In wine, as is the case in most everything in life, there is a standard, and then there is everything within the same category that is compared to it.
Sometimes we make these comparisons to better describe something lesser-known in terms of something that is well-known – “It’s a sweet fortified red wine from Virginia made in the same manner as a vintage Port.” At other times, we make a quality comparison as well – “It’s a crisp, minerally Russian River Valley Chardonnay in the manner of a Premier Cru Chablis, but not quite as good.”
Some people fight against these comparisons to a standard. “I don’t want my wine to be compared to any other wine,” I’m sometimes told by winemakers. “I am myself.” It’s an understandable sentiment when it’s meant to mean, “I don’t copy anyone else’s style,” but it’s sort of silly when it’s meant to say they consider themselves a category of one.
Most good winemakers who are also confident winemakers embrace comparisons. I can remember in the 1980s when Napa Valley and other North Coast winemakers took on the challenge of trying to say their Cabernet Sauvignons were as good as those of Bordeaux. Today, one could arguably claim that Napa Valley Cabernets, as a whole, are perhaps even better than those of Bordeaux.
But at this same time, in Napa and throughout California, other winemakers tried to find the right combination of terroir, clones and cellar practices that would let them claim they could make Chardonnays and Pinot Noirs as good as the Grand Crus of Burgundy. Forty years later, most of them – and most observers – would say they make excellent Chards and Pinots but seldom ones as good as those of the Burgundy standard bearers.
Which brings me to California sparkling wines and the Champagne standards. No one region worldwide can compare in quality with Champagne, although it would be quite possible to mistake a good flute of Franciacorta from northern Italy, which uses the same grapes and methods, for a Champagne. And sparkling wine producers of southern England, who remind me in their competitive arrogance and winemaking resources to the Napa Cabernet vintners from the 1980s, are making sparkling wines that can be mentioned – and tasted – in the same breath as Champagne.
And I would add selected sparkling wine producers of northern California to that same short list of being “in the same breath as,” although I have never heard these same American producers claiming to be as good as Champagne or even stating it as their objective, unlike their table wine compatriots.
One reason is that some of these producers are owned by Champagne houses and have been tasked with making good, but not great, bubbly that would add to their parent company’s profit line while not being an embarrassment to their international brand name. Just as Napa grape prices don’t invite top invite top producers to make entry-level Napa Cabs, Champagne grape prices are such that Moët, especially, decided decades ago to make their entry-level, economical sparkling wines not in France but in Chile, Australia, and California.
Nevertheless, a handful of California sparkling wine producers, even some with Champagne roots, are knocking on the door of greatness. And they know it, even if they don’t say it.
So, I was especially excited a few weeks ago when I had the opportunity to taste vintage California sparkling wines from the 2010s, the 2000s, even from the 1990s made by three excellent producers – Schramsberg, Domaine Carneros, and Roederer Estate – presented in three flights. Schramsberg was represented by bottles from 2015, 2004 and 1997; Roederer by the 2017, 2007 and 1997, and Domaine Carneros by 2016, 2006 and 1995.
To me, the 2016 Domaine Carneros “Le Rêve” Blanc de Blanc stood out in the first flight, the 2007 Roederer L’Hermitage took honors in the second, and the 1997 Schramsberg J Scram Late Disgorged (70% Chardonnay, 30% Pinot Noir) was fabulous in the third and, to my palate, was the best of show.
As is often the case, great wines got me thinking beyond the wines themselves.
The first thought is not in the least radical, but it is a little different in its characterization. I believe we in the wine trade should think of an axis of very good, and possibly great, sparkling wine being made in a contiguous geographic crescent that can be separated from, and which stands above, the rest of California. One tip of the crescent begins in the Carneros region of Napa and Sonoma and curves out to the Sonoma Coast and continues northward into the Anderson Valley of Mendocino County. As a factual matter, almost all the top California/American sparkling wines are made from grapes grown in this area.
I broached this topic with the three people presenting their wines – Remi Cohen of Domaine Carneros, Arnaud Weyrich of Roederer, and Hugh Davies of Schramsberg – and they agreed my axis definition was a defensible one, although hardly a revolutionary geographic observation. These three cooler counties with their cooling fogs and breezes are where all three houses get almost all of their grapes, as do several other exemplary sparkling producers.
They also noted that, even in this cool region of a hot state, the days when picking begins get earlier and earlier. Cohen noted picking for Domaine Carneros base wines began August 3 in 2016, and Davies remembered a late July pick a few years ago. Arnaud said that California even has an advantage over Champagne in not having to worry about rain if growers wait a few extra days to begin harvest. But, he warned, “If you pick only according to Brix [amount of grape sugar] in California, you will get too much acidity in your wine.” In fact, Arnaud said, “With the strong core of acidity, we need to have more time on the yeast.”
Davies, who said 2024 marks his family’s 60th harvest at Schramberg, noted he is fermenting some base lots in neutral oak barrels “to get some layering.” With about 300 different lots for each vintage of Schramsberg, that selection takes some planning. Davies’ noted his base wine generally is about 11% alcohol, adding, “To get ageability in our wines, you have to work for high acidity, low pH and lots of CO2.”
My second thought, the more radical one, was sounding out each of the three winemakers on the idea that California sparkling wines made from Napa, Sonoma and Mendocino grapes should have their own distinctive appellation, one that would give a unified face to the marketplace, the same way that Champagne and Francicorta approach their buyers. Right now, everything is fragmented with no common identity other than “California.”
Domaine Carneros uses “Carneros,” Roederer uses “Anderson Valley” and Schramsberg – which adopted the Champagne model of buying lots from all over the region – has on its label “North Coast,” but that is an appellation that covers six counties, including Lake, Marin and Solano.
I noted to them that the title of the tasting invitation was “California Classic Sparkling Wines Master Class,” hardly something to inspire inspiration. Cohen told me there had once been an organization of a few quality sparkling wine producers, including Domaine Carneros, designed to jointly market wines, but that had fallen apart some years ago.
Why not a three-county sparkling wine super-appellation with its own name, such as “Pacifica?” I asked, so that all sparkling wines from these Carneros to Mendocino would have a common face to present to the world. Not a bad idea, they individually replied when I chatted with them before the tasting. But not something they were yet ready to propose a toast to.
But, thinking like those Napa Valley red wine pioneers who believed making wines as good as Bordeaux was an achievable idea, I can at least think that a seed might have been planted.
. . .
Photos courtesy of Charles Communications Associates