Cheval Blanc and D'Yquem dinner with Pierre Lurton and Bernard Burtschy (Taberna del Alabardero, Washington D.C.): As Bernard Burtschy pointed out, this was pretty tight. Fresh white fruits, citrus, granny smith, white pepper and mineral. Medium concentration, fine mousse, good acidity and clean medium finish. It is interesting that the 02 has opened up beautifully all of sudden in the last few months where the 00 remains youthful. Also this is more linear/cooler but less concentrated than the 02. For my palate the 02 is superior, about three points higher in general. Still very nice way to start.
Absolutely fantastic and in a great spot. Persistent bead, light golden color, fragrant nose, and lots of fruit on the palate with vibrancy that was exciting...more of a fruit driven profile than a yeasty one and did not disappoint.
1st Vivino Int'l chapter in Singapore (Sat. evening/night), Part-2 (Park Regis restaurant): After the incredible afternoon, this was a prelude/aperitif to what's to come over dinner. Nothing like the '85 Dom which kickstarted our afternoon adventure, this was still good. We got brioche, nuts on the nose. Fine mousse, bright acidity and a good dose of minerality and citrus on the palate. Maybe I'm wanting too much... but this didn't have the complexity of the '85, or the power/depth of the '90. Nonetheless, a nice drink to start the dinner!
Light yellow color with a very lively, fine mousse. Aromas of summer melons, minerals and yeast. Rich but beautifully balanced and structured fruit in the mouth with great depth and persistence on the palate. This powerful yet lithe Champagne was delicious with the outstanding food at Little Fish Restaurant. Still very youthful, this wine may rate an even higher score with a few more years of bottle age.
Completely blind, but what a pleasure to have this wine in the glass again. Beautiful citrus and minerals in the bouquet as well as on the palate. The wine develops in the glass and a bit later there are some pleasant reductive impressions and almonds. Nicely dry. A beautiful and mature Champagne.
Birthday dinner with the best wine kakis at Sichuan Douhua. Yellowish gold. Nose was slightly muted, with good acidity, minerals, green apples, lemon and whiffs of butter. Palate had some age, but with good freshness and acidity. Kiwis, lemon cream, meringue intitally, after time there were more secondary flavours like toffee, butter, toast and oil. Lacking on the mid palate, and seemed to lack that extra bit of complexity I would expect from an aged Dom. Good wine.
Lighter golden color. Very fine mousse. Beautiful nose of brioche, ripe pear, citrus, minerality, a touch of mint. On the palate there are notes of pear again, peach, minerals, apricot, chalk. It's medium-full bodied and elegant, with medium+ acidity. Small bubble and a very refined mousse. Long finish that ends with a touch of bitterness adding complexity. A very pretty Dom Perignon that is ready to drink now.
Spennende tiltalende nese med bra intensitet. Flott konsentrasjon, og friskhet. Lang finish som prikker godt i munnhulen. Ved release var jeg ikke imponert. En slags metallisk element som forstyrret. Kommet seg veldig, og dette er bra! 92-93p
Clean, clear, fresh, effervescent, green apples, slight brioche Oyster shell minerality, steely, tightly wound, metallic, gooseberries Medium finish, yeasty We all enjoyed the night's opener. One can never go wrong with a bottle of Dom
Whites and Fish @ Tonny's (Tonny Restaurant, Geylang Lor 3, Singapore): Yet another bottle of the 2000, and this was as consistently good as it has been over the past 2-3 years or so. It had a gently sweet nose of ripe red apples and strawberry flesh laced with a little smokiness and some mineral scents, with just the lightest floral note trailing on behind. The past few bottles have been showing an increasingly resolved palate, and this certainly continued the trend – it was round and generous, with a fine mousse that it just beginning to lose its vigour, and fleshy tones of red apples and sweet lemons. Lovely balance, even if it was clearly on the fleshier, less sleek side of Dom Perignon. There was just a little bright citrus edge showing the last vestiges of youth as the wine went past the midpalate, and then it trailed off into a long, minerally finish, with little kiss of warm spice and the tiniest linger of biscuity flavours. Very nice.
Vigorous mousse that faded quickly. Impressive bouquet of fresh bread dough, apples, lemon zest, with hints of chalk and almonds. Similar on the palate, fresh, pure and crisp. Excellent but does not wow with its complexity. Perhaps this will improve with more bottle age.
Thanks SH! Really enjoyed this bottle. Light on its feet with some good acidity. Citrus, vanilla, light yeast, chalk, and saline. Well extremely well with beer cheese soup. Haven't had a bunch of Dom but think I'm a really big fan of the style.
Lovely is the one word description for this beautiful Champagne. Beautiful citrus and minerals. Good bubbles and freshness, soft and very tasty. A lovely, hard to resist bubble. Ready now and the next few years.
I know the world loves this wine but I again found it good but largely unexceptional. Probably just me but if I'm in for wine this expensive I'll spend the extra $40 on a NV Krug (which to my palate is clearly superior).
Pours bright gold with lively bubbles. Big yeasty toast aroma. On the palate, initial notes of apple and poached pears give way to licorice, creme brulee and boozy dessert notes, perhaps drunken rum cake. Long, persistent finish. Complex and constantly evolving. And this is not even supposed to be a "good" year for Dom.
Light colour, citrus and brioche nose. On the palate, very elegant, complex, long, citrus, brioche, creamy texture. Quite different to other vintages I've tasted - less pronounced flavours but an excellent wine drinking beautifully now. No appearance of decline so probably good for quite awhile yet even though 2000 was not such a top year. Wish I had more.
It's been nearly 5 years since I last tasted this wine, and time has been kind, generous even. In a very good place at the moment, with no immediate threat of decline. Truth be told, I'm temped to use exclamation points (gasp) this was so good. With 30 minutes of air, this proved an exceptional blend of creamy, nearly plump apples, spice, chalky minerals and roasting nuts; each taste better than the one before. The tension, and focus offered here proved a terrific counter point to the gently softened, lightly spiced fruits. My only regret is that this was not from magnum. The one to open while the more age-worthy Doms are sleeping. highly recommended, thru 2019
This has really come around since my previous bottle 3 yrs ago. Wonderful aroma of bread, citrus, and a floweriness that I can't quite peg. On the palate, wonderful crisp apple, peach, yeast, Meyer lemon (i.e., semi-tart, but not sour lemon). Glad I waited the 3 years, but wish I had another one to open in the future.
Légèrement doré, très fines bulles persistantes. Nez plutôt sur la réserve, mais bouche d'un charme fou ! Fruits, blancs, agrumes, arômes de pâte à biscuits, de plain grillé, d'une bonne concentration et que dire de la longueur ! J'en boirais tous les jours ! Généreuse offrande d'un ami, geste très apprécié.
Showing plenty of smoky pinot berry component, more serious than fresh, lacking a citrus edge and depth of chardonnay. Certainly good Champagne, clean and elegant despite an odd touch of heat, just lacking anything extra to justify the price.
Very enjoyable indeed. The color has darkened quite a bit since last bottle, and the body, taste has gained considerable structure. Brioche, slight baking soda, very fine bubbles and delicious citrus, apple, and nutty taste all in beautiful harmony. It is getting ready to be enjoyed.
CT Offline VI--San Antonio Edition (San Antonio, TX): Crisp, floral, citrus, notes of honeysuckle, lychee, honey, and wildflowers. Smooth, silky, really quite enjoyable. Good acidity that shows this one may have some more maturing to go. Drink now, or hold over the next several years prior to opening. May have a long life ahead of it operating at a high level.
Good as you would expect, but ultimately overpriced and very overrated. Is this just a champagne for people that don't know about champagne. Not nearly as good as either 02 or 03. Give me a PR Winston Churchill any day
we do not think our friends took the best care possible of this bottle so we will not complain about another average bottle of Dom 2000. Was rich and evolved and ripe but lacked depth and vitality we have come across in good bottles of this wine. A good 90 but not really representative.
MAYBE. Am I missing something but every time i have had this champagne, it always seems a bit thin, a sharp acidity that is not well balanced by fruit. I just don't get the attraction. we opened an nv bollinger and it seemed so much more flavoursome. is it an aging issue or is it just a naked emperor?
Saturday night at The Papies (The Papies, Elizabeth St, London): Ah finally a good bottle! Dissapointing to be honest to have had so many misses on a 2000 DP. But Anyhow.. Colour shows some age but its the nose that is so captivating here, rich, ripe long yeasty, toasty notes across. On th epalate it carries the on the tune and actually feels a lot older than a 2000. A beautiful bottle great to be enjoyed now. 94 easy
We are not sure if there are issues of bottle variation here but the bottle,cork and all looked very good. The nose was on the light side, light toasty, rich fruit scent. Teh problem was that on the palate it had almost zero vitality. Where is that Dom precission and focus and life? Note sure what is going on here but not of Dom level. Maximum crouwd pleasing power though.. 90 performance this time round and looking at our notes a lot of variability over the last few years
Gold straw. Hugely gouttey, coppery, steely nose; masculine, but appealing; no butter or brioche, let alone oxidation. Palate fairly lean and clean, precise and mineral. Fine, clean mousse. Medium bodied with excellent length -- where it suddenly seems almost big. Years and years to go... (From magnum)
In Zermatt. Good. Fruit, sugar, acid in balance but this bottle had nothing special. Maybe it's because it's been stored in a very cold alpine environment? Definitely tasted like a Dom but just lacking excitement. A pale imitation of the 02.
I do not know if this is the perfect Champagne, but I have never tasted any better wine. I opened this one for Christmas as a present to myself and my guests. It definite got Christmas dinner off to a festive start.
Nose - quite floral but heavy sensation of oak. Nice note of passion fruit. Pinot Noir easy to taste. Overall, very pleasant. Palate - cooking apples and breadsticks. Good mouth-feel. Long finish. 90 pts.
Goose dinner with friends (Stockholm): Nose: noticeably toasted with toasted hazelnuts and some toffee, cocoa powder, rather ripe fruit, some spice. Palate: medium bodied+, ripe yellow fruit - mostly yellow apples, apple compote, slightly spicy, some mineral, a hint of grapefruit bitterness. Aftertaste with apple notes and some mineral. Nice development, rather foody style. It has gotten quite a lot of development since this vintage was launched a couple of years ago. However, it is not as firm, elegant or mineral as the 2002.
Effervesence is still present, but certainly showing its age. Secondary flavors and aromas are emerging. Creamy, yeasty and mushroomy. These really emerged as the wine opened up. Suggest consuming at a warmer temperature than typical for Champagne.
The first of four bottles, and definitely the best Dom Perignon i have had. Beautiful energy, chardonnay presence. Already quite complex with toasts, iodine, very fine bubbles and transparent color which is matched by a transparent texture. a wonderful surprise.
Surprisingly full body vs Pol Roger 1998 Winston Churchill. I thought I could feel a lot of yeast and brioche, toasted. Color was rather pale, but I was surprised by how full the champagne was vs previous bottles. This was a Mag. I think I gonna save my other bottles cause this could be a pleasant surprise in a few more years...
Drinking side by side with the '90. Certainly a rough night. Nose is graphite, hazelnut, citrus, not nearly as much fruit as the '90. On palate, lots of lemon zest, lemon rind. Crisp but smooth on finish. WORLDS OF DIFFERENCE THAN THE '90. Crazy bubbles.
Bob's Birthday Dinner (Maude's Liquor Bar - Chicago, IL): Drank alongside the '98 Dom Perignon. This was a bit tight and took a couple hours to open up. Wasn't as complex or exotic as I had hoped - but had the typical weight for a Dom with nice herbal, bready and orchard fruit tones. I said this a couple times over the course of the weekend, but decanting this probably isn't the worst idea.
Enjoyed a glass at Le Bernardin to start the evening off. In the glass, pale gold. On the nose, notes of apples, fresh rainfall, minerals, and secondary notes of mushroom and yeast. On the palate, bracing on the attack, quickly rounding out on the palate to become full-bodied, with citrus and apple notes, and an almost Chablis-like flinty note; however, the palate didn't have as much going on as the nose did. With said, still a very nice glass of champagne, just perhaps not giving as much as I was expecting.
Milton's Birthday Dinner (Imperial Treasure Super Peking Duck, Paragon): Excellent. This bottle was back on form after the rather forgettable one we had towards the end of last year. In fact, it was probably the best of the six or seven bottles that I have had so far. It had a beautiful nose, rather telltale Dom Perignon, with ripe apples and strawberries alongside more developed aromas of honey and toffee, some caramelly hints, then beautiful earthy accents with white meat nuances, shades of smoky mineral and a nutty, yeasty back-note. Very nice. The palate was perhaps a little less developed, slightly younger tasting than the nose would suggest, but it was very delicious - with a typically subtle gentle mousse carrying nicely fleshy white fruit and appley flavours laced with the tiniest waft of strawberry. It was fruity up-front, but past the midpalate, this was more marked by streaks of earthy, stony minerally streak with a little drift of lemon and flower blossoms floating alongside into a wonderful finish with tons of length on it. This was very fine indeed. The 2000 DPs have really come a long way from their rather unconvincing youth. If they continue to develop along these lines, they should make quite wonderful Champagnes in 5 or 6 years' time.
Very good, as always. The structure and mouthfeel is very balanced. 50-50ish in Pinot Noir and Chardonnay. Nice small bubblelines and toasty, zesty and little tropical fruit aroma's. Will easy do another 5 years in the cellar.
Well I rated this high as it marks a great occasion, still have a couple in the barrel for the get together but wanted to crack one open to share with my wife. I was told that champagne of good quality has bubbles that rise only in the center of a glass.. What a load of crap that was :-) Anyhow, I could get used to this, I expect to have a head like a robbers dog tomorrow and that's alright by me ! Light, fresh, crisp and much more delicate than the bubbly I am accustomed to..highly recommended !
Mouton 86 vs Lafite 89 and some other friends (The Papies, Elizabeth St, London): Maybe its bottle variability, or maybe its aging but this time it felt a lot different than almost a year ago. Well round this time, almost like an early 90s krug, more of a burgandy wine than a sharp Dom. Very toasty, rich and long. Well round and has lost a bit of its sharpness. Still very enjoyable. 92-93 and drink at will.
Drank to celebrate birth of our second son. Not sure how this influenced rating. Light color. Nose was appley, mushrooms. Definitely different from NV champagne. Mainly in length. Perhaps more aging would have made me feel differently. In any case I now conclude that this is not good value for money unless one values status. Wine is very good but there's a lot of NV out there that is much better value for money. I guess I am cheap.
Wonderful, expressive nose of citrus and stone fruit, clean, bracing mouthfeel and a modest finish. Very enjoyable. This bottle does open up to show more complexity after an hour or two, while the bubbles are persistent if poured gently from the bottle. So it's worth taking time with this one. That said, even though my experience with champagne (methode) is limited, I've had better for much less. IMO low QPR.
I drink a lot of champagne. That's not a boast but here in the UK there seems to be a deal every other week on this French sparkling wine. All of it, I have to say, is non-vintage but I have hit upon some fabulous NV of both famous and relatively unknown champagne houses.
As such, drinking a vintage bubbly is always reserved for a special occasion. I have always been suspicious of any review that references such an event. For example, if you are a couple on honeymoon, don't even bother posting on Trip Advisor; you're too 'loved-up' to make any rational judgment on a hotel/restaurant & your review is therefore automatically null and void.
I say all this as an admission that this bottle was saved for a special occasion, which happened to be my birthday. It was an aperitif whilst waiting for my birthday meal and, immediately upon pouring, the light honey colour showed that this was a champagne with a little more depth than the usual NV.
It was smooth and subtle in the mouth, yet leaving a lingering tickle on the palate. This was an 'ah' type of wine, since each sip was followed by the aforementioned satisfied sigh.
I have always found champagne difficult to appraise since the bubbles and occasion seem to get in the way but this was a beautifully constructed and executed example of vintage champagne.
On a very important day in our lives, Beth and I shared this bottle of Dom Perignon tonight. It was glorious and beautiful, outstanding in every way. The shimmering pale gold in the glass, pinpoints of effervescence glistening, as aromas of fresh bouquets and summer showers tantalize the nose. On the palate, delicate lemon with fresh-picked apples, backed by biscotti and glazed pastry, and notes of mineral on the lengthy finish. Really spectacular. Magnifique.
Tasted blind. Good minerality, reminiscent of Dom P from a weaker year, however not as good as in top vintages. Ought to have higher acidity and less fat fruit to gain the normal 2-3 extra points for elegance and finesse.
Popped and poured into Burgundy glasses. Focused and refined expression of citrus and mineral. Reminiscent of a young, barely oaked, Grand Cru Chablis. Hints of faint mushroom and toast emerge with time. Improved as it opened up and provided a spicy, lingering finish. Still a young and disjointed for my palate but the structure is clearly there, it just needs time. Will not touch another bottle for at least 5+ years. 90+
My review might be tainted, having recently tasted DP 99, 95, and 96, however, I just cannot get behind this vintage and think that you can do much better than it outside of DP for under $100. Definitely opens up after a few hours and everyone agreed that it was much more approachable when tasted in an open white wine glass (vs. champagne flute.)
Champagne Tasting (Waterford): 50% Chardonnay, 50% Pinot, 84 months on the lees with no oak. Focus and intense nose with yeasty high notes. Like scotched oak and brown sugar. Mineral like wet granite. Long long finish with precision on the palate.
December Birthdays (My Little Spanish Place): Still pretty good, but this was one of the weaker bottles of 2000 DP that I have had. It must be said that it did have a lovely nose as always - flowery aromas, creme fraiche, strawberry and red apple scents, earth and mineral, all unfolding in gentle layers. Beautiful stuff. The palate was rather full, rich, a bit big, especially when put next to the supermely elegant, charming 1991 Billecart Salmon that we had alongside. This showed gobs of fleshy green apple fruit, pears and lemons on the attack and midpalate before a bit of flowers peeked out in a nice long, slightly yeasty finish ringed with spicy notes. Very mouthfilling, with impressive depth, but I thought this lacked some of the fresh balance and verve of top vintages like 1996 and 2002, or even when compared with other bottles of 2000 that I have had. Nevertheless, still a very good wine, just not quite up to expectations given how this vintage seemed to be on an upward trajectory over the last couple of bottles.
Pale yellow with very fine beads. Excellent bouquet of brioche, lemons, chrysanthemum and pebbles. Excellent balance with a lovely mouth feel. Fresh tasting apples, yeast and lemon palate with a very long citrus and mineral after taste. Very elegant.
Drank 2 bottles and bottle variation is very evident. This bottle is excellent. Ready to drink. Toasty nose and sweet peach aroma, balanced with the right level of acidity. Elegant! The second bottle did not drink as well initially but got better after one hour in the glass
Sampled 11/24/11. This wine has improved and is now seemingly starting to hit its plateau. Wonderful lemon and orange peel with green apple. Vibrant acidity that is well balanced. It might not be as long lived as the '85, '90 or '96, but it certainly is proving to be better than I originally thought it would be.
I continue to like the style from this house more than some more knowledgable champagne folks. This bottle is another example. For me, perfectly balanced. Medium weight with a bit of nuttiness, the right amount of sweetness. Drinking more mature than the 1996 Deutz opened the following day.
Classic and typical Dom Perignon with a languid mousse and developing a nice bronzed colour. The nose is alluring very lightly toasted white bread with the crusts cut off. Toasty palate with some lightly roasted hazelnut. This is just starting to emerge from early adolescence and is starting to put on the merest weight. Always a pleasure to drink.
My first bottle of Dom. Comparing it with a 98 La Grande Dame I had recently this is not as yeasty, a little fresher with more mineral, citrus and acid. Both fantastic but both different. Another 5 years would probably round things out and make it absolutely amazing, but this is more than drinkable now.
Excellent, fresh, sparkling, citrus. Served at a champagne dinner with veal and scallops which was an excellent choice. The best champagne of the evening outperforming by far Roederer Cristal 2000 (which was served for desert) which was quite astonishing to me as Roederer was(!) long time my favorite champagne.
good but overpriced as usual. much better, and cheaper, was 1998 la grande dame veuve clicquot. I noticed robert parker's antonio galloni disagrees and gave 94 to dom and only 90 to la grande dame. i make bold to suggest you might profitably take my advice though. the veuve is richer and more flavorful, but the dom is lighter if you prefer that. Omigoodness I seem to disagree with myself on this same wine from last december. ??? I have no explanation.
EWG: Decadence (Conrad Green's Abode): I'm not a huge fan of this, at least in the context of what you hope it to be. Its a nice enough Champagne in the abstract but it falls far below good vintages to me. Yes, it needs more age but I don't see a lot of upside here in the way of depth, concentration or interest. Trademark sulfur nose. Big powerful bubbles with strong apple notes. I swirled and coaxed it for a while to no change. Tons of NV farmer fizz out there that blows this off the table for less than half the price.
Cannot say it was bad, bubbles were very fine, flavour was good, but not as complex as I expected. Not too much flavours, quite mature already. You can find much better at a much lower price. Well, quite disappointing...
as one would expect from a wine with these credentials, this was a delightfully floral wine at the front with a long delicate creamy finish. Bubbles are fine and seemingly everlasting. Very solid wine. Recommended for a special occasion in spite of price.
The last bottle of this I had about a year ago was yeasty and simple. Not this.
This was incredibly fresh, loaded with apple and almost an apricoty stone fruit note. Mineral, saline even. Just the faintest hint of nut, but somehow the wine doesn't seem oxidized at all. This registers almost like a very fine muscadet, with more fruit and much more intensity. Great wine.
2011 BMDP Charity Dinner and Extras (Meritus Mandarin and then John and Elaine's): Very good indeed. Drank with strawberries and cream over a post-dinner poker game. Unlike the previous bottle, which was absolutely singing, we did not have the time to decant this. It was also served in flutes rather than white wine glasses (my preference these days is always for the later), which must have muted is somewhat. Nevertheless, it still showed very nicely indeed. Nose was all nuts, earth and red apples, while the palate had more primary lime and lemons along with a nice stream of minerality to add to the mix. Lovely balance and substance all around. The finish again took on the deliciously, nutty, yeasty notes picked up on the nose, especially with the strawberries, which seemed to call out a shaved almond flavour in the wine. Yummy - this keeps getting better.
Notes of apple, citrus, mineral and toast. Medium-bodied, with good acidity, a pleasing texture, and good depth of flavor. Great balance, and a long and well delineated finish. Will improve for many years to come.
@ Hotel des Indes, The Hague, the Netherlands…..Vivid yellow gold in color. Dynamic mousse with countless, powerful and persistent, small bubbles. On the nose lots of delicious fruit and very refreshing. On the palate great strength and length, again lots of (candied) fruit, refreshing and elegant, with a superb balance. The ultimate aperitif, It also combines refined with lobster, crab, caviar, oysters or turbot. Needs a little longer to mature in the bottle for more complexity..
Drank a bit warmer than I would like, which probably impacts the score. Nice acidity with light citrus like hints. Needs some years to flush out and add some other notes to the palate. Still, elegant and showing promise.
denne hadde vi julaften 2010 , dette er vel noe av det bedre jeg noen sinne har smakt , crisp masse florale dufter , flott lang ettersmak , første som slår meg er gjærbakst , men den forsvinner ganske fort , da er alt det beste igjen . synd dette var siste flaske WOW
New Years Eve Cabernet and Dom Blowout (Our House (2033 Brandywine St., Philadelphia)): In the middle of two great Doms and this was definitely overshadowed. A nice wine in its own right but it simply did not stack up to the 96 and 02 Doms. Toasted bread, oatmeal, lemon and citrus. Nuttiness on palate with citrus and apple. Nicely concentrated but did not exhibit same complexity, concentration and power as other vintages. Nice citrusy finish.
Almost clear with a slight green tint. Smells like dough laced with gooseberries. Wonderful acids mixed with a bitter green fruit element and yeast (approaching marmite for (*&^s sake). Strong lemon elements. I am not a champagne drinker, but found this quite nice.
I opened 4 bottles of wine tonight, this dom, a 2001 la mission haut brion, a 2006 corizon cab, and a 2008 andrew will sorella. The dom was the clear hit of the night, and the second place winner was the sorella. In comparison to other (less expensive) champagnes I have had lately, such as the Charles Heidseck reserve, the Perriet Jouet, the Genet, Bonville, the (french) Roederer, I liked the dom best - more flavor, which my wife called mushroomy. It reminded me of a champagne a friend had aged in his cellar and brought to a dinner. Domaine st michelle is really good for $10, but for $125+ this is better, not 12 times better, but better. Enjoyment is not measured on a continuous scale however, and this one crosses the ahhh... line. Still the first glass is more spectacular than the second....next day we continued celebrating with pierre moncuit and 1996 duval leroy, but the dom is still our favorite. oddly it also seems the best buy, since the price of $125 is about what i remember it being 10 years ago, whereas no other wines we like have held anything like the same price for that period. the 1996 duval had a strong flavor but not as smooth and subtle as the dom. By the way I preferred this to the 2002 we had a little while back, but i am not a champagne drinker usually. I have also noted a good way to spoil your enjoyment of a good wine is to drink several good ones together, since only one will shine, whereas separately all will shine.
...later: We liked the 2000 Dom so much I sprung for another $125 bottle, but the second bottle was unlike the first, i.e. it was not smooth but strong and a bit rough. same vintage, same store ....what gives ???
Champagne Brunch (@Terkel): Impressive and complex nose with butter, hazelnut, smoke, coffee, green apple and burnt butter. Equally impressive palate with burnt butter, fresh green apple, hazelnut with a long acidic aftertaste. Good balance. It has an almost creamy texture to it that is very adorable. Lovely wine and even better than I had expected!
Really good. Spectacular bubbles, I've never seen a bubble like that. Lovely nose of lemon and green apple. A bit of yeast and white flowers. The acidity must be domesticated and that's the point that makes me think that this vintage have years of life. I would like to drink it in 5 years.
Light color. Typical mineral nose, crushed wet rock thing. Tight tart nose. Crisp w some sweet fruit in there. Bit of smokiness in there on the palate, acid, fruit all balanced, maybe a bit too tight right now, the fruit still gaining weight on day II. Today this does not yet earn it's wings, bit pricey for value. A solid vintage Moet is too close to this at half the price. Maybe more time will let this settle, just wound too tight even at day II.
Minneapolis Wine Club Champagne Tasting (Shari's House): For the price I am not a buyer and this is really young but the Henriot Vintage from 96 is better and half the price. Chalk, orange peel, minerals, and dough on the nose and palate. There is a creaminess on the palate and has a medium finish.
Minneapolis Wine Club does Champagne (Shari's House): expressive nose of floral, mineral, toasty, yeast, apple, lemon, citrus. The palate is delicious, creamy, elegant. Really nicely balanced fruit, minerality, and acidity. This is excellent. My WOTN in a close race with the '01 DVX, DVX wins in a landslide on QPR however.
Shared 3 bottles of this at Palomino's "going out of business" party week in Minneapolis. No detailed notes, but a center of the plate pitch for my palate - not too dry, not too heavy / doughy, the slightest bit of sweetness. This wine has its detractors, but I'm a fan. The problem is I can't find this wine anywhere for as cheap as it was at the restaurant. "Half price on all wines" brought the cost of this one to $95!
slightly reticent nose, flowery and pleasant but not the bolder and forward style I like. On palate - very fine mousse, elegant and lifted, more than the nose was giving. very well balanced fruit and acidity, sweetness but not cloying. very good palate.
Kelvin's Bachelor's Party (Imperial Treasure Super Peking Duck, Paragon): Really good. This was a bottle with the Andy Warhol labelling, but I thought I would post it as a "normal" DP as there is really no difference in the stuff within the bottle. Decanted it for half an hour before serving, so the bubbles had gone down, but if the wine's showing was anything to go by, the decanting really helped. This was by far the best of the 4 bottles that I have had so far. Lovely nose - walnut scents, white meat, red apples, citrusy lemony notes, a bit of yeast and white flowers. Typically pleasing DP stuff, and I think even more open than the last time I tried it. You could say the same of the palate as well. Super refined mousse made for a really nice mouthfeel, and it was deliciously juicy with lovely fruit sweetness showing in flavours of fleshy red apples, white plums, a bit of cherries, little hints of ripe lemons and some minerality, all nicely integrated, with just that a little bite of wheat biscuit at the very end. Very friendly, as befitting both the wine and the vintage, but with no lack of depth. This has really improved since the first time I had it. Very nice.
8.5/10 - This starts fruity and big with apples and lemon. Mid palate is structured with great toasty and crisp flavours. Dry without being achingly so. Great smooth mouthfeel with an unending stream of tiny bubbles. Mum never drank so much in her life till this wine.
The Dom must deliver at the price it is offered, and to a degree it does. Refinement in the extreme, fine bead, fine flavors, minerality and citrus, long and lingering, exquisitely satisfying. All that said, I am not sure I would plonk down the loot myself.
Lovely wine. Profuse bead kept exploding from the base of the glass.
Palate was lovely; complex, yeasty and very approachable with very persistent, fine mousse and attractive acid (with nice soft edges and a great, clean finish).
Drank beautifully, at 10 yrs of age, without any hints of harshness. Super classy. Very, very enjoyable; the 4 of us all loved it - it "hit the spot" but the 2 males at the table thought that it didn’t have the intensity or “attack” of a Krug. However I do not want to imply that it was lacking - it wasn't. Clearly a premium wine and worth the money.
Notes of fresh bread dough, matchstick, shiitake mushroom, green apple and lemon. Large, coarse bubbles -- too fizzy at first, then went flat too quickly. Overall, no better than a typical $30 champagne or even an $18 California sparkling wine. Disappointing at this price.
2010 Masters of Wine Champagne Tasting (San Francisco, CA): Straw-yellow color. Yeasty apple and mineral aromas. Medium bodied palate with apple, pear, lemon, mineral, and even a little mushroom. Impressive mousse. Beautiful long finish. A very elegant wine that feels a bit constrained at present. Definitely getting better, but also it’s definitely not yet where it needs to be for this prestigious label. I have difficulty seeing this ever comparing well with the 1990s-vintage Doms. Personally, I would think twice before purchasing this for either short term consumption or aging. That being said, it’s clearly evident this is a quality Champagne that I wouldn’t kick out of bed either if given a glass.
We started with a glass of the 2000 Dom, having had a glass a week earlier we knew not to expect fireworks, not that it is a bad wine, but it is not a great Dom Perignon. It has the hallmark slightly sinister brooding reductive elements that make me wonder why the marque is such a crowd pleaser when young. But it is a lighter style and seems to lack the depth of other young Doms, certainly the 98 and 99 were better at this stage, the 98 by some way.
Sparkling wine blind tasting: Tasted blind. Strong nose. Really fine bubbles. Good finish. Second best wine of the tasting, but not worth the steep price. 89-90
Go with the Roderer instead, which was ranked first and cost 1/3 the price. The 2005 Westport Rivers RJR Brut (from Massachusetts!) came in just behind the Dom, but it's less than 1/6 the cost. There's the QPR! This wine is definitely worth tasting blind, as the ~$150 price tag will make you think this is better than it is.
Very nice from start to finish. Nose had good complexity, yeasty and floral with white fruits all in balance. The body was lovely and full without being heavy and a long, long finish rounded it all out.
Taste at Elysian. Still a winner. Nutty, dark caramel, green apple and pumpernickel bread. A dark yeasty quality. Palate is really nice. Long finish with great balance and acidity. Again, a lovely wine.
Dom Perignon Tasting at CW Alcohol 12.5% The regular cuvee of Dom Perignon is tight on the nose, display focus and intense aromas of white fruits and florals with hint of brioche and mineral undertone. Clean on the palate, the fine beads gently explode which caressing the palate along with its crystalline, pure texture with acidic finish that linger on the mouth. Still young an I believe another 3-5yrs will do the justice. While this is good, I wont pay for the price.
With times, this came rounder and more balance, with dry finish and hint of bitter lemon peel undertone.
Slightly reticent aromatics of pear and apple fruit with gentle yeasty flavours. The palate is another matter - in the mouth it's an explosion of bright, pure fruit with touches of brioche and a savoury minerality beneath. There's a sense of real finesse and elegance here with a gentle silky texture and really good acidity beneath that keeps this very streamlined and precise. Lovely.
The wine was O-K, but that is it. For the price paid i think you should be offered a lot more... The wine was very muted on the nose and did not offer a lot of complexity on the palate... Disappointed.
Ultimate Parker in Singapore Mega-Tasting (The Fullerton Hotel, Singapore): Third try, and this was by far the best I thought. Nice nose, with typical DP friendliness - yeast, biscuits, some white meat inflection and plenty of lacy white fruit. Palate was very eager to please, Fresh and fizzy mousse, lots of upfront fruit with sweet lemons and peach and a touch of flowers. This had some weight on it and a nice concentration on mid-palate, and pretty decent length as well, with a little note of yeast to say goodbye. Surprisingly nice. Not a profound beauty, but no ditzy airhead either, which some DPs can tend towards.
Not half as good as the 96 I tasted a couple of years back. This simply was not worth the hefty price tag. Very good champagne with decent complexity, but more clean and crisp really on the flavour profile. You can find this quality at less than half the price. Nevertheless, i will never complain when I'm being served DP.
It's got nice chalky minerality, and lots of small persistent carbonation. Staid to the point of expressing almost nothing. There is nothing really wrong with it, but wine this expensive shouldn't make you go meh. As far as I can tell there is absolutely nothing special about this wine except the label.
For my 100+ I'd take a flyer on something different and more interesting next time -- Selosse Initial?
On MH016 first class from Kuala Lumpur to Amsterdam, in the ealy morning hours. Definite notes of brioche and toast on the nose, straw yellow with miniscule mousse. A wide ranging attack encounters the palate with a silky soft elegant-effervescent texture, nutty notes and little sweet in the long finish, focussed. Great! Why not 1st class every time I fly?
I have trouble getting into this wine. Its really funky, with musk and a little 'shroom and cat piss on the nose that almost drown out the lemon notes, and in the mouth its got even more funk to it, like it tastes like a skunk walked by a few minutes before you picked up the glass. Almost has a chenin-y funkiness to my taste. Its undeniably complex, but I just don't know if I like it.
Close to 92. Very nice nose with lots of fresh citrus and some very ripe fruit. (It has a hint of the same funk i find lots of in Ruinart BdB.) A hint of gunpowder in the nose too. Quite yound and citrussy taste with some raw apple. The nose is better than the taste, but the taste is very good as well. Some fruit candy and melon in the nice aftertaste. It becomes a bit sweeter and better with time in the glass and with a rising temperature. Needs years to improve.
In cellebration of Canada's gold medal hockey win! Woo hoo... At that point of the night it could have been camel piss and we would have enjoyed it, but it was actually really good. This was the best champagne that I have had, but my experience has been limited.
Dinner with the Monthly Group (Park Palace, Grand Park Hotel): Putting my DP bias aside, this was actually really nice. Better than the last time I tried it six months ago at any rate. Lovely nose. Yeast, earth, white fruits, dusky strawberry tones - far deeper, and far more expressive than the Roederer Brut NV that preceded it. Mousee was fine, almost indistinct. Palate had plenty of biscuit and caramel notes, overlaid with a dry, structured spine and juicy acidity, and laced through with mineral and lots of juicy strawberry fruit and flowery top notes. A very expressive wine in true DP fashion. The dry minerally finish had decent length and closed the wine off rather nicely. Lacks complexity, as I noted with the last bottle, but this was well-balanced and delicious. Not a sophisticated lady, this was more like your playboy playmate gone legit. Still though, quite a pleasure to drink.
Fresh, yeasty and vibrant on the nose. Clean and creamy on the palate. Nice minerality and hints of crisp apple. Long finish. Here is the problem with this wine. Technically, this is a well made Champagne. The flavors are clean and everything is well balanced, but frankly, compared to other Champagnes at the table, this is just kind of boring. Nothing that makes it stand out or interesting.
Taste at Elysian. Next day from the bottle. Still plenty of carbonation plus it had a night to open up. Enjoyable classic DP nose of brioche, yellow apples, light honey, barnyard hay and light yellow and white flowers. Palate is more weighty showing some richer baked breads and more yellow fruit. Finish is pelasant and medium to full bodied showing lovely acidity and length. Still overated and overpriced.
Just drank a bottle on a normal friday night with a good friend in front of a warm fire. The DP started quite good and elegant, albeit a bit closed. It only got better and better and (as usual) the last two glasses were pure delight. The perfect bottle to drink amongst good friends with good food on a non-special night, not to be wasted with Holidays and related philistines ;).
Should only get better in 2-5 years. Will keep the rest of the case/box locked in the cellar for a couple of years.
Despite being a bit youthful (I'll save another bottle of the 2000 for a few years), this was showing nicely after an hour. Good citrus foundation, with hints of pear and peach. A tart lingering finish, with a tad of smokiness (or was that from the fireworks?!) that was quite refreshing. Hold for 3-5 yrs.
We don't drink DP by the case load, but we've been drinking it several times a year for the last two decades or more. The 2000 we had on Christmas 2009 was hands down the most disappointing bottle we've had. We knew the 2000 wasn't a 1996, but this was just so basic. The 1998 and 1999 are both better. Maybe this just shouldn't have been declared a vintage. There was essentially no complexity, none of the yeasty goodness we've come to enjoy. It was a fine sparkler, but it wasn't a £100 bottle of Champagne. Next time, perhaps it'll be the Krug.
There's no doubt about it; DP is now more approachable young than in past vintages. This 2000 stated out very promising with delicate yet forceful aromas of wheat crackers, brown sugar and lemon peel. Nice texture, too, plenty of pintpoint bubbles but not too gassy. Unfortunately, as it warmed, it got more blurry and soupy, losing much ot it's appeal. This is a difficult wine to read.
Couldn't separate itself from the line-up. Delicious but basic. Massive acidity, strong green apple flavors with bits of oak here and there. To young? I need to find that is in it's drinking window and try to understand what all of the hub-bub is about.
Mainstream Champagne at Franks house (At Franks house): Nose: Oysters, candy, slightly mineral, apple closed. Mouth: Fresh bread out of the oven, slightly bitter, firm, slim and clear structure with hints of apple and apricot. Fantastic bubbles small and many that grow in the mouth. Can drink now but will develop. Keep.
Masters of Wine Champagne Tasting (San Francisco, CA): Moderate yellow color. Relatively large bubbles with a persistent fizz. Yeasty apple nose. Delicate palate with lovely apple, spice, oak, and lemon flavors. Light-to-medium bodied. Medium-long finish. There’s definitely elegance here, but it’s hesitant. My one complaint with young Dom is that it’s too light and simple when young. The 2000 vintage is slightly fuller than I recall other recent Dom vintages, but overall it’s still too light for my taste. Far more time aging is needed. In my mind, at this price any Champagne should not only have great aging potential but should also be far more drinkable while still relatively young. Nonetheless, a truly excellent wine and perhaps the best young Dom I can recall.
Nice tight bubbles with yeasty sourdough bread notes. Toasty Brioche notes emerged with more time, but the wine never really displayed the depth or complexity one associates with this great house. Was served a touch warm but held strong throughout the dinner. Hold onto these for a few more years before revisiting *(*)
33rd Birthday: Light yellow. Buttery note on the finish. Nose of citrus, almond, pear, and honey. Light toasty note. Medium body with very soft bubbles. Moderate acidity. Medium length finish. As the Champagne warmed up and breathed in the glass it gained a smoky flinty note and got more complex.
Naturally, very young colour. Very fresh with nice, bright acidity. A little toast and brioche with quite a precise mousse. However, quite jagged and awkward at this stage and became increasingly so with more air in the glass.
Served blind and at cellar temp shortly after being opened: A nose of apples, yeast and buttery oak. Over-ripe green and yellow apples as well. On the palate the apples are spiced showing some nutmeg which carries into some lime juice on the finish. Tart finish that leaves behind a texture and flavor like you were sucking on a cotton shirt. Nice body, nice light bubbles but overall un-complex and boring compared to the competition and feels fairly standard. If anything I thought this wine was the ringer of the night. Placed last place for me in a 8-bottle blind Champagne tasting.
Blind Champagne - Dom Pérignon loses to Cava AGAIN (My House (Portland, OR)): This is the second time for me a Dom Pérignon has lost out to a Cava, and this time in a blind tasting. Certainly darker color than the previous two wines, on the nose this is showing pretty heavy oak funk, an egg, and bird crap. Pretty decent fruit on the mid-palate, but again getting quite oaky. Rancid a bit on the finish, with high acidity, and oak building. Really not too appealing and perhaps I'm over scoring this? I think nearly everyone in the tasting either scored this last, or at least bottom three. This wine was the main reason we did the tasting blind, and the reaction didn't disappoint.
Wow, what a great bottle! Initially this was chilled too much (but the girls like it that way). Once it came to proper tasting temperature, this beauty sang! Nice tight concentration of bubbles in the glass against a lemon zest color. The palate presented with citrus, bread yeast, wildflower and some soft melon undertones. The sweet citrus really stood out towards the end of this bottle as it warmed up. Simply lovely.
Tasted at the BBR & Moet Tasting "The Three Expressions of Dom Perignon" presented by Richard Geoffroy. Crisp & intense with a delicate nose. Minerality. I like the term used by RG as precise because it is exactly that. Simply another top DP champagne.
CT London Event (Hide Bar, Bermondsey, London): I thought this was showing really well. Very clearly DP styled. A little tight on the nose at first, showing its youth maybe, but opened up to show very expressively, with lovely chard tones of sweet apples and melons, a touch of yellow flowers, a little musk and some bread. Palate was quite a bit sweeter than the Cuvee Claude Moet that preceded it, almost bursting with fruit - I got green apples and cherries. Lovely integration though, with a nice focus and a little minerally backbone. Nice long finish too, with more sweet fruit, again the green apples and cherries, before it tailed off to a tightly wound mineral and yeast finish. Could have done with a touch more complexity and structure, but it was very nicely balanced and delineated.
Colour: Golden with hints of green Bouquet: Toast, fruity Palate: Very lively and small bubbles, loads of them. The palate is very balanced and elegant. You can find cream, lemon and other citruses and butter from the dry taste. Very fresh and tasty indeed. Long and rich finish.
Drank at a Sherry-Lehmann/Dom Perignon wine dinner at Fishtail - This was the starter wine and good place for it was much lighter then the '95 and '93 Oeno's. Some toast and citrus and on the nose, lemons, sour apple, minerals on the palate. This is a ligher, refreshing champagne that is best served on a hot day. The texture was no where near as good as the Oeno's, but still enjoyable.
Had alongside a Krug GC and a 98 Veuve LGD. The lightest of the three but very enjoyable for the citrus, vanilla, unripe tart green apple, and yeast components. Light on the palate but had a medium plus finish. Went well and actually got much better with the chevre and apple compote.
2009 LVMH Tasting at Elway's Cherry Creek (Denver, CO): Very lively nose of minerals, chalk, stone fruits, some ginger and citrus elements, too. Really tight on the palate which is to be expected, but this does not have anywhere near the structure of say the '96. I was hoping for a bit more of the lees effect on the nose. The assemblage was a bit off, I thought. Drink thru 2015.
Light yellow. Fine persistent mousse. Delicious nose of nuts, breadcrumps, caramel and lemon. In the mouth this is very forthcoming and while it is nowhere near the 1996 and lacks some structure it certainly is drinking very nicely and a good deal more interesting than the 1999.
Very nice but very soft champagne. Butter yellow color, full mousse of small but not tiny bubbles. Almost nothing on the nose even with extended aeration, until it finally yielded a scent of fresh mountain air. Pleasant, delicate and elegant and would be decent enough for a blancs de blancs NV or vintage grande marque - but not for DP.
Champagne Tasting (Waterford Wines Milwaukee): 50% Pinot Noir, 50% Chardonnay, disgorged spring of 2008, dosage 7g/l would i say exclusively non-offensive? touch of salonishness to the nose. ben refers to a hazelnutiness to other vintages. 2000 is a really light vintage in comparision. moet - 30 million cases
A lighter DP that some say would never have been made if it weren't for the vintage. I say less of the burnt rubber stink that normally pervades DP making it such an overpriced horse piss wank fest. Although I admit that I am having a strange attraction to this bottle right now.
Oh my god how good this is - boys and girls, this indeed is the real deal, the best champagne we've ever had. The bottle was enjoyed this am as part of a birthday breakfast for a good friend while up in Bryson City NC for a Christmas weekend get-away with our dinner club. Pale straw colored, tiny lively bubbles, unbelievable aeromatics - nose initially very effervescent with tones of mature pear and vanilla coming through after initial effervescence blew off. Crisp, minerally and yet soft and very well balanced. Flavors included a very pleasant underlying nuttiness and almost a mocha structure with primary flavors of green apple, peach and vanilla. First DP we've had, I now understand the fuss and the reputation. Highly recommend this, however way too expensive to be any kind of a good QPR - in life, however, some things are simply worth the money.
Had a taste - this was great. Balanced acidity, not puckeringly dry. A rich but controlled sweetness and nuttiness on the palate. A little bit of earthiness on the nose did not show on the palate. Really nice.
Pale straw color with beautiful pinpoint bubbles. Light mineral and citrus aromas - shy but well balanced., In the mouth, the citrus impression blossoms to yellow fruit with a mineral underpinning. A bit fat and unfocused at the moment (though the wine was disgorged April, 2007). A classic Dom Perignon vintage where the DP style coexists with the style of the vintage. Long, mineral laced finished with a slightly sweet impression.
An excellent wine as always. It did not impress me as much as the 98 which I would have given a couple of more points. Nice fruit but could've been better. Less acidity and more elegance in the 98. Next up is 99.
At the 2008 Post hotel Wine Summit in Lake Lousie Alberta Canada, We were fortunate to have Pascal Pecriaux who has been with Dom Perignon for thirty years. He walked us through three vintaged DPs, one DP Rose, and three of their Enotheque. It was a tough way to start a Saturday morning at 9:00, but I was up for the challenge. The 2000 Dom was the first of three and I have to admit my first vintaged Dom. This pale greenish yellow effervescent offering tickeled my nose with hints of citrus and apricot. On the tongue it was at first mediciny and acidic. As I and the wine woke up and listened to the heavy accented Pecriaux, this glass of Champagne began to charm me.
Started out rather elegantly mineral, but gained weight and sweetness quickly after opening. Sweet and fruit forward, not really as acidic or as crisp as I would hope, some attractive minerality - a nice enough Champagne, but not really anything special.