Older Champagnes from Europe seem fresher. The 83 Cristal mag was from London.
Great tasting Kevin , keep going ! I am not surprised about the Grand Echezeaux . This is always scores very high in our blind tastings . I love that wine .
I had a prefect great fresh Dauvissat Forêt 2008 last week …
I had a very nice Dauvisset-Camus Forest 04 a couple of weeks back 11/12 from an en-primeur purchase back in the day (£120 plus tax and duty for the 12 - those were the days!).
A lot of were drunk, with pleasure, very young, but they’ve all been sound, ageing at quite a slow rate to me despite ambient storage.
Silly me, I’ve been so caught up in the Excessible Baller thread I thought those big numbers were quantities…
One more point to add to this discussion–In terms of premox, I think the bottles that have travelled quite a ways in general have their premox show up earlier. I live on the left coast of the USA, and my bottles have seen a lot of mileage, even if they have been treated extremely well. Those in Europe see a somewhat different picture, and commonly report mostly healthy bottles when we are reporting premox problems. Personally, I don’t believe the European bottles are immune–I just think the premox will show up somewhat later in those bottles that remain at the estate or have not travelled far.
I’ve always felt this way. I also felt that the Australian tastings seemed to also show more pre mox.
Lol
TAKE THAT BACK!
And it’s usually not even close.
Not trying to be insulting. Just an observation.
ditto the California bottles !
Apologies Nick, that was meant to be read sarcastically. I’m on the far end of the Aussie supply chain as everything that comes in country does so on the east coast and then gets shipped to WA from most often Melbourne. So my bottles travel another 2,100 miles when compared to the ones opened at those tastings you refer to.
But I meant my response to be a tongue in cheek reply, not a statement of fact. Sorry for the confusion.
No worries Andrew. I took no offense.