Home > Producer Profiles > Champagne Profiles > Charles Heidsieck

Charles Heidsieck

The house of Charles Heidsieck has seen something of a renaissance in recent years. It's been making waves with a succession of excellent wines, both vintage and non-vintage. Instrumental in the revival of this house has been Daniel Thibault, who died in 2002. Thibault was an excellent winemaker and blender, and has been responsible for what are probably the finest wines ever to bear the label of Charles Heidsieck.

The origins of Charles Heidsieck lie in 1785, when it started life as a Champagne company under the auspices of Florenz-Ludwig Heidsieck. This firm subsequently gave rise to all the Heidsieck Champagne houses; Charles Heidsieck, Heidsieck & Co Monopole and Piper-Heidsieck. Today both Charles Heidsieck and Piper-Heidsieck are under the ownership of Rémy Cointreau.

Up until the 1980s Charles Heidsieck produced a sound range of wines including a non-vintage Brut, a vintage wine and a prestige cuvée Champagne Charlie. But with the arrival of Daniel Thibault, and the backing of Rémy Cointreau, this was to change. Thibault's coup de grace was to convert the perfectly serviceable non vintage wine into a Brut Réserve. In order to achieve this Rémy Cointreau permitted sales to fall by millions of bottles so that Thibault could build up some reserve stocks. Whereas most houses have only a few vintages at their disposal for the production of the non vintage cuvée, Thibault had over eight vintages. Masterful blending of these older wines into the non vintage cuvée - which is, you may or may not agree, beginning to sound more like a multi-vintage prestige cuvée along the lines of Krug NV or Laurent-Perrier's Grand Siecle - with the reserve wines comprising up to 40% of the final blend, is what results in such a fabulous wine. Fabulous in it's own right, but particularly so if value for money is a concern. Further success came in 1997 when the already successful Brut Réserve was relaunched as the Brut Réserve Mis en Caves. With this change in designation Thibault was able to provide information regarding the non vintage cuvée by providing a date of cellaring on the label. The cellaring date follows on from the dated of the base vintage, so the Mis en Caves 1992, the first release, was comprised of 40% reserve wines and 60% the 1991 vintage. This model has continued with great success, with one of the most successful blends being the Mis en Caves 1997, based on the outstanding 1996 vintage. Overall I believe that this practice has been a great success for the consumer, who now actually know what they are drinking, unlike the situation with other non vintage cuvées which give no indication as to the base wine or blend at all. As such two bottles of externally identical non vintage Champagne may in fact contain two completely different wines. There is no such problem with the Charles Heidsieck Brut Réserve Mis en Caves range, however, and later vintages also included the date of dégorgement.

The range of wines produced here, other than the Brut Réserve Mis en Caves, includes two vintage wines the Brut Millésime and Brut Rose Millésime, both based on 30% Chardonnay and 70% Pinot Noir & Meunier, with the rose produced by the addition of red wine rather than the saignée method. The prestige cuvée currently produced is the Blanc des Millénaires, a pure Chardonnay cuvée. Although the Brut Réserve wines have seen great acclaim, Charles Heidsieck has not been raking in the profits. Sales have fallen, partly out of necessity whilst reserve stocks were built up, partly because the Mis en Caves concept took the basic cuvée out of the non vintage market somewhat. And the difference in quality between the Mis en Caves wines and the vintage wine has narrowed sufficiently to make the non vintage wine the preferred buy, affecting sales of the vintage wine. In addition, the once popular prestige cuvée Champagne Charlie is no longer produced, replaced by Blanc des Millénaires, which has not made the same impact as its predecessor. For the consumer though, the situation is good - the Brut Reserve Mis en caves wines offer extraordinary quality at an excellent price. I hope the currently evident quality is maintained by Daniel Thibaults's replacement, Régis Camus. (24/3/04)

Contact details:
Address: 4 Bd Henry Vasnier, 51100 Reims
Telephone: +33 (0) 3 26 84 43 50
Fax: +33 (0) 3 26 84 43 90
Internet: www.charlesheidsieck.com

Charles Heidsieck - Tasting Notes

Click to locate stockists.

Charles Heidsieck Brut 2000: The nose here is delightful; although subtle, there are elements of nuts, especially almonds, swirled in cream here. the palate is broad, rather nutty, with a fresh citrus slant to it. It has a fine, palpable fruit texture. Elegantly interwoven flavours swim in a lovely vinous texture; this is stylish, still evolving, and should be fine. From the 2009 annual Champagne Tasting. 17.5+/20 (March 2009)

Charles Heidsieck Brut 2000: There is a little honey and nut on the nose here, behind a fresh layer of white fruits. Lovely style on the palate, rounded with depth and definition. Lovely array of flavours, with brioche and nut oil character, and white tropical fruits. Stylishly composed, balanced, and full of potential, although it is very approachable now. From the 2008 annual Champagne tasting. 17.5+/20 (March 2008)

Charles Heidsieck Brut 1996: A fine straw-gold hue, with an equally fine and delicate bead. The nose is just lovely, elegant and seemingly creamy, with brioche and nutty character. There is a great minerality, with fine evolution showing here. The fresh and crisp mousse is supported by a creamy and broad palate of intensely expressed flavours, nutty and slightly mushroomy, but still with a fine, citrus precision. This is lovely now, but has the structure to go on for years yet, rather like the wine's finish. Excellent. From a 1996 Champagne tasting. 18.5+/20 (August 2007)

Charles Heidsieck Rosé 1996: This has a lovely, copper-tinged onion skin colour. The nose is rather close at present, but the wine has a lovely presence on the palate despite this, showing a good acid backbone and a big, structured style. Full, characterful, needs 4-5 years to show its best. Certainly one of the better wines in this line up. From the annual Champagne Information Bureau Tasting. 16.5+/20 (March 2006)

Charles Heidsieck Blanc des Millénaires Brut 1995: A lightly honeyed nose, with slightly high-toned aromas of polished wood, nutty complexity and mature, dried white fruits. A lovely palate follows, showing fresh character and a mature, elegant seam of richness. A lovely, clean and clearly defined style. A very vinous, appealing, wine which has developed nicely over recent years. Nudging excellence. From the 2008 annual Champagne tasting. 17.5+/20 (March 2008)

Charles Heidsieck Blanc des Millénaires Brut 1995: A pale lemon hue, with notes of mineral honeycomb and smoky, honey-laden brioche on the nose. This is very nice indeed. Full, nutty, honeycomb character. Very open and forward, but with a good structure beneath. Firm acidity. A lovely style, with a lingering, golden nutty finish. Still a touch on the youthful side for me, although it has clearly developed a little since my last tasting, but clearly this had great quality. From the 2007 Champagne Information Bureau Tasting. 17+/20 (March 2007)

Charles Heidsieck Blanc des Millénaires Brut 1995: An appealing, lemon-gold hue. Very open and expressive nose, showing honeycomb swirled with a mineral bite. Quite aggressive style at present, with very bright acidity and a firm mousse, but there is plenty of appeal here, and certainly there is potential. Definitely one for the cellar, and should improve over the next 5-8 years. From the annual Champagne Information Bureau Tasting. 17+/20 (March 2006)

Charles Heidsieck Blanc de Millénaires Brut 1985: A fine but not prominent bead on a golden yellow background. This wine has a truly captivating nose, with coffee, toast, caramel and toffee all putting in an appearance. A delightfully creamy texture to the nutty, toasty palate, with balanced acidity and a lingering finish. Lovely stuff. 17.5/20 (May 2001)

Please noted that unlike most of my other records of tasting notes on non-vintage wines, where I order the notes by date of tasting, most recent first, here I have ordered them by the cellaring date of the cuvée, most recent first.

Charles Heidsieck Brut Réserve NV: Disgorged 2008, but no mis en cave information here. A pale straw hue, and a fine bead. The nose is certainly very developed and interesting, very vinous, with stretched out toffee and brazil nuts, with a hint of autumnal fruits, all warm and golden. The palate shows a similarly warm and rounded character, fleshy and rather plump, with a mouthfeel that tends to overface the acidity and mousse a little. I find this a little surprising, as I would think this wine would be based on the 2004 vintage from the disgorgement date, and thus thought it would be little firmer. Towards the end quite open, a touch loose-knit, but with some slightly bitter grip at the finish. This might come together with time. 15.5-16+?/20 (February 2010)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Cave 2004 Brut Réserve NV: Purchased April 2008, and previously tasted at the annual Champagne tasting in London one month earlier than that. Under Régis Camus Charles Heidsieck seem to have distanced themselves from the overt declaration of the cellaring date as they did with the neck-label 'mis en cave' designation, but in fact the information has merely moved to the back label (this was cellared in 2004, meaning it is based largely on the 2003 vintage), and they have also added dates of disgorgement - this was disgorged in 2007. The hue is pale and elegant, the bead plentiful and an unusual mix of fine and fatter bubbles. The nose is fine, slightly honeyed fruits, caramelised apple and pear, with a gently nutty hint of brioche. A rather appealing, somewhat fat feel to the palate, with an incisive mousse and clean acidity propping up a rather plumper style than usual. I suspect it just needs more time in bottle. Great, evolving flavours though, all lemon brioche and praline. It has come together somewhat since March 2008, but it does still seem a little unintegrated today, nevertheless it has lots of good components and good length too. 17+/20 (September 2009)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Cave 2004 Brut Réserve NV: Current release. Not so prominently labelled as mis en caves compared with previous releases, which is a shame. There is some nicely polished fruit here, but otherwise it does not have a very expressive nose compared with some of the other wines. It is warm, ripe, rather nutty, and not quite as focused as I would have expected. Nevertheless there is some good acidity and the start of a better definition I think. Overall well composed but needs a little time. From the 2008 annual Champagne tasting. 16.5+/20 (March 2008)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Cave 2003 Brut Réserve NV: This is the 2003 cellaring, so largely based on the 2002 vintage. Deep, smoky, brioche and fruit. Some depth and complexity here, belying the generous use of reserve wines I would think. Very fine, gentle and composed on the palate. Appealing, soft, fine mousse. Full of appeal, perhaps not as concentrated as some previous releases of this particular cuvée but very good nevertheless. Certainly one of the better wines here today. From the 2007 Champagne Information Bureau Tasting. 16.5+/20 (March 2007)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 2001 Brut Réserve NV: A good lemon-gold hue with a fairly lazy, sparse bead of surprisingly tight bubbles. White flowers and pale fruits on the nose, with a slightly nutty, stylish finesse, indicating the presence of reserve wines, showing through. Full, creamy white fruit palate, with a lovely, crisp fresh mousse. Rounded, stylish and balanced. Still showing the awkward angles of youth at present though, and so demands a year or two in the cellar to be enjoyed at its best. 16.5+/20 (October 2005)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 2000 Brut Réserve NV: A pale golden hue, with a moderate-sized bead. What a lovely nose, full of citrus character such as orange peel, with notes of dry praline. Just gorgeously expressive. Fresh and precise on the palate, showing good body, elegance and crispness, although it is full and creamy, with more citrus character. Fine length. This has shown great development since I last tasted it, and my score reflects that. Should continue to improve, and drink well, over the next few years. 17.5+/20 (March 2006)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 2000 Brut Réserve NV: Pale hue, with a very tight bead. Clean, piercing, lemon and white fruit on the nose, with green elderflower like notes. A beautifully fresh palate, with a firm mousse opening out into a creaminess on the midpalate. Lovely weight and crisp acidity. A lovely, crystal-clear purity on the finish. Altogether it’s a little tight at present, but offers some lovely primary fruit flavours. Not up to the ‘97 bottling, but ahead of the more forward ’98. Needs three to four years bottle age. 16.5+/20 (November 2004)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 1998 Brut Réserve NV: A mid gold colour in the glass, and a fairly fine bead. A lush, captivating nose, full of forward, ripe white fruits, with a background touch of nuts and marzipan which becomes more obvious as the wine warms in the glass. Also a little vegetal complexity. Plenty of fat texture on the palate, with a good creamy mousse, cut through which sharp, peppery acidity. Plenty of complex flavour too. This is delicious stuff, with a grippy, biting finish. Good, tasty, no-nonsense non-vintage Champagne for drinking over the next year or two. 17/20 (February 2004)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 1997 Brut Réserve NV: A non-vintage cuvée blended and cellared by Daniel Thibault in 1997, and based largely on the 1996 vintage. A moderately deep gold hue, with a fair bead. The nose has advanced considerably since my previous tasting (excepting some faulty bottles I experienced), with lots of walnut, honey and brioche character now evident. The palate is full and creamy, with a supple composition carrying along notes of minerals and nuts, with a bitter bite curiously reminiscent of the taste of the papery casing of pistachio nuts. Lovely structure, rather showy, although to be critical not the focus or delineation of a great Champagne, and a little short on the finish. But lovely just the same, and always great value. From a 1996 Champagne tasting. 17/20 (August 2007)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 1997 Brut Réserve NV: One of the brilliant Mis en Caves range of non-vintage Champagnes from Charles Heidsieck, based largely on the 1996 vintage and cellared by the company in 1997, hence the date. Opened with too little effort, the cork almost falling out of the bottle, clearly having lost all its elasticity. Looks good in the glass, although there is a dirty note troubling the nose. Within minutes the bead disappears and the wine is flat, in the glass and on the palate. Clearly a victim of cork failure probably secondary to poor storage prior to my acquiring them. A second bottle is opened, with the same results. Both, and numerous remaining unopened bottles, are returned to the supplier. From a tasting of non vintage Champagne. Not rated. (May 2003)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 1997 Brut Réserve NV: Lovely colour, fairly deep, and moderate bead. A fantastic nose - full of fruit, almost tropical in profile, with a smoky quality that reminds me of previous cellarings of this wine. Lovely creamy mousse on the palate, which is packed with flavour, which like the nose has a tropical fruit edge. Full bodied, youthful, with grand acidity. This is lovely stuff, with the structure necessary to see it through a period of cellaring, although very approachable now.  18/20 (November 2002) Label

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 1996 Brut Réserve NV: My tasting note opens with a simple...Wow! A rich layer of biscuit and yeast on the nose, underpinned by a superb streak of citrus fruit freshness. This leads to a palate of more excellent citrus fruit with a creamy richness and biscuity undertones. A fine and elegant mousse persist through the midpalate. It culminates in a rich, lingering finish. 17/20 (May 2001)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 1995 Brut Réserve NV: A creamy golden colour, with a fine and lazy bead. Delicious aromas of cream, fresh bread and toast, with some good leesy, yeasty notes. The palate has a fine texture, elegant balancing acidity, and a good toasty, oyster richness. It finishes with a savoury, leesy note. 17/20 (May 2001)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 1994 Brut Réserve NV: A paler lemon gold, with a fine bead. The nose has a surprising intensity of tangerine and mango fruit, with a rich, toasty, yeasty aroma. On the palate, a prominent mousse and superbly fresh, elegant acidity. Lots of citrus fruit, a rich clotted cream-like texture, and a layer of bready yeast. Less classic than the Mis en Caves 1993 NV, but still superb. 17/20 (June 2000)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 1993 Brut Réserve NV: Two bottles tasted within a couple of months. The first has a rich, golden hue in the glass, a fine and quite plentiful bead. Classic biscuit aromas, with a buttery/creamy richness. Palate is a dream - rich, creamy and biscuity, and yet fresh and lively with the necessary balancing acidity. Mouth-filling, and a lovely, lingering presence. Very enjoyable. The later bottle has even greater appeal, with an attractive lemon-gold hue, and a moderately fine bead. Bready, brioche nose. Quite a rich palate, nutty flavours, a soft mousse. Some clean, apply notes, and lovely acidity. The second note is from an English sparkling wine and Champagne tasting. 17.5/20 (August 2000)

Charles Heidsieck Mis en Caves 1992 Brut Réserve NV: Good creamy oyster richness on the nose, with some citrus aromas, developing into coffee and brioche. The palate has a coffee cream richness, rather too prominent lemony acidity, and a good foaming mousse. Seems disjointed, a little harsh even. On the way down so drink up if you have any - although this may have been storage related as this wine was acquired some years after release. 16?/20 (May 2001)