DiningBuzz! - Champagne

Granted this is a strange date to be posting this, and I honestly hope it doesn't seem churlish, but am I the only person in the world who's sick to death of Champagne?

It's not even the drink itself I mind so much, it's having it thrown in my face everywhere I go, especially whilst travelling. Arrive at a hotel: "Here's your Champagne Sir!" Step onto a boat (whether private or a cruise ship) "Here's your Champagne Sir!" Step into the F cabin on a plane "Here's your Champagne Sir!"

Everywhere, it's a marker for, well, channeling Porgy (or is it Rochester?) "We'z libbin de high life nah!!!" Oh please. Does it occur to everyone that this 'marker' for 'special occasion' loses its value if it's everywhere you turn?

No, I haven't objected at wedding receptions nor will I object tonight. Some places and times it's definitely right. But everywhere always?? Am I really alone in thinking this? I even searched Google for "champagne everywhere you go" and virtually nothing came up except "We don't buy no drinks at the bar; pop champagne cuz we got that dough. -- Trey Songz." Which sort of illustrates my point http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/icon_smile_tongue.gif

Free champagne to those arriving by boat! (http://www.loveriver.org/offers/detail/pissarro_restaurant_-_free_champagne_to_boats_2_course_prosecco_for_18/)

http://thechampagnebus.com/

"You don't just 'turn up' in the sparkling gold metalflake CHAMPAGNE BUS, you ARRIVE!" http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/laugh.gif

Now of course, having posted that I can already hear someone saying, "poor dear, the troubles you have" http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/laugh.gif

I need a drink now http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/icon_smile_tongue.gif

just add some gin.....peps it up!

half the cost of the drink goes into marketing. probably another 10-20% in the packaging.

You must travel in Business/First more often than I do- I'm not tired of it yet and it still feels special to me.

The only time I found it disappointing was at a wedding reception where the glasses of champagne were sitting on the tables as we came in and by the time the bride and groom arrived and we raised our glasses it was close to room temperature and had lost most of its effervescence.

But if it's cold and sparkly, pour me a glass even if it's a 10 AM flight!

Please continue to follow this discussion in the FT Dining Buzz Forum.
Thanks...
Happy New Year!
Obscure2k
TravelBuzz Moderator

Add a little OJ. Viola! Mimosa baby!! Not good enough? Then make yourself a Buck's Fizz......

Used to feel the same way as the OP. Thought it was just a British thing as well.

As I have aged a couple of things have made me appreciate champagne more. I have been able to experience a higher quality. Also, as I get older I feel the need to celebrate more.

Granted this is a strange date to be posting this, and I honestly hope it doesn't seem churlish, but am I the only person in the world who's sick to death of Champagne?

It's not even the drink itself I mind so much, it's having it thrown in my face everywhere I go, especially whilst travelling. Arrive at a hotel: "Here's your Champagne Sir!" Step onto a boat (whether private or a cruise ship) "Here's your Champagne Sir!" Step into the F cabin on a plane "Here's your Champagne Sir!"

Everywhere, it's a marker for, well, channeling Porgy (or is it Rochester?) "We'z libbin de high life nah!!!" Oh please. Does it occur to everyone that this 'marker' for 'special occasion' loses its value if it's everywhere you turn?

No, I haven't objected at wedding receptions nor will I object tonight. Some places and times it's definitely right. But everywhere always?? Am I really alone in thinking this? I even searched Google for "champagne everywhere you go" and virtually nothing came up except "We don't buy no drinks at the bar; pop champagne cuz we got that dough. -- Trey Songz." Which sort of illustrates my point http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/icon_smile_tongue.gif

Free champagne to those arriving by boat! (http://www.loveriver.org/offers/detail/pissarro_restaurant_-_free_champagne_to_boats_2_course_prosecco_for_18/)

http://thechampagnebus.com/

"You don't just 'turn up' in the sparkling gold metalflake CHAMPAGNE BUS, you ARRIVE!" http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/laugh.gif


The trick is simple: don't assume Champagne is only for special occasions.


Much like regular wine, I will never get sick of it.

I really enjoy champagne when the day needs a lift (sometimes starting with breccies) bought off-price and as a rather slightly over-priced every day wine. It's lovely with some large prawns and some sour dough bread. A sort of lift you up tapas.

Offered warm at spasmodic times isn't welcome. I buy the stuff I like when it's on offer and we buy a lot of it and drink it. For example our favourite champagne is Deutz. But it's really expensive so it's the odd special occaision and weddings. But we've been buying Bredon Brut NV Champagne from Waitrose at around £12 a bottle when on offer. It's pretty Deutz like and great value.

Oddly we take some cruises where champagen is free flow all the time. It's crap. We don't bother. We'd prefer the cash to be spent on decent Cava or Prossseco rather than the nastiest champagne known to man.

Yeah, it's like when Lobster is on sale up here for $4 or $5 a lb like it is now. It sucks having it a couple times a week. Sometimes, we'll even have some sparkling wine with it.

To many people, bubbly is an extravagance. Ignore the fact there are some very cheap champagnes, but to some it's like when somebody wears a Tux, it's just so much more formal (even though my suits cost more than the tux did). If it keeps some people happy, it's a good move for whoever is passing it out.

What about those of us who live in France, or indeed the Champagne region of France? It's not exactly super special here. Just a normal bubbly wine. Not expensive either.

Well, I'd imagine you'd be tired of it too. Not necessarily tired of champagne but definitely tired of having it (usually substandard champagne) thrown in your face everywhere you go as though you've suddenly entered the High Life.

It's not exactly super special here. Just a normal bubbly wine. Not expensive either.

That's the problem. It's still nothing near a normal wine here in the US. It's probably ahead of rose's in acceptability, but still most people think of it as an extravagant celebration wine.

That's the problem. It's still nothing near a normal wine here in the US. It's probably ahead of rose's in acceptability, but still most people think of it as an extravagant celebration wine.

Old habits die hard. It has been a celebratory wine here in France for at least 300 years or more. But for us, it doesn't take much of a reason to celebrate. So not that extravagant.

As one who loves VCE , I have grown to love and appreciate Prosecco, even more than champagne.

entered the High Life.

You refer to the Champagne of Beers?

http://www.millerhighlife.com/

As one who loves VCE , I have grown to love and appreciate Prosecco, even more than champagne.

most prosecco served in venice is still wine. it is pretty standard as that inexpensive carafe white in inexpensive(for venice) restaurants. i like it a lot. it is also very low in alcohol, so i can drink an extra glass.

Now of course, having posted that I can already hear someone saying, "poor dear, the troubles you have" http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/laugh.gif

I need a drink now http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/icon_smile_tongue.gif

I've never thought of it the way you posted it in the OP, but I think I agree with you.
Good point(s).

As one who loves VCE , I have grown to love and appreciate Prosecco, even more than champagne.

My sister turned me on to Prosecco a few years back. You can get some really nice bottles for about 50% of the cost of decent champagne!

What about those of us who live in France, or indeed the Champagne region of France? It's not exactly super special here. Just a normal bubbly wine. Not expensive either.

If you need a drink that's more special, try a Burgundy Grand Cru. That will be rare and expensive even in France.

If you need a drink that's more special, try a Burgundy Grand Cru. That will be rare and expensive even in France.

Not true. I live in Burgundy and do not have any trouble accessing Grand Cru wines at a decent price.

The trick is simple: don't assume Champagne is only for special occasions...

In the words of Mme Lily Bollinger~

" I drink it when I'm happy and when I'm sad.
Sometimes I drink it when I'm alone.
When I have company I consider it obligatory.
I trifle with it if I'm not hungry and I drink it when I am.
Otherwise I never touch it, unless I'm thirsty."

Not true. I live in Burgundy and do not have any trouble accessing Grand Cru wines at a decent price.

Depends upon what you consider decent. I would wager that you're not getting Grand Crus from top producers in the Cote de Nuits for under $50 a bottle even right out of the domaines. Probably not too many for under $100 a bottle either. If you really know what you're doing, you can get yourself some of the best 1er Cru wines, from vineyards that abut the best Grand Crus, from top producers, for that $50-100 range (Stuff like a Gevery Chambertin Combe aux Moins, Cazetiers, or Lavaux St, Jacques from either of the LeClerc brothers), or some of the Vosne Romanee Vineyards that abut Richebourg or La Tache, like Suchots

Now $100 a bottle right out of the domain for a Grand Cru Burgundy from a top producer is a more than decent price, relative to what folks pay elsewhere for them. But for the vast majority of people, that's still an extremely high price for a bottle of wine.

My sister turned me on to Prosecco a few years back. You can get some really nice bottles for about 50% of the cost of decent champagne!

After spending a Summer in Venice, I opt for prosecco over champagne whenever possible. Actually, toasted with a bottle of prosecco that I brought back when I proposed to my now wife.

After spending a Summer in Venice, I opt for prosecco over champagne whenever possible. Actually, toasted with a bottle of prosecco that I brought back when I proposed to my now wife.

And let's not forget the delights of a nice cava...but good Champagne still has a different taste that the others lack. I think I'd describe it as yeasty...but not quite.

Off-topic, snarky, and OMNI/PR-esque posts have been deleted. Please stick to the OP's thread-topic, thanks.

cblaisd
Moderator, Dining Buzz

After spending a Summer in Venice, I opt for prosecco over champagne whenever possible. Actually, toasted with a bottle of prosecco that I brought back when I proposed to my now wife.

Nice ^

Depends upon what you consider decent. I would wager that you're not getting Grand Crus from top producers in the Cote de Nuits for under $50 a bottle even right out of the domaines. Probably not too many for under $100 a bottle either. If you really know what you're doing, you can get yourself some of the best 1er Cru wines, from vineyards that abut the best Grand Crus, from top producers, for that $50-100 range (Stuff like a Gevery Chambertin Combe aux Moins, Cazetiers, or Lavaux St, Jacques from either of the LeClerc brothers), or some of the Vosne Romanee Vineyards that abut Richebourg or La Tache, like Suchots

Now $100 a bottle right out of the domain for a Grand Cru Burgundy from a top producer is a more than decent price, relative to what folks pay elsewhere for them. But for the vast majority of people, that's still an extremely high price for a bottle of wine.

Well if you are using $'s, then everything from Europe is ridiculously expensive. But I don't consider €30-ish for a Grand Cru to be expensive at all. And yes, that's what I would and have paid for a good Gevrey C. On the other hand, I generally stick closer to Beaune as it is a much shorter drive for me. There are a few "rock star" wines like Romanee-Conti that are ridiculously overpriced. I obviously stay clear of those. But a Romanee St. Vivant can be had at a good price.

And you know there are Grand Cru white's right? Burgundy has the best white wines in the world. While I usually pay relatively little for those, there is one white I once paid about €100 for.

Lastly there is the Hospice de Beaune auction each year, where you can get the VERY best of Burgundy for around €30 or so a bottle. The only problem is you have to wait over a year to get the wine, then 5 more years minimum to open the bottle.

Nope, not sick of champagne :) now some particular brands I am not especially fond of, but I don't turn my nose up at the proffering of it!

I drink a fair amount of prosecco and cava, especially in summer. There is also a gorgeous pink sparkling from Spain that I bulk buy! I like celebrating the little things on life, and opening a bottle of bubbly with eg Thai take out just makes me smile. So much so I keep my champagne (and prosecco) corks in a huge glass vase fondly known as my 'happy jar'

Regarding Prosecco, Cava and it must be mentioned Crémant de Bourgogne, it is usually best to drink whatever is local, the US being the exception to that rule. So when in Spain I drink Cava, in Italy I drink Prosecco or if in Asti of course I drink Spumante. :)

And here in Burgundy we drink Crémant de Bourgogne much more than Champagne. It's much cheaper and just as good as all but the very high end Champagnes. Also, it is a little known fact that most of the grapes used in the top Champagnes actually come from Burgundy. However Crémant de Bourgogne isn't exported much, except to Holland for some reason. You won't easily find it in the US.

I was in Strasbourg recently and picked up a box of Crémant de Alsace. It's ok, but it tastes quite different as you would expect. I'm not a fan. But some very good Gewürztraminer can be found in Alsace as well as Pinot Gris.

I find Crémant de Bourgogne and Crémant de Limoux fairly often in the US...at least, in decent wine/liquor stores in NYC and Chicago.

I find Crémant de Bourgogne and Crémant de Limoux fairly often in the US...at least, in decent wine/liquor stores in NYC and Chicago.

Thanks for letting me know. I've never seen it in California nor Chicago suburbs. But I haven't looked extensively.

They serve Crémant de Limoux in the KLM lounge at AMS.

we drink a cremant de bourgogne from bailly-lapierre. right decent and right inexpensive. went to a moet tasting a few years ago, and they served a cremant they said was only served in house and not sold.

if the grapes do not come from a speifically defined area, the wine is a cremant, not a champagne.

This is what we drank last night. http://www.vitteaut-alberti.fr/en/wine/pdf/cremant-de-bourgogne-cuvee-speciale-agnes-4.pdf

Excellent for about $10. ^

Not true. I live in Burgundy and do not have any trouble accessing Grand Cru wines at a decent price.

Could I trouble you with naming a few examples...? If you dont mind, approximate price points would also be greatly appreciated. Would a visitor to your area have access to these wines at the same prices...? Please forgive all my questions... thanks !!

Last time I was in Burgundy (2009) the restaurant I dined in (fabulous meal though heavy in the Burgundian style) sold cleanskin Corton from their own vineyard for circa EUR 50 a bottle. Great quality, no doubt in my mind that it was genuine Corton, but not labeled and "sold out the back of a truck" :) . My impression was that this was typical, and how they keep the locals supplied with wine for a fraction of the world price, without compromising the export market prices.

Last time I was in Burgundy (2009) the restaurant I dined in (fabulous meal though heavy in the Burgundian style) sold cleanskin Corton from their own vineyard for circa EUR 50 a bottle. Great quality, no doubt in my mind that it was genuine Corton, but not labeled and "sold out the back of a truck" :) . My impression was that this was typical, and how they keep the locals supplied with wine for a fraction of the world price, without compromising the export market prices.

more likely from one of the growers and custom labeled for the restaurant. although there are many tiny plots in burgundy, most restauranteurs do not have the time to also maintain a vineyard. a number of the growers do also have B&B's i do not know of any who have a grand cru vineyard burgundy and a michelin * restaurant.

Could I trouble you with naming a few examples...? If you dont mind, approximate price points would also be greatly appreciated. Would a visitor to your area have access to these wines at the same prices...? Please forgive all my questions... thanks !!

Many Grand Cru's can be easily found in the €50 range if you buy early. For example I bought a case of 2010 Corton Grand Cru Rouge (Cuvée Charlotte Dumay) from the Hospice de Beaune auction at €53.21 per bottle. I won't actually get the wine til sometime this spring but once it is bottled and put on sale through normal channels it will likely go for over €75 per bottle. And if you happen to see this wine at one of the worlds top restaurants sometime after 2015, it will cost hundreds. The same can be said for the two cases of 2009 Château de Pommard I put on reserve long before it was bottled. It is already going for over €75 per bottle direct from the Château.

But finding Grand Cru's under €40-50 is not easy for the public. You have to know someone, or be in the wine business yourself. Gaucho, as I think you are in the wine business, perhaps you should come to this event? http://www.grands-jours-bourgogne.com/program-grands-jours-de-bourgogne/program-grands-jours-bourgogne-march-2012,798,4545.html

Many Grand Cru's can be easily found in the €50 range if you buy early. For example I bought a case of 2010 Corton Grand Cru Rouge (Cuvée Charlotte Dumay) from the Hospice de Beaune auction at €53.21 per bottle. I won't actually get the wine til sometime this spring but once it is bottled and put on sale through normal channels it will likely go for over €75 per bottle. And if you happen to see this wine at one of the worlds top restaurants sometime after 2015, it will cost hundreds. The same can be said for the two cases of 2009 Château de Pommard I put on reserve long before it was bottled. It is already going for over €75 per bottle direct from the Château.

But finding Grand Cru's under €40-50 is not easy for the public. You have to know someone, or be in the wine business yourself. Gaucho, as I think you are in the wine business, perhaps you should come to this event? http://www.grands-jours-bourgogne.com/program-grands-jours-de-bourgogne/program-grands-jours-bourgogne-march-2012,798,4545.html

That being said, the Hospice wines are sort of a special case because you are buying a future through a wholesale channel in bulk, and the Chateau de Pommard is not in fact a Grand Cru. It may well be as good as many a Grand Cru, but it itself is merely a monopole Premier Cru. But that was one of my points in my earlier post, that Grand Crus are essentially unattainable at those prices, but if you really know what you are doing and have access directly with the producers (and apparently, both of these factors apply to you, Stimpy), you can buy some of the handful of very select Premier Crus that are as good as many an actual Grand Cru, at more reasonable prices than the Grand Crus can be obtained. I used to make a buying trip to Burgundy every 2-3 years during which I would buy several cases of these handful of Premier Cru wines that are actually hitting above their class, and which are in fact at the Grand Cru level. And I found that the sweet spot of these wines tended to be in the $35-50 USD/bottle range circa a decade ago bought directly from the domains they were produced at, and even then, they tended to sell in the U.S. for at least double, often 2.5x the prices I paid directly at the producers (I had a deal with an importer in Dijon who would bring the wines into the U.S. for me for $25 a case).

That being said, the Hospice wines are sort of a special case because you are buying a future through a wholesale channel in bulk, and the Chateau de Pommard is not in fact a Grand Cru. It may well be as good as many a Grand Cru, but it itself is merely a monopole Premier Cru.

Hospice wines are a special case, but they are freely available to anyone to buy, even over the Internet and even with quantities as low as 6 bottles.

And the part about Château de Pommard is debatable. The Château does not do business in the usual Burgundy way. I don't think their wines are even officially Premier Cru. I'd write more, but I have a plane to catch!

Hospice wines are a special case, but they are freely available to anyone to buy, even over the Internet and even with quantities as low as 6 bottles.

And the part about Château de Pommard is debatable. The Château does not do business in the usual Burgundy way. I don't think their wines are even officially Premier Cru. I'd write more, but I have a plane to catch!

I've decided to pop round for a drink.:D

Hospice wines are a special case, but they are freely available to anyone to buy, even over the Internet and even with quantities as low as 6 bottles.

And the part about Château de Pommard is debatable. The Château does not do business in the usual Burgundy way. I don't think their wines are even officially Premier Cru. I'd write more, but I have a plane to catch!

there are Premier C. found this in their wiki"Pommard wine is produced in the commune of Pommard in Côte de Beaune of Burgun.................The AOC regulations also allow up to 15 per cent total of Chardonnay, Pinot Blanc and Pinot Gris as accessory grapes in the red wines, but this not very often practiced.

i recall in the wasserman book(which i cannot find) that the popularity of pommard in britain stems from the proximity of an airfield in WWI.

Wow, thanks to everyone, I have learned a tremendous amount in this thread!

ETA:

You refer to the Champagne of Beers?

http://www.millerhighlife.com/

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/laugh.gif



Everywhere, it's a marker for, well, channeling Porgy http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/icon_smile_tongue.gif

Oops, I just saw Porgy & Bess (http://www.playbill.com/events/event_detail/22596-Gershwins-Porgy-and-Bess-The-at-Richard-Rodgers-Theatre) in NY. Turns out I was chanelling Sportin' Life (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh5ijrsHx5Q).

Wow, thanks to everyone, I have learned a tremendous amount in this thread!

Just supply some bottles!

Agreed. I will never understand FlyerTalk's obsession with chugging free champagne on flights either. It's an alcoholic beverage readily available everywhere wine is sold. What's the big deal.

Agreed. I will never understand FlyerTalk's obsession with chugging free champagne on flights either. It's an alcoholic beverage readily available everywhere wine is sold. What's the big deal.

It isn't just FT. It is the elegance of flying in a cramped F cabin drinking marginal swill, sometimes with a screw cap. It is elegant. It is special. It is, after all, first class ;)

Agreed. I will never understand FlyerTalk's obsession with chugging free champagne on flights either. It's an alcoholic beverage readily available everywhere wine is sold. What's the big deal.

For me ... it's because I'll drink champagne that is much more expensive than I drink at home. IN BA F for example they sell Johnie Walker Blue ..... I'd never stump up that. They are serving champers that is £100+ per bottle.

I know you'll say that if we can travel F then we can buy expensive champers but not all people are like that ....... my champers tops out at £35 per bottle and is normally around £15.

That being said, the Hospice wines are sort of a special case because you are buying a future through a wholesale channel in bulk, and the Chateau de Pommard is not in fact a Grand Cru. It may well be as good as many a Grand Cru, but it itself is merely a monopole Premier Cru. But that was one of my points in my earlier post, that Grand Crus are essentially unattainable at those prices, but if you really know what you are doing and have access directly with the producers (and apparently, both of these factors apply to you, Stimpy), you can buy some of the handful of very select Premier Crus that are as good as many an actual Grand Cru, at more reasonable prices than the Grand Crus can be obtained. I used to make a buying trip to Burgundy every 2-3 years during which I would buy several cases of these handful of Premier Cru wines that are actually hitting above their class, and which are in fact at the Grand Cru level. And I found that the sweet spot of these wines tended to be in the $35-50 USD/bottle range circa a decade ago bought directly from the domains they were produced at, and even then, they tended to sell in the U.S. for at least double, often 2.5x the prices I paid directly at the producers (I had a deal with an importer in Dijon who would bring the wines into the U.S. for me for $25 a case).

Do you guys post at http://wineberserkers.com/forum/index.php?sid=7aba7259419df857dce286186a809930 as well?
it's a wine fanatic forum like this one for flying.. I think you'd be right at home there.. lots of Burg heads there. ^

Tired of champagne? I could never be tired of champagne. However, I am tired of the typical brands everyone drinks: Veuve Clicquot and Moët. I do not like neither of them and find them very displeasing. It is just that both brands have great marketing campaigns.

I drink champagne regularly. I love it because I consider it to be "the Buddha" of wines :-D Whenever I am stressed, I resort to a nice bottle of champagne and a pack of my lovely Dunhill cigarettes. I like Ruinart Blanc de Blancs and Laurent Perrier Vintage 2000. If not, Tsarine is lovely too.

Tired of champagne? I could never be tired of champagne. However, I am tired of the typical brands everyone drinks: Veuve Clicquot and Moët. I do not like neither of them and find them very displeasing. It is just that both brands have great marketing campaigns.

I drink champagne regularly. I love it because I consider it to be "the Buddha" of wines :-D Whenever I am stressed, I resort to a nice bottle of champagne and a pack of my lovely Dunhill cigarettes. I like Ruinart Blanc de Blancs and Laurent Perrier Vintage 2000. If not, Tsarine is lovely too.

i agree... möet is very ordinary, cliquot is ok though I find. but interested that you like tsarine! they used to serve it. business class on Malaysia airlines in about 2004... I never liked it. maybe time to revisit.

For me ... it's because I'll drink champagne that is much more expensive than I drink at home. IN BA F for example they sell Johnie Walker Blue ..... I'd never stump up that. They are serving champers that is £100+ per bottle.

I know you'll say that if we can travel F then we can buy expensive champers but not all people are like that ....... my champers tops out at £35 per bottle and is normally around £15.

I still don't get it. Even if I'm not going to keep my fridge stocked with bottles of dom, i'll have 1 glass pre-departure, then switch to water so I'm hydrated and wake up at my destination refreshed and not hung over. Just because free booze that's normally out of your price range is available doesn't mean you have to clamor to drink them dry.

Some people get hangovers, some don't. It depends usually on your age and the quality of the Champagne.

Some people get hangovers, some don't. It depends usually on your age and the quality of the Champagne.

Its very much about getting enough water.... if you drink a lot of water while you down your booze of choice, chances of having a hangover are greatly reduced. Folks forget that drinking alcohol will dry you out... ;)

Its very much about getting enough water.... if you drink a lot of water while you down your booze of choice, chances of having a hangover are greatly reduced. Folks forget that drinking alcohol will dry you out... ;)

I'm pretty sure champagne with the carbonation gets into your blood stream faster.
plus unless they're serving decent bubbly, crap alcohol will leave you with a hangover more than decent alcohol?

A hangover is basically entirely dehydration. Drink lots of water and you won't get one at all. The "quality" of the alcoholic drink does not matter, nor the speed at which it is absorbed into your blood. Water is the cure.

A hangover is basically entirely dehydration. Drink lots of water and you won't get one at all. The "quality" of the alcoholic drink does not matter, nor the speed at which it is absorbed into your blood. Water is the cure.

hmmm... I've been lucky enough to have fake alcohol a few times and it certainly produces one big hangover... water or not!! :)

A hangover is basically entirely dehydration. Drink lots of water and you won't get one at all. The "quality" of the alcoholic drink does not matter, nor the speed at which it is absorbed into your blood. Water is the cure.

I don't believe that is at all true. Ask any experienced bartender even! Poor quality alcohol, especially poor quality sparkling wine, can give anyone a hangover. But other than that, I never had a hangover til my mid-30's. And it had nothing to do with water. I'm not a doctor, but a quick Google search produced this....

"When we drink, our livers release an enzyme called alcohol dehydrogenase, which breaks down the alcohol into a harmless chemical so less of it enters the bloodstream. Young people - and regular drinkers - produce more of this enzyme, so they don't feel the effects of alcohol as much as older people."

That said, I absolutely agree that drinking water on long haul flights is critical. Alcohol is dehydrating as is the cabin air.

I don't believe that is at all true. Ask any experienced bartender even! Poor quality alcohol, especially poor quality sparkling wine, can give anyone a hangover. But other than that, I never had a hangover til my mid-30's. And it had nothing to do with water. I'm not a doctor, but a quick Google search produced this....

"When we drink, our livers release an enzyme called alcohol dehydrogenase, which breaks down the alcohol into a harmless chemical so less of it enters the bloodstream. Young people - and regular drinkers - produce more of this enzyme, so they don't feel the effects of alcohol as much as older people."


That quote is not about the hangover-effect, it's about how the people mentioned get less intoxicated to start with. This is the difference between two people consuming the same amount of alcohol and one getting completely smashed while the other stays reasonably functional.

Sure, there are multiple causes for the hangover-effect, but I do believe dehydration is the most important one.

Personally I much-prefer Prosecco over Champagne!

Its very much about getting enough water.... if you drink a lot of water while you down your booze of choice, chances of having a hangover are greatly reduced. Folks forget that drinking alcohol will dry you out... ;)

A hangover is basically entirely dehydration. Drink lots of water and you won't get one at all. The "quality" of the alcoholic drink does not matter, nor the speed at which it is absorbed into your blood. Water is the cure.

+1 ^

You can drink some crazy amounts of booze and yet still have no hangover if you down enough water in the process. A lot of water actually.

Best tip is to always go to sleep with a full glass of water by your bedside. The difference between a hangover and not having one (or a much, much LESSER one) is taking a few gulps of water when you wake up during your sleep. It only takes you a few seconds, so if you do get the chance then take those few sips before continuing your sleep. As mentioned, definitely put a glass of water by your bedside before you crash out...

To be honest I'm tired of this champagne/sparkling wine issue. It's all the same thing. Otherwise what's next, can't call cheese "mozzarella" if it's not made in a certain city in Italy? Or maybe the name pizza should be banned if it doesn't come from wherever it was invented, so all those pizza places the world over will have to rename their product as "cheese on bread." ;)

Champagne is a process, a way of making the product and shouldn't have been locked down to a specific region in France simply because it was named after it.

In the end, apart from the top brands, I have become extremely suspicious of all "champagnes" I haven't heard of previously, simply because there's an extremely high chance that they're complete rubbish. All they need to sell is just have the name, so quality went out the window completely...

Give me good sparkling wine (real champagne) over "champagne" any day...

To be honest I'm tired of this champagne/sparkling wine issue. It's all the same thing. Otherwise what's next, can't call cheese "mozzarella" if it's not made in a certain city in Italy? Or maybe the name pizza should be banned if it doesn't come from wherever it was invented, so all those pizza places the world over will have to rename their product as "cheese on bread." ;)

Champagne is a process, a way of making the product and shouldn't have been locked down to a specific region in France simply because it was named after it.


With time and experience you will hopefully learn that places have meaning.

With time and experience you will hopefully learn that places have meaning.

Ah oui, zee terroir of zee place imparts a certain je ne sais quoi...

+1 ^

You can drink some crazy amounts of booze and yet still have no hangover if you down enough water in the process. A lot of water actually.

Best tip is to always go to sleep with a full glass of water by your bedside. The difference between a hangover and not having one (or a much, much LESSER one) is taking a few gulps of water when you wake up during your sleep. It only takes you a few seconds, so if you do get the chance then take those few sips before continuing your sleep. As mentioned, definitely put a glass of water by your bedside before you crash out...

Yeah, I do this. It doesn't always help. I seem to remember reading that you need about 8 oz of water for each service of alcoholic beverage. That can be a lot of water!

To be honest I'm tired of this champagne/sparkling wine issue. It's all the same thing. Otherwise what's next, can't call cheese "mozzarella" if it's not made in a certain city in Italy? Or maybe the name pizza should be banned if it doesn't come from wherever it was invented, so all those pizza places the world over will have to rename their product as "cheese on bread." ;)

Champagne is a process, a way of making the product and shouldn't have been locked down to a specific region in France simply because it was named after it.

In the end, apart from the top brands, I have become extremely suspicious of all "champagnes" I haven't heard of previously, simply because there's an extremely high chance that they're complete rubbish. All they need to sell is just have the name, so quality went out the window completely...

Give me good sparkling wine (real champagne) over "champagne" any day...

The day that a chardonnay grape, or a pinot noir grape, grown in the central valley in California, or the plains of central Spain, or elsewhere, tastes exactly the same as a those same grape varietals grown in Reims or Epernay, your point will have some merit. That day is not here, however.

the vast majority of the budget busting "champers" are blends of 3 grapes that are sourced from thousands(14000+) of growers, scattered hundreds of kilometers apart. a very few are single vineyard, a few are single grape variety. the significient feature of the "top" brands is that the majority(over half) of the cost is in the promotion and advertising.

some of the best "champers" is brought into the usa by thierry thiese(SP?) it is usually single vineyard, from a small producer that dumps most of his product to a major league house. some of these guys produce "champers" made from each of the 3 accepted varieties. some specialize in just one of the three accepted varities. i have never seen a french pinot blanc "champers", although it is an accepted grape.(this is a pinot noir sport, not the grape used in italian pinot blancs.)

Champagne has been an integral part of celebration for so long. I was on vacation a few weeks ago and got so tired of seeing all these people ordering champagne. I'm sure they saw it as part of the "vacation celebration".
The interesting thing about it is that there was a study that showed that drinking champagne - in moderation - helped people with Parkinson's, stroke and Alzheimer's. So, maybe I need to start drinking it!

The interesting thing about it is that there was a study that showed that drinking champagne - in moderation - helped people with Parkinson's, stroke and Alzheimer's. So, maybe I need to start drinking it!

wonder who paid for the study. if they are going to do it with a double blind, i'm in, atrial fib and all.

With time and experience you will hopefully learn that places have meaning.

Yeah, the last champagne I tried (flying biz on AY) was so nasty it became apparent that it's only selling point was the name.

Forget it. Give me a true champagne not made in France any day. :)

Yeah, the last champagne I tried (flying biz on AY) was so nasty it became apparent that it's only selling point was the name.

Forget it. Give me a true champagne not made in France any day. :)

not too long ago, i was on a british flight. they served british champaign. i see they have taste tests that prove it to be the best>

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/news/89725-zut-alors-english-champagne-beats.html

Forget it. Give me a true champagne not made in France any day. :)

Well, at least that will keep you sober

I know this is heresy, and in part because I'm inexperienced and haven't had good guidance, but I think it all tastes the same. That's not in a bad way though, I love drinking champagne and sparkling wines especially with my girlfriend or while traveling, but one label is the same as another to me. :o

I know this is heresy, and in part because I'm inexperienced and haven't had good guidance, but I think it all tastes the same. That's not in a bad way though, I love drinking champagne and sparkling wines especially with my girlfriend or while traveling, but one label is the same as another to me. :o

Your taste is never heresy. It is the only honest criticism an inexperienced person can make. The problem is when inexperienced people try to claim knowledge beyond their own taste.

I know this is heresy, and in part because I'm inexperienced and haven't had good guidance, but I think it all tastes the same. That's not in a bad way though, I love drinking champagne and sparkling wines especially with my girlfriend or while traveling, but one label is the same as another to me. :o

I know what you mean - I really don't appreciate the differences between red wines, or white wines (although I am learning and now know what to expect if someone offers a merlot for example).

But champagnes - each one tastes very different to me. I agree there are some very good sparkling wines... some of those made in Australia are more expensive than the imported French brands.

With champagne you are buying the grapes from a particular region, and the experience those houses have accrued in being able to mix a consistent product to provide a consistent taste - they have been at it for hundreds of years. (plus a healthy dose for their marketing and branding!)

The soil, the water, the weather, what you use to press the grapes, that's what make a wine, how can a champagne be called champagne outside of the champagne area?

And replying to aster it's true, a mozzarella di bufala, made around Naples in Italy is going to taste much different from any mozzarella made with the same cows in an other country. The difference is what the cow eat and drink. You'll never get the same grass, the same soil and the same water in an other place. (Actually even mozzarellas made in norther italy tastes different from the ones in southern italy). So you can call those solid chunk of cheese that I found here in the states by the name of mozzarella but they've nothing in common with mozzarella.

The same goes with all the products that come from the earth...

The soil, the water, the weather, what you use to press the grapes, that's what make a wine, how can a champagne be called champagne outside of the champagne area?

Thing is, if we took 10 brands of "champagnes" made in France and champagnes made elsewhere, poured a glass of each, then you could tell which 5 were French and which 5 weren't?

Champagne is a process, and it's the process that defines the product more than anything.

Either way, if you think that a certain region in France can hijack an entire product name this way then you would obviously support Iran if they tried to block the rest of the wine-producing world from using the Shiraz label...

Thing is, if we took 10 brands of "champagnes" made in France and champagnes made elsewhere, poured a glass of each, then you could tell which 5 were French and which 5 weren't?

Champagne is a process, and it's the process that defines the product more than anything.

Either way, if you think that a certain region in France can hijack an entire product name this way then you would obviously support Iran if they tried to block the rest of the wine-producing world from using the Shiraz label...

I don't know if I'd get them all right... but in blind tests neither can some of the top wine experts.

no one is saying other sparkling wines aren't made to the same high standard as champagne, just that they have different tastes, as you would expect, given the particular growing conditions.

and no one can make top vintage sparlling wines that even come close to those produced by the top French houses.

champagne is also an indulgence, and if you want to indulge then you sometimes get the best. that can only be french, because they have that experience.

If I'm not mistaken, it really doesn't matter if the French have a monopoly on the word champagne... it is backed by international law (there are a few exceptions, which I believe are in the USA as grandfather naming rights)

Thing is, if we took 10 brands of "champagnes" made in France and champagnes made elsewhere, poured a glass of each, then you could tell which 5 were French and which 5 weren't?

Champagne is a process, and it's the process that defines the product more than anything.

Either way, if you think that a certain region in France can hijack an entire product name this way then you would obviously support Iran if they tried to block the rest of the wine-producing world from using the Shiraz label...

???

Champagne is not a process, champagne is a region of France.

The method is called champenoise and of course it is used in many different areas to make different wines, (cremant, prosecco, spumante, etc) and each of them is really different from the other..

Of course any sommelier could distinguish champagne made in France by sparkling wines made wit the champenoise method somewhere else...

A region doesn't hijack a name, it simply tells where a product is made, you could have the same blend of grapes in a red wine made in the US and in Italy and it will taste different.
Shiraz is a grape not the name f the region, it doesn't define the taste but the name of a particular grape.
You can grow that grape anywhere in the world but you can't grow the champagne territory anywhere in the world.

The same goes for many other kind of wines... Valpolicella for example is the wine that grow in the Valpolicella area in Italy and even if you can make a wine with the same blend everywhere in the world you can't call it Valpolicella because it's where it is made that makes the difference not the grapes that are used.

The same goes with Tokaij, an amazing Hungarian wine. It was made in a particular region of Italy too until a few years ago, and the Italian Tokaij, while a little different, it was great.
But then the one made in Italy could not be called Tokaij anymore because it was not made in that particular region of hungary so they were legally forced to change the name in "Friulano" and leave the Tokaij name to the ones made in hungary.

Etc etc etc

As mentioned any wine is more of the product of its region than of its processing. This is the whole reason Applellations exist. The better the wine the more expensive it is and thus growers want to protect their brand and governments have agreed. Applellations are legally defined and protected. Growers in Champaign want the premium $ that come from that name just as Napa growers don't want Central Coast growers saying their wine is a Napa wine.

Now an individual may not taste a difference but many people can and this is why certain regions command a premium for their product.

???


Of course any sommelier could distinguish champagne made in France by sparkling wines made wit the champenoise method somewhere else...


Etc etc etc

i disagree with that statement. give a sommelier a 100% Pinot Meunier and 90 of 10 will miss by a mile. same with an old RD. seen a number that miss on Salon.

domain carneros and domain chandon throw most of them, particularly if they are comparing to the heinz 57 varity french.


also do not forget, that sommelier term can be cheaply gained title.

We are supposed to be travelers here. I've tasted sparking wines all over the world and I live in France now. I can clearly tell the difference. When I was younger and living in America I could not tell the difference.

Champagne are not difficult to recognize... Especially if you compare them to other sparkling wines.. They probably are the easier to recognize for many people..


I found reds with a full body and particular blends much more difficult..

It all comes down to your mouth.. I could recognize a valpolicella or a chianti among any other wine because I grew up with them, but I would find really hard to distinguish a Chilean Shiraz from a Californian one..

But I'm not a professional sommelier..

Thing is, if we took 10 brands of "champagnes" made in France and champagnes made elsewhere, poured a glass of each, then you could tell which 5 were French and which 5 weren't?

Champagne is a process, and it's the process that defines the product more than anything.

Either way, if you think that a certain region in France can hijack an entire product name this way then you would obviously support Iran if they tried to block the rest of the wine-producing world from using the Shiraz label...

Actually, the specific grapes (and where they are grown) define the product more than anything. Next would be the process, and next would be the particular blend that the palette of the winemaker (often following a house style) strives for.

The fact is, wine of a certain character is made from the Champagne region in France. Others can copy the process, but the grapes, even if the same exact varieties, are not grown in the soil of the Champagne region, in the climate of the Champagne region, it won't be exactly the same stuff, and it will taste different, even if you do not have the palette to discern that difference.

Now it's true, that there are similarities. But Domaine Chandon Brut, made in Napa, from the same grape varieties, as Moet Chandon Brut, made in Champagne, under the guise of the same parent company, tastes different. Personally, I actually prefer it, because the grapes are invariably riper and fruitier than the grapes grown in Champagne, and the Champagne product is more austere and yeastier, because there is less grape flavor to be overcome, but that's my preference - they are NOT the identical product.

The same is true of other French Champagne houses that also make similar wines in places like California, Spain, Argentina, and Chile under their own subsidiary companies.

The fact is, the French have been somewhat more successful in protecting the name Champagne, than they have with other famous place names, such as Chablis and Burgundy and Sauternes. But I can assure you, Chablis from the small town of Chablis, does NOT taste like "Chablis" made anywhere else on the planet either.

The fact is, wine of a certain character is made from the Champagne region in France. Others can copy the process, but the grapes, even if the same exact varieties, are not grown in the soil of the Champagne region, in the climate of the Champagne region, it won't be exactly the same stuff, and it will taste different, even if you do not have the palette to discern that difference.

Well to be accurate, the vast majority of the pinot noir grapes used in Champagne come from Burgundy. And a fair amount of the Chardonnay grapes too. This is why crémant de Bourgogne is just as good as an average Champagne.

The fact is, the French have been somewhat more successful in protecting the name Champagne, than they have with other famous place names, such as Chablis and Burgundy and Sauternes.

I think nowadays Burgundy is just as well protected as Champagne.

Now it's true, that there are similarities. But Domaine Chandon Brut, made in Napa, from the same grape varieties, as Moet Chandon Brut, made in Champagne, under the guise of the same parent company, tastes different. Personally, I actually prefer it, because the grapes are invariably riper and fruitier than the grapes grown in Champagne, and the Champagne product is more austere and yeastier, because there is less grape flavor to be overcome, but that's my preference - they are NOT the identical product.
.



i have been told(never been to aharvest) that the grapes for champagne are picked very green to keep the sugar down. looking at the dossage, a ripe grape and all that sugar is going to make a very sweet wine.

The fact is, the French have been somewhat more successful in protecting the name Champagne, than they have with other famous place names, such as Chablis and Burgundy and Sauternes. But I can assure you, Chablis from the small town of Chablis, does NOT taste like "Chablis" made anywhere else on the planet either.

i loved the chablis of old. the chablis of today does not taste like the chablis of old. it was famous for being "flinty". was great with oysters with a bit of lemon on them. didn't sell all that well. now, it tastes like another Burgundy. good, maybe better than the 60's, but very different than the 60's.

in the "old days" white burgundys were 10-11% alcohol, and red burgundys 11-12%. look at them today. they have almost oz and CA residuals. thank you robert parker.


correct suguar is wrong word. they are 10-12% alcohol when finished

N.B. i could not afford and did not drink burgundy before the AOC(i thought it called the DOC). after the introduction of the AOC, for years the red burgundy was insipid. at the same time, rhones became wonderful. since then, the burgundy growers have started growing wonderful grapes and making great wines in cellars that they cleaned up.

Well to be accurate, the vast majority of the pinot noir grapes used in Champagne come from Burgundy. And a fair amount of the Chardonnay grapes too. This is why crémant de Bourgogne is just as good as an average Champagne.

That's simply not true. The grapes that go into real French Champagne, come from Champagne. That is most definitely the law, in France. I'm sure some houses may violate the law, but if they do, it's at the margins to make up for poor harvests, not a general practice.

I think nowadays Burgundy is just as well protected as Champagne.

At least 99.9 % of the wine in the world sold under the name "Burgundy" is not even from France. Ever hear of Gallo Hearty Burgundy?

i have been told(never been to aharvest) that the grapes for champagne are picked very green to keep the sugar down. looking at the dossage, a ripe grape and all that sugar is going to make a very sweet wine.

That's a euphemism (or marketing spin) for the fact that the grapes that grow in Champagne simply don't get very ripe because of the climate.

i loved the chablis of old. the chablis of today does not taste like the chablis of old. it was famous for being "flinty". was great with oysters with a bit of lemon on them. didn't sell all that well. now, it tastes like another Burgundy. good, maybe better than the 60's, but very different than the 60's.

If you come here you can still find excellent and real Chablis. Maybe they don't export it, but it still exists in Chablis and it tastes nothing like the other whites.

N.B. i could not afford and did not drink burgundy before the AOC(i thought it called the DOC). after the introduction of the AOC, for years the red burgundy was insipid. at the same time, rhones became wonderful. since then, the burgundy growers have started growing wonderful grapes and making great wines in cellars that they cleaned up.

I'm not sure what years you are referring to, but Burgundy wine was both excellent and world famous in the 18th and 19th centuries. But if you are referring to the 20th century, of course two world wars ravaged the region.

Funny, cause some of the nastiest stuff I've ever tasted carries the "champagne" label and is pretty much undrinkable. As for the better stuff, you're paying mainly for their expensive advertising. But then that's what the postmodernist approach does to you... you pay for the label, the brand, as that's more important than the product itself.

Champagne and "bubbly" mean the same thing. Oh yes, it's also a region, but champagne has always been the generic term for a product.

That's simply not true. The grapes that go into real French Champagne, come from Champagne. That is most definitely the law, in France. I'm sure some houses may violate the law, but if they do, it's at the margins to make up for poor harvests, not a general practice.

I haven't read the actual AOC text, but I was told that in 1984 it expanded the areas where grapes used in Champagne were grown. Perhaps in some years they can't grow enough Pinot Noir in Champagne so they look to Burgundy. There are some Grand Cru areas of Burgundy who sell their grapes to other regions.

At least 99.9 % of the wine in the world sold under the name "Burgundy" is not even from France. Ever hear of Gallo Hearty Burgundy?

I thought Gallo legally had to import their grapes from Burgundy, no? Wasn't there a big court case a couple years ago where some French exporters went to prison for selling non Burgundy grapes to Gallo and calling it Burgundy? And Gallo had to dump millions of gallons of wine. I know that in the past much of the worlds Burgundy didn't come from Burgundy, but with new WTO rules I don't think that is the case anymore.

The same goes with Tokaij, an amazing Hungarian wine. It was made in a particular region of Italy too until a few years ago, and the Italian Tokaij, while a little different, it was great.
But then the one made in Italy could not be called Tokaij anymore because it was not made in that particular region of hungary so they were legally forced to change the name in "Friulano" and leave the Tokaij name to the ones made in hungary. Etc etc etc

IIRC, the former "Tokay d'Alsace" must now be called "Pinot Gris" after an interim period when it could be called "Tokay Pinot Gris".

I thought Gallo legally had to import their grapes from Burgundy, no? Wasn't there a big court case a couple years ago where some French exporters went to prison for selling non Burgundy grapes to Gallo and calling it Burgundy? And Gallo had to dump millions of gallons of wine. I know that in the past much of the worlds Burgundy didn't come from Burgundy, but with new WTO rules I don't think that is the case anymore.

you really got that one wrong. burgundy is not a controlled name in usa. for years gallo hardy burg was a field blend of the lesser preferred grapes from the gallo california fields. at that time they wer(they may still be the largest vineyard holder in usa. they threw all their zin, syrah, petit syrah, merlot, into it. in the 60's it was right decent wine.

the french exporter case was for pinot noir. the growers from the region called in the aoc(doc?) and stated that gallo was buying 10 times or 100times more pinot from these exporters than grown in the entier region. gallo was paying some outrageously pathetic price, line a euro a gallon, then selling it as their "french import pinot" in the usa with a $10 shelf price per bottle. by the way, i don't think pinot noir is a controlled name in france.

you really got that one wrong. burgundy is not a controlled name in usa. for years gallo hardy burg was a field blend of the lesser preferred grapes from the gallo california fields. at that time they wer(they may still be the largest vineyard holder in usa. they threw all their zin, syrah, petit syrah, merlot, into it. in the 60's it was right decent wine.

the french exporter case was for pinot noir. the growers from the region called in the aoc(doc?) and stated that gallo was buying 10 times or 100times more pinot from these exporters than grown in the entier region. gallo was paying some outrageously pathetic price, line a euro a gallon, then selling it as their "french import pinot" in the usa with a $10 shelf price per bottle. by the way, i don't think pinot noir is a controlled name in france.

You seem to corroborate what I said. What part did I get wrong with my question? The French guys went to jail for selling wine to Gallo that wasn't pinot. And I never said pinot was a controlled name. That would be foolish.

That must depend where you come from - Champagne has always been champagne to me, we'd never call other sparking wines like prosecco etc 'champagne', they are just dofferent products, just as we wouldn't call other cheeses Roquefort or Gruyere.

Funny, cause some of the nastiest stuff I've ever tasted carries the "champagne" label and is pretty much undrinkable. As for the better stuff, you're paying mainly for their expensive advertising. But then that's what the postmodernist approach does to you... you pay for the label, the brand, as that's more important than the product itself.

Champagne and "bubbly" mean the same thing. Oh yes, it's also a region, but champagne has always been the generic term for a product.

Funny, cause some of the nastiest stuff I've ever tasted carries the "champagne" label and is pretty much undrinkable. As for the better stuff, you're paying mainly for their expensive advertising. But then that's what the postmodernist approach does to you... you pay for the label, the brand, as that's more important than the product itself.

Champagne and "bubbly" mean the same thing. Oh yes, it's also a region, but champagne has always been the generic term for a product.

???

Champagne has never been a generic term for a product... At least not in the eno-gastronomic world..

Sparkling wine and champagne are two totally different things..

There are no wines made out of the champagne area that can call themselves champagne, even the ones made by champagne producers in Napa don't call themselves champagne..

That doesn't mean that there are bad champagne producers that produce bad champagne.. As there are bad bordeaux producers who produce bad bordeaux...

Bubbly doesn't mean anything... There are sparkling red wines, sparkling rosè, sparkling white wines... Champagne is a kind of wine, as Prosecco or Cremant... You can't call them all champagne, it doesn't make sense...

???

Champagne has never been a generic term for a product... At least not in the eno-gastronomic world..

Sparkling wine and champagne are two totally different things..

There are no wines made out of the champagne area that can call themselves champagne, even the ones made by champagne producers in Napa don't call themselves champagne..

That doesn't mean that there are bad champagne producers that produce bad champagne.. As there are bad bordeaux producers who produce bad bordeaux...

Bubbly doesn't mean anything... There are sparkling red wines, sparkling rosè, sparkling white wines... Champagne is a kind of wine, as Prosecco or Cremant... You can't call them all champagne, it doesn't make sense...

While technically correct I think most people in the US use Champagne in a generic sense for most sparkling wines, except Cold Duck which is so bad I don't think it can be considered even a sparkling wine ;)

I thought Gallo legally had to import their grapes from Burgundy, no? Wasn't there a big court case a couple years ago where some French exporters went to prison for selling non Burgundy grapes to Gallo and calling it Burgundy? And Gallo had to dump millions of gallons of wine. I know that in the past much of the worlds Burgundy didn't come from Burgundy, but with new WTO rules I don't think that is the case anymore.

Gallo certainly does NOT import grapes from Burgundy for their "Hearty Burgundy. The stuff comes entirely from the central valley of California. Their legal issue was for a wine known as Bicyclette Pinot Noir, and the problem they had with it was that if contained mostly grapes other than Pinot Noir - but Gallo themselves was either being defrauded (or chose to turn a blind eye to it) by the folks in France who sold them the stuff in bulk. But this wine had much smaller sales volume of sale than Hearty Burgundy ever did.

I'd have to find an expert to get the current WTO status. But I do recall the history of the name problem. After WW2 there was a raft of treaties, one of which the French pushed to declare that no other country could exploit their names such as Champagne, Burgundy, Cognac, etc. I think all the nations of Europe signed the treaty, as well as many others. But the US for whatever reason did not sign the treaty. I recall clearly in my youth that most all California sparkling wine was called Champagne. But doesn't seem to the be case anymore, and I think it is due to a more recent WTO ruling.

I recall clearly in my youth that most all California sparkling wine was called Champagne. But doesn't seem to the be case anymore, and I think it is due to a more recent WTO ruling.

Actually, this is due to the influx of the French Champagne houses into the California market, and aiming for the top end in quality while not compromising the value of the term "Champagne" for their Champagne-made product from France.

At a minimum, Moet Chandon, Mumm, Taittinger, Piper Heidsieck, Roederer, and Deutz - all true Champagne producers, also established California operations, and none of them called the sparkling wine that they produced in California "Champagne". And of these, Domain Chandon, Roederer Estate, and Piper Sonoma have been quite successful ventures (although Maison Deutz failed commercially, and the Mumm and Taittinger operations remain low volume).

You seem to corroborate what I said. What part did I get wrong with my question? The French guys went to jail for selling wine to Gallo that wasn't pinot. And I never said pinot was a controlled name. That would be foolish.

i did not say that. although pinot is not a controlled name pinot noir is a controlled name in the majority of the civilized world................, as are a lot of the pinot xxxxxx (usually white).

and, it is not worth the trouble for me to reaearch the controls on the names pinot gris, pinot blanc, and pinot noir in alsace.

i also think [they] were sent to jail for selling the wine a pinot noir. why else would they get busted. selling mystery wine to the usa on the cheap is not illegal. maybe mislabeling is a crime. for what did [they] get busted?

Closed for review and housekeeping.

cblaisd
Moderator, Dining Buzz

Re-opened for another try.

Please enjoy civil and pleasant discussion.

cblaisd
Moderator, Dining Buzz

grape britain:english pfhizz.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/624213e2-6e32-11e1-baa5-00144feab49a.html#axzz1prGRp211

robinson, who is extremely well respected in the industry in spite of being female and british put out a rave review for british sparkling wine products.

My idea of a good night while traveling :cool::D:

http://cmk10.smugmug.com/Travel/Flyertalk-Pictures/i-d7N792g/0/M/1008029-M.jpg (http://cmk10.smugmug.com/Travel/Flyertalk-Pictures/19735160_jnCDSF#!i=1760424321&k=d7N792g&lb=1&s=A)

My idea of a good night while traveling :cool::D:


This is a bad idea! You should go home and grill a steak... you seem to be far more competent at that task! :D

This is a bad idea! You should go home and grill a steak... you seem to be far more competent at that task! :D

Haha well put. But when you're at a Hampton Inn by the airport and the neighborhood liquor store has bars on the windows, you take what you can get! :D

Does anyone have any suggestions for champagnes/sparkling wines less than $12?

Does anyone have any suggestions for champagnes/sparkling wines less than $12?

On sale, you can generally find Piper Sonoma for $11-12, and at that price, I think it's much the best sparkler out there - especially if you are trying to get as close as possible to the taste and character of REAL Champagne. Domain Chandon is comparable, but typically a couple bucks more a bottle. I personally slightly prefer the Piper to the Chandon, and the fact that it's usually a couple bucks less is a bonus.

For a few bucks less, Codorniu Brut, from Spain is pretty good, but I personally would pay ~$3 more for the Piper Sonoma.

If you don't mind something a bit different, and typically less dry and more fruity, there are lots of Proseccos from Italy available for around that price - although I'm not up on which ones are best.

Does anyone have any suggestions for champagnes/sparkling wines less than $12?

If you live in or travel to France or Italy or Australia, yes indeed you can get some very nice Champagnes or sparkling wines at that price. But if you are in the US, that's probably not possible due to shipping, import, middle-men, etc. I personally have never tasted nor reliably heard of a decent US-made sparkling wine.

$12 no, but for about $17 you can find Schramsberg Mirabelle which is a very acceptable way to pass time before a meal.

If you live in or travel to France or Italy or Australia, yes indeed you can get some very nice Champagnes or sparkling wines at that price. But if you are in the US, that's probably not possible due to shipping, import, middle-men, etc. I personally have never tasted nor reliably heard of a decent US-made sparkling wine.

There are plenty of very good U.S. sparkling wines, although at that price point, I could only really name Piper Sonoma, and for a couple of dollars more, Domain Chandon. Korbel is not bad, but I prefer the ones made by the French houses' U.S. operations for more of a Champagne type style. Somewhat above that price point, in addition to Schramsberg mentioned above, there are also Iron Horse, Gloria Ferrer, Scharffenberger, and my personal favorite, Roederer Estate. Mumm and Taittinger also have operations in Napa, although I think that their products are a tad over-priced relative to the others I just mentioned.

You can get some reasonable Italian and Spanish sparkling around that price point over here, I prefer it to the US and Canadian fizz personally.


Does anyone have any suggestions for champagnes/sparkling wines less than $12?

If you live in or travel to France or Italy or Australia, yes indeed you can get some very nice Champagnes or sparkling wines at that price. But if you are in the US, that's probably not possible due to shipping, import, middle-men, etc. I personally have never tasted nor reliably heard of a decent US-made sparkling wine.

When I was a drinker, Champagne was my preferred beverage. Living in France for a while, I got used to drinking it not for celebratory reasons, but just to drink it. After all, I was alive, so I guess I could "Celebrate" that fact. ;)

A Sommelier introduced me to Veuve Cliquot about 20 years ago and that did it. I drank Veuve every chance I could. I preferred it over anything. Sams Club used to carry it for around $40 the bottle. A good deal.

You can get some reasonable Italian and Spanish sparkling around that price point over here, I prefer it to the US and Canadian fizz personally.

Prosecco is a great choice in the 10-12 range. Cantine Maschio Proscecco Brut is worth considering, and would make a nice Bellini also.

in my experierence, Roederer Estate(CA) is preferred by a wide margin over the "bottom of the barrel"Roederer FR in blind tastings by people who should know better. this is not a small differential, but 2 or 3 to 1.

the roederer people confirm this preference.

in my experierence, Roederer Estate(CA) is preferred by a wide margin over the "bottom of the barrel"Roederer FR in blind tastings by people who should know better. this is not a small differential, but 2 or 3 to 1.

the roederer people confirm this preference.

That's because Roederer Estate is better. It's not cheap though. The NV Brut is $20-25, while the vintage cuvees are $40-50 a bottle here in California

That's because Roederer Estate is better. It's not cheap though. The NV Brut is $20-25, while the vintage cuvees are $40-50 a bottle here in California

$18 at Beltramos in Menlo Park, and it was really good last night out of magnum ($45)!

"bottom of the barrel"Roederer FR
Do you mean the Roederer Brut Premier (the entry level NV Champagne from Roederer in France ?)

$18 at Beltramos in Menlo Park, and it was really good last night out of magnum ($45)!

That's a pretty big price differential between 750ml and Magnum. But a fine price for the single bottle, for what I consider to be the best standard cuvee sparkling wine made in the U.S.

That's because Roederer Estate is better. It's not cheap though. The NV Brut is $20-25, while the vintage cuvees are $40-50 a bottle here in California

Roederer Estate NV Brut can be found in the DC area for ~$18.

Also, Mumm's Napa Cuvee (the only offering by Mumm's US operation that we like) can be found for ~$15 on sale.

Here is a list of my favorite Champagnes......

Normality.......
Billecart Salmon Rose NV
Cattier Brut Antique
Deutz NV

For an occasion....
Krug Vintage
Dom Perignon Oenotheque

Important moments.....
Krug Clos du Mesnil
Salon
Bollinger Vieille Vignes Françaises

I love Champagne Marguet Pere et Fils.

It's somewhat hard to find in the US, but well-stocked wine shops tend to have a bottle or two.

For me the best is....

Normality: Crémant de Bourgogne

Special Occasions: Any good and hopefully aged vintage Champagne

Out and about: Free Champagne. :D

I tend to agree with the OP.

It's wonderful when some things can remain associated with very special occasions, Weddings, Births, etc. A flight at the front can be terrific, I always look forward to it, but personally I don't feel the fizzy stuff embellishes the experience.

Who says champagne is a marker for special occasions? It is just another wine. It is like saying chardonnay, cabernet, or Scotch for that matter would lose its "specialness" if you drank it every day.

I drink champagne the same way others drink chardonnay. It is my everyday wine of choice.

Who says champagne is a marker for special occasions? It is just another wine. It is like saying chardonnay, cabernet, or Scotch for that matter would lose its "specialness" if you drank it every day.

I drink champagne the same way others drink chardonnay. It is my everyday wine of choice.

just about everybody says that. traditionally it is a drink of celebration and has become associated with that. not least because the cost of champagne is usually high.

That will differ a lot depending on which geography and type of family you come from.

Hmm.

Heidsieck "Blue Top" Monopole: Dry, Ash taste
Moet & Chandon: Warm the first time. The second time chilled was much nicer.
Lanson Black Label: Eminently enjoyable. Happy to see BA choose this as their Club World/J champagne
Veuve Clicquot: Forgettable, though too much of a "bite"
De Malherbe: Makes a tasty Kir Royale at my favourite hotel bar
Saint Evremond: Not remarkable, but for $21, it was fairly good.
Taittinger: What's all the fuss about, again? Forgettable inoffensive.

Sparkling

Freixenet: Fine
Kupferberg: (German sekt in BA Y. Tasty and enjoyable)
Furst von Metternich: Sekt. Absolutely love.
Ridgeview Estate, Grosvenor: MY FAVOURITE!!! Wonderful burst of crisp citrus. I would whore for this brand if I were paid in bottles of Grosvenor.

As for being drowned in the stuff at celebrations and "VIP" (premium class air travel, wine receptions, fundraising socials etc) activities, I do not complain, as I by and large enjoy the stuff. What I don't enjoy are the mark-ups tacked on the product as a "luxury beverage" and the dearth of availability of anything except Moet and Veuve at my local NY licquor stores. The UK has amazing availability (COMPARATIVELY!) and Germany has so much excellent local booze, I never thought to look.

just about everybody says that. traditionally it is a drink of celebration and has become associated with that. not least because the cost of champagne is usually high.

Champagne is no different than any other wine. There are cheap ones, expensive ones and very expensive ones.

Champagne is no different than any other wine. There are cheap ones, expensive ones and very expensive ones.

the cheapest champagnes (as opposed to sparkling wines) are usually $40 plus a bottle... ranging up to several hundred dollars.

not usually what most people drink every day.

In western culture, champagne is often associated with special events... marriages, proposals, romantic dinners...

the cheapest champagnes (as opposed to sparkling wines) are usually $40 plus a bottle... ranging up to several hundred dollars.

Perhaps in Australia that is true. But as I said above, I can get decent Champagne for €5 here in France. And maybe €10 in markets all over Europe.

Perhaps in Australia that is true. But as I said above, I can get decent Champagne for €5 here in France. And maybe €10 in markets all over Europe.

I was replying to a person based in CA, USA.

I was replying to a person based in CA, USA.

In the U.S. probably the cheapest price that can be paid for real Champagne is in the $20 a bottle range, and that would be a house brand of a discount chain store like Costco. Real Champagnes from well known brands will probably set someone back $25-30 a bottle at the low end here in the U.S.

That being said, several well-known French Champagne houses also produce good sparkling wines in a Champagne style, but not called Champagne, from their California operations for prices in the $12-20 a bottle range. You can get some quite decent stuff for $12 or so, such as Piper Sonoma or Domain Chandon. For under $20, Domaine Mumm or Roederer Estate. I personally prefer the California products to the lower end French stuff of all 4 of these brands. That it tends to be $10-15 cheaper a bottle is just a bonus.

In the U.S. probably the cheapest price that can be paid for real Champagne is in the $20 a bottle range, and that would be a house brand of a discount chain store like Costco. Real Champagnes from well known brands will probably set someone back $25-30 a bottle at the low end here in the U.S.

That being said, several well-known French Champagne houses also produce good sparkling wines in a Champagne style, but not called Champagne, from their California operations for prices in the $12-20 a bottle range. You can get some quite decent stuff for $12 or so, such as Piper Sonoma or Domain Chandon. For under $20, Domaine Mumm or Roederer Estate. I personally prefer the California products to the lower end French stuff of all 4 of these brands. That it tends to be $10-15 cheaper a bottle is just a bonus.

"Real" Champagne is any Methode Champenoise sparkling wine. I don't buy into the French protectionist racket when it comes to naming convention. It would be as silly as England trying to stop sweaters not made there from being called Cardigans or Raglans.

Sorry people live in places where government fees and shipping make Champagne expensive, but if I were in Oz I'd probably be drinking a lot of Wolf Blass, Greg Norman and Katnook and I'd still call it Champagne.

"Real" Champagne is any Methode Champenoise sparkling wine. I don't buy into the French protectionist racket when it comes to naming convention. It would be as silly as England trying to stop sweaters not made there from being called Cardigans or Raglans.

You as an individual can call it whatever you want. But if you are going to slam another country as being protectionist, I might ask you to what purpose would you go to such lengths as to call sparkling wine Champagne and post about it here? What's in it for you? People in glass houses...

You as an individual can call it whatever you want. But if you are going to slam another country as being protectionist, I might ask you to what purpose would you go to such lengths as to call sparkling wine Champagne and post about it here? What's in it for you? People in glass houses...

The purpose is to point out that France should be called out for their phony protection of the name "Champagne". Any méthode champenoise sparkling wine is a champagne, whether or not the French care to admit it. A rose by any other name.

The purpose is to point out that France should be called out for their phony protection of the name "Champagne". Any méthode champenoise sparkling wine is a champagne, whether or not the French care to admit it. A rose by any other name.

That doesn't make any sense to me. It's Champagne if it comes from Champagne. Otherwise it's sparkling wine, or cava, or prosecco, or whatnot.

US producers should invent a name for their fizzy wine too.

The purpose is to point out that France should be called out for their phony protection of the name "Champagne". Any méthode champenoise sparkling wine is a champagne, whether or not the French care to admit it.

No, you're wrong there. Champagne is the name of a region, not a wine. In English it is properly called a sparkling wine. Only if it comes from Champagne should it be called Champagne. Or you could even call sparkling wines from Champagne, sparkling wines. But when other sparkling wines call themselves Champagne, they are trying to latch onto the coattails of the image of Champagne. And that is just plain wrong.

No, you're wrong there. Champagne is the name of a region, not a wine. In English it is properly called a sparkling wine. Only if it comes from Champagne should it be called Champagne. Or you could even call sparkling wines from Champagne, sparkling wines. But when other sparkling wines call themselves Champagne, they are trying to latch onto the coattails of the image of Champagne. And that is just plain wrong.

exactly... all cognacs are brandies, but not all brandies are cognacs! Jeremys1973 - are you also proposing that every brandy should be allowed to call itself a cognac?

That doesn't make any sense to me. It's Champagne if it comes from Champagne. Otherwise it's sparkling wine, or cava, or prosecco, or whatnot.

US producers should invent a name for their fizzy wine too.

No, you're wrong there. Champagne is the name of a region, not a wine. In English it is properly called a sparkling wine. Only if it comes from Champagne should it be called Champagne. Or you could even call sparkling wines from Champagne, sparkling wines. But when other sparkling wines call themselves Champagne, they are trying to latch onto the coattails of the image of Champagne. And that is just plain wrong.

Champagne is a region in France, it is also a method of making a sparkling wine. There is no substantive difference between the Mumms and Chandon in California and France. It would be as silly as not being able to call any pilsner beer, not a pilsner because it is not from Pilsen. It is protectionism pure and simple to keep prices artificially high. How phony it all is is illustrated by plans to "expand" the Champagne region. Really? "sparkling wines" from this village are not now Champagne, but will be in a few years? That is what is wrong.

I'm sorry but I'm pretty sure that's not correct.
Champagne is a region but not a method.

The method is called champenoise and everywhere in the world there are sparkling wines made with the champenoise method, called on many different ways, Spumante to name one.

There's no reason to call a wine made outside of the champagne region with the same name.
You can call it sparkling "wine made with the champenoise method" but not champagne.

American Chandon or Mumm definitely don't taste like the French champagne made by the same company, why would you call them in the same way?

They're not champagne, they're not cremant, they're not franciacorta, they're not prosecco, they're not cava, they're sparkling wines.

i think that to be called champagne from frANCE the wine must be made from grapes of certIN types and from specfic locations. there are grape types and portions of areas that are within the entire champagne area that cannot be used for french champagne from france.

exactly... all cognacs are brandies, but not all brandies are cognacs! Jeremys1973 - are you also proposing that every brandy should be allowed to call itself a cognac?
And should we extend this by calling wine blends from other parts of the world Bordeaux, Saint-Émilion, Pomerol, Médoc, Graves, etc.?

I'm sorry but I'm pretty sure that's not correct.
Champagne is a region but not a method.

The method is called champenoise and everywhere in the world there are sparkling wines made with the champenoise method, called on many different ways, Spumante to name one.

There's no reason to call a wine made outside of the champagne region with the same name.
You can call it sparkling "wine made with the champenoise method" but not champagne.

Actually no, French protectionism is so bad that they do not even allow "methode champenoise" on "sparkling wines" not from France, they instead mist say "méthode traditionnelle".

i think that to be called champagne from frANCE the wine must be made from grapes of certIN types and from specfic locations. there are grape types and portions of areas that are within the entire champagne area that cannot be used for french champagne from france.

That is all incorrect, they can be made from pretty much any grape they want in any percent they choose so long as it fits in a certain regional parameter.... which is going to change soon.... which is pretty much a tacit admission the designation has been phony all along.

And should we extend this by calling wine blends from other parts of the world Bordeaux, Saint-Émilion, Pomerol, Médoc, Graves, etc.?

Those name are not as generic as champagne is, although Gallo does a lovely Hearty Burgundy I am sure you'd love....

Jeremy, you've demonstrated that you would like many sparkling wines to be called champagne on the basis that you disagree with any geographical limitation of naming, but not that it is actually the case.

If you want to go to war with the EU's whole geographical protection system, then that is a much wider issue, although the conventions around champagne started a long time beforehand:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_Geographical_Status

On the same basis, I would love there to be a lot more belotta ham in this world, but there's not.

The purpose is to point out that France should be called out for their phony protection of the name "Champagne". Any méthode champenoise sparkling wine is a champagne, whether or not the French care to admit it. A rose by any other name.

That is just so incredibly incorrect that I can't even be bothered explaining why.

If I buy something that says "Champagne" on the label, I expect it to come from the Champagne region of France, not some fizzy drink from California.

I would agree.

Champagne is a region in France. When I buy "Champagne", I expect it to be from France.
Sparkling wine is product bottled outside of France.

It's an easy distinction.

I'd never call a Pinot Noir a "Burgundy" unless it was a French Burgundy. I'd never call a Cabernet Sauvignon a "Bordeaux" unless it was a French Bordeaux. I honor the Region of origin. If not from the Region, then I refer to it as the Varietal. As all vintners do.

I happen to think very highly of California Cabernet Sauvignon. I also happen to think very highly of Oregonian Pinot Noir. This does not mean I don't appreciate the Bordeaux or Burgundy wines of France. But it's easier for people in the wine business to refer to them as such to differentiate between them. The same is true for Champagne VS Sparkling wine.

Finally;
The belief in America that Champagne is mostly a "Celebratory" drink has always amazed me. Those of us that lived or are living in France know that it is simply a bottle of goodness to be enjoyed as you will. After all, we are alive, yes? Why not "Celebrate"? ;)

Americans should understand the concept as the US Congress formally declared that Bourbon has to come from Kentucky. If you shop for Bourbon in the UK for instance, they have Jim Beam there that is actually made in the UK. However you will not find the word Bourbon printed anywhere on the bottle.

Americans should understand the concept as the US Congress formally declared that Bourbon has to come from Kentucky. If you shop for Bourbon in the UK for instance, they have Jim Beam there that is actually made in the UK. However you will not find the word Bourbon printed anywhere on the bottle.

You got my vote, Stimpy.
Even Ren would agree.

I'm disappointed with the behavior in this thread. One of my favorite reasons to come to Dining Buzz! Is to get away from the tension and sniping in a lot of the travel forums. :td: to the attitudes here

I'm attending a party tonight for a good charitable cause.

The host is serving a huge selection of wine and will have some awesome Champagne.

It will be interesting to see whom goes with wine and whom takes the Bubbly.

I for one, will have a glass of Champagne. It will be a fun evening! :):td:

That is just so incredibly incorrect that I can't even be bothered explaining why.

If I buy something that says "Champagne" on the label, I expect it to come from the Champagne region of France, not some fizzy drink from California.

If the Champagne region is so sacrosanct, why is it being made bigger? Either it is the region or it isn't.

There is no discernible difference between French fizzy drinks and fizzy drinks from other regions where the méthode champenoise is used. Brilliant marketing and fierce protectionism have been able to boost prices for their product.

In blind taste tests for fizzy drinks from France, the UK, US, Oz, etc the French have not fared well, even Moët & Chandon took a beating. The French have stopped entering their top fizzy drinks in international blind competitions. Only houses trying to make their name are willing to take the risk.

If the Champagne region is so sacrosanct, why is it being made bigger? Either it is the region or it isn't.

There is no discernible difference between French fizzy drinks and fizzy drinks from other regions where the méthode champenoise is used. Brilliant marketing and fierce protectionism have been able to boost prices for their product.

In blind taste tests for fizzy drinks from France, the UK, US, Oz, etc the French have not fared well, even Moët & Chandon took a beating. The French have stopped entering their top fizzy drinks in international blind competitions. Only houses trying to make their name are willing to take the risk.

The fact that YOU can't taste the difference doesn't mean that there isn't any difference. Your own post implies that there IS a difference. I can assure you that I CAN taste the difference between wines made by the same method and by the same company from the same varietals of grapes grown in Champagne vs grapes grown in, say Napa or Sonoma county. I have done it blind and consistently, with Chandon, Roederer, and Mumm products from both areas.

Incidentally, I tend to like the California versions slightly better, but that's my taste preference. There IS a difference in the character of the grapes, imparted by the different soils and different climates of the respective regions.

I hereby invoke the first rule of holes.

There is no discernible difference between French fizzy drinks and fizzy drinks from other regions where the méthode champenoise is used.

Apart from the taste. And the quality.

In blind taste tests for fizzy drinks from France, the UK, US, Oz, etc the French have not fared well, even Moët & Chandon took a beating. The French have stopped entering their top fizzy drinks in international blind competitions. Only houses trying to make their name are willing to take the risk.

Which blind taste tests exactly? What were the circumstances? Who were the testers? How many test back this up? Sorry but I'm always very suspicious of unnamed "tests" or "studies".

If I order champagne and I'm served a new world sparkling wine I'll send it back because it's not what I ordered.

Nyetimber from the UK has been known to "win" blind taste tests and there are a handful of world-class Proseccos out there, but I think we all have to admit that the Champagne region pretty much dominates the world's top fizzy wine production.

Taste tests are a waste of time whether its Champagne versus Prosecco or Coke versus Pepsi. As we say in Burgundy à chacun son goût

Taste tests are a waste of time whether its Champagne versus Prosecco or Coke versus Pepsi. As we say in Burgundy à chacun son goût

Indeed. Whether you translate that as "To Each his Own" OR "There is no accounting for taste!" ;) Message received.

Taste tests are a waste of time whether its Champagne versus Prosecco or Coke versus Pepsi. As we say in Burgundy à chacun son goût

I disagree - it totally depends upon how they are used. If they are used to try to justify the overall superiority of one item over another, then yes, they are a waste of time. OTOH, if they are used by the taster to get in better touch with their own taste preferences, to understand what you actually like and don't like and whether or not it represents value TO YOU relative to other choices that are available to you, then they are very worthwhile.

As I said, I have used these sort of tests to calibrate my own palate, to understand where my own sweet spots are for my wine preferences. I learned that I prefer my Zinfandels young, my Cabernets to be about 7-12 years old and from Napa rather than elsewhere in CA, my Pinot Noirs from the Santa Rita Hills rather than elsewhere in CA or Oregon, and that I prefer the $12-20 California sparklers to low end real Champagnes, and that Red Burgundies are a near total crapshoot where the specific producer of the wines is far more important than the particular appellation or the vintage. I also find that there are a handful of 2nd growth Bordeaux wines that I personally find to be as good or better than the first growths, and certainly they represent better values TO ME. I also know where I tend to agree with Robert Parker's general opinions (Cabs, Bordeaux, and Rhone Varietals) and where I don't (Pinot Noirs, Burgundies, Chardonnays). I've learned that among under $15 wines, I'm more likely to get a Malbec from Argentina, a Shiraz from Australia, or Rioja from Spain that I really like, than a wine from anywhere else in that price range.

That doesn't make those opinions right, it just makes them a well tested representation of my personal tastes, which gives me confidence in what I buy that I will be satisfying my own taste preferences in a cost effective manner.

Apart from the taste. And the quality.

The worst stuff I've ever tasted in my life was 'made in France', a so-called "Champagne" that was served in AY biz.

So thanks but no thanks, when it comes to taste and quality I'll happily give non-French champagnes a go.

The whole desperate ruling not to use the generic word champagne (aka "bubbly") for anything not made in that specific region is like having some obscure soft drink manufacturer make a claim that the term "cola" should only be used by them, so from now onwards Coke, Pepsi and others will not be allowed to use it...

Seriously? You are saying that sparkling wines should be all called champagne because once they served you a bad champagne on a plane and now you prefer American sparkling???

Of course there are horrible champagne from France, as there are horrible malbec from Argentina, horrible chianti from Tuscany, etc etc.. It doesn't mean that an whole region is not entitled to call the wine made there with his own name.. And it definitely doesn't give the right to an other region to use their name..

The worst stuff I've ever tasted in my life was 'made in France', a so-called "Champagne" that was served in AY biz.

So thanks but no thanks, when it comes to taste and quality I'll happily give non-French champagnes a go.

The whole desperate ruling not to use the generic word champagne (aka "bubbly") for anything not made in that specific region is like having some obscure soft drink manufacturer make a claim that the term "cola" should only be used by them, so from now onwards Coke, Pepsi and others will not be allowed to use it...

cola is the same generic term as sparkiling wine.

All 'Cokes' and 'Pepsis' (and other brands) are colas... but they are not 'cokes'.

The same for champagnes. They are ALL sparkling wines.

And it is the same for cognacs - they are ALL brandies.

No one is saying for a minute that there aren't some average champagnes. Or some rather excellent sparkling wines. But that doesn't mean that the excellent sparkling wine from Australia or USA should be called a champagne.

cola is the same generic term as sparkiling wine.

All 'Cokes' and 'Pepsis' (and other brands) colas... but they are not 'cokes'.

The same for champagnes. They are ALL sparkling wines.

And it is the same for cognacs - they are ALL brandies.

No one is saying for a minute that there aren't some average champagnes. Or some rather excellent sparkling wines. But that doesn't mean that the excellent sparkling wine from Australia or USA should be called a champagne.
Exactly - Aster completely missed the point. Some of the best sparkling wines I've ever tasted are from Australia, but their makers would not tolerate your ignorance if you called them champagnes.

So thanks but no thanks, when it comes to taste and quality I'll happily give non-French champagnes a go.

..

Good luck with that - there are no non-French champagnes.

So thanks but no thanks, when it comes to taste and quality I'll happily give non-French champagnes a go.

Nobody ever denied that abstinence was an option

Like I said, a lot of people - myself included - use the term champagne just as we would say bubbly. It's a generic term for sparkling wine. That's all.

I'm also not going to play this silly game of not calling a champagne a champagne for geographic reasons as the most important part of it is the production process. So to me a Codorniu is a champagne, regardless of the legal wranglings that are comical to say the least. :)

When a foolish points gets repeated over and over again, you just have to say "stop feeding the trolls". Let it go.

When a foolish points gets repeated over and over again, you just have to say "stop feeding the trolls". Let it go.

But what do you do when the troll keeps coming back and feeding himself? I mean, it doesn't matter how often he says it, it's not going to be correct.

But what do you do when the troll keeps coming back and feeding himself? I mean, it doesn't matter how often he says it, it's not going to be correct.

Let him repeat it to an empty room. The point has been made and intelligent people can tell the difference. Time to move on.

its like calling Parma ham Iberico.... in whatever way they are produced, it's wrong...

its like calling Parma ham Iberico.... in whatever way they are produced, it's wrong...

Iberico ham comes from Black Iberian Pigs. It doesn't matter if that Black Iberian Pig is in Arkansas or Spain, it will still be a Black Iberian Pig, you can't take a Danish Protest Pig, ship him off to the Iberian peninsula, slaughter him and call him a Jamón ibérico. Parma ham by contrast requires no specific pig or boar, it is dry cured ham from Parma. If you are going to use analogies, do know something about it.

The point has been made and intelligent people can tell the difference.

Pick a side, French lawyers or common sense.

Intelligent people don't let some over-protective ruling from a paranoid local industry change what is a global product.

If I buy an Australian feta cheese and a similar ruling gets pushed though, am I going to stop calling it feta cheese? Don't think so, though I'm sure the "Le Champagne" brigade will jump right in about how it's no longer a feta for one simple reason... lawyers. :rolleyes:

I'm attending a party tonight for a good charitable cause.

The host is serving a huge selection of wine and will have some awesome Champagne.

It will be interesting to see whom goes with wine and whom takes the Bubbly.

I for one, will have a glass of Champagne. It will be a fun evening! :):td:

So hopefully now your hangover is better you'll let us know what champagne they treated you to?

When a foolish points gets repeated over and over again, you just have to say "stop feeding the trolls". Let it go.It's not clear whether you're referring to those who agree with you, or the others.

I can't believe the lack of common sense...

Champagne is a region, the wine made in that region is called champagne.. It's so easy and simple..

Valpolicella is a region, wine made in that region is called valpolicella.

Chianti is a region, wine made in that region is called chianti.

Cotes du Rhone is a region, wine made in that region is called cotes du Rhone.

Now, someone thinks that to his taste champagne and American sparkling wines are the same and so he pretends to call American sparkling wines "champagne". Just because he said so.

Where is the common sense? Would you call the Alps, "Rocky Mountains", just because once, while you were skiing in St Moritz, you thought there was a similar slope in Aspen? And then pretend that it's only lawyers that prevent people from calling the Alps "Rocky Mountains"?

Wines made in champagne are called champagne, not because lawyer said so, but because they are made in that region with grapes from that region.

If you make a sparkling wine in Napa you can call it Napa Sparkle, or however you like, but why on earth would you call it with a name of a region of France thousands of miles away?

Wow, I had no idea this thread was still going! May I venture an opinion or two? http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/icon_smile_tongue.gif

Champagne has been an integral part of celebration for so long. I was on vacation a few weeks ago and got so tired of seeing all these people ordering champagne.

Spot on. It's everywhere. In retrospect I also realized that I don't favor carbonated drinks of any kind http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/benzomatic/Emoticons/icon_smile_tongue.gif Probably should have added that to the OP.

Ah oui, zee terroir of zee place imparts a certain je ne sais quoi...
LOL... I don't know if you're channelling Jackie Gleason or Homer Simpson, but it works either way.

Who says champagne is a marker for special occasions? It is just another wine. It is like saying chardonnay, cabernet, or Scotch for that matter would lose its "specialness" if you drank it every day.

I drink champagne the same way others drink chardonnay. It is my everyday wine of choice.

I enjoy good red wine as often as I can. But people aren't making a big deal out of it everywhere I go. It's the 'big deal' that people make which is at least as annoying as the champagne everywhere. It's presented to me as though I'm supposed to imagine that life is suddenly transformed just because I'm given a glass of lukewarm generic fizz. Nope.

This has spread and spread to the point where I'm just sick of champagne generally and (frankly) look down upon people who drink it all the time thinking they've upgraded their lives to first class.

"Real" Champagne is any Methode Champenoise sparkling wine. I don't buy into the French protectionist racket when it comes to naming convention. It would be as silly as England trying to stop sweaters not made there from being called Cardigans or Raglans.

Nope the analogy would be with Harris Tweed, or better yet Shetland Wool, which are indeed protected. 'Kobe Beef' is another example: protected at its origin and lied about wildly in the USA. Because you can make money that way.

For my part US champagnes should be called "Champagne-style sparkling wine' but the law is the law and they can call it whatever they want. Note that we do protect (generic!) cheese and ice cream more carefully!

And should we extend this by calling wine blends from other parts of the world Bordeaux, Saint-Émilion, Pomerol, Médoc, Graves, etc.?

Exactly.

Americans should understand the concept as the US Congress formally declared that Bourbon has to come from Kentucky. If you shop for Bourbon in the UK for instance, they have Jim Beam there that is actually made in the UK. However you will not find the word Bourbon printed anywhere on the bottle.

Yep, might makes right. Now, I don't eat caviar but should any caviar dyed black be named Beluga? Of course not. But why? Just because of the species?

I've been going to a couple of my local Cost Plus World Markets over the last month and they have some discounted wines at 50% off if you buy any 4 from the disco shelf. I've been able to get Heidsieck Monopole for $20 and Nicolas Feuillatte for $15. I usually mix in some cheaper whites and reds to get up to the 4 minimum.

Each store has a different amount left and the displays are sometimes hidden. Just throwing it out to anyone who has an interest.

I've been going to a couple of my local Cost Plus World Markets over the last month and they have some discounted wines at 50% off if you buy any 4 from the disco shelf. I've been able to get Heidsieck Monopole for $20 and Nicolas Feuillatte for $15. I usually mix in some cheaper whites and reds to get up to the 4 minimum.

Each store has a different amount left and the displays are sometimes hidden. Just throwing it out to anyone who has an interest.

Thanks for the tip. I've never seen any decent prices on champagne there.

I forgot to add that you need to sign up for their Explorer frequent shopper program to get all the discounts. It's easy to do at the store. It's driven off of your phone number.

http://www.worldmarketexplorer.com/

Fellow members of this thread, I raise my glass to you!

http://cmk10.smugmug.com/Other/PS-First-and-SFG-2012/i-gWs9RVh/0/M/1010033-M.jpg (http://cmk10.smugmug.com/Other/PS-First-and-SFG-2012/24223133_vrVNfZ#!i=1975026490&k=gWs9RVh&lb=1&s=A)

Went to Ruinart on a recent trip to Champagne and loved it. I bought a couple bottles of the blanc de blancs at duty free in CDG. It's really delightful (about $65).

The tasting we had was the 2002 Dom Ruinart blanc de blancs and the 1998 Dom Ruinart rose. Both were delightful.

So what would all you experts suggest as the best value champagne for ~$100 or less?

So what would all you experts suggest as the best value champagne for ~$100 or less?

mumm makes a napa brut. it's about $15 a bottle. when done blind, over half the people prefer it to one of the expensive mumm frenchies.

for french champagne about as good as it gets, and less than half the price of the heavy promoted stuff, find some thierry thiese wines. this is his catalogue;
http://www.skurnikwines.com/msw/theise_catalogs.html

pierre peters and Chartogne-Taillet are really fine wines. a bit hard to find. close to being in a league with DOM and KRUG.

I'd get a couple of bottles of Laurent Perrier Demi sec.

I really, really like Ruinart blanc de blancs - about $70/bottle if you can find it in the US.

Every year at Cargolux Airlines Luxemburg we ordered a truckload of Champagne at a local Epernay producer. One colleague ordered 100 bottles for his own consumption, that's drinking two bottles/week.

So what would all you experts suggest as the best value champagne for ~$100 or less?

One of the best Champagnes I've ever had is the NV Launois BdB - incredibly elegant and complex to keep your interest. And it's a total steal at $34.99.

http://www.klwines.com/detail.asp?sku=1002121

I enjoy Perrier-Jouët. I polished of a bottle of it and a bottle of Dom Perignon in the same night, and there is no comparison. Dom really is swill.

I enjoy Perrier-Jouët. I polished of a bottle of it and a bottle of Dom Perignon in the same night, and there is no comparison. Dom really is swill.

At Binny's in Chicago, Perrier-Jouet $24.99 a few weeks ago. I bought a couple of bottles, but I should have paid attention to the sale date. When I went back, it was over. :(

The regular price of Laurent-Perrier Brut or Demi-Sec at Mariano's in Chicago is $29.99. They frequently have sales of 15% off. We bought four bottles a couple weeks ago and got a $20 off coupon for the next wine purchase.

I enjoy Perrier-Jouët. I polished of a bottle of it and a bottle of Dom Perignon in the same night, and there is no comparison. Dom really is swill.Completely different styles, and Perrier-Jouet is the best apple juice money can buy :) I do love it as a light, floral style.

Well I finally tried Krug. Had a couple glasses during a CX First flight last year. Definitely worth the wait and certainly better than anything I'd had before ^

Well I finally tried Krug. Had a couple glasses during a CX First flight last year. Definitely worth the wait and certainly better than anything I'd had before ^

Yes, it is my favorite. Try their Clos de Mesniles (I probably butchered the spelling). It is a reserve single bottling that is mind blowing.

So what would all you experts suggest as the best value champagne for ~$100 or less?

Billecart-Salmon is quite good. I like the Brut Rose.

Billecart-Salmon is quite good. I like the Brut Rose.

Yes. And I like Duetz and Pol Roger Brut in that range a lot as well

Yes. And I like Duetz and Pol Roger Brut in that range a lot as well

+1 ^

Yes. And I like Duetz and Pol Roger Brut in that range a lot as well

+1 on Pol Roger. My favourite.

In the sub-$100 category, I'll add Bollinger to the list (and agree with the others suggested here).

Finding a really nice bottle of Champagne under $100 is not too hard IMO. It is the under $40/45 price-point where I find it hard to find something (Champagne or sparkling) that offers something special. For me, at under $50, I reach for the Nicolas Feuillatte label. Or even lower, Mumm's Napa M Cuvee is a great under $20/bottle.

In the sub-$100 category, I'll add Bollinger to the list (and agree with the others suggested here).

Finding a really nice bottle of Champagne under $100 is not too hard IMO. It is the under $40/45 price-point where I find it hard to find something (Champagne or sparkling) that offers something special. For me, at under $50, I reach for the Nicolas Feuillatte label. Or even lower, Mumm's Napa M Cuvee is a great under $20/bottle.

Oh yes, Bollinger is very nice. And I would add Taittinger to the list. I agree you can get very nice champagne in the $50-$100 price range. At least for the style I prefer, I prefer a lot of these to something a lot more expensive such as Dom Perignon. They aren't Krug or the Pol Roger Churchill Cuvee, which are probably my favorites, but there are some very good wines in the $50-$100 range.

I love Ruinart's non vintage Champagne at about $70/bottle. Hard to find in the USA though.

Their Dom Ruinart rose is delightful and priced to match.

+1 on Pol Roger. My favourite.

I concur... popped on bottle of this when I proposed to my wife, popped a bottle of this when my sister and her boyfriend became engaged, popped a bottle of this last weekend just because I felt like it....

My fav too

FDW

...popped a bottle of this last weekend just because I felt like it....


^

Life is too short to need an excuse. Or even a reason other than "just because..." :)

^

Life is too short to need an excuse. Or even a reason other than "just because..." :)

We had a champagne party over the weekend. We went through 19 bottles, but people brought so much (even though they were told not to), we ended up with 2 bottles of Veuve Clicquot brut, one Pommery brut, 5 Laurent-Perrier demi-sec, one brut, one Cuvee Rose, one Millesime (local shop has great L-P prices), one Taittinger brut and two Piper-Heidseick Cuvee-sublime, plus four bottles of mimosa worthy only "stuff." :)

There will be a lot of "just because..." over the coming weeks and months. :D

We had a champagne party over the weekend. We went through 19 bottles, but people brought so much (even though they were told not to), we ended up with 2 bottles of Veuve Clicquot brut, one Pommery brut, 5 Laurent-Perrier demi-sec, one brut, one Cuvee Rose, one Millesime (local shop has great L-P prices), one Taittinger brut and two Piper-Heidseick Cuvee-sublime, plus four bottles of mimosa worthy only "stuff." :)

There will be a lot of "just because..." over the coming weeks and months. :D

Sweet baby Jesus! You need help man! You can't possibly drink all that alone. I'm perfectly willing to come and help you if it all possible given my schedule.

Sweet baby Jesus! You need help man! You can't possibly drink all that alone. I'm perfectly willing to come and help you if it all possible given my schedule.

Yeah, stop by for a mimosa! ;)

Yeah, stop by for a mimosa! ;)

Bwahahahahahah! ^

Leaving aside the Grande Marques... one of my favorite lesser known houses of Champagne is Cattier. Their standard bottling, the Brut Antique is outstanding. Not sure how easy it is to find in the US, but for the Champagne lover it will be worth the persuit....

Leaving aside the Grande Marques... one of my favorite lesser known houses of Champagne is Cattier. Their standard bottling, the Brut Antique is outstanding. Not sure how easy it is to find in the US, but for the Champagne lover it will be worth the persuit....

BA was serving one of the Cattier's in First Class last year. I thought it was decent, but not stellar.

BA was serving one of the Cattier's in First Class last year. I thought it was decent, but not stellar.

This is line with my experiences. Im a big fan of their regular bottling, but their vintage and "higher end" labels have been average performers.

Although I have not had it for a long time, I have enjoyed non-vintage Champagne from Duval-Leroy, and find it to offer very good value. It is a very good choice for entertaning when one needs many bottles.

Had a bottle of Ruinart yesterday..... I was seriously unimpressed..... :(

Had a bottle of Ruinart yesterday..... I was seriously unimpressed..... :(

You really want their Blanc de Blancs which is very good at the price range.

Their R de Ruinart is pretty forgettable - I can't remember anything about how it tastes, despite having had quite a lot of it over time.