Astonishing rediscovery of M&C Brut Imperial

P1030620.JPG
How many of you think that Moet et Chandon Brut Imperial is mass market entry level champagne with strong branding and deep marketing pockets?⁣

Well, it might all be true, but nevertheless it is high quality product. I know many wine enthusiasts find it boring and lacking personality as opposed to a vast offering from other Grande Marques and growers. ⁣

Traditionally its higher dosage which is supposed to be more appealing to amateur palates puts off champagne connoisseurs.⁣

So does Moet Imperial have the right to win for picky wine geeks?⁣

I strongly believe it has. The vivid example is this old bottle I had the pleasure to share with my beloved last night. ⁣

My guess this bottle comes from 70s. However this label design had been used for a most part of last century, so hard to tell exactly. I do come from the current state of the wine. Higher dosage protected the wine for decades allowing it to develop this awesomeness!⁣

Deep brownish amber color. Still fizzy. Mushroom shape cork showing long bottle age. Usually reductive style of M&Ch developed with so many years spent under natural cork into a very pleasant oxidative one. ⁣
Complex tertiary aromas of kombucha, coca cola, caramel and mushrooms.⁣
Wet wood develops in fine spicy matured cheese. ⁣
Palate offers this lovely grapefruit citrus aftertaste.⁣
Excessive sugar is very well integrated with bottle age and hardly noticed. Above medium acidity brings it all into a perfect balance. Finish is unexpectedly long.⁣
Absolutely fantastic sateen texture giving it mellow and round mouth feel.⁣

Did I rehabilitate M&Ch Brut Imperial and convinced you to give a try to an older label? ⁣

Please let me know your thoughts in comments.
 
My quite extensive experience suggests that it at least used to be indestructible. My father kept bottles in the attic for years and it always seemed improved by the process, making me wonder if it was actually designed to be mistreated in the supply chain.
 
The thing with this, like pretty much all of the lower cuvees of the grandes marques is that they need age. Young, straight of the retailer's shelf, they tend to be like drinking battery acid, but give them 10 years and invariably something attractive will emerge.
 
I've had a fair bit of experience with old moet from dodgy sources. Always reliably awful I'm afraid! Magnums, bottles, even a poor vintage methuselah. Still, pleased other people have more luck. Maybe my 1919 will break the streak and be amazing
 
The thing with this, like pretty much all of the lower cuvees of the grandes marques is that they need age. Young, straight of the retailer's shelf, they tend to be like drinking battery acid, but give them 10 years and invariably something attractive will emerge.
If someone is brave enough, would they care to explain to Mrs C that the Bolly she bought yesterday needs to be left alone for a decade.
Karen has seen the benefits of keeping GM NVs for 12+ months (LBL 2 years) but any longer.....?? :eek::rolleyes:
 
Mark,
I have always kept Bollinger NV for few years (maybe not as much as ten) before drinking and, to my taste, it improves, just gets a bit richer and fuller. Why not distract her with a few bottles Charles Heidseck NV in the short term which seems to be ready to go straight out of the box?
 
Mark,
I have always kept Bollinger NV for few years (maybe not as much as ten) before drinking and, to my taste, it improves, just gets a bit richer and fuller. Why not distract her with a few bottles Charles Heidseck NV in the short term which seems to be ready to go straight out of the box?
Another one Karen really likes. I've managed to avoid buying any, so far. At 3% of the cellar, I feel that it’s plenty of fizz. :eek::)
 
Last edited:
I think old champagne like this is an acquired taste tbh

Whilst I have some friends who love the development in bottles disgorged moons ago I'm not much of a fan myself.

Just another example of the kaleidoscopic range of options bubbles brings though. :)
 
I have always kept Bollinger NV for few years (maybe not as much as ten) before drinking and, to my taste, it improves, just gets a bit richer and fuller. Why not distract her with a few bottles Charles Heidseck NV in the short term which seems to be ready to go straight out of the box?
I was given a mag of M&C as a present whilst at work. I put it in the back of a filing cabinet, forgot about it and came across it 7 years later when I was clearing the office prior to retiring. It was a lovely golden colour, had reasonable acidity and nice mellow toasty notes. No great complexity but very nice and better than it would have been if quaffed when I received it I think and it helped that it was a mag. I have aged NV's for up to 4 years before and they do get richer and fuller. I don't do it any more, so as Richard advises I just go for the Heidsieck which saves precious space.
 
I bought a couple of bottles of bolly grand Annee 1988 from an online auction and while the first one was a bit mature / oxidised for my taste (and I do like old fizz) when blended 50-50 with a fresh bottle of special cuvee bollinger it was delicious. So don’t forget this option :)
 
Top