quote:

---

Originally posted by Nick Shiraef:
I have never had a california sparkler that is even as good as basic NV like Mumm Cordon Rouge or Montedon. I am going to set up a blind tasting to compare the two objectively. This is a very interesting topic for me.
.

---

Nick, just for fun throw a vintage Pelorus (1998 if you can get it) into the mix as a ring in.

I agree with a lot of comments made that the best champagnes are currently superior to the sparkling white wines of anywhere else in the world*. But I think that the days of champagne's total dominance may be numbered. Tasmanian and New Zealand sparkling wines have improved exponentially in the last half dozen years or so and seem to be still improving. I figure that sooner or later that someone will find a superior region for sparkling white wines in America.

However, at the low end of the range Champagne isn't special and has plenty of competition.

* For sparkling red wines the world leader is, of course, Australia.

------------------------------
The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer

I also think the fact that many Champgane domains have begun to aquire properties in Australia and the US is the best proof of thems seeing and end to the Champagne-dominion. They've realized there are other areas that have plenty of potential and they want to be there when that happens.

Guys, don't be too hard on WS on this one. I can speak from experience: it is surprisingly hard to come up with 52 wine poll questions a year.

Now that I'm on that topic, thought I'd share some of my poll suggestions that never saw the light of day:

1. If you were wine, what kind of wine would you be?

2. If you could fill up a swimming pool with wine and swim in it, what sort of wine would you use?

3. What sort of wine do you think they serve in hell / limbo / heaven?

4. In a steel cage match between Marvin and Parker, who's the last man standing?

Actually, I think most of these ideas came from my best friend, who's something of an idiot savant when it comes to wine, and who now manages a plumbing company.

Sorry Keith but surely WS could have come up with something a little better?

I think you should have kept your questions for headlines to appear in future weekly updates. If this week's question is evidence of how desparate WS are getting, I'd say your friend is about to strike gold! Hey, if nothing else, it'll keep the forums bubbling.

(p.s. Sorry WS - I really do admire you as a publication and think the world of (most of) your tasters/writers).

Pauly

You are just plain wrong. Perhaps you just don't have access to the variety of virtually no-name champagne in the US that we have access to in the UK. But for virtually the same price as Aussie, Kiwi, and Cali sparklers (say, 2-4 GBP more per bottle), you get distinctive champagne from small makers who have hitherto sold all their grapes to the big houses. There is some very good champagne around at great prices. Pre-xmas, it was like walking into Toys'R'Us and finding all the latest, best toys on sale, up to 33% off!

Ciao.

I came here for a good argument!

AH, no you didn't, you came here for an argument!

I agree that Champagne is by far more superior than sparkling wine... BUT

after 3 glasses I can't tell the difference anymore and the girls that i'm trying to get drunk doesn't care.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BirDungy:
Pauly

You are just plain wrong. Perhaps you just don't have access to the variety of virtually no-name champagne in the US that we have access to in the UK. But for virtually the same price as Aussie, Kiwi, and Cali sparklers (say, 2-4 GBP more per bottle), you get distinctive champagne from small makers who have hitherto sold all their grapes to the big houses. There is some very good champagne around at great prices.

---

BD,
1) Correct, we have virtually no access to the 'no-name' producers.
2) How about comparing them to the competition in the same price bracket?
3) The cheap Champagnes I've had over here (under $20 AUD, or roughly 8GBP) haven't been distinguished. Nice enough to drink but nothing in them to make me drink them in preference to other sparklers.

------------------------------
The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer

I think it's important to remember that the French long ago perfected the art of making a virtue of necessity.

They couldn't ripen grapes in the Champagne district if they wanted to, so they perfected their sparkling wine from the region, a wine that actally benefits from a degree of under-ripeness, in it's own way.

So the question is-- who can compete with them? California's climate is an embarrassment of riches, in a way, when competing with Champagne. As Schramsberg and others have found out, Napa is too good a WINE region to properly grow grapes for sparkling wine.

That being said, surely there is a marginal wine region out there that could compete W/ Champagne, at least dollar-for-dollar.

Finger Lakes? Canada? South Island of NZ?
Someone is sure to step up in the near future.

I prefer semi-sec sparkling wine/champagne...

For example, I love the white labeled Veuve Clicquot, and don't even really like the regular yellow labeled brut at all.


But from what I read, I get the impression that wine reviewers consider anything not-Brut to be the white zinfandel of bubbly.

So... I don't get a vote, do I?

Thanks for sticking up for Schramsberg. I find their product acceptable for the price, and my wife loves the Cremant. secondly they are approachable-- as you can talk to a live person at Schramsberg, and the Davies are constantly seeking to upgrade the quality of the product, and the vineyards they harvest.

Due to hard times, I've had to go with non French when I wanted Vintage champagne, but I haven't done the non french owned thing yet. The worst champagne I ever had (not claiming Totts and the like when I was 17) came from France, but so did the best. I've had a few CA sparklers, but nothing I'd order again if I had the option of French available. There's just something classic about it.

Btw, I like the idea of the DC Cru! Any chance you got a website?

Sascha

http://www.lunaravencreations.com - fine hand crafted beaded jewelry

BirDungy is correct that we get a lot of lesser name Champagne that is of exceptional quality. I had some from Thierry Lusne which was superb and I must go back and get some more.

However, I suspect that this means that we do not get the variety of Cali, Aussie and NZ sparklers that each of those respected regions get. I know that I haven't seen the full range of Roederer Calis over here and had an excellent one in Philadelphia that I've not seen since.

Dannymay - yep: England


We have the right climate to make superb sparkling wines and some are starting to come through. Unfortunately, the amount of production is small and the ability to expand limited so interest is also limited. If farmers could be persuaded to use relevant land for the purpose we could have a budding industry of quality sparklers.

Lady K has started the website: www.KillerB.biz

Killer

I agree totally with your last statement about the potential for English sparkling wines. They are clean, fresh and distinctive. More on par with Champagne that the new world 'stuff' I've tried.

Maybe we could persuade TB&Co that more vineyards are a good election campaign idea? Or maybe Michael Howard? Charles Kennedy would be a pushover for this (I'm sure I saw something like this in his personal manifesto anyway...)

More vineyards, less housing!

BirD

I came here for a good argument!

AH, no you didn't, you came here for an argument!