Prosecco is arguably the best known and most successful sparkling wine after Champagne and thats partly down to the producers protecting the integrity of the wines from New World interlopers. If you want prosecco, it has to be produced in one of the specified regions of Northern Italy.
It’s also broken age barriers, becoming the drink of the young trendy set all over the world, a sort of party wine that you can open anytime whereas Champers has stayed a bit aloof in many ways, only to be opened on special occasions like weddings, funerals and divorces.
It’s too easy to focus on the occasion for the opening rather than the major differences that exist between the styles though. Yes, they are both bubbly, yes they both come in dry, medium and rose but the palates are strikingly different with prosecco being lighter and if I may say so, slightly easier to enjoy than it’s French cousin. Fruit isn't something normally associated with the more high brow Champers although you can occasionally refer to apple characteristics in addition to the brioche and many other bakery references.
With Prosecco however, it's fruit fruit fruit but in a classy way because the modern proseccos have a depth and complexity that their grandfathers of the 80’s lacked, and that's what makes them so fascinating. Yeah, there's plenty of cheapies on the market but please, please avoid them like the plague unless you like headaches and fits of burping.
Carpene Malvolti 1868 Prosecco
I can always rely on POP to come up with a beauty and this one is fun and fruity. Apples and grapefruits flavours with a refreshing hint of acidity on the finish that lifts the whole wine. Great with seafood.
POP Wines Glasgow £16.50
Bottega Rose Gold Prosecco
Still the daddy or mummy of them all if you really want fun. Flowery on the nose with enough mixed berries to make a fruit basket on the palate.
Gretnagreen.com £29.00
@gerardfinewine
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here