ABOUT WINE

N 4 / Winter 2009

CHAMPAGNE
A delicate balance BY STEVE CHARTERS MW 02 Champagne's credibility gap BY TOM STEVENSON 09 Single vineyard
champagnes BY ESSI AVELLAN MW 18 Autolysis BY HERV ALEXANDRE 28 The science behind the bubbles BY GRARD
LIGER-BELAIR, RGIS GOUGEON & PHILIPPE SCHMITT-KOPPLIN 36 A quest for the best BY PASCAL AGRAPART 44

TONG ABOUT WINE

Quarterly magazine
N 4 / Winter 2009
(December 21, 2009 March 20, 2010)
PO Box 31, B-9000 Ghent (Stationswijk),
Belgium T +32 3 789 97 19
www.tongmagazine.com
[email protected]
EDITOR & PUBLISHER
Filip Verheyden
[email protected]
CONSULTING EDITOR
Fiona Morrison MW
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Brigid Grauman
ART DIRECTION & DESIGN
Manuela Dechamps Otamendi
WEBSITE EDITOR
Matthieu Collet
CONTRIBUTORS
Pascal Agrapart, France
Herv Alexandre, France
Essi Avellan MW, Finland
Steve Charters MW, France
Rgis Gougeon, France
Grard Liger-Belair, France
Philippe Schmitt-Kopplin, Germany
Tom Stevenson, UK
PHOTOGRAPHERS
Grard Liger-Belair, France ( pages 36, 38, 43, 49)
Kris Vlegels, Belgium ( pages 28, 32, 35)
Els Welvaert, Belgium ( pages 2, 6, 10, 18-19, 21, 24, 44)

ISSUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS

Issues and subscriptions are available exclusively
via the website www.tongmagazine.com.
One year (4 issues): 100
Current and back issues: 28 each
For inquiries: [email protected]
or T +32 3 789 97 19
TONG is published quarterly at the start
of each season by Millefeuille Press,
Bergstraat 26, B-9190 Stekene, Belgium.
2009 Millefeuille Press
Statements made by contributors are not
necessarily representative of the publishers opinion.
The magazine carries no advertising.
P 908093

EDITORIAL

CHAMPAGNES
SWEET SECRET
Champagne is a fantastic wine. No other wine,
even if it costs over a thousand euros a bottle, can
rival its image. Despite competition from Spains
cava and other sparkling wines from around the
world, champagne soars on regardless.
Perhaps one of its inherent strengths, as Steve
Charters points out in his article, is that the sales
of champagne are so closely linked to global economic factors. Although sales slowed down in
2008 and 2009, it looks certain they will rise
when our economies pick up again.
And yet, despite brilliant marketing, Champagne has many obstacles to face over the next
10 years. Theres the revision of the appellation;
the growing trend for single vineyard champagnes; and the concomitant rise of the grower.
On the other hand, houses and cooperatives have
never been so demanding and are monopolising
the champagne market both in and outside
Champagne. It is they in particular that are clamouring for a revision.
What about the growing demand for Extra
Brut and Brut Nature champagnes? There are
two reasons for this. Better educated consumers
are looking for more individuality in wine. And
theres a move towards transparent products,
as a part of the healthier lifestyle the media is
marketing.
Many champagne connoisseurs, like Essi
Avellan and Tom Stevenson, say that low- or nondosaged champagnes are often too harsh and thin.
Pascal Agrapart in his article offers an explanation
for this: Brut Nature and Extra Brut need topquality grapes to guarantee perfect base wines that
will give the champagne more natural body.
And this is one of the problems Champagne
faces. It is not one of the worlds most effective winegrowing regions. Although every grower has to
harvest manually, the emphasis is still on mass production rather than quality control. Until recently, for instance, in the winter Champagnes soil

could take on a strange blue colouring. A closer

look revealed that this faint blue gloss was due to
shredded garbage bags from Paris in the compost
bought to fertilise the vineyards. Not every grower
used it, of course, and luckily this urban compost is now forbidden.
But if still too few growers are concerned with
quality control in the vineyard, in my view this
is not only because most of them sell their grapes
to cooperatives or houses, but also because champagne is a wine boosted with sugar to give it more
body, and a blended product. Champagne is in
fact a diluted wine, not only in the sense that 3
to 6% of its volume consists of sugar (chaptalisation, liqueur de tirage and liqueur dexpdition), but
also that it no longer has a direct relationship with
its detailed geographic origins.
In that respect, I believe the big champagne
houses are over-emphasising the blending of grape
varieties, villages and vintages so as to assure the
continuity of their house style. To talk about
blending emphasises the craftsmanship of the cellar master, and the powerful role of liqueur dexpdition is rarely mentioned.
The aromatic and structural influence of
liqueur dexpdition is at its most powerful immediately after disgorgement. It needs time to blend
in and diminishes with age in the bottle, although
the so-called Maillard reaction between the wines
amino acids and the sugar from the liqueur leads
to ripe but delicate honey and caramel tones during bottle ageing. But few big brand champagnes
are made to age and most of them are drunk
within a year or two after disgorgement. So put
simply sugar is quite an important component
in champagne. And, to conclude, if the overall
quality of the grapes would go up, the levels of
expdition could go down.
Filip Verheyden
Editor & publisher
01

TONG N 4

A DELICATE
BALANCE
BY STEVE CHARTERS MW, FRANCE

The English (and perhaps even most of the Anglo-Saxon world)

tend to see history as a long, slow, evolutionary process a result,
perhaps, of their conviction that political history and therefore
democracy began with the Magna Carta and ended with
universal suffrage in 1928.

03

TONG N 4

THE CHAMPAGNE
BUSINESS TODAY
Steve Charters is an Australian Master of Wine based
in Reims, France, where he is professor at the Chair
of Champagne Management in Reims Management
School. His specialities include the cultural and social
context of wine, and more particularly champagne.
His research focuses on the marketing of wine, consumer behaviour and wine tourism.

The French see things from a different perspective. The word rupture is significant in social
discourse, literally meaning a break but in fact
having a much stronger and decisive significance.
Revolutions, the Second World War, Algeria, the
vnements of 1968, even perhaps the election of
French President Nicolas Sarkozy, all have marked
rupture. Likewise, for the Champenois, the world
financial crisis of October 2008 is perceived as
providing a radical rupture with the past.
In fact, as we shall see, the threat to champagne sales began more than a year before the
financial catastrophe, although all seemed well
until a little over a year ago. For most of the
decade we watched wine producers in the rest of
France grapple with overproduction and the
onslaught of mass-market brands from new producing countries, resulting in the claim that there
was a crise viticole; yet meanwhile in Champagne
it was common to talk of a crise de prosprit. Sales
were booming; things were almost too good.
Although a dip did follow the millennial euphoria and the attack on the World Trade Centre, the

last major crash in sales had occurred in 1991-4

beyond the memory of many of the key actors.
Indeed, the good times had gone on for so long
that in early 2008 I heard one industry leader
claim that champagne had cracked the cycle of
boom and bust, and that we would be managing
a situation of perpetual growth.
LINKED TO THE WORLD

160 000 000

140 000 000
120 000 000
100 000 000
80 000 000
60 000 000
40 000 000
20 000 000
0
1945

1952

1959

Champagne exports 1945-2008

04

1966

1973

1980

1987

1994

2001

2008

STEVE CHARTERS MW

The graph on the previous page shows the development of champagne exports since the Second
World War. For the Champenois and their accountants, its a beautiful sight but what it also clearly reveals is that international wine sales are linked
to world economic factors: 30 years of post-war
growth; the first and second oil crises in 1973-74
and 1980-82 and substantial problems (particularly in the UK and US property markets) in
1991-94. The 2001 dip is exaggerated by the aberrantly high growth in sales before 2000.
The boom since 2001 has been fuelled essentially by solid performance in the major importing countries (in the UK, shipments rose from
25 million bottles to just over 39 million in
2007), together with dramatic increases in consumption in new markets. The cases of China and
Russia are regularly referred to as examples of this
but there are others. In 2007 countries as diverse
as Angola, Argentina, New Zealand, Slovenia and
the Ukraine all recorded imports increasing by
over 70% on the previous year.
The sustained growth in export markets
with a record 332 million bottles shipped in 2007
both in France and the rest of the world brought
its share of problems. Essentially all of the 34,000
hectares demarcated within the appellation are
now planted (an increase of 33% since 1980), and
the maximum yield has also increased from an
average of 10,480 kilos per hectare during the
1970s to 13,100 kilos for the first nine years of
the current decade. This is compounded by the
fact that as a combined result of the French fiscal
regime and growers desire to constitute personal
stocks to increase their retirement income, it has
been suggested that growers are reducing the
volume of grapes they are selling to the houses.
The problems with grape supply and some of
the resulting responses are familiar. Before the
crisis it was projected that by some time between
2011 and 2015 demand would exceed supply;
according to the retail banking group Crdit
Agricole, even in the current economic climate
that could occur between 2013 and 2018. The
best-known proposal to deal with this is the suggested revision of the area of the appellation
(which Tom Stevenson writes about in his article).
It is worth noting, however, that although this
proposal originally came from the growers union
SGV in the early years of this decade, research
suggests that the growers themselves are widely
suspicious of it, suggesting its in the interest of
the houses as a way to reinforce their power.
Another result of the buoyant champagne
market is its effect on local land prices. When I
travel into work I see vineyards adjoining arable
land used for sugar beet or wheat; the former is
worth, on average, around 850,000 per hectare,

the latter about 1% of that, some 6-8000. Less

than two years ago, in the Szanne region south
of the Cte des Blancs, a plot would sell for the
equivalent of 1.5 million per hectare. The value
of vineyard land has effectively doubled since
2002, which makes it even harder now for new
entrants to get into the business, and publicly
at least the houses are no longer interested in
supplementing their land holdings.
While for many years there was substantial
good news on the sales front, some developments
were more worrying. For many years in Germany,
sales have grown less buoyant; from an average of
around 18 million bottles per year in the mid-1990s
shipments have declined to around 12 million.
German-speaking Switzerland, likewise, suggests
that champagne sales may be reducing in favour
of prosecco. If, in some markets, consumers are
deserting champagne at a time of international
success that is a disquieting trend, challenging the
established position of the wine as the key marker
of success, celebration and seduction. Additionally,
it is clear that the first hints of the coming problems were evident before mid 2008. Crucially,
shipments to the United States declined in 2007
by 6.2% a reflection of waning confidence
among distributors as much as weakening sales.
As the following table shows, nine of the top
10 markets have imported less champagne in
2008 than in 2009. Interestingly the market that
actually improved is one very closely linked to the
Chinese economy Australia, a major supplier to
China of minerals and primary material.
Destination

% change
2008-09

UK

35.984.574

-7.86%

US

17.193.526

-20.85%

GERMANY

11.573.597

-10.38%

ITALY

9.910.581

-0.40%

BELGIUM

9.438.811

-8.78%

JAPAN

8.332.233

-9.14%

SWITZERLAND

5.439.009

-10.36%

SPAIN

4.090.505

-10.54%

AUSTRALIA

3.648.022

10.25%

10

NETHERLANDS

3.511.889

-13.97%

The 10 major export markets for champagne

The shift from excessive demand to excessive

supply has seen a transformation of the outlook in
the region from one of exultation to a mood of
doom and gloom. Shipments reduced by 4.76%
in 2008, and further in 2009. For the first nine
months of this year the number of bottles leaving
the cellars has declined by 17% over the same period the previous year. Of course most sales tend to
be made in the last three months of the year but
things arent looking good at present.
05

STEVE CHARTERS MW

commemorative wine par excellence. As long as

the CIVC continue to manage the overall territorial brand effectively to sustain that image, and
as long as the key local actors support their work,
then the mid-term success of the region is secure.
Given that I dont have a champagne business to
run, and that I dont have poor cash flow projections for the next couple of years, I remain sanguine
about the future. However, I think that the local
fixation first on the need for greater grape supply, followed by the slump in sales, exemplifies
a more substantial problem in the region, and at
the same time hides significant structural issues.
It reflects what I perceive as a sense of short-termism. Whereas, historically, many of the houses had a long-term perspective on the growth of
their market (reflected in their development of
targeted relationship building and supported by
the role of the CIVC), increasingly the focus is on
the next year or two and in public at least this
is where the regional dialogue tends to concentrate.
The effect of this is that more significant but slowmoving changes tend to be overlooked.

FRENCH ATTITUDE

And yet the dismal figures hide some interesting

surprises. A few months ago I listened to the former CEO of Laurent Perrier, Yves Dumont, make
a presentation about the impact of the global economic situation on business in general. He began
by noting the different responses of the AngloSaxon and French worlds. The former respond to
a crisis by saying Oh no, an economic catastrophe;
we must stop drinking champagne as we cant be
seen having something so expensive at a time like
this. The French, on the other hand, say Oh no,
an economic catastrophe; we must drink champagne to cheer ourselves up. This is reflected in
shipments, which have only reduced in France
over the first nine months of this year by 3.6%.
It is necessary to remember, furthermore, that
while growers only supply 9% of champagne
exports, they are responsible for the sale of nearly
four bottles in 10 within France. Consequently,
last year saw a 20% drop in shipments by the
houses (and even more by the cooperatives), yet
the growers have lost less than 5% of their sales.
While some of the houses are facing major problems, most of the growers I talked to shrug their
shoulders and say that things arent too bad.
Interestingly, this situation is the reverse of what
happened in the early 1990s, when sales by houses
went up as a proportion of the total.
As I have already mentioned, the graph of
exports shows the exact link between the champagne market and world economic circumstances.
Although no one had foreseen the impact of last
years financial turbulence it was clear that something was imminent, and in the future the
Champenois must plan more effectively for this.
We had a reasonable quality, quite large 2008
vintage and an excellent one in 2009 that had
to be much smaller. For the first time variable
maximum yields were allocated to the houses and
the growers. The former harvested to a maximum
of 8,000 kilos per hectare, the latter 9,700 kilos;
however, given that the houses only own 10%
of the vineyard area, that reduction will have had
a marginal effect. Some of the houses (which
tend to be locked into fixed term contracts with
the growers) had been calling for much lower
overall yields.
So far most of what I have written has been
gloomy. I want to stress that in the immediate
future champagne is secure its image has been
carefully cultivated and managed, and it is the

INPUT FROM OUTSIDE

First, the changing nature of ownership in Champagne is going to have an effect on the way the
region develops. Thirty-five years ago all the
houses were owned and managed locally. That is
no longer the case, with three of the six largest
groups being owned outside the region, often
with a spread of shareholders worldwide. This
development has been essential for champagne;
it has facilitated the inflow of capital needed to
sustain the rapid growth of the product and it has
provided a new source of expertise to improve
management and marketing. Yet, at the same
time, it also produces owners who may have little
or no idea of the way the region operates (particularly the complex cultural and social interactions
that sustain the economic ones).
Additionally, the new owners have quite reasonably a primary commitment not to the
long-term collective development of the region
but rather to their own profit. What happens
when that focus conflicts with the wider needs of
Champagne as a whole? It is easy to dismiss this
as a minor concern, yet exactly the same thing has
happened in Australia, where the unity provided
by a common commitment to brand Australia
in the mid-1980s has given way to a growing fissure between a few large companies with a glob-

The changing nature of ownership has facilitated the inflow of

capital needed to sustain the rapid growth, but these new owners
may have little or no idea of the way the region operates
07

STEVE CHARTERS MW

choice and the opportunity to discover wines that

are less well-known and perhaps more distinctive.
Certainly some reputed, quality-focused growers
are gaining a positive critical reception combined, in part, with the fact that they can respond
to a particular requirement of keen consumers
because they tend to be more terroir focused (see
the article by Essi Avellan MW).
The final structural change that will have a
long-term impact on the world of champagne is
the rise of cooperatives as key sellers, rather than
just as suppliers of raw material to the houses.
Over the last two decades a number of cooperatives has sought to establish major brands in
competition with the houses; the most obvious
is Nicolas Feuillatte, now the leading brand
in France and the fourth or fifth worldwide, but
others include de Saint Gall, Jacquart and Veuve
Devaux. Nicolas Feuillatte is effectively a cooperative of cooperatives, and sources grapes from
around 40% of all the growers in Champagne;
its marketing is formidable, and its perspective
global. It is now, other than in the way it is constituted and owned, effectively a large house.
For historical reasons, there are fiscal advantages to being a cooperative. As long as they
remained no more than suppliers to the houses
this was not controversial. Now, however, they
work with the houses but they also compete with
them on international markets. That dichotomy
is bound to cause tensions, as will their tax status.
Moreover, is it also the case that in the long term
their global view may distance them from their
traditional base, their members the growers?
This article has focused on many of the problems faced by Champagne, but fundamentally I
see the outlook as positive; champagne continues to maintain its position as a wine apart; the
first choice for celebrating and for making a statement, and a benchmark for finesse, elegance and
complexity. There are other factors that may well
reinforce the wines position in world markets: the
pending application for UNESCO world heritage
status should strengthen the regions profile; there
is evidence that in some countries young people
like the idea of champagne and expect to drink
it more in the future; crucially, as noted above,
sales in a number of new markets have been growing rapidly over the past years, and these are markets that may well ride out the current global
financial calamity. The future is bright but it
will take planning and careful management.

al perspective and a need to maintain short-term

profitability, and the niche players in the industry
who provide much of its diversity. The result has
been a growing lack of coherence about the way
Australia responds to a rapidly shifting global wine
market, and major internal problems over issues
like grape supply.
Just as a few of the houses are changing, so the
world of growers is rapidly developing. Historically
they were paysans; many still see themselves as that
but others have come along with different experiences: in the last few months I have met an exlawyer, a PhD in history, a graduate of the
Chicago Business School and an English teacher.
The skills they bring to their role and the expectations they have of it are very different from
those of their parents and grandparents. It is
often said that the new generation of growers
does not have the commitment to working the
vines of their forebears. As I watch them out in
the vineyards at eight am on a frosty January
morning I cant say I blame them if they prefer
developing a business plan or producing a market
analysis to clearing away prunings or replacing
decaying trellising.
Crucially, however, we need to remember that
there are 15,000 growers, a third of whom sell
their own wine, and that they dont all neatly fall
into a single category; just like consumers, they
can be segmented. Some are ideological committed members of cooperatives, suspicious of the
houses. Others like the houses and enjoy feeling
part of the world of champagne. A few are large,
selling highly reputed wine; on the other hand my
neighbour here is typical of most with his seven
ares of vines (effectively a plot 35 metres by 20
metres); he manages them at weekends and picks
over half a day in September with a few friends,
before delivering the grapes to the local cooperative. The growers are a disparate group, even if
collectively they respect the houses and recognise
the need to work with them. Yet, as one said to
me a short while ago, we have a marriage of convenience with the houses; we know we have to
be married to them, we have to work at making
the marriage succeed but it doesnt mean that
we love them.
There is talk more outside Champagne than
inside, perhaps about the rise of the grower.
That is, perhaps, more a reflection of demand in
certain key export markets than reality. The great
period for the growth of grower wines was from
the mid-1950s onwards when they began to
establish a substantial presence in the French market. However, it is clear that in some mature
markets (crucially Belgium, but also the Anglophone world and perhaps Scandinavia) highinvolvement consumers are looking for more
08

TONG N 4

CHAMPAGNES
CREDIBILITY
GAP
BY TOM STEVENSON, UK

09

TOM STEVENSON

THE 2003 PLAN TO RE-ZONE CHAMPAGNES VINEYARDS WAS INITIALLY A HUSH-HUSH

AFFAIR. UNTIL RECENTLY, THE NAMES OF THE EXPERTS TAKING PART IN IT WERE
UNKNOWN AND THEIR PROCEEDINGS KEPT QUIET. FRANCES INSTITUT NATIONAL DES
APPELLATIONS DORIGINE (INAO), THE BODY IN CHARGE OF REGULATING CONTROLLED
PLACE NAMES, PUT TOGETHER A COMMITTEE OF FIVE EXPERTS TO EXAMINE A POSSIBLE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF VILLAGES WHERE CHAMPAGNE CAN BE MADE,
AS WELL AS THEIR ZONE DE LLABORATION, THE AREA WHERE CHAMPAGNE MAY
LEGALLY BE PRODUCED.

Based in Britain, wine writer Tom Stevenson needs

no introduction. He is a world authority on champagne, and has written extensively on the subject
for the last 30 years. His most important work is
Christies World Encyclopedia of Champagne &
Sparkling Wine, first published in 1998.

Those experts, who we now know, are historian

Claudine Wolikow, geographer Marcel Bazin,
geologist Michel Laurain, agronomist Dominique
Moncomble and phytosociologist Stphane
Thvenin. Only one of them is actually from the
Champagne region. Their decisions are currently
undergoing a legal inquiry.
According to many local people, the production
region of Champagne could easily be expanded
by as much as 10,000 hectare, a conviction I find
puzzling. My own estimations set things at somewhere between 1,200 and 5,000 hectares of land
suitable for the production of good-quality
champagne in the proposed 40 new villages
that are to become part of the AOC (Appellation
dOrigine Contrle). Those figures are admittedly a guess, but they are based on solid evidence. I looked at current usage in the villages
right next to the proposed new ones and extrapolated from there. Some 5,000 hectares would
create 6 billion in new wealth because the most
suitable land for viticulture is the least suitable

for any other form of agriculture. The cheapest

farmland in the region costs from 1,800 in the
Haute-Marne to 4,000 in the Marne. On the
other hand, the most recent sale of modest, not
grand cru, AOC Champagne land was in Bethon,
where it went for 1.2 million. If all these people
are right about the 10,000 hectares, then the
potential for new wealth is not 6 billion but
12 billion.
MYSTERY VOTE

The champagne houses are all singing from the

same hymn sheet, and if there is one chorus I
have heard more than any other, it is that the
growers in general, and the Syndicat Gnral des
Vignerons (SGV) in particular, are pushing for
this expansion. This in theory is true. SGV presented INAO with a formal request for expansion
after a vote at the associations general assembly of
April 9, 2003, when the motion was carried by
393 votes to 25.
11

TONG N 4

Letter is one of the leading voices in the champagne industry. Together with Mumms former
boss, Jean-Marie Barillre, he knows how easy it
is to lose a reputation and how difficult it is to
regain it.
The only way to ensure no quantitative expansion without a qualitative revision is to re-evaluate all the champagne-producing villages, not
just the proposed new ones. The percentile system
of the Echelle des Crus has been dumped for
being little more than a glorified price list.
If their classification is to command any respect,
Champagne should abandon its Beaujolais-like
village-by-village cru system and re-evaluate all
vineyards on a plot-by-plot basis. Take Avize or
Cramant: this would entail reducing the status
of some vineyards to premier cru, while those on
the wrong side of the D9 would simply become
village cru wines. On the other hand, there are a
few places, like Mareuil-sur-A, where a number
of its vineyards ought to be classified grand cru,
and hardly any of its vineyards deserve less than
premier cru status. And there will be some villages
where sites will have to drop out of the appellation altogether. If the expansion is to be credible,
not only must there be complete transparency
about why new vineyard areas have been selected, there must also be a radical reassessment of
champagnes cru status, with a trimming of the
inferior areas.
The data for this has already been assembled
during the five-year zonage project of the 1990s,
making the task much easier than it sounds.
Zonage examined the entire AOC Champagne
region, as well as almost 20,000 ha of areas
immediately surrounding it by dividing the zone
into more than 200,000 50m x 50m parcels that
were then subjected to the most intensive exploration of terroir ever conducted. Each parcel was
meticulously evaluated under the ground, above
the ground and from space by every means
of analysis then available, from hole digging to
satellite imagery.

Why they should want such a thing is perplexing, to say the least. Are we to believe that the
growers actually want to open up their monopoly
to new owners and allow in almost one-third
more grapes, which can only soften prices and
reduce their income? Whatever the documented
evidence, the biggest brands are those with the
most to gain from an expansion, and I have been
told confidentially that they are the ones behind
the request.
I could understand if, for the good of the
industry, the leaders of the SGV came to some
sort of arrangement with the upper echelons of
the Union des Maisons de Champagne (UMC),
but this request was not agreed behind closed
doors and was the result of a conclusive democratic vote. The growers I spoke to pointed out, not
unreasonably, that the 393 yes votes by no means
represent majority opinion among the SGVs
15,000-plus membership. The subplot is that,
because the growers have nothing to gain, it
would look good for them to be seen as initiating this expansion. How they got the SGV to play
ball is the subject of myriad conspiracy theories.
I came across some extreme comments and accusations that I will not quote, but it would be fair
to say that among growers, a few are suspicious of
some of the motives for pushing the SGV motion
through. To paraphrase one of the more printable
comments made to me by six growers and one
small house: We assume that most of those who
attended the assembly were in favour of the
motion to expand, which is why they turned up.
As in all elections, those who arent in agreement
seldom vote to defend themselves. On the other
hand, it might be said that the growers who dont
want to see their franchise broken have only
themselves to blame.
PARCEL BY PARCEL

I spoke to Frdric Cumenal, top executive at

Mot & Chandon, who told me: The revision of
the appellation is a fantastic opportunity to push
for further quality standards. We entirely support
the idea of jointly evaluating a possible revision of
the Champagne appellation. We trust INAOs
wisdom, and we will support its decision. We know
they will select the criteria that will permit the
Champagne region to achieve its full potential.
Most of the spokesmen for the leading houses stuck to Cumenals party line. There is a sense
of complacency about INAOs quality criteria,
but few of them asked for them to be made
transparent. One exception was Michel Letter,
chief executive at Mumm and Perrier-Jout, who
demanded, without any prompting, no quantitative expansion without a qualitative revision.

IT MAY NEVER HAPPEN

The means are there, but what about the will? I

was discussing this with Charles Philipponnat,
boss of Champagne Philipponnat. He had always
been keen on a revision of this kind even before
the proposed expansion, but he was also doubtful
that it would ever happen. From a qualitative
point of view, he said, we are sure that the
experts from INAO will qualify parcels just as
good as or maybe even better than those in the
neighbouring villages. To be realistic, we dont
expect the designation of much grand or premier
cru land, but the new areas should be able to
12

TOM STEVENSON

an infallible argument for expansion), but also

to provide complete transparency about the quality criteria involved and how those yardsticks have
been applied by the experts.

produce decent non-vintage material without difficulty. However, if we classify new land, this
implies that we should have to re-evaluate existing land and perhaps declassify some areas in the
process. I cant see this taking place, which is a pity.
Also, I think the status of grand or premier cru, as
well as simple village cru, should apply to parcels,
not to whole villages, but as far as I know this has
not been contemplated in the revision process.
As it happens, a few days earlier I had a phone
call from the boss of a family-owned house of
impeccable reputation who preferred not to be
named but who told me that he had just heard
that the experts were indeed contemplating declassifying some land in current villages. When I asked
him if there were any plans to compensate growers, he told me there was talk of a compensation
scheme similar to the one used for the 25 ha of
AOC Champagne destroyed to build the highspeed TGV line. I mentioned this to Philipponnat,
who said: If this idea is making its way into the
minds of our experts and leaders, thats great
news, because it will make the whole process credible. So, there may be the will

TIMING IS KEY

The possibility of expanding Champagne is not

new. In a recent interview, Frdric Rouzaud, the
boss of Champagne Louis Roederer, spoke of a
similar project mooted in the late 1980s. The crisis of 1990 (when higher prices led to a slowdown
in sales) put an end to this, he claims. On the
contrary, I would say that then was precisely the
moment to contemplate an expansion. With sales
plummeting, cellars bulging with bottles, and
4,000 ha of AOC Champagne yet to be planted,
no one could have accused Champagne of cynically milking an expanding market. Furthermore,
if it had gone ahead, the new areas planted would
be coming on stream now, just as Champagne
needs it and no one would have seen anything
wrong about it. No one would even have noticed.
Expansions and contractions have come and gone
not just in Champagne, but in every wine
region of France without so much as an eyebrow
raised. But this time everyone is looking. A good
illustration in Champagne is Fontaine-sur-A,
which was added in 1990 without any fuss and
justifiably so, as it boasts some of the best slopes
between Avenay Val dOr and Louvois. Villages
like Fontaine-sur-A were not delimited between
1908 and 1927 simply because their mayors
hadnt bothered to apply for inclusion in AOC
Champagne. Many of the landowners were aristocrats who werent interested in commerce; in
other cases, villages had been devastated by phylloxera and had switched to growing other crops.
Historically, the province of Champagne covered 2.5 million ha. According to Cyrus Redding
in A History and Description of Modern Wines, the
Aube alone had 22,586 ha of vines in 1833. In the
late 19th century, during Champagnes golden
years, there were more than 60,000 ha of vineyards. The appellation law of 1927 (which grew
out of the delimitations of 1908 and 1919, and
the lawsuit of 1911) recognised 46,000 ha in 407
villages. In 1951, following a slump in the market, Champagne requested a contraction in the
delimited area, and INAO reduced the AOC to
34,000 ha in 302 villages. When I started researching champagne in 1980, there were 34,500 ha in
311 villages. Today, there are 35,200 ha in 319 villages, of which just over 34,000 can be planted (the

ELUSIVE RULES

Champagne desperately needs credibility. Requesting such a massive expansion was bound to have
an adverse effect when champagne sales are at a
pretty high level although there may yet be a
decrease of 15% to 20% this year. Demand still
outstrips supply and almost every spare hectare
of AOC land has been exhausted. The media
(and not just the wine press) has suggested that
the push was motivated by greed. Internet
forums have risen in disgust. With everyone in
Champagne toeing the official line, the question
of whether to expand is apparently not open to
debate even within the industry itself. This smacks
of arrogance and Champagne should take heed.
I myself dont believe that Champagne is guilty
of greed but of stupidity. It is true that expansion proposals have so far been intelligently
drawn up to enhance both the quality and efficiency of Champagne within its historical borders. But the timing is wrong when champagne
appears to be relatively unscathed by the recession. Champagne has to bridge a credibility gap
if its strictly delimited image is to be taken seriously. And the only way to achieve this is not only
to ensure that every hectare of newly classified
AOC land is superior to the average quality of
Champagnes current vineyards (which would be

Expansions and contractions have come and gone without so

much as an eyebrow raised. But this time everyone is looking
13

TONG N 4

2009: Early in the year, INAO was to make its

second and final avis at village level on the probably enlarged findings of the public inquiry. But
the commission for the inquiry has received
claims from more than 1,000 associations and
individuals wanting to add some 200 villages to
the Zone de Production! The experts have to
evaluate each claim carefully and this is not likely
to be completed much before the end of 2010,
so INAO will not be in a position to make its second and final avis at village level before 2011.
So, we are already two years behind schedule, but
if the number of villages is increased by any significant figure, the experts will obviously take significantly longer to examine the villages in detail
in order to determine which plots within those
villages might be suitable for viticulture. We have
yet to see what the reaction will be from those
whose current claims are refused (some must be
refused, most probably will be), but whatever that
bun fight is like, it will be nothing compared to
any rejected claims at vineyard level, since the difference between an hectare that is accepted and a
neighbouring hectare that is not could be one million euros. So the mid 2021 end date (for new
vineyards in a glass you will be able to drink) has
already become mid 2023 and will probably be
closer to mid 2025, but I would not be surprised
if it ends up mid-2030;
2010-2011: INAO will make its second and
final avis at village level;
2011-2016: It will take at least five years for
INAOs experts to examine in detail all of the 40
or more new villages to decide which plots
might be suitable for vineyards;
2017: INAO will issue its first avis accepting in
part or fully the experts proposals at vineyard level;
2017: These proposals are submitted to another year-long public inquiry, and the results are
bound to be the subject of heated debate: the land
on the right side of the experts divide will increase
in value overnight from as little as 1,800 to as
much as 1.2 million per hectare, whereas the
land on the other side will not;
2018: Early in the year, INAO will make its
second and final avis at vineyard level;
2018: The Secretary of State for Agriculture
will sign a law authorising new boundaries for the
Zone Parcellaire de Production de Raisins (AOC
Champagne vineyards);
2019: The CIVC will authorise the first new
areas to be planted;
2021: The first new vines achieve third leaf
and can be harvested;
2023: It will not be until the middle of the year
at the very earliest that the first wines will reach the
shop shelves. The earliest disgorgement date is
March 31, and even the most thrifty producer

balance being tracks, bridges, cuts and other inaccessible areas), and 33,542 ha are in fact planted.
The AOC law specifies three zones: Zone de
llaboration; Zone de Production; and Zone
Parcellaire de Production de Raisins. The Zone
de llaboration is the only zone in which it is
legal to vinify and transport champagne grapes
and wines. This represents the outer limits of
the region, currently comprising 647 communes
covering more than 600,000 ha. The Zone de
Production is inside the Zone de llaboration; it
currently includes 319 communes spread over
roughly 300,000 ha. Within these communes
there are, as indicated above, 35,200 ha in which
AOC vineyards may be planted.
NOT FOR TOMORROW

Frdric Rouzaud recently pointed out that so

far no one has mentioned any increases or decreases, and in theory he is right. Theoretically, INAOs
experts could do the same as in 1951 and reduce
the appellation, but this is unlikely to happen.
There have been both increases and decreases at
village level, and ideally there will be increases and
decreases at vineyard level too. But on one point
Rouzaud is absolutely right: we have to wait. The
chronology up to now and 12 years into the
future looks something like this:
2003: On April 9, the SGV requested a revision of the AOC Champagne. INAO formed a
committee of experts in five disciplines (history,
geography, geology, phytosociology and agronomy) that included only one Champenois (the
technical expert from the Comit Interprofessionel du Vin de Champagne, or CIVC);
2004-2007: Experts examined two zones of
Champagne (Zone de llaboration and Zone de
Production) at village level;
2007: On June 26, INAOs experts drew up
confidential maps and presented a preview of the
proposed changes to CIVC at a secret meeting
in Epernay;
2007: On October 10, Sophie Claeys-Pergament
in the regional paper LUnion broke the story
of the proposed 40 new and two excluded villages;
2007: As a stopgap measure, for a five-year trial
period (expected to last much longer) and to
increase production immediately, the maximum
yield was raised from 13,000 kilos to 15,500 kilos
per ha;
2008: On March 14, INAO issued its first avis
(notice) accepting the experts preliminary findings;
2008: The proposals are submitted to a yearlong public inquiry, which is likely to add and
more improbably remove villages from either the
Zone de llaboration or the Zone de Production;
14

TOM STEVENSON

BEFORE

SOISSONS

REIMS

SAINTE MENEHOULD

CHATEAU-THIERRY

EPERNAY

CHALONS-EN-CHAMPAGNE

VITRY-LE-FRANCOIS
SEZANNE
SAINT-DIZIER

NOGENT SUR SEINE

TROYES
BAR-SUR-AUBE

BAR-SUR-SEINE

AOC Champagne Zone de l'laboration

AOC Champagne Zone de Production
AOC Champagne vineyards

(Source: INAO Tom Stevenson)

15

TONG N 4

would allow his wine to age for three months

before shipment.
But even this far-flung date may be subject to
delay. With two public inquiries in the offing, this
seems more than likely.

although they should be in no doubt about what

they have to deliver. If all the new land they propose can be demonstrated to have a potential quality in excess of the average quality of the current
AOC vineyards, then they will have produced an
infallible case for expansion. Not to proceed would
clearly condemn the future of champagne to an
unnecessarily inferior quality.

ALL IS IN THE DELIVERY

Readers may be surprised to read that despite

my quibbles I am happy with the village-level
expansion. Whether the new vineyards are worthy of their new status will ultimately reveal
whether this expansion was a good thing, but we
know that so far the experts have done an excellent job. Even someone with no knowledge of the
region and its terrain can sense how neatly the
Zone de llaboration envelops the Zone de
Production, just one commune deep in most
parts, easing the necessary movements between
vineyards, press houses, wineries and warehouses.
The logic of a one-commune envelope could not
be applied along the very southernmost border of
the Aube district because that would have
encroached upon the Cte dOr department, and
Burgundy would not have allowed that.
I can see one further improvement the experts
could make, and that would be to encompass a
narrow corridor along the main roads linking each
of the three separate districts. INAO may think
that such considerations as transport are not its
responsibility, but if they did, I would include a
clause in the law reserving the right to adapt these
corridors should new roads be built.
I am reasonably happy with the 40 new villages in the Zone de Production. They do not so
much expand the AOC outwards as consolidate
it inwards, filling gaps between villages or adjacent to existing villages, where an impartial expert
might reasonably expect to see vineyards. Even
those villages that fall outside the current Zone de
llaboration are, in fact, within the potential of
the 1927 law.
But I am less convinced by the two excluded
villages of Germaine and Orbais lAbbaye. Over
the years, neither village has demonstrated much
in terms of quality, and yet their exclusion smacks
of the sacrificial lamb. Is it a coincidence that only
two producers are involved, and that they happen
to be two of the largest houses in Champagne with
the most to gain from an expansion? On their own,
such tokens are not worth the idea of excluding
villages or vineyards. On the other hand, a larger
exclusion that would include lesser-quality land
within the current 319 villages, and a plot-by-plot
classification of grand and premier crus, would
really help Champagne bridge the credibility gap.
After the public inquiry has made its deliberations, the experts will face their toughest test,
16

TOM STEVENSON

AFTER

SOISSONS

REIMS

SAINTE MENEHOULD

CHATEAU-THIERRY

EPERNAY

CHALONS-EN-CHAMPAGNE

SEZANNE

VITRY-LE-FRANCOIS

SAINT-DIZIER

NOGENT SUR SEINE

TROYES
BAR-SUR-AUBE

BAR-SUR-SEINE

Proposed AOC Champagne Zone de l'laboration

This map accurately reflects the future boundaries of AOC Champagne if
the new and excluded villages proposed by INAOs committee of experts
are not altered by the public inquiry. (Source: INAO Tom Stevenson)
(These maps were first published in Wine&Spirit June 2008)

Proposed AOC Champagne Zone de Production

Current AOC Champagne vineyards
17

TONG N 4

SINGLE
VINEYARD
CHAMPAGNES
THE
ALTERNATIVE
REALITY
BY ESSI AVELLAN MW, FINLAND

19

TONG N 4

INSIGNIFICANT, YOU MAY THINK WHEN YOU HEAR THE TERM SINGLE VINEYARD
CHAMPAGNE. AFTER ALL, ONLY A FEW DOZEN PEOPLE MAKE IT IN AN OCEAN OF OVER
2000 CHAMPAGNE PRODUCERS. PRODUCTION QUANTITIES ARE MINUSCULE AND WHEN
YOU CHANCE TO SPOT ONE OF ITS MOST CELEBRATED BOTTLES, THE PRICE IS SO
ASTRONOMICAL THAT YOU RESIGN YOURSELF TO LETTING IT GO.

Essi Avellan is Finlands first Master of Wine,

and editor of the international publication Fine
Champagne Magazine. Avellan contributes to a
number of international newspapers and wine and
food magazines and judges at several wine competitions. She knows everything there is to know about
single vineyard champagnes.

that I had underestimated its pace. I am afraid my

paper already needs updating as so many new
wines have emerged, further defining the category.
Most champagnes are blends of polished consistency, complexity, harmony and volumes.
When asking Rem Krug about the blending
components origins and varietals used in his
Krug Grande Cuve, he gets irritable. He considers that the drinker shouldnt bother with such
details. They are the makers secret and our task
as consumers is to enjoy the perfect result.
Fair enough. But our desire to know more is
justified. What distinguishes a great wine from one
that is merely good? Many would say authenticity and sense of place. In addition to clearly stated
origins, I believe authenticity in wine means sincerity, commitment and devotion. Fine champagne fulfils all these criteria. What we mean by
sense of place is a trickier notion. Champagne is
a processed wine. In addition to blending, its taste
of terroir is diluted by sugar added at several stages;

Despite these seemingly outrageous prices, champagne houses are reticent of investing in single
vineyard champagnes. The iconic Krug Clos
du Mesnils share of the houses output is so negligible that its bottles could be donated to the
diehard krugists without making a dent on the
balance sheets.
Yet, despite common assumptions, the microtrend of terroir champagnes is a significant one.
There are sound reasons why the concept is mushrooming and its wines are selling increasingly well,
with media and consumer interest developing as
well as a distinct price premium.
Four years ago, during my Master of Wine
studies, I became infatuated with single vineyard
champagnes. In addition to the wines themselves,
I became interested in why this region that swears
on blending was going for the very antithesis of
that. I wrote my Master of Wine dissertation on
the subject. Reading it today, I note that my projections about the concepts future were right but
20

TONG N 4

chaptalisation, liqueur de tirage and liqueur dexpdition. Double alcoholic fermentation and
prolonged lees ageing add layers of process over
the fruit and the residual sweetness hides some
delicate nuances.
Nevertheless, champagne is immediately identifiable and unique, and cannot be imitated in any
other region in the world. For this reason, blended
champagnes are multi-terroir wines par excellence.
Equally, non-blended champagnes are monoterroir wines.

ular, like the concept of terroir wine and find

single vineyard champagnes to be efficient sales
tools with associated stories they can share with
the client.
But knowing what makes Le Mesnil Chardonnay isnt an incentive for buyers of Krug Clos
du Mesnil at 600 a bottle. At Krug, they will
never tell you that Clos du Mesnil is better than
Grande Cuve. It is merely different, they will say,
a diamond one wishes to show on its own. With
wines too, scarcity enhances desirability. Many
wine consumers believe that high price is a statement of quality when in fact it is rarity that sets
the price. Think of Krugs initial launch of Clos
dAmbonnay at $3,500. This was at the time an
unheard of price for champagne, and yet the 3,000
bottles would have found their way to collectors
and krugists cellars at much higher prices. Rarity
is a luxury, and the costliest single vineyard champagnes are often bought for their luxury appeal
rather than for their gustatory quality. This is not
to say that Krug Clos du Mesnil and Clos
dAmbonnay or Billecart-Salmon Clos Saint
Hilaire are not outstanding wines. They are, but
their taste is not worth their price premium. Add
other values, like emotions or ostentatious purposes, and even these wines can be bargains.

WHERES THE MAGIC?

To understand a wine, you have to understand

terroir. Wine lovers and professionals know a
great deal about the regions of Bordeaux and
Burgundy, their individual characteristics and best
producers. But how many can identify even five
villages in Champagne?
If you love champagne, just as you would for
any other wine, you might want to make a pilgrimage to its birthplace. There must be thousands
of wine lovers every year who travel to Burgundy
to see Romane-Conti. To see the horses ploughing the land, to run the earth through their fingers, makes them feel they know and understand
the wine.
An understanding of champagne starts with its
base wines. At vintage time, the cellar masters
have hundreds of individual wines in their hands,
from Champagnes five major districts; Montagne
de Reims, Cte des Blancs, Valle de la Marne,
Szanne and Cte des Bar. Each of the 317 villages
and parcels within possess unique characteristics,
which the Champenois are fully familiar with.
For wine lovers, this is where the fascination lies
with single terroir champagnes be they single vineyard or single village (mono cru): it is to learn to
distinguish individual origins in the glass. You could
explore Cte des Blancs Chardonnay by tasting
the following: Larmandier-Bernier Vieilles Vignes
de Cramant (Cramant) and Agrapart Vnus Brut
Nature (Avize). Top that with Chardonnays from
Montagne de Reims and Valle de la Marne,
David Lclapart Cuve lAptre (Trpail) and
Tarlant Cuve La Vigne dAntan (Oeuilly).
Complement the tasting with wines from Szanne
and Cte des Bar, Ulysse Collin Blanc de Blancs
(La Gravelle) and Jacques Lassaigne Cuve Le
Cotet (Montgueux), and you will understand the
meaning of Chardonnay in Champagne.
Some wine lovers like this more intellectual
approach to champagne. Sommeliers, in partic-

GROWING POPULARITY

If these are the reasons we buy single vineyard

wines, how does this translate on the producers
side? Lets start with a brief history. The category
was born in 1935 when Philipponnat acquired the
Clos des Goisses vineyard and put a mono-parcel
vintage champagne into production. Later, in
1951, Cattier vinified the grapes from the Clos du
Moulin vineyard into a multi-vintage champagne.
In Le Mesnil, the Krug brothers purchased the
Clos du Mesnil vineyard by accident. After discovering its potential they launched the wine from
the 1979 vintage. A neighbour in Le Mesnil, Pierre
Peters, started production of Cuve Spciale in
1983 from the Les Chtillons parcel. Further
south in the Aube, Drappier developed Grande
Sendre in 1975 and its ros version in 1990.
But it was not until the mid-1990s that
growth developed exponentially. Leclerc-Briants
trilogy of three multi-vintage wines was launched
in 1994. Billecart-Salmons Clos Saint Hilaire and
Claude Cazals Clos Cazals were first produced
in 1995. Mot & Chandon launched the multivintage Trilogie des Grands Crus range that
included three single varietal wines: Pinot Meunier

The costliest single vineyard champagnes are often bought for

their luxury appeal rather than for their gustatory quality
22

ESSI AVELLAN MW

Les Champs du Romont, Pinot Noir Les Sarments

dA and Chardonnay Les Vignes de Saran. The
range has now been discontinued.
Today the concept is mushrooming. Jacquesson
recently replaced their prestige cuves with a collection of four single vineyard wines. Taittinger
launched Les Folies de la Marquetterie in 2006.
Philipponnat expanded its range with a rarity,
Clos de Goisses Juste Ros. Krug finally brought
Clos dAmbonnay to daylight in 2008. But most
of the action in fact takes place outside the major
houses. Cdric Bouchard, a new grower in the
Aube, creates only single vineyard, single variety
and single vintage wines. Chartogne-Taillet,
Ulysse Collin and Nicolas Maillard are all exciting new producers on the single vineyard scene.
And there are many others and more to come. For
instance, Andr Clouet is cellaring their Clos
Bouzy and Lansons Clos Lanson is also a work
in progress.

WHATS IN A NAME?

The single vineyard champagne phenomenon is

growing so fast that an official status and rules
need to be created. It is hard for the consumer to
understand the category, as it does not have a
commonly recognised name. With single village
wines, the French use the term mono-cru, but
the term mono-parcelle for single vineyard
wines does not make sense to an international
audience. Single vineyard champagne is the best
term to date. However, labels use a rainbow of
terms to evoke them.
Originally, single vineyards were called Clos,
after walled vineyard. Philipponnats wine was
called Vin des Goisses but when Revue du Vin de
France journalist Renaud Boudoin saw the plot he
suggested they adopt the term clos that was
being used in Burgundy. Vin des Goisses was
renamed Clos des Goisses for the 1959 vintage.
Cattier Clos du Moulin and Krug Clos du Mesnil
belong to the early clos. The newer launches
include Billecart-Salmon Clos Saint Hilaire,
Claude Cazals Clos Cazals, Veuve Fourny Les
Clos du Notre Dame, Henri Mandois Les Clos
and Krug Clos dAmbonnay.
Clos is a great marketing name but when the
vineyards are not walled, alternative names have
been found. The word vignes (vines) is used for
Egly-Ouriets Les Vignes de Vrigny, LarmandierBerniers Vieilles Vignes de Cramant, Alain
Thinots La Vigne aux Gamins, Tarlants Cuve La
Vigne dAntan and Cuve La Vigne dOr. Dehours
is the only one using the name lieu-dit (specific
place, a named vineyard), which encapsulates the
concept but is difficult for foreigners to pronounce
and to remember.
The name of the vineyard itself is used increasingly. Among many examples are Cdric Bouchard
(Les Ursules, La Haute-Lembl, La Bolore and
Le Creux dEnfer) and Chartogne-Taillet (Les
Barres and Les Orizeaux). The term terres (earth,
soil) is used in Jean Milan Les Terres de Nol and
Larmandier-Bernier Terre de Vertus.
To make it even more complicated for the consumer some of the names do not derive from a
particular terroir or place: Agrapart Vnus (named
after the family horse), Pierre Peters Cuve
Spciale, Tarlant Cuve Louis and Ulysse Collin
Blanc de Blancs and Blanc de Noirs.

TERROIR MICRO-TREND

What started with a few haphazard single vineyard launches has grown into a solid micro-trend.
Even though grandes marques lead in price and
recognition, the concept is being increasingly
appreciated and used by small growers. The reason for this is that the production scene for champagne is in transition. Today, the 15,000 growers
who own 88 percent of the vineyards sell a mere
one fifth of the total champagne production. Due
to the capital intense nature of the business and
its high entry barriers, growers own production
used to be limited. But now, as demand exceeds
supply, prices of vineyards and grapes have risen
and owning land in the region has become
increasingly profitable. The 2006 figures show
that a hectare of land on average produces grapes
worth 64,985. With these returns, champagne
production has become a realistic option and an
increasing number of growers are jumping on the
bandwagon.
Nicolas Maillard is a textbook example of the
new, innovative, quality-oriented and terroirdriven grower. He used to sell his grapes to the local
cooperative in Ecueil but recently started his own
production with single vineyard wines at the top
of his range. The terroirist movement has opened
up new opportunities for growers outside the
well-known Grand Cru villages, people like
Cdric Bouchard from Cte des Bar and Ulysse
Collin from Szanne.
Single vineyard wines are a wonderful marketing opportunity for growers hand-grafted
wines with got du terroir. Being part of this phenomenon helps with marketing where their own
resources human or financial fall short.

IN THE MAKING

There may be mixed practices in the naming of

single vineyard champagnes, but the winemaking
approaches are relatively uniform. The first
approach is house style vinification, where only
the individual terroirs characteristics separate the
23

ESSI AVELLAN MW

As demonstrated above, much is happening

on the single vineyard front. I find the concept
exciting, but this does not mean that I like all the
wines. There are great and not good enough single vineyard champagnes. To a certain extent, the
first, Philipponnat Clos des Goisses, is unrivalled,
embracing as it does the concept to the fullest: the
steep sloping, south-facing 5.5-ha parcel in
Mareuil-sur-A that faces the Marne channel is
superlative. Quoting Charles Philipponnat: We
do not make this wine. It practically makes itself.
The parcel is so perfect that nearly anybody
would succeed. This to me is the essence; only
the best vineyards are worthy of the wines. And
for this reason I would like to see the category
made official with strict rules to obstruct opportunist ventures to capitalise on it.
I enjoy both growers and grandes marques
single vineyard champagnes, despite their very
different natures. The polished and perfected style
of the latter transforms smoothly to the single
vineyard wines. The best grower wines then again
offer hand-grafted wines with plenty of character and sovereign transparency.

wine from the rest of the range. Here we have

Krug, Duval-Leroy and Pierre Peters, for instance.
Some, like Taittinger and Franck Bonville, use old
or large oak for vinification even if they rarely do
for the rest of the range. Additionally, there are a
few growers intent on making Burgundy with
bubbles, more a wine than a champagne. Cdric
Bouchard, for instance, highlights his wines vinosity with a lower than normal pressure level.
But the leading and growing trend is naturalness and transparency. Natural yeasts are commonly preferred and Chartogne-Taillet even goes
so far as to prepare yeast from individual single
vineyard plots. Most keep dosage as low as possible and completely dosage-free champagnes are
gaining popularity in the name of maximum
transparency. Sometimes these make me yearn for
a gram or two of harmony and charm, but I can
appreciate that these growers do not want to compromise their ideas.
IN THE GROWING

As the name single vineyard wine implies, it all

boils down to the vineyard. The minimum standard of viticultural management seems to be lutte
raisonne but many, like Jrme Prvost and
Marie-Nolle Ledru, have gone fully organic or
biodynamic. Agrapart and Larmandier-Bernier
apply biodynamic practices.
Old vines and reduced yields are generally
considered essential. Tarlant and ChartogneTaillet even have plots of ungrafted vines from
which they create their single vineyard wines
(Cuve La Vigne dAntan, Les Barres).

THE WAY FORWARD

Champagne is on the irrevocable path to becoming a serious, gastronomic wine. The terroir
wine movement is tightly linked to this vinous
revolution. It is interesting to go back a few
decades and compare Burgundy with Champagne.
Burgundy, too, used to be dominated by large sellers but nowadays the most reputed and highpriced wines are those of the small growers. Is this
what is foreseeable for champagne?
I dont think so and certainly hope not.
Champagnes greatness and the secret of its centuries-long success is in blending. Climate dictates
this for wine quality but it is equally essential
commercially. Consistent quality and style year in
and out are champagnes strength, as are its enviable volumes. This does not mean the region
shouldnt evolve with the times. Todays enlightened champagne lover seeks understanding,
unique experiences and authenticity alongside the
magic of the bubbles.
On export markets, the impression is that
champagne is all about big brand glamour. This
is only the half-truth. Visit the region and you will
realise the drinks scope and complexity with its
countless small growers. The growers single vineyard champagnes are the quality spearhead of this
alternative reality of champagne.

STYLES AND QUALITIES

Single vineyard champagnes are made in all styles:

blanc de blancs, blanc de noirs, ros, vintage,
non-vintage, etc. Many early ones were blends
of Chardonnay and Pinot Noir, like Clos des
Goisses, Clos du Moulin and Grande Sendre.
Clos du Moulin is a blend of three vintages, a way
of minimising the effect of the vintages. But most
of the new ones are varietal wines from a single
vintage, whether or not they are labelled as such.
There are also interesting curiosities like 100
percent Pinot Meuniers from Henri Mandois,
Jerme Prvost, Tarlant and Chartogne-Taillet.
Cdric Bouchard even makes a pure Pinot Blanc
Roses de Jeanne La Bolore. Ross are still fairly uncommon. Jacquesson, Cdric Bouchard,
Drappier and Phillipponnat as rare examples.

I would like to see the category made official with strict rules
to obstruct opportunist ventures to capitalise on it
25

TONG N 4

ripeness. Terre de Vertus is actually dual vineyard

wine as it is made from two plots that are right
next to each other. All the grapes are from a single
vintage, but it is not labelled as a vintage because
it is launched on the market too early. It can be
somewhat austere at youth but a years post-disgorgement ageing perfects it.

ESSI AVELLANS FAVORITE SINGLE

VINEYARD CHAMPAGNES
PHILIPPONNAT Clos des Goisses

This plot is so remarkable that it can produce

wine worthy of the name nearly every year. It is
approximately a 70/30 blend of Pinot Noir and
Chardonnay. The high ripeness level of the grapes
allows them to avoid malolactic fermentation.
Clos des Goisses is a genuinely long-lived champagne and it is one that also needs time, so
patience is required.

JRME PRVOST La Closerie Les Bguines

Jrme Prvosts concept is peculiar. He basically

makes one wine only, a 100 percent Pinot Meunier
from his vineyard in Gueux. It is a single vintage
wine but not labelled as such due to the young
release age. Old vines Pinot Meunier works surprisingly well on its own and bottle age brings out
the vinosity and full complexity. This one has
quickly acquired cult status.

BILLECART-SALMON Clos Saint Hilaire

Billecart-Salmon clearly followed the Krug model

with its launch of Clos Saint Hilaire from the
1995 vintage. It is a monumental wine in which
the Billecart style is strongly present. This Pinot
Noir from their back garden has so much body
and power to it that it feels immortal. Do try to
keep some back to enjoy it mature.

CDRIC BOUCHARD

Roses de Jeanne La Haute-Lembl

A newcomer in the single vineyard forum is
Cdric Bouchard from Aube, whose vinous style
with lower pressure than normal is unique. La
Haute-Lembl 100 percent Chardonnay is my
personal favourite. The 0.118-hectare vineyard
yields 500-800 bottles a year, so it is almost
impossible to find.

KRUG Clos dAmbonnay

Intriguing wine, which feels almost chewable at
entry but whose acidity lifts the palate and leaves
an amazingly fresh finish. The Krug house style
dominates over the terroir, as it does for Clos du
Mesnil. The Krug style is at its best with muscular red varieties, and this pure Pinot Noir has a fair
chance of surpassing Clos du Mesnil both in quality and consistency.

CHARTOGNE-TAILLET Les Barres

An exciting new launch from Chartogne-Taillet of

Massif Saint-Thierrys Merfy. The Pinot Meunier
is ungrafted and Alexandre Chartogne takes every
measure to maximise its terroir effect. He ferments
the wine with natural yeast sourced from the same
parcel. A voluptuous and vinous champagne.

TAITTINGER Les Folies de la Marquetterie

Taittingers concept with Les Folies is very different from the above-mentioned grandes marques
wines. The Chardonnay dominant blend is made
from the vineyards surrounding the Houses original acquisition, Chteau de la Marquetterie in
Pierry. Its unique style deriving from partial vinification and ageing in large oak vats complements
the Taittinger range. Pricing under the houses
vintage makes it one of the best single vineyard
purchases.

TARLANT

Tarlant produces three single vineyard champagnes. Cuve La Vigne dAntan, a 100 percent
Chardonnay from Les Sables vineyard, is made
from near-extinct ungrafted vines. The sandy soil
and more than 40-year-old vines produce a rich
and vinous wine with a strong character. At
youth, the old oak used for fermentation and maturation plays a noticeable role. Very much a wine,
this too should be given some bottle age.

JACQUESSON Dizy Corne Bautray

Jacquesson is a great spokesman for the concept
of single vineyard wines. After the 1996 vintage,
they replaced their prestige cuve with a series of
single vineyard champagnes, which they produce
only when the natural conditions are right. I have
found Corne Bautray Blanc de Blancs from the
high-lying vineyard in Dizy to be fascinating, a
transparent terroir wine with a unique character.
LARMANDIER-BERNIER Terre de Vertus
Larmandier-Berniers wines are true terroir wines.
Biodynamic methods and non-dosed nature work
well in their wines of impeccable fruit purity and
26

ESSI AVELLAN MW

THE COMPLETE LIST SO FAR

AGRAPART
Vnus Brut Nature

LARMANDIER-BERNIER
Terre de Vertus
Vieilles Vignes de Cramant

BILLECART-SALMON
Clos Saint Hilaire

JACQUES LASSAIGNE
Cuve Le Cotet

FRANCK BONVILLE
Belles Voyes

GEORGES LAVAL
Cuve Les Chnes Brut Nature
Cuve Les Hautes-Chvres Brut Nature

CDRIC BOUCHARD
Inflorescence Val Vilaine
Roses de Jeanne Les Ursules
Roses de Jeanne La Haute-Lembl
Roses de Jeanne La Bolore
Roses de Jeanne Le Creux dEnfer Ros de Saigne

DAVID LCLAPART
Cuve l'Aptre
LECLERC-BRIANT
Les Authentiques
Les Chvres Pierreuses
Le Clos des Champions
Les Crayres
La Croisette
La Ravinne

CATTIER
Clos du Moulin
CLAUDE CAZALS
Clos Cazals
CHARTOGNE-TAILLET
Les Barres
Les Orizeaux

A.R. LENOBLE
Les Aventures Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru
MARIE-NOELLE LEDRU
Cuve de Goult

ULYSSE COLLIN
Blanc de Blancs
Blanc de Noirs

NICOLAS MAILLART
Les Chaillots Gillis
Les Francs du Pied

DEHOURS
Lieux-dit Brisefer
Lieux-dit Les Genevraux

HENRI MANDOIS
Les Clos

DRAPPIER
Grande Sendre
Grande Sendre Ros

JEAN MILAN
Les Terres de Nol

DUVAL-LEROY
Authentis Clos des Bouveries

PHILIPPONNAT
Clos des Goisses
Clos des Goisses Juste Ros

EGLY-OURIET
Blanc de Noirs Les Crayeres
Les Vignes de Vrigny

PIERRE PETERS
Cuve Spciale

GONET-MDEVILLE
Ambonnay La Grande Ruelle Extra Brut

JRME PRVOST
Brut Nature La Closerie Les Bguines

JANISSON-BARADON
Spcial Club Les Toulettes Blanc de Blancs

TAITTINGER
Les Folies de la Marquetterie

JACQUESSON
Dizy Corne Bautray
A Vauzelle Terme
Dizy Terres Rouges Ros
Avize Champ Can

TARLANT
Cuve Louis Brut
Cuve La Vigne d'Antan
Cuve La Vigne d'Or
ALAIN THINOT
La Vigne aux Gamins

KRUG
Clos du Mesnil
Clos dAmbonnay

VEUVE FOURNY
Les Clos du Notre Dame

27

TONG N 4

AUTOLYSIS
BY HERV ALEXANDRE, FRANCE

Champagne or for that matter any sparkling wine made according to the traditional method must ferment successively twice.
The first fermentation transforms grape must into base wine,
but the second fermentation is what really matters: it happens
in the bottle and increases alcoholic content (with 1.2 to 1.3%
abv) as well as internal bottle pressure (up to 5-7 atmospheres).

29

TONG N 4

THE MYSTERY
OF CHAMPAGNE
Herv Alexandre is professor of Oenology at the
Institut Universitaire de la Vigne et du Vin Jules
Guyot at the University of Burgundy in Dijon,
France, where hes responsible for the Diplme
National dOenologue. He is also rector of the Union
of Oenologists of France. His research focuses on
micro-organisms in wine, yeasts and bacteria.

ethanol. They also need flocculating or agglutinating properties, as well as good autolytic capacity
and an ability to influence foam quality.

After this second fermentation, the wine is aged

on yeast lees. Ageing on lees takes at least nine
months, depending on a particular countrys legislation. For standard and vintage champagnes
this is at least 15 months and three years respectively. During this prolonged contact, the yeast
experiences autolysis, a slow process associated
with cell death that involves enzymes releasing
compounds from the dead yeast cells into the
wine: peptides, fatty acids, nucleotides and amino
acids from inside the cell, and mannoproteins
from the cell wall.
Low ageing temperature slows down the process.
During ageing on yeast lees, a wines organoleptic
and foaming properties change, and so does the
wines composition.
Commercial yeasts used in first and second
fermentations are different. Yeasts for the first fermentation are selected for high fermentation speed
and low acid production, among other properties,
whereas yeasts for the second fermentation are
chosen to grow at low temperatures and under
pressure in a medium containing at least 10% abv

THE MECHANISMS

Yeast autolysis is an irreversible process caused

by intracellular yeast enzymes. The process
involves four steps:
- The inside cell structure breaks down, releasing enzymes in the cell wall;
- The released enzymes (proteases) are at first
held back by specific inhibitors, then activated when these inhibitors break down;
- Intracellular polymer components hydrolyse
(break down), with the hydrolysis products
accumulating in the cell;
- The hydrolytic products are released into the
wine when their molecular masses are low
enough to penetrate pores in the cell wall.
Although this may apply to most autolysis
processes, there are differences between natural
and induced autolysis.
30

HERV ALEXANDRE

Induced autolysis is widely used in industrial

applications, such as the production of yeast
extract to enhance flavour or the production of
intracellular enzymes. Yeast autolysates are also
added to growth culture media because they are
rich in vitamins and amino acids. Autolysis in
industrial processes can be induced by physical
inductors (rise in temperature, alternate freezing
and thawing and osmotic pressure), chemical
inductors (pH, detergents and antibiotics), or
biological inductors (aeration and starvation).
Depending on the inducer, this autolysis process
can be very fast - from 48 to 72 hours.
Natural autolysis, however, used in the traditional method for making champagne, is a
much lengthier process. This is especially so
when the autolytic conditions pH 3 to 4, ageing temperature 15C, and the presence of
ethanol (12% abv) are far from the ideal 45C
at pH 5. These differences often produce more
delicate results.
In the production of sparkling wines, yeast
autolysis only starts two to four months after
completion of the second fermentation. During
the process, as mentioned above, the yeast cell
wall breaks. The cell wall of Saccharomyces cerevisiae may account for between 20-30% of the
cell dry mass. It is primarily made up of mannoproteins and B-glucans. Glucanase enzymes are
known to be involved in yeast cell wall degradation.
No one yet knows the kinetics of this process that
occurs during a sparkling wines autolysis or the
oenological parameters affecting it.
The action of these enzymes has been deduced
from the compounds that are released. During
autolysis, the yeast cell walls release acids, evoking
the proteolytic activity that is probably occurring in the cell wall. Cell wall degradation during autolysis causes the release of amino acids and
macromolecules.
Although enzymes break down the cell wall,
there is no destruction of the cell wall itself,
which remains thick and smooth. After autolysis,
the yeast cells are much smaller and develop wrinkles or folds and ridges.
Although the process leading to autolysis is
not yet fully understood, we know that various
events occur during yeast autolysis (Figure 1).
Immediately after the second alcoholic fermentation, the yeast cells are elongated and ovoid, and
the cell wall is thick and smooth. Inside the cell,
a large vacuole (or core) is surrounded by spherical bodies (Figure 1a). Between three to six
months (Figure 1b), the cell and vacuole become
smaller, and spherical bodies are distributed
throughout the vacuole. The cell wall is rough,
and the yeast cells have developed small wrinkles
or folds. Between nine to 12 months (Figure 1c),

the cell appears to have collapsed, which explains

its small size. The cell wall remains unbroken,
with ridges and folds, but the yeast cell has lost
most of its content.
The biochemical changes are as follows: first
comes an excretion of amino acids. After three
to six months, peptide and protein breakdown
(hydrolysis) continue to enrich the sparkling wine
with amino acids, and the cell walls release a significant amount of polysaccharides. Plasma membrane degradation starts, releasing lipids into the
wine. From nine to 12 months, the amino acid
concentration decreases and the peptide and protein releases dominate. Cell wall polysaccharides,
a.
Amino acids
Cell wall

Nucleus

Vacuole

Plasma membrane

b.
Polysaccharides

Lipids

Sugars

Spherical bodies
Proteins and peptides

c.

Ribonucleotide

Figure 1. Schematic representation of the morphological and biochemical changes in yeast during autolysis in sparkling wine.
Immediately after the second alcoholic fermentation (a), between
3 to 6 months (b) and between 9 to 12 months (c).
31

HERV ALEXANDRE

Origin

Compound type

Nucleocide

during autolysis after the release of mannoprotein. The levels of polysaccharides in champagne
increase from 366 mg/L in the base wine to 602
mg/L after nine months of ageing.
Mannoproteins play a key role in the stability
of a wine. They reduce haze formation and prevent
the precipitation of tartaric salts by sticking to the
growth sites of the crystal, thus blocking that very
growth. The effects of macromolecules on foam
quality are enormously important. Material that
precipitates in ethanol has been found among the
compounds present in foam. The optimum ageing time for the best and most stable foam is
roughly 18 months. After 18 months, foam quality decreases. Finally, mannoproteins contribute
to the mouth-feel of champagne, and to the intensity and persistence of its aromas.
Lipids are important components of sparkling
wines because they influence foam stability.
During the second fermentation, the lipid content increases. After bottle ageing in contact with
yeasts, the lipid content increases further.
Nucleotides are the result of the breakdown of
DNA during autolysis. Although there are no
definitive studies on this, nucleotides are thought
to be flavour compounds.
But the most important compounds released
during autolysis that affect the aromas of champagne are arguably volatile and have until now
been less well studied than non-aroma compounds. Most of these volatile compounds are
released after four to six months, with esters the
predominating family. Short chain (C3-C4) and
medium chain (C6-C12) acyl esters with characteristic fruity odours appear at the beginning of
autolysis and then decrease. Long chain acyl
esters have also been identified, as well as the
release of terpenic alcohols and higher alcohols.
Geraniol, a-terpineol (smelling like lilac), citronellol and farnesol (anis, jasmine and roses)
have all been identified. These compounds have
low perception levels ranging from 100 to 300
g/L. Farnesol and nerolidol (woody) are thought
to contribute greatly to champagnes aromatic
quality. Among the higher alcohols, the rapid formation of isoamyl alcohol and 2-phenylethanol
(roses) is important.
About 10 aldehydes with a grassy odour that
negatively affect the aromatic profile have been
measured and identified, although most disappear
during ageing.
Descriptive analysis is another way of characterising the effect of the traditional method on
aroma. Changes in aroma during the production

Proven or potential impact

on sparkling wine

Flavouring agent

Nucleotide

Cell content

Amino acid

Aroma precursors

Peptide

Foam quality

Protein

Sweet & bitter taste

Sweet & bitter taste

Protein
Foam quality
Lipids

Foam quality

Glucan

Foam quality

Mannoprotein

Increase in mouthfeel

Cell wall

Table 1. The origin of different compounds released during yeast autolysis and their proven or potential impact on sparkling wine.

lipids and nucleotides (from broken-down yeast

DNA) increase slightly.
The principal factors that affect autolysis are
pH, temperature, the presence of ethanol and the
nature of the yeast strain. The optimal temperature
for autolysis when using the traditional method
is believed to be between 10 to 12C.
DOES AUTOLYSIS HAVE A TASTE?

The compounds released during autolysis change

the physical and organoleptic properties of champagne and any sparkling wine made following the
traditional method. Table 1 summarises these
changes.
Nitrogen release is thought to reflect the
autolytic activity of yeast. During bottle fermentation amino acids are released into the wine.
After the available glucose has been exhausted, the
levels of amino acids increase. Peptides are first
released from the yeast cells and then broken
down into amino acids.
Amino acid enrichment of sparkling wine
may well improve its aroma. Amino acids are the
precursors of some aromas, mostly those that
define the inimitable character of champagne,
including acacia-like aromas.
Of the lactones, the so-called sotolon (3-hydroxy4,5-dimethyl-2(5H)-furanone) slowly increases
in champagne during ageing. Sotolon has a green
nut or curry-like smell.
Some peptides have sweet and bitter tastes and
their surfactant properties are believed to play a role
in foam stability.
Polysaccharides, too, are released during yeast
autolysis. These macromolecules mainly contain
glucose (74%) and mannose, another form of
sugar (26%). The mannose/glucose ratio increases

Toasty and biscuity aromas are much more likely to be linked

to oxidative ageing after disgorgement than to autolysis
33

TONG N 4

of sparkling wine vary either for individual wines

or wines from different grape varieties. But it is not
enough to know the profiles of the base wines
to be able to predict the sensory properties of
the sparkling wines after 18 months of lees ageing. Descriptive analysis of the base wine allows
one to distinguish among grape varieties like
Chardonnay or Pinot Noir. However, after the
secondary fermentation the sparkling wines can
no longer be differentiated easily by variety or
colour, meaning that secondary fermentation
together with lees ageing profoundly modify a
wines aromatic profile.

only keep the wine fresh, they also greatly reduce

the need to add SO2 to champagne. Because autolysis absorbs certain essential yeast nutrients, the
dosage in the final champagne will not referment
in the bottle. One has to look upon autolysis as a
structural element in champagne rather than an
aromatic one.

BISCUITS AND TOAST

The study of autolysis has been extensive, yet several questions remain to be answered. For example,
it is not known whether there is a similarity in the
autolysis of yeast following the musts fermentation and of yeast after the wines fermentation,
as with champagne. Analytical studies of wine,
and particularly sparkling wine, have given us a
clear picture of the different compounds released
during autolysis. But we still dont know the molecular mechanisms responsible for the induction
of autolysis.
Last but not least, and essential in a discussion
of champagne aromatics, the yeast origin of many
aroma compounds, like the typically biscuity or
toast-like odours of long-aged champagne, is not
clear and needs scientific proof. The volatile compounds characteristic of a long-aged champagne
may also be found in still wine that has not been
aged on yeast lees. The impact of these compounds
on the physical and organoleptic properties of
sparkling wine is also poorly understood. Many
changes occur during autolysis, making it difficult
to attribute a specific compound to specific aromatic changes. We are still unsure as to which
components formed or released during ageing are
odour-active compounds. Therefore, the effect of
yeast autolysis on the aromatic properties of
sparkling wine should be re-evaluated using techniques such as gas chromatography-olfactometry
complemented with sensory descriptive analysis.
To say that the complex aromas in long-aged
champagne come directly from autolysis is wrong.
Toasty and biscuity aromas are much more likely
to be linked to oxidative ageing in the bottle
after disgorgement and to the Maillard reaction
between amino acids and the sugars from the
liqueur dexpdition in the champagne. The Maillard
reaction causes ripe burnt sugar-like, honeyed and
toasty aromas.
In fact, autolysis inhibits oxidation because
of the release of the reducing enzymes from the
dead yeast cells. In that way, dead yeast cells not
34

TONG N 4

THE
SCIENCE
BEHIND
THE
BUBBLES
BY GRARD LIGER-BELAIR, RGIS GOUGEON & PHILIPPE SCHMITT-KOPPLIN, FRANCE & GERMANY

37

TONG N 4

EVER SINCE THE DAYS OF BENEDICTINE MONK DOM PIERRE PRIGNON (1638-1715),
ITS ELEGANT EFFERVESCENCE HAS MADE IT A CELEBRATORY WINE. IN CHAMPAGNE
WINES AS IN ALL SPARKLING WINES, EXCESS CARBON DIOXIDE MOLECULES FORM AS
A BY-PRODUCT OF ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION. AS SOON AS YOU UNCORK A BOTTLE
OF CHAMPAGNE, THE PROGRESSIVE RELEASE OF CO 2-DISSOLVED GAS MOLECULES
CAUSES BUBBLE NUCLEATION, KNOWN AS THE EFFERVESCENCE PROCESS.

Grard Liger-Belair is professor of Chemical

Physics at Reims University in France. He also
heads the universitys Bubble team, exploring the
science of thin films, bubbles and foams and their
interdisciplinary applications. Among other prizes,
he has won the Association of American Publishers
2004 award for his book Uncorked, the Science of
Champagne, published by Princeton University
Press. He carries out his study of champagne bubbles with Dr Rgis Gougeon, associate professor of
Physical Chemistry at the University of Burgundy,
and Dr Philippe Schmitt-Kopplin of the Institute
of Ecological Chemistry in Munich.

Approximately 5 litres of CO2 escape from a typical 0.75 litre champagne bottle. For an idea of
how many bubbles are involved in the degassing
process, divide the volume of CO2 to be released
by the average volume of a typical bubble - 0.5 mm
diameter. The resulting number is close to 108.
Critics judge the quality of a particular champagne by the way its bubbles behave, among other
things. Small bubbles that rise slowly through the
liquid are usually considered much more desirable
than larger bubbles. The aspect of the foam ring
on the liquid surface, the so-called collerette, is
caused by the bubbles in the glass another
important feature of champagne. And yet it is
only quite recently that the tools of physical
chemistry have been used to identify the physicochemical mechanisms behind nucleation, and the
rise and collapse of bubbles in champagne and
other sparkling wines.

UNCORKING THE BOTTLE

Have you ever considered the velocity reached

by an uncontrolled champagne cork popping
out of a bottle? Measurements conducted in our
laboratory in Reims showed typical velocities as
between 50 and 60 km/h.
When opening a bottle of champagne (or any
carbonated beverage), you will notice the small
cloud of fog that forms right above the bottleneck (wonderfully illustrated Figure 1 by
high-speed photographer Jacques Honvault.)
Contrary to popular belief, this cloud is due to a
significant drop in temperature in the headspace
below the champagne surface, itself caused by
a sudden expansion of gas when the bottle is
uncorked. The rapid temperature drop causes the
instantaneous condensation of water vapour in
the form of this characteristic cloud.
39

TONG N 4

jectories in the champagne bulk.) Fliers are a significant source of bubbles in glasses poured with champagne. The photograph of a typical flute filled with
champagne displayed in Figure 3a shows a detail
in Figure 3b, in which you can identify some fliers.

Figure 1. Champagne cork popping out of a bottle; the cloud of fog

above the bottleneck appears clearly ( Jacques Honvault).

BUBBLE NUCLEATION
a.

A close study of glasses that have just been filled

with champagne reveals that most of the bubble
nucleation sites are located on preexisting gas cavities. These cavities are trapped inside hollow,
more or less cylindrical cellulose-fibre-made structures measuring some 100 m long with a cavity
mouth of several micrometres. Figure 2 shows a
typical fibre acting as a bubble nucleation1 site.

b.

Figure 3. Photograph of a typical flute poured with champagne (a), and

close-up of particles acting as bubble nucleation sites floating freely in
the bulk of the flute (called fliers), thus creating those charming bubble
trains in motion in the champagne bulk (b) ( Alain Cornu/Collection CIVC).

BUBBLE RISE

After their birth on cellulose debris, it is buoyancy that brings the bubbles to the liquid surface. As
they rise, they go on developing by continuously
absorbing the carbon dioxide molecules dissolved
in the liquid matrix. Bubbles thus steadily accelerate along their way through the champagne.
High-speed photographs show this acceleration in
the steadily increasing space between the bubbles of a particular bubble train (see Figure 4.)
Tasters of champagne and sparkling wine are
traditionally concerned with the size of the bubbles (there is a saying that the smaller the bubbles, the better the wine), which explains why
so much attention is devoted to modelling the
average size of ascending bubbles. Recent calculations have shown that the final average size of
ascending bubbles is however the result of a hugely complex interplay between several parameters.

Figure 2. A typical cellulose fibre absorbed on the wall of a glass poured

with champagne; clearly visible is the gas pocket trapped inside the fibres
cavity that causes bubble formation ( Grard Liger-Belair/Cdric Voisin).

Flutes that have been towel-dried just before serving display an excess of bubble nucleation sites,
and thus an excess of effervescence. Some of the
particles that act as bubble nucleation sites (most
of them including cellulose fibres) may detach
themselves from the glass wall to eventually
immerse themselves into the rest of the champagne. Yet these particles remain active (in terms
of bubbling capacity), provided a gas pocket with
a radius of curvature larger than the critical radius
has been trapped within them. These particles
immersed in the champagne bulk produce those
easily-recognisable bubble trains, which seem to
dance erratically inside the glass while you taste the
champagne. These suspended particles are called
fliers (due to their often complex and circling tra-

Figure 4. Characteristic bubble train promoted by the repetitive bubble

formation process from a single cellulose fibre; bubbles are clearly
seen developing as they rise ( Grard Liger-Belair).

1. bubble nucleation is the scientific term for bubble birth.

40

G. LIGER-BELAIR, R. GOUGEON & PH. SCHMITT-KOPPLIN

Lets look at a few of them:

1. The longer the travelled distance h, the
larger the bubble. This dependence of bubble
size on the distance it has travelled through the
liquid means that, in a champagne tasting, the
average bubble size at the champagne surface
varies from one glass to the next. In a narrow
flute, for example, the champagne is poured to
about three times the level of that in a typical
coupe (which has a shallower bowl and a much
wider aperture.) Therefore, the diameter of average bubbles in a flute will be larger than those in
a coupe, as shown in the photograph in Figure 5.
2. Bubble size is also strongly dependent on
atmospheric pressure. Were you to enjoy a glass of
champagne at the top of Mount Everest, where the
overall pressure is about 30% of that at sea level,

Figure 6. A few seconds after pouring and the collapse of the foamy head,
the surface of a champagne flute is covered with a layer of bubbles
approximately arranged in a hexagonal pattern that strikingly resembles beeswax ( Grard Liger-Belair).

free surface of a glass filled with champagne also

reveals an unexpected and lovely phenomenon. A
few seconds after pouring and the collapse of the
foamy head, the inside surface of a champagne
flute covers itself with a layer of bubbles like a
bubble raft, where each bubble is characteristically surrounded by six neighbouring bubbles (see
Figure 6.) In scientific terms, bubbles arrange
themselves approximately in an hexagonal pattern
that strikingly resembles that of beeswax. While
snapping pictures of the bubble raft that appears
after pouring, we accidentally took pictures of
bubbles collapsing close to one another in the raft.
When the bubble-cap of a bubble ruptures and
leaves an open cavity at the free surface, adjacent
bubble-caps are sucked towards this empty cavity
and create unexpected and short-lived flowershaped structures that are unfortunately invisible
to the naked eye (see Figure 7.)

Figure 5. Bubble size distribution at the free surface of champagne

glasses 30 seconds after pouring, whether champagne is served in
a coupe (left) or a flute (right) ( Grard Liger-Belair).

the bubbles would increase in volume almost by

a factor of four! This is basically the same phenomenon that causes gas embolism in the blood vessels
of divers who resurface too quickly after having
breathed high-pressure air under water.
3. Bubble size also strongly depends on the
concentration of CO2 dissolved in champagne.
The lower the CO2 content, the smaller the bubbles. In fact, cork is a porous material which is
far from being completely hermetic with regard
to gas exchange. CO2 molecules are therefore able
to slowly diffuse through the cork along the ageing process. This is the reason why old champagnes systematically have small bubbles.
4. The gravity acceleration that drives the bubble rise (through buoyancy) also plays a relatively
important role in the final bubbles size. On the
moon, where gravity is about 1/6 of that on earth,
average bubble volume would increase by a factor
of almost three (we dont yet have photographs
to illustrate this phenomenon)

Figure 7. Flower-shaped structure found during the collapse of bubbles

in the bubble raft at the free surface of a flute poured with champagne
(bar = 1 cm) ( Grard Liger-Belair).

A PATERNOSTER OF AROMAS

From the consumers point of view, bubbles are

essential to champagne, sparkling wines and in
fact any carbonated beverage. Without bubbles,

BUBBLES LIKE FLOWERS

The close observation of bubbles collapsing at the

41

TONG N 4

ing to the fruity aroma of several grape varieties

(see Figure 9.) Each dot in Figure 9 represents the
concentration factor of a given compound found
in the aerosols (ie the ratio of its concentration in
the aerosols to its concentration in the bulk below
the champagne surface.) These compounds, mostly including saturated and unsaturated fatty acids,
act as surfactants (ie as a double-ended compound
with one end attracted to the liquid phase and the
other repulsing it.) It has been suggested that
champagne bubbles pull these compounds out
of the liquid bulk, with one end attracted to the
bubbles airy interior and the other to the liquid
outside. The bubbles then rise to the surface of the
glass where they pop, releasing the compounds in
the form of aerosols. A scheme of this mechanism

Figure 8. The myriad of bubbles that collapse at the surface of a glass

of champagne radiate a cloud of tiny droplets that are characteristic of
sparkling wines and that complement the sensual experience of the
taster ( Alain Cornu/Collection CIVC).

champagne wouldnt be champagne, and sparkling

wines and beers would be flat. And yet the role of
effervescence is far more than simply aesthetic.
When champagne or sparkling wine is poured
into a glass, the myriad of ascending bubbles collapse and radiate a multitude of tiny droplets
above the free surface, in the characteristic form
of refreshing aerosols (see Figure 8.) Based on a
phenomenological analogy between the fizz of
the ocean and the fizz in champagne wines, the
hypothesis was put forward a few years ago that
aerosols found in the headspace above a glass
poured with champagne could considerably
enhance the drinks fragrance release. It does this
by bringing chemical compounds to the tasters
nostrils, demonstrating both surface activity and
organoleptic interest. Very recently, ultra highresolution mass spectrometry was used to analyse
the aerosols released by champagne bubbles.

Figure 10. Scheme of the bubble bursting mechanism responsible for

the ejection of champagne aerosols over-concentrated with compounds
showing both surface activity and aromatic properties. These compounds
appear as red dots. Below are high-speed photographs of a bubble
collapse, leading to the projection of a liquid jet which quickly breaks
up into tiny droplets.

is shown in Figure 10, together with high-speed

photographs of the popping process. This recent
discovery supports the idea that rising and collapsing bubbles are a continuous paternoster lift
for aromas in every glass of champagne. Aerosols
were thus shown to hold the organoleptic essence
of champagne.
FURTHER READING
GOUGEON, R., LUCIO, M., FROMMBERGER, M.,
PEYRON, D., CHASSAGNE, D., ALEXANDRE, H.,
FEUILLAT, F., VOILLEY, A., CAYOT, P., GEBEFGI, I.,
HERTKORN, N., SCHMITT-KOPPLIN, PH. (2009)
The chemo-diversity of wines can reveal a metabologeography
expression of cooperage oak wood. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences USA, vol. 106:9174-9179.
LIGER-BELAIR, G. (2009) Le Champagne: effervescence!
La science du champagne, Odile Jacob.
LIGER-BELAIR, G., CILINDRE, C., GOUGEON, R.,
LUCIO, M., GEBEFGI, I., JEANDET, P., SCHMITTKOPPLIN, PH. (2009) Unraveling different chemical fingerprints
between a champagne wine and its aerosols. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences USA, vol. 106:16545-16549.

Figure 9. Concentration factor analysis of all masses present in the

mass spectra of champagne aerosols and bulk, respectively.

Compared with the liquid bulk in the glass itself,

the aerosols contained an over-concentration of
compounds known to be aromatic or precursors
of aromas, such as isomers of dihydrovomofiliol
or Blumenol B and Annuionone G, contribut 42

TONG N 4

CHAMPAGNE EXPERIMENT

A QUEST
FOR
THE BEST
BY PASCAL AGRAPART, FRANCE

45

TONG N 4

I PRODUCE SIX CHAMPAGNES THAT ARE RICH IN STYLE FOR THREE REASONS. FIRSTLY,
THE BASE WINES ARE GIVEN A MALOLACTIC FERMENTATION; SECONDLY, THEIR VINIFICATION IS PARTLY DONE IN 600-LITRE OAK BARRELS; AND THIRDLY, THE BASE WINES
ARE MATURED FOR ONE LONG YEAR BEFORE THEY ARE TRANSFORMED INTO CHAMPAGNE.

Pascal Agrapart is a champagne grower in Avize,

one of the grand cru villages in Champagnes Cte
des Blancs. He makes terroir champagnes, and is
not interested in so-called luxury cuves.

My basic cuve is Les 7 Crus, a blend of seven

villages including grand cru but that I dont personally consider worthy of that accolade. It ages
on the lees for 24 to 36 months and the dosage
is 10 g/L. I had originally wanted to call this
champagne Sans Cru, but my wife warned me
that people might interpret this wrongly.
The next cuve is Terroirs, made with wines
from the four Cte des Blancs grand cru villages
of Avize, Oger, Cramant and the lesser-known
Oiry. It spends 48 months on the lees and its
dosage is 7 g/L. The third is a ros with a slight
Pinot Noir influence (7% of the blend, the grapes
originating from Cumires) and a delicate style
(dosage 10g/L).
Then comes my top range. These are three
vintage champagnes each from different vineyards
in Avize and Cramant, all aged 60 months on the
lees. Minral is from two parcels with very calcareous soils: Champ Bouton in Avize and
Bione in Cramant. Both parcels are at the foot
of the slope; the soil is some 40 cm thick, with a

lot of white earth and the thick layer of chalk

immediately underneath. Minral is an Extra
Brut with a 4g/L dosage.
The second one, LAvizoise, is a blend of two
adjacent parcels midway up the slope in Avize
Robard and Voie dEpernay. The clay-rich
soil produces slightly heavier wines. This champagne is an Extra Brut with a 4 g/L dosage.
My top wine is Vnus, a single vineyard
champagne from a 30-are parcel that produces
4,000 kilos of grapes a year, so just one marc,
one pressoir. It is named Vnus after my horse
that worked for many years in the vineyard and
died last year at the ripe old age of 21. The vineyard is midway up the slope and the soil is a mix
of chalk and clay. It is a Brut Nature, and therefore without dosage. All my champagnes are
commercialised minimum 60 days after disgorgement.
It would be arrogant to say that my champagnes improve every year, and yet it is true and
there are good reasons for this. First, the climate.
46

PASCAL AGRAPART

in my vineyards, ones that are still permitted

but not recommended. I have planted a little
Arbane, Pinot Blanc and Petit Melier and am
using them for an experimental wine that is not
yet commercialised. It will probably be a few years
before I find out what impact they have on my
champagnes.
The trend for single vineyard champagnes,
which ignores the classification into ordinary, premier and grand cru villages, could be an enormous
advantage for small growers. Although the big
brands also produce them, these single vineyard
champagnes can make the reputation of a small
grower by building a personality. It is not a bad
thing that Krugs Clos dAmbonnay is so expensive. Small growers could learn from this if they
started to concentrate on single vineyard champagnes. But for this, one needs a well-researched
viticultural and winemaking approach, and the
problem is that Champagne does not yet take its
winemaking seriously enough. I have been making terroir champagnes for the last 10 years, so
single vineyard wines are not new to me.
Not all of the vineyards in the grand cru village where I am based, Avize, are good enough
to have grand cru status. As a result, I do not want
to blend wines from good-quality vineyards with
lesser-quality ones. I want my champagnes to
express the vineyard they come from. My estate
owns 10 hectares divided into 70 parcels, some
of which are of good and others of lesser quality.
I try to blend parcels that have the same geological identity.
I have my doubts about the expansion of the
AOC. When expansions took place in the past,
the surface just became bigger and the circle
pushed outwards. There was no fuss about it.
Now, they also seem to want to divide the internal body of the appellation. I dont know if this
move is based on a quality assessment or if it is
a quest for more comfort within the AOC.
Fundamentally, I am opposed to expansion and in
favour of lower yields with higher retail prices, and
I believe a lot of small growers share my opinion.
Existing rcoltant-manipulant growers wouldnt
have much to gain from an expansion of the area
since the surface of their domaines is fixed. But
if the expansion were to include a quality revision
of all vineyards, plot by plot, then this would confirm my belief in terroir. So the knife cuts at both
ends. Before the economic crisis the average price
of a bottle of champagne leaving the domaine was
14. Now, both growers and houses are selling at
about 10, which is far too low in my opinion.

Twenty years ago, the average harvest started at

the end of September and ended in early October.
The problem has traditionally been that the
grapes arent ripe enough and the must has to be
chaptalised (sugar is added). If the grapes werent
ripe at harvest, the year was practically lost viticulturally speaking because the bad weather starts
from October onwards.
Nowadays, the harvest starts in the first half of
September because the growing period has almost
consistently grown warmer. Growers can opt to
leave the grapes longer on the vines, which results
in higher alcohol levels and better-structured
grapes in general. Chaptalisation is rarely required
nowadays, although most winemakers still practise it. Climate change could be Champagnes
trump card because it leads to better structured,
more refined base wines.
The problem for too many growers in Champagne today is the compaction of the soil in their
vineyards due to a chronic lack of oxygen. Too
many pesticides have been used over the years,
with the result that the topsoil is dead and all
microbiological life has been destroyed. Because
of this compaction, the roots do not grow deep
enough and dont penetrate the porous chalk layer
underneath, with the result that in dry periods
during the growing season, the vines suffer increasingly from hydric stress. If they want to counteract these effects of climate change, growers need to
work their vineyards much more than in the past.
I am not a great fan of the dogmas of organic or
biodynamic winegrowing, but I do believe that
if a vineyard is to produce its best grapes the soil
must be properly worked.
Ripeness levels are still too low so far in Champagne. I am not opposed to the current trend for
producing more Extra Brut and Brut Nature, but
since one cannot rely fully on liqueur dexpdition
to sweeten up the champagne, winemakers must
ensure that they have perfectly ripe grapes to give
body to Extra Brut and Brut Nature champagnes.
The success of these low or non-dosaged champagnes is due to the fact that consumers want
healthier and more natural food and drinks, but
in the case of unripe grapes, champagnes need
dosage to be harmonious. Brut Nature and even
Extra Brut should always be perfectly faultless
champagnes. To give an example, in 2003 the Extra
Brut Minral only got 1g/L of dosage instead of
the average 4g/L. That was simply because the
base wines were very ripe and well-structured.
Perhaps because I like to challenge preconceptions, I have also planted some old grape varieties

Climate change could be Champagnes trump card because

it leads to better structured, more refined base wines
47

TONG N 4

Champagne should remain the worlds top sparkling wine.

In my quest for the best, I have started an
experiment with the 2003 vintage that aims to
make champagne using only grapes and nothing
else. In fact, as a result of adding sugar to the
liqueur de tirage (the solution of wine, sugar and
yeasts that kickstarts the secondary fermentation)
before bottling and to the liqueur dexpdition
(a mixture of pure cane sugar and old wines to give
the champagne its dosage) after disgorgement, 3
to 6% of the volume of the resulting champagne
does not consist of grape-based material.
My aim is to make champagne that is as natural as possible with base wine from perfectly ripe
grapes, fermented twice with natural yeasts and
with the addition of natural grape sugar for the
prise de mousse. Natural wine and natural yeasts
are easy to find if one works the vineyards rigorously. Natural grape sugar, on the other hand, is
a problem. For this, I decided to use concentrated
rectified grape must for the liqueur de tirage. The
wines will be Brut Nature, without the addition
of liqueur dexpdition. I buy this Sssreserve, as the
Germans call it, in the south of France and in
2008 the inter-professional champagne board, the
CIVC, gave me the legal authority to use it. Why
was it illegal before? Because, according to CIVC
rules, wines cannot be bottled until January 1st
after the harvest. Since my grape must is from the
current harvest and since I bottled it with my oneyear-old base wines in October that was three
months too early.
When bottling the base wines, I add the grape
must together with fresh yeast from young, fermenting wines of the current harvest, in other
words the base wines are aged for a whole year
before they are transformed into champagne. I also
add a small touch of bentonite to prevent the yeast
from sticking to the glass, which would make
remuage (the gradual turning and tipping of the
bottles) and poignettage (the bottles standing on
their necks, allowing the yeast to move down
towards the neck) impossible. Bentonite is always
used in liqueur de tirage. These champagnes are
still ageing on the lees but so far I have not had any
problem with the prise de mousse. I am the only person to be doing this in Champagne, as far as I know.
To taste these experimental wines is a completely new experience. They are bone-dry, inevitably,
with a very floral and fruity character both from the
must and the yeasts autolysis. Since they wont have
any dosage, they will remain the same after disgorgement, making them very dry but volatile,
almost like a dry Riesling. It will be interesting to
see how they develop in the future.

48