CHAMPAGNE VERSUS PROSSECO

Is this even a question? Champagne of course! I know that I will be condemned for saying that Champagne is better and I will also be called a snob, but there is a reason why Champagne is Champagne. Yes Champagne is expensive. In fact it is more expensive than when I started drinking it but one can be very lucky to find a good deal here and there. I also said that if you want to learn to appreciate Champagne you have to drink a lot, often and not the same. I won't lie that I had always drunk Champagne, nor will I say that I have not tried Prosseco or other fizz.I will say though that Champagne is altogether a superior drink delivering wines that are at extremely reasonably prices if you consider them as expressions of the varieties from which it is made. For comparison, Burgundy a good bottle of burgundy fares around £300 and you can get a decent expression of Chardonnay from Champagne at around third of the price, for example Comptes de Champagne by Taittinger. I refer to Champagne as wine. Champagne is also the first letter in my drinking alphabeth 'C' and the second one is 'B' for Burgundy. When it comes to Prosecco I see as just a sparkling wine and not an artistic expression of the grape varieties it is made from. But then that is just me. Champagne as we know it now is a fairly new thing, only about 100 years old and who knows what Prosecco will be like in 100 years. As I am unlikely to experience that I will continue to drink the best drink in the world as it is. Sometimes 3 times as expensive as Prosecco but then I don't feel the need to nurture an alcohol addiction. May be just enjoyment addiction. So for me, Champagne is still the best drink in the world. :) Peter

CHAMPAGNE - BESSERAT DE BELLEFON

My gym was shut! But it was not some planned refurbishment but a police raid. I cycled back only to ponder the eternal question of drink and ab flab. Shall I indulge again? Did not take long to see that the mission of reducing the 15% of body fat to about 9% would this evening be a complete failure. I decided to have a date with my long time love affair, Champagne. Strangely, I was somehow set on a bottle anyway, and in fact on a bottle that I had not had before, but I was not sure what to have. Have you ever thought 'Oh Bollinger? Not again!'? I did! And I did it about an hour ago! I think the jaws of my friends have sunken in awe of uttering those words. Anyway, I chose something that has been looking at me for a while though I had seen in other shops. And strangely enough it was what I thought, and what I was happy to drink and in fact, how bloody rare, I actually felt like drinking, A straight Chardonnay. So what is it like (as I am still drinking it)? Clearly it is not a grande mousseux, as the bubbles are slowly popping out and the pearl threads are quite leisurely streaming through the wine. On the nose, I dare say, hint of cream (clearly an MLF except that it is toasty not brioche like; hmmm may be I can't smell well as I am at the end of a terrible cold or a clear example that I have not tasted anything interesting for while) and lemon juice. Now the lemon juice is a tertiary note I would comment on but on the palette the taste of lemons is accentuated. As a wine it is well rounded cuvee with citrus baseline structure so the acids drive the length of the wine. Hmmm, I would compare the wine to Ruinart's BdBs but at the begin more with Dom Ruinart rather than the standard version. The next balanced chardonnay from Champagne that comes to mind is Billercart and Salmon. Both however, do share similarities, but the nose here stands out. May be this is just a good wine with no identity. Will finish and try again, how soon I do not know. peter

NON CHAMPAGNE ENTRY.

As you probably know Champagne uses, predominantly, Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Meunieur as their basic grape varieties to produce their legendary drink. I have been following Champagnes for over 10 years, and aside the wines from there I have always, although with a slightly more tepid enthusiasm, various expressions of the aforementioned varieties. I spent some time in Slovakia and tasted some of the wines there. Pinot Noir is extremely popular though I fear that it has reached its excellence as the producers are able to produce 'nice, good wines'. I also must conclude that it is unlikely to pass that anyone will develop a truly exquisite wine with an outstanding character that will stand out in the entire world of wine; amongst wine professionals and amateurs alike. Chardonnay wines however, can be quite oily or just too ripe or too round but this could be due to MLF which unless avoided will always give the wine slight feminine character, with hints of cream. I found one sparkling wine which I thought was quite impressive. Regrettably not at its best, but the composition of eighty per cent Chardonnay and twenty Pinot Noir was a classic expression. And naturally it was quite an interesting one! Although I think that the product was rushed on to the market to meet some, non-existent demand, but more like push it onto the market to offset the production cost. I only conclude those point because the taste of the wine was similar to grapefruit with slight bitterness and that the wine was very fruit driven on the nose. In case of the former this is indicative of young vines and in case of the latter it is a result of short exposure to sediments. But I was impressed! I certainly taste worse Champagnes. I would like to see how this wine develops over the next few years, so I will keep a watchful eye. :)

LE MESNIL - BLANC DES BLANCS

Oh here we go again. It has been a while since I wrote something for which I do apologise to my beloved reader. Every since I got a smart phone and got sucked into the black of hole of a reflected screen, I rarely use the laptop.

I admit that my Champagne intake diminished too, but I cannot say I have been entirely sober.

The usual dilemma is often exacerbated by an expectation that I am trying to meet, in fact more candidly, exceed all my previous sensational experiences. It is my curse to have drunk so much. It is also the curse of drinking so much that what once seemed thrilling now seems ordinary. I see no point in digging deep to discover why that is so, because what I am about to say makes me forget about it.

I discovered an extremely reasonable and sensational, and at long last a 'classic' Champagne. A stroke of folly, or luck, made me chose a bottle that looked simple. I bit the bullet and I was very impressed. The village is so famous for its big Chardonnays I was expecting something with weight and quite ripe with good balance of sugars and acids. It was still a non-vintage so I had my raving reigned in. On opening, all my expectations were met. The wine was big, bold, balanced, with character, elegant, seductive and marvellous to drink. I sighed of relief that this was, at last, A CLASSIC Champagne. Toasty notes mingling with candied fruits, yet on the palette lively acids added to elegance, making it virtually luscious.

Sigh!

It all to an end when I finished the bottle.

ANDRE CARPENTIER

I have not forgotten! But, still, I will keep it as a secret. Nobody will read what I drank on last ICD! Not even a week ago, a critical thought devoured my conscience. I realised, that I have been writing about the usual Champagne which judging by my last review is now almost unreasonably expensive. However, that alone was not a deterrent. One day I stood infront of a shelf staring at all the producers of distinction and I could not really commit to buying any of them. I looked two shelves further and discovered that one was half price. £13.49! Yes! easy decision and a good choice. This is an uncomplicated light drinking Champagne. I did not really think about reviewing it, but I definitely enjoyed drinking it. With that in mind I looked elsewhere for even a better tipple but £2.51 more expensive! Enjoy. Btw, you can buy A. Carpentier in Tesco.

11TH INTERNATIONAL CHAMPAGNE DAY

Today concludes the first year of the new decade of celebrating Champagne. I will drink, and I will drink Champagne, but to choose from such an extensive catalogue of Champagnes, what could be the best to mark the conclusion of the first year of the new decade? Watch this space! :)

CRISTAL 2004

I don't really know how to approach Cristal. Up until recently my thoughts on Cristal hadn't really crystalised, but it was one morning when I was climbing out of the shower I realised what the allure of Cristal had been. My last entry addressed Cristal as a clear disappoitment. Yes the 2002 was not impressive. In fact it was a standard Cristal where on reflection of the experience of drinking the 96, 97, 2000, 2002 vintages, I was bound to review and make some sort of conclusions to help me orient myself in what Louis Roederer would be producing and what the differentiating characteristics of future releases would manifest as. Yet again, the last bottle of Cristal was a gift. And naturally someone felt that the price tag on the bottle of roughly £200 was a sufficient compensation for a little misdemeanour. Whilst I am trying to reduce the shock of what became known as 'the event' it is crucial to understand what the motivation to gladly offer a bottle of such reputable and highly priced nectar might have been. Through Champagne I studied people's motivation for a decade. I often encountered love, enthusiasm, guilt but on this occassion the person's attempt was a sheer primitive and futile manipulation and a request for forgiveness. And rightly so! If someone tries to prove their point with a big knife in their hand at 3am then to repent, the easiest things to do is to buy someone. It is said that I am easily impress with Champagne, but that is not true. There is a dtifference when someone gives you a bottle to see what you think, and when they are trying to corrupt your intergrity. So what do you do? ACCEPT! In the UK it is impolite not to. But this is not about 'The Event' but the event of drinking the wine. So what was it like? Hmmm, to say that it was another Cristal clear disappointment would be unfair. To say it was outstanding, would be a lie. So what was it like? Well, since 2004 was a different vintage altogether I was expecting this Cristal to show at least some character of the year, but 2002 was not demonstrating anything particularly outstanding either, it turned out to be just another Cristal. So that day, when I was climbing out of the shower, and it was in there, where I reflected on all the years I had tasted, the conclusion is very simple. The problem of Cristal, is that the idea of drinking it, is far more exciting than the drink itself. May be now I will finally have the pleasure to enjoy Cristal for what it is. Hmmm, not rushing into buying it again soon. :)