The classy and fascinating back story behind pink champagne


23 Responses to “The classy and fascinating back story behind pink champagne”

  1. agraham999 says:

    You should visit the Champagne region of France and tour the Avenue Champagne in Epernay. Walk from champagne house to champagne house and tour the cellars of Moet and many other famous houses. Here are some photos of our last trip there:

    Nothing like a great vintage rose…especially drinking it in a room that sits above 16 million bottles of champagne just waiting for their turn to come upstairs. 

  2. Matt Casey says:

    Or the Cava region of Spain around Barcelona. 
    Just as good IMHO.

  3. Kaleberg says:


    Pink champagne is the good stuff. Try a bottle of Dom Ruinart or La Grande Dame or Krug Rose. They are spectacular. (And so are the prices.)

    • SomeGuy says:

       If you can get there, the rose champagne from the vintner Francoise Didier in Cormicy is wonderful and very reasonably priced to boot.

  4. Kaleberg says:

    Thanks of the tip. There must be hundreds of champagne houses, but so many have limited production or limited distribution, so finding something beyond the big dozen or so is a matter of luck and recommendations. When it comes to champagne, we are always on the lookout.

  5. Grey Devil says:

    Am i the only one intrigued by the idea of blue champagne? Tried doing a quick search and couldn’t find anything on any vitners purposefully crafting a blue hued one, though if this is truly the case then are there any reasons for blue in a champagne to be undesirable?

    • Promethean Sky says:

       No, you are not the only one.

    • miasm says:

      TIL that Blue Champagne COULD be a thing.

    • ryuthrowsstuff says:

      I’m willing to bet the blue color comes with some other undesirable characteristics. There’s a red plant pigment found in lot of fruits and veg, including grapes, that changes color based on PH.

      If the blue color is a result of a PH change then it would definitely effect the flavor directly. But it could also screw with yeast during fermentation and effect the preservation of the wine during aging. A higher, more basic ph would mean a wine that spoils easier. It could also slow or stop the fermentation  You’d get a lower alcohol content (more prone to spoilage) but also potentially a failure to carbonate.  So while the blue color might be marketable/cool on its own I doubt it would make for a drinkable wine.

      So just throw a little bit of blue curacao in with your bubbly of choice. Basically a neon kir royale.

  6. Fantome_NR says:

    “a drink I tend to associate with undergrads and poorly conceived 7-Up cocktails.”

    This is really unfortunate. You need to frequent some better restaurants and make use of the sommelier’s service.

    • Wowbagger_Infinitley_Prolonged says:

      Did you read the rest?  The entire post was her admitting that this was an incorrect assumption.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Some people, like me, can’t stand the stuff.  It tastes like my mouth tastes after a night of drinking.

      • Fantome_NR says:

        Maybe you’ve never had the good stuff. I had an excellent Champagne rosé on Tuesday night, if you want I can let you know what it was. I don’t have my notes with me.

        • ryuthrowsstuff says:

          I’ve had the good stuff, and never really liked it much. Besides the vast majority of rosé anything tends to be terrible. I chalk that up to a few too many people trying to do something difficult very cheaply or without understanding it. Its a shame because it gives quality products an unfair reputation. But that doesn’t mean everyone would love it if only they could get “the good stuff”.

          I for example prefer cheap to mid-priced Cava and Prosecco over almost any champagne. Honestly just like the flavors better. Its got a simpler, crisper thing going on.

          • Antinous / Moderator says:

            Besides the vast majority of rosé anything tends to be terrible.

            Great.  Now I want to get my hair feathered and watch Karen Black movies.

          • rodbod says:

             “Besides the vast majority of rosé anything tends to be terrible.”

            That, to me, reads like personal preference expressed as fact.

            Also, spend more money, get better wine.

    • Gilbert Wham says:

       It’s a monicker I associate with bathtub speed, but hey.

  7. pjcamp says:

    As long as it tasted the same, I’d drink the hell out of blue champagne. Brown too, for that matter.

  8. rodbod says:

    That article will certainly have pleased the Dom Pom PR folks. Other writers have a different version of the story (see for example Chris Kissack ).

    As to the idea that 2002 is the best vintage for a generation. That is to ignore 1996, which of course Dom Perignon might well want to do if they have sold through all stock of the ’96 and are now pushing the ’02.

    (I’m not denigrating the 2002 vintage, it was truly great. But I think (and many writers with far more experience than me say so), that ’96 was better.)

    It’s true that pink champagne is tricky to make, which is why Champagne is the only appellation in France which is permitted to make rose wine by blending red with white ( ).

    As to taste, I find Dom Pom rather sugary-sweet. Much better, IMO, are Laurent-Perrier, Henriot, Billecart-Salmon, Bonnet, or straying far from France, Clover Hill in Tasmania.

Leave a Reply