1996 in champagne. what happened?

by Edouard Bourgeois
November 21, 2025

Ratings for 1996 often use words like "exceptional" and "grandiose," with some comparisons to 1928. What made 1996 objectively unique was the high average potential alcohol (10.3%) combined with high total acidity (10g/litre)—figures rarely seen together. As Charles Philipponnat noted, this is a significant jump from the 9.3% potential alcohol common forty years prior.

Acidity and potential alcohol work together for balance, but typically, when one is high, the other is low. In 1996, both figures were high. Bruno Paillard called it a 'naughty boy' vintage due to its unpredictable nature and the anxiety it caused producers while waiting for acidity levels to drop. However, the result for those with patience is "fantastic."

While acidity is key for aging, the true test is time. Over two decades later, the remaining 1996 bottles reveal which producers succeeded. The best examples are still complex and alluring, where the high acidity is balanced by a wide range of aromas, from brioche to stone fruit. Unfortunately, some other bottlings show only residual acidity, resulting in unbalanced and tart wines.

I recall opening a glorious bottle of 1996 Cristal for my son's birth seven years ago; the wine was still vibrant and charged.

Another fabulous example was made by Krug. As Olivier Krug said, "It’s a year where a good house or a good winemaker will make a good wine... It’s a tricky vintage." Other industry professionals have shared similar sentiments, noting that some vintners either opted out of making a vintage bottling or failed to achieve balance, resulting in wines that are already clumsy or tired.

The 1996 vintage often draws comparisons to its predecessor, 1995. These were the last two great Champagne vintages following the 1988, 1989, and 1990 trio. The 1996s are powerful wines; the best combine weight from ripeness with tension from acidity, providing the interest, complexity, and structure needed for long-term aging.

Interestingly, more houses released 1995 as a vintage Champagne than 1996, with a ratio of roughly 60% (1995) to 40% (1996).

Given its unpredictability, the safest bet for 1996 Champagne remains to go with producers you trust.

While looking for pictures of 1996 Champagne on my IPhone, I also found several other wines from various regions where the 1996 vintage truly shone, as seen in images below;jbgories

Edouard Bourgeois 2/3/22 Edouard Bourgeois 2/3/22

Henri Bonneau Dinner at la Tablée

Bonneau dinner

by Edouard

2/1/22

On Thursday, La Tablée continued with a dinner honoring the wines of the late Henri Bonneau. John Junguenet joined our team to attend the event and shared some anecdotes about his upbringing around his father Alain Junguenet, the wine importer of famous Rhone producers. John started the event by saying how important it is to understand the perception wine consumers get on Rhone valley wines. Châteauneuf du Pape produces an average of 15 million bottles of wine each year, and there is no classification among these wines. So, it is solely the reputation of each domaine that makes the difference. Henri Bonneau certainly achieved a unique status. Anyone who has had the chance to taste a bottle from Bonneau always remember his or her first time. If some wines can be described as “polished”, Bonneau’s Châteauneufs are quite the opposite, without, however lacking elegance. I have never been to the domaine but from what I have heard, it is one of the most compelling visits. It is sometimes compared to a time travelling experience, with John telling the story of the abundant mold that would change coloration according to the time of year. John essentially grew up in Henri’s cellar, a certain magical underground cavern Daniel Johnnes remembered for its steps going downstairs - slippery because of the high humidity. Some of the barrels were older than Henri himself while he was still making wine in his 70’s… The facetious winemaker was also known for his interactions with the few journalists who managed to pass the gate. When asked about technical details on his wine production, he would answer: “I have no technical information, and I’m not sorry”. While some vignerons follow a detailed winemaking procedure that includes a certain percentage of new oak, a precise length for aging or an exact proportion of whole cluster each year, Henri followed no recipe, relying solely on his senses. Daniel recalled tasting with him: after Henri took a sip of wine taken from the barrel, he declared: “Well, that was not so good a few moths ago, but it’s getting better…”. He would not release his wines if he thought they were not ready, so it would not be rare to see a younger vintage before an older one hit the market, sometimes waiting 6 years before releasing a cuvée.

Henri passed away in 2016. We were lucky to source excellent bottles directly from his cellar with the help of John Junguenet for the dinner. I don’t have a detailed list of my tasting notes, but I am keeping a very fond memory of the 1999 Cuvée des Celestins. The wine was very elegant and soulful, with rounded tannins, aromas of ripe prunes, even dark chocolate. The finish was very long and silky.