???

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.

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..

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.

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 cr�mant de Bourgogne is just as good as an average Champagne.

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

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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