On our recent visit to Majestic Wine, my husband selected a bottle of champagne that I ordinarily would not have bought - the demi-sec Carte Blanche from Louis Roederer. I'm not a big fan of sweet champagnes, but he was keen to try it, so we put a bottle into our mixed case.
We drank it on Saturday with a flavour-ful red Thai chicken curry and it was a surprisingly good pairing. The champagne had a clean, fruity-sweetness to it - tasting of very ripe fall fruits like apples and pears - and lots of bubbles so that the sweetness didn't cling to the palate for too long. While I don't think I could just sip this wine on its own, it was a great match with the mild spice and coconut of the curry. I was amazed that I liked it as much as I did. Well done to my husband for insisting we try a bottle.
Monday, 13 July 2009
Monday, 6 July 2009
An Explosive Bubbly
I was at Selfridges the other day, and had a quick look around their wine department. It's the sort of place that I like, as they always have something a little different. On this occasion, I received high praise when I took my selected bottle, a blanc de noirs champagne called Inflorescence to the register - apparently it's the most interesting bottle of bubbly they have at the moment, with Bouchard, the maker, having produced only 2000 bottles.
We opened it yesterday, as my husband was trying out the new smoker equipment he bought for the BBQ and had prepared some absolutely amazing and perfectly cooked smoked duck legs (the skin was crunchy, the meat was tender, moist, and well-flavored, I can't wait for him to make them again!). The wine didn't let the food down. It was very clean, with the complex flavours of honey but none of the sweetness. It had a creamy-smooth and very long finish with a mild toastiness to it. The only down-side was that it was so bubbly it literally exploded in my hands when I opened the bottle (and trust me, I've opened enough bottles that my technique is pretty good!) - I wound up drenched in champagne which was such a waste.
I'll be buying another bottle of this the next time I'm at Selfridges, hoping that they don't sell out before I get back!
We opened it yesterday, as my husband was trying out the new smoker equipment he bought for the BBQ and had prepared some absolutely amazing and perfectly cooked smoked duck legs (the skin was crunchy, the meat was tender, moist, and well-flavored, I can't wait for him to make them again!). The wine didn't let the food down. It was very clean, with the complex flavours of honey but none of the sweetness. It had a creamy-smooth and very long finish with a mild toastiness to it. The only down-side was that it was so bubbly it literally exploded in my hands when I opened the bottle (and trust me, I've opened enough bottles that my technique is pretty good!) - I wound up drenched in champagne which was such a waste.
I'll be buying another bottle of this the next time I'm at Selfridges, hoping that they don't sell out before I get back!
Lazy Days of Summer
I have to admit - I've been slacking. Not in drinking bubbly, of course, but in writing about it. Two bottles have gone unreported in June:
We had a friend from the US visiting, and although he's more of a pub-goer while he's here, in his honor we popped open our last bottle of Quartet to celebrate his last days with us. It seemed fitting to drink an American bubbly with an American friend.
About a week later, we drank one of our 2004 bottles of Maison Lenique. No special reason - the weather was nice and we were cooking a meal outdoors, and it just seemed to deserve some bubbles.
We had a friend from the US visiting, and although he's more of a pub-goer while he's here, in his honor we popped open our last bottle of Quartet to celebrate his last days with us. It seemed fitting to drink an American bubbly with an American friend.
About a week later, we drank one of our 2004 bottles of Maison Lenique. No special reason - the weather was nice and we were cooking a meal outdoors, and it just seemed to deserve some bubbles.
Monday, 15 June 2009
Maison Lenique Tasting
To continue my husband's birthday celebration and to celebrate the birthday of another friend in June, we had a small get-together on Sunday to do a tasting of all of the Maison Lenique champagnes we've purchased through 3-D Wines. Thankfully, the weather co-operated, and we had a lovely afternoon out in the garden.
We tasted the 2003 and 2004 vintages (grand cru, blanc de blanc wines) along with the 2004 maker's reserve with a course of light foods - melon with ham, strawberries, and zucchini pancakes. Almost unanimously, the 2003 was the favourite wine. It had a richness and nuttiness that was missing in the 2004 wines - one of our friends called it 'Krug-like'. The next favourite was the 2004 reserve, which had a lemon-yeasty freshness that's perfect for a summer afternoon, and then the 2004 vintage, which had a nice creaminess to it, but a slightly milder flavour than the other two wines.
We had some outstanding home-made fruit wines that one of our friends made with our main course, and then moved back to champagne for dessert. Our friends brought a bottle of 2002 Canard-Duchene Brut Millesime, which we served alongside a flourless chocolate cake. I'm supposed to say negative things about this wine, because it's not very reputable at the moment, and my friend has decided to make it his house champagne and doesn't want the price point to go up because of any good publicity. But I really can't. This was a light, fresh champagne with loads of bubbles. It was perfect with the chocolate dessert, and even better with the s'mores we made once the cake was gone (who knew that s'mores would be the perfect champagne dessert with their rich chocolatiness and burnt sugar flavours?). I'd definitely try other champagnes from this maker, especially while the price is still reasonable.
We tasted the 2003 and 2004 vintages (grand cru, blanc de blanc wines) along with the 2004 maker's reserve with a course of light foods - melon with ham, strawberries, and zucchini pancakes. Almost unanimously, the 2003 was the favourite wine. It had a richness and nuttiness that was missing in the 2004 wines - one of our friends called it 'Krug-like'. The next favourite was the 2004 reserve, which had a lemon-yeasty freshness that's perfect for a summer afternoon, and then the 2004 vintage, which had a nice creaminess to it, but a slightly milder flavour than the other two wines.
We had some outstanding home-made fruit wines that one of our friends made with our main course, and then moved back to champagne for dessert. Our friends brought a bottle of 2002 Canard-Duchene Brut Millesime, which we served alongside a flourless chocolate cake. I'm supposed to say negative things about this wine, because it's not very reputable at the moment, and my friend has decided to make it his house champagne and doesn't want the price point to go up because of any good publicity. But I really can't. This was a light, fresh champagne with loads of bubbles. It was perfect with the chocolate dessert, and even better with the s'mores we made once the cake was gone (who knew that s'mores would be the perfect champagne dessert with their rich chocolatiness and burnt sugar flavours?). I'd definitely try other champagnes from this maker, especially while the price is still reasonable.
Wednesday, 10 June 2009
Not My Birthday, But...
It was my husband's birthday yesterday, and the festivities of course involved some bubbles. We opted for a lovely red wine to go with our meal of rum and black pepper steak - but he always has apple pie for dessert on his birthday, and loves to have some champagne with it.
He chose a bottle of 2002 Vintage Veuve Clicquot that we purchased at Majestic Wine. We've drunk a variety of different champagnes from this maker before and always enjoyed them, although to be honest, most of the bottles were gifts rather than bottles we'd bought for ourselves. We were looking forward to trying this vintage champage, which we'd not had before.
My husband said that it went well with his apple pie, but we had a hard time really pinning down what this champagne was about. It was a little yeasty at the start, citrus-sour in the middle with just a touch of green apple (and yet somehow, also a mild sweetness), and with a smooth but short-ish finish. The bubbles were OK. We finally agreed that this is a greatest-common-denominator champagne. It's drinkable, but not special or unique. Everyone who drinks it can find something to like about it. But it wasn't what we've come to expect from a vintage champagne.
He chose a bottle of 2002 Vintage Veuve Clicquot that we purchased at Majestic Wine. We've drunk a variety of different champagnes from this maker before and always enjoyed them, although to be honest, most of the bottles were gifts rather than bottles we'd bought for ourselves. We were looking forward to trying this vintage champage, which we'd not had before.
My husband said that it went well with his apple pie, but we had a hard time really pinning down what this champagne was about. It was a little yeasty at the start, citrus-sour in the middle with just a touch of green apple (and yet somehow, also a mild sweetness), and with a smooth but short-ish finish. The bubbles were OK. We finally agreed that this is a greatest-common-denominator champagne. It's drinkable, but not special or unique. Everyone who drinks it can find something to like about it. But it wasn't what we've come to expect from a vintage champagne.
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
An Unmemorable Rose
We have to stop making the lemon-caper chicken to serve with champagne. The last time we did, we got a dud bottle. On Saturday, we thought we'd try it again, and had a wine that was totally unmemorable, not really worthy of the lovely meal.
While we were at Majestic Wine, we picked up a bottle of Perrier-Jouet Blason Rose. We were excited about this wine, as we've drunk champagne from this maker before and it's been good. There's a lot of positive marketing about this particular champagne, too, saying it's 'powerful' and full of berry fruits.
But it was only OK. Definitely not powerful. A little sour at the finish. And like many rose wines in general, not a very distinctive flavour. The most disappointing part for me was that the bubbles are so fine that you can see them in the glass, but you can't feel them in your mouth - way too subtle for my taste.
I'm glad we only bought one bottle of this wine - we paid a premium for the brand, and I'll only remember the wine because I've blogged about it. I wouldn't look forward to drinking more of it.
While we were at Majestic Wine, we picked up a bottle of Perrier-Jouet Blason Rose. We were excited about this wine, as we've drunk champagne from this maker before and it's been good. There's a lot of positive marketing about this particular champagne, too, saying it's 'powerful' and full of berry fruits.
But it was only OK. Definitely not powerful. A little sour at the finish. And like many rose wines in general, not a very distinctive flavour. The most disappointing part for me was that the bubbles are so fine that you can see them in the glass, but you can't feel them in your mouth - way too subtle for my taste.
I'm glad we only bought one bottle of this wine - we paid a premium for the brand, and I'll only remember the wine because I've blogged about it. I wouldn't look forward to drinking more of it.
Monday, 1 June 2009
Quartet for Two
My husband had a very brief holiday this weekend. To get him into a more relaxed state of mind when he arrived home on Thursday evening, we opened a bottle of Quartet from the Roederer Estate, a wine we had drunk before and really enjoyed. It was a warm, sunny evening, and we sipped it while we grilled some pork chops, which we ate with mustard mash and grilled, fresh English asparagus.
We still really like this wine. This time around, though, it had a sweetness we didn't remember. We couldn't decide if we had missed it the first time around, or perhaps if this producer isn't consistent from batch to batch. I'm leaning toward the latter, as I tend not to like sweet bubbles, and think I would have caught the sweetness the first time around. We have another bottle in the house, part of our cache from Majestic Wine, so we'll see if the sweetness re-appears in that one.
We still really like this wine. This time around, though, it had a sweetness we didn't remember. We couldn't decide if we had missed it the first time around, or perhaps if this producer isn't consistent from batch to batch. I'm leaning toward the latter, as I tend not to like sweet bubbles, and think I would have caught the sweetness the first time around. We have another bottle in the house, part of our cache from Majestic Wine, so we'll see if the sweetness re-appears in that one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)