Funny how some Costcos still have it at $118 while most are $129.
I see no problem comparing the Dom and the Tait… They’re similar enough wines. I’d say moreso than simply stating that one contains 1/3 pinot. But varietal composition aside one could just be comparing young wines from the same region ala Petrus vs Cheval
Personally I think The Tait. CdC needs additional age beyond release MORE than the Dom. Qualitatively I’d expect the Tait. to gain a little on the Dom over the next 2-3 years.
I’ve never found Dom to be oaky.
That Tait and Dom are both “luxury” brands has zero bearing on how the wine tastes to me and that’s all I’d be interested in comparing. Despite being marketed “name” brands, they’re both great wines.
I understand where Mike is coming from and it does prompt good discussion; however, both producers are in direct competition with each other for sales and like others stated above, the same comparison can be made between the various Bordeaux’s and blends. More so, when your average wine consumer purchases a bottle of Champagne do you really think they are thinking about the nuances of a BdB vs a blend? Definitely not; they are looking for the champagne that they like the best.
Ah, I see. I taste oak in Krug, but just a little. Tom Stevenson, in his World Encyclopedia of Champagne and sparkling wine, says the oak they use is “relatively neutral”, and goes on to say “tasted with other Champagnes, Krug’s oakiness is distinctive, but rarely discernible when drunk on its own”. I agree more with the first part than the second, but I have to acknowledge his authority. From what I can find, Krug ferments press wine bound for distillation in their new barrels, using them only after doing so for three years (http://www.wine-pages.com/features/krug.htm). That doesn’t leave a barrel truly neutral, but as many barrels as they have, with a very old average age, it would impart very little oak flavor in a final blend. I don’t know how the use breaks down among their different bottlings, if newer barrels are used in greater concentration for certain ones or not. Bollinger does seem to use similarly old barrels. I don’t think Salon uses oak at all, so I was wrong about that.
Anyway, I shouldn’t have corrected you on a small point as your overall message was basically correct. It’s possible that whatever I taste in Krug isn’t from oak at all, or at least not from any actual oak flavor. I think some of it is, but with all of the autolytic and oxidative/barrel character, it’s tough to tell.
When I tasted the 2004 Dom at the K&L Champagne event this year, I noticed that the wine was much toastier, smokey even, than previous vintages. I even returned to the table try another sample from a different bottle, with similar results. Perhaps this is the oak component that others here are talking about? Personally, I am not a buyer. Not to doubt Charlie’s (or his wife’s) positive experience with it, but the wide swings in bottle variation in this wine, which also happened with the 2002, make me wary about spending that kind of cash when there are many other excellent and more consistent tête de cuvées out there.
I was surprised to see Nathan ask about oak, and now I am again seeing this comment. I haven’t had the '04 yet, so I am not in a position to agree or disagree. I have never noticed an overt presence of oak in any DP before, though. Have you, with any other vintage? I also wonder if you are generally averse to oak flavor in Champagne. Do you like Krug? Vilmart?
Love Krug and Vilmart. There is a sweetness and vanilla flavor component in the 04 that I don’t care for.
It seems pretty clear that whatever you’re noticing is not oak.[/quote]
Doug,
I usually associate vanilla as an indicator of oak so that is where my comment came from. I like Dom a lot typically, but just haven’t been enthused by the 2004. I also know from experience that Dom ages very well so maybe what I’m detecting is a matter of reductive elements, combined with dosage that are going to take quite some time to come into balance- I just don’t know.
What I do know is that both bottles of the 04 Dom that I have tasted from have been toasty with vanilla flavors and a distinct sweetness that I did not notice when tasting 96, 98, 99, 00 & 02 on release, so at relatively the same stage.