What other Champagnes are similar to Krug?

My apologies in advance if this has been covered before. My favorite Champagne experience ever was the NV Krug Champagne Brut Grande Cuvée. However, I cannot bring myself to purchase any in quantity at ~$160/bottle. Are there any producers making similar wines at lower price points?

I’m sure some will say Krug is Krug and they are probably right. But in regard to oxidative notes only, Tarlant comes to mind.

For $60 this is “similar”…

  • NV José Michel & Fils Champagne Cuvée du Père Houdart - France, Champagne (10/24/2019)
    Was in the mood for Krug, but decided to check in on one of these, since I’m drinkin solo tonight. First time with this champs…have heard good things about this MV cuvee. Base wine is 2011, with back vintages of 71,75,76,82,84…20% chard, 40% PN, 40% PM. I believe 40% of the wine is from the fresh 2011 base, and the rest equal parts reserves. WAY fresher than I thought it would be! Starts out poppin with bursting bubbles of fresh citrus and ginger…tart and sour lemon and green apple skin, saline minerality…then you have this subtle faint ox, sautéed apples in butter, peanut brittle, white truffle nuance in the background…creamy and very elegant, especially as the bubbles dissipate, and the citrus calms…really turns engaging and complexing. If you let the wine sit in the glass for a bit, the freshness takes a back seat to some very intriguing honeycomb, subtle sherry, musty old cellar, peach cobbler, spiced apple cider notes…becoming more delicate and fragile like an old wine, but not at all falling apart. Another splash from the bottle awakens the freshness again like a shot of adrenaline…which I am finding I like more in this wine. I’m keeping a stopper in the bottle as I go through it…preserving the freshness as much as I can. I REALLY like this! Not as rich and captivating as a Krug, but pleases in a similar MV way for me. The QPR is outstanding as well! (94 pts.)

Posted from CellarTracker

^ Love that wine.

Tarlant, Seleque, Miniere

Nothing is all that similar to Krug especially when you consider that they use all three of the main grape types, grow/source from all over the region, and use a very large amount of reserves across numerous years. You are not going to find many small producers capable of doing that and the larger producers that are capable of it, don’t necessarily want to take on the work and expense. Krug also isn’t about oak or oxidation either. Yes, the wines see oak, but it tends to be older, fairly neutral and the wine is only in it for the fermentation period and a short period after. The wines normally sees more time in steel than they do in oak.

The best example I can think right now for a Grande Cuvee comparison is Charles Heidsieck with their NV Brut Reserve, but only for the bottles that were based on the 2007-2013 vintages and saw 5-8 years of age prior to disgorgement. With another year or two of post-disgorgement age, these wines show a lot of finesse and richness. Not as precise or elegantly rich as Krug and a bit creamier, fruitier, and rounder. You probably wouldn’t mix the two up blind, but some will prefer the Charles Heidsieck.

However, this isn’t as much the case anymore as Charles Heidsieck has been moving through stock incredibly fast over the past couple of years and the wine has fallen to only 3 years of age prior to disgorgement. To deal with this ‘good problem’, they have increased and played with the reserve wine mix, but it has lost some of the richness and character that came from the longer lees aging and made it a bit more similar to Krug at 1/3 to 1/4 the price.

Brad, while not exactly 1/3rd the price, what’s your view on 2008 Charles Heidsieck?

Wine making and additional aging aside, they have a team which tastes and blends wines from the past 10 years or more to get to their house style and overcome any potential vintage weaknesses. I think it’s the reserve wines from premium years like 90 that commands the price and is worth it for me.

So I guess the question is who else adds significant reserve wines?

I bought some Taittinger Reserve a couple of years ago that supposedly contains 35-40% reserve wines. Result wasn’t Krug but very enjoyable. Especially at $35-40.

Taittinger’s reserve wines are predominatnly only 1-2 years older than the base vintage and usually make up only 20%-30% of the final blend (with closer to 20% being more common). A lot of producers don’t hold their reserve wines separately all that long (cost, space) or choose to start a perpetual reserve. Krug is well known for their selection of reserve wines, but others have more. Of course, these others also produce more bottles. Veuve Clicquot has the greatest collection of reserve wines that I have seen. Charles Heidsieck would be second. What makes Charles Heidsieck so impressive is that for a few years they barely sold more wine than Krug.

Interesting. 20% is a big difference from the 30-35% I read when I bought it. Maybe that year was one off? Definitely not the 35-40% I remembered. Thanks for your expertise!

Robert Parker’s Wine Advocate
Taittinger’s Brut Réserve is the signature cuvée of the house and represents a large volume. It is an assemblage of 45% Chardonnay, 35% Pinot Noir and 20% Pinot Meunier; the recent disgorgement (dosage is pretty sweet with nine grams) is based on vintage 2011 and contains 30-35% reserve wines. It is a pretty intense Champagne with good body and structure, refreshing mineral tension and good grip in the finish. (SR) (6/2016)

Mr. Baker,
Up until the last handful of years, Charles Heidsieck was roughly 700,000 total bottles, correct? While this is certainly 15X higher production than Growers like Selosse as an example, it is merely a fraction of the production of other houses which are often, and possibly erroneously, referenced in the same sentence as Charles Heidsieck. The US Consumer, in general, is seemingly not educated to the fact that Charles Heidseick was using 40-60% reserve wines with 5-8 years of aging en tirage. In regards to non vintage Champagne, it is astounding when the Consumer is not willing to recognize the massive difference in quality in the bottle, which often translates to merely $5-$10/bottle extra, and in some cases no difference, at the register.

To answer the OP’s question…Krug

With all the caveats already made by others (and I’m glad that Brad made the important point that Krug’s distinctive “patina”, derived from barrel fermentation and lees aging, isn’t in fact “oxidative”), I would suggest Jean Milan’s “Grande Reserve 1864” bottling.

Emile,

Historically , in the 1980s, sales were between 3.5-4M bottles at Charles Heidsieck; they were one of the largest houses. To build up reserves, and launch the new formula Brut Reserve they cut production and sales purposefully slipped to 2.5M in the early 1990s. Unfortunately, even as the wine kept getting better, sales continued to slide as the Brut Reserve became Brut Reserve Mis en Cave and by the early 2000s, sales were sometimes below 1M per year. This slide continued and a decade ago, they were down to around 250,000 bottles per year. They have recovered now and production/sales is back up over 1M bottles a year.

Based on the vision of the house and sibling relationship with Piper-Heidsieck, I can’t see Charles Heidsieck ever getting up above 2M bottles a year again and 1-1.5M bottles per year is a pretty healthy spot for Charles Heidsieck. The biggest challenge that Charles Heidsieck has IMO is that it really doesn’t own any vineyards.

I completely agree that for $40-$45, the Brut Reserve was a super, super deal for many years. I think the market has caught up though as stock has been flying off the shelves globally and they would like to position the wine a bit higher price-wise. From 2018 through early this year, I noticed that base year of this wine changed from 2008 to 2010 to 2012 to 2013 to 2015 in some places. You could also find the 2010, 2012, 2013, and 2015 bases all disgorged in 2018 as well. Good problem for Charles Heidsieck to have.

Dinesh,

I like the 2008 and think it is quite young now, but will develop very well over the next decade. Today, the wine shows lots of citrus on the nose, has a red citrus palate with touches of cream and bitterness. A long finish is very attractive, but the wine is tightly wound. As I mentioned, I find it too young for my palate today, but it is clearly built to grow as it ages. It is nothing at all like the Brut Reserve, but still a very well made wine. The 2012 Charles Heidsieck vintage is out there now too.

Mr. Baker,
Thank you for your response. So, it seems from your response that production under one million bottles was not intentional in a pursuit of quality and simply the result of sluggish business? I had been under the impression that it was a choice to stay under one million bottles annually for the purpose of maintaining, if not increasing quality. Thank you your insight.

Clouet 1911

Emile,

No, sales were never planned to be under 1M bottles a year. If things had gone as planned, Charles Heidsieck sales would have climbed back towards 3.5-4M bottles in the 1990s. The original dip in volume in the late 1980s and early 1990s was to build up reserve stock. The hope was that once the reserves were in place, production and sales would move back up. As sales continued to fall through the early 2000s, they were able to be more selective as well, but not necessarily on purpose. The current leadership took over Charles when sales were in the 250k bottles per year range so getting back up to 1M bottles was a goal. The current vision has Charles being much more of a premium, lower volume, yet still larger, well known house.

*Edited to correct spelling of ‘bottles’ in second to last sentence.

I would suggest trying Eric Rodez Grands Vintages, Eric worked at Krug, and he also uses oak for the first fermentation, combined with relatively old base and reserve wines.

Disclaimer: I represent the wines for my market.

-a

Thank you very much for your feedback.

In regards to volume as it relates to quality, this is an interesting and much larger discussion. Of course, the Champagne region has increased in size and may continue to increase in size, which facilitates increased volume. What are your thoughts on increased volume as it relates to maintaining “premium” quality and image? I have heard that some historically, reputable houses have increased production 100-400% over the last 20 years whereas other Producers, often referenced as a competitor, or at similar quality level, have not grown much at all(for a variety of reasons). Is it possible to maintain quality with substantial increases in production? I realize this depends on many, many factors, and that most likely NV wines would experience more growth than vintage wines or Tete de Cuvee bottlings. Your thoughts are appreciated.