WTN: American Sparkling wine - Is it French?

No question about hoe delicate and clean so many of the French Champagnes are. Back in the 1970's, 1980's and 1990's most of them were still pretty reasonable in terms of price. There are still a few out there...

But, what do I really enjoy about French Champagnes?
1 - Clean and Crisp
2 - Small delicate bubbles
3 - Super Clean aftertaste

I've been searching for American Sparkling wines that can provide some of those qualities. I've come up with two:

Domaine Chandon - Napa Valley (Founders came from the famed Moet Chandon)
Roederer Estate - Anderson Valley (Founders came from the fame French Loius Roederer)

While many United States Sparkling wine makers follow the true "Methode Champenoise", not all could hold claim to the same finesse.

I did a Sparking Wine / Champagne tasting one day. I had one of the real low end American Sparkling wines ($6) , a medium priced one ($10-12), a higher end American ($20) and a true French Champagne ($45). I used the exact same champagne glasses. I poured each of the above into glasses and had people observe the glasses. It was clear that the lower end
American sparkling wine had huge bubbles which hit the top and almost stopped (which I sometimes call artificially inseminated bubbles), and as we moved to the higher end American and French, the bubbles were tiny and the steam up the glass never stopped. Almost without tasting it, the audience wanted to go directly for the high American and the French.

I will still say, there is nothing like a true French Champagne. But, I would never hesitate to suggest one of the two California Sparkling wines to anyone for any occasion.
continue to rise to the top of the glass.

Comparisons are always interesting and informative, and you always learn something from them.

But you sorta slanted your tasting right from the get go, didn't you?

You had the 'marque'---the mark to hit---as the high-priced version of "true Champagne" (something of a redundancy, the Champagne folks would maintain), but put forth the cheap, the moderate, and the high-price versions of the American bubbly.

Was the cheap version a methode champenoise/methode traditionelle? Secondary fermentation in the bottle? Otherwise, not a worthwhile comparison. And why even put a low-price/medium-priced American in there if there's not a comparative French to put it up against?

I would definitely agree with your Roederer selection from CA! That's my go-to as well when I'm looking at the "French-Californian" sparkling wine. Love the stuff.

Another you might try in a comparison sometimes is the Argyle from OR. Great bubbly. And another (also popular with many denizens of this place) is the Gruet from NM.

I totally agree about the comparisons.

My purpose for doing that tasting was to show the differences between a low end 'artificial' style sparking wine right up to
the French classics, it really wasnt about taste testing. Just the physical appearance and aroma was clear enough to separate each of those wines.

I apologize if I came across in my post as if I was trying to do a taste comparison.

No apology necessary, Ron. Just discussin' here.

Not so much lately, but I used to do these things too, mostly for pros.

Would start with Prosecco, possibly throw in an Asti (but sometimes not), then a Spanish Cava, maybe a Franciacorta, a French Petillant or Cremant, French Champagne NV, French Champagne Vintage, then a new world range of Australia, WA, NM, OR, and CA.

Good way to detail all the differences possible mongst all these styles. Didn't see any sense in wasting time with the lowball American stuff----life's too short, and all that.

[Jenise]

Ron, I get tested a lot by friends who think I'll fall for a good American bubbly (and there ARE good ones, most notably for me Iron Horse and Schramsberg though some good stuff is being done in Oregon, too) and think it French, but the latter just never happens. The closest one came was actually Canadian, from BC producer Blue Mountain, and even then (this was at Bill Spohn's house) though it was very French in style and excellent, I thought it more likely to not be than be. What nobody anywhere outside France ever seems to get right is that primary savory biscuity/brioche/yeasty bread thing--instead, it seems the fruit is always at the fore. No matter what they do, they can't hide it.

Ron, I get tested a lot by friends who think I'll fall for a good American bubbly (and there ARE good ones, most notably for me Iron Horse and Schramsberg though some good stuff is being done in Oregon, too) and think it French, but the latter just never happens. The closest one came was actually Canadian, from BC producer Blue Mountain, and even then (this was at Bill Spohn's house) though it was very French in style and excellent, I thought it more likely to not be than be. What nobody anywhere outside France ever seems to get right is that primary savory biscuity/brioche/yeasty bread thing--instead, it seems the fruit is always at the fore. No matter what they do, they can't hide it.

In the early days of the French, flush in their confident glory of Champagne, beginning to establish houses in California, most notably Napa and Sonoma and Mendocino, there was a very strong and very conscious "We're going to show you how to make REAL sparkling wine because we're Champenoise!" attitude prevailing. And to a large extent, no one could tell them anything.

Few years later, they were stuck in a very unfortunate situation, because no one liked the style very much. Just being French didn't prove to be enough. Not even the producers liked what they were putting out. It wasn't until they reluctantly started taking advice----and most importantly realizing that they couldn't make French Champagne in California (that apparently there was something to this terroir thing they kept muttering about) and changed their approaches and styling that they started producing worthwhile wine. They abandoned the 'toasty, malty' approach and acknowledged they had to be making more fruit-forward wines, because that's what the location gave them (and truthfully, the mass drinking market in this country preferred).

(I had a couple of long discussions with Edmond Maudiere at the time---he was the Mumm's Chef de Cave and running the program there. He was puzzled, but then resolute, that the changes in approach and style had to be made, and the resulting differences were apparent, and much better than the first couple of releases. Some other ITB people in SonomaNapa and Mendo had some similar discussions with others at the time, and reported much the same.)

Of all of them, though, I think Roederer did it the best up in Anderson Valley.

What nobody anywhere outside France ever seems to get right is that primary savory biscuity/brioche/yeasty bread thing--instead, it seems the fruit is always at the fore. No matter what they do, they can't hide it.

OK, you've piqued my interest. Is there an example of the genuine article for under $20?

[Robin Garr]

OK, you've piqued my interest. Is there an example of the genuine article for under $20?

I wouldn't say so, Dan, but one way to come close is to go with the FRENCH bubblies that are made by the Champagne process but that can't be sold as Champagne. The name to look for is Cremant plus a regional name: Cremant de Bourgogne, Cremant de la Loire, Cremant d'Alsace, etc. Some of them - Bourgogne in particular because of the cuvée - emulate Champagne rather closely. You'll have to ask Jenise about the biscuity/toasty thing, which I also love; I'd add that I tend to like Champagnes best when there's plenty of Pinot Noir in the cuvée.

What nobody anywhere outside France ever seems to get right is that primary savory biscuity/brioche/yeasty bread thing--instead, it seems the fruit is always at the fore. No matter what they do, they can't hide it.

The only non-French producer I've seen who manage it is a grower in the Rheinhessen - Volker Raumland. What little I've tasted from him was certainly up there with a lot of very, very good Champagne (both in terms of the flavour profile with similar non-fruited flavours in the wine, as well as the sense of precision and balance) - unfortunately his pricing is also in the same range.

[David M. Bueker]

Ah the price issue. Champagne costs more than it should, even grower Champagne, though I am more willing to give my $ to an actual farmer than to add yet another layer of silk to the pockets of LVMH.

What's really wonderful about a wine like Roederer Estate (my favorite Cali sparkler) is that it is delicious and reasonably affordable. It is not a substitute for Champagne, in the same way that a California Cabernet is not a substitute for Bordeaux.

There are some reasonably priced sparklers from France that are well worth putting along side Champagne, Roederer Estate, etc, but even there the pricing is headed up (e.g. Huet Petillant used to be $20, and now is $32).

There are some reasonably priced sparklers from France that are well worth putting along side Champagne, Roederer Estate, etc, but even there the pricing is headed up (e.g. Huet Petillant used to be $20, and now is $32).

Dunno where you're buying your Huet, but Chambers has the '05 at $26.

[David M. Bueker]

There are some reasonably priced sparklers from France that are well worth putting along side Champagne, Roederer Estate, etc, but even there the pricing is headed up (e.g. Huet Petillant used to be $20, and now is $32).

Dunno where you're buying your Huet, but Chambers has the '05 at $26.

True. The '02 (original release) had gone up over $30 when the Euro was at $1.60.

You'll have to ask Jenise about the biscuity/toasty thing, which I also love; I'd add that I tend to like Champagnes best when there's plenty of Pinot Noir in the cuvée.

I am with you on preferring Champagne from the black grapes. The biscuity taste develops with aging: keep your Champagne for at least 3 years.

True. The '02 (original release) had gone up over $30 when the Euro was at $1.60.

Damn. I just ordered a few bottles of the '02 (second release) for $28 from CSW. No complaints at those prices.

Robin is correct about the non-Champagne French bubblies. I'd say right now the over-all leader in Cremant is Alsace, in terms of high quality, refined style, and affordable price. A good standard that's pretty widely available is the Lucien Albrecht...but there are many that are splendid.

Second to that the Chenin Blanc based wines from the Loire---totally different from the Pinot/Chardonnay based Champagne, of course, but Chenin from the Loire offers an incredible style all its own, and one that is well worth seeking out.

A 'sleeper' is sparkling wines from the Jura made from Chasselas. Goes toward the crisp and bright rather than the Pinot Noir from the nature of the grape, and doesn't always have the complexity you look for in Champagne, but it can be a QPR leader.

OK, you've piqued my interest. Is there an example of the genuine article for under $20?

I wouldn't say so, Dan, but one way to come close is to go with the FRENCH bubblies that are made by the Champagne process but that can't be sold as Champagne. The name to look for is Cremant plus a regional name: Cremant de Bourgogne, Cremant de la Loire, Cremant d'Alsace, etc.

We did have the Crémants of Moncontour and Chidaine in the Loire and enjoyed them very much. In Alsace we didn't know enough to try them. A very good reason to go back!