Is champagne worth the extra money?
Are our best bubblies as good as the Frenchies?
Can you compare the two at all?
Which is our best sparkling wine?
To the question ‘is champagne really better than our best bubblies?’ we usually get a waffly answer about apples and oranges, in other words: you can’t compare the two styles. This is despite the fact that our winemakers have been busting a gut for decades to produce a bubbly that challenged the French icons.
The original problem was that we didn’t have the grape varieties or the cool climate of the champagne region. Since we planted Chardonnay and Pinot Noir in the Yarra Valley, Macedon and Tasmania, those limitations have gone away. That was over a couple of decades ago.
Aussie Prestige vs bulk Champagne
As our ambitious producers developed better cool climate styles, they took a leaf out of the champagne marketing guide and introduced special ‘cuvees’ – fancy bottles from the House of Arras, Jansz and Chandon to Clover Hill, Hanging Rock and Brown Brothers. The prices went up and soon reached the same $50 level as the basic wines of the champagne houses, which are made in vast quantities and owe more to smart marketing than smart winemaking.
It’s rare to find a review that pitches Aussie bubblies against champagne, but I found a piece James Halliday wrote for the Weekend Australian magazine a couple of years ago (this article is for paid subscribers of the Australian but you can find an open version with Google – see below). JH reviewed a bunch of local and French wines, and the $40 – $60 locals acquit themselves remarkably well with scores ranging from 94 -96 points. The champagnes scoring points in that range were $100 or more.
Game over but hold it – there’s a late scratching
This was music to my ears until I saw this caveat form the G.O.M. of Aussie wine: ‘… are the points for the Champagnes comparable with those of Australian sparkling wines? The answer is no, they are not. Nor would points for great red Burgundies compare with those for Australian and New Zealand pinot noirs; First Growth Bordeauxs with Margaret River cabernet merlots.’
I always thought we had a single 100 point scale for wine reviews, but James seems to suggest that we have a range of 100 point scales for different wine styles from different countries. News to me, but James writes: ‘Points are as subjective as the words in the tasting notes, but are a separate way of expressing the taster’s opinion, to be assimilated along with the description of the wine in the context of the particular tasting. All this may frustrate some consumers, but the ultimate reality is that Australia can never make Champagne, a Burgundy or a Bordeaux, so direct points comparison is fraught with contradictions and qualifications.’
Frustrated? No, confused
Actually, comparative tastings are pretty common: Aussie Cabernets vs Bordeaux, Burgundies vs Pinot Noir, and only one scoring system is used for the wines. We review different wine styles and different wines from different countries all the time, and of course we always use the same system for reviewing and scoring. It’s based on certain criteria as the panel below from Nick’s Vintage Direct shows for sparkling wines. Why would we not apply those criteria to all sparkling wines we review? Aren’t we always looking for a strong mousse and a fine, lasting bead? A hint of fresh bread or yeast, complex yet subtle flavours and good length … ?
Of course we want good Champagnes and good Bordeaux and Burgundies to be distinguishable from our bubblies and Margaret River Cabernets and Central Otago Pinot Noirs, but reviews and scores should focus on the quality of a wine, and how close it comes to meeting benchmark criteria for the style or variety. Regardless of it origin. Do we apply different criteria to an Argentinian Malbec than to a Wendouree Malbec? No. Can we compare Aussie Chardonnays with white Burgundies? Of course we can, and we do. Sure they have their unique characters, but that’s nothing to do with the overall score.
$20 Blue Pyrenees trounces fancy labels at the Sparkling Wine Oscars
Fast forward to 2014, and the inaugural Champagne & Sparkling Wine World Championships (CSWWC) were held in the UK just a few of months ago. The competing wines came from Champagne, England, South Africa, Australia, USA, Cava, Chile, Italy and New Zealand. They were judged both against their compatriots and against each other. Of course champagnes won the most gongs here, but the champs were fancy wines like Louis Roederer Cristal which cost $300 a bottle.
The good news is that Blue Pyrenees Midnight Cuvée Blanc de Blancs 2010 beat 9 other Aussie beauties, and this is a $23 wine from the Pyrenees in Victoria (at jackswine – when you join the mailing list, you get a $20 discount voucher which we applied to the 6-pack ordered to reduce the price to $118 or $20 a bottle). The Australian gold medalists included the fancied House of Arras Grand Vintage 2004, the House of Arras E.J. Carr Late Disgorged 2003, the Clover Hill Cuvée Prestige Blanc de Blancs 2001 and the Coldstream Hills Sparkling Pinot Noir Chardonnay 2010.
These wines sell for $50 to $100, so the winning Blue Pyrenees nicely supports our premise that you don’t have to spend big money on drinking great wine, even when it comes to bubbles.
Additional Resources
Halliday’s article is gated on the Australian’s website but, when you google Australian sparkling and champagne, weekend Australian magazine, you’ll see the article without restrictions.
Blue Pyrenees crowned champion sparkling of Australia – Huon Hooke at SMH Good Food
A toast to Australia’s Champagne and sparkling wine drinkers! The summary of a market survey by Roy Morgan