Dinner with 06 de Venoge Rose-updated info/Dom, 3 white Burgs, 4 Zins,97 Dal Forno Valpo, 04 Foradori, more

Our dinner group enjoyed a fun dinner in the private dining room at the Wine Cask restaurant in Santa Barbara with a very creative wine theme of champagne, white Burgs, and “orphan” reds, such as Zinfandel, Petite Sirah, Mourvedre, Petite Verdot, etc. And, boy did we ever step up with some orphans.

Eight of us shared 15 wines in all, ate well and enjoyed great fellowship. We were also privileged to be served by one of the best servers in all of Santa Barbara who is a friend of most of us and quite wine savvy which helped for food pairings.

Our wines:

2006 de VENOGE LOUIS XV BRUT ROSE- I’ve seen this very unusual bottle on shelves in wine shops a few times and often wondered what was in the bottle and could it merit the high price tag affixed to it? A rare opportunity came up for me to purchase a couple of bottles of this rose plus a 95 and 96 Brut, so this was my first time to explore anything from this house; the first nose was pretty serious being full on, bold and flamboyant, but in short time, it mellowed out and gave generous but not overwhelming spicy bright red fruit which on the palate translated into strawberry and red cherry with some noticeable apricot blending in; it had a creamy mousse and was in amazing balance from the nose through the tail; later on, it was even better with more richness, more body, thus providing even more pleasure.

fullsizeoutput_246a.jpeg
2014 JEAN-FRANCOIS MERIEAU TOURAINE BRUT BULLES- 90% Chenin Blanc, 10% Sauvignon Blanc; everything about this bubbly was mellow; the nose was lightly sprinkled with fresh citrus of which lemon lime was most prevalent in the taste profile and its medium weight added to an element of elegance for easy drinking pleasure.


fullsizeoutput_246b.jpeg
2006 MOET & CHANDON DOM PERIGNON BRUT- served blind; one got it was Dom immediately calling out some menthol notes he associates with young DPs; I didn’t get it; I liked it and more and more with each taste as it expanded over time; the nose was a bit skunky at first, but then it blew off and gave way to spicy citrus fruit followed by a streak of toasty, lemon zest; it was lush and creamy and finished on a high note with all of its attributes coming together; extra time brought it all into a state of oneness.

fullsizeoutput_246d.jpeg
2010 DOMAINE ROULOT LES LUCHETS MEURSAULT- minerals and flint jump out of the glass and then comes some herbal infused citrus especially lemon being delivered in a tactile sensory pleasing medium; it finishes with more flint at the end; by itself, I would have liked it, but the next 2 shined above and beyond it.

fullsizeoutput_246e.jpeg
2017 MOREY-COFFINET LA ROMANEE CHASSAGNE-MONTRACHET 1er Cru;- this took it to another level with lovely aromatics of mineral laced Meyer lemon which continued on to the back end; the wine was in perfect balance, had a smooth texture and exuded class and elegance.

fullsizeoutput_246f.jpeg
2012 PIERRE-YVES COLIN-MOREY EN REMILLY SAINT AUBIN 1er Cru- I`ve been a fan of just about every release of this wine and this bottle held up to high expectations with minerals and spicy mild citrus notes; it had bright acidity, nice balance and a long satisfying finish; I found I was thinking its a tossup between the M-F and this as to which is the best of the white Burgs, if not for WOTN. An outstanding red made it a mute point for WOTN.

fullsizeoutput_2470.jpeg
1991 RAVENSWOOD OLD HILL RANCH ZINFANDEL SONOMA VALLEY- this brought back good memories when I was buying lots of vineyard designate Zins from Ravenswood in the 80s and 90s and Joel Peterson was one of my heroes before I had a huge palate shift and moved into Pinot Noir; our bottle had no obvious color signs of aging and even the fruit profile seemed fresher than a 28 year old Zin should be expected to have; it had lots of spice laden blackberry, blueberry and plum fruit; it was so tasty and showed no signs of any heat with its 14.9% abv.

fullsizeoutput_2471.jpeg
1980 ROULON SMITH VINEYARDS CHAUVET VINEYARD ZINFANDEL SONOMA COUNTY- 13.7% abv; there was absolutely no bricking or sign of aging; mature fruit was prevalent throughout with especially dried blackberry and plum; it was delightful, easy on the palate and a real treat.

fullsizeoutput_2474.jpeg
2003 MARTINELLI JACKASS HILL ZINFANDEL RUSSIAN RIVER VALLEY- 16.9% abv; from a 3 acre vineyard planted in 1900 and claimed to be the steepest in Sonoma County at 60 degrees; the vineyard got its name as the family often remarked that only a jackass would farm a hill that steep; it had a dark purple vibrant color; lots of wood notes from the nose on through with super ripe black cherry and blackberry fruit; it finished with a bit of root beer like notes; it can stand a lot of time and decanting in advance with the next opening is recommended.

fullsizeoutput_2475.jpeg
1996 OJAI VINEYARD ROLL RANCH VINEYARD SYRAH- the color was a pure dark purple; the nose was very inviting with a hint of clove and jammy blueberry and plum which continued on to the back end; it was full bodied with layers of depth and held on for a long finish; this wine has a while to go before it reaches its apogee.

fullsizeoutput_2477.jpeg
1997 ROMANO DAL FORNO VALPOLICELLA SUPERIORE- a Corvina blend; always a treat, this fine bottling hit all of the sensory receptors in the right spot at the right time; the aromatics were full of inviting nuances including pepper, spice, liquorice, earth, leather and smoke along with rich black fruit; in the taste I got generous amounts of more defined black cherry and black currant; the mild pepper trail continued on throughout as a nice surprise; it was full bodied, had layers of depth and complexity and kept on unfolding, getting better and better with time. Did I mention, it had unbelievable softness and mouthfeel? I`m thinking WOTN now.

fullsizeoutput_2478.jpeg
2004 ELISABETTA FORADORI GRANATO VIGNETI delle DOLOMITI- 100% Teroldego; this was pretty intense from the color on plus it had a hit of Brett that required pushing past to glean some of the attributes which included massive doses of black raspberry, blackberry and black cherry along with a streak of spice; it was very complex, full bodied and did not want to give up at the back end. An Interesting side thing about this wine was pronouncing the varietal. We had a few different spins on it. Mine: TEAR, as in rip, ALL TO GO.

fullsizeoutput_247b.jpeg
2000 ARNALDO-CAPRAI SAGRATINO de MONTEFALCO 25TH ANNIVERSARY- 100% Sagratino; here’s another very intense wine that will blow your socks off unless you have very tight shoe laces; loads of spicy dark fruit highlight the aromas and taste profile and it reeks of my childhood theatre going indulgence I’ve borrowed as a wine descriptor, jujube; in fact, its more like jujube than jujube.

2009 P+S PRATS & SYMINGTON CHRYSEIA DUORO- blend of 70% Touriga Nacional and 30% Touriga Franca; this wine says catch me before you get palate fatigue which is quickly approaching after the last 2 and the 11 before it; I caught enough to know this is a pleasant wine offering really delicious red, blue and black fruit highlighted by a touch of chocolate, licorice and coffee; just past mid palate, it dried out a bit and finished quite dry.

Chryseia means “golden” in ancient Greek as does the name of the river in Portuguese.

This comes from a collaboration from Charles Symington in the Duoro and Bruno Prats from Bordeaux mindful of the Opus joint venture of Baron Philippe de Rothschild of Château Mouton Rothschild and Robert Mondavi.

fullsizeoutput_247d.jpeg
2015 ONCE & FUTURE PALISADES VINEYARD PETIT SIRAH CALISTOGA- made by Joel Peterson of Ravenswood fame, this was inundated with sweet wild cranberry fruit accented with talc, sandalwood and pine; it seemed way too young and probably would have benefitted from a long decant and certainly would have been better opened earlier in the evening than being our final of 9 reds.

fullsizeoutput_247f.jpeg
Our prince of sweets graced us with another gem:

1999 KRACHER WELSCHRIESLING TROCKENBEERENAUSLESE NUMBER 10- 375 ml; honeyed burnt apricot abounds here in this super thick syrupy dessert in a glass.

fullsizeoutput_2481.jpeg
When it was all over, everyone agreed our wine theme was very creative and gave us a chance to open some bottles we rarely have AND it turned out to be really fun.

This is such a wonderful group to be associated with and I treasure each and every dinner we share every 2 weeks year after year, times 20 now.

Cheers,
Blake

What an interesting mix of wines! Well done.
Off the wall question - did you get the de Venoge at Chabrol in Amsterdam? I seem to remember this bottle and few others in stock there a few months ago.

Your question is not off the wall. The last time i saw Venoge was at Chabrol, in fact, I was thinking of that when I wrote up the notes. The price tag was off the wall as I remember= over $250 Euros although I looked it up on Wine Searcher and that was the cheapest price in the US in dollars.

I bought mine through Envoyer.

Incredible line up Blake.

I always thought De Venoge was like the AdB champagne of elsewhere? Maybe not true in the least though?

Cool notes, thanks for the read on the wines.

Please help me with AdB. Not sure what that stands for.
Appreciate your comments.

^ I believe what is meant is that De Venoge is a very generic brand, which entry cuvée can be had around 25€ or so. Not bad but very generic indeed. I guess they make some other cuvées as well to explain the $250 price tag comments.

Alain

A good friend of mine was telling me he just had that 03 Jackass Hill on Saturday. He really enjoyed it, but hard to believe at 16.9% that it wouldn’t be tough to drink more than 1 glass or so.

Michael

Since I’m not that familiar with the house, I looked it up and found some info from different sources:

"Champagne de Venoge is a Champagne producer based in the Épernay region of Champagne. The house was founded in Mareuil-sur-Aÿ in 1837 by the Swiss Marc-Henri de Venoge, who soon moved operations to Épernay.

The house produces approximately 1,700,000 bottles annually, with cuvées spanning from blanc de blancs to blanc de noirs to the prestige label Des Princes.

In 1825 Henri-Marc de Venoge set up in trade in Mareuil-sur-Ay, a business that in 1837 was to become the Champagne House that carries his name. 6,000 bottles were sold in March 1838 and 22,000 in April of the same year. By May 1838 sales were being made to clients in Brussels and Mannheim and 10,000 more bottles had been sent out.

The next stops on the de Venoge expansion programme were London, Pforzheim, Karlsruhe, Fribourg, Ulm, Munich, Antwerp and Copenhagen.

Henri-Marc de Venoge was also the first to illustrate his labels, which was a completely new concept in Champagne.

Until then, labels had simply shown the name of the producer and the vintage. In 1837, Henri-Marc designed an oval label sporting two painted bottles and the de Venoge name. He retired in 1845 and died in 1860.

Joseph de Venoge, was the true driving force behind the firm established by his father. He launched the brand on the international scene with the help of his brother, Léon who settled in the United States. Soon, champagne was being dispatched to New-York, New Orleans, Philadephia, Port-au-Prince and even Calcutta.
He took over as Chairman in 1845 and launched the first special cuvees which later became brands in their own right: Cordon Bleu in 1851, Vin des Princes in 1858 and Vin du Paradis etc. He died in 1866. A road in Epernay still carries his name.
Gaetan de Venoge joined the firm in 1864 as export manager, which has always been the stepping stone towards general management at de Venoge.

He was one of the founders of the Syndicat des Grandes Marques, created in 1872. The greatest Champagne Houses belong to it, united in defence of the appellation and the quality of the wines of Champagne.

Marquis Adrien de Mun who quickly joined his father-in-law, Gaetan who died in 1898 allowed his name to be associated with that of de Venoge, thereby introducing the brand into Paris’ high society.

At that time de Venoge was dispatching over one million bottles against a total of 30 million for the whole of Champagne.

The Marquis de Mun died in 1922 and left his mother-in-law and his widow in charge of the company.

The last direct heir of the de Venoge family left the helm of the firm in 1958.

Today De Venoge is part of Lanson-BCC, the second largest group in Champagne after Moët Hennessy. Under the leadership of its President Gilles de la Bassetiere the House sells approximately 700,000 bottles annually, of which 50% in France and 50% abroad.

De Venoge style is characterised by vinosity with freshness. The House only uses the first pressing [cuvée] and age its wines for at least 3 years, while using a very low dosage (about 7 grams per liter), and this is where the freshness comes from.
Each cuvée in De Venoge’s range of champagnes is highly individual, expressing the richness of its terroir and the typicity of a particular grape variety."

Blake, I could Be wrong but I was under impression that De Venoge is as Alain said kind of basic champagne in a fancy bottle much like Armand de Brignac. Sounds like your bottles way exceeded that which surprised me. But again I have no tasting history, it was just perception that I picked up somewhere. Thanks for the history.

I think he was referring to Armand de Brignac; expensive, but more bling than substance. At least that’s how I read it.

I went through a half dozen of the 1996 de Venoge Champagne Brut Louis XV. Nice wine, showing little of its age. Medium density. Lots of citrus - lemon curd and lemon grass, with orchard fruit in the background. Some brioche and subtle oxidative notes. Refined bead. For a '96 tête de cuvée, it was a deal at the last price it was offered from Envoyer. It was priced slightly below '06 Taittinger Comte and '95 Heidesiek BdM, although one batch went for quite a bit less. I’m happy I bought more Comte and BdM than de Venoge, but did well with all three.
“I Dream of Jeannie” shaped crystal bottle is pretty, but won’t fit in any rack.

Terrific notes, as always, Blake. A pleasure to read.

OK, now I got it. Armand de Brignac. Also never had one of those and heard it was more about the pretty face than the content.

Thanks Chris. It was a pleasure to experience the wines and write about them for prolonged enjoyment.

I look forward to trying the 95 and 96 de Venoge Brut Louis XV I bought from Envoyer. Love your “I dream of Jeanie” analogy. Maybe I need to rub the bottles prior to opening for a better experience.

To get more about de Venoge, I reached out to Brad Baker and here is his in depth reply:

"de Venoge is a somewhat middling house that is trying to improve. In the late 1800s and early 1900s they were a big deal, but slowly slid until they became more of a second and third tier player that was mostly prominent in Europe. In 1961, they introduced the Cuvée des Princes as their vintaged prestige wine in the odd shaped bottle that Louis XV comes in today. In the 1990s, they changed things a bit and made Cuvée des Princes an upper end NV range (still in the same odd bottle) and introduced Louis XV as the new vintage prestige wine - also in the odd bottle.

In general, I don’t find the NV or basic vintage wines from de Venoge to be all that interesting. The Cuvée des Princes range is the sweet spot to me as the price is reasonable and the quality is fairly high. I like Louis XV, but don’t see it as a wine that is worth $100. It hasn’t aged all that well and hasn’t sold very well - that is why there is still quite a bit of 95 and 96 available. For the last few years, they have been discounting it to move it, but they want to keep the new release pricing high.

de Venoge’s problem in my opinion is that they don’t own many vineyards and don’t have contracts with the best growers/sites either. They are investing in marketing and communication and have made a push in the US market, but you are only as good as your raw materials. Their winemaker in the 90s was Eric Lebel who took over at Krug in 1999. I mention this because Eric is a great winemaker, but even he couldn’t make de Venoge a top player.

They do have good ownership and leadership and the wines can be enjoyable, but most are not the best values. de Venoge also has a good stock of old vintages so library releases do come out, but the quality is not always the best. If the Louis XV wines were around $85-$90, they might be worth it, but I prefer to go with Princes lineup in the $60-$70 range."

Hmmm. Good report from Brad. I thought des Princes was still vintage dependent. I had an excellent, if tight, 1993 des Princes just a few years ago.
Not that it matters for wine quality but I wish the bottles were more conventional. They remind less of Jeannie than of the instant salad dressing bottles of my youth.

Paul,

1993 was the last vintaged version of Princes. It essentially became Louis XV starting with the 95 vintage and the Princes has now developed into its own NV range of Extra Brut, Blanc de Blancs, Blanc de Noirs, and Rose. This range sits between the basic offerings and the Louis XV wines. It still uses the same funky bottle. I wish de Venoge would change it, but I don’t see that happening anytime soon. It would be nice if they would change it for the Louis XV lineup since the shape has a back story with the Princes cuvee, but no real relation to Louis XV. While some do like this bottle, it is a pain to cellar and I don’t see the shape doing any favors to the wine in terms of how the wine develops. Additionally, since the bottles are unique and eye catching, they are often put out on display. Louis XV is in clear glass which doesn’t help it out in terms of light; at least the Princes wines are now in dark glass. I get that a lot of folks like the bottle as a clear glass decanter, but the wine suffers for the art IMO. Price-wise, the Princes wines tend to be around $60 in Europe and represent a good buy. In the US, for whatever reason, the pricing seems to be $80 and upwards where the value is much more of a question.

Thanks again Brad for all of the info and update.