Golden colored. Notes of toast, green apple, apricot and rocks. The class here is clear as this is really intense with impressive depth, however, the acidity is simply searing and throws this out of balance. The raw material is impressive - it's like the nose and palate are dialed up to 10, but then the acidity on the backend is just off the charts and as a result the wine is not particularly harmonious at this point. I want to love this and I hope that someday it finds the right balance but it seems like it's going to take a really long time to find out. 92?
Golden color. Looks mature and it's ready to drinki IMO. Honey, apricot and some oxidative notes also. Fortunately it has lots of 96 acidity to balance things out. I need to drink my 1996 champagnes now. This is beautiful and delicious now but I'm a bit afraid that the fruit will fade within 5 years. For my taste, it's drink them now.
Some Champagnes: Orange peel and gun powder, some apricots. Big acid, which is finely balanced by the ripe fruit. Complex, and a fantastic spicy finish. Will eventually be an even better wine in 10-20 years time.
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.
(Krug) The ‘regular’ Krug was adolescently awkard on this night, and its oak really stood out again at first. The oak cooled off with time, and it became more beautiful and big; college should serve this wine well.
(Krug Champagne Vintage Brut) Light medium golden yellow color; rich, yeasty, hazelnut, peach, apricot nose; tasty, yeasty, balanced, hazelnut, tart apple, tart peach, very tart apricot palate; long finish
(Krug) We finished with a 1996 Krug. Lady Agah was ready to perform after dinner, so we revved it up a notch with a closing act fit for a nightcap. The Krug was, as usual, stellar but young. It had enough acid for the entire restaurant, and it had enough rocket fuel to last for decades. Do not disturb until 2025 (96).
(Krug Champagne Vintage Brut) Light medium golden color; yeasty, bready, tart white fruit, tart citrus nose, that opens to tangerine after 30 minutes in the glass; tight, very tart citrus, tangy, tart lemon, mineral, kumquat palate with medium-plus acidity; long finish
(Krug) The little ol’ ‘regular’ 1996 Krug wasn’t too shabby, either. It was clean, fresh and classic, quite zippy itself and noticeably special, even after the two monarchs that preceded. The palate was long, spicy, edgy and longgg. It will be fascinating to have these three together for the decades to come
(Krug Champagne Vintage Brut) Light yellow color; nice yeasty, tart peach nose; tasty, focused, tart peach, apricot and lemon palate with zingy acidity; long finish (opened up a lot after 30 minutes in the glass)
(Krug) The Krug was outstanding as usual, more balanced and fat than some recent memories. There was great toast to it and a creamy, uplifting personality. Extremely complex, the 1996 Krug is one to bank on for the next century.
(Krug) This wine has a remarkable nose, tense and tight, with a very compact character and hugely expressive aromas of dried orchard fruits, with a golden edge. The maturity of the wine shows in a sincere and captivating style, although this is clearly a wine still in a youthful phase of its evolution. But on the palate - wow! Rather than gentle maturity, this is broad and lively, a real mouth-filler, creamy but fresh, fanning out to dominate in the midpalate, and yet it also remains incredibly fine. There is just so much depth and texture here, juxtaposed against the pure structure of the wine, it seems to defy description. I find myself catching my breath as I drink it, and a shiver runs down my spine. This is exceedingly fine, and if the palate per se wasn't convincing enough the long and pervasive finish, which goes on and on, should do the trick. A stunning Champagne, brimming with potential. I have to confess I am in awe; I would like to score this 20/20, but is this perfection? I'm not sure, although it seems damn close.
(Krug) 1996 Krug was Bipin’s version of a palate cleanser, and Bipin shared how Remy told him that his father found 1996 to be similar to 1928…high praise, indeed. Its nose was very racy and full of complexity, possessing aromas of citrus, bright seltzer, hay, straw, even stable and yellow fruits. The palate was racy, zippy, citrusy and long. Buttery aromas developed, and its acidity really took over in the glass
(Krug) The 1996 Krug was the third time I have had this recently released Champagne and the best of the three. Robert Bohr was all over its green apple right away. I was all over its vanilla cream, its earth and seemingly deeper, nuttier nose. Still fresh, of course, the Krug also had aromas of white meat, that green apple, oil and bread. It was really racy and popped in the mouth, more so than the Pol Roger, explosive and full of citrus flavors on its finish. The breed here was exemplary, as were its bread aromas and flavors. A regal finish rounded out this classic
(Krug Champagne Vintage Brut) Tart orange, tangerine and kumquat palate; long finish
NOTE: Some content is property of Vinous and Champagne Warrior and View From the Cellar and JancisRobinson.com and i-WineReview.com and ChampagneGuide.net and Vintage Tastings and RJonWine.com and Winedoctor.