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
Grands Crus from Domaine Mugneret-Gibourg, at Daniel
About last night… An overview of the Mugneret-Gibourg lineup from a memorable Pressoir.wine dinner at Restaurant Daniel
By Raj Vaidya and Edouard Bourgeois
December 8, 2020
Last night we were all thrilled to get the opportunity to taste five vintages side by side from 2 prestigious Grands Crus, Ruchottes-Chambertin and Echezeaux, all from the famed Domaine Mugneret-Gibourg. (By the way, I want to remind you that the recording of the interview with Lucie Teillaud Mugneret from Domaine Mugneret Gibourg is available for you Club Members with your login access on our website).
Starting with the difficult 2011 vintage, the two wines expressed the signature of that challenging harvest, showing notes of root vegetables, dirt and a hint of a vegetal character. In my opinion, the Echezeaux outperformed the Ruchottes-Chambertin. I really found the fruit of the former to be very pretty and airy, while the latter appeared sturdier and more serious. A nice pairing with the sunchoke velouté, and a nice way to ease into a terrific series of wine pairings with the elegant menu designed by Daniel Boulud.
What followed was probably my favorite flight. Paired with an incredibly tender wood fired octopus, the 2014’s shined as bright as you could have hoped! While 2015 may steal the show with higher scores and overall praise for its muscular energy, I often prefer the more delicate character of the pinot noirs from 2014. That year, Mother Nature did throw a few curve balls though, starting with hailstorms, mostly concentrated on the Cote de Beaune, and later on, the apparition of a damaging fruit fly, the Drosophila Suzukii, apparently only interested in red grapes, thus not affecting Chardonnay grapes… However, the quality of fruit was impressive and so pure.
As interesting as it gets, we also opened a Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Cru 2008 from the domaine. The wine was juicy and perfectly balanced. Lighter on its feet than the grands crus from the same vintage for sure, but with enough personality and depth.
~ Edouard
After our little speed bump of the 08 Gevrey 1er Cru (which was actually the young vines of Ruchottes, bottled thus labeled for a period in the mid aughts), we dove into one of my favorite vintages for the Domaine, the bright and ethereal 2008’s. The Ruchottes held a clear edge of quality between the two wines, more precise without a touch of austerity, while the Echezeaux exhibited a bit more of a meaty edge while still being a bit blockish. After an hour or so the Ech’ caught up in quality, but by then we’d moved onto my favorite vintage of the current century thus far…
We paired the 2010’s with a spectacular dish of Pintade, or guinea hen, roasted and served with mushrooms, truffles and spelt. The wines exhibited the signature density and finesse of the vintage, and were incredibly long on the palate, perfectly balanced between pleasurable dark red fruit and the beginnings of earthy, tertiary flavors and aromas which melded perfectly with the truffles.
We finished with a selection of perfectly ripe cheeses and a pair of 99’s. The prodigious 1999 vintage produced wines with incredible depth and complexity. These bottles did not disappoint, though they were not as fleshy and precise as the 2010’s they followed. More of an earthy style, even a tad bit more rustic than the polish of the more contemporary bottles preceding. But the length was tremendous!
A glorious night of delicious Burgundy, what’s better than that?
~Raj