1996 Champagne Fleury Champagne Brut Millésimé

• By Josh Raynolds
  November/December 2010, IWC Issue #153, (See more on Vinous...)

  (Fleury Pere et Fils Brut Vintage) Login and sign up and see review text.

Garagiste

• By Jon Rimmerman
  1/4/2011, (See more on Garagiste...)

  (BRUT Fleury Champagne) UPDATE: Transparency Happy New Year to all – 2010 was a memorable year at Garagiste with new and old friends helping us forge ahead toward a more meaningful understanding of wine, food and culture. While I rarely take any time off, I took some much needed rest last week which allowed me to ponder several topics that I believe will be vinous hot-buttons in 2011 and beyond... Transparency is one of them. I remember reading the words of a famous critic a few years ago who stated something like “transparency in wine a foolhardy notion” - after laughing for a moment at the nonsensical and completely amateurish notion put forth by someone with so much power, I realized that he indeed believed that statement. Wholesale proclamations are dangerous – it’s just as dangerous to stand behind an idyllic natural wine mantra (as certain bloggers are prone to do) as that is just as uninformed. In wine, a middle ground serves the best intentions of all parties, including those with a chip on their shoulder or something monumental to say. By recognizing the opinions of those you disagree with, it elevates your own stance and argument that much further. By completely brushing it aside, it makes you look ignorant – no matter how educated or well-tasted you believe you are. As the ultimate equalizer in wine and prose, transparency touches us all. In one respect, alcohol levels in wine are a poster child for the word. As one of the most transparent elements of the vinous experience (from the consumer’s end), it is the least transparent on the label. As a consumer, it makes little to no sense to follow alcohol levels listed on a wine label as the vast majority of printed alcohol levels bare little resemblance to what’s in the bottle – in fact, many are outright lies (mostly to save on taxes that increase as the alcohol levels rise). This is an incredible disservice to the consumer that often ends in bewilderment or one of the famous catchall wine phrases such as “it must have been a bad bottle”. No, it was really 14.8% alcohol, not 13.9%. If an independent party were responsible for analyzing every wine for commercial sale in the US (just like the FDA), none of this would be an issue. To offer your wine for sale, you would automatically submit the finished bottled wine to this authority, it would be analyzed and the return information sent back to you would be part of the back label – simple and obvious. This “transparency” sticker would become commonplace and the consumer would feel more at ease and more knowledgeable about the food he/she were drinking. If you don’t think this is possible, see the pioneering effort by the Consorzio di Brunello di Montalcino – they will send you facts on production and what’s really in the bottle (including analyzed alcohol levels) with a simple text message: http://bit.ly/ezI6aB In some way, this pits producer and regulating agency against one another (surprise, surprise) but if it were commonplace, if everyone had to do it (wanted to do it?) wouldn’t wine label stats and actual stats begin to more closely resemble one another? The Brunello effort is only the beginning. As our society moves toward more information - sooner, faster, stronger - it is inevitable that other regions will have to follow suit with this type of information (I'm sure some of them have already). Consumers demand complete transparency in almost everything we do, purchase, utilize, so why not wine? For some reason, the romantic, mysterious tag placed upon wine gives it a free-pass from almost all regulation. That cannot last. Wouldn't it be easier if wine regions policed themselves (as in Brunello), instead of waiting for a government backed bureaucratic agency to mess something up that they really do not understand. If a wine savvy inventor is out there, I’ve given you an idea that could and should be developed into a standard that everyone trusts and utilizes. Pro-consumer transparency has the uncanny affect of creating more trust and a more cohesive audience, not the opposite – the more you reveal, the greater the loyalty from those you so covet (in this case, the wine-consuming public). You know what? If the public believes in your transparency, they may just give you a free pass when you make a few mistakes. In addition to transparency in alcohol levels, I’ve spent the better part of my career attempting to eradicate pesticides and chemicals in grape-growing – I believe that cause has been well served. Now I am taking this fight a step further toward what’s inside the bottle. Organic or BIO viticulture is only one side of the story. While it is certainly admirable, it means very little if you augment organic farming with hidden additives in the finished wine. By hiding behind a certain veil of secrecy, wine remains one of the only “foods” without the need for an ingredient listing. If you are curious about what is actually in your wine, (you thought it contained grapes?), here is a tidy little list of what may be (and probably is) in a number of the bottles you so cherish and have in your cellar. If 10% of the ingredients listed here were in the foods you considered purchasing at the grocery store today, would you still support its consumption or subject your body to the unknown ramifications of repeated ingestion? Many of you would run for the hills: http://bit.ly/au5XcV The moral of the story is to get involved. Nothing will change without the consumer standing up for their rights to know – whether it’s transparent and real alcohol listings or ingredient statements, what was once and still is a beverage of romance has been forced to find a sensical method of disclosure. Wouldn’t it be easier if wine was made from, well, let’s see...grapes and natural yeast from the vineyard? If so, all of this would be a moot point. The next time you wonder what’s inside that bottle of 2007 Napa Cabernet or 2009 Burgundy, send the winemakers a letter and demand they give you a list of the ingredients instead – all of the ingredients. If you are going to plunk down $50-250 for a bottle of wine, the least they could do is let you know what you’re eating. - Jon Rimmerman ************************* 1996 Fleury Dear Friends, New Year’s Eve has come and gone but its promise is best enjoyed by continuing the feel-good love affair with a timeless beverage of frivolity. As Samuel Johnson once wrote of London (I will transpose his words to accommodate a fine bead)... “If you are tired of Champagne, you are tired of life”. Speaking of transparency, I enjoyed several fine wines over the break but none captured my attention more than the fascinating wines from an emerging house of biodynamic reckoning (inside and outside the bottle). I didn’t have any plans to offer this set of wines but after I posted several TN’s on twitter last week regarding Fleury, I received a dearth of requests to make the tasting notes come to life in the form of an offer. It wasn’t easy (the wines are quite cumbersome to source) but here you go – including a third wine I tasted (but did not write a twitter TN on), the stunning and singular 2004 Cépage Blanc. Here is a re-print of my Fleury twitter post: “For New Year’s Eve, I tossed the Krug and the obvious aside in order of something really interesting and innovative – Fleury Champagne... 1996 Fleury Brut Champagne (Côte des Bar) - As one of the original and oldest renegade BIO/organic producers in Champagne’s most exciting region, the Cote des Bar, Fleury is about to make major waves in the US. This wine was disgorged five years ago and it is singing at present. Cashmere and eccentric luxury are the order of the day in this mostly Pinot Noir based wine (as is typical of the Bar). From a great vintage, this wine has years to go but I see no reason to defer gratification as it explodes with a certain sensitivity and Asian-tinged fruit/spice compote that is exciting, exotic and complex beyond its humble origin. Impressive and so very long on the palate. 1995 Fleury Extra Brut Champagne (Côte des Bar) - From another top year with a more nervous disposition than the 1996, this no-dose/low-dose example is only for the faint of heart, or more accurately for the well-initiated and culinary adventurer that wishes to pair a top-quality, biting and mineral crusted example with their evening meal. Like a barbed sword, this example was disgorged six years ago and it has a still-compact frame that has at least another decade to unfold. An oenophile’s wine that is potentially even more impressive than the softer 1996 (the 1995 saw no malo and the 1996 did).” I didn’t think any of the major US critics had ever tasted Fleury but I was wrong – upon further investigation, It’s apparent the major critical journals are trying to dig a bit deeper into the underground which gets a firm nod of approval from me – kudos to them. Fleury Champagne – among the most exciting and challenging of the “everything old is new again” kids on the block... All three wines below are VERY HIGHLY RECOMMENDED as transparent expressions of their respective vintages and as a windowpane of the BIO/organic movement in the Bar: 2004 Fleury Champagne “Cépage Blanc” Brut (Côte des Bar) - EXTREMELY LIMITED (at present, there are only 60 bottles of this wine for the entire US market – made from 100% Chardonnay, this is a very unique wine, especially for the Bar) 1996 Fleury Brut Champagne (Côte des Bar) - 1995 Fleury “Extra Brut” Champagne (Côte des Bar) - (this is not the Brut that K & L has, this is a special Extra Brut) (keep in mind, barriques are not considered a dirty word in Champagne (see Vilmart). Also, most of the wood they use is old - JR) Please give us your maximum number up to 12/each wine and we will allocate accordingly This parcel is directly from the winery cellar with perfect provenance. To order: niki@garagistewine.com This parcel is set to arrive in late February (please check OARS for local pick up after March 1st). It will ship during the Spring shipping season. Out of state orders will be held for free under ideal storage conditions (56 degrees/70%humidity) until shipping is possible. Locals may pick up at their leisure. For current local pick up and arrival/ship information, please see your OARS link below (at the bottom of this offer) - don’t know how to access your OARS? Simply click the link and see your account. You can also paste the link into your browser. If you are having trouble with your link or your account, please contact: support@garagistewine.com NO SALES TO RETAILERS OR WHOLESALERS Thank you, Jon Rimmerman Garagiste Seattle, WA Champ8881 Champ8882 Champ8883 Click here to view the status of your orders in O.A.R.S.

RJonWine.com

• By Richard Jennings
  12/16/2009, (See more on RJonWine.com...) 93 points

  (Champagne Fleury Champagne Brut Millésimé) Light orange color; light citrus, orange, caramel, peach, ginger nose; focused, tart citrus, tart orange palate with a touch of caramel; meidum-plus finish (1/3 Chardonnay, 1/3 Pinot Noir and 1/3 Pinot Blanc)

• By Richard Jennings
  12/13/2008, (See more on RJonWine.com...) 91 points

  (Champagne Fleury Champagne Brut Millésimé) Medium canary yellow color; lovely brioche nose; tart grapefruit and lemon palate, chalk, tight yet, with high acidity; medium finish (needs 5-7 years)

• By Richard Jennings
  9/20/2008, (See more on RJonWine.com...) 92 points

  (Champagne Fleury Champagne Brut Millésimé) Dark canary yellow color; lovely toasty, yeasty, citrus nose; tasty, tart peach, citrus and mineral palate with good concentration and acidity; medium-plus finish 92+ pts.