MedocMad wrote:
Very strange my fizz expert says the 2004 is a fantastic vintage much better than 2005 ??
Bought two this morning to try, no shakes if this is poor at £15.00
'04 is racy and fine for 1er and grand cru. Yes.
Richard, '05 was only 1 notch below at 1er level, if at all. You will find controversies when on the way down to base camp.
'04 was a razor sharp vintage for the best vineyards on the best slopes, not an easy growing season at all for ripening, and the top cru wines will be amazing. Getting the ripeness-acidity levels right at the top of the tree is a different story. Down in suburbia, where the ordinary mortals are to be found, the wine will be thinner, and much less fine, and therefore a better growing season such as '05 will produce more balanced champagne with more substance and flavour.
Your book talks about Krug level wines -
it is damn near pointless talking about Krug when evaluating the scenario across the plains.
We conclude therefore, and by interpolation, and this is only an opinion for boggy standard marques, blogged by me and tribs.
For me, Heidsieck Gold Top is not a classic keeper EVEN in more sustantial and fuller years, HGT is pretty light indeed. If the '04 gold top was brilliant, it would not be £15 quid.
Does that help any ?