The Wine's the Thing
Mitch Kornfeld
12/27

Get Bubbling on New Year's Eve with RAMPCS

The New Year is rapidly approaching so it's time talk about some sparkling wines. The attention-grabbing (I hope) acronym in the title has nothing to so with computers or anything hi-tech, but stands for, "Readily Available Mass Produced California Sparklers." The phrase "mass produced" has a somewhat negative connotation but I find the connotation to be usually a little misplaced. Think about it. Unless you drive something like a Rolls-Royce or a Lamborghini your vehicle is mass produced, and unless you're in the habit of buying hand tailored clothes your off-the-rack (or in my case out-of-the-package) wardrobe is mass produced too, and yet you probably have a very nice car and some very nice clothes.[1] It is also something like that with wine. Any wine produced in a quantity of less than 1,000 cases, which is where I draw the "hard to find line," these days, can be said to be hand-made. At what point you can say a wine is no longer hand made but is mass produced I really can't say, but all the RAMPCS wines are made in quantities way over that line, but their quality as a group is really quite good. 

I'll be reviewing eight wines today. All of them are made by the labor-intensive (though aided by machines) methode champenois. That is to say the secondary fermentation that produces the famous sparkle in sparkling wines takes place in the very bottle you purchase, open, and enjoy. The methode champenois is by far the best method there is for making sparkling wines. Obviously this is the method used for real Champagne, and obviously it leads to the inevitable comparisons between the wines of the two regions. 

The grape varieties used in these wines are mostly Chardonnay and Pinot Noir, and they are the best varieties to use for sparkling wines. In the Champagne region they are the best varieties too although in that region a third variety, Pinot Meunier, is also used. Pinot Meunier is one of the parents of Pinot Noir, can you name the other parent?[2] There is a little Pinot Meunier in California, and some shows up in some of these wines but it's not a significant amount. 

The winemaking methods and the grape varieties in the Champagne region and in California are basically the same. There are quite a few other variables such as the yields of the vineyards, the time the wine spends in the bottle on the yeast, and certainly the soils, but the biggest variable in terms of showing up in the finished wines and being really noticeable is the different climates. 

As I have said before the hallmark of California wines is the bright ripe fruit flavors they get from all of that sunshine. In France and especially in the northerly Champagne region they just don't have all of that sunshine, so they have to rely on favored sites, lower yields, severe selection of fruit, and in this case, more time on the yeast, to produce high quality sparkling wines. I don't think it's a stretch to say they have succeeded, as Champagne is arguably the most famous wine in the world. When they are good they exhibit a "layered effect," and a harmony of complexity and seamless elegant drinkability that is unmatched. It does take some time and study to really appreciate Champagne. I know it did for me. I like to think that one reason for that is they are not exactly giving the stuff away. These days non-vintage Brut Champagnes sell mostly in the low and mid-twenty dollar range. Their California counterparts, if you can call them that because they are different, are usually in the mid-teens. They cost about one-third less than Champagnes, and in these unsettled economic times price becomes a definite consideration. 

Another consideration is that bright California fruitiness. I know wine. You probably know wine. But do all of your friends know wine? Will they fully appreciate the $27 a bottle Champagne, that you bought by the case, when the ball is dropping, the streamers are flying, and the noisemakers are noise making? They will all say they did but I have my doubts. The fruitiness of these California wines makes them more accessible and more crowd-pleasing than the more subtle Champagnes. Don't get me wrong. These California sparklers are not cheap substitutes for Champagne. They are very good wines. Some of them are real charmers, in fact I was surprised just how good they have gotten. They are fruity, tasty, and elegant, and they have all of those real methode champenois imparted bubbles. At their prices they also prove that sparkling wines don't have to be opened only on special occasions. Find one (or more) that you like and bring one home sometime after your hard week at work.  "Oh honey, sparkling wine. What's the occasion?  No special occasion, just one of the Seven Sacred Holidays.  Which one? Friday" 

Recently we got together at the home of the lawyer of our esteemed editor and tasted our RAMPCS wines. The notes are in the order the wines were tasted. The labels were revealed, and I opened them with an attempt to go from the lightest to the heaviest. The prices quoted were the prices I paid at Garnet Wines and Liquors, the cheapest place in Manhattan. The list prices are usually $2 or $3 more so don't be surprised if you come across heftier price tags than what you see here. Garnet gets knocked for not having the best selection. I think for the size of the store it's a really well chosen selection. You could go to places with larger selections, Union Square Wines for one, but their prices aren't as good (except when they have a sale), and you can find prices as low or better, but you have to go out to the 'burbs where the rents aren't as high to find them, but the selection is usually no better. My rule of thumb is the more bare concrete you find on the floor the better the prices but the more homogenous and predictable the selection. I'll take Manhattan. Garnet is on Lexington Avenue between 68thand 69th Streets, just a few stores up the block from the 68th St. stop on the #6 train.  Here are the notes: 

Wine Number 1. Korbel Brut, California Appellation ($10.99). I detected an initial sharp nose of pears and something petroleum-like but it went away quickly. The bubbles weren't very long lasting so drink up. The label says 1% residual sugar, which puts it right in the middle of the Brut range, and it is not noticeably sweet. It's light bodied with just a hint of yeastiness. It's pleasant but really innocuous. Our esteemed editor characterized it as "a straight out white with bubbles." This is not high praise as he is a red wine drinker. This wine is neither very good nor very bad, which is what I say about Budweiser, though it's much better than Budweiser. If someone hands you a glass drink it, it's all right. If they tell you they are fond of it that's all right too as millions of people drink it. It's where the first rule of wine appreciation applies. If you like the person recommend the Domaine Chandon wines to them. At literally a couple of dollars more they're a definite step or two up. 

Wine 2. Pacific Echo 1995Anderson Valley (Mendocino County) Blanc de Blancs ($18.99). I know I'm supposed to be talking about mass produced wines, but you might not find this '95. You may find the more recent years should be pretty good too. '95 was an excellent year, '96 was a bit behind it, '97 was even better, and '98 was only in the good-average category, though you don't need superlative years to make good sparkling wine. The base wines used for sparkling wine production are harvested slightly underripe (with higher than normal acidity) because the acidity in the wine is lowered by the secondary fermentation. One of the best California sparkling wines I ever had (one year ago for New Year's) was a 1989 from Navarro, an Anderson Valley neighbor of Pacific Echo. '89 was the last so-so year before '98. This '95 Blanc de Blancs was made from 100% Chardonnay grapes. It showed a bit of yeastiness in the nose and also in the taste. It was mildly fruity, showed some length, and though it didn't have a ton of character it was really elegant and very nice. The bubbles lasted longer than the Korbel but they weren't tremendously persistent. I suspect the wine would have been livelier a year or two ago. Remember sparkling wines are ready to drink when you buy them and aren't made for aging. Everyone liked this wine. The Reluctant Connoisseur said, "It's the kind of wine you can drink all night." This one is for the fans of elegance. Keep in mind that a Blanc de Blanc is not going to have the body and the power of a Blanc de Noir or even of most Bruts. Your "average" Brut probably is probably made from two-thirds black (read red) grapes. 

This Pacific Echo also said "Scharffenberger" on the label, a reference to the founder and previous owner. He went on to making chocolate in the Bay Area. I recently saw his father's obituary in The New York Times. It had to be his dad. How many John Scharffenbergers of Philo California (Anderson Valley) can there be? The father was 81 and could be described as a well-off industrialist. It helps to have a head start. John Scharffenberger sold his winery to a French firm. I believe it was Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin. In fact all of the wineries from here on out are outposts of French Champagne houses. They know that world class sparkling wines can be produced in California. 

Wine 3. Pacific Echo Mendocino County (Non-Vintage) Brut ($14.99). They couldn't get enough Anderson Valley fruit to give it an Anderson Valley appellation, but I suspect it has a healthy dose of A.V. fruit. This wine had a very different nose than the first two, with much Pinot Noir in evidence. I detected some of that California Pinot Noir funkiness in the nose and in the taste. This one has quite a bit of taste. It doesn't shortchange you in that department. It had the most intense taste of all the wines in the group, though I wasn't personally thrilled by the way it tasted. If you're from the "more is more" school, or have ever said "elegance schmelegance," this is the wine for you. It's a tasty Brut with quite a bit of bubbles and it will stand up to food. 

Wine 4. Domaine Chandon Brut California Cuvee 198 ($12.99). When you see a numbered cuvee from Domaine Chandon look at the last two digits in the number and that means the year the predominant amount of the grapes used were harvested. They use this three-digit designation when they have a batch with special promise and they feel it deserves to be bottled on its own. Again '98 wasn't a great year in California but you don't need a great year to make sparkling wine, though it certainly doesn't hurt. This '98 is a perfectly lovely wine. It's comprised of 54% Pinot Noir, 31% Chardonnay, 11% pinot Blanc (not a classic Champagne variety but it is a very good one), and 4% Pinot Meunier. (Note the 58/42 red variety to white variety ratio.) It doesn't have much nose but shows a touch of yeastiness. It has medium body and shows a beautiful balance of fruit, body, and acidity. It's really very elegant and is a fine sparkling wine. Garnet didn't have anon-cuvee designated Brut. Hopefully they made a lot of this. Domaine Chandon is carried just about everywhere so you shouldn't have any trouble ordering it. You might have a problem getting it in time for New Year's though. 

Wine 5. Roederer Estate Anderson Valley (Non-Vintage) Brut ($16.99). This wine comes from four vineyards in the cool Anderson Valley. The Valley is open at one end to the Pacific Ocean (that's where the name Pacific Echo comes from) and it's the cooling influence of the ocean that makes this a good place for growing grapes destined for sparkling wines. It's also good for cool weather varieties and is probably California's best region for Reisling and Gewurztraminer, and you can also find some fine Chardonnay and Pinot Noir. If you get out to Roederer you can taste the Brut out of magnums, which in addition to being an interesting intellectual experience is also a real treat. This edition of the Brut has medium body and medium richness. It is smooth, elegant, crisp, and seamless. It's another nice effort from the Louis Roederer folks. I've always liked this wine. 

Wine 6. Domaine Carneros 1997 Carneros Brut ($16.99). For starters Domaine Carneros is the name used by the California branch of Taittinger. The Carneros appellation is found in the southeastern portion of Sonoma County and the southwestern portion of Napa County. It is influenced by San Pablo Bay, an arm of San Francisco Bay. Again the maritime influence cools things off and makes it a favorable place for sparkling wine varieties. 1997 was a great year in California and it certainly didn't hurt this wine, as it was the consensus favorite. It had a few more bubbles than the others and it had an attack and showed some intensity. It also showed richness and elegance at the same time. More than one person said that this was the most Champagne-like of the group. It's something of an apples to oranges situation, and '97 was clearly a great year, but I prefer this wine to the current Taittinger "La Francaise" Non-Vintage Brut, which by definition doesn't come from great years. It's about $8 a bottle less too. You can't go wrong with this wine. 

Wine 7. Domaine Chandon Carneros Blanc de Noirs Cuvee 397 ($12.99). Here's another (mostly) '97. It's made of 88% Pinot Noir, 11% Pinot Meunier, and 1% Chardonnay. It has a pinkish hue as you would expect, shows nice body, and is rich and long lasting. It's tasty and easy to drink. It's another very good effort from Domaine Chandon. I was impressed by these Domaine Chandon cuvee wines. They were clearly the best values of the tasting. 

Wine 8. Mumm Cuvee Napa Blancde Noirs ($18.99). This wine was pink with a sort of orange-bronze tint, think of "the color peach." It showed some yeastiness and toastiness, and was quite bubbly on the palate. Food brought out some creaminess, but the overall impression was of crispness and elegance. It was another nice California sparkler, and a nice wine to end the tasting. 

There you have it. There's something for everyone. They're easy to find. They are good wines, and they won't break the bank. The Domaine Carneros was our favorite for quality, and the two DomaineChandon wines were the best values. The Pacific Echo Blanc de Blancs was the most elegant and their regular Brut was the most flavorful. The Roderer and the Mumm were just fine too. With the possible exception of the not too showy Korbel all of these wines will make for a fine New Year's celebration. May I be the first to wish you a better year than the one in the past. To your health. 

Notes:

[1] About a decade back The Wine Spectator published a poll of its subscribers and as I recall the average income was about $100,000 a year. I figure if you have a six-figure income you probably have a nice car and some nice clothes. 

[2] The grape's name is "Traminer." There's still a little of it around, mostly in Germany, Austria, and northern Italy, though it's been mostly supplanted by it's flashier clone Gewurztraminer, the spicy Traminern.

© Mitch Kornfeld 2001 All rights reserved

Send your comments or questions to...
mitchk@unionsquarejournal.com


Previously by Mitch Kornfeld...

The Napa Valley Comes to Town, Part II (09/04/01)

The Napa Valley Comes to Town, Part I (07/12/01)

Windows on Long Island (06/13/01)

Bully for Your (05/30/01)

Big Euro Tasting, Part III -- Remembrance of Bouquets Past (05/17/01)

Big Euro Tasting, Part II -- Greater Burgundy (05/09/01)

Grand European Tasting (05/01/01)

King Cab, Part V -- Spain, Chile, Argentina, Australia (04/18/01)

King Cab, Part IV -- Italy (04/04/01)

King Cab, Part III -- California (03/21/01)

King Cab, Part II -- Bordeaux (03/07/01)

King Cab, Part I -- Some Basics (02/27/01)

For a Big Red, Think Petite (02/18/02)

Tannic Monsters from the ID (02/08/01)

New York Wine and Restaurant Deals (01/30/01)

Dad's Cardinal Zins and Other Clichés (01/20/01)

Some Basics for a Winter's Eve (01/12/01)

And if They're Spanish That's Fine (01/05/01)

Hello Carbon Dioxide (12/29/00)

Wines for Christmas (12/22/00)

Nouveau Beaujolais, Etc. (11/24/00)

Going to a Tasting 101 (12/01/00)