Whilst I still don’t really agree with the merit of ranking in this way. It might make more sense to rank wines not houses.
After all that’s somewhat more like the Bordeaux classification works.
But where does Vincent Couche fit into all of this?
Fan of big, burly Paul Bara.
This is a very interesting question but, as many others have highlighted already, Champagne is such a highly individual, fragmented region, with so many distinctive terroirs and styles that such a classification on a large scale seems too reductive. It would be akin to classifying the whole of Bordeaux, reds, and whites, from all subregions.
Perhaps dividing Champagne into its five subregions and identifying the best growers for each one could be more useful? Saying that Larmandier-Bernier should be in the list somewhere around “4th” sounds crazy considering they are arguably one of the best blanc de blancs specialists. Or Laherte Freres, who for me is at the top of the game for Valle de la Marne and Pinot Meunier. I would love to see the individual endeavours of such growers measured against who shares at least some kind of similarity - starting with the inclusion of terroir could be an effort to include a more Burgundian POV into the debate?
Obviously, the Montaigne de Reims is the biggest terroir and the one who sees more variety within itself, but no classification is perfect, and it would be helpful for those who haven’t yet delved deeper into the region to start recognising different soils, climates, main grapes planted and draw some conclusions on how their palate align to each of these elements.
For me, this topic reminds me similarly of Échelle des Crus. Fortunately, that system is dead. Broadening out to Howard’s thought above, you end up with some 5 tiered gradation, which feels similarly subjective to Échelle des Crus. Example…I love Marie Courtin, Larmandier-Bernier, Vilmart, Mousse, Collin, etc, but someone else may think those producers are sub-par to someone like a Lanson or Diebolt Vallois.
The best way in my mind to solve for this is to support who you like with your wallet, and your time (assuming you want to visit the producer).
2 Likes
Where have you been? It took you 12 hours to weigh in?
Sage advice.
I doubt I could get a consensus on this board that today is Friday. A consensus is not really important. Learning from each other is what is important. For example, I would rather see someone say a producer I did not name qualifies in a specific category rather than up there somewhere because then I have an idea how much the poster likes that producer’s wines.
For example, I am very interested in the comments from people who would downgrade Selosse. I mostly put Selosse in its own category because of price (well, that is how the Bordeaux classification was originally done) and am not sure myself how much I like the wines. I wanted to see the reactions of others and am glad to be getting them.
Consistent with your comments, I put Suenen where I did in part because they are newer to me and I have not yet seen how the wines age.
This is one name I have not even heard of. Please discuss in more detail.
You tell us
I haven’t had enough other top grower bottlings to say how they all stack up, but I think everyone who likes umami notes in their Champagne should try Vincent Couche Sensation (it’s late disgorged)! His entry level Elegance NV is good for the price too. He pays very close attention to the fruit in the fields and wine in the cellar and is certified biodynamic. For me, Couche proves that great Champagne can be found outside of what are traditionally considered the most prestigious Champagne regions (Couche is out of Côte des Bar). 
1 Like
How does consistency affect your initial ranking? I find Selosse highs to be very high. But I have also found some inconsistency over the years, both when considered in isolation or as compared for example to a house like Vilmart. And when the wines sway too oxidative, which for Selosse happened less than others who tried to emulate Selosse, you lose me.
I’m a little baffled at ranking by price. It’s not 1855. Or is your theory that market (in whole? in part?) determines quality? I would have thought on this Board, price would not drive anyone’s ranking. Price also has not seemed to affect what I see you liking in Burgundy and Germany,
My theory was I wanted to put something down to start a discussion. I put Selosse in its own category because it is in one by price and by views of friends (I have friends who really like the wines) and critics. Personally, I find the wines too oxidative. I tend not to like wines in a real oxidative style, like Koehler-Ruprecht traditionally made in Germany. I have not believed that my dislike of the wines of KR made the wines bad, but rather represented a personal preference. As a result of personal preference, I do not buy Selosse. However, I did not think I should downgrade Selosse because I viewed my dislike as a personal preference on style rather than a quality distinction.
Completely agree.
So, some people criticize what I have done for using not enough of personal preference and others criticize me for using too much personal preference. I must have done something right if I can be attacked from both fronts.
1 Like
Hot take alert…
Why do people who mostly eschew point ratings, still want to classify things? Makes no sense to me.
1 Like
Howard - Once again, we’re not criticizing you, let alone attacking you! It has nothing to do with you at all. If you propose a question, it’s perfectly reasonable for those responding to talk about the best way to go about answering it and what the criteria might be.
I am extremely happy when people suggest that they believe producers should be evaluated differently from how I have done. I don’t know how to answer whether this should be done based on personal preference.
But, I have a problem understanding what there is at some point other than personal preference. At what point does the personal preference of enough people become objective? Is it possible to have an objectively great wine that nobody likes? I doubt it but even if there is, what would be the point of the wine if nobody likes it. At what point does the personal preference of enough people mean a wine is great. Does this differ if the wine is made in small quantities like Selosse (so that the personal preference of a relative handful of people can mean prices go way up) than for a wine made in huge quantities (say Dom Perignon) - to what extent are prices for this based on preference and to what extent based on brand name).
Filaine is a relatively new grower owned by Fabrice Gass, who worked at Bollinger and started this as a side project. He’s a traditionalist who ferments in wood with no malolactic fermentation. Dosage is low but not extreme (I personally find many of the no dosage/low dosage cult champagnes a bit hollow) and the wines have great acidic tension, complexity, and depth. I’ve really enjoyed those I’ve tried.
I’m a fan of Selosse, Ulysse Collin, and Bereche in particular but have enjoyed many of the producers on your initial list.
1 Like
Howard,
You have a lot of questions that will take a great deal of discussion. This could be a 100 page thread to get close to consensus. Look what happens anytime they try to implement classification updates in France. It’s a complicated process with loads of disparate opinions.