I would be careful with equating sweetness in the base wines with residual sugar/dosage in the finished product. You still have a second fermentation to go through and the residual sugar still needs to be there at that point. A lot depends on how the producer adjusts (or doesn’t) for any sugar left after the first fermentation. Even with producers who push for ripeness, things haven’t reached the point where they are stopping the first fermentation prior to completion in order to keep a wine ‘healthy’ enough for a second fermentation. Residual sugar after the first fermentation normally leads me to believe that a fermentation didn’t finish and was more of an accident/lazy yeasts than done on purpose, but I have seen some strange experiments. In general, I’m much more interested in residual sugar left after the second fermentation than the first.
In terms of tasting Vins Clairs, I think most producers are pretty honest about any residual sugar left after the first fermentation and most are not aiming for it. It can screw too much with the second fermentation. I think you can get a feel for a producer’s style over time and from tasting across producers, villages, plots, etc… to accurately analyze the potential of a Vin Clair. Tasting Vins Clairs is never going to let you zero in on a wine’s, village’s, region’s, vintage’s, etc… exact quality in the same way that a barrel sample of still wine just prior to bottling can, but it can be a pretty good guide as to where a wine and vintage has the potential to end up especially as you start following the wines from Vin Clairs to finished product.
Another topic that really affects the final wine is dosage type - especially MCR vs. cane sugar. MCR is sweeter than cane sugar on a g/L basis so comparing dosage levels is not always apples to apples. Of course, if a wine has 2,3, 5, or 10 g/L of residual sugar prior to dosage, that can really affect things too. Quite a few grower/small producer Champagnes that claim 0-2 g/L of dosage yet taste quite fruity and slightly sweet actually have some residual sugar in them beyond the dosage. Sometimes quite a bit and sometimes even variable across batches/bottles.
I for one would not be surprised at all if someone was not that into Bereche. At their best the wines (Le Cran, Rive Gauche, Mont Fournois, maybe Les Beaux Regards too) can be some of the most intense Champagnes out there with massive acidity and this combined with low residual sugar is without adoubt challenging to some. I love these wines, Le Cran and Les Beaux Regards being my favorites.
Larmandier-Bernier Longitude too light? That’s a surprise, given the wine is base wine is aged in oak and the reserve wine comes from a perpetual blend containing all the vintages since 2004.
L-M style might be drier with less dosage and higher acidity than in normal Taittinger Champ, but I would never call them light, as they can be quite ripe, concentrated and weighty - at least for my palate. Maybe they are just too dry for you and you prefer your Champagnes to have a bit more sugar?
Not so much with recent disgorgements. They went through the solera and eliminated everything that was past its prime. It’s much fresher now, and I think more interesting.
You and Kirk. I’ve found Bouchard extremely variable. I’ve loved some wines and been meh on some others. Including ones other people love.
I’ve pretty much come to the conclusion that people react even more strongly to stylistic differences in Champagne than in other wines. How else to explain how many people like Krug? That makes no sense to me at all
The 2008 Bereche Le Cran was outstanding. I had one bottle, I opened last year and I think I was the only one that paid attention to it (non-Champagne crowd I shared it with), but it was lights out. I would have stuck it on my WOTY list but I didn’t have another to taste and I don’t accord wines that kind of praise unless it is repeatable. I made sure to buy 3 bottles of the 2012 when it was offered this year. I have high hopes for the 2012.
As for the Longitude, the 2013 base has been excellent, all the bottles of it I have had (2 since last XMAS). I have found the Longitude to be one of the best values in Champagne, given the 4 or 5 bottles I have had of it (one previous bottle of base 2015 and still 2016 sitting in my cellar). Energy, balance, acidity…all the things I want in my Champagne. I recognize that Longitude is made up of a good percentage of reserve wines but I simply offer the base year for discussion purposes.
As mentioned, it’s all about preferences. I’m also a big fan of Bereche and Longitude, and find Taittinger Francaise to be decent but not that interesting.
Hmm, I don’t really know about the sugar level, but in general, I like drier champagne. I opened one to try again today and realized the acidity from LB longtitude is too high for me. Because of the high acidity it became too crisp and thus giving that light mouth feel and seems less concentrated. It is an ok champagne for me. Not exciting but not flaw in any way.
I believe it’s all about preferences as well. I’m curious if the frequency of having something will have any effect on how you perceive it to be interesting or not. If you have it all the time, do you still find it interesting?
Champagne for me is every day wine. I go through 2-3 bottles a week on average and alternate them all the time. There is a clear preference, but I cannot drink the same thing over and over again no matter how good they are.
I also have Champagne essentially every day, with a lot of variety. Once in a while a bottle of sparkling wine makes it into the rotation, but mostly it’s Champagne.
Doesn’t seem like it. La Francaise clocks normally around 10 g/l, Longitude around 3 g/l.
It’s hard to say because I don’t know on which vintages the wines are based on, but most likely Larmandier-Bernier isn’t that much higher in acidity. It just doesn’t have the residual sugar to mask the acidity.
Found the initial article and the thread interesting. From an economics perspective, feels like a tug of war on whether the region looks more like Bordeaux or Burgundy in 20 yrs, and between French tax laws, Covid impact on Champagne consumption in Europe and the objective improvement in the big houses Brad alluded to, feels like its going to be more like Bordeaux with a group of 25-50 growers that export well globally with strong reputations.
Champagne is like every other wine, very personal, but I’ve always found it probably splits across three primary flavor characteristics: lemon/acid, fruit-forward, and oxidative/yeasty. Often times dosage is irrelevant unles within the context of a winemakers general approach (e.g. Bouchard La Presle is certainly in the 2nd group and not lacking sweetness in my mind despite zero dosage). As a result, where you fall in the spectrum will influence which producers you gravitate towards. I’m a huge fan of Selosse because for me his approach to winemaking and oxidative style is what I’m looking for. I can’t imagine Larmandier Bernier’s Latitude being less interesting than Taittinger, but to be honest, I’m hopelessly biased from visits to both, and it very well could be for someone with very different preferences in their Champagne.
![[whistle.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/8/87d24eb81ec6dc01d84f3d6c19fa9a357e90218e.gif "whistle"){kind=small}
?