Last night I was very happy to host a fellow wine blogger (Torsten from Winerambler) and my old chum ‘The Kid’ Peter for a Riesling and Pinot Noir-themed tasting. We drank copiously and terribly well. The wines were served blind which heightened our critical faculties. Even the English wine was good (immensely unbelievable as that sounds).

Classic Cuvee 2003, Nyetimber
Wow, this smells like proper fizz and it is English, I’m staggered. It has pronounced mushroomy and toasty characters. Wow, its not immediately horrible and vapid. There is plenty of ripe fruit on the nose, which edges toward being very slightly over-mature, but that is 2003 for you, even in Blighty it seems. There is a reasonable degree of class to this; it may not be the most riotously complex of sparkling wine noses but there is more than enough to keep the fizz-lover interested. And it is an English wine that doesn’t smell thin and insipid, my mind is spinning! The mousse seems reasonably refined and there is some tasty fruit on the palate. I like its acidity, pretty well balanced and certainly keeping this fresh. The finish is remarkably long, with a pleasing array of vibrant fruit characters persisting. This is properly good sparkler. Hell’s bells, I just said the extraordinarily improbable statement that an English wine is properly good; are there no certainties left in the world?

Riesling Spatlese Piesporter Goldtropfchen 2003, Reinhold Haart
A tits-out nose of gloriously sun-ripened fruit; this is distinctly exotic but still unmistakably Mosel Riesling. Its pineapple/grapefruit characters could suggest this is a Scheurebe, but it seems more like very ripe Riesling. Not over-ripe, but attractively voluptuous. The palate is a little short on acidity, but it has completely lovely fruit and an appealing sweetness. There is some prominent minerality showing here as well, and it is quite stylish, this was grown in a top vineyard. This is one of the best examples of 2003 German Riesling I’ve had, it is pretty balanced, has well-defined fruit and a quite grown-up vineyard character. Good stuff, thanks Torsten.

Riesling Grand Cru Sommerberg ‘D’ Vendanges Tardives 2005, Albert Boxler
This nose has real VT character, candied fruit and manifest power. It is also incredibly mineral but this character shows itself with a lot of finesse. It is almost surprising that a wine this big can display such elegant and beautiful minerality. It is a wonderful nose that would tweak the lewd bits of any lover of fine things. The palate also has late harvest power, but as it commits frankly debauched acts in your mouth the balance is never less than faultless. Its acidity is searing and stomach slashing (ouch, ouch, ooooowwww… I’ll need the Gaviscon soon enough), there are dumper-truck loads of candied citrus fruit and the minerality is spell-binding. It is not the scale or power that make me love this wine, and I love it oh so much, it is the harmony and panache which so many Alsace VTs just don’t seem to manage. My last bottle of this tremendously fine wine, alas.

Auxey-Duresses Premier Cru 2006, Comte Armand
Now this smells like proper Burgundy, it has inviting dark fruit and a powerful earthiness. There is some power to this nose, but it is not in any way overblown or overly focussed on muscle. This is the nose of Pinot from the correct place, alright; there is charm, class and complexity on show. The palate also has power and a rather rigorous tannic structure, it is a tad on the tough side but has more than enough dark, ripe fruit to keep the balance satisfactory. This makes me think that the clout this wine has is quite finely honed and I think it would be a good wine to age. When trying this blind I thought this was a good Nuits-Saint-Georges Premier Cru, which shows it has some pretentions to style and quality. I should have got this right. I love Comte Armand wines and have tried far too many so I feel I could recognise the winemakers finger-prints all over it. It is a sad day when I cannot spot Comte Armand wines, when the label was revealed I felt a smidgen of exasperation at my failure.

Vosne-Romanee Premier Cru les Suchots 2006, Domaine Confuron-Cotetidot
This smells breathtakingly beautiful. Its pure expression of complex, exotic fruit really warps my mind to its way of thinking, and this nose thinks it wants to mesmerise and captivate. Sure there is a good mineral character, but that enthralling fruit is what does it for me, an enchanting expression of Vosne. Oh bums, after that nose I feel a tad disappointed by the palate. The tannins have more than a suggestion of being significantly daunting and together with its far from reserved acidity they make the palate seem somewhat stiff and demanding. There is a lot of fruit there as well, and it is charm-tastic, lovely-licious fruit, but it is not quite in balance with the brutalist tannic structure. Its powerful earthiness is very convincing and really persists on what is a very long and multifaceted finish. There are many things to like about this wine, but ultimately it just falls a bit short of the mark.

Pinot Noir ‘Sangreal’ 2006, By Farr
There is more than a suggestion of stemminess on this nose, along with serious earthy power and plenty of really scrumptious fruit. Authentic complexity is present and I am rather compelled; if this was not one of my offerings I’d say after smelling this it was a genuinely good offering from the Cote de Nuits. The palate bursts with lots more of that scrumptious fruit which sits in appetizing harmony with a finely-wrought tannic structure and succulent acidity. That stemmy character is also present on the palate and I feel this, along with its intense earthiness, really add to the complexity. This is the best Australian Pinot Noir I’ve had since the brilliant and refined Mac Forbes wines. Top stuff, Mr Farr.

Riesling Auslese Goldkapsel Brauneberger Juffer-Sonnenuhr 1997, Fritz Haag
By all that is evil and malevolent this nose is stunning. It has definite traces of maturity, but the fruit is pulsing with excitement and vivacity. Super citrus action which you know is going to taste luminously lively. The powerful slate character is also persuades me that this is a wine of stylish class and refined sophistication. Yeah, this is a penetratingly compelling nose and no messing around. It tastes staggeringly acidic, but lovely, animated, energetic acidity which just makes makes my drool flow and draws me in to drink more and more. The slate minerality shows multifarious levels of captivating character which meld intricately with the acidity and enchanting, exquisite fruit to produce an utterly brilliant, breathtaking buccal experience. The enthralling harmony of this salaciously complex and indecently elegant wine blows my mind in an outlandish maelstrom of aesthetic ecstasy. We are lucky when we get to drink wines this good; I feel lucky. But then I also feel absolutely deserving and unreservedly worthy of such delights. Hooray for Riesling, Pinot Noir and all who love them!

Daniel's mother is visiting and we have opened a really good bottle of fizz. To be honest, I'm quite surprised how totally fantastic it is.

Vintage Champagne 1996, Alfred Gratien
This has a powerful cocoa nose, but there is a lot of sophisticated fruit there as well. This certainly smells big, but there is some real complexity and style to it. There are shades of maturity but still full of life. The Bollinger 96 the other day was much more mature, and much less beguilling than this. The palate has a nervy tension between power and beauty. Like an Italian sports car, this throbs with energy but still remains sleek. Real complexity and length. Drinking extraordinarily well now but unlike the Bollinger there is absolutely no rush to drink, it'll be a brilliant star of livid intensity for years to come. A top bottle of fizz.

Today marks the eighth anniversary of the partner and I moving in together; eight wild but happy years. Seems a good excuse for fine Champagne.

Grand Annee Brut 1996, Bollinger
There is a lot of cold cocoa on the nose, hints of meat and digestive biscuits as well. It is a big, powerful nose with a lot of depth and definite signs of maturity, but not really terribly fruity. The palate is weighty and dense, a real mouth-filler. Incredible acidity, though, and the mousse is nice and fine. Serious length. This is a very good bottle of Champagne which I think it is time to drink. And now I’ll go drink and enjoy it with the partner rather than write any more.

Right, I’ve felt the need to add another word. This is perfectly mature in the sense of drinking over the next 2 years or so, it really doesn’t need any more time. I mean this seriously, Tully, don’t just keep yours until it falls apart, as you seem to have a TVD-esque penchant to do. You don’t need much of an excuse to open fizz, everyone loves it especially when it is as good as this.

Sorry to my international reader, but these Champagnes seemed such bargains I had to alert my UK reader.

Cedric Bouchard has made some of the best Champagnes I’ve had. Inflorescence was amazing, I was stunned by its complexity and purity of expression. It cheered me up no end when I was ludicrously insane. I had Les Ursules for the second time last weekend and it was mind-expandingly good (especially after a shit meal). I can think of few Champagnes that are better than those two, but they are all much more expensive. Both of these wines can be purchased from Vine Trail at prices that redefine the word ‘bargain’. You want to hit their site and buy these wines as soon as possible*.

There are flasher things from M. Bouchard, and it turns out you can pick them up at The Sampler in Islington here in London. If you go here and scroll down to ‘Roses de Jeanne’ you will see some really quality kit.

La Boloree is a single vineyard Pinot Blanc from the great 2005 vintage. It must be the most expensive Pinot Blanc ever made and sold. All who try it say it needs time but is an amazing wine. I’d love to try it.

La Haute Lemblee is a tad more of a conventional blanc des blancs Champagne being made from pure Chardonnay, again from the 2005 vintage. Once again, this gets rave reviews. I will buy two bottles, one to try and one to age. The top geezer Jeremy wants me to score him a bottle as well so save three for us will you?

The Inflorescence ‘La Parcelle’ 2002 vintage can also be purchased from Berry Bros for a few quid less. I’d love to have a bottle of this, I am sure 2002 will be a great vintage and I want to age a wine which I think will deliver incredible pleasure in the future.

The only Cedric Bouchard/Roses de Jeanne wines I have had have been blanc des noirs, which is an incredibly rare wine style. This strikes me as a bit of a shame as those few I’ve been lucky enough to try (largely Bollinger Vieilles-Vignes Francais, which I admit is a rather flash) have been great; a style I have really enjoyed. Pinot Noir is just such a great grape even when it is white and fizzy.

*I should say I report on the wines from this merchant only after I have secured some, the partner having purchased three bottles of each for me as a chrimbo present. He loves me so much. They also sell the wonderful Mourvedre-tastic Collioure Clos du Moulin from Domaine du Mas Blanc which is a must buy whenever one sees it.

On our jaunt into the provinces we stayed at Cheltenham’s Hotel du Vin. They had this wine (and Inflorescence) on their wine list for a very reasonable price. It was amazingly brilliant.

Champagne les Ursules Blanc de Noirs ‘Roses de Jeanne’, Cedric Bouchard
The nose has an incredibly livid expression of fruit, lovely pear fruit we feel. It is powerful, stony and dense, but compelling, thrilling and vivacious. Smells fantastic, a very vinous and complex Champagne that has a depth of character rarely associated with fizz. It is extremely elegant for a wine so packed with stuffing. The mousse is totally fine, not as fizzy as Champagne usually is. The mouthfeel is polished and classy, with incredible complexity to back up its charming side. There is so much to this, it is a truly, amazingly, penetratingly good bottle of Champagne. Daniel tells me it is one of the best bottles of fizz, and certainly best value, he has ever had.

M. Bouchard says he does not really like making sparkling wine, bit of a drag inheriting Champagne vineyards then. He wants to start making more and more Coteaux Champenois still wines. Bonkers, I tell you, totally bonkers. When someone makes as good fizz as this he should not be messing around with weirdy still wines.

I got this to celebrate the partner's return to London after two weeks away. He says, "If this is what you opened you cannot be too ecstatic to see me." I am ecstatic to see him, but this wine is piss boring.

Champagne Brut Grand Cru Blanc de Blancs Presidence 2002 Vieilles Vignes, R & L Legras
Bit bready and yeasty on the nose, with hints of... erm... I am not sure there are any hints of anything else. This smells fresh, and that is about it. By arse I am freaking bored to tears smelling this. Some character would be nice. The palate is watery and insipid. This must be called 'Presidence' because it is as short as Sarkozy. I'd like to rant semi-coherently about this having no redeeming features, but it just has no features at all. Avoid.

I’ve been wanting to try this wine for a while, so lunch with my friends seemed like a good time to pop one. The more I think back about this wine the more I worry about the dosage. At the time I thought it worked so maybe I should not be concerned.

Champagne Coeur de Cuvee 1996, Vilmart
Really quite impressively oaky on the nose. It is very biscuitty too. There are properly complex aromas here. Now this is a tasty palate, super fruit and just great complexity. Is the dosage a tad high? No, it works well with the fruit and oak. And oak there is on the finish, I can almost feel the need to pluck splinters out. It is really long. Superb. Excellent. Wonderful.

I’ve raved about Inflorescence from this producer, this is an even grander wine. Once again is is a single vineyard wine, fermented to a low pressure, etc.

Champagne les Ursules Blanc de Noirs Roses de Jeanne, Cedric Bouchard
An earthy, rich, bready nose which is totally refined and lovely. The fruit is brilliant, as is the minerality. Yum! The palate is incredible: powerful, dense, stylish and super-classy. This is knockers wine triple plus.

I really like Jacquesson , they have improved greatly in recent years. The Avize Grand Cru is an amazing vintage fizz. This is a bit more ‘basic’, but it is not terribly basic.

Champagne Brut Cuvee 732, Jacquesson
A fresh, lively nose of bright, crisp fruit. Lots of apples are there, lovely English apples. I suppose this is a French wine, but those apples are Granny Smith’s (who wasn’t allowed to sell her apples until her daughter gave birth) rather than Golden (not very) Delicious. There is some biscuitty complexity present as well, which is very pleasing. The palate also has a lot of that bright, crisp apple fruit to it. It has a lovely mousse and just bursts with life. This is a really enjoyable drink, has perked me up no end. Serious pleasure in a bottle.

Yesterday we were at Lord’s having a whale of a time watching England thrash the West Indies by ten wickets. Ha! We drank some good wine. We started off with a bottle of Gosset Grande Reserve which was totally lovely: weighty, dense and stylish. It had deposited more tartarate crystals than any bottle of fizz I had ever seen. I don’t mind this in the slightest, shows the wine hasn’t been mucked around with.

After lunch we popped a bottle of Morey Saint Denis 2004 from Domaine Dujac. My long-time reader may recall this was one of my candidates for the best village level Burgundy in my poll. I didn’t vote for it at the time, but after trying the 04 I feel I should have done; it was bloody marvellous. Great fruit, silky tannins, perfectly balanced acidity. A really serious village-level wine that delivered an incredible amount of pleasure. We both kept saying how much we were enjoying it. Peter, you were absolutely right, Dujac Morey provides so much happiness. It has done in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Well done the boys and girls at Dujac!

Another bottle of 2002 fizz, better (and less painful) than the Gimonnet, I am pleased to report. Years ago we went to a very unsatisfying tasting at Roederer and this is the first bottle of their wine I have purchased since then. I got this to celebrate eight years of the partner living in the UK (OK, and also because I wanted to try another 2002).

Vintage Champagne 2002, Louis Roederer
It is quite bready and yeasty. There is an odd coconut character to the nose which is not as unattractive as it sounds. It seems fresh and lively when you smell it, as well it should only being seven years old. The palate has a fine mousse, some reasonable fruit and pretty good length. There is a degree of complexity, as well. This is a perfectly reasonable bottle of fizz with nice flavours and good balance, but I find myself being less thrilled drinking this than, say, the Inflorescence, which had the advantage of being cheaper. It is good enough to celebrate a happy event, though.

I purchased this bottle for the partner, because I lost a bet. I bet the partner a bottle of wine that when I was locked up the NHS would cock-up getting me to psychotherapy. A good bet, I thought, but I lost. This, we are told, is pure Pinot Noir from a 1.49ha vineyard which produces 8900 bottles per year. It is secondarily fermented to a low pressure (4 Bar) and has no dosage.

Champagne Blanc de Noirs Brut 'Inflorescence', Jean-Pierre Bouchard (aka Roses de Jeanne)
By arse, this has an amazing nose. I don't quite know how to describe it, but I am smitten. Buttered ciabatta, possibly, or something Pinot Gris-like? There is much in the way of fruit there. It really smells like a deep, intense and complex wine, rather than a just another bottle of fizz. I mean, tits, man! This is ace! (Not ace-hole.) The palate is really great. Dense and complex, powerful and weighty but absolutely refined and balanced. It is truly excellent. The light, refined, fine mousse seems of almost secondary importance, which is odd for fizz, so stylish and god-damned pleasing is its powerful vinous character. That top geezer Jeremy told me about this, a top recommendation. I'll recommend it when I am feeling together enough for more wine recommendations. It is a freaking triple-A bottle of wine; I want more. And I am pleased to report it is better and cheaper than Egly-Ouriet's Blanc de Noirs.

There have been many heated satellite connections between here and Burgundy on the subject of Salon's cellaring potential. I think the Jury is out until a tasting at the producer can be organised, but this is really up for drinking. It is quite, quite lovely.

Blanc des Blancs Le Mesnil 1996, Salon
A lovely nose of buttered bread and creamy minerality. This is fresh and lively, but the aromas to seem the merest hint on the oxidative side (is that 'brown' verses 'grey' aromas?). I cannot deny it is really complex, vinous and very compelling. The palate is very vinous too, like a Grand Cru Chablis of quite mind-buggering brilliance that has the most refined of mousses. It is totally pleasing Champagne, with surprising density and thrilling complexity for a Blanc des Blancs. Why risk ageing it? This is currently delivering extraordinary pleasure. I'll open mine soon.

Some may disagree, but I prefer Krug.

I wonder if the 1996s will have the longevity I orginally expected. I've got some great stuff, that I don't want to get over the hill, but properly mature Champagne is a marvel.

Guest blogger, and winemaker par excellence, Jeremy Seysses reports on his recent trip to Champagne.

A few weeks ago, Diana and I joined Etienne de Montille and Christy Canterbury for a few days of tasting Pinot and Chardonnay, but with bubbles in it. We pooled resources together, compromised on the long list of places we wanted to visit and finally agreed on a shorter list, but were still too ambitious to achieve anything like punctuality. Fortunately, the Champenois were incredibly gracious about our tardiness. We were joined by friend and wine writer Peter Liem, whose blog, mostly about Champagne, is a very good read: www.peterliem.com

If one agrees that the center of the world is located somewhere near Morey St Denis and Nuits St Georges, then driving to Reims is easy, you pretty much just head north for a little over 3 hours. Diana and I rose before the crack of dawn, bright eyed and bushy tailed and hit the road, waving at Troyes and the Aube part of Champagne as we whizzed by and made it to Craon de Ludes for our 10 o’clock appointment at Berèche.

Raphael Berèche is a member of the young movers and shakers of the area. After a few years of experimenting, he is moving the estate increasingly towards biodynamics. In the winemaking, he adopts a similarly natural approach without letting things go weird. He was one of the few places we visited who uses natural yeasts, for instance. We first tasted through the 2008 vins tranquilles. I must confess that based on my previous experience of this exercise, I was expecting acidic pain and misery. No so. These were certainly acidic, but with body and reminiscent of very good pre-malo burgundy in a number of instances. It was easy enough to relate to them. My personal standouts were the 2 components of the future cuvée “Instant”, which will be pure Ludes 1er Cru wine, as well as the single vineyard Chardonnay “Beaux Regards”, but all were excellent and set a standard that was hard to beat. With bubbles, favorites were the Beaux Regards (pure 2005 vintage) and the Extra-Brut for which we tried two different bottlings. The first was based on 2004 and the next, to be released soon was based on 2005. It is an austere, mineral, long wine, with lots of drive and energy. There is a hint of reduction on the Berèche wines which I find very appealing, but more on that topic later. The 2002 vintage wine, with citrus notes and aromatic herbs, was delicious. The Reflet d’Antan, a cuvée perpétuelle or solera raised in large barrels, is spectacularly complex, with quince, cinnamon, nutmeg, anis and pear notes, but is more oxidative and less my style ultimately. I have high hopes The Sorting Table will soon be importing these wines into the US.

Raphael invited us to a tasty lunch at le Foch in Reims and we arrived a mere hour late in Ambonnay at Henri Billiot. Monsieur Billiot was very genial about our tardiness and amenable to fast tasting, skipping winery and facilities visit. Stepping by his grand-daughters Barbie castle/shrine, we sat ourselves at the tasting table and tried the range of wines with the exception of Cuvée Julie. Henri Billiot is a straightforward man. If you ask him why he forgoes malo or uses a particular method, the reason is usually “because I like it that way” or alternatively “because I don’t like it otherwise”. The wines are much in his image. They probably felt a little more rustic following lunch, but were solid, straightforward wines, not flattered by the tiny glasses from which we tasted. The standout for me was very much the vintage 2002. The Cuvée Laetitia, another cuvée perpétuelle from best vintages (18 in it so far) left me a little baffled. Vanilla, biscuits and citrus: attractive aromas, but with this recently disgorged bottle a bit broad and high in dosage for my palate.

Our next appointment was with Laurent Champs of Champagne Vilmart, in Rilly-la-Montagne. Quite a contrast with Billiot, there is nothing rustic about the polished operation that is Vilmart. This had some of the feel that Berèche might possibly have in another 20 years attitude-wise (I doubt the wines will ever have much in common). Laurent Champs clearly experimented at one point and his ambition is palpable, but where Berèche is in a phase of aggressive experimentation and searching, Vilmart gives the impression of being where it wants to be. Conclusions have been reached and fewer questions are being asked. The Vilmart style is clearly not for everyone, demanding a tolerance for oakiness as everything goes through foudre or barrel. The style is somewhat reductive, which lends a toasted bread quality to many of the wines, aromas that converge with oak aromas. I was a fan of the Grand Cellier N.V., the fine mousse of this wine delights me and I love it with a couple of years on it. The Grand Cellier d’Or 2002 was closed, but I liked its toasty chocolaty-ness and thought it had potential. Usually a fan of the Coeur de Cuvée, I liked the 2000 less, finding it a little low in acidity and with a few oxidative aromas. The Cuvée Création 1999, the last release of this wine, was a spectacular display of exotic fruits, with a very long, mineral, vibrant, energetic palate and lots of extract. It is a head turner. An interesting fact about Vilmart is that there wines are Chardonnay dominated in an area best known for Pinot noir.

It was dark and cold when we finally rolled into the courtyard of Krug. We were greeted by one of Olivier Krug’s assistants, Julie, whom I strongly suspect of having “I love Krug” tattooed in crimson red somewhere under her skin. Talking about the “emotion of Krug” and “the Krug way” (Krugdo in Japanese), we froze our buns through the impressive stacks of empty barrels used for fermentation (they are full for only 3 months of the year – amazing!) and the cellar. The cellar was full of bottles, mostly of Krug. We tasted three different wines. The Grande Cuvée was attractively complex, with a fine mousse, spice, cinnamon and baked apples. The Krug wines are distinctly on the oxidation side of the spectrum, and I admit to favoring the more reductive school of Champagne. The wines don’t taste oaky, but taste of going through barrel, or rather have that sort of austere drying texture. The 1998 vintage showed some of the extremes of the vintage, with very high acidity but also ripe fruit in the form of dried apricots on the nose, real finesse and some hints of mushrooms. It is the first Krug to have a majority of Chardonnay. The 1996 vintage doesn’t taste any older, just different, with more lemon and orange fruit and lots of acidity of a more austere inherent nature. It is more saline and savory, and quite a beast.

Hungry and tired, we were ready for some red wine. Dinner at les Berceaux was good, but foolishly ordering Côteaux Champenois 2003 did not do it on the red wine front. We had to leave it till the next day though.

----------------------------------------------

On our second morning, we headed to the birthplace of Champagne, the Abbaye d’Hautvillers, where Dom Pérignon is said to have stumbled across invented secondary fermentation. Now as a small wine producer, I have an inherent distrust of large houses and there are none larger than LVMH, who own the place and the iconic brand that is Dom Pérignon. Wording this next sentence is difficult, and I want it to come out right. There is something hugely satisfying about having ones prejudices validated. Richard Geoffroy denied me this pleasure, instead replacing it with an absurdly good line up of wines served by a white gloved sommelier in a monastic white-walled 30m long room in the Abbaye. The only thing one might have criticized was the perhaps over the top white gloves, but really… The 2000 vintage of DP and DP Rosé were really delicious. The “normal” DP had just a hint of reduction that I loved. Richard Geoffroy touched on the topic of grey flavors (= associated with reduction) vs. brown flavors (oxidation) and you can read an interesting summary here http://www.peterliem.com/2008/11/grey-somber-characters.html While Geoffroy associates coffee, toast and chocolate with grey rather than brown, the shorthand is convenient. I’m a grey flavor guy. The Oenothèque 1995 was a model of toasty, creamy complexity. Toast and cream were recurrent descriptors. The 1995, poor thing, was blown away by the sneak preview into the Oenothèque 1996, which was all focused harmony and length, with some toasted almonds. I’m getting thirsty and hungry just thinking back to it. The texture was silky and sexy. A pity that buying some will cost me an internal organ, but I may still give in. Where does one go from there? The answer was provided swiftly in the form of Oenothèque 1975; Wow that wine is good! Toast, maybe even a little petrol, followed by brioche, apricots and iodine, a micro bubbled mousse, it was dreamy. What next? Ahh, a magnum of 1966 Oenothèque, of course! Unfortunately, this last one proved to be lightly corked. The palate said something about the fact that this is probably a truly great wine, but once I spot TCA, I have a hard time ignoring it, so I returned to the other wines and drank them as fast as I could before they were taken away admired them thoughtfully. The 1999 DP served over lunch was good, but a notch down from the 2000 or any of the Oenothèque wines, but I am now a fan of Dom Pérignon, much to my dismay.

This of course made us late for our tasting at René Geoffroy where Jean-Baptiste Geoffroy took us through his full range of 2008 vins tranquilles and the current releases. Our second Geoffroy of the day was a model of enthusiasm and energy, running us up and down his new winery in Ay. His 2008s were universally excellent, with my standouts being the Empreinte, Vintage 2008 and Rosé de Saignée, an interesting blend of 60% Pinot noir and 40% Chardonnay grapes macerated together for 60 hours before being pressed. It should make a stellar rosé. In bottle, I found the wines a little coarse bubble-wise, but I found this to be somewhat universal of these post lunch tastings, so perhaps I was more sensitive to it in my digestive state… My obvious standout for the bottled wines was the Vintage 2000, quite Krug in style, firm, powerful, austere, very mineral and complex. The other wines were attractive, but did not instantly resonate with me.

------------------------------------------------

Looking more bushy eyed and bright tailed than the reverse, we began the day in Cramant at Diebolt-Vallois. This perked us up no end. An impressive lineup of 2008 vins tranquilles, including the components of what should be a marvelous Fleur de Passion, was followed by an extraordinary tasting of wines in bottle. Beginning with the Cuvée Prestige, a round, creamy Blanc de Blanc, with aromas of toast and brioche, we moved straight into the big boy wines with the Fleur de Passion 2000. Surprisingly for a wine made of pure Chardonnay, the wine had real red fruit aromas, especially wild strawberry, but it was also very floral and fine, in need of time to reveal itself more. The logical follow up to this wine was to see a mature example, such as say 1976 Blanc de Blanc the Fleur de Passion cuvée did not exist back then. Hurray! Lovely aromas of lime blossoms, almonds, honey and brioche, and remarkably fresh, this was an incredible wine that made us into real Diebolt fans. The irrepressible Jacques Diebolt, though, was not about to stop there and disgorged a bottle of the legendary 1953 on the spot. Legendary is fitting for that wine, which was certainly one of the great Champagnes and wines I have had the privilege to taste. Complex, fresh, fine and long, it had all the attributes of greatness in scores and was the inspiration behind the cuvée Fleur de Passion, which marked a return to barrel fermentation and no-malo. My mouth is watering just thinking back to that wine. I was scolded by my travel companions and Mr. Diebolt for having foolishly planned another appointment that morning, with his daughter’s companion no less.

We reluctantly dragged ourselves out of the cellar and headed to Mareuil and the house of Jean-Paul Hébrart. He kindly spared us a tasting of the full line up, concentrating on a selection of his top wines and some really impressive vins tranquilles from 2008, which promises to be a truly great vintage. I found the Special Club wines very good, but a little high in dosage for my taste, something that might not be an issue with age. I truly loved his Rosé, a charming, elegant and fresh wine with lots of fruit. I intend to drink lots of it as soon as the sun comes out.

It was high time and even possibly past time for lunch. La Table Kobus, in Epernay, welcomed us with a smile and wonderful attitude and amazed us by having a bring Your Own Bottle policy right in the heart of a wine region. This allowed for Christy to whip out the bottle of Mondavi Cabernet Reserve 1976 that she always carries in her purse for such occasions. It was a brilliant example of what made Mondavi’s reputation in their heyday and satisfied our longing for red wine. Incidentally, the food was good too.

Post lunch, we visited Champagne Jean Milan, where we were received by the delightful daughter of Mr. Milan. I must learn to never schedule tastings after lunch… As on previous days, many of the wines appeared to be rather coarse mousse-wise, and fairly inexpressive aromatically. That said, I suspect many of them to have been disgorged very recently too, hence their bubbly vigor. I personally enjoyed the Brut Special, with its low dosage, and good clean clear personality. The Brut Millénaire, which is the same wine with another year prior to disgorgement and higher dosage, may well be better most years, but currently, with its base of 2003 and 2004, it is less compelling than the 2004/2005 blend making up the Brut Special. My standout was the Cuvée Symphorine 2004, fresh, crisp and long, with a lot of green apple flavors. I ultimately liked it better than the dramatic Terres de Noel 2004. Full of spices, nutmeg cinnamon and apple pie, it appeared a little ponderous to me on this occasion. The Réserve and Grande Réserve wines were very good, but on this occasion did not capture my imagination. I fully intend to revisit Milan again in future as I do feel that the taster may have been the one guilty, rather than the wines.

Back to le Mesnil for our final tasting, we rolled an hour late into the Champagne Pierre Peters where the very kind Madame Diot, Rodolphe Peters’ secretary, was waiting for us. An employee of some 38 years, this is the third generation of Peters she works for. This is the kind of person who somehow still smiles as you show up an hour late on a Friday night. The wines were smiling too. There are few non-vintage wines that can compete with Pierre Peters Brut de Réserve. Made from a blend of 15 vintages and a 100% Grand Cru Blanc de Blanc, this wine is pure class and charm. This depth in reserve wines is clearly part of this Domaine’s strength and a source of consistency. I can’t imagine that there are many growers with such stocks. The 2002 Vintage was predictably tight and youthful, reassuringly so. It should be great in time. We also tried a bottle of the 1998 Vintage, which has some of the characteristic toast and ripe fruit of the vintage, underlined by sharp minerality and acidity. The 2000 Cuvée Spéciale “les Chétillons” (formerly known as just “Cuvée Spéciale”) is rich, with a very elegant hint of bitterness and tannin. This wine borders on heavy, but should be great in time. The 1996 Cuvée Spéciale, kindly left for us to try by Mr. Peters was a model of exuberant freshness, combining youth, intensity and light-footedness. It was creamy and lovely and I wish I had some in my cellar. I must confess to stocking up on Pierre Peters. The magnums of Brut Réserve are one wine I want to keep a slowly rolling stock of in the cellar at all times. Testing the suspension of our little Audi, we hit the road back to Nuits St. Georges and had to take a full 36hrs off of Champagne before opening our next bottle…

For some reason (not, I hope, being paranoid schizophrenic) I have come to the conclusion that 2002 is going to be the next proper Champagne vintage after 1996. I didn't like the 1997s, the 1998s didn't do it for me (even Pol!) and whilst Bolly 1999 was reasonably good it was hardly a thrill. So what caused this idea? I am not sure, I am yet to have a 2002 Champagne until about... now!

Champagne Blanc de Blancs Premier Cru 'Fleuron' 2002, Pierre Gimonnet
Quite a nice nose of ripe fruit, but it is not particularly sophisticated or thrilling. I suppose there is a nice stoniness to the fruit on the nose. The palate has some good fruit, but is a bit harsh and rough. It is freaking acidic too and really quite short and light. This is merely a reasonable drink, it by no means justifies my faith in the vintage. Whilst not sub-interested I have to say I don't really like it very much. Bums.

The quantity of Gaviscon I've had to neck to deal with the pain caused by this wine is quite amazing.

1996 was such a great vintage in Champagne. All that acidity which causes so many problems in wines from other regions really works a treat here.

Grand Millesime 1996, Gosset
This still smells quite youthful, lots of fruit here. It also has a toasty character and more than a hint of cold cocoa. There is a real intensity to the nose, very vivacious. The palate is incredibly intense; massive acidity, great fruit, density of flavour and a really exciting texture to it. Bags of complexity, this is properly classy Champagne, alright. I bloody love this, will age for years to come.

This is a really good NV fizz, like the Cuvee 728 I feel this will age over a period of time.

Champagne Cuvee 732, Jacquesson
A really lovely bready, biscuitty nose. It has both fresh fruit and maturity. There is some real complexity showing here. The palate has a beguiling array of flavours: fruit, mushrooms, fresh bread, minerality; this is all just lovely. It is very long and has a really nice mousse. This is a top bunny bottle of NV fizz, and it doesn't cost that much either.

Drank at Lord's whilst watching the cricket. This is a non-vintage, zero-dosage Champagne.

Champagne Pure, Pol Roger
Nice fruit on the nose, reasonably biscuitty. This smells like standard Pol Roger, and that is no bad thing. The palate is really rather acidic and direct, it bloody well hurt my poor stomach. Nice fruit, though, and a good, fine mousse. Reasonably long persistence of flavours on the palate, too, but the acidity dose dominate and this is just a bit too linear. For all of its style, I'd like a touch more weight and fat to the palate. Don't get me wrong, this is a nice NV fizz, but I prefer the standard Pol.

I hosted a wine tasting last night, people didn't get as many right as I had hoped. Mind you, tasting Champagne is always really foxy, especially when, like these wines, they had a bit of cellar age on them. I had aged all three for three and a half years since I purchased them. The Cornas were both damned good.

Champagne Grand Siecle, Larent-Perrier
A lovely, polished complex nose, smells a bit of fishy Pinot and tinny, but mainly rich, complex, stylish aromas. This is a lot better than when it was fresh from the shelf. The palate was very complex and smooth, with a fine mousse and a good, long finish. This was quite delicious, well worth the £35 it cost.

Champagne Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru Brut, Billecart-Salmon
Quite anonymous on the nose. There is not much there apart from a bit of egg and toast. Age has made this less expressive; weird. The palate was very direct and linear, with a good creamy minerality and lots of nice fruit on the finish. However, it was a touch direct. I found it a bit hard work on the old stomach for not much reward.

Champagne Blanc de Noirs Grand Cru, Egly-Ouriet
Oh this is so difficult. Really hard. You see, the thing is every Egly-Ouriet wine I've had I've hated so I have sort of decided I hate Egly-Ouriet, yet this wine was truly excellent. It had a dense nose of red fruit and rich soiliness. Yet it still seemed very light and refined on the nose. Lovely complex flavours here. The palate had real weight, plenty of fruit, but great acidity and vivacity. The finish had a touch of meat about it, but the acidity and minerality were also present making this a lively, exciting wine. I am sure a bit of age helped it. This was quite delicious. Shame the wine is so expensive these days. Still, the only Egly-Ouriet wine I can recommend (up until now).

Cornas 1998, Clape
A lovely, herbal, meaty nose which strangely has a hint of arseholes about it. There is a hint of greenness, but loads and loads of lovely ripe fruit. A good grind of pepper is in there. It is extremely complex and not lacking any style. The palate has a huge tannic structure, interlaced with herbal pepperiness and masses of dark fruit. Very complex, but a tad angular. Great length, with real complexity on the finish. Quite delicious.

Cornas "Domaine de Rochepertuis" 1998, Jean Lionnet
Wow, what a nose! Silky, sexy ripe fruit, earth, pepper and bags of class. This smells polished and hedonistic. Real class here, and yet it is very Cornas. The palate has a lot of tannin, but it is very ripe and integrates with the bags of lovely, lovely fruit very well. Many flavours seemlessly play across your palate as you taste this. Not as angular as the Clape, but I suppose some pedants may not find this Cornasy enough. Excellent, up for drinking now over the next seven years.

It had been playing on my mind as to which Cornas would be better. Votes at the tasting were two each leaving me with the deciding vote. I have to say I lean toward the Lionnet. It just has a bit more class and style. Don't get me wrong I loved the Clape and thought it worth every penny, but the Lionnet is just a bit sexier. Half the price, too, not that these things matter so much on Elitist Review...

Now I am going to be rude and turn my attention from the neighbours in order to write a quick note on this wine. It has been sitting in my cellar for just over three years as I thought, when I tried it on release, that it was interesting enough to do the experiment.

Champagne Cuvee 728, Jacquesson
Very mushroomy and biscuitty on the nose, some reasonable complexity of aromas here. Nice mousse, reasonably refined, with good flavours of toastiness and buttery fruit. Quite what buttery fruit is I don't know, but that is what it tastes like. Good length, good style too. This has not only lasted for three years but has improved. Top NV fizz!

I tried this at the London Wine and Spirit's Trade Fair last year, I was impressed. I am pleased the partner has purchased a few bottles. Bit pricy, mind.

2003 by Bollinger
This smells extremely fruity and very vinous, far more like wine than most Champagnes. It is dense, full-bodied and meaty, with plenty of Bollinger cold cocoa. It is quite oaky, too, but by no means excessively so. It has a very full-bodied palate, but with fine acidity and plenty of fruit. Again the palate is very wine-y. It is quite delicious, in a big, fruity, oaky way, but it still has a really fine mousse and exceptional balance. This is a really fine Champagne, amazing that Bollinger could make something so good in 2003. Not for ageing, though, drink now with a degree of confusion, as this is so characterful, but a lot of pleasure.

I've got to add to this note. This wine is bonkers, really characterful and full of flavour, style and extract, but it is damned good. I don't feel ashamed of saying this wine is wanton in its exuberance, yet has real beauty. The mousse is properly fine and the acidity is so present it hurts my fragile stomach. But, I have to emphasise, this wine is crazy, really tits out for not only the boys but the girls who like that kind of thing, too. Not for ageing, by any means, but the extreme pleasure I am getting from this wine demonstrates its ultimate fine-ness. This is far more characterful than even the 1996, and is probably as good if you drink it now. I really love it, crazy for sure, but completely wonderful. Well done Daniel for buying three bottles of this.

This wine came in distinctly silly packaging, but after the successes of some recent 1996 fizz I thought it would be a suitably grand and celebratory wine to pop at midnight. All I can say is it is not worth the sponds.

Champagne Grande Cuvee 1996, Billecart-Salmon
Ripe apples, cold cocoa and hints of coffee on the nose, this smells indistinguishable from their Cuvee Nicholas-Francois 1996. Still, it is quite complex and seems relatively open. The palate has frightening amounts of acidity, but loads of apple fruit. There is real complexity here, but no more so than the Cuvee N-F. This is certainly a very nice, complex and stylish  drink, but just not worth over double the price of the Cuvee N-F. I have to say I feel let down by this wine, but sadly it is just too good to rate as 'sub-interest', no matter how inflated an amount I paid for it.

These two wines have sat in my cellar for two years after purchase. I thought I would compare them on some significant event but then, isn't every night with one's friends a significant event?

Z.D. 2001, Green Point
There is some good fruit on the nose, but also something damp and fungal; hints of Chenin Blanc? It smells aged rather than matured. The palate has some dirty fruit as well, and an aggressive acidic character. This has lost the fresh fruit and charm of its youth and now seems rather old and tired.

Champagne Brut Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru, R & L Legras
A lovely, developed, buttery, honeyed nose. This smells like Chablis with extra lemon zest. Mousse is a bit rough, but there is some lovely fruit and minerality there. This seems at a perfect stage of development. It is a bit fizzy, I cannot deny, but for a fifteen quid botte of fizz this has deemed itself worthy of a couple of years in the cellar.

The third year we'll be buying some of this from Italy. The 2005 was very nice last year, how will the 2006 compare?

Moscato d'Asti 2006, Vignaioli di San Stefano
This seems quite a lot riper than the 2005, it seems rounder on the nose. A good rich palate with plenty of glycerol as well as a refreshing sparkle. Very nice fruit. Good length, too, but above all it is really charming. This is clearly a good vintage and we should go for it!

I've been invited out for lunch, and we'll be having some interesting wines.

Champagne Blanc de Blancs Cuvée Centenaire, Alfred Gratien
A nose of ripe lemon fruit and some oak. It smells very much like white Burgundy or Grand Cru Chablis. It has a pleasing minerality to the nose. This smells great. The palate has a lot of lemon fruit and some real acidity, but there is a roundness to it which is really pleasing. This is a great bottle of NV fizz.

Today marks six years since my partner moved to England. I wanted to open something good, but I fear I have fallen slightly below par.

Champagne Brut Chardonnay 1998, Pol Roger
This has a very pure nose of lemon fruit with a hint of minerality. That, sadly, is pretty much it; it really lacks complexity. The palate also has good lemon fruit, some minerality and a hint of weight, but is really quite linear and direct. The acid is too fierce and there is not enough of anything else to balance it out. The mousse is also not as fine as one might hope for from a Pol Roger wine. It is a refreshing drink, with enough fruit and minerality to help one plough through the bottle, but it is sadly not up to the Pol standard. At least it is better than the straight vintage 1998, but I think the Gratien NV Blanc des Blancs I had recently is considerably better than this. It was a lot cheaper, too.

I talked the partner into buying a bottle of this, twenty year old sparkling Vouvray. I told him they can be really good, and well worth the risk of £14 that he might find it too weird to enjoy. Fortunately, it is really good and he loves it.

Vouvray Brut 1987, Huet
Quite a deep yellow colour, but not the orange of old sweet Vouvray. The nose has aromas of ceps and baked apples. It is obviously not Champagne and is distinctly Loire Chenin in character; it has hints of dampness and rotting wood. The palate has a nice weight to it, good concentration and a reasonably fine mousse. There is some mature fruit there as well, much to my surprise. Oddly, there is a hint of tinned peas flavour, which is strangely attractive. Really good length. It is really quite complex and the flavours, whilst odd, are tasty rather than unattractive. This is.. well... can I say 'lovely' about Vouvray? Yes, I damned-well can! This is a bargain for such serious and enjoyable wine.

I've pretty much got all of the 1996 Champagnes I need, especially after this morning's delivery of a bottle of Billecart-Salmon Grande Cuvée. This is a prestige cuvée I've wanted to try for a while, but as this is a 1996 I'll have to wait until I open it. I've only purchased three 1996 prestige cuvées (as they are freaking expensive) and each one has come in over-blown packaging. The Grande Cuvée has a particularly silly 'crocodile-mouth' box:

The first thing I do when I get extraneous packaging like this is throw it away; it certainly doesn't make it to one of my cellars. I can see how the makers want people to think that they are getting something special for their obscene amount of money spent, but surely the wine should be special enough? I'd rather spend a few notes less and just have the bottle of wine.

Ah 1996 Champagnes, such good things. I'll be drinking my small but perfectly composed collection over a very long time. This means I'll have to try some later vintages, hmmmm... I've had Billecart-Salmon Cuvée Nicolas François 1997 and Bollinger Grand Année 1997 and found both to be terribly disappointing; they seemed so forward, mature and lacking rigour. 1998 is more of a 'classic' vintage (although the one I have had was bloody awful); I'll order some Pol Roger.

The buying recommendations are a bit early this month. This is partly because I am bored and stuck in front of the computer whilst the cleaner is working her magic, but also because I feel there is a degree of urgency about getting these wines. 1996 was an exceptional vintage for Champagne; both riper and more acidic than 1990 (which was the previous 'best vintage ever'). The wines burst with luxuriant fruit and fine acidity and will generally age very well. I've rarely enjoyed Champagnes as much as the 1996s I've had, although most of what I have purchased went immediately to my various cellars. The problem is that demand for these wines was so high most of them have now disappeared from wine merchant's shelves and have been replaced by the (much-lesser) following vintages. The five wines I recommend here are ones I have particularly enjoyed that happen to still be available, albeit in limited quantities. I suggest you snap them up and lock them away safely in your cellars; they'll provide a lot of pleasure in years to come.

Champagne Cuvée Sir Winston Churchill 1996, Pol Roger: Quite the best 1996 fizz I've had. A big, bold Pinot dominated wine that is utterly beguiling and really requires at least another five years in the cellar. This is a completely fantastic wine. If you are a member of the Wine Society you can get it there for £90 a bottle (incl. delivery), if you are not a member then Nickolls and Perks have it for £89 a bottle (excl. delivery).

Champagne Clos des Goisses 1996, Philipponnat: This single-vineyard Champagne is really another one for the cellar, they are beautiful when mature. This is quite a big-styled Champagne that is unusually high in alcohol at 13%. Top stuff, though. £75 from Fortnum and Mason.

Champagne Brut Chardonnay 1996, Pol Roger: This is far prettier than the two wines above, and more approachable to drink now. It has very good ripe fruit and a rich, creamy character. It'll also age very well. £48.95 (less if you buy a case) from Berry Brothers and Rudd. It is not 14% as they claim on their website.

Champagne Cuvée Nicolas François Billecart 1996, Billecart-Salmon: Until I had the Churchill, this was the best 1996 Champagne I had tried. I preferred it to Bollinger. It is light-bodied which may make one think it'll drink well young, but really this will improve greatly with age. A note is here. The Wine Society have it for £40 a bottle or you can get it here for £48.72 a bottle.

Champagne vintage 1996, Gratien: A reasonably full-bodied, oaky Champagne that has quite a lot of style and class for the price. A brief note is here. £35 from the Wine Society.

Today marks five years since my partner and I moved in together; a bottle of Champagne seems in order. The wine merchant I got this from claimed on their website and shelf-sticker that this was was an old vines cuvée, yet there is no mention of this on the bottle. Perhaps they are trying to over-sell it. I was not terribly worried when I looked at the bottle as I have had plenty of Legras fizz before and they have generally been acceptable drinks for the money.

Champagne Brut Grand Cru Chouilly Blanc des Blancs 1998, R et L Legras
This smells of lemonade and bread, and that is it. Is there any complexity here? Any style? Any interest? No, it seems incredibly dull. The palate has some harsh acidity and a bit of citrus fruit, but it too is stunningly dull. No minerality, not much fruit, nothing nice, really. I'd be hard-pressed to guess this was Champagne if I were presented it blind so lacking in character is it. This really is wallpaper wine, there is nothing here to grab one's attention and put a smile on one's face. Yawn-a-rama. This merits a 'piss-boring' quality comment. And to think I opened this for a celebration. Oh how I have failed. But not as much as Legras has failed.

New year's eve is unfolding with some top wines. Only Billecart-Salmon NV Blanc de Blancs to come after this and I am afraid I will be too carried away with the mood of new year to write that up after midnight. Keep drinking those fine wines, boys and girls!

Champagne vintage 1985, Krug
When this was opened it had an incredible, and rather surprising, nose of fresh red currants and raspberries. It was nice, but a bit odd. As we are drinking this the nose has shown more mushroom and toast character. It is also quite creamy with honey notes. No hints of oak. It is certainly very complex and very impressive. The mousse is very fine, and there is a lovely acidity to the palate as well keeping this very dense Champagne lively and full of beans. There is a real concentration to the flavours: toast, mushrooms and fruit all bound together in perfect harmony. The finish is extraordinarily long with serious complexity. I was a bit surprised and slightly under-whelmed by this wine when we first opened it, but as it has had some time to breathe this has developed into a truly great and really sexy bottle of Champagne. It has it all: weight and power, refinement and complexity, style and class. Wehay!

This was one of the bottles we picked up on a booze cruise to France. It cost there in euros what it costs here in pounds.

Brut Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru, Billecart-Salmon
A very elegant nose of apples, toast and yeast. There is some minerality there too, so this smells quite complex. The palate is beautiful, with apple fruit, fine acidity and great length. The mousse is very fine. It is light and refined, but not lacking depth of flavour or complexity. This is quite lovely. An excellent non-vintage fizz that is great to drink now, but I am sure will age very well.

I've managed another bottle, even though I thought they'd be no wine until tomorrow. This is really yummy fizz. I still find myself thinking 'Sloo' when I have something tasty even though it is a very long time since I was at primary school.

Champagne Grande Réserve NV, Gosset
This has a very toasty nose that has very strong overtones of cold cocoa. It smells very Pinot influenced. This has a very dense, powerful palate of fruit, toasty flavours and weight. It is really delicious for a non-vintage Champagne, sloo.

This is the second year we've imported some of this via an Italian wine merchant. It is a great summery drink.

Moscato d'Asti 2005, Vignaioli di San Stefano
The nose is really floral and fruity. Yummy yummy, this smells delicious. There is a nice refreshing fizz, good acidity and lots of tasty fruit. The sweetness is perfectly balanced. There is some real depth of character with this 2005 vintage. This is really good Moscato, fizzy, fruity and fun.

This is one of my favourite non-vintage Champagne; it is a bargain when purchased in France.

Champagne Brut NV, Alfred Gratien
The nose is really quite fruity, but some toasty oak is also very noticeable. The palate also has plenty of fruit, good acidity and a finish that leaves you picking oak splinters out of your throat. The oakiness is balanced with the fruit, though, so this is really quite a nice drink.

Another Pierre Gimonnet wine, opened to be drank with roast chicken. It is also a Blanc de Blanc from Cuis. 

Brut Premier Cru Cuis 'Gastronome' 2000, Pierre Gimonnet et fils
A bready, biscuit-y nose. It has some weight and a touch of mineral complexity. The palate also has a degree of weight, but the acidity makes it a touch severe. It certainly has length and quite reasonable complexity. Even though this hurts my stomach a bit, I really quite like it for bargain (€18 in France) Chardonnay-based fizz. It will go well with food. Oh let us be honest it is also pretty good by itself.

What a lovely day it has been in Town! The sun has been shining, there has been a gentle breeze and I have been trying a new Champagne producer. This is his most basic stuff and it is a bargain.

Champagne Brut Cuis Premier Cru, Gimonnet et fils
This smelled very fresh and malic on the nose, there was also a pleasing degree of minerality to it. The palate was very apple-y, a bit angular, but not short on concentration. It was quite nice. Don't get me wrong, it was by no means special, just a good bottle of fizz for €16.

I've really hated every Egly-Ouriet Champagne I've had. This was recommended to me by someone reliable who claimed it was nice and fruity; niceness and fruitiness are characters lacking in their other fizzes I've tried. As it is their most basic cuvée it should have been fooled around with less. It is pure Pinot Meunier.

Brut "Les Vignes de Vrigny", Egly-Ouriet
The nose is bready with some fruit, but it smells pretty confected to me. The palate is short and lacking any form of complexity of favour. It is really one-dimensional and bland. What fruit there is there is strange and confected, nothing nice to report at all. It is very thin and what flavours it has are really actively unpleasant. The finish is seriously disgusting. No way, this is vile to the extent that even my first glass will not be finished.

Today marks five years since my partner moved to England. If view of all of the wonderful times we have had together we decided to celebrate with something damned good.

Champagne Cuvée Nicolas-François 1996, Billecart-Salmon
A luxuriant nose of ripe red apple fruit with the merest hint of cold cocoa. This smells quite youthful and tight, but very elegant and refined. The palate is fiercely acidic, but has plenty of fruit to balance this. It is very ripe, with good concentration, but the balance and refinement of it is simply superb. This is very complex, stylish and intellectual. It also has a great hedonistic streak running right through it. It will age really well. The best 1996 Champagne I have had, quite brilliant.

Today was the fourth anniversary of my partner moving in with me. This is know as the 'flower' or 'fruit' anniversary. We did fruit in the form of a bottle of fizz.

Grande Année 1997, Bollinger
A surprisingly mature and slightly oxidised nose. Some fruit and quite a lot of cold cocoa character. The palate was very forward and not as complex as the last bottle of this I had. Not so much Grand Année as Super Année-uated. This is not a patch on the '96, but when it is being drank for such a happy event I cannot really complain.

The first bottle of Champagne of this new year's evening. The back label helpfully tells us this was disgorged in September 2004 and it has a minimalistic 4g/l dosage. This cost ~€31 and was a bargain at that price

Champagne Avize Grand Cru 1995, Jacquesson et Fils
A lovely, toasty, bready nose. It has plenty of apple fruit and is really pure and elegant. The palate is linear and direct, but has plenty of fruit and sings a deeply charming song. It is very long. It has a fine but lively mousse. The balance is superb and all the flavours are integrated; it lacks the 'face-lifted' character of some RD Champagnes. Up for drinking. And I am deeply up for drinking it. This is a seriously charming and lovely bottle of Champagne, I can think of few bottles at this price that provide so much pleasure. Many thanks to the wonderful partner for providing this.

I spent last night in Whitstable eating oysters and fish. Only one bottle of wine consumed, but it was pretty good.

Champagne Brut Reserve NV, Billecart-Salmon
A toasty, elegant nose. It showed a bit of maturity. The palate also showed a bit of mature complexity, and it really was quite complex for a non-vintage. Good length, nice power but very well balanced. One of my favourite non-vintage Champagnes.

Moving house and being in hospital have kept me away from the internet for a while, but I return with a review of a wine with grand pretensions.

Laurent Perrier la Grande Siecle La Cuvée
I remember having an excellent bottle of this about five years ago; I recall the smoothness of the mousse and the mature softness of it. I picked up another bottle at a bargain price in France (half what it costs in the UK) and tried it again. This is a true multi-vintage wine, made from three good vintages in recent-ish years. I am told the current release is based on 1996, 1993 and 1990 but this could well be wrong. The wine had a mature nose and palate, with a rounded and polished mousse. It was quite silky. Sadly, it appeared to lack much in the way of complexity, and was very short. It had the oddly 'face-lifted' character of Bollinger RD: mature yet fresh and fizzy. I don't like this character. I was not terribly impressed.

I have another bottle that I shall try ageing for a few years, but as far as non-vintage prestige cuvées go I think Gratien Cuvée Paradis is much better. And Krug, obviously.