Champagne

foodguy · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by gomestar

I enjoyed each and every one of the wines for one reason or another. The NV estate was a great value, the L'Ermitage had awesome acidity and bright fruits, and then the Champagnes were all excellent. Public baller image aside, Cristal really is an absolutely incredible bottle.

Cristal is a seriously good bottle of wine, but the the thing with all of those prestige tete de cuvees is that they are made in absolutely MASSIVE quantities. i can see paying huge money for a single-vineyard burgundy when there were like 350 cases made. but when they're making THAT much (and it's NV to boot), it just seems wrong.

fcuknu · Dec 22, 2009

2002 was a really fabulous vintage. I wouldnt call it a steal at 180-200 a bottle, but you can do worse.

A Y · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by foodguy

if you ever get the chance, do try the JScram bottling from schramsberg, even spendier, but probably the most Champagne-like sparkling wine i've had out of the US>

Hmm, why not spend less $$$ on the real thing?

Actually, I've been trying to find a good blanc de noirs that's just pinot noir --- the ones I like keep getting unstocked at the local places, and I'm too lazy to mail order. The last ones I had and liked was A.Soutiran and Selosse (I think --- it was one of the cult Champagnes).

--Andre

foodguy · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by A Y

Hmm, why not spend less $$$ on the real thing?

Actually, I've been trying to find a good blanc de noirs that's just pinot noir --- the ones I like keep getting unstocked at the local places, and I'm too lazy to mail order. The last ones I had and liked was A.Soutiran and Selosse (I think --- it was one of the cult Champagnes).

i thought we'd gotten past the idea that there was only one "real thing". what's delicious is delicious, no matter where it's grown. personalities may vary, but quality doesn't necessarily follow.

gomestar · Dec 22, 2009

I still think there is only one real "Champagne". I don't call California Pinot Noir "Burgundy", and in Burgundy they don't call their chardonnay or pinot noire based sparking wine "Champagne". Also, sparkling wine outside of Champagne isn't held to the same restrictions (much more lax bottle atmospheric pressure requirements, etc.)

I don't, however, discount sparkling wine from any other region simply because it's not from Champagne.

foodguy · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by gomestar

I still think there is only one real "Champagne". I don't call California Pinot Noir "Burgundy", and in Burgundy they don't call their chardonnay or pinot noire based sparking wine "Champagne". Also, sparkling wine outside of Champagne isn't held to the same restrictions (much more lax bottle atmospheric pressure requirements, etc.)

I don't, however, discount sparkling wine from any other region simply because it's not from Champagne.

my point exactly, which is why i referred to them as sparkling wines.

gomestar · Dec 22, 2009

ah, true, I wasn't really paying much attention beyond the one post

it happens all the time for sparkling wines, people call it Champagne as long as it has bubbles. Which means they're not drinking enough sparkling wine, and this makes me sad.

A Y · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by foodguy

i thought we'd gotten past the idea that there was only one "real thing". what's delicious is delicious, no matter where it's grown. personalities may vary, but quality doesn't necessarily follow.

You may have misunderstood me. You had suggested an expensive sparkler because it's most like a Champagne. The logical question to ask is why not pay less and get the actual thing rather than an expensive, imperfect copy of it?

I'm not saying whether it's better or worse, just that if you want the original product, and it's cheaper to get the original product, why not just get the original product?

--Andre

gomestar · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by A Y

You may have misunderstood me. You had suggested an expensive sparkler because it's most like a Champagne. The logical question to ask is why not pay less and get the actual thing rather than an expensive, imperfect copy of it?

I'm not saying whether it's better or worse, just that if you want the original product, and it's cheaper to get the original product, why not just get the original product?

--Andre

simply for discussion purposes, some potential reasons:
1. It's actually "better" than many true Champagnes at that price
2. It's different from a Champagne, but this style is preferred by somebody

the problem is, I'd never buy a $75 Cali sparkling wine while browsing through a wine store.

A Y · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by gomestar

simply for discussion purposes, some potential reasons:
1. It's actually "better" than many true Champagnes at that price
2. It's different from a Champagne, but this style is preferred by somebody

the problem is, I'd never buy a $75 Cali sparkling wine while browsing through a wine store.

Those are good reasons, but foodguy said J Schram is "probably the most Champagne-like sparkling wine i've had out of the US." So it seems to me that he was specifically seeking a Champagne experience.

I couldn't bear to pay $75 for a CA sparkling wine either, which is the only reason I haven't tasted the L'Ermitage Rose.

--Andre

foodguy · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by A Y

Those are good reasons, but foodguy said J Schram is "probably the most Champagne-like sparkling wine i've had out of the US." So it seems to me that he was specifically seeking a Champagne experience.

I couldn't bear to pay $75 for a CA sparkling wine either, which is the only reason I haven't tasted the L'Ermitage Rose.

--Andre
being the "most champagne-like" doesn't necessarily mean a champagne imitator or ersatz champagne. what i was talking about with the j schram is that it is made in a very champagne style (meaning, in this case, British champagne style ... rich, toasty, yeasty). but it still has a fullness and freshness of fruit that in my experience you very rarely find in Champagne.
That said, i would rarely spend $75 on a California sparkler either. But after having tasted these two examples, on certain occasions, I would pay that much for them.

Pezzaturra · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by A Y

Those are good reasons, but foodguy said J Schram is "probably the most Champagne-like sparkling wine i've had out of the US." So it seems to me that he was specifically seeking a Champagne experience. I couldn't bear to pay $75 for a CA sparkling wine either, which is the only reason I haven't tasted the L'Ermitage Rose. --Andre
I would highly recommend to spend $39.99 for Roederer L'Hermitage 2002 . It is Cali sparkling wine and it tastes like the best French vintage at 3 times the price. Taking in account L'Hermitage taste it is an unbelievable bargain.

Dmax · Dec 22, 2009

Originally Posted by foodguy

Cristal is a seriously good bottle of wine, but the the thing with all of those prestige tete de cuvees is that they are made in absolutely MASSIVE quantities. i can see paying huge money for a single-vineyard burgundy when there were like 350 cases made. but when they're making THAT much (and it's NV to boot), it just seems wrong.
Maybe I misunderstood what you wrote, but I have only seen vintage tete de cuvees. Are you saying there is NV Cristal or other prestige cuvees?

foodguy · Dec 22, 2009

ack. brainfart. that's what i get for not fact-checking my posts. massive quantities, yes, NV, no.

A Y · Dec 23, 2009

Originally Posted by foodguy

being the "most champagne-like" doesn't necessarily mean a champagne imitator or ersatz champagne. what i was talking about with the j schram is that it is made in a very champagne style (meaning, in this case, British champagne style ... rich, toasty, yeasty). but it still has a fullness and freshness of fruit that in my experience you very rarely find in Champagne.

Thanks for the clarification!

Originally Posted by Pezzaturra

I would highly recommend to spend $39.99 for Roederer L'Hermitage 2002 . It is Cali sparkling wine and it tastes like the best French vintage at 3 times the price.
Taking in account L'Hermitage taste it is an unbelievable bargain.

I've had that, and it's good. I was just at the grocery store, and saw the L'Ermitage Rose for $54, 1999 vintage.

--Andre

Champagne

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Super Yelper

Distinguished Member

Super Yelper

Distinguished Member

Super Yelper

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

FEATURED PRODUCTS

Similar threads

Featured Sponsor

Yes, I have a signature fragrance I wear every day

Yes, I have a signature fragrance but I don't wear it daily

No, I have several fragrances and rotate through them

I don't wear fragrance

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: