Stas,
This one isn’t true. The NV has always had some degree of malolactic in it, but the vintage wines are sometimes non-malo and Cristal even more often non-malo. It is all vintage dependent. For example, in 2019, none of the estate grapes (~80% of the production and all of the vintage material) saw malo.
* edited for incorrect spelling - fifth word of second sentence changed from has to had
Given the ripe grapes, the low sulfur use at crush, the fact that the cellar isn’t chilled, and the fact that he goes to barrel with quite a lot of solids, and the comparatively long time in wood, I would be surprised if spontaneous malolactic wasn’t the norm rather than the exception. But I’ll discuss with him and Guillaume next time I go.
That’s what I thought as well, but googling about Selosse and malo, most of the sources say that the wines are primarily non-malo, although rather invariably as a combination of no-malo and malo. In one interview Anselme said that he doesn’t know how many wines go through MLF since he doesn’t follow the wines that much and doesn’t do any analyses. I don’t know if that’s true or just marketing talk, though. 
Nevertheless, looking forward to hearing what they tell you!
From what Anselme and Guillaume have told me, they don’t really care if the wine goes through malo or not. They do not encourage malolactic, but won’t stop it. Based on this, their stance is a preference for non-malolactic unless the wine feels it needs to go through malo to remain stable. With the ripeness level that they pick at, the malic acid never stands out, but I am not sure anyone knows the answer to exactly how many of the barrels go through malolactic. Anselme and Guillaume probably have some degree of notes on this from each vintage, but I have never seen any type of summary.
Most of the time, when tasting the still wines in the fall/spring, it doesn’t seem like most have gone through malo, but some barrels have or are in the midst of it. I also can concur that Anselme doesn’t really follow the wines much for the first few months after harvest. I’ve visited with him and tasted the still wines in November and December and he has stated that he hasn’t had the wines yet and normally doesn’t until quite a few months after harvest. He has also led me through the still wines without tasting them alongside me. Guillaume has no problem tasting during this period. As for analysis, Anselme has also told me that he doesn’t have much interest in doing this and I believe him. Winemaker friends of mine have put some of his wines through a typical analysis and the results have been all over the place. Doesn’t matter much to me as I enjoy the wines.
Well, the truth is somewhere in between. Just clarified wit Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon, chef de cave of Louis Roederer. Here is his answer:
“No malo (or very rarely) on Cristal & blanc de blancs. The grapes don’t need malo. Partial malo on all other wines.”
Stas,
There have been some non-malo vintage wines outside of the Cristal and BdB. All of the Brut Natures that have been released to date have been non-malo and the Vintage and Vintage Rose have had years of non-malo release too (though both of these usually have some malo). Historically, some degree of malolactic was done on all the wines in most years, but that has changed over the last few decades with each year and the plots dictating to what degree Jean-Baptiste carries malo out. In general, malo is almost always in the minority for any Roederer wine.
Yes! Brut Nature is non-malo, of course. Completely forgot about that one ))
The Brut Nature are the Starck bottlings? What do folks think of them? I find them interesting but a bit less than I hoped.
-Al
My feelings about the Roederer Brut Nature are similar to yours. I want to like the wine more than I actually do.
I really like the 2009 Starck.
Al,
Yes, the Brut Nature are the Starck bottlings. Some refer to the wine as Brut Nature and others refer to it as Starck. They are one and the same.
In 2006 and 2009, I found the Brut Nature to be a good wine, but my least favorite of the Roederer vintage releases. In 2012, the Rose Brut Nature is really, really good and the first time I really have been wowed by a Roederer Brut Nature wine.
Getting back to the malolactic topic, one other interesting point to consider is that Champagne producers often rely on a different bacteria recipe to carry out malolactic then what many still wine Chardonnay producers would use. With the malic acid in Champagne often being much higher than a comparable still Chardonnay (or similar white wine) from another region, the bacteria recipe choice mitigates the risk of the diacetyl compound taking over. If Champagne producers were to use the same malolactic fermentation starting recipe that a buttery Chardonnay still wine producer used, the results would likely be disastrous.
2008 Cristal is 20% MALO.
And if anyone is interested (I was, as I bought a bunch),
2012 Cristal: A blend of 60% Pinot Noir, 40% Chardonnay, with 32% of the wine vinified in oak casks; no malolactic fermentation.
Fun and interesting thread, btw 
Tyson Stelzer’s Champagne Guide book has quite a bit of information about a producer’s usage of malo across the portfolio. Worthwhile reference point.
In my mind I can’t help but think MUY MALO!