Had to try this given the disparity between Brad Baker’s comments and the mostly superlative notes in CT from palates I trust. Brought as one of the starters for the BWE gathering in DC last night.
1996 Philipponnat Champagne Brut Clos des Goisses (France, Champagne): It didn’t taste under-ripe or too advanced or acidic to me, but this is my first bottle of the 1996 and I don’t drink Clos des Goisses regularly so it’s not easy to place in perspective. I found a nice earthy, bready, mushroomy nose, not a lot of fizz, and a well-balanced, medium bodied Champagne with a bit of maturity, really nice complexity on the palate but not a lot of power, and a medium finish. This was a secondary market purchase in 2008, disgorged April 2006. I thought it excellent and it garnered a lot of positive comments from other bubble-heads present. I think it has years to go.
Then we compared it to a bottle of 1996 Krug, which was bigger and rounder and more powerful yet beautifully balanced and complex. The Krug was a consensus preference but presumably going for a somewhat different style.
At least we had the Philipponnat before the Krug. I’ve got 3 more bottles of the April 06 disgorgement and look forward to drinking them, probably on their own. I’ll hold 1 for longer term storage.
I stopped buying Clos du Mesnil after 1988, just got too pricey. But still have a couple in the cellar. Those are special occasion bottles.
Glad you enjoyed the 96 Clos des Goisses. I think my biggest problem with it is that it showed better and had immense potential as a youngster that will never be fulfilled. Not a bad wine, but nowhere near the top of vintage which is where it once was at. There is also some bottle variation with the 96 vintage and wines that have a good amount of Pinot Noir - so that also comes into play. 1996 Krug also shows this bottle variation IMO.
I had the privilege of drinking with David on saturday night. The CdG definitely showed older, more mature, and a bit more oxidative than the Krug. Both were lovely, though the Krug definitely showed as finer, more filigreed, and more balanced. Without food to pair it with, the CdG’s acidity seemed unbalanced with the rest of the palate. Still an excellent champagne though.
