Dom Perignon, do you love it or hate it? This is a question analogous to asking one their political persuasion during an election year, meaning, in my experience, it is most often best left un-asked. All too often the conversation devolves from a pleasant discussion of attributes and draw backs, as I find most wine talks with good company, to petty comments as comebacks to snide remarks, often having to do more with money and percieved class issues than the actual bottle or glass supposedly being discussed. I am most definitely not one to claim that all good champagnes are over one hundred dollars, but I also will not dismiss a bottle solely because it it; I say let the wine speak and the experience decide.
On that note, and on the eve of New Year’s eve, I would like to briefly mention Dom Perignon’s 2000 vintage. I am not a devotee of Dom Perignon, nor do I despise them, they are simply another long standing maker of consistent champagne, that I do drink from time to time, and often enjoy I might add.The 1996 vintage was grand but now is all but unavailable, the 2002 and 2003 are not ready, so that leaves us with the 2000 as the only reasonable Dom option this New Year’s eve, if that is the direction one chooses to go, and I have to say it is a pretty good way to go. The 2000 vintage started off unimpressive to me, but has grown exponentially as it has matured. It is still vibrant, but has mellowed well, with plenty of yeast and soft earth flavors and the fruits are more impressive now than two or three years ago (which has surprised me).
So if on the eve of this new year you feel that a bottle of Dom Perignon is what your situation demands, and assuming you do not have a bottle of 1996 laying around, then please enjoy the 2000 and leave the younger vintages to rest for a bit longer. And remember that, while I will not dissuade anyone from enjoying a bottle of Dom, there are many amazing champagne producers out there, and variety is the spice of life.
NeoOpulence 