There’s been a lot of kerfuffle about the proposed expansion of the Champagne delimited region, currently standing at just over 33,000 hectares (ha). At an industry update session earlier this year, Bruno Paillard, President of the commission for communication and the appellation at the CIVC (Comité interprofessionnel du vin de Champagne), (and owner of Champagne Bruno Paillard, explained the process:

Planted surface in Champagne, source: CIVC

In the 18^th century it is estimated the champagne region was around 80,000 hectares. At this time the region was producing still wine.  Early documents reveal the planted surface in 1822 was 65,700 ha, by which time Champagne was moving from still to sparkling wine production.  But after late 19^th century devastation by phylloxera, the vineyard area reached its nadir at the beginning of the first world war in 1914, falling to just 6,000 ha.  By 2000, it had recovered slowly to 33,105ha.

After decimation by phylloxera, and after the first world war, recovery was slow. The front line had gone through the region, and by the end of the war, two key export markets were closed off:  Russia due to the Revolution (1917) and the USA due to prohibition (1920 to 1933).  With a brief interlude of the glittering twenties, global recession soon followed in 1929, and the second world war a decade later.   

So it was only in the 1950s that people started to replant.  If ever there is a wine product associated with a kind economy, at home and abroad, Champagne is it, though war, recession and anti-alcohol lobbies are friends of no wine producer.  During the 2009 recession, total Champagne shipments were down 15% on 2008, though shipments to the USA were down 30%, with both this market and Germany falling to their respective early 1990 levels.

But it was in those bright, glittering 1920s that the Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée was set up, along with a map of the region drawn up in 1927.  Though it’s unofficial, it is the map still being used today.  It listed more than 30,000 ha as being capable of growing vines for Champagne.

Now, in the early 21^st century, those unofficial boundaries are bulging and bursting at their braces, as shipments show:  in 1950 Champagne shipments were just 33.4 million bottles, and this had grown to 293 million bottles in 2009. 

In 2003 INAO, the organisation that oversees appellation legislation, started a study to revisit the Champagne boundary issue.  The study is formed of two parts. In the first part, historical records are being examined to determine a list of villages with some sort of record for having produced Champagne in the past. Paillard said the “second step is to have each parcel of land within these villages checked by commissions of independent experts to determine whether the quality of the land is suitable for growing Champagne grapes for example exposure, altitude, slopes etc.”

As at the beginning of 2010 he added “the list is not yet finalised. We have integrated 40 villages and expelled two, though those are appealing the decision.” He added the scientists could not find a good reason for them to be maintained because the soil and exposition was not of top quality.  It’s still under appeal with a final decision is expected by the end of this year, or even the beginning of next year.

Paillard was also keen to reassure, saying “we are convinced Champagne is unique. This is something that refers to history, it is fair to the past. It will not lower the average quality of Champagne.  The idea is to make it greater. And that takes time.”

Sources: 
Oxford Companion to Wine 3^rd edition, 2006 (and pers. comm. with assistant editor)
CIVC (pers comms., Aug/Sep 2010)
UMC (website and pers comm., Sep 2010)

Notes

* The CIVC does not include the Réhoboam in its list of sizes, saying it no longer exists for Champagne, though both the OCW [2006] and the UMC do list it.

** The Solomon has proved the most controversial to pinpoint accurately. Both the CIVC and the UMC (Union of Champagne houses) state it at 18 litres / 24 bottles. Other sources, not cited here, have the Solomon variously at 20 litres /26.6 bottles, or 21 litres / 28 bottles, but I’m inclined to go with the CIVC and the UMC.
** Both the CIVC and the UMC deny the existence of the Melchior.  The CIVC says “the Melchior was never used in Champagne. There is no record in the known archives.”  The OCW says the Melchior is 18 litres /24 bottles (the size of the Solomon, here), but does not specify this size for Champagne, so the 18 litre /24 bottle Melchior could yet be a correct size/name for a different region. But it’s clear there is no Melchior in Champagne.  

*** The Sovereign is listed in the OCW as 34 bottles “in theory”, but direct communication with Taittinger, possibly the only producer to use this size, confirms it at 35 bottles.

**** The CIVC cites the Primat size above, but it is missing from the UMC list.

Part of the confusion arises because there are no specific rules for the larger formats as they are mostly created for special occasions (at very long lead-times).

In 2002, the Champagne region undertook an environmental impact assessment, from which a target reduction of carbon emissions by 25% by 2020 has been set, and a reduction of 75% by 2050.

Lighter Champagne bottle

Laurent Panigaï, head of viticulture at the CIVC (comité interprofessionnel du vin de champagne) said “the carbon footprint was studied, the whole footprint including external inputs into production.” They found that growing grapes and making wine is only one quarter of the carbon footprint, but that packaging accounted for a third of the footprint in 2003, and of this third, bottles alone represented 17%.

To achieve the target level of reduction, Panigaï said “we set up a climate action plan with five directions [buildings viticulture, oenology/services, transport and multi-disciplinary projects]. We have 17 R&D programmes, with some 40 initiatives under way or in the pipeline.”

The first of these is the lighter weight glass bottle, which has actually been in development for the last decade, before the sustainability agenda came to the urgent fore. The quick win for producers, which the CIVC hope will result in deep uptake, includes the fact that no new cellar equipment is needed. The new bottle is ready to go. It’s also pretty much the same shape, and has plenty of pressure resistance for the bubbles.

Panigaï said some bottles are already on the market, and the “target for next tirage [bottling with yeast/sugar for the second fermentation] of 2011, is that 80-90% of Champenois will use these bottles.”

If the overall target for lightweight bottles is met, i.e. everyone in the industry uses them, this will shave of nearly 4.5% of the targeted 25%. It’s a good start, but much more needs to be done in the coming decade.

One of the other potential opportunities is re-directing the annual prunings. Champagne produces 150,000 tonnes of waste wood biomass of prunings each year. Panigaï said “two-thirds [the canes] is useful for our soils as a good mulching. But one third is lost, as trunks and cordons are burned.” He said, if 50,000 tonnes could be transferred into local biogas creation, this would account for a 5% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, so a little more than the lighter bottles. But, he said, this is a mid-term solution.

Brits’ love affair with sparkling wine shows no signs of letting up, so what better wine style to both bring in the new year, and to start a new series exploring wine tasting, flavours and styles.

Champagne is by far and away the most important sparkling wine from France.  Alsace and the Loire are next with Burgundy falling into line, along with one or two specialist styles.

Style and flavour are inextricably linked to the way sparkling wines are made. In France, most are made by the ‘traditional method’, and even then, there’s plenty of flavour difference.

Traditional method is used to describe sparkling wines made in the same way as Champagne.  The term Champagne can only be used for sparkling wine made in the eponymous region of northern France.  Everywhere else in the world it’s ‘traditional method sparkling wine’. 

Wines reviewed below

Still wine is fermented at harvest.  This still wine is then blended according to a number of desired styles.  The still wine is put into the very bottle that you will be pouring from, along with a little yeast and sugar, as food for the yeast.  A second fermentation takes place in the bottle. The bottle then rests ‘on its lees’ (the yeast cells), for a mandated period of time: for Champagne a minimum 15 months for non-vintage; minimum 36 months for vintage. At the end of this time the lees are removed and the bottle topped up. This top-up includes an amount of sugar to conform to the style on the label – mostly brut, but also sec, semi-sec, and increasingly trendy – zero dosage.

Most of what we drink is Brut, so dry, but it’s those lees that confer flavour. The more time spent on lees, the more nutty, savoury, toasted, complexing flavours can be found in the bubbly, including fresh cream, cob nuts, almonds, brioche, granary and toasted characters. 

A second crucial element is the grape varieties used.  In Champagne these are stipulated as chardonnay, pinot noir and pinot meunier.  Most non-vintage is made of a blend of the three, but ‘blanc de blancs’ is made just with chardonnay (white grape) and ‘blanc de noirs’ is made with one or both of the pinots (black grapes).  More chardonnay gives more floral, lifted, citrus notes with a lightness of structure that belies its strength. More pinot noir gives greater power and body, more mouth-filling, whereas pinot meunier is supple and strawberry-fruity.

In the wine recommendations opposite, there is a ‘blanc de blancs’ and a ‘blanc de noirs’ to show as clearly defined differences as possible. If neither of these terms is mentioned, the wine will usually be blend of the three grapes.

A third crucial element in flavour is the acid structure of the wine and its mousse – the bubbles.  The best quality mousse is a fine, persistent one, where a steady stream of small bubbles erupts on the palate. If a mousse dissipates quickly or the bubbles are big and coarse, the sensation is less attractive, and is usually indicative of a lesser quality wine.

The acidity runs through the heart of all these elements. Early harvest is often ideal to preserve as much natural acidity as possible. Part of the refreshing and enlivening nature of sparkling wine comes from the perky and tingling acid core, around which all the flavours evolve and develop in the mouth.

Other regions in France call their traditional method wines Crémant, though the time on lees is often less: minimum time nine months. Already this suggests it will be fruitier rather than more nutty and toasty.

And the grape varieties used are those found locally, so this will also affect the flavour profile.  Sorg’s Crémant d’Alsace has pinot gris and pinot blanc which add floral aroma and fruitiness. The Presle Crémant de Loire has a lot of chardonnay and has developed toasty, creamy notes of notable time on lees, whereas the Crémant de Bourgogne has been made in a deliberately light and fruity style without the complexing characters of lees ageing, and is delightfully pure and fresh for that.

Bruno Sorg, Crémant d’Alsace Brut NV
£15.00 The Good Wine Shop   
Cork,  12%
A delicious bubbly focusing on fragrant fruit, from a top grower in Alsace.  This is a blend of chardonnay, pinot blanc and pinot gris. There’s freshness from the chardonnay, plus depth, weight and a little richness from the pinot gris (not to be confused with light, crisp, neutral Italian pinot grigio). Fragrant butter biscuit notes waft over white fruits, apple and pear, all with a hint of fragrant allspice. The nose promises much, and the palate does not disappoint, with fresh peach with apricot foam, and an evasive spicy hint of complexity.  

Château de la Presle, Jean-Marie Penet, Crémant de Loire Brut NV
£13.50  Bottle Apostle 
Cork, 12%
This is an aperitif to impress, with hints of those yeasty notes more usually found in Champagne, and little surprise as this is three-quarters chardonnay. Aromatic acacia flowers, apple, with white nectarine on both nose and palate.  Hint of honey-roasted white pepper spice also come through on the palate to complex the white fruit core of this bubbly. It has a creamy, persistent mousse, and a medium-full weight with rich fruit concentration alongside the silhouette of a savoury, creamy lees note.

Cave de Lugny, Crémant de Bourgogne, Blancs de Blancs Brut NV
£10.49  Oddbins
Cork, 12%
Blanc de Blancs so by definition chardonnay, with all the refreshing focus on primary fruit, so no savoury leesy character.  Fresh, crunchy apples, white pear and white rose fragrance leads into plenty of clean fruit on the palate. The mousse is creamy and well-defined. This is made by the well-known co-op in a widely appealing aperitif style. 

Sainsbury’s Blanc de Noirs Champagne Brut NV
£15.99 Sainsbury’s
Cork, 12%
Made only from black grapes: 40% pinot noir and 60% pinot meunier.  Hints of brioche on the nose are followed up by butter biscuit and fresh cream on the palate.  This gives way to fresh-roasted almonds and white flowers on the mid palate. With 30 months’ ageing on lees, this bubbly has a good level of complexity at the price.  It’s been made for Sainsbury’s for more than 20 years by the same co-operative in Reims.

Pierre Gimmonet et Fils Cuis 1er cru Brut NV
£168.00 per 6 bottles/£28 per bottle, Armit
Cork,  12%   
This is made only using chardonnay grapes, and is made by the Gimmonet family who have been crafting Champagne since 1750. Aromas of fresh bread emerge temptingly from the glass.  It is immediately gratifying and uplifting with a good density of flavour.  Acacia flowers and freshly-harvested cob nuts combine with hints of flavoursome creamy sweetness.  And lifted citrus notes meld into the enticing creamy mousse to create an altogether appealing sensation.

Hervé Augustin

Champagne Ayala

 is the only non-German, non-French name in Champagne. It was founded in 1860, two years after Spaniard Edmond de Ayala married Gabrielle d’Albrecht along with her dowry of the Château d’Aÿ and some very nice vineyards in Aÿ and Mareuil sur Aÿ, in the Montagne de Reims region.

In 2005 Champagne Ayala was bought by the company that also owns Champagne Bollinger – Société Jacques Bollinger. The SJB portfolio also includes Domaine Chanson in Burgundy, Langlois-Château in the Loire and Cognac Delamain. 

Augustin explained Ayala’s route towards low and no dosage Champagnes. He said: “dosage [generally] used to be very high, for example 100g/l RS [residual sugar] in the UK, in Germany up to 150-160g/l. In Russia it was up to 330g/l RS.”  The 1876 Cristal from Louis Roederer, for example, had over 100g/l RS.

“Ayala is said to have shipped the 1865 vintage in 1870 with dosage as low as 20g/l RS, which was like a revolution at that time, though now, it seems high,” adding “in 1913, even the Grandes Marques of Champagne refused to sell low dosage champagne.”

After the house was bought by Bollinger, a clear revitalising strategy was laid. Augustin had been the number two to Ghislain de Montgolfier at Bollinger, and was parachuted in to Ayala, with the mission of keeping a distinct identity, separate from that of Bolly.  Ayala uses no oak and no malolactic fermentation, for example.  

Augustin said: “we had to find a new way to have a clean position in Champagne.  When I arrived, we discussed dosage with the cellar master. The wines were good but with too much dosage, around 10g/l, though this is not high now for Champagne.”

They were keen to get a move on, so in conjunction with Nicolas Klym, who has been cellar master at Ayala for thirty years, they decided on a zero dosage cuvée to present at an international wine trade exhibition in the middle of 2005. Augustin said: “it was a completely new philosophy for champagne. We could not build a new cuvee; it was the cuvee built three years previously.”

Another five years on, and two ranges exist:  the low dosage range, with maximum residual sugars of 8g/l; and a zero dosage range, with no added residual sugars.

Low dosage range

1. Brut Majeur
2. Perle d’Ayala (prestige cuvée)
3. Rosé Majeur NV
4. Millésimé
5. Blanc de Blancs
6. Rich Majeur

Zero dosage range

1. Brut Nature NV
2. Perle d’Ayala Nature (prestige cuvée)
3. Cuvée Rosé Nature

A note on dosage

Champagne spends many months, sometimes years maturing in bottle on its yeast lees.  At the end of this time, the wine is ‘disgorged’, meaning the yeast lees are removed.  A final ‘dosage’ – a wine/sugar solution – is added immediately afterwards, which gives the wine the level of dryness/sweetness required by the cellar master.

A note on Brut 

Brut Champagne, by law, can have anything between 0 and 15g/l of residual sugars. Normally the wines taste dry because of the high acidity levels in Champagne, that palate-tingling freshness common in so many bubblies.

Quite often Brut Champagnes have around 12-13g/l RS as a result of the dosage, though the overall trend seems to be a slow reduction in this amount.  This is partly a stylistic tweaking by individual houses and partly a result of recent warmer ripening conditions in the region which means that acidities are coming down a tiny bit.  In turn this obviates the need to add as much sugar in the dosage.

For whatever reason, Augustin believes in zero dosage, saying it’s “a big trend for the future.  I believe zero dosage will be more important than rosé in 20 years. And we want to be the pioneer and leader of that segment of the market.”

One of the unusual things about Ayala is, Augustin said, that “100% of our stock is able to be zero dosage. We do not have two cuvees [of the Brut]. If there was a great demand tomorrow, 100% of our brut could be zero dosage.”  He added “others [Champagne houses] are building a separate cuvee for their zd. Here we have only one stock.”  Louis Roederer, for example, are aiming to release a zero dosage towards the end of 2010.

At the moment just 5% of Ayala Brut is sold in zero dosage. They’re ready to immediately meet any increase in demand, but given that zero dosage Champagne is a taste that needs to be acquired, they’re not likely to see an immediate rush on stocks.

Tasting notes, January 2010, London.

We compared the first three wines in each range.

The first two, Brut Nature NV and Brut Majeur NV, are the same wine maturing on lees, until the moment of disgorgement.  It is only then, at disgorgement, that the dosage is added, or not. Both are the same blend, with the same length of time on the lees, more than two and a half years.

Brut Nature NV

40% pinot noir; 40% chardonnay; 20% pinot meunier
Dosage: zero
Augustin: the wine has “citrus, purity and precision.  There is a marine air from no dosage.”
As if by association I pick up a salty, yeasty, dry tang on the nose. The effervescence is attractive and smooth, the core is tight and clenched.  The wine is palate tingling-ly fresh, with savoury, dried bread notes.  There is not much berry fruit expression.  It is tight and angular, with steely notes and a fine mousse.

Brut Majeur NV

40% pinot noir; 40% chardonnay; 20% pinot meunier
Dosage: 8g/l RS
This is much more floral, more forthcoming, more expressive on the nose, with white flowers, buttery bread, and red berry fruits. The palate is fuller, with a more expressive and softer body, not surprisingly, given the note of sweetness from the dosage. The wine is easier and friendlier on the palate, giving it a much wider appeal.  It’s fresh and youthful, with a long fruity finish.

The prestige cuvée Perle d’Ayala is also made from the same base wine, aged for the same length of time, so again we’re comparing the organoleptic effects of the dosage.

Perle d’Ayala Nature 2002

80% chardonnay; 20% pinot noir
Dosage: zero
Aged six years on lees
Creamy, soft, citrus; intense on the nose. Rich, savoury, toastiness on the palate from long lees ageing; supple and mouth-filling. Remarkably lush flavours, considering the zero dosage, but no overt ‘fruitiness’. Good complexity and volume. Creamy persistent mousse and long creamy finish.

Perle d’Ayala 2002

80% chardonnay; 20% pinot noir
Aged six years on lees
Dosage: 7.4g/l RS
Fruit to the fore on this one, with white flowers and citrus, supple attack, with the little bit of sweetness obvious by comparison to the zero dosage version; it’s a little softer and simpler, a bit fuller on the palate without adding vinosity or complexity. And this has none of the savoury toastiness coming through. 

The umbrella house style with the rosés is for a high proportion of chardonnay.
Unlike the previous pairs, the rosés do not come from the same base wine, or predominantly the same vintage. 

Cuvée Rosé Nature NV

Augustin: “The first rosé without any dosage made by a Champagne house.”
Augustin: “this is for people who don’t do rosés. High dosage and high pinot noir [found in some other Champagne houses] can make a rosé heavy.” 
50% chardonnay; 40% pinot noir including some still red wine; 10% pinot meunier
Dosage: zero
Quite a deep salmon pink. Faintly spicy strawberry fruit on the nose, with a fresh palate attack, tight and angular, softening into gentle mousse, with nicely toned fruit structure. Good vinosity and backbone with a long finish.

Rosé Majeur NV

50% chardonnay; 40% pinot noir including some still red wine; 10% pinot meunier
Dosage: 7g/l
Deep rose petal pink. Greater fruitier aroma, fresh red berries, with citrus lift, soft, caressing mousse with lovely depth of flavour. Fuller, broader mouth texture, and somehow less complex.

Observations

The low dosage works really well, but as I find I prefer Bruts with lower rather than higher dosage this is no surprise. I’ve started to notice those brut Champagnes with higher dosage. I tend to mark them down for an element of overt sweetness, and a bit of flattening of fruit aroma and flavour.

In comparison to the zero dosage opposite numbers, the low dosage appeared less complex, perhaps less erudite, but easier to appreciate, and with a much broader appeal.

The zero dosage seems quite an ‘intellectual’ style of wine, requiring critique and analysis. Maybe this is in part its newness as a category (and to me). The wines are clearly good, though I’m not convinced I yet need to intellectualise and analyse when I’m consuming Champagne; I rather want to enjoy it without consciously doing so.

The 2002 vintage

This is the current release of Cristal, which will go straight on to the 2004, as none was made in the hot 2003 vintage.  It was a great vintage in Champagne: according to Lécaillon “god was champenoise in this year.”  He said it wasn’t a classic year, when the average temperature would finish the growing season at 11.2 to 11.3°C. In 2002 it was sunny and dry, finishing at around 11.7°C.

Lécaillon explained that Champagne is always “a fight between the storms and water of an oceanic climate, and a continental climate that is dry and hot.  In 2002, we got a push of continental weather.  It got dry, with quite cold north-easterly winds which slightly concentrated and slowed down the ripening, giving more finesse.”

In terms of optimal harvest point Lécaillon said: “we taste the grapes, looking for flavour, aroma, balance.  Sometimes we pick at 9% potential alcohol, slightly unripe.  Tasting is the only way to decide which plots are ready.  Sugar is a good measurement, but only as a rough figure, not a detailed figure.” 

He said, simply, “we made exceptional wines in 2002.”

The technical components of philosophy

Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon

Throughout the seminar Lécaillon emphasised that there is no formula at Roederer, but there is a house style led by Roederer’s philosophy of production.

On grape ripeness:  Ripeness in Champagne is likely to be considered unripe in most other wine-producing regions.  Lécaillon explained full ripeness in Champagne “is a question of taste. When you get lot of aromas and flavours, and you still get a focus on acidity and freshness.  A ripe grape for me is, when I taste it, I get a long length with fresh acidity and aromas. It comes back to what you aim for.”  

On stainless steel and oak:  A mix of stainless steel and oak is used for the first fermentation, depending on the cuvée. Lécaillon said “the idea of blending oak fermented wines and stainless steel wines is tradition and modernity: tension, subtlety, pure wines and flavours of the modern with the richness of tradition. We protect from oxidation as much as we can.” The oak used is large casks averaging about a quarter of a century in age.

He added: “Oak is not about taste. Oak is more to do with lees stirring, ageing on total lees, micro-oxidation, creamy, silky texture. We want champagne that is more sensuous and hedonistic when it’s young.”

On malolactic fermentation:  There is no formula, Lécaillon repeated, it’s always a question of balance.  Though malic acid does seem to be prized, as he said “we think malic acid provides life giving acidity, and vibrations to the blend. We look for malic acid, but not too strongly otherwise it’s too appley; just enough to give a crescendo on the palate, or energy as we call it at Louis Roederer. It gives one extra dimension.” 

In 2002, none of the wines underwent malolactic fermentation.

And it’s never done on chardonnay. Lécaillon said: “we never do malo on chardonnay; when we do malo we do it on pinot noir or pinot meunier. It decreases the elegance of chardonnay. And in fact chardonnay is less acidic than pinot noir.” 

On structure and texture: Lécaillon said “structure comes from the vineyards; texture is built in the winery. For that creamy, silky texture, the smooth feeling that wraps around the acidity, we work on total lees, keeping as much solids as we can. We age the [still] wines on total lees for 4-6 months. Sometimes we do lees stirring every week, or every few weeks. When you age wines on total lees you get a creamy texture, but you are on the reductive style, so you need to be careful not to go too far towards a reductive style.” Reductive aromas are not favoured.

On lees ageing in bottle: Lécaillon said “we never look for long ageing on lees at Louis Roederer. A long time on lees brings more oxidation and autolysis which gives a biscuity taste.” More fruitiness is retained when the time on lees is not so long.  For Cristal, Lécaillon said: “four to six years on lees is more than enough. After that we keep it a minimum of eight months on cork before release.”  

On dosage:  The champagnes are in the 9-11g/l dosage range. Lécaillon said: “it’s a new thing for Louis Roederer.  We have some reduction of dosage from 10-12g/l to 8-10 g/l. Any kind of sugar you add, it’s a kind of mask you put on top of the wine. We’ve removed a little bit of the mask.”

On his favourite Cristal: Lécaillon was not to be drawn on his favourite vintage of Cristal. Instead, in truly diplomatic style, he said: “Cristal is at its optimum at 20 to 25 years from the vintage. I love the ’82, the ’85, the ‘79, they all have their own identity, and like children you cannot prefer one. You try to understand why they’re different, and to observe with humility and learn.  It’s a permanent learning process.” 

The titbit of gossip: Roederer have been working for five years to produce a brut nature/zero dosage bubbly for the house and they hope to release it by the end of 2010. 

Tasting notes – Dec 2009

2002 Louis Roederer Blanc de Blancs

Grapes come from four villages in the Côtes des Blancs.   

Gentle lemon spice with apple blossom. Fine mousse opening on the mid palate, aromatic spice, fine, elegant core with mid palate perfume, and lemon toast. There’s a creamy feeling around the fresh acid core. A certain lightness of texture alongside the blossoming flavour.

2002 Brut Vintage

The aim for this wine is to be the classic wine of the Louis Roederer range. It’s pinot noir dominated with about 70%. The fruit comes from north-facing vineyards, which Lécaillon suggests gives more mineral, chalky, spicy flavour in the pinot noir rather than red fruits. 

Spice and toasted almonds aromatise the nose and palate. The mousse has a soft, creamy persistence. Notes of steel magnolias, cream and citrus emerge on the fine, elegant palate profile. Pure and linear structure, with the richness of toasted yellow fruits and white blossom.  It has a rounded, softer style, maybe helped by 11g/l dosage. It’s more than approachable now, not as tight as one might expect. Fleshy white fruits, still with proper deportment.

2002 Brut Rosé

Fruit comes from the Marne Valley, from south-aspect vineyards. The 70% pinot noir component is macerated fro 6 to 10 days at cool temperatures. The grapes are not crushed, thus the very light colour.  The rest is from chardonnay.

It has the faintest salmon pink hue. Dry-baked strawberry fruits on the nose with wafts of cinnamon and fresh almonds. A sweet fruit attack, with hints of honeysuckle and pink grapefruit follow through. A richness of flavour blossoms in the palate alongside the soft, fine, creamy mousse. Fine integration of acidity with light, yet intensely-flavoured fruit.

Cristal

The clear bottle with its flat base, and the golden label resulted from a direct request from the Russian tsar, Alexander II, for whom the original champagne was created. The story goes that the tsar didn’t want his wine waiter hiding poison in the punt…

In 1876 Cristal was noticeably and fashionably sweet, with more than 100g/l residual sugar. Now it is firmly ensconced in the brut camp.  The idea for this bubbly was to blend the old vines, over 25 years, of the three estates, to use the most integrated, balanced, sophisticated grapes for Cristal. Lécaillon said “we still do it the same way; not from the same blocks because we have to replant, and we use the old vines.”

2002 Cristal

A blend of 55% pinot noir, 45% chardonnay. Cream, roasted almonds, and steely nose flow into full fruit on the palate, with a silky, creamy texture, a nutty core and passion fruit and honeysuckle nuances. It’s youthful and fresh, with warm white fruit of nectarine and peach. Very smooth, silky texture, with a soft and almost sensorially lush mousse; refined and long, sublimely balanced.

Lécaillon said “we put this in family of top vintages of Cristal. There is extra energy, length, finesse, and silkiness in this wine, but it was all there from day one from harvest.”

2002 Cristal Rosé

Made from 60% pinot noir and 40% chardonnay, this also has the faintest salmon pink hue (as does the Brut Rosé). Warm strawberry notes with a sprinkle of black pepper precede a spacedust-textured entry mellowing immediately to a soft mousse with a cranberry perkiness. It’s less in the roasted nut spectrum, and more in the attractively fruit-focused forum.  A dosage of 10g/l helps make this soft and readily appreciable already.

1999 Cristal

A very warm vintage. The nose leads with dry honey and dried citrus fruit, followed by a rich, floral perfume, with warm roasted almonds. This has a complex and intriguing nose. The palate entry is of toasted nuts, with warm, savoury fruit, in a refined framework.  Dried citrus comes through on the tight palate though the acidity is not raging, more in the warm and open spectrum. A warm nuttiness, with floral notes and candied fruits follows up behind with possibly a hint of cumin. This is rich and powerful, and long.

1996 Cristal

A very cool vintage.  Hints of aromatic fire-smoke rise aloft the roasted mixed nuts and allspice. There’s even a silhouette of cherry blossom. The palate shows the full breadth of toasted notes, with the enlivening steely core running the length of the palate, creating frame and poise. It’s long, it’s fresh, it’s supremely well balanced and integrated. It’s sophisticated with a certain lushness of expression. The soft silky cream mousse persists throughout. Soft roasted nuts, white fruit, seamlessly integrated into an exceedingly good wine.

1990 Cristal

Not as robust as 1996 or 1999.

Hints of straw colour are emerging. Warm, toasted aromatic spices on the nose, roasted hazelnut with baked honey and sweet, truffle notes on the palate. Rich and powerful, with toasted nuts, figs and even a whiff of bitter chocolate. Still has an upright acid backbone, with mature notes coming to the fore including a hint of mocca; very long finish.

1988 Cristal

The last traditional year, before entering a hot/warm cycle in 1989.

Creamy flavour, with toasted and roasted fruit and nuts. Savoury, nutty, fire-smoke, truffle, and fresh mushroom. Citrus notes are beginning to fade behind the toasted notes, though it retains its fresh core, fleshed out with those savoury, developing notes. Soft and creamy, persistent mousse. Delicous, but not the standout vintage for me. It doesn’t have the persistence in the mouth of the 1996 (or the youth), though its finish is supremely long.

1979 Cristal

Deep straw colour. Aromatic tarry, toasty nose, which is both dense and intense. It has a dark and brooding intensity, with savoury, toasted, full-bodied complexity and richness. That trademark acid backbone continues to confer freshness and longevity. It hasn’t gone into a biscuity profile, just beautifully tarry and toasty, with an admirable length of finish.