Decanting bubbly? Wha'?

[Robin Garr]

Okay, so I drop in on the neighborhood wine shop this afternoon, and while I'm there I pick up a couple of recently arrived Crémants, continuing to pursue my hypothesis that the best CHEAP bubbly is Prosecco, but the best QPR bubbly is Crémant from various non-Champagne regions of france.

Later I'm looking at the back label, and this small-print advice absolutely stumps me:

"To enhance your enjoyment of this wine, we recommend decanting it before serving."

WTH? Has anybody ever seen or tried this approach to a sparkler? Seems to me that all it would do would be knock down the desirable mousse.

Hi Robin,
I guess that an “aggressive” bubbly wine could be somewhat "tamed" by decanting it. Probable most likely in France some sparkling wines are served from pitchers or carafes in local cafes or restaurants.

Salute

[Robin Garr]

I guess that an “aggressive” bubbly wine could be somewhat "tamed" by decanting it.

I thought it might be something about people not liking gassy wines, Victor. It's certainly true that not everyone wants sparkling water at a restaurant, although it is my usual choice.

Probable most likely in France some sparkling wines are served from pitchers or carafes in local cafes or restaurants.

Could be. I haven't seen it, and certainly not around Champagne, but then, I haven't been everywhere and haven't seen everything.

Has anybody ever seen or tried this approach to a sparkler? Seems to me that all it would do would be knock down the desirable mousse.

Cédric Bouchard, one of the top grower-producers in the Côte des Bar believes his sparklers are best served decanted. I've heard of some wine lovers who do so regularly with their champagnes to better appreciate the nuances of the particular terroir, especially from single-vineyard champagnes. I also love to experiment myself and always try to set some leftover bubbly, usually champagne, aside in the fridge overnight to experience it anew the next day without the bubbles and learn more about the wine's expression that way.

[Robin Garr]

Cédric Bouchard, one of the top grower-producers in the Côte des Bar believes his sparklers are best served decanted. I've heard of some wine lovers who do so regularly with their champagnes to better appreciate the nuances of the particular terroir, especially from single-vineyard champagnes. I also love to experiment myself and always try to set some leftover bubbly, usually champagne, aside in the fridge overnight to experience it anew the next day without the bubbles and learn more about the wine's expression that way.

Excellent information, Keith, thanks! I've tried flat bubbly too, also for the sake of science, but - maybe because I also like sparkling water and just seem to embrace carbonated drinks - it doesn't appeal to me as much in that state.

Scratching my head over the concept of decanting Champagne or other bubbly.

But as to your theory about best inexpensive bubbles: you may well be right in that some of the various and sundry bubblies of cremant and mousseux can be profoundly good at a great low price---from the Jura with a lot of Chasselas or from the Loire with a lot of Chenin (although some Jura tend to be overly bland, and some Loire Chenin is vapid beyond belief and little better than battery acid).

No love for cava though? Mind you, I would not have thought cava myself a few years ago, as I never liked that characteristic rubbery component that most cava had, courtesy of the varietal blends that dominate. But a lot has changed, and there are more and different varieties being commonly used now, so the rubbery thing isn't always a marker anymore.

[Robin Garr]

No love for cava though? Mind you, I would not have thought cava myself a few years ago, as I never liked that characteristic rubbery component that most cava had, courtesy of the varietal blends that dominate. But a lot has changed, and there are more and different varieties being commonly used now, so the rubbery thing isn't always a marker anymore.

Well ... two issues, really.

One is, frankly, I'm keeping it simple for journalistic purposes. Prosecco good and cheap. Cremant good value for quality. Of course it's possible to go on and on with nuance, exception and variation. Heck, that's what wine talk is all about.

But more seriously, even without the "rubber" (what is that, Xarel-lo character? ), when I think about going out to get a sparkly wine that's not too expensive but that will be pretty certain to please me, I go to Prosecco, not Cava. I simply perceive better QPR there. But of course if we picked out a dozen of each and set them up blind, it wouldn't be as simple as that.

Okay, got it. Makes sense on the first one (you want to write an article on Prosecco )

I love Prosecco too; my wife dotes on the stuff; it's enormously satisfying, for sure, for sure. And cheap enough to safely be a potato chip bubbly---which is how they usually serve it in St. Marks Square!

Because it's a variety and from a single area (well, picky pick, maybe a couple of closely related areas) Prosecco fits in a fairly narrow range: that of like it for its lemony perkiness, or not.

Cava covers a lot more range, is just as if not more nicely priced, and offers more producers from more different places, so more apt to please a wider range of palates and preferences.

Which means, after you write your Prosecco article, consider writing a cava piece!

Me, I wouldn't mind seeing a shootout between (among?) Prosecco, Cava, Loire and Jura. I'm eliminating Clairette de Die and such, as they stand firmly within the aromatic/pungent range and are therefore, to me, entirely different creatures.

Me, I wouldn't mind seeing a shootout between (among?) Prosecco, Cava, Loire and Jura.

This!

The first time that I tried a Bouchard Champagne, I read about how Cedric recommended drinking his Champagnes as if they were still wines. I have not taken his advice yet.

Also, a few years ago, I read that the glass manufacturer Georg Riedel likes to decant Champagne.

Incidentally, Adami makes a still Prosecco that comes in a Bordeaux-style bottle, which I have not tried yet.

I've tried flat bubbly too, also for the sake of science, but - maybe because I also like sparkling water and just seem to embrace carbonated drinks - it doesn't appeal to me as much in that state.

Ok, but in my experience decanting champagne or even leaving it overnight does not cause it to become 'flat'. There is still carbonation, although less aggressive.

In that sense, decanting sparkling wine doesn't seem to be any more heretical than decanting any other wine category, it all depends on the particular wine, circumstances, etc.

Cédric Bouchard, one of the top grower-producers in the Côte des Bar believes his sparklers are best served decanted. I've heard of some wine lovers who do so regularly with their champagnes to better appreciate the nuances of the particular terroir, especially from single-vineyard champagnes. I also love to experiment myself and always try to set some leftover bubbly, usually champagne, aside in the fridge overnight to experience it anew the next day without the bubbles and learn more about the wine's expression that way.

Agreed. There are some Champagnes where I've found decanting helps a great deal (Tarlant Vigne d'Antan, Ulysse-Collin, Selosse and Bouchard in particular) - the wines tend to be so tightly wound young, and become much more expressive with some air. They don't lose their effervescence either and go 'flat' for some time either - the bubbles just become a little tamer.

FWIW, had a bottle of Jacques Selosse Initiale a couple of nights ago that was decanted for a couple of hours, and was all the better for it. (I've had the same wine & disgorgement before popped and poured, and it was nowhere near as enjoyable.)

[Robin Garr]

Ok, but in my experience decanting champagne or even leaving it overnight does not cause it to become 'flat'. There is still carbonation, although less aggressive.

Actually, your mention of "leaving it overnight" raises a separate but possibly related issue: In my experience (an offshoot discovery in the process of debunking the old silver spoon myth), Champagne/methode traditionnelle wines hold remarkably well overnight in the bottle open to the air, without any stopper or closure at all. My theory is that the outgassed CO2, as heavy as it is, settles on the surface of the wine like a protective blanket and holds the rest in solution. Now I'm thinking the same hypothesis might apply to Champers in a decanter.

I've had Henriot 1996 served side by side decanted and not. I'm not sure the decanting made a difference. Both were delicious, though.

I've never thought to decant champagne either.

However, I almost always let champagne "sit in the glass". I never drink quickly or just while it's chilled. I love to let it linger, like a slow soft kiss... I can pour a glass and enjoy it over a half hour or so.

Maybe I also have a "built-in" decanting method of sorts in that I also use chardonnay/burgundy style stems rather than flutes...LOL. I seem to break a lot of rules when it comes to my favorite wine. Not by intention, just out of comfort (or preference)...

Bad Jeff habit #1 - preferring the elegant modest Chardonnay/Burgundy stems to the traditional slim flutes. I actually like the greater surface space and the ease in drinking out of a bowl shape. I know I likely lose the effervesence faster, in addition to the focus of aromatics, but it's just the way I've come to enjoy it. In all honesty, I wouldn't mind the carbonation of champagne's being subdued just a bit, as an average rule. Stylistically, "mellowed" champagnes are my taste (relative to brisk, young or frothy). I do love the chalk hints and purity that I find more in the latter group but, in a perfect world, it's the creaminess emerging behind all that (in time) that really turns champagne into that tamed, sensuous, textural seduction that I love so much. So a loss of some exuberance (or even the impression of that loss) in the form of slightly wider glasses is something I don't mind at all myself.

Bad Jeff Habit #2 - Often letting the champagne sit in the glass and warm a bit longer than what is generally advised for sparkling wines. (As mentioned above).

Bad Jeff Habit #3 - Failing to hold wine glasses by the stem. Yeah, I know, I should've learned this on day one of Wine drinking etiquette 101, yet somehow I didn't show up for class... I always just put my paws directly on the bowl. I always feel like I'm going to drop the glass if I were to hold it by the stem. It just doesn't feel normal to me...

Bad Jeff Habit #4 - Going a bit too stream of thought with the post topic once again...

Anyway, I wish everyone a very safe and happy New Year!

Take Care,

Jeff

Bad Good Jeff habit #1 - preferring the elegant modest Chardonnay/Burgundy stems to the traditional slim flutes. I actually like the greater surface space and the ease in drinking out of a bowl shape. I know I likely lose the effervesence faster, in addition to the focus of aromatics, but it's just the way I've come to enjoy it. In all honesty, I wouldn't mind the carbonation of champagne's being subdued just a bit, as an average rule. Stylistically, "mellowed" champagnes are my taste (relative to brisk, young or frothy). I do love the chalk hints and purity that I find more in the latter group but, in a perfect world, it's the creaminess emerging behind all that (in time) that really turns champagne into that tamed, sensuous, textural seduction that I love so much. So a loss of some exuberance (or even the impression of that loss) in the form of slightly wider glasses is something I don't mind at all myself.

Fixed.
With really good bubbly, I've found that putting it in a wider Burg glass doesn't diminish the effervescence that much - and I get far more aromatic enjoyment that way. For the more complex, layered champagnes like Krug, Tarlant VdA or Dhondt, I have a hard time drinking them from traditional flutes - they always seem so much more expressive and more dynamic in a bigger glass.

Late joiner on this thread.

Basically yes to everything said here - bigger more expressive champagnes can be decanted, and drunk from a more open glass. I've seen some folk just use white wine glasses for this purpose, like the Riedel Chianti Classico glass. In fact I bought some more open mouthed flutes in the post Christmas sales with this in mind, ad tried them last night on a basic Champagne, the Ployez Jacquemart Selection Brut. Works well..

Happy New Year everyone,

cheers
Andrew

Two things. First, there is a chance that the decant advisory was accidentally included on the back label, as it is "standard" wording on many back labels, and could have been inadvertently included on this label. Regardless, it made for an interesting discussion.
Secondly, I agree with Hoke on the issue of Cava. I believe that Cava is Spain's gift to the wine world. They made a major commitment to rival Champagne, and were the first to use the gyropalette. The fact that Cava is usually priced below Prosecco is IMO a function of production and market pressures. Prosecco has a easy to pronounce and somewhat sexy name. When we do our annual blind tastings of sparklers Prosecco's regularly come in at or near the bottom, so much so that I have stopped including them in the lineup. Not to mention that Cava is produced "methode-champanoise" vs. Charmant or tank method. Also the increasing use of Chardonnay and Pinot Noir bode well for the future of this versatile everyday sparkler.

I could see decanting to reduce extra gas (and it wouldn't quickly make the wine flat- as Robin notes Chanpagne even without a stopper will retain some gas till following day).

As to Cava vs Prosecco, the reality (well, at least my reality) is most of both is probably insipid, and the best of both (Coste Piane, Bisol, Sorelle Bronca in Veneto, Gilabert or Castellroig in Spain) are damn good.

I've tried flat bubbly too, also for the sake of science, but - maybe because I also like sparkling water and just seem to embrace carbonated drinks - it doesn't appeal to me as much in that state.

Ok, but in my experience decanting champagne or even leaving it overnight does not cause it to become 'flat'. There is still carbonation, although less aggressive.

In that sense, decanting sparkling wine doesn't seem to be any more heretical than decanting any other wine category, it all depends on the particular wine, circumstances, etc.

Happy New Year Rahsaan. Knowing your Loire affliction, I opened a NV Champalou bubbly recently and shared with the staff at the Grill. Delicious, but kept a glass for day 2. Held up very well and mousse was still singing!

Agreed with the notion that leaving a bottle of Champagne open or merely stoppered in some way overnight will do the wine no harm. Going further, agreeing with Robin's hypothesis that the heavy carbon dioxide prevents both oxidation and the loss of the sparkle.

Also agreed that serving Champagne in a Burgundy style glass as opposed to a flute or tulip can allow for greater appreciation of the nose of the wine.

As to decanting of Champagne, I much prefer my wine to open in the glass, that allowing me to enjoy it at whatever stage I choose rather than decanting which most surely impacts on the first attack (e.g. yeast on the nose) as well on what I like to smilingly refer to as "bubbleicity". Perhaps a matter of personal choice but I want to feel the sharpness of the first attack of the Champagne and then to follow the wine as that attack recedes.

Best
Rogov

Now and then I stick a half-finished bottle of sparkling wine in the fridge overnight and I've had a few Champagnes that tasted better the second day. Not that I will probably ever decant the stuff.

As for Riedel recommending decanting, if I owned Riedel I'd recommend decanting milk, orange juice, Ovaltine, Coca Cola, Bud Lite, Pepto Bismo, mouthwash.....

As for Riedel recommending decanting, if I owned Riedel I'd recommend decanting milk, orange juice, Ovaltine, Coca Cola, Bud Lite, Pepto Bismo, mouthwash.....

I think they do that. Kool-Aid too. One for purple, one for red, one for green...