Clear, light gold in glass. A nose of ripe apple, citrus lemon and lime, almonds, biscuit. On the palate this was dry, with medium(+) acidity and a medium body. Medium(+) flavour intensity, with apples, pineapples, nuts and brioche apparent. This was nice drinking, but sat a bit heavier in the mouth and felt rather more developed than I would have expected. Do not hold much longer.
Tim + Ching Birthday 2016 (Extra Space): No expectations at all on seeing the bottle. But on tasting this is really not bad. Appearance is clear, pale intensity, gold colour. Fading fast bubbles. Nose is clean, medium+ intensity, with aromas of buttery nuts, brioche, saline minerality. Developed. On the palate, dry, high acidity, medium alcohol (12.5%), medium body. Medium+ flavour intensity, with flavours of almond nuts, butter, saline minerality, ripe lemon fruit. Medium+ finish. Good quality. Nuts and minerality is definitely nice here, but losing fruit already, and tastes older than you wopuld think for 2004. Becoming more like an aged white burgundy. Time to drink up and enjoy.
Didn't have huge expectations for this but it was terrific. Seems mature and reminds me of great white burgundy in it's flinty minerally quality. Brioche, lemon curd, green apple and peach. Palate soft as silk with crystal clear bubbles and lasting acidity. This is mature and drinking great right now. I wouldn't be cellaring it long term.
Mid straw. Good fizz. Nose started with brassicas before the citrus and peach came through. Started fresh and zesty with more tropical notes than the nose. Then came a bitter note like almonds and the yeasty element. Overall, starts fresh and fruity end with a savoury profile. This feels like it's aging faster than I'd expect and came across as complex and deep. I really like it.
Moët et Chandon can be unpredictable yet this Grand Vintage from 2004 was absolutely fabulous. This will sound like heresy but like Cantenac Brown below, I enjoyed this far more than the Dom Pérignon 2004 which is overrated in my opinion. Also don't bother with the 2006 Grand Vintage. It's not nearly as good as the 2004.
The 2004 is crisp, precise and very fragrant. Peach, almonds, mango and citrus fruit open up into a palate of subtle spice and brioche. Has a relatively low dosage but it's still extremely fruity and not at all austere.
Extremely impressed with this. It's drinking wonderfully now and may be at its best. Some careful ageing may improve this further but it's not quite as youthful as the Laurent Perrier Vintage from 2004 so I'm not so sure.
As I enjoyed this champagne, I thought how can Moët produce a champagne as nuanced and lovely as this whilst making something as dreadful as Ice Imperial?!
Professional reviews have copyrights and you can view them here for your personal use only as private content. To view pro reviews you must either subscribe to a pre-integrated publication or manually enter reviews below. Learn more.
(Moët & Chandon Champagne Grand Vintage Brut) Light yellow color with lots of speedy tiny bubbles; appealing, tart pear, lightly yeasty, lightly floral, light honey nose; youthful, tart pear, mineral, very tart pear, very tart apple palate with citrus on the finish; medium-plus finish (38% Chardonnay, 33% Pinot Noir, 29% Pinot Meunier; 5 grams dosage) 92+ points
NOTE: Some content is property of Vinous and JancisRobinson.com and Champagne Warrior and i-WineReview.com and RJonWine.com.