[wine] Champagne Brunch on Sunday at Muffy's, Big S on Th.

Greetings, Garage Nouveau was wonderful, as always. Thanks Kris, Eric, Lars, Fritz! This week, we've been invited to Muffuletta. 11 a.m. on Sunday the 27th. Muffuletta Cafe 2260 Como St. Paul, 55108 St. Anthony Park 651-644-9116 Style du jour is "Champagne" I've included a couple of articles on affordable sparklers from the Times. Yes Warren/Ruth Joyce Betsy Bob B-Dave Jim/Louise Russ/Sue Guess: Lori Nicolai Karin Directions: Take Hwy 280 to Como, go east up the hill and then to the second light (Carter). Alt: Take Snelling to Como, West to Carter. Next Thursday, it's the Surdyk's Chamapagne Tasting for just $23.50. See Joyce's note FFI. Cheers, Jim December 11, 2002 Sipping Champagnes at $40 or Less By FRANK J. PRIAL CHAMPAGNE is the wine of legends: the widow Clicquot setting off for St. Petersburg in a coach and four with her case of samples. Edward VII's servant following him around the golf course with a bottle at the ready; his son George V serving Pol Roger in magnums to the seven reigning monarchs of Europe after his father's funeral; Mo�t & Chandon sending a trainload of Champagne to the San Francisco earthquake survivors. With less intrigue perhaps but no shortage of seasonal enthusiasm, the Dining section's tasting panel sipped and nosed its way through 26 nonvintage brut Champagnes last week, all costing $40 or less. Still, Champagne being what it is, some of the panelists supplied their own romance. Amanda Hesser imagined tasting her Champagne with cured ham. Eric Asimov opted instead for sushi, or fried chicken. Well, to each his own. In addition to Ms. Hesser, Mr. Asimov and me, our panel was joined by Howard Horvath, the wine director at Esca in Manhattan. As esteemed as Champagne may be, we all agreed that Champagne was, strangely enough, underrated. Its unmatched status as a wine for celebrations has also kept it confined to parties. "It goes well with lots of different foods," Mr. Asimov said. "Champagne has been pigeonholed." Mr. Horvath quickly chimed in, "And that is a mistake." Most Champagnes are nonvintage. Instead of using a wine of a single year, they are complex blends that can contain wine from 20 different vintages and as many vineyards. Winemakers manipulate the blends until they achieve the qualities they are seeking, whether light-bodied, heavy-bodied, fruity, yeasty or somewhere in the middle. In all those nonvintage blends, all the big houses blend toward a norm, seeking consistency year after year. These Champagnes do not have the same individuality that vintage Champagnes have, and after a while the panel felt a bit panicky trying to find different terms to describe the often subtle differences between bottles. What we were looking for from these nonvintage brut Champagnes was freshness and liveliness, and from a good many of them, that's what we got. "I wouldn't refuse any of these," Mr. Horvath said, and Ms. Hesser echoed that sentiment, saying, "They're all perfectly drinkable." We also all agreed that a few of them did leap out, and that the prices were right. Even though Champagne is a complicated wine to make, it remains relatively inexpensive. While it is possible to spend $250 on a bottle of Dom P�rignon ros� or $300 on an older bottle of Krug Clos du Mesnil, in our recent tasting the most expensive bottle was a Ruinart at $40. Average price per bottle was $29.60. Vintage Champagnes are invariably higher priced, but even with their proliferation in recent years, most houses base their reputations on their nonvintage wines. "Brut," the most common style of Champagne, means raw or untreated in French, and indicates that the Champagne is dry, that it contains little or no added sweetness. Paradoxically, "extra dry" Champagne is sweeter than brut, and "sec," which means dry, is sweeter than extra dry. A Champagne even drier than brut might be called "brut nature" or, in one case, "brut sauvage." Our tasting panel was generally enthusiastic about the Champagnes we tasted. Our favorite, garnering 3 1/2 stars on our 0-to-4-star scale, was a Louis Roederer Premier Cuv�e R�serve at $32.50. Two wines received three stars, Bollinger Sp�cial Cuv�e, also $32.50, and the Nicolas Feuillate Gold Label Premier Cru at $23. This Feuillate also was chosen the tasting's best value. The Roederer and Bollinger wines were consensus winners, a rarity among our generally contentious group. The Roederer was an elegant wine with, Mr. Asimov said, "power, finesse and complexity, yet with a creamy texture to it." Ms. Hesser described it memorably as "taut and springy." The Bollinger, as Bollingers often do, "mixed power and grace" and, Mr. Horvath said, displayed attractive "toasty" aromas. I called it brawny, but with a touch of elegance. It's worth noting that Champagne is made only in the Champagne district of France, 90 miles east of Paris. "La" Champagne is the region; "le" Champagne is the wine. Once it was common to use the name Champagne on wines made anywhere from California to the Crimea, but the European Union cracked down, threatening trade sanctions against offenders. It also banned the use of the term "m�thode champenoise" to describe sparkling wines made with the same techniques used in Champagne. This represents an understandable but slightly holier-than-thou attitude on the part of the Champagne producers, who once had to contend with riots over their illegal use of grapes trucked in from other parts of France and who still buy and affix their labels to bottled Champagne purchased from other producers within the region. Five of our nonvintage bruts took home 2 1/2 stars, and in describing almost all of them, the terms that kept popping up were "lemony" and "toasty." Of the three ros�s we tasted, two received 2 1/2 stars: a Jacquesson & Fils ($37) and another Nicolas Feuillate ($30). It was also eye-pleasing to see some salmon-colored liquid in a sea of straw-colored glasses. The Jacquesson I particularly liked. I thought it had extra body, and then said it had that je ne sais quoi. Luckily, my panel mates didn't ask me exactly what I meant. Ms. Hesser enjoyed the crisp flavor of the Feuillate ros�. A total of 11 Champagnes made our chart below, with three wines tied at two stars apiece: A Laurent-Perrier ($30), Veuve Clicquot ($36), and from Mo�t & Chandon, its Brut Imp�rial ($36). At our tasting, some of the bottles were poured into Champagne flutes, others wound up in wine glasses. Writing recently in Gourmet magazine, the critic Gerald Asher quotes Jean-Herv� Chiquet, one of the two managers of Jacquesson & Fils, on the use of the flute. "Flutes are pretty," Mr. Chiquet told him, "and they are fine for looking at the tiny bubbles. But to fully appreciate a Champagne as a wine, you must use a wine glass." I have long felt the same, and our rather ambitious tasting confirmed that view. We ran out of flutes and employed about eight standard wine glasses. We found that they made judging the wines much easier. They were easier to fill and drink from and rarely tipped over. If nothing else, they were certainly easier to stick one's nose into to smell the wine. And they retained the wines' bouquets longer than the flutes. Still, the flutes are more attractive. And since few Champagne drinkers are seriously evaluating the wines, there is no compelling reason to switch. And flutes are themselves a vast improvement over the flat short-stemmed glasses still favored in Hollywood films and on cruise ships. They are for shrimp cocktails, not good Champagne. Tasting Report: Sometimes Light, Sometimes Full-Bodied, but Always Lively Louis Roederer $32.50 *** 1/2 Brut Premier Cuv�e R�serve High praise from all: Frank J. Prial called it elegant, and Eric Asimov found power, finesse and complexity. Taut and springy, Amanda Hesser said, while Howard Horvath detected good acidity and aromas of fruit and vanilla. Bollinger Brut Sp�cial Cuv�e $32.50 *** Another consensus winner, mixing power and grace: Hesser likened it to a ripe persimmon. Asimov found it full-bodied yet fresh and exuberant. Brawny but elegant, Prial said. Horvath liked the toasty aromas. BEST VALUE Nicolas Feuillate $23 *** Gold Label Premier Cru Hesser and Asimov were big fans of this one. Asimov called it lively with a long finish, while Hesser called it clean and crisp. Horvath enjoyed its freshness, but Prial found it merely correct, with no faults. Piper Heidsieck $28 ** 1/2 Beautiful and well balanced, Horvath said, and Prial liked its body and long finish. Asimov found it pleasant, with a yeasty aroma, but not complex. Taittinger Brut La Fran�aise $29 ** 1/2 Hesser found it dynamic, full, clear and powerful. Asimov liked its finesse and long finish. Prial called it harmonious, but for Horvath, it was too sweet. Guy Larmandier $28 ** 1/2 Premier Cru � Vertus Asimov and Horvath found it lively and well balanced. Prial called it attractive and liked its touch of sweetness. A pretty Champagne, Hesser said. Jacquesson & Fils Ros� $37 ** 1/2 Prial found extra body and substance. Asimov detected an herbal complexity in the flavor, and Horvath liked the combination of fruit and acidity. He felt this would go well with chocolate. Hesser called it bitter and fragmented. Nicolas Feuillate $30 ** 1/2 Ros� Premier Cru Perhaps influenced by the pale red color, Hesser, Horvath and Asimov detected raspberry and strawberry aromas. Asimov liked the full body, Hesser and Horvath the crisp flavors. But Prial found a flat middle. Laurent-Perrier Brut L.P. $30 ** Light-bodied and fresh, Asimov said. Prial, too, liked the body and texture, while Horvath found clean grapefruit notes. Hesser settled for clean and nice. Veuve Clicquot $36 ** Prial called it big-bodied and substantial, while Horvath, who pegged it as Veuve Clicquot, detected peach and apricot flavors. Hesser found it pleasant with some sweetness, and Asimov, too, tasted a little sweetness. Mo�t & Chandon Brut Imp�rial $36 ** Vivacious, springs out of the glass, Prial said. Asimov liked the soft, light bubbles, floral aromas and long finish. Toasty, with citrus notes, Horvath said. But Hesser found it dense and bitter. June 23, 2004 WINES OF THE TIMES In Champagne's Shadow, the Sun Shines By ERIC ASIMOV MERICAN wines almost all bear a burden, but none more so than sparkling wines. Cabernet sauvignon, chardonnay and pinot noir all have French ancestors with which they have been endlessly compared. Only zinfandel, a wine that has reached prominence only in the United States, is exempt from the French albatross. Perhaps these comparisons are unfair. While the grapes grown in the United States and France may be the same, the climate, soil and cellar practices are often completely different. It stands to reason that the wines should be different, too. The problem is Champagne. Both in the mouth and in the brain, Champagne's identity is so powerful that it has left little room for American sparkling wines to maneuver. Practically all the winemaking regions in the world produce sparkling wine, but unlike the American version, they do not invite comparisons with Champagne. Instead, they have carved out their own identities. Spain has its cava, Germany its sekt and Italy its various spumantes. Even other parts of France . Alsace, the Loire and Burgundy, to name a few . make sparkling wines that are distinct from Champagne. With a few exceptions, most use the local grapes to make their sparklers, rather than the Champagne combination of chardonnay, pinot noir and pinot meunier. But in the United States, without a competing local tradition, winemakers use the Champagne formula. Sometimes they even use the Champagne name. And if they don't quite charge Champagne prices, they are not so cheap that they can avoid the comparison. When, with the Fourth of July approaching, the Dining section's tasting panel gathered to sample 25 American sparklers, we asked ourselves whether we could find a distinguishing identity. My colleague Florence Fabricant and I were joined by Beth von Benz, the wine director at Judson Grill in Manhattan, and her husband, Scott Mayger, the wine director at WD-50, also in Manhattan. All of us agreed that American sparkling wines had improved dramatically in the last 25 years as vintners have become wiser about where best to grow their vines. But we also agreed that an identity for these wines had yet to coalesce. "In the New World, the struggle is to make sparkling wines that have some sense of place, as in Europe," Mr. Mayger said. "They are quaffable, but have no identity." Ms. Fabricant felt that the point of comparison should not be Champagne but other regional sparklers, and Ms. von Benz, too, wondered if we were setting the hurdle too high. She suggested instead that the American sparklers had their own fruity "crowd-pleasing style," distinct from the more austere Champagnes, and, in fact, more appealing to Americans. Maybe so, but I felt she was generous in finding virtues. The challenge for Americans, after all, is difficult. The Champagne region is on the cold edge of the winemaking world, where each year farmers struggle to get their grapes to ripen. When they succeed, the result is grapes of great acidity but not a lot of sweetness, not good for still wines but perfect for Champagne. In California, where the climate is far warmer, the goal is the reverse . to produce grapes that are not too ripe, with sufficient acidity for sparkling wine. This is the reason the California wines tend to be fruitier, without the dry, tangy leanness that gives Champagne its liveliness and energy. Personally, I don't see how the benchmark for American sparkling wine can be anything other than Champagne, given the ambitions of American winemakers and, indeed, their identities, which include such well-known Champagne names as Roederer, Mumm, Chandon, Taittinger and Piper. I was pleased . and relieved, since we taste blind . that my favorite was the sparkling wine that I have long touted as the best in California, the Roederer Estate Brut. While we also appreciated the quality of Roederer Estate's high-end (and more expensive) L'Ermitage, it lacked the subtlety of its nonvintage sibling. The panel's overall favorite came from the J Wine Company, which also makes very good still wines. Its 1998 brut had balance and finesse, important qualities for any sparkler. We gave it three stars. We found price had little bearing on our ratings. Our top 10 included neither of the two most expensive bottles in the tasting, a 1997 J. Schram from Schramsberg for $80 and a $45 '97 Le R�ve from Domaine Carneros, Taittinger's arm in California. Prior experience mattered little as well. Aside from the Roederer Estate, I've been a fan of two other American sparkling wine producers, Iron Horse in Sonoma County and Gruet in New Mexico. Their wines didn't make the cut, either. Age, however, mattered less than we might have expected. Two wines in our sampling already had considerable age. A '94 Royal Cuv�e from Gloria Ferrer, owned by Freixenet of Spain, was full-bodied yet elegant, and still youthful. An 1985 Falconer, made in San Luis Obispo County and released only recently, was light-bodied and intriguing, with an extreme toasted flavor. At $15, we all felt it was worth trying. Nonetheless, the tasting left us with more questions than answers. Comparing domestic sparkling wine with Champagne might be not be fair, but we could not help it. "They make good sparkling wine in California, but it's of rich soil and sun," Mr. Mayger said. Vive la diff�rence, I guess. Tasting Report: Warm Weather Sets Off These Sparklers J Wine Company Brut Russian River Valley 1998 $29 *** Medium-bodied, well balanced and very dry, with floral aromas and persistent creamy, yeasty and citrus flavors. BEST VALUE Roederer Estate Brut Anderson Valley NV $17 ** 1/2 Classic Champagne style with toasty aromas; has verve and style. Gloria Ferrer Royal Cuv�e Carneros 1994 $20 ** 1/2 Full-bodied, with citrus and toasty aromas. Rich fruit flavors. Roederer Estate Brut L'Ermitage Anderson Valley 1998 $38 ** 1/2 Big, round and ripe, well balanced and lively; a crowd pleaser. Piper-Sonoma Brut NV $13 ** Balanced and refreshing, with fruit and floral aromas. Domaine Chandon Blanc de Noirs Carneros NV $16 ** Rich, with herbal and fruit flavors; finishes with alcohol heat. Pacific Echo Brut Anderson Valley NV $13 ** Floral and yeasty aromas; fresh at first but quickly turned flat. Falconer Blanc de Blancs San Luis Obispo County 1985 $15 ** Toasty, nutty, slightly oxidized quality indicated age. Light-bodied with citrus flavors; an interesting wine. Domaine Carneros Brut Napa Valley 2000 $18 * 1/2 Big wine with floral aromas; pretty but one-dimensional. Argyle Brut Willamette Valley NV $22 * 1/2 Straightforward and clean; nothing wrong but doesn't stand out. -- ------------------------------ * * Dr. James Lee Ellingson, Adjunct Professor jellings(a)me.umn.edu * * University of Minnesota, tel: 651/645-0753 fax 651 XXX XXXX * * Great Lakes Brewing News, 1569 Laurel Ave., St. Paul, MN 55104 *