What’s all the fuss about Dosage?
One of the things I see and hear at champagne tastings, much to my bewilderment, is what seems to me to be an obsession amongst some wine writers, wine journalists and others in the trade, about the ‘dosage’ – the amount of sugar that has added to the wine to adjust the level of sweetness.
‘What’s the dosage’? is often the first question asked of the champagne maker even before the wine has been tasted and, in my view, the question is almost always irrelevant.
The questioner is not looking for a broad category of sweetness such as Brut, but rather a precise number in terms of grams of sugar per litre of wine.
Asking this question – before you’ve even tasted the wine - suggests to me that the questioner is just using ‘dosage’ as a buzz word to convey the impression of some expert knowledge about champagne, when, I feel, it does the opposite: a misunderstanding of the purpose of dosage.
Many decades ago, there was a lot more low-quality champagne on the market, and the tendency was to use dosage as a means of masking the poor quality of young wines that really needed longer aging to acquire more balance.
Then, as now, the majority of champagne was classified as Brut. This is a broad category that covered champagne with between 6 and 15 grams of sugar per litre (gr/l) of added sugar.
Although the band was subsequently reduced to 6 – 12 gr/l, that still leaves a lot of leeway to vary the dosage and still remain within the Brut category. In fact, it’s quite possible that one champagne in the Brut category can have twice as much sugar as another champagne that is also in the Brut category. So the categorisation was vague and potentially confusing.
That being the case, it does make sense to ask for more precise detail about the exact dosage in gr/l, but not before the champagne has even been tasted.
Champagne makers – at least the good ones who are likely to be the only ones exhibiting at a trade tasting - don’t add sugar willy nilly just for the sake of it. They adjust the dosage so that it is at the optimum level to complement the blend of wines they have chosen. The key factor is the harmony between the wine and the dosage. If the champagne maker has got this balance right, the champagne with be agreeable on the palate and the dosage will not generate any remark whatsoever because it will seem to be the only and the obvious level of sweetness for that particular champagne.
In my view, he question about the exact amount of sugar doesn’t even come into the discussion unless, on tasting, the champagne seems unbalanced. At that point the issue of the dosage does become relevant, and it is pertinent to enquire about the precise level of dosage, but only after the initial tasting of the champagne.
More recently, it seems to me that a few things have happened which have led to a sort of fixation on the issue of sugar content that I have noticed at some champagne tastings.
- Society as a whole has become more aware of the high (unhealthily high?) levels of sugar in many of the foods on the market.
- It’s become trendy to insist that low dosage champagnes are inherently superior and generally more desirable, when in reality I don’t believe this is necessarily the case at all.
- The skills and technical knowledge of champagne makers have improved allowing them to create champagnes that require less added sugar which are then perceived (and perhaps deliberately promoted) as more ‘natural’.
The combination of these three factors has contributed to the availability and perceived desirability of champagne with low-dosage that fall into the Extra Brut or Brut Zero categories.
Nevertheless, the fact remains that a champagne maker will still select the dosage that he or she deems to be perfect for the blend they have created and the precise amount in gr/litre is only relevant if the balance between the champagne and the dosage appears to be out of balance and this can only be assessed after first tasting the champagne.
In and any case, my view is that there are very few champagne drinkers who can tell the difference between say, a dosage of 5 gr/l and one of 2 gr/l. The use of the broader categories, Brut Zero, Extra Brut and Brut, is adequate for all normal purposes and any finer distinction is of more interest to the wine trade than to all but a small handful of consumers and does not warrant the attention it gets.
But perhaps I’ve got this all wrong. Do let me know what you think.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.







It’s a feast for the senses: live music everywhere, fantastical illuminated floats, spectacular sound-and-light shows, and, naturally, all the along the 500 yard length of the avenue, champagne flowing freely as the great houses open their doors for tastings and pop-up bars : Moët & Chandon, Pol Roger, Perrier-Jouët, De Venoge, Boizel, Esterlin and A. Bergère, to name just a few.






