Dom Pérignon re-brands Oenothèque

 

12th May, 2014 by Patrick Schmitt - This article is over multiple pages: 1 2

Dom Pérignon has changed the name of its late-release, recently-disgorged Champagne with the unveiling of its 1998 vintage.

Dom Pérignon P2 – 1998

Previously called Oenothèque, the house has labeled its latest vintage re-release “P2 – 1998”, referring to the fact this launch represents the second “plenitude” of the 1998 vintage, which was first released to the market in 2005.

Speaking to the drinks business ahead of the launch, Dom Pérignon cellar master Richard Geoffroy said he would continue to use the term “Oenothèque” for the brand’s storage facility in Champagne, but employ the word “Plénitude” for the vintage releases.

“Dom Pérignon has developed through plenitudes since day one, so there is nothing new, but we felt that instead of referring to oenothèque, which is the site holding the inventory, it was better to refer to plenitude.”

Continuing, he said that the decision was motivated by a desire to highlight the benefits of extended ageing on the lees for Dom Pérignon.

“We thought it was more relevant to come up with something evoking the phenomenon of active maturation on the yeast, which is so salient and singular to Dom Pérignon.”

“And because the 1998 vintage is launching on its second plenitude, we have come up with Dom Pérignon P2 – 1998,” he added.

“But we will keep referring to oenothèque as the actual physical place [where the wines are stored],” he said.

Explaining further the plenitude concept, Geoffroy told db that Dom Pérignon, when left in contact with its lees, does not evolve in a linear fashion, but ages in a series of stages, producing “windows of opportunity, or plenitudes” when he believes the Champagne can be disgorged and released to bring consumers a different expression of the same vintage.

“The programme is based on the observation that these wines don’t develop in a steady or linear way, but in plateaus, giving windows of expressions,” he recorded.

Geoffroy said he witnesses “no less than three windows in the life of a given vintage,” pointing out that the first plenitude comes around eight years after the vintage, which is when Dom Pérignon Vintage is released, while the second one arrives between 12 and 15 years – which was previously the first oenothèque release, but from now will be know as P2.

“Eventually there is a third window, after around 30 years, when the Champagne has spent no less than 20 years on its lees,” he said.

After this, Geoffory recorded that “the wines evolve very slowly and more steadily.”

Speaking further of the three windows or plenitudes, he added, “These are moments in the life of a wine when it stands up and speaks out of an exciting character.”

Then, drawing attention to the value of extended ageing on the lees for Dom Pérignon specifically, as opposed to maturation post-disgorgement, Geoffroy said, “We are are strong believers in the virtue of yeast maturation – we think it dramatically contributes to the singularity of Dom Pérignon.”

The P2 – 1998 was unveiled late last week in Iceland, and has spent 12 years ageing on its lees, with a further two years resting post disgorgement in the Dom Pérignon cellars. It follows the Oenothèque 1996.

There will be no re-release of a rosé to complement the unveiling of blanc P2 – 1998, although next year Dom Pérignon will launch a rosé P2 from the 1995 vintage.

Geoffroy explained, “There is no vintage ready for a second release for rosé, so we remain with the 1993.”

However, he added, “Next year, Dom Pérignon will launch a rosé from 1995.”

Geoffroy continued, “It couldn’t be synchronised; the wine dictates the timing, and we couldn’t make them to coincide in one event – it is not the nature of wine.”

During the discussion with db, Geoffroy did not want to announce whether Dom Pérignon would follow the 2004 vintage, launched last year, with the 2005 – a vintage that Moët has decided to skip.

However, he did stress that every vintage released by Dom Pérignon must be good enough to go into the brand’s cellars for extended ageing on the lees.

“We would not consider making a vintage which we wouldn’t be able to re-release through a second or third plenitude,” he said, adding, “The capacity to go to a second or third plenitude is a criteria of declaration.”

When asked about the characteristics of each plenitude, Geoffroy said the first vintage release displayed “harmony”, pointing out that the 2004 vintage launched last year needed nine years ageing on its lees to have “an overall harmony”.

With the second release, or plenitude, Geoffroy looks for “energy”, an aspect he said was evident in the release of P2 – 1998.

“The 1998 is about energy: the wine is already 16 years to the vintage. You could well expect the maturity of the wine to be based on weight and power – paradoxically it is not.

“It is full, packed with energy – so lifted, so Dom Pérignon, so penetrating; energetic and dancing, nothing weighty, nothing tired or oxidative.”

As for a third plenitude, Geoffroy said that he witnesses “something more accomplished, streamlined, integrated and more into complexity – but integration is the one word: it is when all the characters are back to the core of the wine.”

But, he then stressed, “The lifespan of Dom Pérignon is far more than 30-40 years, and from the third plentitude, the wine will keep improving.”

Dom Pérignon puts around 10% aside of every vintage into the house’s cellars for extended ageing, and then Geoffroy and his winemaking team taste the wines twice a year to monitor the Champagnes’ evolution.

When Geoffroy believes the wine is ripe for its second or third release, he disgorges the Champagne in one go, and, since 2000, has printed the disgorgement year on the label.

The dosages for Dom Pérignon’s late-release Champagnes are lower, and always under 6 g/l of sugar, compared to between 6 to 7 g/l for the first release.

The 1998 – P2 was launched in Iceland last week and will be shown to UK trade and press in early June.

 

Concha Y Toro Marques de Casa Concha Cabernet Sauvignon 2011 in Malaysia

Wine Spectator is featuring this as highly recommended. In arriving to a highly recommended wines, Wine Spectator probably have used a combination of high score and relatively accessible price.

At RM100 or even with bigger discount if you buy 12 bottles (a case), you hardly can get a 93 pointers. 

Personally, I like to age a range of wines that have very accessible pricing between RM100-RM200 but have scores between 90-94 for everyday drinking.

Will update the thread when I drink this in the near future.

Please feel free to write to me at ‎gohberry (at) hotmail.com if you need to find out more on where to shop for wine.

Concha Y Toro Marques de Casa Concha Cabernet Sauvignon 2011 in Malaysia

Wine Spectator is featuring this as highly recommended. In arriving to a highly recommended wines, Wine Spectator probably have used a combination of high score and relatively accessible price.

At RM100 or even with bigger discount if you buy 12 bottles (a case), you hardly can get a 93 pointers. 

Personally, I like to age a range of wines that have very accessible pricing between RM100-RM200 but have scores between 90-94 for everyday drinking.

Will update the thread when I drink this in the near future.

Please feel free to write to me at ‎gohberry (at) hotmail.com if you need to find out more on where to shop for wine.

Vintage 2011: Barsac & Sauternes

A consistent bright spot in 2011 is the sweet wines of Barsac and Sauternes. Both areas excelled, with a slight edge to Barsac, whose limestone soils generally provide wines of greater freshness and cut, a character that marries well with the style of the vintage.

Botrytis cinerea, or noble rot, attacked early and quickly in 2011. The beneficial fungus, which attacks the skins of Sémillon and Sauvignon Blanc, the area's two most important varieties, shrivels the grapes and concentrates the remaining juice. Because of its early arrival and fast spread in 2011, it affected grapes that were fully ripe yet still retained lots of natural acidity.

"A good noble rot in Sauternes is a fast noble rot," says Denis Dubourdieu, owner and winemaker at Château Doisy Daëne in Barsac. The Château Doisy Daëne Barsac L'Extravagant 2011 (99, $425/375ml) and Château Doisy Daëne Barsac 2011 (95, $50) beautifully exemplify the vintage's racy, fresh profile. The L'Extravagant bottling is a rare cuvée, not made in every vintage; in 2011, it comprises 50 percent Sauvignon Blanc, a higher-than-usual amount for the region's sweet wines. (A typical Barsac or Sauternes is 80 percent Sémillon, 20 percent Sauvignon Blanc.)

There are 28 sweet wines from the 2011 Barsac and Sauternes vintage in this report, with nine earning classic scores and an additional 15 earning outstanding marks, a superb overall showing. As a whole, I rate the 2011 Barsac and Sauternes vintage 97 points.

"For me, to have great Sauternes you need perfect ripeness and, immediately after, the development of noble rot without waiting," says Xavier Planty, director and co-owner of Château Guiraud, echoing Dubourdieu's hypothesis. "We got that in 2011, with ripeness, then humidity and noble rot, and sun and wind for concentration. The wines have tension, acidity and freshness of fruit."

The Château Guiraud Sauternes 2011 (97, $50) is a large-scale wine, with gorgeous almond cream, apricot, ginger, mango, piecrust, papaya and toasted hazelnut notes all seamlessly layered and lined with finely textured acidity for balance and freshness through the finish. Château Guiraud is the largest estate in the appellation, making the wine among the easiest to find.

The 2011 sweet wines easily best those of the more powerful, tropical-style 2009 and 2010 vintages, and are on a level with the classic quality of the 2001 harvest.

"The vintage's strength is not so much in its richness, but in its energy and vibrancy," says Bérénice Lurton, owner of Château Climens, whose Barsac 2011 (97, $115) is one of the stars of the vintage, rippling with creamed pineapple, persimmon and white ginger notes against a backdrop of orange blossom.

Other top bottlings include the Château d'Yquem Sauternes 2011 (99, $400), which leads the way overall, showing a lush, caressing feel and loads of mango, papaya and guava notes before picking up the vintage's telltale freshness on the finish, where fig, orange blossom and persimmon accents kick in. The Château Coutet Barsac 2011 (97, $70) is the best bottling yet from the Baly family, which has reestablished this château as one of the region's best sweet wine producers.

Lovers of sweet wines can buy almost blindly in this vintage: Other delicious wines come from Châteaus Suduiraut, Doisy-Védrines, Clos Haut-Peyraguey, Raymond-Lafon, La Tour Blanche, de Myrat, Nairac, Rayne Vigneau and Lafaurie-Peyraguey. Only two top estates have yet to formally release their 2011s: Château Rieussec and Château de Fargues, whose Sauternes 2011 earned a barrel rating of 95-98 points.

 

Dom Perignon

Issue: October 31, 1995

300 years ago a monk named Dom Pérignon developed the essential methods still used today to make Champagne By Per-Henrik Mansson and Ted Loos Aweek to ten days before each harvest, the master vintner would perform a meticulous ritual. Every year it was the same: Bunches of grapes--all picked from individual sections of a 40-acre estate--were put on the windowsill overnight to cool. The next morning, always on an empty stomach, he began his tasting. As he carefully sampled the grapes, he began to formulate the assemblage of different grapes in his mind. Then he used intuition--and maybe a bit of divine inspiration--to decide how to marry the different parcels and the proportions each site would play in the final blend. By seeking out the best fruit for his top cuvées, he showed an unusual interest in quality. It may not be unusual by today's standards, but this vintner was a Benedictine monk who fine-tuned the concept of "selection" more than 300 years ago. Both his methods and his results were quite revolutionary for the 17th century. Thus Dom Pierre Pérignon created the legendary "vin de Pérignon." His blanc de noirs, a white bubbly made from red grapes, became the world's first outstanding sparkling wine and changed the history of Champagne. When he arrived at the Abbey of St.-Pierre d'Hautvillers in 1668, the area north of the town of Epernay in the Champagne region was known for sheep and cereal crops. From the age of 28, when he was named head of the monastery, Dom Pérignon spent nearly half a century as cellarmaster and administrator of the abbey on the slopes above the river Marne. By the time of his death at age 76 in 1715, he had made himself into the greatest man of wine who ever lived, according to Richard Fetter, author of Dom Pérignon: Man and Myth. "Who else can you look at who has so single-handedly changed the face of a region?" Fetter asks. "I don't think anyone else can make that claim." Did he invent champagne? Well, yes and no. Granted, he wasn't the first to produce sparkling wine, and he didn't create the méthode champenoise now used to make Champagne today. This technique involves adding to an already fermented still wine yeasts and a sweet mixture that trigger a second fermentation in the bottle, producing the well-known bubbles. Pérignon couldn't have understood exactly how yeasts worked, since Louis Pasteur's discoveries came much later. But le vin du père Pérignon was a forerunner of the elegant Champagnes we know today. The monk raised the making of sparkling wine to an art form. Because his product impressed the epicures of his time, he placed Champagne on the map as a region with the potenial to make great bubbly. In a sense, Pérignon helped make Champagne (the region) what it is today, even though Champagne (the drink) is now produced in a quite different manner. Over the centuries, historians and others have wondered whether Dom Pérignon's wines were the result of a deep secret, some magic formula that disappeared when he died, just a few days later than Louis XIV. Historical evidence suggests that the monk's success in producing the first fine sparkling wine was due to a combination of factors. Above all, Pérignon focused his efforts on improving the quality of still wines through strict vineyard husbandry and his knack for selecting and blending the right grapes. While some European winemakers already blended various wines to make their final cuvées, Pérignon assembled grapes, not just vats of wine. No other 17th-century vigneron is known to have taken the concept of "selection" as far as he did. Pérignon's wine turned bubbly almost certainly by accident, at least in the beginning. He usually bottled his wine during the third week in March because at that time it seemed he could produce the most bubbles. Unhappy with the temperature of his cellar, Pérignon built a new one in the cool rock on the property. He apparently understood how important constant, low temperatures were for the quality of his wines. The big difference between Pérignon's system and the méthode champenoise is that the bubbles in Pérignon's wine were the result of an interrupted alcohol fermentation. This is how it worked: The wines had only partially fermented in the fall as winter approached and the temperature dropped in the abbey's cellars, which interupted the alcohol fermentation and left some residual su gar in the wines. As warm weather returned in the spring, however, the residual sugar prompted the fermentation to resume. Left to itself, this process often produced an oily, yellow wine that was undrinkable. It was already known that wine would referment in the spring, but Dom Pérignon managed to gain control over nature and produce sparkling wine more consistently. His genius lay in his ability to improve each winemaking step, from the pruning of the vines to the bottling of the wines. Dom Pérignon had a sharp mind inspired by the rigorous logic of Cartesian philosophy. He had been schooled in advanced theological studies since the age of 18, when he chose to enter the Benedictine order. It has been said that nothing focuses the mind like a life of celibacy and communion with God, and Pérignon's achievements are as close to proof as we are likely to get. As the harvest got under way, Pérignon kept firm control over the process. Sometimes pickers would make several passages in a vineyard to pick just the type of grapes needed for the monk's different blends, ensuring that they were harvested at the correct maturity levels. Although the Church may have taught forgiveness, Pérignon was a shrewd businessman who had high standards and severely punished sloppy work. A vineyard police force vigilantly enforced Pérignon's dictates. He forbade pickers from eating grapes while harvesting them because he feared they would choose the best fruit; they were not allowed to eat bread on the job because he feared that crumbs would fall into the basket and pollute the harvest. Grape thieves received years in jail for their crime. To obtain grapes with finesse, Pérignon demanded that vines be pruned to rise only two feet above the ground, while an average of four feet was common in most neighboring vineyards. This severe pruning lowered yields, and probably improved the wine's flavors. And he threatened to take to court any worker who pruned in the rain, because he believed it would damage the vine. When the grapes arrived in buckets hauled on a cart by a mule or a donkey, Pérignon stood in the winery dressed in a hooded robe tightened at the waist by a leather belt, the traditional garb of the Benedictine monks. This was the most important moment of the year. For each cuvée, he made sure that the right types of grapes were placed on the press in the proportions he had determined. For his top vats, he insisted on using only tiny Pinot Noir berries. Unlike many of his fellow vintners, he refused to use white grapes because he felt they oxidized easily and produced heavy wine not to his taste. He vinified the must from each pressing separately. Grapes were left to drop their juices lightly for a while, creating first-run juice. Then heavier pressing was applied, for the first and then the second tailles. Like today's quality Champagne producers, he refused to use the more rustic wine made from the third pressing. The best vintners working today go to great lengths to protect their wines from having any contact with air, which could oxidize and ruin them. Three centuries ago, Pérignon and his team perfected a sophisticated contraption to minimize this contact. To rack their wines, they linked the barrels with metal pipes so that the wine would siphon from one barrel to another. Pérignon was only able to channel his perfectionist tendencies into developing a superior wine because of the resources of the Abbey of St-Pierre d'Hautvillers. He was backed by a well-run, highly disciplined organization, the Benedictine Order. It kept him in the same monastery for 47 years, which was considered a long tenure even back then. The prosperity enjoyed at the abbey sprang to a great extent from Pérignon's ability to make the most of his vineyards. He sold off lesser parcels or faraway vineyards to consolidate holdings around the abbey. And he discovered, as vintners after him also have, that a quality-oriented approach boosted the wine's reputation, which then enhanced its price. Pérignon's wines--identified by the abbey's symbol, a cross imprinted on the wax covering the cork--sold for much higher prices than average wines from the region, mostly still red wines. The signs of prosperity were unmistakable: The abbey expanded its facilities, and the number of monks who resided there doubled during Pérignon's tenure. Since it was the days before sturdy, thick-glass bottles had been introduced, the abbey suffered enormous losses from bottles that exploded when the pressure built up. One year, 1,560 out of 2,381 exploded, or 65 percent of production; another year it was 1,100 out of 1,418 bottles, or 77 percent, according to René Gandilhon's authoritative work, Birth of Champagne: Dom Pierre Pérignon. Such losses could be devastating, and they deterred many lesser lights among local vintners. According to Fetter, in the Montagne de Reims, an area of Champagne north of the Marne Valley where Pérignon lived, vignerons didn't try sparkling wine for another 100 years. The reputation of the vin du père Pérignon, however, spread to the court of Louis XIV and to the king himself. The wines showed considerable finesse, at least by the standards of the rustic wines made back then, and became the toast of the finest tables in Europe. But the tribute that rings most true comes in the opinion of the brotherhood that nourished Pérignon's talent. A full 100 years after Pérignon made his last wine there, Dom Gossard, the last cellarmaster at Hautvillers, described the master's ability to marry grapes this way: "Never once did he make a mistake." A Deserved Reputation Dom Pérignon is overexposed, expensive--and worth it, based on our tasting By Per-Henrik Mansson Named after a 17th-century monk, Champagne Dom Pérignon is the quintessential prestige cuvée: it comes from the best vineyards; it's produced only in the best vintages; it's expensive ($89 in U.S. retail stores for the '88); and it has an interesting story behind it. Even though virtually every Champagne house makes a special prestige cuvée, Moët & Chandon's D.P. (as Dom Pérignon is often called), and Louis Roederer's Cristal, are arguably the two most famous. To produce its top cuvée, Moët can draw from more than 1,100 acres of grands crus vineyards that it owns, says Richard Geoffroy, Moët's head winemaker. And within these grands crus, he chooses from the best parcels, or lieux-dits. Among them are: Saran and Les Buissons in the grand cru commune of Cramant; Les Moulins and Les Joyettes in Mesnil-sur-Oger; Les Assises and Les Dames in Bouzy; and old vines from the site of Dom Pérignon's original monastery, the Abbey d'Hautvillers. "I just cherry-pick the best for the Dom Pérignon," says Geoffroy, who uses 25 to 50 different vineyard sites to assemble the D.P. blend. (Up to 2 percent of Dom Pérignon might be made from purchased grapes, but the great majority comes from Moët's own vineyards.) The juice from each vineyard site is fermented separately in stainless steel vats ranging from 6,600 gallons to 13,200 gallons capacity. No wine ever ferments or ages in wood (Moët did away with the use of oak for Dom Pérignon in 1969). All wines undergo malolactic fermentation by winter, at which time Geoffroy and his team blend the D.P. cuvée to a specific style. What that style is became clear during a vertical tasting of Dom Pérignon held in June at the Abbey d'Hautvillers for this story, a tasting that will be repeated in the United States this fall. On Oct. 27, Moët will treat attendees at the New York Wine Experience to a sit-down tasting of seven vintages of Dom Pérignon: 1969, 1973, 1975, 1976, 1982, 1988 and the newly released 1985 Dom Pérignon Rosé. The 11 vintages I tasted in the summer displayed all the finesse, elegance and subtle complexity you could want in a Champagne. Few of the wines were disappointing, although the tasting did reveal the risks of keeping old wines, even in the best of conditions (all bottles came from Moët's own cellars). Three bottles were oxidized or fading, and second bottles had to be fetched (which were much better). Dom Pérignon is not a fat, opulent Champagne that hits you over the head and weighs on your palate with extremely rich flavors. Instead Geoffroy's goal is to make a crisp, firmly structured Champagne that still has some roundness. The fruit shines through, uninhibited by any contact with wood, but the malolactic fermentation softens the full- bodied wine. Dom Pérignon invariably ages on the lees for six to seven years (the 1988 was released in early 1995). This long aging process makes the wine ready to drink on release and develops nuances of flavor that remind you of bread dough, spice and hazelnuts. While Champagne benefits from contact with the lees in the bottle after its secondary fermentation, once these dead yeast cells and other sediments are removed in the disgorgement step of the méthode champenoise, the wine tends to age and lose its freshness. It's best to drink a Champagne like D.P. within a year or so after it's been disgorged. In fact, Moët releases its vintage Dom Pérignon in waves, disgorging more wine as stocks dwindle on the market. Thus the '88s released in early 1995 were disgorged in the fall of 1994, and later releases of '88s will also be disgorged shortly before shipping. The wines I tasted at Hautvillers were disgorged just minutes before being poured. Moët's marketing team in the United States is now promoting Dom Pérignon as a wine that can age well, and this fall they released a wooden box containing one bottle each of D.P. from '66, '76 and '85. (These wines will be disgorged just prior to shipping to maximize their fresh character.) The three-bottle package should retail for around $500, and only 500 of these boxes will be made available in the United States, according to R. John Pellaton of Schieffelin & Somerset Co., the New York-based importer for Moët Champagnes. The '85 is the better of the three wines in the box, according to my recent tasting in France. But, then again, the Dom Pérignon cuvées of the top years from the 1980s are a remarkable series for Moët, as prestige cuvées from those years are for many other Champagne houses. "We had an extraordinary string of vintages with the '82, '83, '85 and '88," says Geoffroy, 40, a former physician who has been in charge of Dom Pérignon since 1985. The current release, the '88, is a good example of the D. P. style: crisp and fresh, with a citrus undertone and a long, beautiful finish. Wine Spectator's tasting panel in New York recently rated it 91 on the 100-point scale and described it as creamy, with a melt-in-the-mouth texture (see July 31). That wine had been disgorged at least six months earlier, while the wine I tasted in Hautvillers was disgorged right in front of me. The D.P. I tasted was tighter and firmer, and the exercise proved that by the time Dom Pérignon arrives in retail stores--following shipment from France and storage in the United States--it's become a rounder, smoother wine than when it started out from the cellars in Epernay. "Like all '88s, it was closed and should open up with time," Geoffroy said at the tasting. The '88 was made from 45 percent Pinot Noir and 55 percent Chardonnay. While it's delicious now, the '88 D.P. is a vintage Champagne that actually should improve and gain complexity for a couple of years in the cellar. My favorite wine in the tasting, the '82 (60 percent Chardonnay, 40 percent Pinot Noir), was a joy to drink, so seductive, every sip revealing nutmeg, spice, chocolate, toasted bread, butter and vanilla flavors. Despite a large crop, the grapes that year reached, in Moët's words, "perfect balance between the acidity and sugar." Typical of a great D.P., the '82 is both crisp and caressing in texture. Wine Spectator editors have rated the '82 Dom Pérignon from 93 to 98 points in various tastings over the past eight years. This is one of the greatest Champagnes ever made. Wines like the '82 prove that Dom Pérignon is not just some flashy marketing creation, although the marketing of the brand has helped carve out a special image for D.P. in the Champagne category. While several other Champagnes often score as high as D.P. in Wine Spectator's tastings, none is as well known. In 1935, Moët decided to create a special bottle of Champagne from wine of the '21 vintage. The first D.P. shipment to the United States was 100 cases of 1921 in 1937. Since 1921, Dom Pérignon has been produced in 27 vintages. Like virtually all Champagne houses, Moët officials refuse to reveal specific production and sales figures for its prestige cuvée. They again refused to give figures for this report. This policy creates a perception of scarcity in the marketplace and, therefore, helps support the wine's high price. Insiders in Champagne estimate the production level of Dom Pérignon at around 200,000 cases. (For comparison, Louis Roederer produces from 17,000 to 50,000 cases of Cristal a year.) For nearly 60 years, Moët & Chandon has relentlessly pushed through the message that its Dom Pérignon Champagne is one of the greatest wines. That so many people want to toast their achievements and special moments with Dom Pérignon is testimony to a remarkable marketing and winemaking tour de force. Much of this success is based on D.P.'s consistent quality. "Consistency" is religion at Moët. From D.P.'s marketing team in New York to its winemakers in Epernay, no discussion about this Champagne can be held without much talk about how this luxury product must taste the same, year in and year out. You can see their point. It is a difficult market. Sales of Champagne dropped from a peak of 1.3 million cases in 1987 to 785,000 cases in 1992, a 40 percent decrease. In such a climate, Dom Pérignon seeks to attract more than just the hardcore wine aficionados. To grow, Moët needs to rope in a broader consumer base--people who will buy D.P. as much, if not more, for its image than for the wine itself. D.P. wants to make the same stylistic statement in every vintage it releases. "Our style must come through stronger than the vintages," says Geoffroy. "D.P. is less representative of each vintage due to the art of blending. There is this expectation among our customers, and they want to find 'their' Dom Pérignon. So never can we tell them, well, we didn't do our cuvée very well, but buy it anyway. We must always produce the wine they expect to find." Selected Dom Pérignon Vintages 1988-1959 91 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1988 $89 A beautiful wine with a long finish. At first sip this is sharp and crisp, showing lime and citrus flavors, but it turns a bit earthy on the palate and develops yeasty, chalky notes. Try in 1997. 90 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1985 $110 Excellent finesse in this wine that is still fresh with lime and citrus, but it also hints at lovely hazelnut, nutmeg and coffee bean notes. A very long orange-peel-scented finish. A touch lighter than the '82. Drinkable now. 93 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1982 $150 Seductive and wonderfully balanced, crisp yet it caresses the palate. Has a very complex toasted bread and buttery croissant character along with some nutmeg, spice, chocolate and vanilla notes. At its peak, so drink and enjoy. 88 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1980 $135 Fresh and elegant, with characteristic doughy, yeasty flavors and a touch of honey and mocha. Smooth, supple and a touch herbal on the somewhat short finish. 90 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1978 $190 A steely, full-bodied and complete Champagne, showing a touch of honey, cedar, butter and spice. Has fruit and lime flavors, with a long finish. Drinkable now. Tasted twice; the first bottle was musty, oxidized and tired. 87 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1976 $150 A smooth, silky Champagne that's mature without being oxidized. Has floral and honey notes along with some tart pear and pie crust accents. A bit lighter than the '78, and terrific to drink now. Tasted twice; the first bottle was tired. 90 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1973 $175 Light to medium body, this is an elegant, discreet and balanced Champagne that has a creamy, smooth mouth-feel and delivers some truffle, honey, lime and hazelnut notes. Refined finish. Perfect to drink now. 89 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1969 $225 A incredibly powerful, full-bodied Champagne that needs food to show its best. It lacks a bit of finesse, but it bursts with flavor--from buttery toast and butterscotch to chocolate, orange peel and grapefruit. 85 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1966 $250 A bit light and starts out slow, but it takes off on the long finish. Hints of grapefruit and a slightly herbal character, but the honey notes are attractive. 79 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1962 $200 A hard, dry wine that has lost some of its fruit. Austere and has a chalky, drying finish. Drink up if you have any. 84 Moët & Chandon Brut Champagne Dom Pérignon 1959 $300 A nice, mature Champagne that's a bit resinous, with pine nut and vanilla notes. Shows a hint of honey on the chewy, flinty finish. Drinkable now. Tasted twice; the first bottle was oxidized. These vintages of Dom Pérignon were tasted at Moët & Chandon in June by Wine Spectator senior editor Per-Henrik Mansson. It was not a blind tasting.

 

Champagne Trio

It's an opportune time to sample classic vintage Champagne from three excellent years

By Jim Gordon

---

You may remember the excitement about a trio of great vintages in Europe that finished out the last decade. For Bordeaux, Burgundy, Barolo and many other regions, the years 1988, 1989 and 1990 produced a procession of top-quality wines virtually unheard of in the annals of wine history.

The same phenomenon occurred in Champagne. But while the wines of Bordeaux and elsewhere from those years were released three to five years ago, and have already been consumed or stashed away in kcellars, the great French Champagnes from 1988, 1989 and 1990 are just reaching wine shops now.

Vintage Champagne provides the most exciting current buying opportunity in a season marked by the release of an often disappointing crop of non-vintage bruts. After blind-tasting more than 160 current-release Champagnes, and spending a week in the region interviewing winemakers and tasting even more wines, our advice is to splurge on the vintage bubbly this year but be cautious about the less expensive, non-vintage bottlings.

This report covers new releases since our last annual tasting report in the Dec. 31, 1995, issue, and also revisits many vintage Champagnes that were previously reviewed but are still on the market.

Vintage Champagne typically costs 50 percent to 100 percent more than nonvintage, but wines like the following that scored at the top of their respective classes are worth it. For 1988, a superbly balanced Dom Pérignon ($89) and powerful Bollinger Grande Année ($60) tied at 93 points out of 100. For 1989, an overlapping release of Bollinger Grande Année (92, $60) was our favorite. And for 1990, with lots of the best names still not released, a bright, lively tasting Louis Roederer (92, $46) leads the pack so far.

The best is probably yet to come. We give 1990 a tentatively higher rating on our vintage chart than the two previous years, and perhaps only a third of the traditional quality leaders have released their 1990s. Dom Pérignon 1990, for example, won't arrive in the shops until late winter or spring.

How to explain the disparity between the high quality of the vintage-dated bubbly and the comparatively low quality of the non-vintage bubbly this year? So-called non-vintage Champagne is really multi-vintage, to use a phrase that Champagne Krug and a few other firms prefer. Typically, a non-vintage brut is made of about 80 to 85 percent base wine from one vintage, and the remainder is reserve wine, primarily from the previous year. The Champenois say this enables them to produce a consistent style from year to year, but clearly the quality can still vary.

The region of Champagne, located northeast of Paris, is the northernmost major wine region in France. Even in a really good year, the grapes here don't ripen to the same levels of flavor and sugar content as they do in an average year elsewhere. The effect of the weather in a lesser year can get into the bottle.

Most winemakers we spoke to said their current non-vintage blends are based on the relatively weak 1992 vintage, but a few others are still based on more reliable 1991 lots of wine, including high-scorers from Paul Bara and Nicolas Feuillatte. Last year, the non-vintage was primarily from 1991, with reserve wine coming primarily from the excellent year of 1990. And indeed, for nine out of 11 of the big brand-name bruts that I spot-checked, the scores were higher last year.

1992 was one of four mediocre to good years from 1991 through 1994 when the weather may not have been disastrous, but did not cooperate in producing really flavorful, ripe grapes. (One telling anecdote is that many houses, including Champagne Krug and G.H. Mumm, are not making any vintage wines from these four years.) The new releases two years ago, three years ago and four years ago were based on 1990, 1989 and 1988, and they were generally better in quality than the current crop. Maybe we got spoiled.

The popular Veuve Clicquot orange label ($40), for example, scored 82 this year versus 87 last year. Bollinger may have released two of the best vintage wines this year, but its usually excellent non-vintage Special Cuvée scored only an average 79. Perrier-Jouët Grand Brut and Laurent-Perrier Brut L.P. also paled in comparison to last year's versions. In our blind tastings, these Champagnes seemed to start out well, with fruity, floral aromas, b ut they didn't provide the fullness of flavor and body we look for, and they turned thin on the finish.

It's a good time to shop for sparkling wines from California and elsewhere if you want to spend less than $30. But if you are prepared to invest in something special for the holidays, or even to lay down in your cellar for future meals and celebrations, take a close look at 1988, 1989 and 1990 Champagnes.

Brothers Rémy and Henri Krug set up a tasting at their headquarters in Reims to demonstrate the differences between the three vintages. They poured nine wines from three of the better villages--not bubbly, but base wines from their supply of vintage reserves used for blending. We tasted 1988, 1989 and 1990 Pinot Noir samples from Ambonnay, three more Pinot Noirs from Verzenay and three Chardonnays from Mesnil.

These generally austere, tart base wines aren't usually much fun to drink, but in this tasting they were fascinating. The Ambonnay '88 was crisp, tight and clean. The Ambonnay '89 tasted much riper, more broad-textured and fruitier. The '90 seemed like a cross between the previous two, with plenty of lively acidity yet with ample fruit flavor, too. These descriptions held up for the Verzenay and Mesnil wines as well. And these same impressions hold for most of the vintage Champagnes that I have blind-tasted over the past three years.

You might call 1988 a classic vintage for Champagne. Claude Taittinger, whose firm specializes in rather light-bodied but bracing, tangy Champagnes, prefers the slightly restrained quality of 1988 over 1990 and 1989. But we preferred the new Taittinger Brut 1990 (90, $52) over the 1988.

The weather during the 1989 growing season was extremely hot and sunny. It produced ripe-tasting, full-blown Champagnes that the Champenois mark down for lacking the classic crisp acidity they want. That makes these Champagnes suspect for aging in their estimation, but we found them quite appealing. At their most extravagant, the '89s have a flavor as rich as white chocolate. But it was a difficult year in the wineries, where grapes sometimes came in too fast and strained winemakers' abilities to keep up with the pace of the harvest. Moët & Chandon winemaker Richard Geoffroy says, "We are among the few that didn't declare 1989, and we're proud of it." For winemaker Jean-Pierre Vincent at Nicolas Feuillatte, 1989 was also too extreme. "It's not Champagne," he says succinctly.

Comparisons of 1989 and 1976 were common. So if you'd like to see how 1976 has fared in the cellar, and you have $280 to spare, try the spectacular and mature, newly released Krug Collection 1976 (93).

No one in Champagne, it seems, has anything bad to say about 1990, however. That's no doubt partly because 1990 is what they are eager to sell right now. But it's also because it was a reasonably ripe, trouble-free vintage that produced an abundance of appealing Champagne. We found four among this year's new releases that scored 90 or better and cost less than $50: Louis Roederer, Moët & Chandon Impérial, Ruinart R de Ruinart and Serge Mathieu.

"1990 is like a new jacket, that you just put it on for the first time and it needs nothing," says Geoffroy. "It has a natural balance and harmony."

As more and more 1990s are released in the next couple of years, we should have even more reason to celebrate the vintage. For now, however, one other vintage deserves special mention: 1985. This fine year is in its full glory now. We found nine 1985s rated 90 points or more that are still available, including three blanc de blancs. These are all worth buying to taste an outstanding year that may be at its peak of perfection.

The outstanding buy in this group is the Charles Heidsieck Brut 1985 (93, $48). The Mumm René Lalou 1985 (92, $50) is so good that you would think it should be drunk right away, but I had a fantastic Mumm 1955 in an Epernay restaurant, Le Vigneron, that makes me think the 1985 will have plenty of good years ahead of it if stored properly.

We sampled 21 blanc de blancs in our blind tastings and 34 rosés. The blanc de blancs were more exciting, providing seven outstanding wines, led by 1988s from Henri Germain and Ayala, and 1985s from Comte Audoin de Dampierre, Krug and Delamotte. Salon's outstanding 1983 is also worth a mention. To see how far the blanc de blancs envelope can be pushed, you might want to try the pungent Dom Ruinart Blanc de Blancs 1988.

Rosé Champagne can be difficult to assess, because the styles vary so widely from house to house. Colors range from a pale amber to bright coral, and the flavors cover the waterfront from earthy and tealike to something as vivid as strawberries. If you want to explore, Charles Heidsieck's Brut Rosé 1985 (93, $55) and Piper-Heidsieck's non-vintage rosé (90, $48) are two good choices.

With the new year approaching, many people are thinking about not only what they will be doing this Dec. 31, but what wine they will have to toast the turn of the millennium as 1999 changes over to 2000. If you are interested in laying away Champagne now, the blind-tasting results that accompany this article will help you make your purchases. For most people, vintage 1990 Champagnes that you can buy now should be perfect.

But if you don't want to stock your cellar ahead of time, the 1995 harvest was well above average in quality, according to the Champenois. And that's the vintage that will form the core of the non-vintage Champagnes on sale in late 1999.

---

What Champagne Is All About

Champagne, the region, came before Champagne, the sparkling wine. And although winemakers in certain parts of the world (particularly California) persist in using the term champagne for their own sparkling wines, French Champagne from the Marne Valley is the original.

Bubbles are not the only thing that sets the wines of Champagne apart from those of others. Over the centuries this northerly wine region has adopted its own set of rules to make wines that defy the cold winters and short growing seasons. Growers here rarely harvest grapes that are ripe enough to make normal table wines without a heavy addition of sugar. So the vineyard owners and wine merchants of the past made a virtue out of necessity. They produced a still wine that was low in alcohol and high in acidity, then put it through a second fermentation to raise the alcohol level and create the effervescence. This second fermentation takes place in the individual bottles, and leaves behind used-up yeast cells (called the lees) that give the wine extra character as it ages for at least a year and a half and often up to three years or more on the lees.

Champagne also tries to outsmart nature by using different grape varieties. The three main ones are the red-wine grapes Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier (which are pressed right after harvest to produce a nearly clear juice) and the white-wine grape Chardonnay. The weather in some years and in some locations favors one over the other two. Most Champagnes are blended from at least two of these before the secondary fermentation. Bottles labeled Blanc de Blancs are made only from Chardonnay.

Winemakers get further flexibility from their widely scattered vineyards, which bring in the effects of different soils and microclimates, and from the practice of blending two or more years together to make the traditional non-vintage Champagne.

Champagne may be known as the drink of celebration, and it does go very well with appetizers, or is quite enjoyable as an apéritif. But it is also fine to drink after you sit down at the table. Its crisp acidity makes a good match with many first courses that feature fish or shellfish, and it can be very good with lighter meat and poultry dishes, too.

--J.G.

---

A Value-Oriented Upstart

Perhaps the best value in Champagne this year comes from one of the least-known Champagne houses: Nicolas Feuillatte. The non-vintage Brut Réserve Particulière (89 points, $22) is a real find, especially while many of the other houses' non-vintage bruts are lackluster.

But that's not all this modern, upstart winery is good at. Feuillatte (pronounced foo-YAHT) also has an outstanding 1985 prestige cuvée on the market, a very good 1986 vintage brut and one of the best non-vintage rosés I tasted this year.

Although it may seem like Nicolas Feuillatte Champagne came out of nowhere, it is, in fact, the product of a very well-financed, high-tech winery that can pick and choose the best grapes from 4,600 acres of vineyards that it controls. Established only 20 years ago, it is still an infant compared with the grandes marques of the region, but it is now the third-largest wine producer in Champagne.

The winery's success lies in the com-bination of the worldly, appealing personality of Nicolas Feuillatte, the man, and the vast resources of a growers' cooperative in the little town of Chouilly, near Epernay. Nicolas Feuillatte, the Champagne, is the cream of the crop of Champagnes produced by the giant Centre Vinicole de Champagne.

The cooperative's 4,800 member-growers harvested enough grapes for total sales in 1996 of 430,000 cases of Champagne. But only grapes from the best acreage--the 35 percent that is rated premier cru and grand cru--are used for the Nicolas Feuillatte brand, which predicted total sales in 1996 of 167,000 cases.

"I know it's a cooperative, but I like to call it a cellar," says Feuillatte, to distinguish it from the generally mediocre quality of wine from most French wine cooperatives. "We are slowly stepping up to be a grande marque." Born in France, the 70-year-old businessman says he became an American citizen in 1955 and spent 20 years living in New York while working for his family's restaurant-supply business.

Feuillatte inherited 30 acres of vineyard in Champagne's Montagne de Reims district in 1970 and started bottling his own Champagne five years later. With the help of friends in New York and Paris, Nicolas Feuillatte Champagne was served at high-society events. He began to develop this new brand on a larger scale. "But to have the guts to do something different, you also have to have the money," he says.

Feuillatte sold his brand to the Centre Vinicole de Champagne in 1986 and agreed to stay on as spokesman. Since then, a team of professionals hired by the cooperative has shaped the Feuillatte Champagne of today. The cellarmaster, with 21 harvests under his belt, is Jean-Pierre Vincent. The executive in charge of the whole operation is Jean-Marc Pottiez, whom the cooperative hired away from Fortant de France, the thoroughly modern, fast-growing Languedoc winery, after a nationwide executive search.

This crew is out to prove that big can be beautiful. With a harvest in 1996 large enough to supply more than 1.2 million cases of Feuillatte for later release, it will be interesting to see if the high standards of quality can be maintained as the quantity increases. On the production side, Vincent has state-of-the-art equipment to handle and monitor the Champagne with care, four years' worth of stock aging in his mammoth, 1 million-square-foot cellars and more than 45 base wines to choose from when making a blend. On the marketing side, Feuillatte has eye-catching packaging (especially for the prestige cuvée Palmes d'Or), an elegant boutique on rue Fauberge St.-Honoré in Paris and an apparent commitment to value.

Says Pottiez, "Since we started, we have been using all the elements of modern technology to allow a good quality-to-price ratio."

--J.G.

---

Jim Gordon's Top Champagne Picks

wine / price / score

KRUG Brut Champagne 1985 / 94 / $120

A seductive, fully mature Champagne that's rich in texture, full in body, still quite firm in balance.

BOLLINGER Brut Champagne Grande Année 1988 / 93 / $60

A rich, mature bubbly that combines power and subtlety.

COMTE AUDOIN DE DAMPIERRE Blanc de Blancs Champagne 1985 / 93 / $97

Mellow, and subtle in flavor, smooth and soft in texture.

CHARLES HEIDSIECK Brut Champagne 1985 / 93 / $48

Suave, satisfying and flavorful, blending wonderful toasty, earthy aromas with mellow and mature fruit flavors.

CHARLES HEIDSIECK Brut Rosé Champagne 1985 / 93 / $55

Robust, and imposing, this has distinctive toasty aromas, vivid fruit flavors and accents of mushroom and walnut.

KRUG Brut Champagne Collection 1976 / 93 / $280

Proudly shows its age in the honeyed, nutty, smoky flavors, but retains freshness and is crisp in texture.

MOET & CHANDON Brut Champagne Cuvée Dom Pérignon 1988 / 93 / $89

Offers toasty, earthy aromas, lively but mellow fruit flavors.

BOLLINGER Brut Champagne Grande Année 1989 / 92 / $60

A real mouthful of ripe fruit flavors, delicate spice and lingering vanilla notes. This is smooth and creamy in texture.

NICOLAS FEUILLATTE Brut Champagne Cuvée Palmes d'Or 1985 / 92 / $80

Powerful, vibrant and intensely fruity. Has a broad array of flavors, a smooth texture and is well balanced.

G.H. MUMM Brut Champagne René Lalou 1985 / 92 / $50

A delectable Champagne--from the bouquet of honey, spice and almond through the creamy texture and lingering finish.

POL ROGER Brut Rosé Champagne 1988 / 92 / $53

An elegant marriage of fruit and toast gives this depth.

LOUIS ROEDERER Brut Champagne 1990 / 92 / $46

This has everything you want in a Champagne: Bright, lively fruit flavors, a smooth, creamy texture and a lingering finish.

RUINART Brut Rosé Champagne Dom Ruinart 1986 / 92 / $98

A distinctive copper color and mature, vivid flavors give this rosé lots of personality.

---

Rating Selected Champagne Vintages

1990 / 90-94* / Fine balance and full flavor* / Drink or hold

1989 / 88 / Extremely ripe and generous / Drink

1988 / 90 / Outstanding, beautifully balanced / Drink or hold

1987 / 81 / Acceptable, but few vintage bottlings / Drink

1986 / 86 / Very good quality, lean in style / Drink

1985 / 96 / Superb balance, great structure and flavor / Drink or hold

1984 / 79 / Unexceptional quality; large harvest / Drink

1983 / 83 / Good, pleasant Champagnes / Drink

1982 / 94 / Rich, complex, with abundant flavor / Drink

1979 / 91 / Classy, elegant, aging well / Drink

1976 / 88 / Ripe, opulent year / Drink

1975 / 92 / Bold but balanced Champagnes / Drink

* Preliminary analysis based on limited releases.

Vintage ratings: 95-100, classic; 90-94, outstanding; 85-89, very good; 80-84, good; 70-79, average; 60-69, below average; 50-59, poor.

Drinkability: "Drink" means most of the wines of the vintage are ready to drink; "hold" means most of the age-worthy wines have not yet matured.

SOURCE: WINE SPECTATOR

12/31/96

 

 

What Champagne Is All About

Champagne Gets Serious

With new names to discover and great vintages to savor, it's time to stock up

By Jim Gordon

---

As a host of outstanding Champagnes from an expanding spectrum of Champagne makers reaches wine shops, this is a season of discovery for wine lovers. First, a new wave of handcrafted Champagnes from small vineyard estates has just reached American shores, offering quality that rivals that of the best wines from the more famous Champagne houses--often at less than half the price.

Second, the grandes marques themselves are not to be outdone and have released a great collection of highly rated vintage Champagnes from a trio of great years: 1988, 1989 and 1990. Krug and Veuve Clicquot, to name two, turned in virtuoso performances with their highest-priced cuvées. All things considered, the current supply of top-quality Champagne is probably unprecedented.

As usual, Champagne doesn't come cheaply, but when the quality in the bottle is as high as it is in the spicy elegance of the Krug Brut 1989 ($125) or the full-bodied sophistication of the Veuve Clicquot La Grande Dame 1989 ($100), each of which scored 94 points on the Wine Spectator 100-point scale, you are getting what you pay for. These and literally dozens of other exciting bottlings turned up in Wine Spectator's biggest tasting report ever on the wines of Champagne.

I blind-tasted 195 Champagnes over the past year, a majority of them in recent weeks, and all the findings are presented here and in the Buying Guide (full tasting notes begin on page 184). An unprecedented 58 Champagnes scored 90 or better, and more than three-quarters of those were vintage dated. If you pick any real Champagne off the shelf from 1988, '89 or '90, you stand a very good chance of experiencing what only Champagne can consistently deliver: a superbly balanced sparkling wine that tastes crisp and refreshing yet supple, while layering on rich flavors that linger on the finish.

The news about non-vintage Champagne is not as universally positive. Very few of them were bad, but many of them tasted merely good. They didn't have the vibrant fruit flavors of the vintage wines, nor the complexity or length. More than 30 rated 84 points or less, and the least expensive of these has a suggested retail price of $24. Despite what the owners and importers of the big brands say, non-vintage Champagne, blended from base wines from different years and from different districts in Champagne, often is not consistent in quality from year to year.

Unless you insist on serving "real" Champagne on principle, you generally will find much better value in non-vintage California sparkling wine (see Jeff Morgan's report, "Sparkling Values," beginning on page 78). On the other hand, with so many outstanding vintage Champagnes starting at $35 or $40 a bottle, it's smart to trade up from the non-vintage wines. It's also worth noting that many wine retailers put heavy discounts on non-vintage Champagne, so bargains can often be found. Three of my favorite non-vintage choices are the lush, seductive Cattier Brut Champagne Antique (91, $30), the mature and assertive Montaudon Brut (91, $30) and the refined Pommery Brut Royal Apanage (90, $27).

Probably the most exciting news for Champagne connoisseurs is that an American wine importer, Terry Thiese of the Kronheim Companies, has made a cause of finding and importing high quality Champagnes from small family-run estates. When I visit Champagne, I am always amazed by the size and diversity of this wine region. Hundreds of wineries there make high-quality wines in small quantities, like their counterparts in Burgundy, yet almost none of these bottlings come to America. Why should the big brands be the only taste of Champagne that most of us can experience?

Thiese, who has long championed small-production German wines, asked himself the same question. So he sought out the small, basically unknown Champagne houses, tasted their wines and selected 10 to introduce to the United States this fall. Eight of the 10 are covered in this report--Henri Billiot, Chartogne-Taillet, Gaston Chiquet, Rene Geoffroy, Pierre Gimonnet & Fils, Larmandier-Bernier, A. Margaine and Vilmart. The majority are quite exciting, both for the quality of their wines and their reasonable prices, but don't expect them to be easy to find soon.

Look especially for two that carry the designation "Special Club," a name bestowed by a group of growers on worthy wines after a taste test. Gaston Chiquet made a powerful but sophisticated Brut Champagne Special Club 1990 (92, $39), and A. Margaine released a plush Brut Blanc de Blancs Special Club 1989 (90, $43). These wines beat out many of the higher-priced Champagnes, including Dom Perignon 1990 (89, $110) and Louis Roederer Cristal 1990 (87, $150), to earn this designation.

Another source of Champagne new to the United States is a cooperative of 1,800 growers called Union Champagne, most of its exports designated as de St.-Gall. It's an impressive lineup: three out of the five wines I tasted broke the 90-point barrier. All three were Blancs de Blancs, made solely from Chardonnay grapes, and the best was an absolutely stunning Cuvée Orpale 1985 (95, $49) made strictly from grand cru vineyards. Union Champagne will be hard to find, because the brand is just getting established here.

The Orpale was not the only Champagne from 1985 that scored 95 points. This increasingly rare vintage, in which a severe spring-freeze drastically reduced the size of the grape crop and boosted the quality of what remained, accounted for three of the top four wines in this report. The Charles Heidsieck Brut Rosé 1985 (95, $55) has been available for a few years, and this year it tasted better than ever.

Two of the other top-scorers were from Krug, the small, family-operated, Remy Martin-owned house known for barrel-fermenting its base wine and setting prices that make the other houses seem frugal in comparison. Krug's Brut Blanc de Blancs Clos du Mesnil 1985 (96, $210), from the tiny, historic, walled-in clos in the Chardonnay village of Mesnil-sur-Oger, really came into its own this year, combining a plush texture with harmonious, mature flavors in truly classic style. Krug's Brut Rosé NV (95, $150) was nearly as impressive in its own right, subtle in flavor and seamless in texture.

Veuve Clicquot also deserves special mention for the quality of its two recently released Grande Dame cuvées, the top wines of its line, scoring 94 points apiece. The Brut Grande Dame 1989 ($100) totally redeemed the relatively poor showing last year of the 1988. The first U.S. release of a Grande Dame Rosé, the 1988 ($195), is delicate, dry and cherry-scented--a class act if you care to spend that much.

The great showing by many of the older Champagnes in this report is no accident. Champagne does improve in the bottle, especially in the 55° natural cellars in Champagne, dug out of the pure chalk subsoil. But Champagne can also improve in your cellar at home, if you have a cool one. This season is an opportune time to buy a case or two of a vintage-dated Champagne that you like and study how it changes and improves with maturity.

The 1990s are prime candidates for the cellar. Many are quite young: They taste rather straightforward, powerfully fruity but without much nuance yet. Even Moët's Dom Perignon 1990 still seems to be in an awkward phase and should improve with time.

The other advantage of stocking up now is that you will be sure to have some good bubbly on hand when the millennium celebrations begin. Rumors about the scarcity of Champagne are unfounded. Abundant supplies of non-vintage Champagne, at least, will be available. But vintage Champagne is made in such small quantities to start with--perhaps only 10 percent of a typical house's output is vintage--and the current vintages on sale, specifically 1985, 1988, 1989 and 1990, are so good, that an investment in one of these would be a wise move even if New Year's Eve 1999 weren't just around the corner.

---

Champagne the region came before Champagne the sparkling wine. And although winemakers in certain other parts of the world (particularly California) persist in using the term champagne for their own sparkling wines, French Champagne from the Marne Valley is the original.

Bubbles are not the only thing that sets the wines of Champagne apart. Over the centuries, this northerly wine region has adopted its own set of rules that defy the cold winters and short growing seasons. Growers in Champagne rarely harvest grapes that are ripe enough to make normal table wines without a heavy addition of sugar. So the vineyard owners and wine merchants of the past made a virtue out of necessity. They produced a still wine that was low in alcohol and high in acidity, then put it through a second fermentation to raise the alcohol level and create the effervescence. This second fermentation takes place in the individual bottles, and leaves behind used-up yeast cells (called the lees) that give the wine extra character--as it ages for at least a year and a half and often up to three years or more on these lees.

Champagne further tries to outsmart nature by using different grape varieties. The three main ones are the red-wine grapes Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier (which are pressed right after harvest to produce a nearly clear juice) and the white-wine grape Chardonnay. The weather in some years and in some locations favors one over the other two. Most Champagnes are blended from at least two of these varieties before the secondary fermentation. Blanc de Blancs are made from Chardonnay only.

Winemakers get further flexibility from their widely scattered vineyards, and from the practice of blending the crops from two or more years together to make the traditional non-vintage Champagne.

Champagne may be known as the drink of celebration, and it does go very well with appetizers, or is quite enjoyable as an apéritif. But it is also fine to drink at the table. Its crisp acidity makes a good match with many first courses that feature fish or shellfish, and it's good with lighter meat and poultry, too.