How long does non-vintage Champagne cellar?

[Blanquito]

I had a disappointing bottle of Veuve Clicquot brut last night. This bottle had been in my cellar for 4-5 years, so I wondered if it was over the hill.

After the recent threads pointing out that vintage champagne needs a long while to shine (at least from great producers), it seemed interesting that the brut variety would be potentially short lived. Or maybe it's just V. Clicquot going through a bad stretch?

Does non vintage brut champagne from the big producers keep or even improve in the cellar?

[johnz]

I'd guess that 4-5 years is pushing it, especially for Veuve Clicquot, which has been in a funk for some years. On the other hand, I've had 5 year NV Bollinger that was really good, and had some of the complexity found in superior vintage bubblies. Too bad the Bolly has had such a price increase -- but I think worth the extra $.

--Gary Rust

[stefan]

Most likely the problem is that NV Veuve from 4-5 years ago was not very good. The current release is better and will likely be good in 4-5 years.

[sdr]

I've not been too impressed with Veuve Cliquot NV at any age based on limited experience, but there are some NVs that do improve with age.
The most obvious one is Krug, which they prefer to call "multivintage." Last night I tasted Krug MV which had at least 10 years of cellar age according to the owner. It was amazingly youthful and fresh and had gained a bit more weight and complexity over the years and seemed as if it could easily last 10 more.
Others that age well include Pol Roger, Egly Ouriet BdeN and Billecart-Salmon BdeB.

[Blanquito]

Thanks for the feedback.

I just checked my holdings, and I have about 6 bottles each of the NV Nicolas Feuillatte Champagne and the NV Taittinger. They been in the cellar 3-4 years-- Should I move them to the head of the queue for drinking?

[stefan]

Yes, Patrick. Neither is likely to improve with more aging.

[JonoB]

I think you will actually be surprised by the Taittinger....

Veuve has been in the doldrums for a while now. I've had 20 year old NV Louis Roederer recently, delightfully youthful but it had been properly cellared.

Age ability of NV really depends on the house. I have recently had a 60 year old Bolly, and yes it was over the hill but not dead, and had a brief second wind, as did its sibling the 66 Bollinger which was still alive but you wouldn't want to keep it much longer. The donor of the bottle said that he tasted a Taittinger from the same batch and said it was amazing.

[DavidG]

It depends on the specific champagne. As Stuart and Stefan said, Veuve has been only so so for a while but I don't think its that bad. I like most NVs with 3-5 years on them but of course some just aren't meant for aging and others like Krug can go for decades.

[Claudius2]

Guys
The last few times I've had fresh Veuve at functions I have found it to be drab - almost tasteless.
There are many more good NVs around - so go for Heidseick, Billecart, Perier Jouet, Roederer, Bolly, Taittinger etc.
Some of the small grower wines like Raymond Boulard, Laherte etc are also very good.

I have no problems with keep fresh NV for 4-5 years.
The central theme here is fresh when you buy it.
it is often discounted when it has been hanging around in warehouses for too long and may be old and heat afected when you buy it.

We had a very nice Charles Cazanove 1996 last night - honey, ginger, brioche. Developed but very drinkable. Yum.
I love champagne!