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
What's Pressoir cooking? Lobstah!
July 21, 2020
by Max Goldberg Liu
July 21, 2020
by Max Goldberg Liu
I am a firm believer in not getting too caught up in wine pairings but I often like “simple” dishes that act as more of a blank canvas for a wine to shine. For me, there is nothing better than a simple roast chicken alongside a red Burgundy.
Vacation on Cape Cod last week gave me the opportunity to enjoy another favorite - lobster!
These were 1 1/4 lb specimens that we simply steamed for around 16 minutes. I’d much rather have two of these than a 2.5 pounder (I find the meat gets a little tough past two pounds). Tastier and less expensive - it’s a win-win!
The first wine we opened at the table was a Pierre-Yves Colin-Morey Bourgogne Hautes Côtes de Beaune Blanc “Au Bout du Monde” 2018. Climate change has rendered the Hautes Côtes in Burgundy much better at producing ripe grapes but was still a little lean for my taste with the lobster.
We usually think of Blanc de Blancs Champagne when pairing with shellfish. We had drank our last bottle of Pierre Péters Cuvée de Réserve before dinner so I decided to open a Pierre Gerbais Cuvée de Réserve (the same cuvée that is now called Grains de Celle). The 25% Pinot Blanc in the blend added a wonderful touch of fleshy white stone fruit that paired beautifully with the lobster.
While these lobsters were simply steamed, I think my other favorite preparation would have also paired really well with the Champagne - my father’s Cantonese-style stir-fried lobster with ginger and scallion. Next time!
