French Champagne

Best values in French Champagne

Critics will tell you that if it's not from France, it's not really Champagne. In general, French Champagne tends to outscore domestic sparkling wines, but not always. Critics say that Nicolas Feuillatte Brut NV (*Est. $30) is a frothy, slightly floral Champagne with a well-deserved reputation for quality. Wine Review Online's Ed McCarthy recommends Feuillatte for those seeking a light-bodied Champagne, and Eric Asimov says that it's well balanced, off-dry and bright with citrus and floral flavors. Feuillatte Champagne also gets high ratings in its class from Tim Fish of Wine Spectator, who notes that with a year or so of aging, this "appealing" wine will reveal even more depth.

Slate.com's Mike Steinberger considers Louis Roederer Brut Premier (*Est. $40) the finest non-vintage Champagne on the market. Steinberger is bowled over by its complexity and refreshing minerality. With an average of three and a half years of aging, this Champagne is redolent of berries, apple, pear and almonds. Wine Spectator notes that it's rich and full of flavors, including lemon and grapefruit, and it really lingers on the palate.

We also found consistently good reviews for Charles Heidsieck Brut Réserve (*Est. $35), which some experts say is fuller-bodied and has a longer finish than others in its non-vintage class. This is a sleek Champagne, with flavors of vanilla and toast. Its finish is said to be especially long.

Piper-Heidsieck Champagne Brut (*Est. $30) is said to be lighter and crisper than Feuillatte, with honey and citrus notes. Wine Spectator awards this "well knit and smooth" sparkler 90 points (out of 100); Bruce Sanderson notes that the "tart" finish is long.

Bruce Sanderson of Wine Spectator says that the Piper-Heidsieck Brut Champagne Cuvée Rare NV (*Est. $105) is a wine with "finesse, and a mouthwatering finish." He considers it an excellent buy in its price class.

Eric Asimov of The New York Times says that Champagne Bollinger's house style, which relies heavily on pinot noir, balances power with grace. The house's Special Cuvée Brut NV (*est. $60) evokes honey and dried orange peel. Slate.com's Steinberger calls this Champagne "superb," praising its "terrific medley of fruits and spices." Bollinger wines age gracefully, according to experts.

Experts say that most Champagnes improve with aging, but this is especially true of vintage Champagnes. Many vintage Champagnes will not reach their peak until they have spent a decade or more in the bottle. The best recent vintages were 1990, 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998, according to producers and critics.

In a tasting of 25 blanc de blancs vintage Champagnes, The New York Times singled out Charles Heidsieck Blanc des Millénaires Brut 1995 (*Est. $100) as a particularly elegant, balanced example of the style. According to Wine Spectator's Sanderson, 1995 was an outstanding vintage. This Champagne can be consumed now or held until about 2012.

If you want the best Champagne available at any price, we found the highest praise for Krug Brut Champagne 1996 (*Est. $300). Wine Spectator's Sanderson says that this wine's creamy texture offsets the steeliness of the 1996 vintage; Sanderson calls expensive Champagne "majestic" and "stunning." Ed McCarthy goes a step further, calling Krug Brut "one of the greatest Champagnes I have ever tasted." Experts say that Krug Champagnes only improve with many years of aging. According to Eyewitness Companions' Wines of the World, the 1981 Krug was nearing its peak in 2002 -- over 20 years after its release. Sanderson says that the 1996 Krug can be held until 2040.

Reviews say that long-aged Champagne has a complex aroma, moderate levels of fruit and a deeper color than young wine. If you are interested in tasting one now, reviews say that the De Venoge Brut 1988 (*est. $100) is a Champagne of exceptional quality, with flavors of leather, coffee and dried fruits. Wine Spectator awarded it 97 points (out of 100). It can be consumed now or held for several more years.