KYD - The Killing Fields (Søllerød Kro): No mousse anymore. It did show nicely but not as solid and as much depth as the 64+66 tasted next to it. Potentially a fake bottle as the label was quite different from the 64+66 but it was unmistakably a Dom P, perhaps just not the 61 in the bottle.
Looking a bit tired with a deeper golden colour and loads of nuts and caramel. Good bottles I’m sure would be majestic as there is real depth and one gets the feeling that there’s underlying class to the wine.
Bubbles largely gone, maybe just a hint of effervescence. Plenty of life in this one though, structure, nuttyness and classic autolytic notes. Touch of biscuit in there too. Pares fabulously with delicate mushroom dishes. I think I preferred this to Krug '64 #FirstWorldProblem
Still with faint bubbles, lush yellow in color. Nose of mazipan, malt and honey, got better with air. Very full palate yet atill got life left. Good and big champagne but might be better a few years ago. Dom in the 60s r amazing.
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.
(Dom Perignon) Bern, Switzerland was the location, and Pekka was behind the curtain, directing his version of ‘A Midsummer’s Night Dream.’ And the first ‘official’ wine of my trip was the 1961 Dom Perignon. It’s a good way to start any trip to Europe, I might add. The debate over which is the best vintage of the best decade for Champagne is always an interesting argument, although I personally go for ’61 over ’66. This bottle was a hair advanced, mature and warm with aromas of honey, yeast and dirty earth, with a twist of lemon. The acidity was still outstanding, but the bubbles were more integrated than in a perfect bottle, yet its richness made it still quite enjoyable, despite the fact this was an affected bottle (95A).
(Dom Perignon) The next wine was so tasty that I invented a word in its honor, ‘yow.’ That’s yum and wow together, by the way. This magnum of 1961 Dom Perignon was an extremely rare, original and non ‘Wedding Cuvee’ - Charles’ and Diana’s, that is. The Royals snapped up most of the production for the wedding, a wise choice, indeed, as Bruce declared that this was ‘one of the Greatest Champagnes ever made,’ and he would know. I thought about it for a second, and after one sip, I concurred. 1961 has always blown me away, but I never put it in the context of the greatest of all-time until then. The nose was fantastic, with a wealth of gold encased in a young personality despite it being an original bottling. There was great fruit here, with none of the excessive sugar of the ’71. Its flavors were rich, big, bold and all balanced by superb acidity. Somehow, despite all of its flavor, it managed to retain a delicacy to its personality. Spectacular stuff
(Dom Perignon) ‘Charles and Diana Wedding Cuvee.’ This was specially released from Dom Perignon for the Royal Wedding. Big Boy got a few cases when he recently acquired Buckingham Palace. Ok, so maybe he only made an unsolicited offer. Pat found the ’61 ‘Krug-like.’ It was fresh, long, spiny and had a vigorous and intense palate, an outstanding Champagne
NOTE: Some content is property of Vintage Tastings.