An interesting week, the release of the new Eichelmann, no real surprises but a very interesting preface, which articulates a growing frustration which a number of my colleagues and myself feel towards especially the younger generation of grower producers.
Also this week we visited one of the top grower producers in our sortiment and he echoed indepedently what Eichelmann wrote. More interesting is his decision to give up making different crus and make just one champagne incorporating the three champagnes he makes at the moment.
To Eichelmann. A lot of young producers are very effective at creating hype via social media. For us it is difficult, if we do not go with the producer, we might have missed a great oppurtunity which we could later regret. The problem with these hyped grower producers, is firstly the price and secondly the quantity. Microvinification sound great, in reality it is expensive so the price reflects more the work involved rather than the quality in the bottle.
As quantity is neglible, allocations are ridiculously small, meaning to share evenly amongst customer, one is reduced to selling one bottle per customer. Is there any real value in buying just one bottle? What is the optimal point to drink ? These young producers seem totally disenfranchised from the wishes of the customers.
Then the never ending fragmentation, with each new release one discovers a new champagne parcellaire nowhere to be found on the map. The top, the bottom, the east and west side all deserve in the produce’rs mind individual expression. The individual expression of the champagnes however is not worth expressing and if the four were blended together a better champagne would have been made.
A producer with 30 hectares said, it is enough for us to have just one parcellaire. Jacquesson with 200 000 bottles a year have identified four sites they consider worthy of a individual expression. Yet we have these young producers with 1 or 2 hectares releasing 4-6 parcallaire champagnes in miniscule quantities.
Eichelmann says, Microvinification shows how necessary it is for producers to have a brut non-vintage champagne in quantity. This is something the maisons have been preaching for a long time, stating it is important for the region. I would have to agree.
Young producers need to be drunk young if they have to build up a clientele, this is resulting in too short aging on the lees, lower dosage and lower or no sulphur. The champagnes are enjoyable in the first few years after release but they just don’t age. The arguement about terroir becomes negligble, if in 4 or 5 years the champagne is shot.
In 2017 Leclapart’s L’Aphrodisaique was an amalgamation of all the best plots, the best champagne he has producer in my opinion. Emanuel Brochet like Leclapart is capable of making champange at Krug level. His decision in the future to make just one champagne rather than three, might help this younger generation understand the benefits of blending.
