Chard guy, this one likes his Pinot," Demarville jokes. He adds that they're also now able to extend the aging of the reserve wines with these barrels, which "automatically raises the complexity of the blend."

While the changes at Veuve Clicquot relate to its infrastructure, the second success story I encountered this past year involved a change in corporate structure, one that will shape the future for sister houses Charles Heidsieck and Piper-Heidsieck.

In late 2010, then-owner Rémy Cointreau put the houses up for sale, and a deal was struck in June of this year with Société Européenne de Participations Industrielles, a French luxury goods firm. EPI quickly appointed Cécille Bonnefond, former CEO at Veuve Clicquot, to head up its new Champagne division.

During the interim period, Régis Camus, chef de cave for both houses, kept doing what he does best: maintaining high quality while producing a distinctive style for the wines of each house. At times in the past, the Charles Heidsieck line of Champagnes may have offered a more consistent quality level than the more abundant Piper-Heidsieck line. But that was certainly not the case this year, and wines from both houses showed equally well. In my tastings, scores ranged from 92 points for Piper-Heidsieck's Brut NV ($45) to 93 points for its Brut Rosé Sauvage NV ($55) and Charles Heidsieck's Brut Réserve NV ($55) and Brut Rosé Réserve ($75) to a high score of 94 points for Piper's elegant 2004 Brut.

"It's a privilege to make both-because they must stay separate in style, but both come from the same source materials," Camus says. One system of vinification is used to produce the base wines that are ultimately blended into the individual bottlings from each house.

The poet in Camus comes out as he describes the difference in style between the two houses. "Piper is springtime, all floral, citrus and white fruit; Charles is fall-golden-with Mediterranean dates and stone fruits." He explains that the style for each is maintained in part through the proper selection of reserve wines to add when blending the non-vintage cuvées, using younger reserve wines for Piper-Heidsieck, and older reserves-usually eight to 10 years old-for Charles.

With Bonnefond at the helm, both houses will surely see changes, but Camus' position will stay the same. Bonnefond affirms, "Régis Camus is and will remain the lead man behind the two lines of wines, ensuring their elegance in their own ways. We have projects for each house. But one clear focus will be to put the wines at the core of our plans."

The leaders at both Veuve Clicquot and Charles and Piper-Heidsieck make it clear that despite the changing times and new opportunities, the heart of the matter is always the wines.

For Demarville at Veuve Clicquot, that focus is on the yellow-labeled NV Brut and the overall Veuve Clicquot style. "[We have] to continue what was done by our predecessors. It's easy to be good for Grand Dame when you use only the best wines," he says, referring to their tête de cuvée vintage Champagne, but adds, "Yellow Label drives our decision-making process."

At Charles and Piper-Heidsieck, Camus's goal is stability. "A Champagne house is judged for the quality of the style," he says, "but most importantly, the consistency."

Each are sentiments echoed by their peers in the region, and reminders that though continually looking ahead, the Champenois know their primary goals and can stay well-tuned to the here and now. It is this ability-to blend all of the little pieces together to create the whole-that keeps Champagne dynamic and fresh, and earns it its place as the world's benchmark for sparkling wine.

Senior tasting coordinator Alison Napjus is Wine Spectator's lead taster on the wines of Champagne.

Beyond The Bubbles [WS]

A closer look at the wealth of offerings from Champagne
Alison Napjus
Issue: December 31, 2012

France's Champagne region has worked hard to establish itself as a symbol of luxury and celebration. But there's solid achievement behind that frothy image. Champagne is the world's premier region for sparkling wine, producing an impressive range of styles and doing so with consistently high quality.

Since our last report ("The Tapestry of Champagne," Dec. 31, 2011 - Jan. 15, 2012), I've reviewed nearly 425 Champagnes from more than 120 different producers. A large majority of them received outstanding scores of 90 points or higher on the Wine Spectator 100-point scale, with more than a dozen rating classic. (A free alphabetical list of scores and prices for all wines tasted is available.)

Of the classic-rated wines in this report, there are a number of bottlings from Krug Champagne, including the two high-scorers, which top the charts at 98 points. Krug's 2000 Brut Blanc de Blancs Clos du Mesnil ($859) is a study on the interplay between finesse and power, while its 1998 Brut ($269) offers lovely harmony and luxurious texture.

Both of these are vintage wines, produced from grapes harvested during a single year and meant to capture the unique character of that growing season and harvest. Our tastings, reflecting the current offerings in the marketplace, are dominated by the 2004 vintage, a year that produced a bumper crop but paired quantity with quality. The resulting wines are vibrant, with good structure and elegance, and based on the strength of the 2004s in this year's tastings, I have upgraded the vintage's overall rating to 92 points.

The two top-scoring 2004s are like stylistic bookends for the vintage, with the delicacy of Veuve Clicquot's Brut La Grande Dame 2004 (94 points, $165) acting as a foil to the richness of Vilmart's Coeur de Cuvée 2004 (94, $148). I also recommend the well-priced 2004 Brut Grand from Baron-Fuenté (92, $40) and the Roland Champion Brut Blanc de Blancs 2004 (92, $66), a wine made from 100 percent Chardonnay, a variety that excelled in 2004.

In addition, vintage bottlings from 2005 and 2006 are beginning to have a presence on retail shelves and wine lists. 2005 was a variable vintage in terms of weather during the growing season and harvest, and as a result it's best to choose carefully and stick to top producers. A fine example is Louis Roederer's Brut Cristal 2005 (94, $249), a mouthwatering wine that shows a layered flavor range wrapped around smoky minerality.

Cristal's success in 2005 may be attributed, in part, to the biodynamically grown vines from which the grapes are sourced. Roederer technical director Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon believes that organic vineyards often fare better in difficult years. Referring to Roederer's biodynamic practices as "haute couture viticulture," he says, "It's about pushing boundaries while revisiting the traditional experience."

It will be easier to assess the overall quality of 2006 as more wines are released, yet the vintage shows more promise than 2005, largely thanks to excellent weather at harvest that year. But there are a number of quality offerings already available. The Vilmart Brut Grand Cellier Rubis 2006 (95, $151) is a delicate rosé for its aromatics and finesse, but also shows a lot of power in an elegant package. And two blanc de blancs offer good value: Jacquart's refined Brut Blanc de Blancs 2006 (92, $55) and J.L. Vergnon's firm and fresh Brut Blanc de Blancs Resonance 2006 (92, $52).

Like all fine wine, the best bottles of Champagne can have a long life, and many houses put aside part of their vintage production to release at a later date—sometimes very much later. Krug's current release of this sort is its Brut Collection 1989 (97, $549), a racy, tightly knit wine that is just beginning to show hints of age with accents of ground coffee, oyster shell and dried fruit.

Krug has been offering its Collection wines since the 1990s. Veuve Clicquot launched a similar concept this year with the Cave Privée series. The Cave Privée wines are specially selected vintages that have not been offered to the market since their original release many years ago. This year's releases include the 1989 Brut Rosé Cave Privée (95, $295), a creamy wine with finely tuned acidity that is aging beautifully, and the 1990 Brut Cave Privée (94, $175), which is rich, with baked fruit, bread pudding and molasses notes, yet remains elegant and persistently fresh.

Both of these Clicquot bottlings were disgorged in October of 2008, in anticipation of their release this year. Disgorgement is an important part of the Champagne production process, wherein the sediment that accumulates during the secondary fermentation and subsequent aging of the wine is removed, before the final step of adjusting the wine's dosage.

"Champagnes age very well before disgorgement, but they can age very well after disgorgement as well," says Veuve Clicquot chef de cave Dominique Demarville, regarding the value of disgorgement for the Cave Privée wines. "It is very important to have both to put the best wine on the market."

The Cave Privée wines list the wine's disgorgement date on the back label of the bottle, joining other houses and producers such as Bruno Paillard and Philipponnat who have been doing so for many years. (For more on the subject, see "Debating Disgorgement Dates," page 104.)

Vintage Champagnes deliver generally high quality and allow producers to craft distinctive wines that reflect the personality of a particular year. But it is non-vintage wines that dominate the marketplace, making up nearly two-thirds of the Champagnes I reviewed this past year.

Non-vintage wines typically offer a good introduction to Champagne, in part because their price point is usually more approachable, and because their general aim is consistency from year to year. They are produced by blending wine from at least two or three vintages (and sometimes more), a method historically designed to balance the dramatic differences between vintage conditions in a cool-climate wine region such as Champagne.

Krug shows its expertise once again with the two highest-scoring non-vintage wines of this report. The Brut Rosé NV (95, $299) is rich and finely cut, and the Brut Grande Cuvée NV (95, $169) offers lovely texture, with layers of fruit, almond, honey and spice flavors. These wines regularly receive high marks within their categories, largely because Krug's attention to detail during its production goes the extra mile and then some.

Non-vintage Champagne need only be aged for 15 months before being released, but Krug's rosé is aged for five years and its Grande Cuvée for six. And while many non-vintage wines blend two or three vintages, Krug's bottlings get added depth and complexity from five or six vintages for the rosé, and as many as 12 vintages (going back to 15 years of age) for the Grande Cuvée. Olivier Krug, director of the house, explains how the additional vintages add more range to the wines: "The idea about reserve wines is to keep specific ingredients from certain vintages."

Other houses also show the ability to partner quality with consistency among their non-vintage bottlings. Alfred Gratien's spicy Brut Cuvée Paradis NV (94, $145) is just a step ahead of the creamy Brut Rosé Cuvée Paradis NV (93, $165) and minerally Brut NV (93, $70), with the rich, well-knit Brut Rosé NV (92, $80) not much further behind. Bollinger's offerings are also impressive: The Brut Special Cuvée NV (93, $75) is very elegant, with fresh, focused acidity, while the Brut Rosé NV (93, $110) shows a briny hint of minerality underscoring fruit and graphite notes.

About a third of the non-vintage wines reviewed for this report are offered this year at a lower price compared with last year's bottlings. Lee Schlesinger, director of marketing for Winesellers, Ltd., the U.S. importer of Besserat de Bellefon Champagne, explains that this price decrease is simply due to the stronger dollar. "2012 prices are a little lower thanks to an improvement of almost 10 percent in foreign exchange."

This means that for the first time since the recession hit, it's possible to find a number of producers offering non-vintage bottlings in the $30 to $35 range. If you're looking for a delicate, aperitif-style wine with bright acidity, try the Montaudon Brut NV (90, $35), while Baron-Fuenté's well-balanced Brut Grande Réserve NV (91) is an excellent value at $30 a bottle. For something with a little bit more richness, Heidsieck Monopole's Brut Blue Top NV (91, $35) is well-defined and energetic.

For just a few dollars more, the Ayala Brut Majeur NV (91, $39) is dry and creamy, and the Vollereaux Brut NV (92, $40) is rich and refined. Piper-Heidsieck also shows well with its Brut NV (93, $50), offering rich layers of brioche, graphite, fruit and spice.

Still, Champagne remains an expensive wine, even in the non-vintage category. But it's important to remember that you're not simply paying for the designer label. Champagne is one of the most technically difficult and labor-intensive wines to produce, and the region delivers some of the most distinctive and ageworthy sparkling wines in the world. They stand out for their diversity and their character, and deserve a place at the table as much as a starring role in your next celebration.

Senior tasting coordinator Alison Napjus is Wine Spectator's lead taster on the wines of Champagne.

Debating Disgorgement Dates [WS]

Disgorgement is a fundamental part of the Champagne method. It refers to the process of removing the sediment that accumulates during secondary fermentation and bottle-aging on the lees. Following disgorgement, a dosage (usually sugar syrup) may be added to the wine, and then the bottle is corked and prepared for release.

French law regulates the amount of time a wine must spend maturing on the lees before disgorgement: at least 12 months for non-vintage Champagnes and three years for vintage bottlings. (Many producers will age their wines even longer, sometimes as much as five years or more for vintage versions.) After disgorgement, producers must keep the finished bottles in their cellars for at least three months for non-vintage Champagne and at least a year—though sometimes more—for vintage cuvées.

Champagnes age differently on the lees, or before disgorgement, than they do on the cork, or after disgorgement.

A Champagne from the 1990 vintage that was disgorged in 1994, for example, then aged on the cork until 2010, may be very different in character from a 1990 Champagne that was not disgorged until 2008 and then opened in 2010. Many experts believe that the lees nourish the wine, adding complexity and preserving youthfulness, but it's a matter of personal preference, and also very much dependent on the character of the wine itself.

Until recently, there was no way for a consumer to know how long a bottle of Champagne aged on its lees before disgorgement. But some houses have begun to indicate a disgorgement date on their labels. Unlike a vintage year, the disgorgement date does not give any specific clues as to the potential quality and character of the Champagne in question; but like the vintage date, it may give some idea of how the Champagne is aging.

Many of the region's récoltant-manipulant, or small growers who produce Champagne from vines they own themselves and do not buy any grapes, have always listed a disgorgement date on their wines. Among the larger négociant houses, Bruno Paillard has included a disgorgement date on all of his house's wines since 1985, including both its vintage and non-vintage bottlings. Philipponnat has done so since the late 1990s, while Lanson started in the last decade. Krug began this year to mark several of its wines with an ID that indicates the quarter and year a bottle was disgorged.

Paillard is a strong advocate for disgorgement dates, believing they help to counter the idea that Champagne doesn't age. "The motivation was to try and explain to consumers that Champagne is, or can be, a great wine, and as such it has its life and its specific kind of maturation, including after disgorgement," he says. "[We want] to encourage people to discover the wonderful extra complexity which post-disgorgement maturation can offer, and the first step is to know when the disgorgement actually happened."

Paillard's conviction regarding the importance of disgorgement dates is matched by those who adamantly oppose them, such as Peter Wasserman, a wine broker who works with Le Serbet, which represents many Champagne producers in the U.S. Wasserman agrees that it benefits vintage wines to include the disgorgement date, but thinks it can be misleading on non-vintage wines.

"It does not tell you either how long the wines have been aged on the lees, or what the composition—the base year plus the reserve years—is of the wine," he says. "You need the whole explanation each time you put a disgorgement date. There is no way to extrapolate [more information]."

There's also the possibility that some consumers might mistake the disgorgement date for a vintage date, or assume that they only want the "freshest" disgorgement date, overlooking the fact that bottle age may be a plus for the wine overall. But at the end of the day, it's additional information for the consumer, and as with any fact or figure, in order to get the most from the data you need to understand what it means and how to put it in the proper context.

Dom Perignon Rose Auction Price [WS]




Vintage Report: Champagne 2009 [WS]

Region: Champagne

Champagne's 2009 growing season got off to a difficult start. After a cold winter, the rainy spring helped recharge groundwater reserves, but June saw a long, difficult flowering, particularly in the Côte des Blancs, caused by cool nighttime temperatures. That led to inconsistent ripening at the end of the season, but this is less of an issue in Champagne than other regions, due to the typically gentle pressing of the grapes and lack of maceration with the skins.

The wet spring led to outbreaks of downy mildew, forcing growers to use treatments to stop its spread. There were also isolated thunderstorms accompanied by hail and mudslides on June 14 and July 3 in the Marne Valley, notably in the village of Aÿ.

August debuted very hot and dry, and stayed that way all month. "We could almost say that Champagne had its first really fine summer since 2003," said Frédéric Panaiotis, chef de cave at Ruinart. "Little rain, lots of sunshine, which, combined with the early budbreak, resulted in grapes ready to be picked early September."

Picking began in earnest during the second week of September, and most growers and houses were finished by Sept. 30. Dominique Demarville, chef de cave at Veuve Clicquot, began with Chardonnay, but waited on the reds. "From my point of view, the grapes were ripe enough regarding the level of sugar and acidity, but not homogenous, due to the inconsistent flowering," he said. "Tasting the grapes a few days before, we decided to delay the picking."

From all reports, the grapes were healthy, with good levels of ripeness balanced by fresh acidity. Ruinart's Panaiotis pointed out that the numbers looked similar to 2008, but the weather patterns during the growing season were completely different, with '08 ripening at the very end, just before harvest.

"Because the summer was dry, the grapes were healthy: No oïdium (powdery mildew), no botrytis," said Pierre Gimonnet, proprietor and winemaker at Didier Gimonnet. "And when it is healthy, that is real quality—very pure flavors."

Yields ranged from 8,000 kilograms per hectare (about 3.5 tons per acre from an old-vine parcel damaged by hail in Aÿ and harvested for Deutz) to 14,000 kg/ha (6.2 tons/acre), depending on grape variety and region.

Though 14,000 kg/ha was the maximum yield in the vineyard, this year the Comité Interprofessionel du Vin de Champagne limited the amount that could be bottled as Champagne to 9,700 kg/ha for growers and 8,000 kg/ha for houses. The remainder, up to 4,300 kg/ha can be set aside as reserve for future years. This policy effectively manages supply and stabilizes prices in a year that has seen sales of Champagne drop by as much as 50 percent.

Whether 2009 is a vintage year or not has yet to be decided by most houses. Régis Camus, chef de cave of Charles and Piper-Heidsieck, likens the young vins clairs to those from the 2002 and 2004 vintages.

Gimonnet noted that, "In the past, our grandfathers and fathers produced one exceptional vintage per decade. This millenium is amazing: 2002 is exceptional, then 2006 and 2008 could be exceptional. So we think we are not credible if we are saying 2009 could be exceptional too."

B.S.