I had these two bottles side by side prior to the Chevalier versus Montrachet event showdown. Both bubbles were served blind, and we were made guessing whether it’s a grower or a house champagne. Everyone believed it was house champagne, and everyone deserved a pat on the shoulder, good start. I will briefly describe both bubble’s characters here.
Krug 2004 was initially quite muted on the nose, with slight yeast and toasty character showing up eventually. The content was very sharp in terms of flavor, very strong acidity and a tremendous length of finishing, the fruits surfaced late into the tasting, so it was telling me this vintage can really age for multiple decades before reaching it’s peak.
Cristal 2004 was much easier to spot, as the main character of Cristal is the fruity profile, although I must mention that initially both bubbles fruits was not easily detectable, it was only when the bubbles start to warm up, then the fruits become obvious. Cristal 2004 possessed an elegant fruit profile, and actually very precisely made champagne.
The verdict for my preference of both comparison was Krug 2004, as I liked it’s ageing potential, and not so upfront with it’s character, with a lot more shades of hidden characters not revealing right on the face.