Champagne Update

On the subject of large houses, note that more than two-thirds of the Champagnes I tasted this year were made by small grower-producers (recoltants-manipulants), reflecting a recent surge in distribution of these Champagnes in the American market by smaller boutique importers. These smaller producers generally offer consumers wines that are more individual if not more idiosyncratic than those shipped by the larger houses, which typically prize consistency above all. That is not to say that all large houses are producing yawn-inducing wines. Far from it, as the large number of impressive bottlings from the big firms I sampled this year bears out. This is especially the case at the level of tetes de cuvee, which can be as fine as any Champagnes made, albeit at a price.

Also worth mentioning is the emergence of more zero-dosage Champagnes-bone-dry, steely, and, in the view of their fans, crystal-clear expressions of the often-great terroirs of the region, unsullied by the adornment that some sugar brings. Detractors-and there are more than a few-often find these wines austere, even severe, so bear this in mind if you're going to give them a go. There is also a growing number of Champagnes available that are raised partially or completely in wood, and often made in a vaguely oxidative and/or low-atmosphere (i.e.,less bubbly) fashion, with nutty, dried-fruit qualities. Those who believe that Champagne's first duty is to be bright, racy and refreshing will likely find such wines curious at best, and flat-out flawed at worst. At the table, however, such Champagnes can really shine, working wonders with rich fish and lighter poultry preparations or, even better, with cheese courses.