I recently attended a lunch event with Hervé Jestin of Champagne Leclerc Briant.
We tasted four of their wines, and he spoke at length about how they are made, and about biodynamic viticulture, and about Champagne. One of the ideas raised, which I didn't really understand, was the notion that the dosage for a champagne should speak to the wine, otherwise it won't benefit the finished product. He demonstrated this by sitting a glass of champagne on its side on a metal plinth which was connected by a wire to a pair of antennae which he then held over some sugar - there was no reaction or reading on the scale attached to the antennae, because the sugar had nothing to say to the wine. I didn't understand, but it surely was interesting.
The point of this was, I believe, to explain why Leclerc Briant is moving towards zero dosage wine making, and indeed to zero sulphur winemaking. On of the things that M. Jestin said was, "I want to train the wine to discuss with oxygen". And of course, until the relatively recent past, all wine making was done without the "benefit" of sulphur, so in a sense, M. Jestin merely wants to go back to the old ways. As I say, I don't really get biodynamic viticulture, but I do know that pretty much without exception I enjoy the end product, so I'm very happy to see more such wines.
The wines we tasted were the Brut Réserve, Extra Brut Premier Cru, Abyss, and Pure Cramant. They were all of very high quality, albeit very pricey. The Abyss didn't speak to me, but I thought the other three wines were complex, and I particularly enjoyed the fine mousse they all exhibited.
I want to single out the Pure Cramant in particular, as being a wine at the very edge of champagne-making: 100% Grand Cru Chardonnay from Cramant, fermented in used oak, unfined, unfiltered, five years sur lattes and then bottled with zero dosage and zero sulphur. And the result? A big, rounded, lush, ripe wine, as pure an expression of white and yellow stone fruit as you could wish for. My tasting notes also mention cranberries and 'something balsamic'. Wonderful wine. But, paradoxically, my enduring taste memory of it is of a warm, pink, lively, ripeness. Pink fruit, not white or yellow. It has somehow evolved in my memory into something approaching the Platonic ideal of rosé champagne.
Can one attribute that complexity, that evolving taste memory, to the biodynamic viticulture? I've no idea, but it surely was lovely.
More on Pure Cramant here.
Showing posts with label Champagne. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Champagne. Show all posts
2019-04-24
2017-09-09
A note on Nicolas François Billecart 2002
I hosted a champagne tasting last night, with wines from Pierre Peters, Fleury Père et Fils, Palmer & Cie, Moutard, and Billecart-Salmon.
It was my first tasting of a Pierre Peters wine, in this case the Cuvée de Reserve Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru, and rather disappointingly I didn't really understand the wine, although I suppose that's an excuse for another bottle.
But that's not the main thing I wanted to say. I've tasted the 2002 Nicolas François three times now; in 2015, last year, and last night. The first of these was in ideal conditions, and the wine, while clearly still very youthful and tightly wound, also managed to be reasonably expressive. Last year's bottle was completely unexpressive, so I was a little apprehensive about opening it again last night, but I have rather done Krug and Dom Pom to death over the last twelve months, so Billy it was.
And I'm so glad I did. It was beautifully expressive. Lean, yes, tight, indeed, but it had such lovely aromas of white flowers, and there was a slight saline edge to it which I hadn't seen before. It was the wine of the night by a country mile, and I look forward very much to tasting it again in another year's time.
It was my first tasting of a Pierre Peters wine, in this case the Cuvée de Reserve Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru, and rather disappointingly I didn't really understand the wine, although I suppose that's an excuse for another bottle.
But that's not the main thing I wanted to say. I've tasted the 2002 Nicolas François three times now; in 2015, last year, and last night. The first of these was in ideal conditions, and the wine, while clearly still very youthful and tightly wound, also managed to be reasonably expressive. Last year's bottle was completely unexpressive, so I was a little apprehensive about opening it again last night, but I have rather done Krug and Dom Pom to death over the last twelve months, so Billy it was.
And I'm so glad I did. It was beautifully expressive. Lean, yes, tight, indeed, but it had such lovely aromas of white flowers, and there was a slight saline edge to it which I hadn't seen before. It was the wine of the night by a country mile, and I look forward very much to tasting it again in another year's time.
2017-01-15
Dom Pérignon
One of the many benefits of working in the booze industry is the quality of the drinks on a staff night out. Our latest expedition began by setting a fairly high bar, with a mini Dom Pom vertical, of the 2006, 1999, and 1982.
(It's interesting to note, by the way, that Dom Pérignon these days doesn't mention Moët et Chandon on the label - perhaps they feel it makes the brand seem more exclusive?)
The 2006, in its first plénitude, was big and bold: fresh icing sugar, sharp floral aromas, but also with a touch of mushroom. The palate was soft, sherbety, with lemon notes and a beautiful rounded flowery character. The finish was noticeably drier than on the other two wines.
The 1999—not a stellar year, but, by my calculation and triangulation based on what the DP website says, in its second plénitude—wasn't any better (in the hedonic sense) than the 2006. Indeed, I think I enjoyed it a notch less. But the flavours were quite different. The nose was both spicy and mineral laden. After a while a floral component rather like that in the 2006 appeared. The palate was intensely mineralic, tangy and grapefruity. It was also richly floral—roses I think—with the richness extending to ripe fruit.
The 34 year old wine, almost but not quite flat and a deep, deep gold, was something else. Well into its third plénitude, this was a glorious glass of fizz. The nose had some of the floral elements present in the 2006 and 1999, but ah!, the rest of it. Runny honey on toast, sweet roasted almonds, buttery caramel, and a shining warmth. Liquid sunshine indeed. The palate showed the slightest spritz, and a fair bit of oxidation (good oxidation, like Madeira), despite which there was still a very decent level of acidity. The flavours were all sorts of fruit: juicy and fresh berries, raisins, figs, lemons. Just delightful.
The Dom Pérignon 1982 wasn't the oldest wine we tasted tonight, but for me it was far and away the finest. I'm usually more of a Billecart fanboy, but if all DP was this good...
2016-04-16
Tasting Note: Chassenay d'Arce Pinot Blanc 2006
Nose: yellow fruit. Clean and fresh. Nothing to say that it's a ten year old wine. Tangy. Citrus and pineapples. Under-ripe honeydew melon rind.
Palate: there is some evolution, but it still feels pretty fresh. Very tangy and tart. Real yellow fruit character, along with a light body.
Conclusion: this is a lovely wine, and distinctively different - I've never encountered that pineapple note in any other champagne. And, as with many wines from the Côte de Bar, it's very good value for money.
Champagne Grapes
Three grape varieties, Pinot Noir, Pinot Meunier, and Chardonnay, account for nearly all of the production in Champagne, but (of course!) things are a little more complicated than that.
Besides the more than 30,000 hectares devoted to the big three, there are a few hectares (less than a hundred, I believe) given over to Pinot Blanc, Pinot Gris, Arbane, and Petit Meslier. Producers such as Drappier, Moutard, and Chassenay d'Arce turn out small quantities of these unusual wines, but they are not easy to find.
And for the truly pedantic among us, the Champagne appellation law of 1919 can be read as meaning that all members of the Pinot family may be used for Champagne, which seems to me like the perfect excuse for some bolshie Brit to go over there and make fizz using Viognier and Aligoté.
2015-06-30
Billecart-Salmon Cuvée Nicolas François Billecart 2002
By a stroke of good fortune, Small Fierce Glasses and I were able to attend a lunch at Prestonfield House in Edinburgh, hosted by Billecart-Salmon, which served to introduce the recently released Cuvée Nicolas François Billecart 2002.
Arriving rather early, we sat on a rooftop terrace in the shadow of Arthur's Seat, sipping the excellent and bracing Vintage 2006 (a polyglot and slightly unhelpful name, omitting to mention, as it does, that this is an Extra Brut champagne, with a dosage of only 1.5g/l). The Vintage is a fairly new venture for Billecart, this being only the second release, but as we sit enjoying the sun and the fizz it is definitely my favourite Billy.
Some indeterminate time later we are ushered into a room which has never knowingly had any item of decor removed, ever, and are there presented with the Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru 2004. Immediately, this is my favourite Billy. It's honeyed, with a glorious perfume of white flowers and biscuit dough, and it is even a little buttery. The palate matches the nose perfectly, and the mousse is billowingly soft (all of today's champagnes were decanted, which allows the wine to breathe and lessens the rasping initial carbonic acid bite of a freshly popped bottle). Over time, as the fizz lessens, the wine becomes ever more vinous. Not in an obvious, Burgundian Chardonnay1 sort of way, mind you. Vinous, but still Champenois.
Production of the Blanc de Blancs is 30,000 bottles, using grapes sourced from five villages in the Côte des Blancs - I wonder which of the six Grands Crus was snubbed?
After a slightly embarrassing interlude (the food was distinctly fleshy, and I had foolishly assumed that in 2015 an establishment so prestigious would automatically be acreophage-friendly) the raison de déjeuner is poured. The Cuvée Nicolas François Billecart 2002 is intense, complex, interesting, and distinctly youthful. Aromas of white and yellow flowers vie with fresh blonde wood and, oddly, malt. There's honey as well, but an older, spicier honey. The palate is balanced and rounded, salt and honey and lemon pith all complementing each other. As with the Blanc de Blancs there's a vinous quality which champagne rarely shows. Whilst I'm enjoying this fine fizz immensely, the Blanc de Blancs remains my favourite.
The Nicolas François is produced using Pinot Noir from Aÿ and Mareuil-sur-Aÿ along with Chardonnay from Avize and Chouilly.
Billecart-Salmon is arguably the best of all the champagne houses. It gets my vote for its ability to produce wines that manage to fuse delicacy and intensity, finesse and sheer unadulterated hedonistic joy. Long may it thrive.
(Oh. We may well have drunk some Gevry-Chambertin and 30 year old Coteaux de Layon too. I wasn't really paying attention to the other wines)
1: I love Burgundy. But who can resist the opportunity to use 'Burgundian' as a put-down?
Arriving rather early, we sat on a rooftop terrace in the shadow of Arthur's Seat, sipping the excellent and bracing Vintage 2006 (a polyglot and slightly unhelpful name, omitting to mention, as it does, that this is an Extra Brut champagne, with a dosage of only 1.5g/l). The Vintage is a fairly new venture for Billecart, this being only the second release, but as we sit enjoying the sun and the fizz it is definitely my favourite Billy.
Some indeterminate time later we are ushered into a room which has never knowingly had any item of decor removed, ever, and are there presented with the Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru 2004. Immediately, this is my favourite Billy. It's honeyed, with a glorious perfume of white flowers and biscuit dough, and it is even a little buttery. The palate matches the nose perfectly, and the mousse is billowingly soft (all of today's champagnes were decanted, which allows the wine to breathe and lessens the rasping initial carbonic acid bite of a freshly popped bottle). Over time, as the fizz lessens, the wine becomes ever more vinous. Not in an obvious, Burgundian Chardonnay1 sort of way, mind you. Vinous, but still Champenois.
Production of the Blanc de Blancs is 30,000 bottles, using grapes sourced from five villages in the Côte des Blancs - I wonder which of the six Grands Crus was snubbed?
After a slightly embarrassing interlude (the food was distinctly fleshy, and I had foolishly assumed that in 2015 an establishment so prestigious would automatically be acreophage-friendly) the raison de déjeuner is poured. The Cuvée Nicolas François Billecart 2002 is intense, complex, interesting, and distinctly youthful. Aromas of white and yellow flowers vie with fresh blonde wood and, oddly, malt. There's honey as well, but an older, spicier honey. The palate is balanced and rounded, salt and honey and lemon pith all complementing each other. As with the Blanc de Blancs there's a vinous quality which champagne rarely shows. Whilst I'm enjoying this fine fizz immensely, the Blanc de Blancs remains my favourite.
The Nicolas François is produced using Pinot Noir from Aÿ and Mareuil-sur-Aÿ along with Chardonnay from Avize and Chouilly.
Billecart-Salmon is arguably the best of all the champagne houses. It gets my vote for its ability to produce wines that manage to fuse delicacy and intensity, finesse and sheer unadulterated hedonistic joy. Long may it thrive.
(Oh. We may well have drunk some Gevry-Chambertin and 30 year old Coteaux de Layon too. I wasn't really paying attention to the other wines)
1: I love Burgundy. But who can resist the opportunity to use 'Burgundian' as a put-down?
2011-02-12
Wild Roses
Goodness, I've never seen such a dark champagne before. If I didn't know what it was, I'd be guessing Shiraz for the grape, or perhaps a Cabernet - Merlot blend.
The Piper-Heidsieck Brut Rosé Sauvage NV is really dark, but when you hold it up to the light you see more of onion-skin than raspberry. And it smells pretty fantastic.
It smells, in fact, properly Champagne-like, but with a big blast of red fruit flavours and a strong mineral - specifically metallic, most specifically copper - element. The coppery tang almost makes me think of a well-hopped amber ale.
The palate is complex, offering a dry attack, a sweet mid-palate, a drying finish, and lovely red-fruit aftertaste. There's more of the coppery flavour in there; coming from, I think, Pinot Noir.
It looks really beautiful too. The dark colour is complemented by a very lively stream of fine bubbles. An excellent and unusual champagne, 3-4.
The Piper-Heidsieck Brut Rosé Sauvage NV is really dark, but when you hold it up to the light you see more of onion-skin than raspberry. And it smells pretty fantastic.
It smells, in fact, properly Champagne-like, but with a big blast of red fruit flavours and a strong mineral - specifically metallic, most specifically copper - element. The coppery tang almost makes me think of a well-hopped amber ale.
The palate is complex, offering a dry attack, a sweet mid-palate, a drying finish, and lovely red-fruit aftertaste. There's more of the coppery flavour in there; coming from, I think, Pinot Noir.
It looks really beautiful too. The dark colour is complemented by a very lively stream of fine bubbles. An excellent and unusual champagne, 3-4.
2010-12-24
It's the bubbles, y'see
That's what makes champagne special. Watching the tiny specks rising slowly up through glass (as plain as possible, please. Crystal just gets in the way) is mesmerising; a gentle, slow, soothing pleasure.
Tonight's fizz was a very fine example, with plentiful tiny bubbles continuing to rise even as the glass was emptied.
It smelled very fresh, like fresh sea air, followed by the classic champagne nose of wet stones and plain bread.
To taste it was dry, full-bodied and delicious. I was starting to wonder where the sweetness was when it slipped in at the end, along with a nice woody note, but then both sweetness and wood sidled off again leaving a brisk refreshing minerality somewhere between sherbet and aspirin.
Altogether a very fine wine, and a lovely way to kick off the Festive season.
Pol Roger Brut Vintage 2000, 4++.
Tonight's fizz was a very fine example, with plentiful tiny bubbles continuing to rise even as the glass was emptied.
It smelled very fresh, like fresh sea air, followed by the classic champagne nose of wet stones and plain bread.
To taste it was dry, full-bodied and delicious. I was starting to wonder where the sweetness was when it slipped in at the end, along with a nice woody note, but then both sweetness and wood sidled off again leaving a brisk refreshing minerality somewhere between sherbet and aspirin.
Altogether a very fine wine, and a lovely way to kick off the Festive season.
Pol Roger Brut Vintage 2000, 4++.
2010-01-04
The Best of 2009
After discovering, last time, that my memory of the year's best wines didn't quite match up to how I had scored them, I cast my net a little wider, paid less attention to scores, and came up with a list of about sixty wines from nine hundred tasting notes.
It is a fairly diverse selection, weighted towards France and Australia (the Oddbins bias, I suppose). So, passing by the Domaine d'Ardhuy Clos de Langres '05 and the Hiru 3 Racimos Rioja '03, fondly smiling at the memory of the Sizeranne '99, and pausing to be amazed once again by the flavours in the Dr Bürklin-Wolf Wachenheimer Rechbächel R Riesling '90, here are my top two for 2009.
Champagne Laurent-Perrier Brut 1999. If I were a rich man I would drink champagne every day, and if I were still richer then I would drink vintage L-P. It has the intensity of flavour, the lightness of touch, the delicate rasping mousse so reminiscent of a gentle cat's tongue, and the sheer blooming deliciousness that, all taken together, discreetly scream, “Drink me. Here. Now”.
I was tipped off about my other choice, the Innocenti Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 2004, by a chap who, if he were a rich man, would drink classed growth claret every day (Mouton, if I recall correctly), with occasional forays into vino like this one, for indeed it is very claret-like. It has structure without being harshly tannic; there is complexity, with layers of flavour weaving back and forth; there is a strong fresh-earth-and-mushroom aroma; but best of all, it has the delicate dark floral top note I often see in, yes indeedy, classed growth clarets. Actually no, best of all is the price - only eighteen pounds in your local Oddbins. Assuming, of course, they haven't hidden it all away for themselves...
It is a fairly diverse selection, weighted towards France and Australia (the Oddbins bias, I suppose). So, passing by the Domaine d'Ardhuy Clos de Langres '05 and the Hiru 3 Racimos Rioja '03, fondly smiling at the memory of the Sizeranne '99, and pausing to be amazed once again by the flavours in the Dr Bürklin-Wolf Wachenheimer Rechbächel R Riesling '90, here are my top two for 2009.
Champagne Laurent-Perrier Brut 1999. If I were a rich man I would drink champagne every day, and if I were still richer then I would drink vintage L-P. It has the intensity of flavour, the lightness of touch, the delicate rasping mousse so reminiscent of a gentle cat's tongue, and the sheer blooming deliciousness that, all taken together, discreetly scream, “Drink me. Here. Now”.
I was tipped off about my other choice, the Innocenti Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 2004, by a chap who, if he were a rich man, would drink classed growth claret every day (Mouton, if I recall correctly), with occasional forays into vino like this one, for indeed it is very claret-like. It has structure without being harshly tannic; there is complexity, with layers of flavour weaving back and forth; there is a strong fresh-earth-and-mushroom aroma; but best of all, it has the delicate dark floral top note I often see in, yes indeedy, classed growth clarets. Actually no, best of all is the price - only eighteen pounds in your local Oddbins. Assuming, of course, they haven't hidden it all away for themselves...
2005-07-10
Summertime, dum-dee-dum-dum-dee-deeeeee-dum
What a glorious day. Ideal weather for sitting outside, enjoying a glass of fizz and some asparagus tips & hollandaise. So we did.
Asparagus needs no garnish. Sizzled butter or perhaps - the decadence of it! - truffle oil would be the height of luxury, but classic dishes exert a kind of gravity. To do otherwise goes against a law of nature.
The Champenois assert that champagne will pair any food. Certainly our bottle of Canard-Duchêne brut (non-vintage, under cork) was a fair match, the dryness and acidity of the wine contrasting with the rich sauce, but other wines would better match the flavour of the asparagus.
Canard-Duchêne has just a hint of pinkness in the depths. The nose is wet gravel (translation: classic champagne style minerality; aka fish tanks), and on the palate I find the same mineral quality. It is very dry, full bodied, and showing just a touch of richness. No real toastiness, tho, which is a little disappointing. I have found it better previously. 13(+)/20.
Asparagus needs no garnish. Sizzled butter or perhaps - the decadence of it! - truffle oil would be the height of luxury, but classic dishes exert a kind of gravity. To do otherwise goes against a law of nature.
The Champenois assert that champagne will pair any food. Certainly our bottle of Canard-Duchêne brut (non-vintage, under cork) was a fair match, the dryness and acidity of the wine contrasting with the rich sauce, but other wines would better match the flavour of the asparagus.
Canard-Duchêne has just a hint of pinkness in the depths. The nose is wet gravel (translation: classic champagne style minerality; aka fish tanks), and on the palate I find the same mineral quality. It is very dry, full bodied, and showing just a touch of richness. No real toastiness, tho, which is a little disappointing. I have found it better previously. 13(+)/20.
2004-07-31
At an Alsatian gourmet dinner last night
Smiley did the hard work of matching the food and wine, I got to go and talk about the wines, tra-la!
Billecart-Salmon grand cru blanc de blancs NV
(with watermelon)
This had a fine creamy mousse, concentrated lemon and cream flavours, and something of biscuits about it. Lemon meringue pie in a glass. It went surprisingly well with watermelon, although I was too nervous to really enjoy it.
Albert Mann Tokay Pinot Gris 02002
(smoked asparagus, green pea and truffle cappuccino)
I have previously rated this as excellent, but I don't think it was quite as good on this occasion. It did seem like a great match for the cappuccino, although sadly there was hardly enough of that to taste, let alone fill up on. The non-veggies pretty much acclaimed this as the star of the evening, paired with foie gras.
Hugel Riesling 02003
Carillon Côte de Beaune-Villages 02001
(an "interpretation" of pasta which featured no pasta at all. Brilliant!)
The riesling was neutral against the "pasta". On its own it was a fine glass, with a strong blossom nose and great limeiness on the palate, balanced by very smooth mouthfeel. The pinot, on the other hand, was a very, very good match for the concentrated dark flavours in the mushrooms and aubergine. It had the ideal balance of earthy, barnyard stink against light berry fruitiness in the nose, while the smooth tannin and gentle acidity on the palate sat very agreeably with the food.
Leitz Rüdesheimer Schlossburg Spätlese 02002
(Alsatian plum tart with Mirabel brandy ice cream and schenkeles)
This had a slight biscuitiness on the nose which kinda echoed the champagne. A very fine dessert wine, the pure long acids precisely balancing the rich concentrated sweetness. The ice cream was the only element of the dessert which was too much for the wine - I think it must have been one third part plum brandy. One element of the dish, a single plum, stuffed with chopped almonds and baked, had me grinning and chortling, so tasty was it.
Billecart-Salmon grand cru blanc de blancs NV
(with watermelon)
This had a fine creamy mousse, concentrated lemon and cream flavours, and something of biscuits about it. Lemon meringue pie in a glass. It went surprisingly well with watermelon, although I was too nervous to really enjoy it.
Albert Mann Tokay Pinot Gris 02002
(smoked asparagus, green pea and truffle cappuccino)
I have previously rated this as excellent, but I don't think it was quite as good on this occasion. It did seem like a great match for the cappuccino, although sadly there was hardly enough of that to taste, let alone fill up on. The non-veggies pretty much acclaimed this as the star of the evening, paired with foie gras.
Hugel Riesling 02003
Carillon Côte de Beaune-Villages 02001
(an "interpretation" of pasta which featured no pasta at all. Brilliant!)
The riesling was neutral against the "pasta". On its own it was a fine glass, with a strong blossom nose and great limeiness on the palate, balanced by very smooth mouthfeel. The pinot, on the other hand, was a very, very good match for the concentrated dark flavours in the mushrooms and aubergine. It had the ideal balance of earthy, barnyard stink against light berry fruitiness in the nose, while the smooth tannin and gentle acidity on the palate sat very agreeably with the food.
Leitz Rüdesheimer Schlossburg Spätlese 02002
(Alsatian plum tart with Mirabel brandy ice cream and schenkeles)
This had a slight biscuitiness on the nose which kinda echoed the champagne. A very fine dessert wine, the pure long acids precisely balancing the rich concentrated sweetness. The ice cream was the only element of the dessert which was too much for the wine - I think it must have been one third part plum brandy. One element of the dish, a single plum, stuffed with chopped almonds and baked, had me grinning and chortling, so tasty was it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)