Who Needs Champagne When You Have California?
California sparkling wine has never been better
Posted: Dec 21, 2011 10:05am ET
Tuesday is a good enough
excuse to open a bottle of sparkling wine at our house, but we're the exception.
(Most of you wait until Wednesday, right?) So in December we get genuinely busy
with bubbly.
I've been drinking
California sparkling wine for 20 years and for about half that I've been
reviewing them for Wine Spectator.
Across the board they've never been better. The industry has settled into a comfortable
middle age. The top producers have refined a signature tête de cuvée, or
flagship wine, and at the same time have not sacrificed value.
Middle age doesn't make for
snazzy headlines but it does mean that consumers have a good selection of
bubbly across every price point this holiday season. Wine Spectator subscribers
can read my complete annual report on American sparkling wine in the Dec. 31 issue but here are some
of the highlights.
I've broken the wines into
three groups: good values, rosés and the cream of the crop.
For value, two wines stand
out this year, overdelivering on quality for the price: Scharffenberger Brut
Mendocino County Non-Vintage (90 points, $19) and Piper Sonoma Blanc de Blancs
Sonoma County Select Cuvée NV (88, $20). Both wines are frequently discounted.
Some of the most exciting
sparkling wines in recent years have been rosés. All the major California
houses make one now and the best offer a festive pink or salmon hue, with
delicately rich fruit and vibrant acidity. Gloria Ferrer is consistently at the
top of my list and the Brut Rosé Carneros 2007 (90, $42) is another winner.
Other sparkling rosés worth a
search are Roederer Estate Brut Rosé Anderson Valley NV (91, $27) and
Schramsberg Brut Rosé North Coast 2008 (91, $41). Value hunters should pick up
a bottle of Korbel Brut Rosé California NV (88, $13). It's soft and easy to
like, with a hint of sweetness.
The tête de cuvées of the
top California sparkling producers are among the best in the world. Certainly
Champagne stands apart and yet I'm convinced that in a comparative blind
tasting the California wines would do surprisingly well. I'm not sure why more
sommeliers and wine professionals won't take up that challenge.
As with any sparkling wine,
there are house and stylistic differences demonstrated skillfully by the latest
releases. Roederer Estate Brut Anderson Valley L'Ermitage 2003 (93, $45) and
Domaine Carneros Blanc de Blancs Carneros Le Rêve 2005 (92, $85) are the most
Champagne-like, blending beautiful austerity with rich complexity.
In a similar vein are Iron
Horse Brut Green Valley of Russian River Valley X 2006 (92, $50) and Mumm Napa
DVX Napa Valley 2003 (93, $55), although stylistically the two wines are more
vintage-driven—a bit more fat and fleshy in some years but always rich and
focused.
The Schramsberg J. Schram is
unabashedly Californian from vintage to vintage and the J. Schram North Coast
2004 (93, $100) is boldly structured yet still light on its feet.
There
are so many California sparkling wines that I could have mentioned. What have I
left out? Do you have a favorite you'd like to suggest?
The new sparkling wines from Ceja in Carneros are delicious and unique. Austere and briny...excellent with oysters. Good value, too.