I am sorry this blog has been quiet for so long. First, I was in a non wine-drinking environment, then I got struck down by a viral infection. But in-between I had the opportunity to sip on a 2004 vintage Dom Perignon on my flight home. This brought up in my mind the question of Dom vs. Krug. This is very similar to what happened in music if you grew up in the 60s. You were either a Beatles fan or a Stones fan, never both. And so it is in Champagne land.
I freely admit that I do not get overly excited by Champagne, the most overworked wine drink on earth, but you can't fault their marketing. Nobody seems to think twice to fork out at a minimum $50 for a bottle of Champus, whereas this person would never spend this much on a white or red wine. Having said this, and to answer the question, I am a Krug person. I go for the weight and the yeast, as opposed to Dom's freshness and vibrancy.
The other thing that happened a couple of days before I boarded the flight, I had a mild form of food poisoning. I was despite all this looking forward to the Dom Perignon from a great year, but bad luck, I could not stomach the acidity. Half of a small glass, that was it.
Now for those who have been reading all this waiting for a review. The palate opens up with citrus and almond flavours, then there is cream and a smoky flavour. This Champagne has good intensity and balance. The bubbles are small and persistent, and the vibrancy of this drink is caused by its well integrated acidity.