I am somewhat a novice when it comes to this area of champagne. Would like to try several over the holidays. Can you recommend several under $50?-or is that price too low?
While I’m sure some here will disagree, Champagne under $50 is getting difficult to obtain. From a big house I’d look for Laurent-Perrier Brut. And for a grower I’d recommend Aubry Brut.
Stewart, the thread is about the tete cuvees, which are almost without exception more than $50, and in almost every case 2 or 3 times that much. The closest to $50 I imagine you will get to a great tete cuvee experience is the 1999 Billecart-Salmon Nicolas Francois. It is a fantastic champagne, which for reasons I can’t really explain has periodically been available over the last couple of years for $69. The cheapest source I can recommend at present is $85 (see link below). Note that the more recent vintages have been priced in the $145/150 range on release; I don’t think you will ever see this wine in the sub-$100 range again, from any vintage.
https://www.benchmarkwine.com/wines/31707-billecart-salmon-nicolas-francois-1999
None of this is to say that there aren’t fantastic champagnes available in the $50 and under price point. You just aren’t going to find a representative “house’s best” in that range
the original question is, of course, inseperable from cost issues so I’ll also say Comte which is my single largest holding of Champagne (not necessarily the Champagne I buy the most but certainly the one I hold onto the longest). I’ve often preferred it to more expensive cuvees when tasted side by side.
'64 surely is as good as those vintages, although most original releases are on their downward slope. '47, '49, '52, '55, '59, '61, '62, '64, '66, '69, '71, '73, and '76 DP is why I put Dom Perignon as my favorite Champagne. My experience with prior vintages is limited and most that I’ve had were well past their prime.
Agree. Also with the advent of so many mono-site wines which, I think by definition can’t be a Tete de Cuvée, you are not capturing all of the ‘best’ wines from a producer anymore.
That said, Heidsieck BdM is probably my favorite of the true Tete de Cuvée on a QPR basis through Taittinger Comtes and Philipponat CdG are always fantastic as well.
Clos des Goisses. I have questions for those who have mentioned Salon and Krug. The first is almost philosophical: if Salon only makes one wine, is it really a tete de cuvee? As for Krug, what wine are you saying is the tete de cuvee? If you ask Krug, they will tell you that they take as much, if not more, pride in the MV than the vintage. By price, both pale in comparison to the single vineyards.
That’s truly disappointing. Krug is probably my favorite Champagne producer and I have an 03 stashed away for my upcoming birthday.
Here’s to hoping it’s bottle variation…
I would call Salon the tete de cuvee and Delamotte the non.
If you were going to be a stickler I think single vineyard champagnes by definition can’t be a tete de cuvee so for Krug you have the Vintage as the tete de cuvee, the MV as the regular bottling and the two others as outliers. Similar to Bollinger with Grande Annee being the Tete de cuvee and not the VVF.
Though it’s probably my favorite wine in Champagne these days, I would query classifying Clos des Goisses as a tête de cuvée on the grounds that it’s a single-vineyard wine.
Post-1990 I’d have give serious consideration to Taittinger Comtes, Charles Heidseick BdM and Pierre Péters Les Chetillons, with Krug vintage probably winning the top spot. The '02 and '04 Salon are not making the same music as the 1996 so I don’t think they could get my vote.
NV Coutier Blanc de Blanc. Not a tete de cuvée, but Grand Cru and fantastic at about $40 per bottle. It’s what I open when I want a great BdB but don’t want to open one of my Comte. One third the price, but way better than 1/3 the quality.
the rose is no slouch either
Hard to argue against Dom from the 60s, 70s and 80s, at least the ones I’ve tasted, which were admittedly from the best years from those decades.
One random discovery tasted side-by-side with the same vintage of Ruinart BdB (long a personal favorite) - the Pierre Moncuit 2004 ‘Cuvee Nicole Moncuit’. Comes from a total of 1.5 acres of 90-year-old vineyards. Killer stuff, beat the Ruinart at the table blind and costs a lot less. Lower dosage than Ruinart, but more complex.
Comtes for me too - I’m surprised how strong the support is even though I agree.
No surprises in the others - Krug, Dom, Ruinart BdB. I have a bit of Salon but I haven’t dug in. Old LGD can be surprisingly good. I’m optimistic on Peters Chetillons but don’t think I’ve had one older than 05 (and I know they don’t go a lot further back).
If you’re disqualifying Goisses, you have to disqualify Chetillons, no?
That wouldn’t be entirely accurate. They are sister companies under the same corporate umbrella. If you want to get particular, I’ll hear arguments that Salon is the tete de cuvee of Laurent-Perrier, but I think that would be equally silly.
Except the VVF is not a single vineyard.
This board is full of enablers. I went and purchased 3 bottles of the 2006 Taittinger Comtes de Champagne. Looking forward to trying it.
Thats funny I was going to also. Where did u find it so I won’t go there
I have now tasted Comtes de Champagne three times in large tastings (the 2005 once, and the 2006 twice), and each time it showed poorly. I love blanc de blancs and it should be right up my alley, but I must be missing something. Does it not show well in group tastings? Does it need a lot of air?