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 Drinking? Some Rousseau bottles which taught me to reconsider decanting...
2/21/2023
Raj Vaidya
I recently had occasion to taste a couple of bottles for a friend and client who was entertaining at home. She loves Domaine Armand Rousseau so I took the opportunity to pick out a couple of bottles I wanted to check in on to see how they were developing. The perks of having friends with such a deep cellar!
1980 was a peculiar vintage for red Burgundy, sometimes having produced superlative wines though many of which are now sadly on their way downhill, somewhat over-mature. Rousseau’s Clos de la Roche was vastly replanted after the frosts of 1981, so I figured the vines were pretty old at the time of the ‘80 harvest, and decided to give it a go.
The bottle showed some moldy aromas at first, I even wondered if it was simply corked, but upon tasting I realized it just needed air. With decanting it opened up quite beautifully, with aromas of black truffle dominating the nose and woody, earthy notes on the palate. It was a delightful wine, light in body and not powerful but very compelling and long on the palate. I had been worried about decanting such a delicate, old wine, and so had decanted just before serving it, meaning that when the dinner guests tasted it at first, that moldy aroma lingered and distracted from the prettiness of the wine. As it turned out the wine was excellent, even 4 hours later in the decanter at the end of the meal. It would have been best handled with an earlier decant.
Just before opening the ‘80 CDLR I double decanted the 1996 Clos Saint Jacques. I know ‘96s need air to mellow the intense acidity of the vintage, indeed it is a vintage Daniel and I disagree on often, I am more of a fan of this bright style of wine while he finds them often to be too acidic. I served the wine blind after the 1980 and just told the rest of the party it was Rousseau, asking them to guess the vintage and appellation. Everyone believed it to be Grand Cru, unsurprisingly, as the Clos Saint Jacques from this domaine is Premier Cru only in name, not in stature. This cuvée often outperforms the rest of the domaine’s holdings, save for Chambertin and Clos de Beze. But nobody guessed the vintage, with several experienced tasters placing it in the early 2000s, vintages generally thought of as more rich and powerful. The high acidity stayed with the wine but the double decanting aggressively introduced a good bit of air to the liquid and brought out superb fruit and spice aromas which made this the wine of the night. I have been wary of double decanting in the past when it comes to maturing Burgundy, the worry being that too much air could make the fruit dissipate and leave only that acidic backbone with nothing to balance it. But my intuition on this bottle turned out to be correct, and the wine sang.
All around a lovely evening thanks to these two very special bottles!