DOM PéRIGNON OeNOTHèqUe AND ROSé 1959–1996

(symposium)
Dom Pérignon
oenothèque and rosé
1959–1996
Gil Lempert-Schwarz reports on two typically impressive Bipin Desai
lunches in Las Vegas , featuring every major release of the past 50 years of
the original prestige cuvée in its late-disgorged and Rosé versions
7 8
T H E
W O R L D
O F
F I N E
W I N E
I S S U E
1 8
2 0 0 7
Saturday lunch
Spago’s private dining room is quite sparsely decorated, with
large mirrors and an oversize piece of contemporary art on
one wall, as well as a mysterious Chinese cloisonné vase,
making it even easier to focus all one’s attention on the “task”
at hand. One might almost say that the simplicity of it all
makes it the perfect setting for showing off multiple vintages
of Dom Pérignon.
As with all of Bipin’s serious tastings, guests are welcomed
with a palate-cleansing, “simpler” Champagne that is meant
to be decidedly young, in order to enhance the experience of
“the real stuff.” In this case, it was Dom Pérignon 1999, which
had only shortly before been released in the United States.
Obviously this is not a simple drink at all, but a rather complex
one, still showing signs of being a baby, with its white fruitladen corn husk character on the nose and very focused palate.
The acidity is still in the ascendant, but there is enough of a
hint of things to come in the utterly pleasing, toasted, mineral
finish. Indeed, 1999 may turn out to be a great vintage for
Dom, certainly greater than 1998, and perhaps in the same
realm as vintages such as 1979 and 1982.
Once seated, a quick glance at the menu revealed that this
would indeed be a prodigious day of eating and drinking.
First-up was an Open Ravioli with Maine Lobster, which was
a subtle and elegant dish to pair with the blockbuster trio of
Oenothèque 1976, 1973, and 1969. With food, I prefer to taste
from youngest to oldest, thereby giving the varying levels of
acidity a chance to interact with my palate, but also with the
dish. Without food, I prefer tasting oldest to youngest (and
reds before whites), and with these great Champagnes I made
sure to taste them before, as well as with, the food. My glass of
1976 was corked, so I quickly ran over and grabbed Richard
Geoffroy’s while he wasn’t looking. This gorgeous, creamytextured wine has all the hallmarks of a great vintage, with
excellent balance and play between fruit and acidity, all
somehow wrapped in a crushed almond and pear essence
mélange, with a superbly focused, long, toasty, and venerably
Photography: The Art Archive / Neil Setchfield
The French celebrate Bastille Day to commemorate the 1790
Fête de la Fédération, held on the first anniversary of the
storming of the Bastille on July 14, 1789. This event became a
symbol of the modern French nation, and Bipin Desai wanted
to use this French National Holiday to celebrate one of its
cultural icons.
Moët & Chandon’s prestige cuvée Dom Pérignon is named
after the famous cellarmaster at the Abbey of Hautvillers
(d.1715), who is still credited with some of the crucial early
developments of the Champagne style. Moët & Chandon
launched Dom Pérignon, the first prestige cuvée, in honor of
the legendary monk, with the 1921 vintage, and has since added
a Rosé and a late-disgorged Oenothèque version, which is only
released several years after a great vintage as a sort of library
selection. Dom Pérignon’s current chef de cave, Richard
Geoffroy, made his way across an ocean and a continent, rare
bottles and magnums in tow, to experience with a select group
of people, assembled by Bipin Desai, exactly what this mythical
drink is all about. While fireworks are the norm on Bastille
Day in France, a different kind of firework popped indoors at
celebrated Beverly Hills restaurant Spago during two
spectacular lunches on this mid-July weekend.
Spago in Beverly Hills, California, under the leadership of
celebrity chef to the stars Wolfgang Puck, has just been
awarded two Michelin stars in the new edition of the bible to
great dining, and there’s no denying that Dom Pérignon is a
great Champagne made to be paired with interesting dishes.
Several of the participants at these lunches were veterans of
Bipin’s marathon vertical tastings, which have included
virtually every top wine from Bordeaux, Burgundy, Alsace, and
Champagne, often in 50 or 60 vintages. Bipin’s events are the
stuff of legend, and this one was no different. It included every
major vintage of Dom Pérignon Oenothèque back to the first
release of the 1959, as well as every released vintage of Dom
Pérignon Rosé back to 1966 (missing only the first experimental
release of the 1959 and the first commercial release of the
1962). Many of the wines were served from magnums.
d o m
I S S U E
1 8
2 0 0 7
T H E
W O R L D
O F
p é r i g n o n
F I N E
W I N E
7 9
(symposium)
aged finish. The 1973 has been a huge hit with me every time I
have tried it (eight times over the past two years). It is the
nuttiest of all Oenothèque vintages, evoking Nutella spread
on freshly toasted whole wheat bread, with underlying white
flowers, crushed granite, ripe white currants, and a touch of
lemon curd. It is so focused on the palate, and slices into the
tongue with such laser-like precision, but also has masses of
structure. It lingers for a full minute, with a finish that’s
reminiscent of freshly shelled walnuts right off the tree.
Absolutely stunningly great Dom.
I launched into a discussion with Geoffroy and John
Kapon of Acker, Merrall and Condit about the different release
stages for Oenothèque—as many as four in relation to the
original Dom Pérignon. John was adamant that he prefers a
well-aged original release of Dom Pérignon to the latedisgorged Oenothèque version, which has had longer on lees.
Geoffroy could not quite agree with that notion, while I, as
the diplomatic moderator, respectfully agreed to disagree
with both parties, as I have had absolutely marvelous examples
of both styles. One vintage that merits further discussion is
the delicious 1990 (the first for which Geoffroy was
responsible), where we can have reasonable access to both
the earlier and later disgorged wines, tasting them side-byside as we did on this occasion. It appears to me that in this
case the Oenothèque takes on a softer touch, and that in
general there is this very cottony feel to these later released
8 0
T H E
W O R L D
O F
F I N E
W I N E
I S S U E
1 8
2 0 0 7
wines, perhaps due to the extended time on lees. The original
releases, including the 1990, appear more fresh and “raw” in a
sense, giving maximum bang for the buck, even years later.
The jury, however, is still out.
The last wine of this first flight was the “difficult” 1969.
Geoffroy described it as a tough vintage, with mildew and rot
in the vineyard, but one that finally pulled through to produce
good wine—certainly good enough to be declared as Dom
Pérignon and then to be enrolled into the Oenothèque
program. Rounded notes of bread dough and membrillo
(Spanish quince paste) abounded on the nose, and it had
noticeably more age on it than the ’73, but it’s not apples to
apples here, despite the palate of apple compote, as there are
also touches of citrus and flinty minerality that add a certain
dimension. A very good Dom, all things in perspective, with a
lengthy, zesty finish that really was quite attractive.
Pan-Roasted French Dover Sole with Maryland Crab was
next, with a flight of interesting vintages: Oenotheque 1962,
1975, and 1985. One might have surmised that Bipin worked
hard with Geoffroy on the pairings and how to combine these
divine wines with the food. These certainly made perfect
sense, and whereas the first flight of 69, 73, and 76 was all
about power, this flight was more about elegance. The 1985 is
an old favorite of mine, and here I must say that the original
release would now offer much truer picture of this top
vintage. This Oenothèque in magnum seemed quite evolved
for its age, and we are perhaps beginning to see a wine that is
already descending from its plateau. Quite yeasty on the nose,
with hints of Oloroso, crushed rocks, and toasted sourdough
bread, going into a palate that appears quite advanced, with
less fizziness, aged Braeburn apples, and crushed macadamia
nuts, but still enough voluptuousness to be counted when
standing up. The 1975 was the first of two great surprises in
this flight and showed oodles of character: loads of crushed
white fruits, mixed nuts, a soft minerality on the nose, and a
palate that was just delicious, again showing lively bubbles,
toasty minerals, and a tremendously firm, complex finish. I
had always had the ’76 over the ’75, but now I wasn’t so sure.
Finally, came the biggest surprise of the day, in the shape of
the little-known ’62—a powerhouse of a wine. As with the
reemergence of the great ’62 Burgundies in recent years, we
are now beginning to recognize that this was indeed a
fabulous vintage for Pinot and Chardonnay all over France.
The wine blew out of the glass in an orgy of crème brûlée,
toasted almonds, warm citrus sauce, floral notes, and distinct
minerality. It appeared much younger than the vintage would
suggest, and had an incredibly layered palate that really came
to the fore with the food. Tremendous concentration in an
elegant and complex presentation.
Time to switch gears, with the 1959 and 1964 from bottle,
and the 1966 and 1971 from magnum, paired with SlowRoasted Rack of Organic Veal with Tenerelli Figs. I had to
taste the ’59 before the food, and my goodness was that a great
idea. The golden-hued ’59 was just as sprightly as a wine 20
years its junior, with an explosion of rich white fruit, musk,
toast, crushed macadamias and honey-nut cheerios (a popular
American breakfast cereal). The palate was such a classic
d o m
pleasure, and the rich, involved, complex finish shows exactly
why this great vintage was the first chosen for the Oenothèque
program. A legendary wine, with everything one could
possibly want in aged Champagne—and then some. The ’64
was also a dream wine—leading me to think that this could be
the theme for this flight—with caramelized walnuts and pear
cobbler on the nose, then a palate that encompassed lovely,
toasty notes as well as clean, forward, musty, grapey character,
good length, and a tasty finish. The ’66 from magnum was
perhaps the most austere of the bunch, with a well-delineated
mineral and dried mango character on the nose, then a palate
with notes of fresh figs, quince marmalade (not sweetened),
yeast, and oak. Still lots of time to go here, and it could take
years to flesh out from this format. Finally, the 1971 from
magnum had more of a damp cloth characteristic on the nose,
but recovered with hints of coffee grounds, corn husk, and
toast. The acidity appears to be lower in this wine, but there
was definite charm to be found here and quite a long, lingering
finish, with hints of pistachios.
This was certainly a good first day, the lunch lasting nearly
four hours, with a stunning range of the oldest Oenothèques.
Sunday lunch
A good ten hours of sleep and a refreshing morning walk in
Beverly Hills was the perfect presentation for Sunday’s lunch,
again at Spago. And right into it we went: Chilled Corn Custard
with Santa Barbara Sea Urchin and Osetra Caviar paired with
1988 and 1993 Oenothèque from magnums. The ’88 was a
youngster in every sense of the word, showing little at this
early stage, but definite notes of yeasty dough, toast, and
mineral-laden citrus, with underlying freshly brewed coffee.
The palate was focused, laser-like, without giving up too
much, but showing hints of the richness that could help this
baby develop further in the future. The 1993 from magnum,
on the other hand, showed rich fatness and much more
Chardonnay character, with layers of crushed walnuts, citrus
rind, and chalky minerality on the nose. The palate was again
rich and forward, the finish long and multi-dimensional, and
gave great pleasure in drinking. This marked a come-back for
this vintage, as it has always been known as rather weak.
We were now on to the last of the great Oenothèques, and
what better way to finish than with a stand-alone tasting of
the reputedly awesome 1990 matched with Agnolotti with
Wild Porcini Mushrooms and Louisiana Crawfish? Now, I
have always loved the original release of Dom ’90, dranking
obscene amounts of it leading up to the Millennium, and
revisiting it several times. It has always been a defining, quite
outstanding Dom, so I was a bit disappointed by this
Oenothèque version in magnum—probably for no other
reason than I expected much more of it. Clearly very vibrant
on the nose, with Oloroso, freshly baked milk bread, and
touches of figs and oysters. The palate was of a piece, showing
acidity enough to ensure a very long life, good balance
between fruit and acidity, and excellent length. But it just
didn’t quite ring the bell for me.
That was soon forgotten, however, as the now impressive
trio of Dom Rosés was in front of me, with the 1978, 1985 in
p é r i g n o n
magnum, and 1995 knocking on the door of Slow-Roasted
Wolf Ranch Quail with Herb-Brioche Stuffing, Apricots,
Ginger and Chinese 10-Spice. The ’78 was a very vinous style
of Champagne, giving up aged Burgundian notes of Pinot:
strawberry compote, ripe red currants, red flowers, and
softness on the mineral side of things. It was a delicious drink,
but got slightly upset by the exotic spices in the food, meaning
its structure was just not there for the long-haul. A good,
slightly rustic finish made up for its shortcomings, and led
nicely into the powerful ’85 which, from magnum, is just a
monster. Slathered with blood-orange, ripe red berries, juicy
currants, and layers of slate and wet granite, it really was
singing in the glass. The palate was attacked by a multitude of
complex red fruit, raw meat, and soft buttered toast, while the
finish was easily the longest of the day. This was a superb Rosé
Champagne in all its brilliance and relative youth. Finally, we
moved on to the baby of the bunch, which was the recently
released 1995. It was quite forward on the nose, with sautéed
strawberries, red flowers, and currants. Acidity seems to play
a powerful card on the palate, and this is almost too young to
drink enjoyably right now; while showing a nice, toasty finish,
it still needs time.
At the end of it all, a fabulous trio of Dom Rosé 1966, 1990
in magnum, and 1996 came out with Grilled Snake River
Ranch Kobe New York Steak with Mustard Sauce. Right off
the bat, the 1966 was a fabulous drink to contend with. Aromas
of dried cherries, caramelized apple, jasmine tea, and a streak
of exotic spices emanated from the glass and played with the
olfactory senses. A palate that was as inviting as the nose
showed wonderfully complex red fruits in the aged Pinotbased Burgundy way, and lasted through the immensely long
and tasty finish. The ’90 Rosé from magnum has a huge
reputation and did not disappoint. It was a dramatic nose that
showed incredible aromas of richly layered mixed berries,
with toasted walnut bread, dense currant bushes, and tender
meat. A powerful palate with loads of complexity and serious
structure, ripe red cherries, boysenberry sorbet, and creamy
fig compote, with a finish to die for, lingering for a full 30+
seconds. This will be the stuff of legends in 10+ years, no
doubt. Not to be outdone, the recently released 1996 Rosé is
also a fabulous drink, like a young version of the 1990, with
many of the same characteristics, albeit slightly more subdue.
It still needs time to open up, but the soft rosewater and red
berries on the nose, and the slightly austere palate, already
hints at the great things to come from what is also considered
a very top vintage for Rosé.
This second lunch was even more multi-faceted than the
first, as both Oenothèque and Rosé were represented, and the
two together made for a truly hedonistic weekend of dream
Champagnes straight from the cellars of Dom Pérignon. It is
clear that this sort of tasting could only really be conducted
with the cooperation of the House itself, and only organized
by a tour-de-force such as Bipin Desai, as I doubt there are
even one or two collectors who could produce these vintages
of Dom in this condition. This is amazing stuff, and again
conclusively proves that great Champagne can age extremely
gracefully, whether early or late disgorged.
·
I S S U E
1 8
2 0 0 7
T H E
W O R L D
O F
F I N E
W I N E
8 1