How to learn Champagne

WINE TALK
21

No worries! I’ve relatively recently ”found” this producer and was wondering if there was indeed something made besides the three wines I know of. I’ve had the NV and Perle and enjoy the style a lot. Have some 2016 Cramant in the cellar too but am in no rush to open any.

22

A fascinating area that seemingly spent more time in the last 100 years on marketing than mapping out great vineyards (they could have used some Burgundian Monks 500 years ago, and skipped the Parisian trash dump)). Counter intuitive to think this is an “up and coming” region, but I think it is. The best growers (big and small) seem to be pushing viticulture and site like never before. Ulysse Collin is in Congy. His wines are amazing. Several more from the Aube as mentioned above, Prevost in Gueux, the list goes on. None of these are Grand Cru or even Premier Cru. Roederer seems to have adapted the grower approach, as nearly all of their vineyards are biodynamic (a costly approach they probably did not have to do, but the wines are better than ever).

Just keep drinking (the FMIII approach) best way to learn (several good books too).

1 Like
23

i think you’re underestimating how much you know about other wine regions and the amount of effort to acquire that knowledge (decades?) and applying it to champagne, which is inherently more (the most?) opaque region re: vintage, blends, vineyards, etc… especially coming from burgundy. when you add in the very dynamic nature of modern champagne, it’s even more difficult.

i suppose reading more would help with geography and other similar elements, but time / effort is what’s necessary.

1 Like
24

this.

25

I’m not sure it is ultimately worth the effort to learn specific geography, vineyards, etc at this point in my life because Champagne appears to be the least hidebound even if it is the most opaque region. So many changes, so many variables vintage to vintage, assemblage to assemblage, especially with growers. Ultimately, it comes down to trial and error as Alan wrote. Knowing vineyard specifics may be interesting, but Champagne is (the most?) inherently manipulated wine style that I know of. To get a leg up on deciding which wines to try and make errors with, I’m relying on expert palates and knowledge more than I have for 25 years. I’m pretty sure that if John Gilman and William Kelley are bullish on a Champagne, I’ll like it enough to try a bottle or two. So I’m taking the lazy way out; others can do the legwork and distill the important information so that it is useful to me. Obviously, YMMV.

1 Like
26

If you know the producer, you know 95% of what you need to know.

1 Like
27
  1. Champagne is huge - it’s the size of Luxembourg. It has least 3 commonly grown grapes and, as more growers experiment, even more grapes. It has markedly different terroirs (given the size) and more technical differences between makers. Lots of reasons for champagne to be very hard to “understand”, I think.
  2. Every time I visit producers my first thought isn’t that “oh, I get this now” but rather that there’s so much that I don’t. That’s as true for in depth visits to Burgundy (which I’ve also been visiting longer) as it is for Champagne. Which makes sense - I don’t make wine and am not doing the work in the vineyards. The more I know the more I realize I don’t.
  3. There’s such a diverse approach to winemaking in champagne. In consecutive days we had a visit at Pierre Peters and Bereche. Both Rodolphe and Rafael are extremely focused on terroir, yet their approaches couldn’t be more different despite that. I don’t have to square their approaches, and neither is more right than the other, but it certainly makes understanding champagne more interesting!

Personally, I just try drinking a lot of it blind and/or trying new things. There’s no substitute at the end of the day.

1 Like
28

First lesson…don’t sell your 2002 DP!

[banhim.gif]

1 Like
29

[rofl.gif]

30

I suppose the inherent complexity of Champagne is the reason the Grand Marques exist. To impose some semblance of order & legibility on a vast, heterogenous wine region. Perhaps you could set yourself a simpler project: to understand the Grand Marques, in much the same way that one might try to understand notable Bordeaux chateaux. The per bottle price might be comparatively high, but I think you’ll have a better chance of getting somewhere in a year or two than if you spend the same amount of money on a greater number of grower bottles

Burgundy and Rhone and Bordeaux and Barolo/Barbaresco etc etc recommendations from here I have found to be wonderfully helpful, but Champagne recommendations have been uniquely… fraught. WB is a great source of factual information, but as far as my tastes go I experience plenty of duds for every hit, and every individual’s tastes seem to vary greatly. Even worse, I might dislike a certain cuvee from a producer and later on find out I really love another, which complicates the exploration. Just have to keep sampling I guess

31

hahah. Got more than what I’m selling but thanks.

32

Knowing what I like through trial and error is enough for me.

Though attending La Fete du Champagne couldn’t hurt and is always fun.

33

producer producer producer seems more apt than anything in champagne since style is more impactful than whatever “terroir” there might be.

34

I agree with the producer comments. I sincerely doubt there’s ever going to be a real chance to be able to identify a vineyard blind in champagne.

Learning to identify a producers traits would certainly be possible though. Even that I have trouble with though as the growers are just doing so many wines these days. Which of course is part of what makes it so exciting as it’s a new adventure in every bottle.

As an example I’ve had great experiences with Les Crayeres vineyard, but I can’t identify the commonality between the wines besides that the grapes are obviously incredible. The producers working with the grapes are great so I expect and generally get good outcomes. I’ve never opened 3 bottles of champagne at once but that would sure make for a fun evening.

2 Likes
35

Have you reached out to Chris Piti for advice?

36

no idea who that is.

37

I grew up Champagne-wise on Dom, Salon, Krug, Clos des Goisses, Cristal. It’s only been the last couple years that I’ve broadened my range. Being burgundy-focused, where it’s all about terroir though producer often trumps, I trying to apply that focus on Champagne. Guess it doesn’t work.

38

Hopefully he will take Piti on your lack of Champagne knowledge!

39

But wouldn’t you have a good framework + reference points from all that time spent drinking those champagnes? It seems like you’d be able to place any new growers/cuvees in that framework and evaluate accordingly…

40