Champagne any good
Discussion
A friend of mine recently gave me 35 bottles of Champagne.
His wife had been given them over years by her former boss.
I have opened 5 of the bottles and they have either been completely flat or very nearly flat.
Is there any way that I can rejuvenate the rest of them? Some of them might be 30 or more years old.
His wife had been given them over years by her former boss.
I have opened 5 of the bottles and they have either been completely flat or very nearly flat.
Is there any way that I can rejuvenate the rest of them? Some of them might be 30 or more years old.
That last bit's wrong. The cork doesn't need to be wet - why? Because the champagne has a layer of CO2 protecting it and so cannot oxidise even if the cork is dry (it's held in by the cage).
OP you are not going to be able to get the gas back in so it won't be like champagne you buy in the shops, but it could be interesting nonetheless.
Maybe drink it from a white wine glass rather than a flute?
OP you are not going to be able to get the gas back in so it won't be like champagne you buy in the shops, but it could be interesting nonetheless.
Maybe drink it from a white wine glass rather than a flute?
tgr said:
That last bit's wrong. The cork doesn't need to be wet - why? Because the champagne has a layer of CO2 protecting it and so cannot oxidise even if the cork is dry (it's held in by the cage).
OP you are not going to be able to get the gas back in so it won't be like champagne you buy in the shops, but it could be interesting nonetheless.
Maybe drink it from a white wine glass rather than a flute?
I think the belief is a dry cork shrinks and let's the gas out. Hence they go flat when stored upright.OP you are not going to be able to get the gas back in so it won't be like champagne you buy in the shops, but it could be interesting nonetheless.
Maybe drink it from a white wine glass rather than a flute?
Champagne has, historically, been made in a climate which is at the northern limit of viticulture. In addition it has some of the highest yields in hectolitres per hecatre (ie lowest concentration of flavour) of any classified French production. This does not set the scene for quality. The strength of the brand and lack of transparency in production eg. practice of growers selling grapes to producers and blending across vintages to maintain a 'style' means that the customer is always at a disadvantage.
Only top quality Champagnes from good producers in a vintage year are released, usually with quite a bit of bottle age. These will take further aging. These can be well into three figures a bottle
Even 'good' old champagne is very much an expensively acquired taste. Much less fizz and some odd oxidative (sherry like) flavours creeping in. It tends to converge on a point where an old white Burgundy would be heading (but not as nice IMO)
People have their favourite marques for taste and sentimental reasons, but Champagne really doesn't hold up to scrutiny against the best competitors - especially those from England.
Only top quality Champagnes from good producers in a vintage year are released, usually with quite a bit of bottle age. These will take further aging. These can be well into three figures a bottle
Even 'good' old champagne is very much an expensively acquired taste. Much less fizz and some odd oxidative (sherry like) flavours creeping in. It tends to converge on a point where an old white Burgundy would be heading (but not as nice IMO)
People have their favourite marques for taste and sentimental reasons, but Champagne really doesn't hold up to scrutiny against the best competitors - especially those from England.
leigh1050 said:
Thanks for the replies.
Looks like I'm going to keep opening them . If it's fizzy il be happy,if it isn't I'll treat it like white wine and hope I don't get the squits!
We had the same scenario, although not with as many bottles.Looks like I'm going to keep opening them . If it's fizzy il be happy,if it isn't I'll treat it like white wine and hope I don't get the squits!
Had 5 bottles of expensive brands of champagne and decided to treat ourselves one night, all of them tased like a combination of sherry and vinegar and were poured down the sink.
Lesson learned, just drink it rather than saving it for "best"
oddman said:
Champagne has, historically, been made in a climate which is at the northern limit of viticulture. In addition it has some of the highest yields in hectolitres per hecatre (ie lowest concentration of flavour) of any classified French production. This does not set the scene for quality. The strength of the brand and lack of transparency in production eg. practice of growers selling grapes to producers and blending across vintages to maintain a 'style' means that the customer is always at a disadvantage.
Only top quality Champagnes from good producers in a vintage year are released, usually with quite a bit of bottle age. These will take further aging. These can be well into three figures a bottle
Even 'good' old champagne is very much an expensively acquired taste. Much less fizz and some odd oxidative (sherry like) flavours creeping in. It tends to converge on a point where an old white Burgundy would be heading (but not as nice IMO)
People have their favourite marques for taste and sentimental reasons, but Champagne really doesn't hold up to scrutiny against the best competitors - especially those from England.
I’d agree with some of that, but the issues you mention in your first paragraph are part of the reason “grower” champagnes have really taken off. Some really are outstanding. Only top quality Champagnes from good producers in a vintage year are released, usually with quite a bit of bottle age. These will take further aging. These can be well into three figures a bottle
Even 'good' old champagne is very much an expensively acquired taste. Much less fizz and some odd oxidative (sherry like) flavours creeping in. It tends to converge on a point where an old white Burgundy would be heading (but not as nice IMO)
People have their favourite marques for taste and sentimental reasons, but Champagne really doesn't hold up to scrutiny against the best competitors - especially those from England.
If you know of any English sparklers that can genuinely compete with the best grower champagnes / prestige cuvées then please do let the cat out of the bag!
oddman said:
Champagne has, historically, been made in a climate which is at the northern limit of viticulture. In addition it has some of the highest yields in hectolitres per hecatre (ie lowest concentration of flavour) of any classified French production. This does not set the scene for quality. The strength of the brand and lack of transparency in production eg. practice of growers selling grapes to producers and blending across vintages to maintain a 'style' means that the customer is always at a disadvantage.
Only top quality Champagnes from good producers in a vintage year are released, usually with quite a bit of bottle age. These will take further aging. These can be well into three figures a bottle
Even 'good' old champagne is very much an expensively acquired taste. Much less fizz and some odd oxidative (sherry like) flavours creeping in. It tends to converge on a point where an old white Burgundy would be heading (but not as nice IMO)
People have their favourite marques for taste and sentimental reasons, but Champagne really doesn't hold up to scrutiny against the best competitors - especially those from England.
I don't know where to start with this post to be honest. Our, homegrown, English sparkling wines are overpriced compared to Champagne and even Cremants. I don't suppose you have ever looked at a map to see how far North our vineyards are compared to those in Champagne, or doesn't that count when you are tasting English sparkling wine?Only top quality Champagnes from good producers in a vintage year are released, usually with quite a bit of bottle age. These will take further aging. These can be well into three figures a bottle
Even 'good' old champagne is very much an expensively acquired taste. Much less fizz and some odd oxidative (sherry like) flavours creeping in. It tends to converge on a point where an old white Burgundy would be heading (but not as nice IMO)
People have their favourite marques for taste and sentimental reasons, but Champagne really doesn't hold up to scrutiny against the best competitors - especially those from England.
LooneyTunes said:
I’d agree with some of that, but the issues you mention in your first paragraph are part of the reason “grower” champagnes have really taken off. Some really are outstanding.
If you know of any English sparklers that can genuinely compete with the best grower champagnes / prestige cuvées then please do let the cat out of the bag!
I was generalising of course but I'd like to see anyone's nomination for a bigger wine rip off than Champagne.If you know of any English sparklers that can genuinely compete with the best grower champagnes / prestige cuvées then please do let the cat out of the bag!
These Guys are pretty decent. Agree not cheap and yet to prove it can age -suspect it won't.
Agree about small champagne producers being where the interest and value is. They deserve more exposure and success compared with the Marques. Some smallish producers have useful relationships with our supermarkets - Coop being a good example.
The fact that the big boys are investing in England shows they respect the competition and maybe hedging against climate change.
A lot of sparkling wine I find to be really over sulphured, thin and unbalanced so tend to be disappointed and picky.
Gassing Station | Food, Drink & Restaurants | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff