Kenny,
It tows the line between freshness and maturity which is sweet spot for me. It has the acid, lemon, brioche, but it has added layers of nuttiness, marzipan, honey, brown sugar and baking spices. I have followed this bottling since release and for such a long time it was acidic and reductive. I have been a fan of the '06 because it had the fruit of the '02 and the acidity of the '04. I never thought the '04 would be special, but the last few bottles have been amazing.
My first full case purchase of Champagne on release (back when a case was 12 bottles) and it was the start of my love affair with Comtes.
IYKYK. This falls into the Urban Legend category of Champagnes that no one expected to be amazing but are. The other being '95 Heidsieck BdM, ironically also made by Regis Camus. My dining companion who is a member of every wine society under the sun, including the Societe des Amis Du Champagne, was blown away by it. I have seen some really good notes so the '08 recently, so maybe that is ready to take the baton from the '02 and run with it.
02 was unreal. We couldn’t give it away as distributor…no matter how many samples I pulled and tasted. 95 BdM was same story. Lotsa samples, little sales.
Both benefitted me greatly for samples, not so great for commission.
Hey Frank with 3 daughters getting married this year, the first one on falltac weekend just couldn’t make it but next year we will be attending! I believe I got this from Envoyer a few years ago? Really hard to find now but now when you can find it it’s stupid expensive. Hope all is well.
Agree on the ‘02 Rare, we had this last night for our 22nd anniversary, seemed appropriate!
I was stunned at the youthfulness of this bottle. The only giveaway on the age might have been the color and the incredibly smooth palate. I have a final glass to taste tomorrow before I note. But it was pretty much a rockstar.
Happy you had a good bottle. My last 3 have been way too oxidized for my preference, but the memory of so many stellar ones still overrides those experiences. 1995 was a great vintage and got overshadowed quickly by the magnificent 1996. I thought the '95 Comtes was the better of the 2 for many years and then the '96 caught up and went a bit further IMHO.
I’ve also loved the '02 although the last bottle was bit over the apex with more advanced notes than I’d like. It was pretty serious upon release and any aging character can only intensify it.
Mailly Blanc de Pinot Noir:
I drank a lot of this champagne in the last 12 months. They have all shown a bit of maturity, as did this bottle, but this was the most youthful expression of this wine I’ve tasted. Raspberry, Peach, Pear, and Red Delicious led the orchestra, while the smoke, coffee, licorice and anise notes had their more ephemeral moments in the limelight. I rather enjoyed this more playful and youthful presentation. This also just has an easy elegance that is sometimes missing in 100% Pinot Noir Champagne.
I just recently found out about this wine and was very impressed. Mine showed more like the one you describe here. I really enjoyed the balance in this wine and feel like the dosage is on point. What was the dégorgement on your bottles that showed more mature?
Alas, in the U.S., they do not include that info.
Double posted
How the times have changed in Santa Barbara County. It seems like not that long ago {1980- 2000s}, there was less than a handful of wineries who made sparkling wine and most of them did so only when it was suitable and within their means. Now it is becoming a regular part of many wineries portfolios.
I don’t think they had the brand recognition to justify the price at the time, although the juice in the bottle was outstanding. IIRC, these were both priced around $130ish retail. The '02 Rare was definitely selling for more than '02 DP, but I thought it was the better Champagne and so I could easily justify buying it.
Happy Anniversary Jen!
My bottle had the same slightly mature color but it also had great freshness, fruit and acidity.
@Jon_Lawrence
That bottle with the neck collar is the original release. Have you compared it with the later release collarless version? I’ve only had the latter (lots of them and I love them). I own a couple of the original but haven’t tried them yet.
Cheers
WT
Last night in Whistler, we byob’d Krug 164eme. I’ve always suspected this would eventually be an excellent edition. We’ve had some very good bottles, but after some time in the cellar, last night’s bottle finally showed greatness.
It’s a protean wine; just when I thought I’d identified a flavor or aroma, another would present. First brioche and gingerbread, then pomelo, later a bitter grapefruit rind…citrus and orchard fruit, hazelnut and almond cream, honey and apricot. Its density and intensity are counterbalanced by the crisp cut of the base 2008 fruit. To my palate, it’s entered a prime drinking window. I wish I could undrink my previous ten bottles.
Any good new hot spots in whistler?
I picked this up from HiTime locally. And for what it’s worth, the 2018 and 2019 base are at Woodland Hills Wine, so if someone wanted to do a vertical of the perpetual using all three, it’s possible. I elected to do the 2018 and 2019 side by side a few weeks back, then do this 2020 having discovered it last week.
And I had some interest in whether there might be some of the 2020 suspicious flavors that some have talked about…I don’t find it. As I said in the other thread, we run the risk of over-analyzing vintage and digging so deeply that we look for flaws that some believe are there. I am neither a winemaker nor have I tasted a bunch of 2020s, and yes, this is a perpetual cuvee with a good % of 2020 in it, not exclusively the vintage itself. I just find pleasure in this wine, and I’ll offer it as a data point within the 2020 discussion. @Brad_Baker
Posted from CellarTracker
