I have been looking for sweet Champagnes available in the US. Doing a
search, the sweetest I can find are several demi-sec ones. I believe
these are required to have 33 - 50 g of sugar per L. I did not find a
single doux which I believe is required to have over 50 g of sugar/L.
Compared to a top BA, TBA, or Tokaji, even doux Champagne does not
have to be very sweet. I am wanting a sweet Champagne to serve with
rather sweet desserts over the upcoming holidays, as I have never
tried this combination. Unless someone knows where I can order a doux
in the US, I likely will have to settle for demi-sec and make sure the
dessert is not too sticky.

I will not order until the weather is much cooler. I have found demi-
secs made by Veuve Clicquot, Moet, Laurent-Perrier, Pol Roger, and
Piper-Heidsieck. A few stores have some others. Veuve Clicquot seems
to be the most available over the country as a whole, and it is
available in 375 ml half bottles as well as bottles. All of the sweet
Champagnes I have found are NV, likely because the sweetness would
mask the year to year variations in the Champagne to a considerable
extent. Has anyone had experience with any of the mentioned demi-sec
Champagnes?

On Aug 31, 4:36�am, cwdjrxyz > wrote:
> I have been looking for sweet Champagnes available in the US. Doing a
> search, the sweetest I can find are several demi-sec ones. I believe
> these are required to have 33 - 50 g of sugar per L. I did not find a
> single doux which I believe is required to have over 50 g of sugar/L.
> Compared to a top BA, TBA, or Tokaji, even doux Champagne does not
> have to be very sweet. I am wanting a sweet Champagne to serve with
> rather sweet desserts over the upcoming holidays, as I have never
> tried this combination. Unless someone knows where I can order a doux
> in the US, I likely will have to settle for demi-sec and make sure the
> dessert is not too sticky.
>
> I will not order until the weather is much cooler. I have found demi-
> secs made by Veuve Clicquot, Moet, Laurent-Perrier, Pol Roger, and
> Piper-Heidsieck. A few stores have some others. Veuve Clicquot seems
> to be the most available over the country as a whole, and it is
> available in 375 ml half bottles as well as bottles. All of the sweet
> Champagnes I have found are NV, likely because the sweetness would
> mask the year to year variations in the Champagne to a considerable
> extent. Has anyone had experience with any of the mentioned demi-sec
> Champagnes?

The only demi-secs I have tasted would be the Piper-H, M&C Nectar
Imperial, and the Selosse Exquise (in what I'd call ascending
quality).

Looking at WS pro, as you note don't see any doux champagnes in US.
Overseas Fleury & Beaufort seem to be the most common.

DaleW > wrote in
:

> On Aug 31, 4:36�am, cwdjrxyz > wrote:
>> I have been looking for sweet Champagnes available in the US. Doing a
>> search, the sweetest I can find are several demi-sec ones. I believe
>> these are required to have 33 - 50 g of sugar per L. I did not find a
>> single doux which I believe is required to have over 50 g of sugar/L.
>> Compared to a top BA, TBA, or Tokaji, even doux Champagne does not
>> have to be very sweet. I am wanting a sweet Champagne to serve with
>> rather sweet desserts over the upcoming holidays, as I have never
>> tried this combination. Unless someone knows where I can order a doux
>> in the US, I likely will have to settle for demi-sec and make sure
>> the dessert is not too sticky.
>>
>> I will not order until the weather is much cooler. I have found demi-
>> secs made by Veuve Clicquot, Moet, Laurent-Perrier, Pol Roger, and
>> Piper-Heidsieck. A few stores have some others. Veuve Clicquot seems
>> to be the most available over the country as a whole, and it is
>> available in 375 ml half bottles as well as bottles. All of the sweet
>> Champagnes I have found are NV, likely because the sweetness would
>> mask the year to year variations in the Champagne to a considerable
>> extent. Has anyone had experience with any of the mentioned demi-sec
>> Champagnes?
>
> The only demi-secs I have tasted would be the Piper-H, M&C Nectar
> Imperial, and the Selosse Exquise (in what I'd call ascending
> quality).
>
> Looking at WS pro, as you note don't see any doux champagnes in US.
> Overseas Fleury & Beaufort seem to be the most common.
>

I've had the Nectar and it is good for what it is but how necesary is a
really sweet wine for a sweet desert, isn't that a bit of overkill?

--
Joseph Coulter, cruises and vacations
www.josephcoulter.com

877 832 2021
904 631 8863 cell

On Aug 31, 9:10�am, DaleW > wrote:
> On Aug 31, 4:36 am, cwdjrxyz > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I have been looking for sweet Champagnes available in the US. Doing a
> > search, the sweetest I can find are several demi-sec ones. I believe
> > these are required to have 33 - 50 g of sugar per L. I did not find a
> > single doux which I believe is required to have over 50 g of sugar/L.
> > Compared to a top BA, TBA, or Tokaji, even doux Champagne does not
> > have to be very sweet. I am wanting a sweet Champagne to serve with
> > rather sweet desserts over the upcoming holidays, as I have never
> > tried this combination. Unless someone knows where I can order a doux
> > in the US, I likely will have to settle for demi-sec and make sure the
> > dessert is not too sticky.
>
> > I will not order until the weather is much cooler. I have found demi-
> > secs made by Veuve Clicquot, Moet, Laurent-Perrier, Pol Roger, and
> > Piper-Heidsieck. A few stores have some others. Veuve Clicquot seems
> > to be the most available over the country as a whole, and it is
> > available in 375 ml half bottles as well as bottles. All of the sweet
> > Champagnes I have found are NV, likely because the sweetness would
> > mask the year to year variations in the Champagne to a considerable
> > extent. Has anyone had experience with any of the mentioned demi-sec
> > Champagnes?
>
> The only demi-secs I have tasted would be the Piper-H, M&C Nectar
> Imperial, and the Selosse Exquise (in what I'd call ascending
> quality).
>
> Looking at WS pro, as you note don't see any doux champagnes in US.
> Overseas Fleury & Beaufort seem to be the most common.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Actually, I see the Exquise is a sec, not a demi-sec.
Delicious wine, but in general I prefer quite dry bubbly

Look for Duval-Leroy "Lady Rose". Vinified at 25 grams/liter.

Joseph Coulter > wrote:

>> On Aug 31, 4:36�am, cwdjrxyz > wrote:

>>> I have been looking for sweet Champagnes available in the US.
>>> Doing a search, the sweetest I can find are several demi-sec
>>> ones. I believe these are required to have 33 - 50 g of sugar
>>> per L.

Exactly.

>>> I did not find a single doux which I believe is required to
>>> have over 50 g of sugar/L.

Right again.

> I've had the Nectar and it is good for what it is but how
> necesary is a really sweet wine for a sweet desert,

Sahara is sweet?! <scnr>

> isn't that a bit of overkill?

Absolutely not. If a wine is less sweet than dessert the dessert
will make it taste only sour.

Thus said, to the best of my knowledge, even demi-sec champagne --
tasting quite sweet on its own -- will taste rather dryish along a
normal sweet dessert.

The only really sweet bubblies I know are Asti Spumante (full
sparkler) and Moscato d'Asti (frizzante); the problem with the
former being that the average quality is lousy; I don't even now
whether there's a decent one. Moscati d'Asti from a reliable
producer, however, should work quite well.

M.

Michael Pronay > wrote in
:
>
> The only really sweet bubblies I know are Asti Spumante (full
> sparkler) and Moscato d'Asti (frizzante); the problem with the
> former being that the average quality is lousy; I don't even now
> whether there's a decent one. Moscati d'Asti from a reliable
> producer, however, should work quite well.

I was close to suggest a Moscato d'Asti as well, because there are good
ones that have a lot of finesse being sweet. But I did not know whether it
had to be a Champagne or if any sweet sparkler (or frizzante) would sufice.

s.

Michael Pronay wrote:
> Joseph Coulter > wrote:
>
>> how
>> necesary is a really sweet wine for a sweet desert,
>> isn't that a bit of overkill?
>
> Absolutely not. If a wine is less sweet than dessert the dessert
> will make it taste only sour.


Ah, I see now - I've always wondered about it! Does everybody here
share these feelings?
I most certainly don't - for me, if the wine is even remotely
sweet, together with dessert it triggers sugar overload. I can drink
sweet wines only alone, or together with something salty or sour or
spicy - Gorgonzola for instance. (Remember the good pairing of Cognac
with lemon). Conversely, with desserts that are sweet and fatty, I like
dry tannic red wines, and with desserts that are only sweet - dry acidic
whites. However, in both cases the wines must have a fruity nose; being
grassy/vegetably (for reds) or flinty (for whites) is not good.

--
You'd be crazy to e-mail me with the crazy. But leave the div alone.

Patok > wrote in
:

> Michael Pronay wrote:
>> Joseph Coulter > wrote:
>>
>>> how
>>> necesary is a really sweet wine for a sweet desert,
>>> isn't that a bit of overkill?
>>
>> Absolutely not. If a wine is less sweet than dessert the dessert
>> will make it taste only sour.
>
>
> Ah, I see now - I've always wondered about it! Does everybody
> here
> share these feelings?
> I most certainly don't - for me, if the wine is even remotely
> sweet, together with dessert it triggers sugar overload. I can drink
> sweet wines only alone,

That is my sentiment as well. I like Moscato for instance but just the
idea of say marscapone with moscato gives me a headache. Water works
well for those really sweet deserts that are too much for wine. YMMV

--
Joseph Coulter, cruises and vacations
www.josephcoulter.com

877 832 2021
904 631 8863 cell

Mike Tommasi > wrote in
:

> Patok wrote:
>> Michael Pronay wrote:
>>> Joseph Coulter > wrote:
>>>> how necesary is a really sweet wine for a sweet desert, isn't that
>>>> a bit of overkill?
>>>
>>> Absolutely not. If a wine is less sweet than dessert the dessert
>>> will make it taste only sour.
>>
>>
>> Ah, I see now - I've always wondered about it! Does everybody
>> here
>> share these feelings?
>> I most certainly don't - for me, if the wine is even remotely
>> sweet,
>> together with dessert it triggers sugar overload. I can drink sweet
>> wines only alone, or together with something salty or sour or spicy -
>> Gorgonzola for instance.
>
> Maybe not Gorgonzola, but basically I agree
>
> Conversely, with desserts that are sweet and fatty, I like dry
>> tannic red wines, and with desserts that are only sweet - dry acidic
>> whites. However, in both cases the wines must have a fruity nose;
>> being grassy/vegetably (for reds) or flinty (for whites) is not good.
>
> I just don't see that. Tannic reds with sweet fatty desserts? De
> gustibus...
>
>

All of this talk is revving up the sweet tooth. Now that I think about
it one of my best dessert pairings was a Rasteau vdn with a chocolate
dessert similar to a pure chocolate mousse (no butter)

--
Joseph Coulter, cruises and vacations
www.josephcoulter.com

877 832 2021
904 631 8863 cell

On Sep 6, 5:23*pm, Mike Tommasi > wrote:
> Patok wrote:
> > Michael Pronay wrote:
> >> Joseph Coulter > wrote:
> >>> how necesary is a really sweet wine for a sweet desert, isn't that a
> >>> bit of overkill?
>
> >> Absolutely not. If a wine is less sweet than dessert the dessert
> >> will make it taste only sour.
>
> > * * Ah, I see now - I've always wondered about it! Does everybody here
> > share these feelings?
> > * * I most certainly don't - for me, if the wine is even remotely sweet,
> > together with dessert it triggers sugar overload. I can drink sweet
> > wines only alone, or together with something salty or sour or spicy -
> > Gorgonzola for instance.
>
> Maybe not Gorgonzola, but basically I agree
>
> * Conversely, with desserts that are sweet and fatty, I like dry
>
> > tannic red wines, and with desserts that are only sweet - dry acidic
> > whites. However, in both cases the wines must have a fruity nose; being
> > grassy/vegetably (for reds) or flinty (for whites) is not good.
>
> I just don't see that. Tannic reds with sweet fatty desserts? De gustibus....


The best I can tell, from reading of old menus and books, Champagne
often was served with some desserts in the 1800s on up into the early
1900s. This appears to have been very sweet Champagne, likely sweeter
than anything we can find today. The taste for dry Champagne, at least
in some English speaking countries, seemed to develop in the late
1880. This likely was influenced greatly by some members of the
British royal family who started drinking dry Champagne, and likely
more as a general beverage than as a wine with dessert. This made a
lot of sense for that purpose. Some of the sweet Champagne back then
likely would make you as large as Henry VIII if you drank a lot of it
every day and moreover likely would give many an over stuffed feeling
most of the time.As was the custom back then, monkey see, monkey do,
and the population that could afford to do so started drinking mostly
dry Champagne.

I have seen brut Champagne served with very sweet desserts, and for me
that is a very evil combination reminding me of unsweetened, somewhat
diluted lemon juice in combination with the dessert. For me, a
combination made in hell would be brut Champagne with the extremely
rich and sweet southern pecan pie. But, since tastes can vary greatly
and one likely could find a few who like the stark contrasts in that
combination. A still wine for desserts is much easier to match. The
higher grades of Malmsey vintage Madeira, Tokaji, TBAs, etc can
sometimes even contain more sugar than a sticky dessert, and they are
so different in taste that one has several taste choices to try to
match. Yet the good ones have enough acid to balance the great
sweetness.

Hi,
On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:52:46 +0200, Mike Tommasi >
wrote:

>cwdjrxyz wrote:

>> combination made in hell would be brut Champagne with the extremely
>> rich and sweet southern pecan pie.
>
>Evil, hellish yes. Yet just about every frenchman, including those in
>the Senate who should be a little more practiced at wine things,
>systematically and almost by tradition serve brut champagne with dessert
>(and port wine for starters!). The horror.

Agree 100% with both of you. I simply cannot understand how they bring
themselves to believe that they like it!!

To some extent I can live with a sweet drink as an aperitif,even if a
dry wine is WAY more successful, and a Brut champagne perfection. But
the use of a dry wine with high acidity like champagne with some sort
of pudding like bavarois, or a Tarte Tatin, or even strawberries, is
truly perverse.
--
All the best
Fatty from Forges

IanH > wrote:

> To some extent I can live with a sweet drink as an aperitif,
> even if a dry wine is WAY more successful, and a Brut champagne
> perfection. But the use of a dry wine with high acidity like
> champagne with some sort of pudding like bavarois, or a Tarte
> Tatin, or even strawberries, is truly perverse.

I guess it has to do with some kind of highbrow diplomatic
"usage". After the main course (or after dessert, don't pinpoint
me on that matter) is *the* time for toast at official banquets.
And toasts are always addressed with a glass of Champagne in hand.

M.