2011 Taittinger Comtes

[crickey]

My objection to Galloni’s score is that he scored it at all when it sounds like both bottles were flawed. Like Cellartracker, Vinous (and the WA) have developed an indicator for when the reviewer thinks the bottles are not representative to signal that consumers should be wary; they score it with a “?”. I have no doubt that Galloni accurately wrote up what he tasted, and what he tasted was crap. I have no objection to publishing a review stating that. If there are problems with the bottles, he is doing a service to alert consumers. I just don’t think he should have given it a score if there are reasonable grounds to think the bottles were flawed.

[Jon_Lawrence]

I had the '11 recently and did not care for it. It is not moving in Europe either and I know folks over there who have tasted it and did not care for it. It was nothing like the vegetal bottle that AG had, but just weak for a Comtes and not worth of 3 digit price tag.

Fully agree, I tasted it as well at Taittinger (no transport issues), and was not impressed. A decent champagne with the Comtes signature, but tasted more like a 50 euro-ish champagne. Lacking depth. If scoring is important to you, I rated it 93.

Great description.

[Carl_Steefel]

My objection to Galloni’s score is that he scored it at all when it sounds like both bottles were flawed. Like Cellartracker, Vinous (and the WA) have developed an indicator for when the reviewer thinks the bottles are not representative to signal that consumers should be wary; they score it with a “?”. I have no doubt that Galloni accurately wrote up what he tasted, and what he tasted was crap. I have no objection to publishing a review stating that. If there are problems with the bottles, he is doing a service to alert consumers. I just don’t think he should have given it a score if there are reasonable grounds to think the bottles were flawed.

Or that one of the bottles was clearly flawed (“vegetal”), while the other was “unyielding and compact”. To start, these sound like two very different notes, and two different wine bottles.

So why give 75 points to an “unyielding and compact” Champagne, unless he is taking the harmonic mean of the two bottles he tasted? One of which was flawed, and cricky says, should not have been rated at all…

[William_Kelley]

I’ve tasted this in both Europe (Champagne) and in the US. Prior to yesterday, I had only had glasses/tastes of this wine and had not spent any reasonable amount of time with the wine. Last night, I opened a bottle I purchased here in the US and followed it for a few hours. I’ll follow it some more later today.

My notes are consistent across all times experiencing this wine. Is it a great Comtes, no. Is it a weaker Comtes, yes. But, even weak Comtes is very good. To me, the issue with this wine isn’t its quality, it is its quality to price ratio or overall value. In terms of quality on release, I have it placed just behind the 2005 and 2007, and even with the 1997 and 2000. I never had the chance to taste the 1994 on release, but this is a better wine than the 1994. The 1997 and 2000 have evolved quite nicely as expected and I think the 2011 will age in a similar positive manner.

My unedited note on this wine:

This is the first mainstream Comtes de Champagne release since the heralded 2008 vintage which also saw the wine make a huge jump in retail price. This jump in price point has held and even inched a bit higher with the 2011 release. Where the 2008 vintage was in full hype mode during the Comtes release, the 2011 vintage is the complete opposite. For many, it is in full avoid mode with some producers cancelling their release of 2011 vintage wines due to the press stereotyping the vintage as green, bitter, horrible, full of pyrazines, and one to avoid. With that preamble, how does this wine show?

Floral citrus and some freshly laundered linen come out on an elegant and fairly classical nose. Lime, mandarin orange, touches of cream, and a soft, doughy note start this wine off. It gains some tart and zesty citrus notes through the mid-palate before softening up on a finish that is medium in length, but still shorter than most vintages of Comtes. This is well made and quite classical in style although it lacks the fruit forward and rounder profile of most recent vintages from 1998 onwards. It is probably the most shy Comtes that I can recall tasting on release, but it is well made and a very good wine. The price point is this wine’s biggest problem. At $100-$125, you can make a case for buying a few bottles, but at $175-$200+, it is a wine that many will likely pass on. My advice is to not judge or hate on this wine due to the vintage or follow stereotypes that run rampant in the press; have your own opinion. Overall, this is a nice wine and one that will age well and improve over time - especially the next 10-15 years. You can decide on your own if the value is there for a purchase.

Nice note, Brad, and nice analysis. Your comments are pretty much in line with my impressions, though I found the 2011 more structurally open than you did, by the sound of it. For what it’s worth, I’ve only tasted it in France so far, as I haven’t been back to the US since the release.

[Greg_K]

I had this last week as part of a large BdB grower lineup (this was a bit of a ringer) and it was fine, but generally unimpressive. Certainly compared to some of the other wines, it didn’t stand out. I’d cellar some at the 2006 pricing, but at the post 2008 pricing it’s a pass.

[Howard_Cooper]

I have it placed just behind the 2005 and 2007, and even with the 1997 and 2000. I never had the chance to taste the 1994 on release, but this is a better wine than the 1994. The 1997 and 2000 have evolved quite nicely as expected and I think the 2011 will age in a similar positive manner.

I tasted the 2007 at the winery in 2018 prior to its release (at least in the US) and rather liked it. I had it again soon after it was released here and thought it was not as good as it was in 2018 (a bit thin and acidic). Over the last year, I have had the 2007 three times and it seems to have gotten better each time I tasted it. Could the 2011 just be going through a strange phase right now and should judgment be withheld for a year or two? I doubt that this wine will sell as quickly as the 2008 and my guess is prices will not be moving on it over the next year or two (except maybe downward), esp. given the reputation or lack thereof of the vintage. So, why make a decision now except to try the wine?

[Neal.Mollen]

Where has Michael been?

Anyway, for those not put off by the foregoing discussion, Zachy’s has this wine on a “flash sale” for $149. I haven’t seen any vintage of this wine “below $150” in quite some time.

[Ethan_Abraham]

The funniest part of that email was that they actually used a Galloni quote!

[alan_weinberg]

[quote=“Jon_Lawrence, post:16, topic:175090”]
, I tasted it as well at Taittinger (no transport issues), and was not impressed.
[/quote]me, too. They wouldn’t let me try 08 or 12.