It is clear from the wines released so far that nature has gifted us something special. All are features that this vintage possess in abundance.
When ones tastes a Champagne from 2008, one subconsciously reaches for a mental list of positive superlatives: precision, intensity, complexity, finesse, balance. So do we really have a ‘perfect’ vintage? Well, a few downright awful 1996s suggest to me that there may be no such thing, but yes, it might just be possible that 2008 lives up to the hype. After the harvest, winemakers were already talking about ‘1996 part deux’, drawing parallels with another vintage of high acidity and high natural potential alcohol, but with 2008 maybe even better. 2008 offers a precise combination of nervy acidity thanks to cool nights, and aromatic intensity courtesty of longer ‘hang time’ on the vine. Even in exceptional years, winemakers make decisions that can make or break future potential.įast forward to 2008, the next ‘vintage of the century’, immediately declared as ‘legendary’ (“oh no!” I hear the cynics cry). There were some excellent Champagnes, but also a number that should have been much better than they were. I’ve tasted a broad selection of Champagne from vintages such as 1996 or 2002 where it is apparent that not everything is as it should be.
Some vintages just don’t live up to the hype.
0 kommentar(er)
