Moet & Chandon, Grand Vintage Collection

2017 degorgement. Very fresh for a 30 years old and can be kept for another decade I'm sure. Unique nose displaying how 21 years on lees influence a champagne. I really find it interesting and like it. The palate reveals that this is "only" regular vintage champagne lacking some concentration and lenght of finish. My 5 or 6th time drinking this wine and experience tells me that letting this breathe for a few hours brings out more of everything. The …

1995 vintage

An interesting bottle with plenty of tertiary flavors but lacks much in the way of bubbles. There is good acidity and ripe flavors and it drinks more like a wine than a Champagne. My personal preference is for more bubbles in aged Champagne but I get why some may appreciate this bottling more than me. Out of magnum.

1975 vintage

not blind, deg. 2017 same flight with 96. I rated same but they are really different. Super fresh, precise, not too sweet, a lot of years ahead. 95

1995 vintage

not blind, deg. 2017 same flight with 96. I rated same but they are really different. Super fresh, precise, not too sweet, a lot of years ahead. 95

1995 vintage

Not an expert and drank it quite (too?) cold at 5’C. Cork seemed fresh and smelt good, and good structure to the bubbles as we poured but relatively short lived. Remained fresh on the palate throughout though, and lovely notes of brioche, citrus fruits, and some butter and nuttiness on the aftertaste. Really enjoyed it and not disappointed, but certainly happy we have drunk it now as sense it would not have many more years to run.

1999 vintage

Enjoyed with Benoit Gouez at Zest in Hong Kong. Flight of Grand Vintage Collection ' 15, '06 and '99. This was a pleasant surprise - unlike the notes below, the bottles we had were in perfect condition and they were really enjoyable. Still fresh and zesty, but with good fruit and fine bubbles. Some toasty, yeasty aromas coming through complimented by coffee and mocha notes. Good stuff! Have very little experience with this wine so hard to discuss ageing potential …

1999 vintage

Very good, but not as developed as previous bottles from this batch. Disgorged 2010. Needs air

1995 vintage

3rd bottle from this batch and finally one without cork taint! Rather odorless and closed, in a bit of a stale way. Has a mature hint of toffey. Has the expected amount of effervescence for a wine disgorged 12 years ago. Strikingly sour and has a bitter aftertaste. Not much enjoyment to be found here. Have also tasted the regular release of this vintage three times. Once in regular size that was tired and past best. Twice in magnum, first …

1999 vintage

Way past peak. Ended up in the sink.

1999 vintage

Celebrating birth of my second child, a healthy baby boy. (Also my tasting note #600.) super complex nose, although a bit closed this time . still drinking young, but unfortunately a bit thin and acidic - this bottle is definately a little off compared to previous experiences

1995 vintage

Thanks to Andy for sharing. This was first glass of the day and quite a nice one at that. More caramel-y. The bubbles are a bit more faded, but there’s still some fizz to it and that nice older champagne flavor. I actually would have pegged this as being a bit older than it actually is. Good wine.

1975 vintage

Decanted and really benefitted. Drink now - 2022+. Still some upside.

1995 vintage

Pnp. Solid. Classic moet. Gunpowder on nose. Rich yet elegant. Fairly concentrated but thinning a bit on the midpalate which may indicate lacking potential for long ageing. Unfortunately slight cork taint which surely has deducted some of the pleasure. 90+ potential for perfect bottles.

1999 vintage

Aw bummer- this is obviously cork tainted. Such a disapointment. Disregarding the flaw I can tell that the wine has much vitality and seems less evolved than the disgorgement date of 04/2008 indicates. So I would say no rush to consume . 2017-2022+.

1999 vintage

Apples and toast. See and salt. Complex and full in the mouth

1995 vintage

Very fresh and shy and takes a long time to open op. Drinking this at 2000-3000m above sea lvl might explain why it is much less generous than the other bottles I've drank. Very good, but could be better. Save. Drink 2020-2025.

1995 vintage

I tried this 2 years ago and thought it was the best champagne I ever had. Since then I've tasted a lot of fantastic champagne, but tasting this again still ranks it top 3 because its drinking so perfectly right now! But I'm certain this has the potential to store for a few more years yet. And what a great value @ 120$! Deg. 11/2007

1995 vintage

From magnum. White peach, ripe pear, light honey, fresh hay, and creme brulee. Mangosteen, pear, apricot and creamy vanilla on the palate. Rounded and very smooth in the mouth. 2002 disgorgement.

1975 vintage

Pronounced brioche nose, with brioche leading to lemon and then lemon pith on the long finish.

1999 vintage

Two mags at Paulee. Both were in perfect condition, and were very, very good.

1975 vintage

A remarkable champagne. Notes of honey, nutty biscuits, buttered croissants, toasted almonds and sweet bread. This bottle has aged very gracefully

1962 vintage

Clear. Steady stream of bubbles, not alot though. Clean nose. Developed nose, some fruits, some toast and slight hint of coffee beans. But not developed as in post degorgement, but a long time on lees. Very dry, tart acidity, but some of the aromas definitly derive from some dosage. Cut a bit short in the finish by the acidity. Good.

1995 vintage

Clear. Clean. Some development notes, some toast. Apples, coffee. Very dry, very acidic. Dry and somewhat bitter (I suspect a drying sensation from the acid). Good wine, but a little bit short on the finish.

1995 vintage

I keep dreaming about this champagne. Drinking so fine right now in 2014. I wish I could afford to buy some more of them.

1995 vintage

(38PN, 31CH, 31M, 6 g/l, disg.April 2008) Pleasant creaminess and more complexity than '02. Character is more evidentm there's tartness of orange rind and lemon rind is on the finish. This is more or less ok after the disappointing 06, 04 and 02 that were poured before.

1999 vintage

Needed 30 minutes on the glass. Absolutely stunning nose of pure Champagne! Almost no bubbles left, but very fresh still! Incredible that it can keep the champagne character after all those years. Full bodied with some saline Oloroso notes to go with the long finish.

1959 vintage

Served too warm so it may have appeared as sweeter because of that. But it's good with deep delicious fruit, bread and chocolate. Very fine.

1995 vintage

Mogen, brödig, lite mer kola och choklad, en del smör. Frisk smak som är hyfsat komplex med bra eftersmak.

1995 vintage

Are you sure?

Moet & Chandon, Grand Vintage Collection

Vintages

No vintages

Community Reviews