The Taittinger Comtes Thread

IMHO, Taittinger Champagne Brut Blanc de Blancs Comtes deserves its own thread. I wish I could say I’m an expert, but I’m merely a smitten admirer who discovered the wine with the 2004 vintage. I can’t speak to older vintages, but hope to see this thread backfilled by others. The 2004 and 2005 hooked me, then the 2006 blew me away.

Here are some of the essentials of this tête de cuvée:

First made in 1952

The bottle is a reproduction of an 18th century bottle design

Grand Cru Chardonnay mostly from Avize, Le Mesnil-sur-Oger and Oger, and some Chouilly and Cramant; only first run juice.

Since the late '80s, about 5% is aged in oak barrels for a few months

Undergoes malolactic fermentation

Dosage is usually 9g/l

Aged in Reims for a minimum of eight years

Production is less than 25,000 cases each vintage


The current release is 2006, which hit the market in late 2015. I’ve read a lot of posts of people passing on the '06 to wait for the '08, which I think is a mistake. The next release will be the 2007, possibly late this year. The will be little of the 2007 released, due to an early harvest in a hot vintage.

The earliest we’ll see the 2008 is late 2019. After that, we’ll have to wait for the 2012, as there will be no Comte produced from the 2009, 2010, or 2011 vintages.

My latest TN on the 2006: Gorgeous and complex nose and palate; Lemon cream, flowers and orchard fruit, but I think it’s the texture and mouthfeel that bring me back so often. Balanced, dense, yet very lithe.

Cheers!

Warren

Some very knowledgeable people were weighing in on this recent thread:

2 different batches of 06` Taittinger Comtes de Champagne?
January 6th 2018
2 different batches of 06` Taittinger Comtes de Champagne? - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers

Count me as a fan of the 2006. Interesting that they would pass on 2009. Lots of tete de cuvées being made with 2009.

Count me in the big fans of Comte de Champagne… As my 1st vintage was the 1988 we drank for my wedding dinner… and I’m I’m still married :slight_smile:

1995 Taittinger Champagne Brut Blanc de Blancs Comtes de Champagne - France, Champagne (30-01-17)
Nose of Mokka, biscuit, apricot, very brioche and butter… taste of delicious brioche and butter, very nice balance, very nice lenght !! (95 pts.)

2006 Taittinger Champagne Brut Blanc de Blancs Comtes de Champagne - France, Champagne (30-01-17)
Nose of white flowers, honey, hint of brioche, hint of smoke, hazelnut… taste of grilled hazelnut, granny smith, nice acidity (93 pts.)

2006 Taittinger Champagne Brut Blanc de Blancs Comtes de Champagne - France, Champagne (20-10-15)
This is all finesse and elegance, beautiful nose of brioche and toast, roasted nuts… Lenght of 30 sec, this will evolve like a nice Meursault, still too young, will be at it’s peak in 10 years from now (95 pts.)

1990 Taittinger Champagne Brut Blanc de Blancs Comtes de Champagne - France, Champagne (29-07-10)
Nos of yellow apple, biscuits, quite evolved a hint maderised… in the month, yellow apples, apricot, lacking a bit of freshness (91 pts.)

1995 Taittinger Champagne Brut Blanc de Blancs Comtes de Champagne - France, Champagne (23-04-10)
Very expressive nose of roasted nuts, ripe yellow apple, smoky, and a hint of acacia flower… in the mounth, yellow ripe apple with crisp acidity, very good lenght, great champagne!! (95 pts.)

I have, but have not opened, the 2006. I have loved the 95, 96 and 04, and have very much enjoyed the 99 as well. I don’t drink it often enough to be an aficionado.

I’ve been a fan ever since Josh Leader brought a 1979 to a dinner at Triomphe about 12? years ago. After realizing that I couldn’t afford to buy aged Comtes at auction I bought some 1995 and 1996 from Premier Cru. I then learned a lesson about how vintages that don’t necessarily show well on release can still age beautifully. I loved the 1999 and but skipped the 1998 and 2000 which were a bit disappointing on release but are really good now.

Of the 2002, 2004 and 2006 trilogy my favorite is probably the 2004 for its lean minerality though I love all of them and haven’t encountered any of the disappointing 2006 bottles that others have seen. I only had the 2005 once and thought it a very strong offering for the vintage.

The great thing is that while the quality is high the production is also very large so the wine remains widely available and hasn’t reached the high pricing of some other Tete de Cuvees.

If you’re just starting out then I urge you to cellar some bottles as they reward it greatly. The 1995 is amazing now and a 1996 opened about a year and a half ago was beautiful but just starting to come into its own. The nose of an aged Comtes is a thing of beauty.

I am hoping that the 06 will develop like the 96 or 02. The recent showing of the 96 is very close, if not equal, to the 96 Salon in quality, of course for my palate, The 06 Rose is excellent as well. The older mags show even better which is not surprising.

Good to hear about the 06 rose as I just bought some!

As a novice to aged champagne, it would be helpful to understand how the wine changes (or subjectively improves) as it ages. I tasted the 2006 a few months ago and highly enjoyed its concentrated flavor, though stylistically I tend to prefer more freshness. Is it fair to say the wine’s fruit will lean out, the acidity may smooth out, and the flavors more oxidized?

I am no Jay but the fruit will become warmer, rounder and more decadent. In Salon and CDC, the expression is similar to Côte de Beaune whites but develop slower. IMO, the great champagnes should retain freshness at least for three or four decades if ideally kept. However, they will become rounder and will not be as precise/focused. Although I find really old champagnes interesting, I don’t like too much oxidative expression.

Posted from CellarTracker

But you probably have more experience than I do :slight_smile:. I was trying to think of how to describe it and I concur with what you say. The words I was leaning towards were rounder and richer but I like the way you put it. Though I want to emphasize that for me one of the greatest payoffs is what happens with the nose which can achive a depth and grandeur that is captivating.

Age is so vintage dependent that I hesitate to make a recommendation. I don’t know if the 1995 Comptes ever shut down but the 1996 certainly did and is just coming around. 2000 is great now at age 18 but was dull on release. 1999 drank well all along. My goal (unlikely to be met) is to save the rest of my 2006s for 2026 or so.

love the 90 and 96. Only one data point w 06 but not a fan. Will keep 6 for the future but not buying more. Will wait for 08.

For my money, one of the best values in fine wine.

Last year, I had a wonderful 1990 Our annual attempt to attempt to compete with the Tucson Lunch Bunch - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers and then had a small amount of the 2006 TN: Chateau Montrose with Mr. Herve Berland - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers Seemed to me that the 2006 has a bright future.

I love this stuff. The value is here. If you enjoy Chardonnay based Champagne, this is a must have to me. Count me in as a 2006 lover.

I agree with most of what’s said above about CdC as it ages, but I do think one of the great hallmarks of CdC is it retains freshness and precision/delineation even as it benefits from time in the cellar. Plus, I don’t generally find oxidative notes in CdC with age, and I also am not a big fan of the oxidative style.

My favorite vintages since 1985 (earlier tastes being few and far between) are 1995, 1996, 2002, and 2004. In a 1996 horizontal with about 12 or 13 Champagnes in 2016, the CdC was just a hair below Salon in (I think) everyone’s estimation of “best”, although we were unfortunately missing a couple possible challengers that day due to a last minute cancellation (Churchill and Krug). And I personally think the 1995 is drinking even better than 1996 right now although who knows if that will last. Jay opened 2002 recently and that may be the sweet spot right now in terms of QPR if you hunt for a good price.

I agree with you that the '95 is drinking better than the '96, but the gap isn’t as large as it once was. While the '96 has progressed very well, I do still think there is a large gap between it and the very best of the '96’s (CdM, better examples of Salon, Cristal and Krug).
'99 CdC is my favorite Champagne from the vintage and is probably the Champagne I’ve consumed most often over the past couple of years.

what’s your 06 opinion?

If you force me to choose, ‘96 Salon is a step up and has an extra gear. I love it. The bottle of Salon that day in 2016 was particularly fresh and outstanding. I haven’t tried ‘96 Krug or Cristal side by side with ‘96 CdC. (Normally I’d say that Krug is a very different beast to compare to Taittinger CdC, but I’ve found ‘96 Krug particularly elegant the couple times I’ve had it.) I’ve never had the ‘96 Clos de Mesnil.

Ive posted many TNs on the 06 which I love and a few other TNs on many other vintages and I can easily say Im a big fan of this grande marque and have been ever since a magnum of 81 knocked my socks off. To this day, the 81 was maybe as good as any other releases although 85, 90, 95 and 96 were stars among stars. The 95 for many years out shown the 96 and many other 96s such as Salon, Dom, Krug, Cristal and Pol Roger`s SWC and is still is rocking.

As Nathan posted early on in this thread, there`s some good discussion in a recent thread he provided the link for.