For Champagne Bubbles, Smaller Is Better

Roland Piquepaille writes "During this holiday season you don't need a special occasion to drink champagne. You can do it everyday, providing you use moderation and common sense. But did you know that champagne taste better when it has tiny bubbles? This is the result of a very serious study published by the American Chemical Society (ACS) and more recently found by the Discovery Channel. And why do you think champagne taste better when carrying smaller bubbles? The answer is pretty obvious. More bubbles are releasing the champagne's flavor and aroma into your mouth. This summary gives you more details. In the mean time, let's all drink champagne!"

Comments

huh

[Tirel]

And here I thought taste was subjective...

Let's all drink champagne ?

[EpsCylonB]

Ermm yeah... my champagne stock is running a little low, you wouldn't mind sending me a crate would you ?

While you're enjoying the bubbles and the aroma,

[Brahmastra]

I'll take some everclear and get wasted long before you

Actually...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's only Champagne if it's bottled in Champagne, France. Otherwise, it's sparkling wine.

Re:Actually...

[I Be Hatin']

Is balogna only balogna when it is packaged in Balogna, Germany, otherwise it is just ordinary meat?

... then it's called "baloney". But under no circumstances would I classify it as "ordinary meat". Actually, I'm even a little suspect about the "meat" part.

Re:Actually...

[davidc]

There's "sparkling wine" which may be white wine which has been carbonated, or fermented in a large vessel - large bubbles, generally is not very nice. Then there's "Methode Champenoise" where the wine gets a secondary fermentation in the bottle just like Champagne does. This stuff is much better, smaller bubbles and rivals the "Champagne" Champagne, at a lower price :-)

A votre Sante!

Re:Actually...

[h00pla]

I love these funny anecdotes about Spain. They are generally untrue, that's what makes them so funny. These travel guides have to sell an adventure and I suppose that insulting the local wine classifies as danger. Anyway...

If you've lived in Spain, or travelled there extensively, you will find that the most Spaniards refer to cava as 'champn' and I have never seen anybody get 'cold and unfriendly'. In Catalua and parts of Valencia is where 'cava' is produced, by legal agreement and some of these are excellent and rival the best French champagnes. Two that stand out are 'Torre Oria' and 'Juve y Camps'. The popular Freixenet, which is sold in the States is quite good, but doesn't really match these that I mentioned.

Re:Actually...

[cmowire]

The synonym for Methode Champenoise is "Naturally fermented in this bottle". Methode Champenoise is the only way you can make "Champagne" Champagne.

The other sparkling wines are "Naturally fermented/carbonated in a bottle" or "Bottle fermented", which means that a large vessel and generally means large bubbles or suffer various other indignities to the way that God intended it to be made, as given to the good Dom. And then there's just plain old carbonated, like soda.

The thing is, to do the Methode Champenoise takes extra time, care, and money, so only people who are serious about making good stuff bother to do it -- although if the Methode Champenoise becomes a snob point, I'm sure the cheap houses will make some wretched Methode Champenoise sparklers themselves.

But I've never seen an Methode Champenoise wine that didn't, at the very least, have lots of tiny bubbles.

Re:Actually...

[phayes]

Due to a French court decision a few years back, it is now illegal (in europe & other countries that respect "l'Appelation d'Origine Controlle" or AOC that you see on most european wines) for wines grown outside of the region of champagne that use the secondary fermentation process to say so on the bottle. According to the Champagne winegrowers association the mere mention of the use of "methode champenoise" even if it is in small print on the back lable was enough to confuse the public into thinking that it came from Champagne (& was thus protected by the AOC).

This happened around the time Rambus was trying to litigate the rest of the world into submission instead of producing a better product & letting the market decide. Draw your own conclusions, but this was when I stopped buying champagne.

Another thing that turned me off champagne is that 90% of the champagne that is produced is what is called a "Vin d'Assemblage" or fabricated wine. Most wines are the product of a single year & region. This is why you can see both the origin (AOC again) & the year on the bottle. However, this is not usually the case for champagnes. Just before the wine is ready for the secondary fermentation it is tasted. To eliminate the differences in taste from year to year, wine fom different years (& often sugar) is added so that the champagne will have a predictable taste.

So, unless it is an exceptional year, wine from champagne does not have a date on the bottle. As they are fabricated wines, they age badly & must be dunken young.

Champagnes that DO have a date (Called Milesime in french) ARE exceptional. Unforunately they also sport a price tag to match. You can leave these bottles in a wine cellar & they get better & better -- to a point as really old champagnes loose their C02.

There are a lot of really excellent sparkling wines out there that are cheaper than most champagnes. My personal favorite is the Vouvray Petillant from the Loire valley region in France. These are not fabricated wines, so some years are better than others, but in 1990 I put a case of 12 bottles away to be opened on new years eve 2001. There were other "champagnes" served that night, including some very expensive bottles but none was as fine as the Vouvrays & the case of 12 was cheaper than a single bottle of the good "Real Champagne".

If only

[frankmanowar]

If only there were a way to measure the bubble size before you spend the money on the champagne.

champagne bubbles

[tuxette]

They get you drunk faster.

Size does count.

[Metallic Matty]

... smaller is better.

This is quite possibly the only instance I can think of where this is true.

Cheers. =)

Re:Size does count.

[clambake]

... smaller is better.

This is quite possibly the only instance I can think of where this is true.

You've never been hit by a car.

No thanks

[Quasar1999]

I like free beer better... ;)

Re:If only

[fastidious edward]

If you buy from a good wine shop they should know. Not only do small bubbles enhance the tastes, they result in a creamy (rather than fizzy) texture which is most welcomed by the back of my throat as well as the taste buds, the stomach and the mind.

If you want fizzy wine to be 'a bit different' to get drunk on choose any cheap plonk (Cava fits the bill well and is also tasty), if you want a decent champagne you can get this for ~USD35 at a specialist wine shop or specialist (staffed by those who are passionate about wince, rather than in-between semesters or on remand) wine section of a shopping mall. Non-champagne sparkling wines are also improving in quality (And sometimes are excellent), but don't expect anything too cheap, if it is cheap it'll get you drunk but won't be the amazing experience good champagne can be.

Don't follow the big names either. For example Bollinger only starts getting good well past USD70/bottle, a lower priced bottle can be just as good at much less cost.

Well, I respect other views, but...

[bobalu]

My guess is a lot of the people who boycotted it only drank it because it was the "right" choice in the first place. Just like most of the people calling them "surrender monkeys" didn't know they lost half a million men in 1916 by NOT surrendering to a sustained German attack at Verdun, more than we've ever lost in all battles including the Civil War. Or that without the help of the Marquis de Lafayette, the French navy and army we'd probably still be singing "God Save The Queen".

Or, while we're at it, that "French" toast was invented by a Mr. French of Albany NY.

Humans. Pfffftt.

An interesting aside...

[openSoar]

The sediment that is produced after the sugar and yeast have made these little bubble is removed by freezing the neck of the bottle whilst it's upside down and then removing the plug of 'goo'.

That's why Champagne bottles have that large foil top - historically, it was used to cover up the fact that you were being short-changed. Now that we have standards and things, these days, they fill the gap with a similar blend before it's corked.

Who knows why they didn't do that before...

Chamagne goes with everything -- red wine doesn't

[GuyMannDude]

And these days, Champagne is for people who want to look exclusive and upper class, when truth be told, actually they're tosspots ;) Red wine or real ale anyday...

I'm not sure if you're trolling or what but here goes. Champagne is somewhat unique in that it is a fantastic accompanyment to almost any type of food. It goes well with appetizers, the main course, or dessert. You can have it with dinner, at a party, or even for breakfast. There really isn't any other kind of wine that is as versitile as champagne. You mention red wine in your post. There are great reds, to be sure, but if you are going to be eating a delicate whitefish, you would probably not want to be serving a Cabernet Sauvignon with that since the wine will easily overpower the food. In fact just the other day I caught From Russia With Love and Bond realizes that the chap who is dining with him is not an agent but is an assassin instead because he's inexperienced enough to order a red Chianti with fish. That pairing just doesn't go very well. You want to select a beverage that will enhance and compliment the food, not overpower it.

Champagne is well suited for this purpose because of the bubbles. The 'fizz', if you want to call it that, help cleanse the palatte between mouthfuls so that you can get the full taste sensation from the 20th bite as you did with the 1st. You can also achieve this effect by using a toothbrush during a meal and cleansing your tongue that way (try it when you're alone some time!) but that looks rather silly. I'm not at all surprised that smaller bubbles are better (in fact, I thought that was common knowledge) because smaller bubbles means you can get more contact surface area (more bubbles) on the tongue and that should increase the cleansing effect.

Of course, there are different types of champagne (differing levels of sweetness) but for the most part you really can't go wrong with champagne. It goes with everything. Something that most certainly cannot be said of red wine or ale.

GMD

Re:If only

[nolife]

I don't take advice from a dude who uses "creamy texture" and "welcomed by the back of my throat" in the same sentence.

Re:Chamagne goes with everything -- red wine doesn

[jpc]

Actually its not because it is white and sparkling, its more because it is acidic and not overtly fruity that it goes with many foods. A dry Riesling will also go with any food that Champagne goes with, as will some other wines. Some red wines do go well with fish but you have to pick carefully. And ales go well with food but again you have to pick and choose a bit. Though something like Adnams goes with a lot of different foods too.

No! Champagne must be aged under a pyramid!

[rueger]

Truly, a very fine champagne style wine is produced by the Summerhill Estate Winery in Kelowna, British Columbia. Their secret is to age the wine under a carefully constructed pyramid so that "all the atoms spin the same direction".

"The site was carefully chosen. First a check of interfering energies was exhausted (i.e. underground streams, electric current exposure, gas line interference, etc.). Then the earth under the pyramid was compacted to 100%. Then a surveyor lined up the square base to coincide with exact True North as it is here in Kelowna. The area was then checked by an astronomer who lines up the foundation to the North Star precisely. It is interesting to note that much excitement took place when we aligned the site because the astronomer's news that almost to the day, 1997 was "the year of the Great Pyramid"."

"The pyramid effectiveness may also be explained using Einstein's concept of Tachyons and Tardyons. Tachyons are particles of invisible energy that move faster than the speed of light (that means it is faster than 186,282 miles per second). Tardyons behave in the opposite way, moving below or at the speed of light. This brings about the theory of negative space-time. [Negative space-time is 180 degrees from positive space-time. In positive space-time living organisms change from life to deterioration. In negative space-time, life moves from deterioration to rejuvenation. It is said that the pyramid serves as the interface between positive and negative space-time."

Scoff if you wish, but they make some very, very fine wine.

Re:While you're enjoying the bubbles and the aroma

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

Things like methanol (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd =Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3588516&dopt=Abstrac t) and fusel oil (a heavier alchohol) are supposed to aggravate hangovers. They're toxic. Of course so is ethanol, but the effects may be different.

Methanol, by the way, becomes toxic when metabolized by alcohol dehydrogenase. A perfectly valid first aid measure for methanol ingestion is to feed the victim vodka. The ethanol keeps the enzyme busy until the methanol can be excreted unchanged. This *may* be why "hair of the dog" helps, though it could jus be general numbing.

Hangovers seem to be a blend of several problems including dehydration.

GREAT Timing!!!!!

[Rastafarout]

This gets posted 2 full DAYS after New Years, and 36 hours before the first Monday morning of 2004.

THANKS for the timely advice! I'll keep that piece of useless information firmly stored in my head for another 360-ish!!

Good science?

[steppin_razor_LA]

I only read the discovery article, but the science seems a bit weak to me.

From what I gather, they took a number of sparkling wines that were rated of different qualities and then tried to determine the difference. Given this methodology, its not at all surprising that they found that the size of the bubbles was the differentiator since I was under the impression it was already well known that smaller bubbles was better.

If the wine tasting community already believed that smaller bubbles were better and that influenced their ranking, then it shouldn't be too surprising that the study turned up a correlation.

Perhaps I'm not giving the study enough credit -- because Discovery doesn't go into that level of detail... but I hope that they used some sort of blind taste test w/ people other than trained wine tasters to establish the ranking system for the different champagnes that they tested...