Most people probably serve it in flutes, but I’ve also been given red Burgundy glasses at tastings before. What do you think? (Sorry for stealing your idea, Brian!)
IMO, flutes are so yesterday. I prefer using a red burg glass for my bubbles.
I still prefer a flute, and find most experts/itb tasters use them. I don’t think a red burg glass is good at all, though I could see using a chablis/chard glass on a real young bubbly. A narrow bowl and mouth purportedly help retain carbonation and temperature and also concentrate flavors on the front of the tongue. Granted one might get a bit more nose with a wide bowl, and could swirl a real tight young bubbly with ample carbonation, but that seems like a less important effect to me personally. IMO bubbly is much more expressive via palate and mothfeel than nose.
John, Can’t say that I agree. Almost all of the people I drink Champagne with, including a number of Champagne makers, prefer white wine glasses.
I almost always use white white glasses. But the glass below does enhance aromatics…especially on younger wines. http://www.winestuff.com/acatalog/Peuge … pagne.html
Yeah I thought about it after I posted. Part of the reason why I wrote expert “slash” itb. My wife is in the wine biz so we do quite a few trade/winery tastings, occasionally higher up the winemaking hierarchy. I think I’d say that it’s probably true that in those cases I do see flutes more, but there are certain cases and (not infrequently) where we’ve used white wine glasses. In those cases it seems like they’re small (chablis type) white wine glasses and rarely a large red burg. It also seems to happen more with a set of young wines. So to me it isn’t clear-cut, and certainly I don’t question your experience. So perhaps most interesting would be why choose one over the other? No offense to my dear friend Lisa, but I don’t see a clear-cut technical reason why a red burg glass would best “yesterday’s” flute. While I can see a white glass a red burg glass seems unusual. So she won’t be getting one of those at our house. 
Again it is largely preference, but I went through a short phase of using white wine glasses for bubbly. I went to a riedel seminar where we did a couple of different wine types out of different shapes. The difference was significant in the case of a burg/pinot. I also found that I liked the flute over the white for sparkling though it was admittedly minor. I switched back to flutes. As I said I have a couple of reasons, that SEEM to make sense to me. I like the carbonation and like my bubbly a tad cooler than most people. I think a flute helps maintain both of these factors over time in the glass. I also don’t see as big a need to swirl bubbly as opposed to say red or white burg which IMO are more aromatic. If I’m going to swirl much, it’s usually a real young wine I’m trying to coax an impression out of, and not in a glass I intend to linger over for 15 minutes. YMMV, and I’m cetainly interested in the why of others’ opinions. At the seminar they explained that another factor in flute design was to concentrate the wine and sensation at the front of the tongue. I was skeptical in general about the shape of the glass affecting the areas of sensation in the mouth, but I have to say that it did seem to be confirmed. Again, subtley and perhaps affected by their assertion.
I prefer white wine glasses, but, I do have full sets of flutes for when entertaining non-wine geeks for bubbly courses. I also don’t mind Whetstoneing it and drinking straight from the bottle.
Anything but a flute is my best advice. I love you John, but some of the local ITB people seem to live and die by whatever ‘common knowledge’ anecdote they last heard was. That’s not categorical but there are a lot of people that do wine sales that are not wine knowledgeable for interest but for having something to tell those that know less than they do. They have no impetus for finding the best answer beyond the last thing they heard unlike most of us would. I figured out real Champagne was best in something other than a flute on my own. When I heard the wine makers for Dom Perignon and others in Champagne used Bordeaux stems, it was the last nail in the coffin.
Dude, how did I know a wine biz dig would accompany your reply? We have differences of opinion on the trade, so let’s not debate the generalizations. I knew you’d chime in as we’ve had enough bubbly together and I think we’ve even discussed it. In fact I’m sure I drank with you during my white wine glass phase. As I said I can see both positions, and know that R.Geoffrey and some others like to use a white wine glass. I do see that as significant, though not an end all either. I’ve spent time in Champagne on winery visits and there’s plenty of tasting in other than still glasses I’m not really sure one can say definitively. There are more than a few scientific experiments that show the temp and carbonation are maintained by a more narrow bowl. That carbonation is lost from the surface at a much higher rate with a wide bowl and that the wine’s sensation is different as the carbonation comes off the bottom at a consistent pace. There is absolutely no debate that the wine goes flatter much faster in a bowl. At the same time I agree about the aromas being more prevalent with a wide bowl. So really I doubt there’s a clear answer.
Keeping fizz alive —> highly overrated. Its all about how the wine smells and tastes for me. If your Champers don’t taste good without them, then it probably wasn’t that good to begin with. I understand the presentation aspect of it in regards to the stream of bubbles, etc. But I really don’t care. It’s about the quality of the drink to me. Just like I wouldn’t want a great Chablis from a flute, I do not want my Champagne in one. I find temperature to be similar in this regard. So so so many great Champagnes are served too cold and thrown back before they have a chance to open and express themselves. You never see that with great white still wines. Its criminal I tells ya!!! “[wink.gif]”
while we do own some flutes, i’ve found that we only use them for cheap grocery-store sparklers. for relatively nicer ones, I usually go for a chablis glass or the syrah-esque glass that i use for 90% of the non-pinot reds that I drink.
I cannot agree with this post more. “[cheers.gif]”
Baccarat St. Remy Short Tulips. The older ones have a deep pointed bottom that keeps a stream of bubbles going for a long time. Newer ones have a shallower, rounder bottom that doesn’t do as well, but are easier to clean. But we basically prefer a tulip glass to a flute.
Hey, different strokes. I don’t hate Mollydooker and you didn’t like 02 Dom. I definitely agree that champagne has to be quality wine without the bubbles, and that plenty of them that have lost their carbonation are tasty. However, Champagne is not just any other white wine so there’s certainly nothing wrong with desiring the carbonation and a different serving temp. I’d imagine the makers would have an ideal for these. Absent the benefit of complexity gained that comes with age and accompanies the loss of carbonation, I’d think flat and room temp are not the ideals. I like my champagne at 45-50 degrees. I’d say a Montrachet is best at 55-60. Personally, I wouldn’t treat these two whites identically. As to carbonation, I think it is certainly more than appearance. First it clearly affects the mouthfeel of the wine. That might be a minor factor, but it also helps deliver flavor. The bubbles affect the liquid around them. They deliver flavor and aromatics both from the glass and on in the mouth. I think the carbonation in part makes it less crucial to have a very large surface area of wine in the glass. There’s actually a cool book called “Science of Champagne” that’s on my Christmas list. It’s wrtten by a scientist in Reims named Balaire. He writes all sorts of geeky articles on wine, including one on bubbles: http://www.americanscientist.org/issues … hampagne/3
I prefer the Riedel Sommelier Vintage Champagne glass which is a cross between a flute and a white wine glass (much wider bowl than a standard flute). As to those that say “the bubbles don’t matter, its all about the taste”, the bubbles matter a heck of alot as they impart an acidic taste to the Champagne which can get decidedly sweet without some bubble along for the ride.
For my taste, I’ve never found any wine glass to be superior to a flute for a sparkler of any quality. The bubbles do matter to the flavor of the wine, and both white wine and red wine classes release them too quickly, effectively causing a head on the wine. That impacts the enjoyment, IMHO. I stay with flutes all the way.
The only time I violate my own rule is for very old champagnes (not just based on vintage year, but how long ago they were disgorged). On 40+ year old champagne, the CO2 has pretty much come out of solution, so you’re essentially drinking a well-aged Chardonnay/Pinot blend with no fizz. Then a white wine glass in perfect.
So JK & Robert Bohr are the exceptions 
?
They prefer the Riedel Sauterne Sommelier series…which to me looks like a design not much different from the kind that release the bubbles too quickly, and only give more area for aromatics to concentrate. Fine for older Champagne that has lost most of the effervesance, but I’d still prefer the narrower bottom/flute shape, with just a tad wider bowl at the top…tulip or modified tulip style.
Riedel recommends serving dry champagne in flutes, since these best bring out the fine aromas of the high-quality base wines from which it is made. Many wine-lovers unfortunately are quite unaware of this superb bouquet, since champagne is all too often served either in coupes or in glasses that are too small (and thus filled to the brim) - neither of which can convey any aromas at all. This flute, filled with four ounces of champagne, concentrates the unique, yeasty bouquet of great champagnes, while emphasising their creamy texture on the palate. The bubbles are not allowed to dominate, but are part of the overall pleasure.
^I don’t care for the super narrow flute in the Riedel Somm series for younger bubbly, but the Vintage model looks ‘ok’. What I’d prefer is their Vitis Champagne model for younger bubbly:
white wine glasses are fine for … white wine(still)! If I wanted a still wine glass for Champagne, I’d be drinking one of the few still white or Pinot you can find from the Champagne region. No point in having bubbles if you don’t use a glass that shows off those bubbles to maximum effect, imho. That’s part of the allure to a sparkler…for me at least. Call me a hopeless romantic then, because unlike the Champagne master blenders, I don’t need to critically evaluate Champagne in the same manner as I would a red Burgundy> it’s a festive drink, no??? 
.
While I like the overall shape of the ‘pitless’, I hate those dimples:
Les Impitoyables
The dimpled design on the outside of the Peugeot Les Impitoyables Champagne glasses > causes light to refract. > Featuring an elliptical curve of the glass, with the apex a third up the bowl, combined with a deep ‘V’ at the stem encourages the carbon dioxide to continually effervesce and brings the aromas of the wine quickly to the nose.
http://www.winestuff.com/acatalog/Peugeot.html
Esprit 180 Champagne
^very close in shape to the Riedel Vintage Champ. glass, while the Sauvignon Blanc looks quite similar to the Riedel Somm, Sauterne glass:
Too tell the truth, I find most Champagne is served too chilled, and almost always consumed too fast to get the most out of the flavors/aromatic development that will occur after having the bottle open for more than an hour or two. I like to open a bottle (or two of the same if you require that), pour out glasses, put a spring loaded stopped back on it, continually pour out more glasses, replacing stopper and so on… and in the best circumstances (multiple Mags a la Big Boy), like with some younger red wines, drink only 1/2 the bottle, put the stopper back on, put the bottle back in the refrigerator, pull it out the next evening 30+min before going back to it again! You get the best of both worlds that way, allowing the wine to fully open up then next day, without losing all of the bubbles, and in the case of younger Champagnes, mostly retaining all/most of the efforvesence the next day.
Problem with those is the stem is too short, allowing most people to touch/hold the bowl, which will heat up the wine too quickly.
chance to open, temperature isn’t going to effect that, it’s exposure to oxygen…can we say “non-sequitur”? NO, I contend most Champagne is consumed, the entire bottle; before the wine can open up…seen it all too many times to know that’s the real truth.
Fizz is “highly-overrated”, then get a still Champagne, you’re not making any sense! Efforvesence is critical in a bubbly, otherwise why bother???
Just like I wouldn’t want a great Chablis from a flute, I do not want my Champagne in one.
…uh, then get a sparking Chablis, aka Cremant de Bourgogne Blanc from Simmonet-Febvre… and put it in a damned flute! ![[tease.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/c/c5b32b76bebaa359b0452ae247b61189ffe5fa7e.gif "tease"){kind=small}
:
Home - Simonnet-Febvre 1840 - Chablis Winery - Crémant - terrois - Simonnet Febvre" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
They make an inexpensive NV, and a Vintage bottling @link above on the 2005:
Tasting note Aged for about 42 months, this powerful and full flavoured vintage Crémant, shows strong and complex aromas with a very fine and rich structure
My ‘flutes’ look more like this and they are fine with me. Of course, at a dinner I am happy with a regular wine glass. As long as it’s crystal!
