Kelli A. White WINE CONFIDENT
I have a very high opinion of Kelli White, dating back to when she interviewed me as part of a general report on “leading” importers she ran in (if memory serves) GuildSomm. The report was great; she was great, funny, smart, unpretentious, and as I learned later, a formidable researcher and a highly professional reporter. After the interview we met for dinner, with spouses in tow, and the banter was non-stop.
So yup, I like Kelli, and I approached her book happily, and because I agree with nearly everything she thinks I find essentially nothing to dispute within her excellent book.
Please note – “within,” because if I do disagree with Ms. White, it is with her book’s subtitle, which reads There’s no wrong way to enjoy wine. This is intended to reassure wary readers that they are not in fact doofuses and poltroons because they enjoy wine differently than they thought they were “supposed” to. Fair enough!
But I can think of one seriously wrong way to enjoy wine, and a bevy of unattractive ways. The wrong way is snootily. And that is because snobbism is a sort of onanism of the immature ego. If you are a snob about wine, then you do not deserve wine. It is wasted on you.
Among the many unattractive ways to enjoy wine are, obsessively; as a “collector” either using wine as an investment vehicle or a status symbol; as someone who seeks to “master” wine, either alone or by chasing the various certification acronyms – and tell me, have you ever know an person who would claim to havemastered wine? I have not, thankfully, and I’d probably be afraid if I ever encountered someone like that. The problem, of course, is that the person who’s willing to enter this sensuous world either has already encountered the snob or the obsessive or the rich jerkoff with his designer cellar full of “100-point wines” or the well intentioned but misguided person who thinks wine reveals its secrets by having a confession tortured from it. The relaxed, absorbed, fascinated person – someone like Kelli White herself – is too seldom encountered, which is why WINE CONFIDENT exists.
I’m glad it exists, but there is a wee voice asking me to consider whether it adds to the many titles in the wine-lit that have purported to do the same thing. I mean, is this book simply a more erudite version of “Wine For Dummies, let alone the dozen or so titles setting about to reassure us that wine is accessible after all? Even if Ms. White’s book is the best of its genre – and I’d make that case (with a nod to Oz Clarke) – I wonder who thought we needed it.
Yet once you are within its pages you’re in the safest of hands. The author is perceptive, her material is superbly organized, she is a font of common sense, she writes clearly and elegantly, and no one could have done a finer job of writing thiskind of wine book. Its title, on the other hand, is debatable.
There are worse things than random Champagnes…..
Many of these were leftover (unopened) bottles from a recent trade tasting in Boston, and so they were not selected “with purpose,” so make of it what you will, as I am doing.
The three Lallements are not random, but rather the newest disgorgements, updated from the last time I sampled them. The others arrived in a re-packed box along with my last bunch of samples. Most are one-offs, which I’ll report on as individuals without the context of the estates as entireties. There’s also a Gimonnet in the mix, another bottle of which I’ll be receiving sometime in the foreseeable future.
I’m also using a new glass, the Riedel designed for Krug – alongside my faithful Juhlin 1.0 and, at times, the smaller Juhlin 2.0 which really emphasizes fruit.
Let us commence to bubblin’.
DEHOURS & FILS Oeil de Perdrix extra brut N.V.
74% Meunier, 15% Chardonnay, a perpetual reserve begun in 1989, with 2020 as the base-vintage. Deg 9/2022 – so just a short tirage.
The wine is named for the shallot-skin hue. I doubt this is the most recent disgorgement, but it’s the one they sent. It smells lovely, with little of the 2020 grassiness, and it smells wildly different from the two stems. The Juhlin shows what I surmise is the more “typical” profile, toasted whole-wheat bread with some teff flour and honey in the mix. The palate is grassier than the aroma, but not objectionably so – except maybe to purists and fussbudgets like myself.
It is shockingly blatant from the lofty Riedel. This glass puts the hurt on this wine. It should be arrested and clapped in irons, it does such damage to the contents. The Juhlin 2.0 shows the wine at its best, but in fact its best is merely “rather good.”
Dehours, if you don’t recall, is one of the Marne Valley’s lions-of-Meunier, and the range contains many highlights, mostly in a generous bready style with elements of shiitake, porcini, and various earthy umamis. I like the estate. It is 180º distinct from Cedric Moussé, which is fine, and indicates the stylistic and terroir distinctions of which Meunier is capable.
There’s fine detail and vinosity from the larger Juhlin, especially considering the short tirage. There’s little to be done about the slightly rasping finish. We also have to question the dosage choice; not challenge it, simply ask about it. And I think we can draw a discreet veil over the search-and-destroy mission carried out by the Riedel.
My faithful little Juhlin 2.0 makes this wine at least 70% better, and I am not exaggerating. It has superior fruit, better balance, more liveliness; it simply gives a greater joy in its unabashed deliciousness. I’ve seldom seen such dramatic variation from glass to glass. Maybe the Riedel needs to be tempered? (It’s the first time I’m using it.)
GAMET Caractères. Extra brut N.V.
It’s 80% Meunier, 15% Pinot Noir, and 5% CH. A blend based on a perpetual reserve started in 1999, but neither the base-vintage nor the disgorgement dateappear. A possible lot number – LCA2016 – may offer a clue.
Only the third time I’ve tasted Gamet, and I must say it’s stylish, precise yet capacious Champagne of the Meunier type. Closer to Moussé now, though with more caramel and breadth (and correspondingly less sheer brilliance), and the good news is, the Riedel glass did not lay the wine to waste, but actually turned it more solid and sturdy.
And once again, the Juhlin 2.0 grabbed a seam of “yummy” and elevated it vastly beyond what the other stems suggested. Now the wine is rosy-cheeked and dimpled.
Look, this all is interesting to me, obviously (and perhaps annoyingly) but considering the cost of a bottle of Champagne, shouldn’t we think about what we pour it into? Accordingly, the wrap on this wine as it “shows” here and now….
Juhlin original: The most vinosity and explication – and minerality.
Riedel: The most backbone, but at the cost of intricacy and animation.
Juhlin 2.0: The tastiest, most fruit-forward, most delightful.
So for me the clear choice is between the two Juhlins, and I’d serve the wine in both of them and sip back and forth. And lest we forget, we have a Champagne with no small measure of class here. Yet it was also the first of these to fall apart after being open four days (and poured three times).
From their website, there is no wine with this name (or label) but there is one with the same data – to wit:
LA VALLÉE SUSPENDUE
ASSEMBLAGE
Base year : 2017
80% Meunier, 15% Pinot Noir, 5% ChardonnayReserve wine : iregular proportion, Perpetual reserve since 1999 Vinified & aged in oak barrels
Malolactic fermentation Aged constantly in oak barrels.
Aging on lattes : minimum 6 years Dosage : 4g/L
Crus : Mardeuil, Fleury-la-Rivière, Damery.
JEAN LALLEMENT ET FILS Cuvée Tradition brut, N.V. ++
a.k.a. “Lallement Green,” disgorged 11/16/23
Having extolled the virtues of this grower, and this wine, for lo these many years, I won’t repeat that language here. I’d like to, because this is a wine that makes me jump for joy, but I shall exercise unusual restraint. What I don’t know, and have to surmise, are the contributing vintages, but based on the disgorgement date I will guess it’s 80% 2022 and 20% 2021 – only because there is zero flavor of the grassy ’20 herein.
What there is, is a Champagne of such astounding depth, terroir fidelity, and clarity that it even wins the battle against the Riedel glass, which cannot subdue this wine’s utter excellence.
The balance is perfect, the articulation could not be bettered, the sheer character and authority are stop-you-in-your-tracks impressive, and for whatever reason this edition is a deep-voiced overtly Pinot-soaked Grand Cru a little less light of foot than usual, but profoundly striking. Indeed – out of this world. And this is their entry-level wine…..!
JEAN LALLEMENT ET FILS Cuvée Réserve brut, N.V.
a.k.a. “Lallement Blue,” disgorged 11/16/23; this “superior” NV wine is only sometimes superior to its “green” sibling. Again I infer an assemblage of 20% 2021 and 80% 2020, with all that implies.
You know the drill: older vines, better parcels, longer aging, and a stated intent to make a more solid, strong wine. In my experience I’d say that is true around half the time, determined by the contributing vintages.
I sold a little to a local retailer who’d sent out a pre-arrival offering, and to my dismay he took 90% orders for this wine instead of the ostensibly “lesser” wine, based on the consumer’s tendency to opt for the perceived “best” and not to attend to the details.
So, this is very good Champagne, especially if you’re someone who doesn’t taste pyrazine, but it has a difficult (2020) vintage to surmount, and very few Champagnes are clearing that hurdle. The Juhlin 2.0 is kindest to it, suppressing the grasses in favor of a rich meatiness that stands in for “fruit.”
That said, ’20 has a tendency to show its worst when freshly poured, and if you have 15-20 minutes to wait it out, it tends to diminish. I don’t know what this might signify. The Riedel both reduces the grasses while also yanking the wine’s structure apart, so there’s that. The smaller Juhlin wants to chirp away, but this isn’t that kind of bird/wine. It’s 18 minutes since I poured this, and the original Juhlin has made its peace with ’20, which means the Champagne is very good though it stands in the shade of the “green.” (And not for the first time…)
Yet I sense this is the wine that will change the most over the days. I’ll taste it again three days from now; it’ll stay under stopper in the fridge, and we’ll see what happens – and also what it might mean.
In fact the grassiness persisted, and may have increased.
JEAN LALLEMENT ET FILS Les Perthois, Blanc de Noirs, brut “N.V.” +
Deg 11/15/23, 100% PN from vines planted in 1950, from a prized parcel in (Grand Cru) Verzenay. “NV” in quotes because my understanding is this is a 2019, the first part of which was made in steel, while this disgorgement was made in cask. It smells that way.
Young Victor Lallement may well despise me, because I challenged his decision to do this wine in wood. The steel cuvée was superb. Would this be just another oaky Champagne?
Well, yes and no – mostly no. The wine makes a strong argument for a synergy between old-vines PN and a (thankfully) subtle leavening of wood. I didn’t, honestly, think it would be this good.
You know, if you tasted only from the Riedel you could write something like “All these grower-Champagnes taste so rustic,” whereas if you tasted from the (original) Juhlin you’d write “Who knew how specifically these distinct terroirs express themselves?” The little Juhlin, by the way, finds its emphasis on fruit uncalled for in this case….
The wine will find its way, and the vintner will find his way. It’s a tiny production; otherwise I’d advocate for a blend of cask and steel. There simply isn’t enough juice to do that.
The Riedel seems to understand this wine. It is, to my amazement, best from this glass. Though it took a few minutes…
PAUL LAURENT Cuvée du Fondateur, brut N.V.
The estate, technically a Negoç, is in the Sezannais. The assemblage is 75% Pinot Noir, 20% Chard and 5% Meunier. It receives “a minimum of 18 months tirage,” but no disgorgement date appears on the label.
Approached skeptically (lack of info, generally “cheap” looking package like a supermarket BOB Champagne) but in fact the fizz is quite tasty, in the succulent PN manner. It has a slight grassy edge from the Juhlin 2.0, and the dosage is “expressive” yet the wine has a lot to enjoy – and “enjoy” is the operative word. This isn’t a Champagne to “study,” but one to let wash over you pleasantly.
The Riedel glass turns it rustic. The original Juhlin (coincidentally sold as the Verre du Krug in the shop where I bought it) is best; the wine has a certain elegance and style. But not more.
J.L. VERGNON “Murmure” Blanc de Blancs 1er Cru brut nature
This is fresh; disgorged Dec 20, 2023.
A cuvée from Vertus and Villeneuve, appears to be the “basic” NV yet it’s zero-dosage….
And it’s a zero that works! I do like it when that happens. Might it have been (even) better with 2-3 g. dosage? Probably, and yet – chapeau for beating the odds.
It’s a classy, deliberate wine, articulately mineral and with a slim edge of green-apple, and to my surprise it’s very good from the truculent Riedel, in which it lengthens the finish and explicates the chalk and iron.
They say it is aged “two years in the cellar before release” which would suggest an assemblage of 2020/2021, and if that’s the case (and I wish that information was available somewhere) there’s very little impact from the ’20 “situation” (let us call it), and yet the importer’s website indicates it’s entirely 2020 and aged three years. So, y’know, duh.
The wine in any case is fine, in its cerebral way, and that’s a description, not a judgment; I like cerebral wines. The solidity imparted by the Riedel glass is welcome. And it’s clear that a good grower made this wine. And was able to (largely) tame the misbehaviors of the ’20 vintage.
PIERRE GIMONNET ET FILS “Paradoxe” brut 1er Cru, 2019
Deg 12/2022, 90% PN “mostly Aÿ Grand Cru” and 10% CH “from Côte des Blancs.”
When I visited Didier (and sons) in April of this year, there was conversation about whether this wine would continue being made. It was almost as if Didier needed to see what would happen if he made Champagne with PN, and now that he’s seen what happens – the wines are very good and atypical for the domain’s identity – his curiosity is satisfied and he can return to his basic profile.
We start with a reduction, which fades in about five minutes, leaving a persuasive PN aroma – I’d say typical Aÿ but I already know it’s Aÿ so I’m looking for it – yet there it is, malt and blueberries. This is even more blatant from the Juhlin 2.0 (to which the reduction clings a bit longer), and to my surprise the Riedel elevates the wine, stiffening its backbone and emphasizing its length, though at the cost of delineation or nuance.
To repeat the coinage above, this is clearly the wine of a superb grower, though it is not a superb wine. It is “interesting,” and very good, but it’s a digression. Also, I’ve had better vintages of it, notwithstanding the hoo-ha over 2019, which I have yet to find convincing.
DOYARD Blanc de Blancs, 2015, Grand Cru, extra brut
Deg 12 Jan 2023 after 78 months of tirage.
It’s a cask-made Champagne, and shows it. The vegetal/grassy notes of the 2015 vintage are, alas, also unavoidable. Thus it is a wine I find difficult. The difficult vintage is of course no one’s fault; the choice of cask aging (“at least five uses” is laudable, but the wood’s still blatant) is optional.
It's a curiosity of Champagne, this insistence to press upon us vintages that are obviously….malformed. I revered the growers in my portfolio and loved many of them personally, and was always distressed when they bottled wines I felt would damage their reputations. (The only time I’m aware of a producer walking away from a flawed vintage was Suenen, when he withdrew his 2011 from the market.) I mean, I had Roederer NV one year when it was appallingly clear the wine was based on 2011. And this is an impeccable house whom everyone properly reveres.
I guess it depends on what hit you’re willing to take. Either you risk your good will and reputation by throwing vegetal stink-buggy wines into the market, or you sell an entire vintage to the distillers and figure out how to absorb the loss of revenue. Nor are we talking about nice little distinctions that only the “specialists” will perceive. These wines were and are disgusting. They’re not merely “atypical” for Champagne; they are overtly repulsive.
I had a grower whose 2005 vintage wine was riddled with the geosmin of that luckless vintage (think slimy mushrooms you left in the fridge too long), and when I opted not to offer it, he never forgave me. I mean never; he was still fussing at me fifteen years later. “There are good vintages and bad,” he said, “And your agent should support you regardless,” and this is fine if we’re taking about greater-or-lesser years, but not when we’re having unpleasant wines forced upon us. “Well, yes, vintage -XXXX- did smell like pig shit, but this is an agricultural product….!”
I miss several things about my life as a merchant, but believe me, this isn’t one of them.
留言