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) A magnum of 1973 Dom Perignon was exceptional. It was just one of those great bottles. It had strong wafery flavors and tasty sugar, with a creamy and somewhat delicate finish by comparison to the Krug. It still had muscle but in a more cut way, and its elegance lingered like good manners (96M).
(Dom Perignon) The 1973 Dom Perignon was ‘too cold,’ per the Warden, who was annoyed he let the temperature of this DP slip past his guard. There was more wafer here, along with light sweetness in a honey, lilac and white honeysuckle direction. It was also fresher than the ’64. This was a classic ’73. The palate was long and zippy, more linear with lots of minerals and much more race in the car. It lacked the fat, decadent fruit of the ’64, however, and the Hillbilly found it ‘thinner and getting crushed.’ I defended the ’73 a bit and its minerally definition, and he conceded he was a bit hard…for various reasons. Its finish kept getting stronger in the glass. Hints of rye crisp rounded out this excellent DP (94+).
(Dom Perignon) It was back to the grill again with a 1973 Dom Perignon, this time from an original magnum. The nose seemed better, more balanced with nice aromas and edge to it, more musky and intoxicating with excellent cream traces. Its flavors of grilled nuts and toast were spot on. Original baby, go ‘head baby.
(Dom Perignon) A 1973 Dom Perignonwas delicious and classic with its granulated sugar, white fruit and mineral aromas and flavors. It was very fresh and racy, in a perfect spot. For some reason, a few of the ‘Dom-inators’ were a bit under-impressed by the ’73, but I thought it was outstanding
NOTE: Some content is property of View From the Cellar and Vintage Tastings.