What are the current best blanc des blancs champagnes?
I always liked Taittinger Comtes des Champagnes, Roederer BdB, Diebolt-Vallois Fleur de Passion and Lilbert, but there is a ton of potentially interesting stuff I have not tried (and have no idea how they compare to my favourites): Ployez-Jacquemart Vintage BdB, Hure 4 Elements Chardonnay, JL Vergnon MSNL, Vilmart BdB, etc.
What is the best is always going to be subjective. From my tastings this year my list would be in no particular order also not comprehensive, I have not tasted Larmandier-Bernier, just cannot get over the prices.
Agrapart Venus but the complete selection from Agrapart is fantastic this year. Robert Moncuit Chetillons, needs lot of time but massive potetnial, in fact everything from Robert Moncuit, Pascal Doquet, everything, De Sousa Caudalies, Freres Mignon, everything. Guiborat everything, but a special mention to the De Caures a Mont Aigu (we had this recently in a comparative tasting with the comtes and the Comtes just seemed flat against the De Caures a Mont Aigu, I suppose the price difference played a large part in our judgements) . Pertois-Lebrun Chetillons. Pierre Moncuit, Cuvée Nicole. Hure Freres 4 Element. Philippe Lancelot,
Outside of the Côtes de Blancs: Vouette et Sorbée Blancs d’Argile. Probably the best Blanc de Blancs is Emanuel Brochet’s Haut Chardonnay alongside Agrapart’s Venus. Jacues Lassaigne excellent selection this year.
Charles Heidsieck Blanc de Blancs also very good this year.
Disappointments this year. Leclaire-Thiephane, these started out really strong but this year way too oxaditive. Domaine Vincey, on the first year I really fell for the hype, and the first releases were very strong. This year, strong in a sense that they were well made but no emotional connection, seemed as if they were going through the motions technically but nothing original.
Egly-Ouriet Les Vignes de Bisseuil 1er Cru. If this was a champagne for under 50 €, then it would be good, but here we see the limitations of terroir and the price is just a joke. Bisseuil just does not deliver, for stuffing for blends it is good due to its neutral terroir. But I think with Egly we have moved into a new world, where it is no longer the champagne but the brand that counts.
Pascal Doquet makes very impressive BdB:s, both vintage and NV.
Mandois is transitioning from 2017 to 2018 vintage and the lees aging to me is really good.
Depending on the price you pay Ruinart is a good choice.
This was a new one. What does “neutral terroir” mean? How terroir can be “neutral”?
I have never understood the hype Ruinart’s BdB gets. I much prefer their regular NV over it. At 80-100€ a bottle, there are lots of more interesting bottles to be had.
Good pick!
Just to give you perspective: Central Valley, California, USA is considered as relatively neutral terroir.
Also in blends often producers put wines/vin clairs from neutral terroirs or into he wines/champagnes,with the aim of creating wines or champagnes for a broader audience.
Young vine rarely show terroir attribute so the terroir influence can be described as neutral.
Bisseuil is a relativelly new area. I don’t think it was intended for single vineyard or appelattion champagnes rather to be as neutrel terroir wine to offer stuffing for other champagnes.
Here is the scale for judging terroirs:
Outstanding Terroir
Excellent Terroir
Good Terroir
Neutral Terroir
Below Average Terroir
I hope this helps you
A little hard to answer without a little context. Is price a constraint? Otherwise Krug’s Mesnil is still great, Collin’s Roises (just had the 14 base 60 month Thursday night and it’s spectacular), Agrapart’s top cuvées, Peters’ top cuvées with age, Lassaigne’s Clos St. Sophie, Brochet’s Haut Chardonnay, Doyard’s Clos de l’Abbaye, Salon, Comtes, etc. And, of course, Selosse’s Chardonnay lieux dits, if you like the style (and wines made in a similar style, like Fallon’s Ozanne).
No, it doesn’t. Is this scale from some official source or just something you just penned on the go?
I could imagine a terroir could be considered “average” but “neutral” terroir doesn’t really make any sense. Terroir always has an influence, so it can’t be neutral in any way - there is no terroir that would have no impact on the grape varieties grown there whatsoever. I especially disagree with your example of Central Valley as “neutral terroir” - it might not be ideal for making quality wines, but it is definitely not neutral.
Furthermore, terroir for one variety might be poor but it might be excellent for another variety - which is yet another point why jamming up terroir that is perfectly good for viticulture under one description. For example CĂ´te des Blancs might be pretty lousy terroir for making still reds, but nobody in their right mind would say CĂ´te des Blancs is below average terroir because the terroir is excellent for making exceptional Chardonnay suitable for sparkling wine production.
In essence, my biggest beef was with the term “neutral”, because it didn’t make sense - that’s why I asked how terroir can be “neutral”. No matter what you do, the terroir is always going to have an influence for the wine. I would’ve gladly accepted the term “average terroir”, because we can understand from the context that the terroir might not be the greatest for making quality Champagne.
I can see the marketing though - grown on neutral soil, aged in neutral oak!
This is a discussion on Blanc de Blancs, not on the ambiguity of language. Are we going to go through every one of your posting notes forensically and analyse every word for clartiy of meaning.
Neutral terroir, average terroir, call it what you want Bisseuil just does not deliver.
Asi I sell wine and champagne, one thing that becomes more and more obvious to me, is the need to keep language simple and make it understandable for those who want to drink good wine or champagne and in effect need an element of reassurance because they either do not want to put in the work or just do not have the time. I could say grand cru quality or premier cru quality, but as we are talking about champagne, grand cru in the general sense is meaningless, unless we are talking about the echelles de champagne which in the modern sense is anachronisitc.
I can say Chetillons or mont Aigu offer outstanding terroir and sites at the bottom on Le Mesnil sur oger or Chouilly offer good to neutral terroir. The wine experts will snub there noses, to sell vrything as grand cru quality wood be disingenous so I find such terms are much more helpful.
This was my point. “Neutral terroir” as a term was maybe simple but not understandable. That’s why I asked. And wasn’t really convinced by your answer. You seem to use the term “terroir” in your own way, not in a way it is commonly used. I wouldn’t say that makes things more understandable for non-experts or beginners.
TBH, I try my best to have my tasting notes as understandable and clear as possible. For example, instead of using very vague words like “mineral” or “reductive”, I prefer to use terms like “saline minerality” or “smoky reduction”, which are different from “steely minerality” or “skunky reduction”.
I just tried to ask you for a definition for a term that didn’t make sense and instead you seem to reply with an ad hominem tu quoque, ie. “NO U” answer.
I suppose one must also mention Tellier, not champions league but very interesting producer.
The producer being hyped this year is Alexandre Chaillion, some compare him to Ulysse Collin but this is a comparison that is being overused, more in the Seleque style, a producer to watch out for.
For us the new champagne year has begun, really strong reportoire this year from Laherte- Not a Blanc de Blanncs but one has to love the label of the new Blanc de Noirs.
Not a champagne but the best white coteaux for me this year is Marie courtins Le Blanc du Tremble 2019. This has the steeliness and mineral drive one wants and does not find in the Chablis.
