Hi All,
Recently placed on order for Camille Saves Rose champagne and was called by the retailer stating that they received Saves Bouzy rouge still wine by mistake. They eventually got the order right and I received the champagne as ordered.
This got me thinking, though, about Bouzy rouge still wines, which I have never sampled. Anyone have any experience with these pinot noir bottlings (and maybe pinot meunier?) and how they showed?
Thanks in advance.
Cheers,
Doug
Hi Doug,
I love the still red wines of Bouzy when the vintage allows for the fruit to ripen nicely. Then they have an ethereal finesse that is very different than reds from Burgundy.
They’re quite nervous on the tongue, so the fruit sparkles lightly in a way that I’ve not found in other reds. They’re quite mineral driven and complex, yet the best ones remain almost impossibly light.
And they can age beautifully.
I’ll add that I went through a case of Egly-Ouriet Ambonnay Rouge Coteaux Champenois from Ambonnay over the course of 10 years or so and it was spectacular from first bottle to last. Wish I still had some hidden away!
I’ve had some delicious Coteaux Champenois wines, though value can be questionable for me.
I’m a big Camille Saves fan (mostly the NV rose and the vintage GC Bouzy, though I just discovered the Les Loges this week) but have never seen their still Bouzy, would love to try.
Chambers often has good Coteaux Champenois selection
Andrew and Dale,
Good thoughts, appreciate the feedback. Looks like some research is in order.
Cheers,
Doug
Just had the 08 of this last night and it was absolutely on fire. The complexity and finesse was astounding. Bollinger’s Coteaux Champenois is not too shabby either.
Bouzy Rouge in solar vintages is quite often superb, and always fantastic value.
Elliot and Nicholas,
I’ll be on the lookout for some of these cuvees. Thanks for the great information. Always fun to explore something new.
Cheers,
Doug
Doug,
In general, when buying in the US market, Bouzy Rouge (or any still red from Champagne) is not a great value. They are an interesting experience, but you usually need to take price out of the equation. If you are buying locally in Champagne especially from the domaine, the quality to value equation can even out. My personal experience is that the pleasure of most still red wines from Champagne equals what $15-$20 can get you from Beaujolais.
Most still red wines in Champagne are interesting and can be fun, but are usually a bit thin and not very complex. It is a broad generalization, but they make sparkling wine in Champagne because the grapes don’t ripen enough for still wines of equal quality.
Bouzy is the top spot for still reds of the region though the Cote des Bar is overlooked and Jerome Coessens makes some stunning stuff from his Largillier vineyard in Ville-sur-Arce. Ambonnay, Cumieres, and Ay can also make some nice wines and I have even had some good ones from Mareuil-sur-Ay, Verzy and Verzenay, but Bouzy has the best track record and is not as vintage dependent as the others. I’ve had Bouzy Rouge going back to the 1950s and the best spots in the best years can make something comparable to a premier cru Burgundy IMO. The problem is that even in Bouzy, the best spots are quite limited, not all of it is bottled for commercial sale, and there is quite a bit of vintage swing. The other problem in Champagne is that many producers make a still red wine to blend for a Rose and to bottle as a Rouge. For a long time at many producers, this was the same wine and you really can’t make one wine to be optimal for both purposes. This is changing (especially with the up-and-coming younger producers), but it is another reason why I feel the wines have lacked.
I have had the Saves still red wine and I find it to be boring. Nothing wrong with trying it, but the Champagnes are way better.
Egly-Ouriet’s still red is top notch, but it is expensive and even here I feel you are paying at a level above the quality.
The Egly-Ouriet is by far the best still red wine I’ve had from Champagne (haven’t had many, though), but it’s so expensive. I’ve never been convinced that I couldn’t do better in Burgundy for the price. Maybe if Burgundy prices continue on their recent trend I’ll change my mind.
Meh. Had one and it was acidic city. Added a little porto to it and it improved much.
Hi Brad,
This is terrific information and I very much appreciate your expertise. The Saves I am contemplating is from the 2015 vintage so it might be a good one to try, but as you say, it may be kind of hit or miss. Thanks for recommendation regarding Egly Ouriet.
Doug and Markus,
Thanks for your input also, especially regarding Egly-Ouriet. The price I have been quoted for the Saves was high enough that it gives me pause.
Cheers,
Doug
Years ago as kind of a joke I used the price of Dom vs. Dom rosé to “prove” that the still red wines of Champagne were secretly priced like top Burgundy.
I think they can be enjoyable wines, but the pricing is simply brutal.
First off, let me admit that while i have enjoyed some top-notch Burgundy, they are not my typical drink, and I am no Champagne expert.
That said, I love pinot noir from the fresh, lean end, from Jura, sometimes Loire, even red Chablis, so of course I am interested in Coteaix Champenois. I have had several bottles of these two, and greatly enjoyed them although they are very distinct:
NV François Secondé Coteaux Champenois Sillery
This pinot noir was ethereally light (Not an adverb I use often), but full-flavored wine, very clean and penetrating at 11% alcohol.
The other one is this:
NV Franck Pascal Coteaux Champenois Confiance Rouge
And is mostly pinot menieur, so I think Champagne may very likely be the best place to get this experience.
5/20/2015 - 92 Points
Clear to bright purple ruby. Modest nose of fresh flowers, bramble, black fruit. The palate is amazing fresh dark berries and stone fruit, and clean dirt, shot through with intense candied tartness. The finish is clean and medium-long, like the palate but without the fruity “sweet” flavors. Unusual blend of 80% pinot meunier/20% pinot noir.
Jim and Steve,
Good information. You are right the pricing is a bit steep. I may try some if the price is right (when and if).
This is a good thread, am learning a lot. Thanks to all.
Cheers,
Doug
Steve,
I think you have summed things up beautifully with what you enjoy from Pinot Noir and the wines you reviewed. Your quote below is a great explanation of what you get from the red wines of Champagne.
I love pinot noir from the fresh, lean end, from Jura, sometimes Loire, even red Chablis, so of course I am interested in Coteaix Champenois.
As a historical side note, up until the end of the 16th century, many in France enjoyed this style of red wine from Champagne and it was very popular especially as Champagne (or better stated Ay) was a ‘royal and prestigious’ area. The still wines from Champagne were very in vogue for a long time, but by the middle of the 17th century things had changed and more and more folks discovered Burgundy and preferred that style of wine to what Champagne was outputting.
From what I know, that fashion came as much from the proximity to Paris and the King’s Court as it did the actual qualities of the wines.
Of course, the more saturated reds we think of as being emblematic of France’s great wine regions are a relatively modern phenomenon - red wines of that era were probably much more rosé than red.
Jim,
I completely agree on your comment of ‘From what I know, that fashion came as much from the proximity to Paris and the King’s Court as it did the actual qualities of the wines.’ Once royalty stopped seeing Champagne in the same light, things changed. The reds were normally red in color, but the funny stuff from Champagne was the whites. As Burgundy started to become more popular, they gave up on competing in the red wine area and turned to trying to make white from red grapes, but always ended up with a faint Rose colored wine. It didn’t help things out at the time although it did eventually lead to the region turning to sparkling wines.
The original ‘Partridge’s Eye.’