'96 Grand Dame

Wow! Rich, full-bodied, baked bread, apple, some Sherry notes, but filled with vibrant acidity.

Glad you had a good experience but the sherry notes are pushing my remaining bottles onto the drink now list.

Great bottle all around. Had one a few months back and it showed the baked bread you mention and a bit of oxidation, IMO, though I attribute that to less than perfect storage over the previous few years. Seemed well developed with deeper flavors and superb balance overall. The fruity notes in my bottle were depleted though that didn’t detract from the experience.

+1. This is the only 96 in my somewhat wide experience that is already showing some oxidative notes. The wine is good, but it is far more evolved than any comparable, and many “lesser” 96s that I can think of.

To me, this is like tasting an 05 Grand Cru Red Burgundy now and feeling like the wine is peaking…cool, I guess, but at the same time, really?

I thought this was very nice on release, but peaked quite early. I liked this best a few years ago (2008 and before). There is bottle variation with some bottles holding their peak longer than others, but in general, today I find this to be a mix of too much acidity and too much maturity. Not a bad wine, but no longer worthy of its pedigree or price. I would rather have the 79, 83, 85, 88, 90, 93, 95, 98, or 04 for current drinking. In the big picture, I think Clicquot did a better job with the basic 96 Vintage than the Grand Dame. The Grande Dame ended up a bit too exaggerated and burned out early while the basic vintage, which was much less expensive, has weathered the years much better and, while its peak may never be as high as the Grand Dame’s, it will be pretty close and have a much wider drinking window. As a bonus, it is also cost a lot less.

i.e. just about any other vintage !

I thought this was very nice on release, but peaked quite early. I liked this best a few years ago (2008. There is bottle variation with some bottles holding their peak longer than others, but in general, today I find this to be a mix of too much acidity and too much maturity. Not a bad wine, but no longer worthy of its pedigree or price.

What Brad said. It was very good on release+~3 years or so but in addition to early maturation I’ve noticed some bottle variation. Not a good thing with any bottle much less a $100+ cuvee. A recent bottle from a friend’s lot proved undrinkable - flawed in some way that the bubble geeks could not diagnose.

Shannon,

I’ve noticed major problems with a lot of LVMH Champagne in the US. They make a lot of this wine and it seems to be handled well through the main import warehouses, but after that all bets are off. I have had a lot of bad bottles due to improper handling. It is much worse with the vintage wines than the NVs as the vintage wines sell slower.