Nice article on Krug MV. I’ve only recently started to appreciate it as most of my Krug exposure has been the vintage stuff.
Same here. The '88 Krug is awesome stuff. The '96 is in the same league and will probably get to the same level, but the '88 will always hold a special place in my heart as it’s our wedding year. The '90 was also outstanding but it lost a step in the past few years while the other two just keep getting better. Maybe the '90 will re-emerge but I’ll never know as mine are now only a memory.
Im of the opinion that the 90 will rise again. I`ve followed it over time since release and it has assumed peaks and valleys, mostly peaks. It has such immense structure, I expect it to be great for many years to come. Mags would be the bottle size to have for the long term.
I haven’t had either of those…I do love Champagne. I had an 88 Dom early last year that was wonderful…I’m certain Krug would be more exciting. The Champagne that sets the standard for me of what a great Champagne is…it the '96 Sir Winston Churchill. I had it NYE a few years ago in 2011 and finally realized that I need more Champagne in my cellar. I really regret not buying the 1996 Salon for $300 in Christmas of 2010 now…
I don’t know man… I don’t buy that sales mumbo jumbo at all. So having 400 wines in it makes it more interesting? Well Nicolas Feuillatte nv must be the most interesting of all then.
“unlike anything else that happens in champagne” - why is that exactly?
I mean Charles Heidsieck use more and older reserve wine, and Louis Roederer have absolute control over their vineyards that are to be blended.
I still have yet to have a Krug epiphany. The wines always seem a bit dull to me (never had Mesnil but a fair number of MV and vintage).
On the other hand I finally had my white Bordeaux epiphany last night after probably 40-50 “what’s up with this stuff” experiences so anything is possible.
