Talk about terrible marketing. The name is impossible to search on.
They’ll be pouring at La Fete and I’ve never heard of them before. The write up sounds like a bunch of marketing hype but that has little to do with whether the Champagnes are any good or not.
Anyway, I was wondering if it was worth a visit to the table. If no one replies I’ll try them and report back. Not that it will do us any good as wine-searcher doesn’t return any hits.
I think it’s just piper heidsieck Rare
It’s the Piper-Heidsieck Rare but they are now positioning it as a separate house. It’s a stupid marketing trick that makes me a lot less interested in the wines, but the last few bottles of the 2002 I’ve had have been pretty tasty.
Ah, thank you.
I agree totally on the stupid marketing trick end of things.
But you can always use the filigree as a tiara. Knowing that makes it a little less vulgar than before I discovered it.
Did you come to my FKALBTG dinner where we served two or three champagne flights, at the Italian restaurant in Little Italy? I served the 2002 Rare along with the 2002 vintages of a bunch of others. The Rare, which I had never had before, was either #1 or #2 of 6 or so Tete de cuvee champagnes. Search Piper Rare on CT. I have a Magnum in the Cellar now. Not in my CT list. The bottle looks like it comes right out of a Bordello.
By the way - it is Piper not Charles. I may bring the magnum on Saturday to PDH depending on how things shape up.
That is my first thought. Normally not much a label guy but their Rare Champagne bottles is cool! 
Jay,
They seem to have rebranded it just “Rare” starting with the 2008 vintage. My first experience with it was the '02 vintage which was priced around $130/btl. It is an awesome bottle of Champagne and I put it up there with "02 Comtes as my favorite of the vintage. It is similar in a way to '95 Charles Heidsieck BdM in that it is Champagne that most people are not familiar with and most people are blown away by it when they try it for the first time. The '06 Rare is good for the vintage, but not at the same level as '02 and '08 is outstanding. It is definitely worth stopping by their table.
Jay, it’s probably been said already, but it is Piper Heidsieck’s Tete de Cuvee. They typically push out a series of releases of each vintage over time, so there is some bottle variation given the variance in time on lees for the wines. That aside, they are typically on the rich, high side of brut dosage at 9-10g/l, but are really well made champagnes. The initial release of the 2002 was absolutely stunning. Later disgorgements were not quite as good, but still very, very good. 2006 was a slight decline in quality, unsurprisingly, but a nice wine. By most accounts, the 2008 is excellent.
While a very baroque bottle, the stuff inside is fine champagne. If you’ve never had it, and they’re pouring the 2008, I would highly recommend dipping a toe in. It is appropriately priced. The rose is probably way overpriced, but the Rare is nice. Typically on the chardonnay heavy side of blends, at like 70-30. They can be just killer young.
Jen and I enjoyed a bottle of the '06 Rare earlier in the year up in Big Bear, CA. Not a huge fan of the (extra cost) packaging, but as many have said, it’s a great Champagne
Yep…likely trying to shield their one great wine from the mediocrity associated with the Piper-H brand?
Agreed Mike. The 2002 is absolutely delicious right now.
Too much so for my palate.
I get a headache just thinking about red label Piper. Looks like DP did the same thing starting with the '00 vintage. Prior to that the green shield labels had Moet Chandon on the top of the shield. That was replaced with Dom Pierre Perignon in 2000 and 2002 and then Dom Perignon Millesime starting in 2003.
Disagree big time on your assessment. Their NV is one of the better big names out there. Always better than Roederer, Mumm, and many others year in and year out.
It doesn’t take much to be better than Mumm NV 
In my books it is one of the lousiest Champagnes year in year out.
And agree with the sentiment that Piper Heidsieck sits smack in the middle of Champagne mediocrity. Can’t really think of a reason why I’d buy Piper - unless I was in a situation where only Mumm and Piper would be available.
Piper NV is almost never better than Roederer. In my opinion, of course.
Seconded (even if I’m not the biggest fan of Roederer NV either).