True or False? A producer’s base-level bottling is a fair indicator of the producer’s more expensive wines.
True
False
0voters
My primary focus is Champagne, where NV bottlings are incredibly common, obv, and can lead to multiple, higher levels of exploration if one is so inclined.
The idea applies to all regions, though, I think. AVA bottlings vis a vis vineyard designate; Bourgogne v 1er and PC; second and third BDX labels v the primary label.
Is it worth exploring a producer’s base-level wines to assess the overall quality/style of a producer?
Great topic! Get in there and make a call!! I say yes.
I’m interested most in Burgundy right now and the question clearly applies directly. First wines that come to mind are PYCM Bourgogne, Hudelot Noellat Bourgogne Rouge, William Kelley, Etienne Sauzet, Dureuil Janthial Rully, Cathiard HCdN, Verget, MG Les Lutinieres and I could go on, but so as not to derail, I think the same is true in Champagne:
Bereche MV,
Vilmart Grand Cellier
Cedric Bouchard Val Vilaine
And last night I had a Pol Roger white label that was so rich it could have been Winston Churchill..
Obviously there are exceptions (I’m eager to highlight those specifically) but if you don’t care about your base cuveé, which likely represents the highest total # of bottles produced, and thereby palates touched by your brand, then I’m suspect of the fullness of your care in other places even for the higher level wines.
Been ringing this bell for a while here! Especially for Burgundy and Bordeaux with such highs. A producers base bottling should absolutely resonate with their top cuvees. Not to drink that exclusively and omit the top, but plainly because it shows they care.
Seconding John for RdJ Val Vilaine, Von der Fels from Keller, Fleur de Savagnin/Chardo from Labet, Chataigniers from Lamy, des Tours CdR, CdR Jamet. Just to echo a few of what I have in cellar.
I would reframe it
It is always a sign of a good work ethic when the humblest wines in the range reflect the same care as the “best”. The top cuvées should be great. But when the most modest reflect the house authentically, that is something inherently praiseworthy, an ethic Im down with.
High low honor children and disposables, not so much.
All.of the good examples.given illustrate this well.
CVNE’s signature script “cune” bottling is one of the few entry point wines that poorly reflects what the rest of the lineup delivers. One of the few avoids I would note in base bottlings.
Lawyerly answer: it really depends on the producer.
Take Burgundy.
With many or most producers, absolutely. Fourrier Gevrey VV tells one almost everything they need to know about Fourrier. Ditto Dujac villages wines, Lafarge Volnay VS, Leflaive Bourgogne, and so so many others.
But there are exceptions. To learn about Rousseau you really need to drink the big 3. I don’t think Clos de la Marechale gives a good introduction to Mugnier. Jadot Musigny bears no resemblance at all to Jadot villages wines. And again, there are others.
Another interesting topic would be: what producers make base-level bottlings that are better than their upper-level wines? Surely there are some.
This is one of those “true, on average” questions. Plenty of counter examples, for sure, but I’d say more true than not. And champagne I feel like it’s true an even higher percentage of the time. Pierre Peters may be the one exception I can think of, where I felt the higher end bottles were leaps and bounds better than the entry level NV. I’m also wondering if this is what prompted the question from the champagne thread…?
A funny example in champagne is perhaps La Rogerie? The Bourg Sud/Nord GC are amazing, while the lieu dit bottlings are a litle bit ‘square’ to me, at least for now.
For example I’m unimpressed by most of Taittinger’s lineup but love the Prelude and Comtes. On the other hand I love both the bottom and top tier at Roederer but am often disappointed by the middle
For Drappier it’s only the brut Nature bottling I love.
If you’re talking Burgundy then it has more use as a proposition
But definitely not Bordeaux where the second wines are often (but not always) much lower in quality
Strange thread. People seem to be mixing the empirical question of whether base-level wines do reflect the broader producer’s efforts with the normative question of whether the base-level wines should reflect the broader efforts.
I sort of feel like Champagne is one region where the entry level NV bottling typically offers only a small fraction of the excitement one gets from the vintage/single vineyard/prestige bottlings and while they are often of good quality (talking about actually good producers, more often than not growers) for me it makes a lot of sense to pay a little more to get a more singular wine. Funny enough, having said that I’m actually a fan of the Pierre Peters NV. But yeah, “it depends” is for sure the answer.
not better, but I often think I like the Île des Vergelesses (not their base level wine) by Chandon de Briailles as much or more than their Cortons. There is just a weightless quality to the IdV that I find just fantastic.
Then, some of this is just the failings of the classification system in Burgundy, but Jadot’s Clos St. Jacques is better than some of their grand crus.
And, while I have not had enough of Nicolas Rossignol’s Volnays to make a judgment, but my favorite wine by him was a 2015 Bourgogne Rouge. Again, there was a weightless quality to this wine that I loved.
If you are referencing the Crianza Rioja, I couldn’t disagree more.
The higher priced models are quality wines but, for what it is, I find the Cune bottling solid and an excellent value. Even more important, it tastes like Rioja.
One man’s opinion.
If we are talking village level, I will pile on for Fourrier’s Gevrey v.v. and raise you a Berthaut-Gerbet Fixin or any of Audoin’s Marsannays.
I don’t chase upper end champagne at all, yet we drink “good” bubbles regularly; Ployez-Jacquemart extra brut in heavy rotation and Raventos blanc and rose’ cavas always have a home here.
Maybe stretching the “base-level” concept but Suenen’s C+C and Agrapart Mineral are faves too.