Sweet Virginia: a US state sparkler proves more popular than Champagne

January 12, 2014

Bubblies from Spain, Italy, France and the US in a (semi) blind tasting bring surprises 

By Panos Kakaviatos

For  the third year in a row, I hosted a wine tasting for a neighborhood garden club at Chain Bridge Forest in Arlington, Virginia.

Some 12 participants – all with casual to keen (but non professional) interest in wine – tasted in the following order.

Although they knew which wines were to be served, each wine – when it was served – was brought in a brown paper bag so that that wine was not known initially.

Before each wine’s identity was revealed, we discussed its merits (or demerits). By the time we ended the tasting, I asked participants to vote on each wine: (1) was that your “number one”?; (2) was it your second favorite and (3) was it your third?

An indication of popularity was the wine that obtained the most votes (whether 1st or 2nd or 3rd place). Please keep in mind that one of the most important criteria for this group (and, let’s face it, for most of us) was price! Stay tuned for some surprises.

Below the wines – served in the following order – and votes they each received with tasting notes.

Gruet of New Mexico Brut USA ($16). It was as all of us concluded rather boring. Some complained that it had a slightly bitter finish. Another participant thought that the bottle was off because she has had Gruet before and that this bottle was not truly reflective of the wine. I found no evident fault, but it certainly lacked excitement. NO VOTES

Domaine Carneros by Taittinger Brut California USA 2009 ($24). This was clearly better. More energy. Smooth. Lacked character for me, but then again, I have been drinking some superb Champagnes recently :-). Still, overall, it was a winner. And for the price, hard to beat. SEVEN VOTES (5 for first place, two for second and two for third).

Segura Viudas Brut Heredad Reserva NV Alt Penedès SPAIN ($20). Most participants preferred the smooth nature of the preceding wine, but many liked this one more for having “quite a bit of character.” It conveyed more concentrated flavor on the mid palate – the most so far – but it was not quite as smooth as the previous wine. FOUR VOTES (zero for first place but two each for second and third).

Domaine de Montbourgeau Crémant de Jura FRANCE $25). Flawed bottle. Light cork aspect.

Ferghettina Franiacorta Brut NV ITALY ($33). This for me represented a noticeable step up, but it was quite pronounced in flavor. Not as smooth as the Carnernos – or typically “Champagne like” and perhaps for that reason did it only obtain one vote albeit for second place. As we shall see for its vintage sibling later in the tasting, both of the Ferghettina’s have lots of character on the palate – and I liked them probably more than the group did. ONE VOTE.

Thibaut & Janisson Virginia Brut USA ($28). Surprise, surprise. This wine obtained a whopping 12 votes – 3 for first place, 6 for second, and 3 for third – because it was so smooth and soft and lively too. I went back to this and just loved it. The initial nose, when first tasted, made me think “this is Blanc de Blancs Champagne” because it was so clean and smooth and appealing like a Blanc de Blancs can be. As NY Times wine writer Eric Asimov recently wrote, they tend to be the lightest and the driest and this one seemed that way, too – although I would say that it was just a touch on the sweeter side of Brut! But it is made from vines grown in Virginia, and the price is hard to beat. TWELVE VOTES! Wine of the tasting.

Delamotte Brut Champagne NV FRANCE ($38). The seventh wine to be served in this blind tasting of bubblies, and it obtained the third most votes of all 11 wines. For the price, this delivers the goods. Clean, lively, somewhat high toned, but certainly fun, I could easily imagine drinking this with oysters or shellfish in general. It was interesting to compare and contrast with the preceding wine. Over time, I came to appreciate the cool freshness of the Delamotte more than the Virginia wine, but the Virginia wine was richer and fuller bodied – and $10 less expensive – and perhaps for these reasons provided more “crowd appeal”. FIVE VOTES (1 for first place, 1 for second and three for third)

Pierre Peters Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru NV FRANCE ($55). Now I have had wines from this producer before, notably vintages, that were very good indeed. Hence a negative note for this NV wine. Costing about $55 tax included, this is too high a price for the rather ho-hum delivery. It was technically fine, with decent bubbles and amiable flavor with a smooth delivery. But I was expecting more from grand cru blanc de blancs as it lacked energy and any kind of “wow” factor – which was expected when compared with far less expensive alternatives in the tasting. NO VOTES!

Ferghettina Franiacorta Extra Brut 2006 ITALY ($66). Two participants gave this first place votes – just one less than those given to the Virginia wine and three less than the California sparkler. And this in spite of the wine being the most expensive of the tasting. Keep in mind that participants – in voting – also took price into consideration. I tend to agree with this falling into first place for the simple reason that it has the most palate presence, in a good sense. It was nuanced and sneaky in its flavors. And it had excellent length, more than the others I recall. In any case, price is high here and some were not expecting a flavor profile that seemed “quirky” compared to a more typical smooth and bubbly of the Blanc de Blancs style, so I could understand why not too many votes came this wine’s way. But it was darn good and if you have a bottle, you will be happy. THREE VOTES

Cruase Tenuta Mazzolino Brut Rosé ITALY ($26). Some participants were completely put off by this pink sparkler. It had an initial wet sock like aspect but that blew off and a pleasing strawberry note came to the fore with time. While hardly great shakes, I thought it was better than most people did. Call me an outlier. Not that I would go out of my way to get this but it was not all that bad. NO VOTES

Freixenet Cordon Negro Extra Dry SPAIN ($10). Another rather pleasant surprise. This was clean and appealing. And for an “extra dry” not overly sweet at all. And for $10, perfect for use in cocktails, but I could also sip on this by itself without much thought. Indeed, this falls into the category of being amiable but not compelling. And such wines have a place! So much so that one participant gave it a first place vote – the only vote it obtained. Compare this to, for example, the Gruet, and it is far better. Felicitaciones España! ONE VOTE

A note on the somewhat confusing categories of sweetness levels in Champagne (and Champagne like sparklers). Participants were confused to hear that “extra dry” in fact is not that dry… that it is sweeter than Brut for example. So below, a quick rundown on levels of sweetness:

Brut Zero is the driest. Not very common, but can be found among growers’ Champagnes and some famous name brands. It is a growing trend as consumers seek bone dry Champagne.
Extra Brut (less than 6 grams of residual sugar per liter)
Brut (less than 12 grams)
Extra Dry (between 12 and 17 grams)
Sec (between 17 and 32 grams)
Demi-sec (between 32 and 50 grams)
Doux (50 grams)