1990 Perrier Jouet Fluer

[The Wise Old owl]

I'm snooping around in a liquor store nearby that just changed owners, and they've apparently bought out a bunch of stock that's been tucked away in the back. I picked up a 3 liter of 1990 PJ Fluer for $325. (It should be a good Christmas or New Years bottle for a couple of close friends to help celebrate) They also had maybe 8 bottles of 1990 Dom Perignon. I've only had one 1990 Dom, a few years back, but I remember the wife loved it. Anyone have thier tasting notes on these two bottles handy? What am I in for this holiday?

[El Presidente]

Ken should be able to answer later today. He just popped in but is heading out to a lunch...again ;-)

[The Wise Old owl]

Ahhh... the liquid lunch...

[Colt45]

Sorry I can't be of any help - the only thing I'd be willing to buy three liters of for my friends would be ripple.

But seriously, I'm always a bit concerned about where and how wines like these have been stored.

I hope you'll post some notes after drinking.

[Cam]

ok the perrier.. wow it's an amazing champagne and well aged, 1990 was a good year all around for french origine wines, this paticular bottle scores a hearty 10 out of 10 on the vintage chart, this paticular wine is quite rare and not many come up for sale in retail stores, not here anyway.. alot of flowerly aromas, orange peels and citrus fruits, roses and daffodils..

never had a 90 dom sorry mate

Cam -

[Cam]

» Sorry I can't be of any help - the only thing I'd be willing to buy three

» liters of for my friends would be ripple.

» But seriously, I'm always a bit concerned about where and how wines like

» these have been stored.

» I hope you'll post some notes after drinking.

should have quoted colt, I agree, the 'back -room' especially a large bottle.. make sure you keep it suitably stored, you don't have to lie it down, but temperature fluctuations affect champagne especially..

Cam -

[Ken Gargett]

» I'm snooping around in a liquor store nearby that just changed owners, and

» they've apparently bought out a bunch of stock that's been tucked away in

» the back. I picked up a 3 liter of 1990 PJ Fluer for $325. (It should be a

» good Christmas or New Years bottle for a couple of close friends to help

» celebrate) They also had maybe 8 bottles of 1990 Dom Perignon. I've only

» had one 1990 Dom, a few years back, but I remember the wife loved it.

» Anyone have thier tasting notes on these two bottles handy? What am I in

» for this holiday?

typical of rob. i was not at lunch. not only have missed first day of the test (a catastrophe) but snatched a quick bite at 2.30pm.

first, may i suggest that we all save every query and order and any business whatsoever we have with czars till monday. both lisa and minismithy are off so rob will have to do some work. i say the deluge!!

next, 90 dom is brilliant. if these wines have been well stored (if not, forget it), that should be a cracker. good bottles are brilliant now and will drink well for years. but check the provenance.

the PJ (in australia, we call it belle epoque, not fleur) should also be brilliant but my concern is that a bottle that size (no matter what they might say) has almost certainly been filled by transfer rather than the usual methode champenoise. most houses use transfer for anything above magnums but they rarely admit it. it is the problem for larger formats. that means it will not quite be the same and and i'd be drinking it much sooner than some.it may be fine or you may find it has nothing like the life you expect. if it was the trad method, would go many years if has been well cellared.

[Cam]

» » I'm snooping around in a liquor store nearby that just changed owners,

» and

» » they've apparently bought out a bunch of stock that's been tucked away

» in

» » the back. I picked up a 3 liter of 1990 PJ Fluer for $325. (It should be

» a

» » good Christmas or New Years bottle for a couple of close friends to

» help

» » celebrate) They also had maybe 8 bottles of 1990 Dom Perignon. I've

» only

» » had one 1990 Dom, a few years back, but I remember the wife loved it.

» » Anyone have thier tasting notes on these two bottles handy? What am I

» in

» » for this holiday?

»

»

» typical of rob. i was not at lunch. not only have missed first day of the

» test (a catastrophe) but snatched a quick bite at 2.30pm.

» first, may i suggest that we all save every query and order and any

» business whatsoever we have with czars till monday. both lisa and

» minismithy are off so rob will have to do some work. i say the deluge!!

» next, 90 dom is brilliant. if these wines have been well stored (if not,

» forget it), that should be a cracker. good bottles are brilliant now and

» will drink well for years. but check the provenance.

» the PJ (in australia, we call it belle epoque, not fleur) should also be

» brilliant but my concern is that a bottle that size (no matter what they

» might say) has almost certainly been filled by transfer rather than the

» usual methode champenoise. most houses use transfer for anything above

» magnums but they rarely admit it. it is the problem for larger formats.

» that means it will not quite be the same and and i'd be drinking it much

» sooner than some.it may be fine or you may find it has nothing like the

» life you expect. if it was the trad method, would go many years if has

» been well cellared.

thanks for that ken, I didn't know that the houses used this technique to fill their vintage magnums and I think dom in general is amazing

[The Wise Old owl]

Thank you gentlemen for your replies, I didn't know about the different filling methods for the larger formats. I almost passed the PJ, thinking it was the standard fare (Brut), my wife noticed the Anemoles and I had to go back... All the bottles I bought were clear with no "smoke" or sediment visible, showing no signs of evaporation or leakage. The proof will be in the drinking. I think I'll try the Dom this weekend, if it's good I'll go back and get what remains of the '90. The 3L will be for the holidays. Thanks again for the expert insight, I'll report on the Dom later!

[havanaclub7]

» Thank you gentlemen for your replies, I didn't know about the different

» filling methods for the larger formats. I almost passed the PJ, thinking

» it was the standard fare (Brut), my wife noticed the Anemoles and I had to

» go back... All the bottles I bought were clear with no "smoke" or sediment

» visible, showing no signs of evaporation or leakage. The proof will be in

» the drinking. I think I'll try the Dom this weekend, if it's good I'll go

» back and get what remains of the '90. The 3L will be for the holidays.

» Thanks again for the expert insight, I'll report on the Dom later!

I've had both champers and they are both excellent although I would lean my preference for the 1990 Dom. You're so lucky to have tracked down the older vintages. I would give anything to have another bottle of 90 DP.

[PartagasIV]

Is 'smoke' in the bottle an issue as far as drinkability? Has it been ruined? I just found a '73 and an '88 DP in the basement. '77 has a bit of that smoke, '88 has sediment. How will that affect taste?

[The Wise Old owl]

» Is 'smoke' in the bottle an issue as far as drinkability? Has it been

» ruined? I just found a '73 and an '88 DP in the basement. '77 has a bit of

» that smoke, '88 has sediment. How will that affect taste?

First, there are folks here much more knowledgeable than me about this, but I think that just because you can see the smoke or sediment certainly doesn't mean it's ruined. If I understand correctly, the sediment is dead yeast cells, so when it's present a bottle may have done all of the "good" ageing it's going to do. At this point it is possible that things go downhill, and they may have already. Open them and find out! One of the best champagnes I can remember was a '73 Taittinger Comtes de Champagne, the sediment was present, but the champagne was awesome, tasting like a rotting jungle floor smells...:-D

[Ken Gargett]

» » Is 'smoke' in the bottle an issue as far as drinkability? Has it been

» » ruined? I just found a '73 and an '88 DP in the basement. '77 has a bit

» of

» » that smoke, '88 has sediment. How will that affect taste?

»

» First, there are folks here much more knowledgeable than me about this,

» but I think that just because you can see the smoke or sediment certainly

» doesn't mean it's ruined. If I understand correctly, the sediment is dead

» yeast cells, so when it's present a bottle may have done all of the "good"

» ageing it's going to do. At this point it is possible that things go

» downhill, and they may have already. Open them and find out! One of the

» best champagnes I can remember was a '73 Taittinger Comtes de Champagne,

» the sediment was present, but the champagne was awesome, tasting like a

» rotting jungle floor smells...:-D

cam, not just vintage. they would use this in many cases (not all houses but i believe it is most as it is simply too difficult to do) with non vintage wines.

re the smoke and sediment, i'd be concerned. the techniques should remove all dead yeast cells. if not, it has not been done properly. could be 'wine diamonds' - tartaric acid, which has crystallised. that will not hurt. you used to see it a long in german wines. harmless.

smoky (assume we are talking appearance like cloudy or hazy, rather than taste or smell), sounds like a dodgy ferment issue and

i'd be very concerned.

[Cam]

» Is 'smoke' in the bottle an issue as far as drinkability? Has it been

» ruined? I just found a '73 and an '88 DP in the basement. '77 has a bit of

» that smoke, '88 has sediment. How will that affect taste?

mm smoke not good.. sediment okay.. listen to ken