2004 Bollinger Champagne La Grande Année
Community Tasting Note
Man in Black wrote:
Thursday, October 31, 2013 - Clear and bright, medium gold colour with small bubbles. The nose is clean and developing with pronounced intensity aromas of yeast, biscuit, dried figs, yellow apple, lemon peel and cream. It's off-dry in the mouth, with high acidity, medium- alcohol, light body, creamy mousse and pronounced intensity flavours of dried figs, yellow apples, lemon peel, biscuits and cream. The finish is long. It's a very good quality wine with a good balance between fruit and autolytic aromas, with an integrated acidity and some complexity, but the aromas are slightly oxidized. Drink now, not suitable for ageing.
Post a Comment / View Man in Black's profileDo you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue (5,329 views)
3 comments have been posted
Post a Comment
/ View Man in Black's profile
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue (5,329 views)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue (5,329 views)
Comment posted by Champagneinhand:
11/3/2013 7:28:00 PM - I am wondering why you would not think this is suitable for aging. Bollinger has always had an oxidized component, very much like Krug. I really enjoyed a 1990 Bollinger RD about a year ago and it was really good. I have found many a champagne that had initial reactions that it would not age well be completely wrong. With friends we really enjoyed a 1995 LGD. ne of the best champagnes in tertiary notes ever. I should also note that the said Bollinger was at a cT event side by side a 1990 DP, and both seemed really good and that they had much longer potential.
Again just wondering what you were using as a reference on why any vintage Bollinger GA couldn't age well?
Comment posted by Man in Black:
11/4/2013 10:14:00 AM - This wine was tasted bling in a classroom, in groups of 4, and it must be noted that my group was the only one that though it was not only not going to develop into something interesting, but it was indeed tired and past its best. The other groups considered it could be kept for many year, although there was not an absolute consensus. Our teacher considered it could be kept for 10 years.
I just decided to be honest with myself when writing this tasting note. When I tasted it I considered it was almost past its best, and that although there were room for a bit more of development it wasn't going to become interesting. Although there is enough structure to keep it I thin that the oxidized and dried figs notes are promising a quick death, even if it's part of the house's style. At least that's how I perceived it. Even if the majority of the people in the classroom considered it worth ageing I did not, and neither did my other mates. And nobody provided sound reasons to make change my mind. Of course I'm probably wrong, but I wanted to write MY tasting note, not the classroom's tasting note, even if I'm wrong.
Comment posted by Champagneinhand:
11/4/2013 12:13:00 PM - Your note was indeed very good. Please don't take any offense to my asking your reasoning. I have 2 bottles on pre-order and I really wanted to know how you came to the conclusion. I see nothing wrong with your methodology. Though, because I have 2 bottles paid for, yet not delivered, I hope you are wrong, and its just beginning to close down for a bit. It seems that the 2002 GA is starting to do that as noted as on late by several people on CT> You provide a compelling rationale to you reasoning, and that's all I was looking for. Many times I have ask a similar question and some are put off by it, but I really am just trying to gain the insight of others, since I haven't had this vintage. Thanks for your timely response and as always, I appreciate the thoughts. Cheers!