Champagne's Gold Standard
By Lyn Farmer


On those rare occasions when consumers ponder Champagne's foundation, many think of great names such as Taittinger, Clicquot, Roederer and Krug. They most likely do not think of the real foundation of the wine, which is Reims and, surrounding it like so many diamonds accenting a necklace, the towns and villages of Champagne. Here is where the wine is really made: in the soil of Aÿ, Sillery, Bouzy, Cramant, Chouilly, Le Mesnil-sur-Oger, Verzenay and others.

These names, unfamiliar to all but the most dedicated Champagne connoisseur, are the villages where the grapes are grown. A select number, just 17, are designated grand cru, much like the Burgundy vineyards of La Tâche, Echézeaux and Chambertin for pinot noir, and Les Grenouilles, Vaudésir and Le Montrachet for chardonnay.

Burgundy is fairly close to Champagne (you can make the trip by bicycle in a leisurely ten days, enjoying a country inn each night along the way, or by car in four hours), but the two regions have different viewpoints. While the Burgundians argue over the worth of every vineyard and splash the designation of grand or premier cru across every bottle of Burgundy that has the right to carry it, the Champenois apply the grand cru designation to entire villages, yet seldom use it on well-heeled bottles of Champagne.

For centuries, certain villages have produced grapes that are significantly better than those grown in other areas. But codifying those differences into an equitable sort of Champagne gold standard is the challenge faced by legislators and vignerons.

The French enacted a rating system in 1927 intended to codify longstanding historical precedent. They updated it in 1985 and still can't agree on what it means. Called the échelle des crus - scale of growths - the system is technical and confusing, designed for the benefit of growers and merchants. For consumers, comprehending its merits is like counting angels on the head of a pin, or bubbles in a Champagne flute - it seems almost pointless. >

Or does it? Today the system rates the wine-growing areas of Champagne on a scale ranging from 80 to 100 percent. Those charged with selling Champagne have recently seized on the numerical aspect of the échelle system to stress relative levels of quality (and justify discrepancies in price). Houses touting the numbers advertise average ratings in excess of 95; one even claims 100. But those numbers represent percentages, not scores on a 100-point rating system. So far, ratings-conscious consumers haven't asked 95 percent of what, but that question can't be far behind.

The "what" in this equation is both price and geography. Think of the percentage categories as being similar to appellations in Burgundy and Bordeaux, with the lowest rank standing at 80 percent. Villages between 80 and 89 percent are referred to simply as crus, which means growths - in this case a wine from a specific area. A group clustered in the 90 to 99 percent range consisting of 40 named villages are designated as premier cru, while 17 villages stand at 100 percent, the equivalent of 24 karat gold, earning grand cru status.

The percentages refer to a complicated system of determining prices merchants paid growers for their grapes so owners of vineyards rated 100 percent received the full amount of the maximum set price for grapes. Those with vineyards rated 95 percent received 95 percent of that maximum price and so on. The system was a recognition that some areas produced grapes that were consistently higher quality and thus in greater demand, thus the échelle was primarily financial in its origins. The practical application was a demarcation of quality.

"It was a good system in 1927," says Claude Taittinger, chairman of his family's esteemed Champagne house. The system, he says, "took into account both the soil characteristics of each village and also the market value, the price levels at which the grapes of these villages were purchased by the Grandes Marques, the biggest and best firms, over a 15- to 20-year period." In effect, the Champenois did in 1927 what the Bordelais had done with their classification in 1855 and let the marketplace set, or at least recognize, the standard for quality.

Daniel Thibaud, chief winemaker at Charles Heidsieck and Piper Heidsieck, says that "The échelle has little bearing on the final quality of Champagne in the bottle. The system gives an indication of grape quality, but the important elements that determine the quality of a Champagne are threefold: grape quality, the vinification process and the blend," he asserts.

Fréderic Panaïotis, winemaker and one of several enologists at Veuve Clicquot, argues that the échelle system really just codified what had been in place for centuries anyway. "Champagne houses have always bought grapes from the best villages at a much higher price than in the less-renowned areas." In other words, quality and price still come down to location.

"It is beautiful country," says Hervé Deschamps, winemaker at Perrier-Jouët. "It looks peaceful, but there is much going on in the soil in those small villages." Indeed, Champagne is bucolic and deceptively placid, but packed with as much diversity as any viticultural region in the world. The échelle system ranks more than 300 separate crus in at least as many villages, some relatively large like Aÿ, some tiny like the 18-hectare Tuilsieux, all fanning out from Reims. (Ninety minutes east of Paris by car, Reims is about the same distance from Paris as Napa Valley is from San Francisco.)

Reims is a beautiful city in a slightly staid sort of way, as if aware of the pleasure it gives the world, but maintaining a discreet reserve nonetheless.

A commercial center, it is not itself a significant vineyard area. But in this region, all vines lead to Reims, where most, though by no means all, of the grandes marques have their headquarters. Fifteen miles south of Reims and spanning the Marne River lies Épernay, arguably Champagne's second most important town and, clustered around it, the three most important vineyard areas.

To reach Épernay from Reims, one passes through the wooded and optimistically named Montagne de Reims, which barely reaches an elevation of 1,000 feet. Thanks to warm air rising from the valley below, even finicky pinot noir ripens in many years, and earlier-ripening pinot meunier is grown for the measure of fruit and fullness it brings to the blend. Wines from Bouzy, Verzenay and the other villages of the Montagne give power and aromatic balance to Champagne.

The Marne Valley stretches westward from Épernay, a sizeable area increasingly planted to chardonnay, but still widely planted to the two pinots. Just across the Marne from Aÿ and still only 15 miles from Reims, lies the source of the region's best chardonnay, the Côtes des Blancs and a string of 100 percent-rated villages including Cramant and Avize that form a chain a scant 13 miles long, terminating at Vertus.

Champagne's wine country does not end in Vertus, however. There are more than 31,000 hectares (in excess of 75,000 acres) of planted vineyards in Champagne, of which only 3,000 hectares are in the 17 villages ranked grand cru. The premiers crus account for another 6,500 hectares, leaving a good deal of arable land. One such area is called Aube, near the town of Troyes, 60 miles south of Reims. Today its wines are admired, but it was ignored in the 1927 classification, in part because of politics, but primarily out of logistical concerns.

According to Claude Taittinger, when the villages were classified, "the grapes were transported in horse carts and, consequently, the négociants preferred the vines that were closest to the pressing centers around Reims and Épernay for their purchases." Aube, the Sézannais and a few other areas were just too far away to be economically viable sources for the big firms, but now, thanks to modern transportation, are becoming increasingly popular with a number of houses, especially as foundation fruit for non-vintage blends.

Geography is just one contentious element in Champagne's ranking system. "A lot of things have changed since 1927," allows Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon, winemaker at Louis Roederer. "For the most part, the rootstocks, the grape variety and the clones are not the same, and the growers have changed, too."

Clicquot's Panaïotis thinks that while change has come, the system's essential purpose remains the same. "Certainly technology has changed, but I think it has changed evenly across the industry - better control of fermentation, the use of stainless steel tanks instead of concrete or enameled tanks to allow better temperature control, better hygiene in the wineries and much better techniques in the vineyard." Pommery Winemaker Thierry Gasco agrees: "The rating system is still applicable because the advances in agriculture and technology served the whole vineyard of Champagne."

Taittinger steers a middle course. "We attach some importance to the classification of vineyards without, however, considering it as the Bible." He further notes that while the classification of vineyards is important, there is more to wine than the place the grapes were grown. "The ways the grapes were harvested and sorted, the age of the vines, the choice of the clones are of considerable importance."

In fact, there are so many variables going into a glass of Champagne, it would seem logical that soil and climate alone, the only factors represented in the échelle system, cannot really be a guarantee of quality nearly a century later. And yet, says Panaïotis, "The value of the scale system is, overall, still excellent. When tasting the base wines in our various blending sessions, we 'verify' it regularly. The extensive program of reserve wines that our winery has developed also gives plenty of proof: the reserve wines which age the longest are almost always grands crus, and to a lesser degree premiers crus. And this holds true for any vintage."

Age worthiness is important because vintage-dated wines must spend a minimum of three years aging in the bottle before release, while non-vintage cuvées are required to spend only 15 months. In fact, the best houses far exceed these legal minimums; it is not unusual for some to hold non-vintage wines for three or four years and vintage wines for five to eight years in the limestone caves of Reims and Épernay before sending them to market.

In the past, age worthiness was considered an attribute of chardonnay and pinot noir, and this was reflected in the focus on those two varieties when the échelle was created. Pinot meunier was considered a workhorse grape that filled out blends with body if not finesse. Easier to grow than pinot noir, it was a reliable grape that matured quickly in the bottle, making it an important component in non-vintage cuvées. Today pinot meunier accounts for nearly 35 percent of the vineyards in the region, making it a close second to pinot noir's 38 percent.

The village of Pierry, on the outskirts of Épernay, is noted for its pinot meunier. It's a case study that makes a good example of the lack of precision in the échelle. "The pinot meunier from there is wonderful," says Fabrice Rosset, managing director of Champagne Deutz. "It is a major factor in our blends, especially when pinot meunier is used for vintage-dated cuvées that must have more aging potential." Yet the village, rated 90 percent, is just barely a premier cru.

To interpret the percentage ratings as scores makes the system too specific. "The rating is just a scale to establish the price," says Winemaker Henri Krug, who together with his brother, Rémi, runs the house of Krug. "It is true that, without the highest-rated growths, I could not produce Krug Champagne. But it is also true that without grapes coming from less-highly rated growths I could not achieve the Krug style, either."

Krug seeks nuance within a particular village.

"A growth or cru in Champagne is, geographically speaking, very wide," he says. "It covers sometimes over 100 or 150 hectares, or more. All the vines within the same village will be rated at the same level, but there are micro-territories better than others. This is why I always try to know the farmers in order to get grapes from a specific area within the growth." His approach applies to both high-rated and lower-rated vineyards. "What matters," he emphasizes, "is the quality of grapes considering the style of Champagne you are looking to produce."

To the makers of Champagne, style is much more important than ratings. For Krug, that means using chardonnay, pinot noir and pinot meunier in all of its wines but the Clos du Mesnil.

But improving the blend by the addition of pinot meunier compromises a wine's rating. "In the old days, it seems no pinot meunier terroir was rated above 90 percent," Deutz's Rosset says. That meant it would technically lower the average rating of a blend, and some houses wouldn't use it in their better Champagnes. "Now it can be grand cru and a lot is being planted in Sillery, which is rated 100 percent," Rosset reports.

"Like our friends at Krug, we use pinot meunier in many of our cuvées, not just our non-vintage Brut Classic," Rosset says. "Cuvée William Deutz has, year in and year out, 10 to 15 percent pinot meunier. What we particularly like about the pinot meunier from Pierry is that it is a 'firm' wine, by which I mean it has backbone. It is not too aromatic and has no weakness in the milieu de bouche (the mid-palate), which we sense halfway through the exercise of chewing the wine during its assessment. These are qualities that not all pinot meunier [wines] would offer even if they undergo the malolactic fermentation," he explains. "So for our sense of Deutz style, the pinot meunier from Pierry is an absolute necessity - for all our cuvées - and above all for the Cuvée William Deutz."

Claude Taittinger believes "pinot meunier is an indispensable quality factor for a Champagne. It guarantees a certain average quality to the blends, while chardonnay has large year-to-year variations, depending on the amount of sunshine." Then again, Taittinger only employs pinot meunier in its non-vintage blends.

"The rating system for pinot meunier is not so much an issue anymore," says Pommery's Gasco. "Ten years ago, through the private purchase contracts, the houses stopped giving more bonuses to chardonnay and pinot noir." By so doing, pinot meunier gained some ground, to be judged solely on quality regardless of its place on the échelle.

Deutz's luxury cuvées, Cuvée William and the blanc de blancs called Amour de Deutz, both carry average ratings of 99 to 100 percent. However, Rosset is not married to the vineyard ratings.

"When the time comes for blending, even if we use more or less the same 'recipe,' from year to year, what counts is the intrinsic quality of each and every component," he says. "They're tasted blind and if something is missing, in a luxury cuvée or the non-vintage Brut Classic, then Winemaker Odilon de Varine and I will seek wines from terroirs other than our traditional sources." Rosset is not alone in arguing that the success of a blend is in the glass, not on the rating scale.

"The rating system was established to classify the vineyards and help set prices," Pommery's Gasco says, "but before the rating system, the quality vineyards were already well known. Madame Pommery purchased great vineyards in 1865 to ensure a regular supply of quality grapes." Pommery's luxury Cuvée Louise is still made solely from three of the grand cru vineyards Madame Pommery purchased. "We consistently find that grands crus produce wines that age longer," Gasco says. Pommery's vintage Champagne now carries the designation grand cru reflecting the origins of the grapes in the blend.

"Our Brut Millésime [vintage] blend is made only from grapes coming from our own grand cru vineyards," Gasco says, but can come from any of the properties owned by the house. "The Cuvée Louise, the Pommery luxury cuvée, always comes from just three specific grand cru vineyards. This gives us a consistent blend, and guarantees a long possibility of bottle aging. For a non-vintage, the process is different because you put on the market a matured wine with less potential for aging. To find a good balance, you need to blend wines coming from different regions, different grape varieties and different échelle ratings."

The Pommery style emphasizes fruit and an elegant style that some would consider light, compared, say, to the more muscular style of Krug vintage. That is partly because Krug barrel ferments its wines, while Pommery's are fermented in steel tanks, but it also reflects the style of the grapes. "Equivalent ratings, whether 100 percent or lower, do not produce the same style and are very different from one another," Henri Krug says. "Talking only about 100 percent-rated vineyards, we cannot compare grapes from Verzy in the Montagne de Reims with a northeast exposure, to grapes from Aÿ on the Marne River, or from Avize in the white district. They are all three very exceptional [wines], but vary in style. It would be like comparing Picasso, Cézanne and Monet."

Moët & Chandon Winemaker Benoit Gouez points out that these differences are difficult to pin down. "Top-rated vineyards, mainly grands crus, are known not only for quality, but for their personality," he says. "They always have a reserve of expression and character, especially in the difficult or selective years. Obviously, the difference is not as high in the good years where almost every cru performs well."

Moët now offers Champagne lovers the unique opportunity to sample single village-single varietal wines with its release this year of an intriguing collection called La Trilogie des Grands Crus. The trio of Champagnes, made solely from chardonnay, pinot noir and pinot meunier, respectively, embody the character of a single vineyard within a different grand cru village. The provenance of the wines are symbolic of Moët's rich history, in that each was made from vineyards acquired by founder Jean-Rémy Moët between 1798 and 1807.

Though none of the three wines shows the balance achieved in a masterful blend, they do offer a sense of village and varietal personality.

It is that personality, evident vintage after vintage, that made these top-rated areas of Champagne desirable long before the échelle confirmed their quality. Take, for example, Clicquot's luxury cuvée La Grande Dame, made from eight vineyards purchased by Madame Clicquot in the 19th century. Today Panaïotis relies on these vineyards out of both sentiment and tradition, but mainly because of Madame Clicquot's insight. She bought vineyards that were consistent performers, and more than a century later, her judgment was confirmed when all her vineyard holdings were ranked among those classified as grands crus.

Three of these grand cru are located in the Côtes des Blancs and provide chardonnay. The five remaining vineyards are all pinot noir from both the northern and southern parts of the Montagne de Reims, as well as the Grande Vallée de la Marne. "Blending pinot noir from the northern part and the southern part is very important because they are very different in style," Panaïotis explains, "The northern wines are very steely, firm and refined, while the southern wines are bigger, fleshier, more structured. So in a cooler vintage we might use more southern wines from Bouzy, Ambonnay and Aÿ, whereas in a warmer vintage, Verzenay and Verzy will bring the necessary freshness to get a perfect balance."

Balance is, indeed, the key, and this test of the winemaker's art is made necessary by the vagaries of nature. "In Champagne, it is complicated because the most famous brands elaborate, or create, a consistent blend of different crus," Roederer's Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon explains. "We believe that the complexity of our Champagne comes from this blend of different origins.

"We could not make Roederer as it is today without our grands crus," Lécaillon asserts. But he chooses carefully among many wines to attain the qualities he wants. "There are differences between different blocks of the same cru and between crus even at 100 percent. We vinify every block in small, 100-hectoliter tanks (about 2,600 gallons) so we keep them separated for better selection when we blend."

Each house has favorite villages and vineyards that have contributed over the years to the house style. For Lécaillon, Roederer is intimately linked to Avize. "It is elegant, round and very well-balanced. We do like it a lot." Chouilly, in contrast, is "very mature, heavy, round with strong typicity that can unbalance a wine. We use it in small proportions to keep finesse in our blends," including Roederer's Blanc de Blancs and vintage cuvées.

Another chardonnay in considerable demand among the grandes marques is from Le Mesnil, which Lécaillon says is "very aristocratic - long, elegant and powerful, but a bit acidic. We use it as much as we can to impart elegance and aging potential," though, of course, too much would create a one-dimensional wine. An exception is the famous (and famously rare) Clos du Mesnil, a single, 4.2-acre vineyard wholly owned by Krug. Emphasizing Lécaillon's point about acidity and ageability, Krug has just released the 1988 Clos du Mesnil, and it is nowhere near maturity even now.

Each house selects the wines that match its style, though the marketplace determines availability as well. "Most of the vineyards [owned by the houses] are located in highly rated places," Henri Krug notes. "Those vineyards were acquired a very long time ago, some when the houses were founded. Additionally, the houses buy grapes from various rated growths according to their need for the style of their blends. Because, in general, Champagne houses own few vineyards in the lower-rated places, they probably buy more grapes from those places to achieve the style and quality they are looking for."

Grand cru vineyards represent only about ten percent of the vineyards in Champagne, but are responsible for much of the region's cachet. "It is important for the houses to own vines in the grands crus because it is quite difficult to find new contracts in these areas," explains Perrier-Jouët's Hervé Deschamps. For Perrier-Jouët and Mumm (both of which are owned by Allied Domecq), 43 percent of their grapes come from grands crus. But because their styles differ, Perrier-Jouët and Mumm often buy from different areas. "Perrier-Jouët owns quite a bit of vineyard in the Vallée de la Marne and in Mailly north of Montagne de Reims," Deschamps notes, but Mumm, which has a bigger, more muscular style, has vineyard holdings in Bouzy and Ambonnay in the southern part of the Montagne de Reims.

The major houses often sign long-term contracts with independent growers to ensure a constant supply of grapes that will contribute to their style. What remains is human skill. "The differences of quality from one wine to another," Pommery's Gasco says, "remain in the winemaking of each enologist and in the secret of the blend."

"I can't drink an analysis report or a blending recipe," Moët's Gouez asserts. "Figures are cold and will never reflect the depth and complexity of great wines. Winemaking in Champagne is about blending; that is the heart of our process, and it needs sensitivity and vision. Formulas don't fit great wines."

Though the échelle system is ostensibly based on geography, as Henri Krug noted, it is important to consider geography within a cru as much as which village the grapes come from.

Known for making particularly long-lived wines at Charles Heidsieck, Daniel Thibaud divides each village into myriad delineations. "The échelle is really a general picture of the overall quality of grapes found in the different areas and crus of the Champagne region. In reality, selection comes down to the geographical position of a given vineyard within a cru. But the échelle only treats the grape itself, not the must [pressed juice] obtained from the grapes." It is important, he stresses, to consider other forces as well, like the weather. " So many external factors influence the quality of the grapes, wherever they are situated on the échelle. Hail can destroy all the potential of a 100 percent-rated cru, for example. Man's intervention and the quality of his work on the vines can also upset the échelle."

Thibaud argues he is a winemaker and not a grape grower, so he prefers to buy most of his grapes from carefully selected growers with whom he has long-term relationships. At Louis Roederer, Lécaillon prefers to have more direct control. Roederer has a policy of owning a minimum of two-thirds of its grapes. "We will never purchase more than one-third of our needs," he says. "It is not linked to the rating, but to the control - in terms of quality - of our grape; this control enables us to have some old vines, to prune as we like, and eventually do some crop thinning." He undertook a "green harvest" on more than 85 hectares in 2001. "There is a risk of lower crop yield," he admits, "but we take it to make better wines. We believe that the challenge of the coming years is in the vineyard, trying to make better quality grapes with a high respect for our soils, our terroirs and of the environment."

Thus, the échelle highlights areas of the highest potential quality, but it is still up to the Champagne makers to assure that quality is realized.

The bottom line in Champagne is that, from first bubble to last, the proof of all the efforts in the vineyard and the winery rests in the glass, not in a legal or financial system that attempts to codify quality. Charles Heidsieck's Thibaud believes the échelle has little bearing on the final quality of Champagne. "Consistency and quality matter, and these come from the winemaker's ability to adapt to what nature has given and [his knowledge] of how wines evolve," he explains. "All wines bring different elements to the blend, whatever their rating."

Henri Krug believes vineyard ratings are important, but there is a limit. Whether the average rating of a wine is 92 percent or 100 percent, what is most important is the choice of grapes to achieve a certain style. All the great houses rely on vineyards rated 90 percent and above, not so much for the ratings as for the quality of the grapes and what vinous alchemy a skilled winemaker can perform with them. Grand cru wines can be stunning but, "rating is not essential," Krug says. "Human expertise, skill and careful choice makes the difference" between Champagne that simply fizzes and Champagne that truly sparkles. Numbers are optional.

Our desire to affix ratings to villages, much like our propensity to score wines, may make it easier for the consumer to relate to what's in the bottle, but in Champagne, making good wine is still a partnership between man and nature and can never be expressed solely on a scale of 1 to 100.

Tasting Bar

Nearly every winemaker in Champagne makes the point that his non-vintage wine is the most challenging product he makes and offers the greatest test of the blender's art. But because the goal of a non-vintage blend is to maintain a certain consistency and house style, many may offer confirmation of blending skill, but demonstrate little to the casual taster about the components from which it is made.

After tasting dozens of wines for this exploration of the villages of Champagne, it is clear that houses are drawn to specific villages for the qualities they offer and the roles they play in fleshing out a house style. The tasting notes that follow represent a sampling of houses, styles and, most of all, nuances that mark the diversity of Champagne. The wines, therefore, were not scored.

Charles Heidsieck, NV Mis en Cave 1996 - $40: Medium-straw color, very small bead and heady, yeasty aromas of fresh-cut apple, steely minerals and hints of hazelnut and almond. The Champagne has considerable body, but the crisp acidity imparts a clean feeling on the palate. Fresh, crisp flavors of biscuit, yeast and citrus, with the citrus lingering on the long finish. Nicely balanced.

Deutz, 1995 Cuvée William Deutz - $115: Pretty pale gold color with lemon highlights; very active small bubbles. Heady bouquet of toast and grilled nuts (a good sense of autolysis, the aroma of aged Champagne). Lemon, candied citrus peel (especially lime) and toffee in the mouth, but very fresh with a spiciness attributed to the pinot meunier component. Very fresh, crisp and elegant, the wine has real grand cru style, combining body with lightness. This wine will profit from more bottle age but is already notably elegant.

Krug, Multi-Vintage Grand Cuvée - $150: Pale gold-bronze color, with immaculate, fine bubbles that contribute to a creamy texture. Full, toasty aromas of orange peel and grilled nuts that carry through to the palate. Richly textured with a creamy consistency and concentrated body and flavors. A lovely hazelnut flavor develops on the long finish. This wine illustrates the limits of the échelle system, for its maker relied in part on wines that fall outside the 99 to 100 percent-rated villages, including 15 percent or more pinot meunier. Krug's Multi-Vintage has always been the classic example of why Champagne is blended: it has an incredible depth of complexity that is thoroughly captivating and is one of Champagne's most consistent performers.

Louis Roederer, 1994 Brut - $55: Medium-straw color, with small bubbles and good activity. A mouth-filling wine with terrific balance and a clean, ripe, red fruit nose with hints of apple, blackberry and toasted brioche. Roederer owns 200 hectares with an average rating of 98 percent, and that breed shows in the elegance of this blend; what also shows is the emphasis the house places on older vines. The Avize chardonnay so favored by Roederer is evidenced here in the lovely apple and brioche aromas and flavors; the pinot noir and extended bottle age contribute toffee and almond notes. Rich with a very long finish; quite crisp at the end.

Moët & Chandon, La Trilogie des Grands Crus, NV - ($250 per three-pack): A series of single-varietal, single-village wines that highlight three grand cru sites, all purchased by Jean-Rémy Moët between 1798 and 1807. The success of the venture is not in the individual bottles, but in what they offer in the chance to taste unblended varietal flavors. The pinot meunier from Sillery has a medium-straw color with gold overtones, and medium bubbles with a good mousse. It is the most intriguing of the group for its scarcity, and attractive in its hints of spice, firm red fruit flavors, crisp acidity and a beguiling sweetness. The pinot noir from Aÿ is yellow-straw in color with medium bubbles, and shows spice aromas, as well as a stony, mineral flavor and hints of red fruit that balance on the long finish. The chardonnay from Chouilly is steely and unyielding with hints of lemon, citrus peel and an intriguing, creamy consistency. In Champagne, chardonnay needs considerable age (generally more than the red grapes), and this wine should open nicely over time. Right now, it is not the equal of a great blanc de blancs (which, after all, may blend chardonnay from several areas), but clearly shows the considerable structure of grands crus vineyards.

Mumm de Cramant, NV - $55: A most unusual wine in that it is, in fact, from a single vintage, but to maintain its fresh, youthful character, it is aged two rather than the three years legally mandated for a wine carrying a vintage date. The wine is pale-straw in color with lemon highlights, medium bubbles and an active mousse. An ideal apéritif wine: crisp and very elegant with a lovely citrus note that wafts through the wine from the nose to the long, pleasing finish. Winemaker Dominique Demarville notes that "Cramant, which is the sole source of grapes for this wine, is very different from Avize, and while Cramant wines can age, we selected (for a fresh, youthful style) emphasizing finesse, elegance and freshness with delicate power on the palate." Because all the grapes come from the 100 percent-rated village of Cramant, the wine is technically a grand cru, though like the vintage date, the designation does not appear on the label.

Perrier-Jouët, 1993 Fleur de Champagne, Blanc de Blancs - $165: The only blanc de blancs ever produced by Perrier-Jouët comes from Les Bourrons-Leroy, a 100 percent-rated single village in the Côtes des Blancs. Pale yellow-straw in color with very active, fine bubbles. Elegant aromas reminiscent of Meursault: lemon, minerals and hazelnut. Still youthful in its crisp fruit, it also has gained some of the complexity of age and could evolve further over the next year or two. Quite dry, the wine has an entrancingly long finish. This is a superior effort that gives clear testimony to the elegant power of chardonnay and the superiority of its provenance.

Pommery, 1995 Grand Cru - $50: A relatively rare example of a wine made solely from grand cru villages rated 100 percent, but not positioned as a luxury cuvée. It has the light, elegant Pommery style without sacrificing any dimension or structure. Medium-straw color with very active, medium bubbles. Lemon and lime notes define the bouquet with a spice component in the mouth, good, crisp acidity and a long, elegant finish. A wine that confirms the sense of personality some winemakers attribute to grand cru wines.

Taittinger, 1995 Brut - $50: Medium-straw color, very fine, active bubbles. In marked contrast to the house's all-chardonnay luxury cuvée, this wine contains 55 percent pinot noir, much of it drawn from the premiers crus vineyards of Hautvillers (93 percent) and Pierry (90 percent). It is its chardonnay, however, that speaks most forcefully, giving the wine lovely citrus and grilled nut qualities often found in a well-made Meursault. A long finish with a persistent lemon quality. Very elegant with food. (Taittinger's affinity for chardonnay is evident both in the glass and in the vineyard: Chardonnay accounts for less than 30 percent of the vines planted in Champagne, yet 40 percent of Taittinger's holdings are in chardonnay. The just-released 1996 is still a bit tight, but also is a more intense wine that with more age should be absolutely stunning.)

Veuve Clicquot, 1993 La Grande Dame - $150: This celebrated luxury cuvée is made from the grapes of eight vineyards, all purchased by Madame Clicquot and all rated 100 percent many years after she purchased them. This wine reflects a slightly tight presentation, due to the fact that 1993 was a relatively light vintage. Fine straw-yellow color, very bright with a tiny bead. Lovely notes of citrus, good weight and spicy flavors from the pinot noir in this full-bodied wine. An exceptionally long finish shows the wine's great breed. The just-released 1995 La Grande Dame ($150) is quite tight, but has considerable finesse and will evolve into an even more explosive wine than the 1993. Tasting the Clicquot Vintage 1995 ($68) alongside the Grande Dame, the extra level of finesse and complexity is apparent from grand cru vineyards in the luxury cuvée. Winemaker Fréderic Panaïotis notes that "the art of blending excellent base wines is more important than a soulless blend of 100 percent base wines that were vinified carelessly." La Grande Dame is a clear statement of the blender's art.

Senior Editor Lyn Farmer produces a daily radio program on wine, and is the restaurant critic for the South Florida Sun-Sentinel.



Article first published in The Wine News