This wine of kings comes in many flavors and guises. There are the light and frothy quaffs, and rich and weighty renderings. There are flavors of citrus, apples and minerals, and flavors of yeast, malt and toast. Some are mindful of freshly baked bread and others of roasted nuts. All of these seductive qualities are products of both nature and the winemaker's art, linked by technique and by age.

Of all the aspects of wine drinking, none is more confusing for novices and long-time drinkers alike than the question of age. Myths abound: All reds need time to mature, all whites should be drunk young and all Champagnes should be immediately consumed to appreciate their freshness. Industry statistics clearly show that nearly 98 percent of wine sold in the United States is consumed within a day or two of purchase. Even makers of the most age-worthy reds happily sell their wine to restaurants where they know it will be dispensed and consumed before the ink is dry on the bill of sale.

Given Champagne's strong identification as a special occasion, celebratory beverage, its makers have had their hands full just getting the general public to accept it as an everyday, fine wine, and an exceptionally food-friendly wine at that. The next step, perhaps even more challenging, is to understand Champagne as a wine that can improve with age.

Some Champenois are concerned that consumers won over by Champagne's freshness and nuance may be unprepared for the difference in flavor of aged Champagne. Louis Roederer Winemaker Jean-Baptiste Lecaillon says "some of these flavors are so particular, people are surprised by the character of old Champagne." He believes that 95 percent of their customers would have trouble understanding some of these flavor facets and aging anomalies.

Even the devotees who make up the 5 percent that Lecaillon would call savvy may be hard-pressed to explain the intricacies of aging or debate the merits of the complete Champagne-aging process, which can be divided into two separate - and very different - methods. The essential second fermentation that takes place in the bottle and creates Champagne's distinctive bubbles leads directly to the first method of maturation, which occurs before disgorging and is known as aging on the lees (the heavy, yeasty sediment created during the secondary fermentation and eventually expelled). Aging the finished wine on the cork after disgorgement represents the second method - a process that is essentially optional and even controversial. Few would dispute the value of extensive aging on the lees, which generally imparts toasty, doughy flavors and complexity, but there is an ongoing debate about whether aging on the cork improves a Champagne or deadens it.

"When aged on the lees, preserved from oxidation, a Champagne will keep more freshness and will taste crisper," due to the wine's natural acidity, says Fabrice Rosset, president of Champagne Deutz. "Wine aged on the cork has received plenty of oxygen in the disgorging process, so we move from the reductive process of lees-aging to the oxidative process of aging on a cork."

Cork-aging is an issue, a loss of control, if you will, for every winery. According to Dacotah Sutor, a U.S. spokesperson for Charles Heidsieck Champagne, cork-aging yields a wine that "will slowly deepen in color, lose some of its bubble and take on the caramel and burnt flavors that are the classic characteristics of maderization."

Palates are divided on the benefits of cork-aging. Over the years (and particularly in researching this article), I have tasted many Champagnes aged on the cork well beyond their release date and continue to marvel at the irony of a white wine that is capable of aging longer than most reds. The resulting qualities that develop are almost never explored by consumers and seldom discussed by the Champagne makers themselves.

"True, we don't talk much about it," says Christian Pol-Roger, general manager of the grande marque that bears his family's name. "The fact is, some Champagnes age well [on the cork] and others do not, but beyond that, it is really just a question of taste." The "taste" he refers to is sometimes called goût Anglais (the British propensity for very old, even oxidized, wine) by the French. Those who possess an English palate generally revel in the slightly maderized qualities imparted by cork aging.

Perhaps the subject has been glossed over by some houses because of market realities as well. Ed McCarthy, author of Champagne for Dummies, calls the myth that Champagne doesn't age after release "Stuff and nonsense!"

McCarthy ventures the hypothesis that Champagne houses have an economic interest in selling more wine by convincing consumers that the wine they purchase is best consumed within the year. "Of course they want you to drink it as soon as possible and buy more," he asserts. "They don't tell you that Champagne almost always improves with some [cork] aging."

Of course, some Champagne is more suited to the process than others. In her book Vintage Timecharts, wine critic Jancis Robinson notes that while few non-vintage Champagnes have a long life ahead of them, the best vintage Champagnes can become significantly more complex with aging on the cork, providing they are properly stored.

Thierry Gasco, chef de caves at Champagne Pommery, says storage is crucial for aging Champagne on the cork, both at the winery or in the consumer's possession. "Champagne is sensitive; it must be kept under ideal conditions to slow the oxidation process."

Christian Pol-Roger agrees: "Storage is terribly important: darkness, no vibration, the right humidity and temperature - these are all important aspects of how a Champagne ages."

The generally perceived delicacy of Champagne is in stark contrast to the robustness of the wine when it is aged under ideal conditions. A well-made Champagne is capable of gaining remarkable complexities with cork aging, although the characteristics vary greatly from wine to wine and blend to blend.

Count me among those who are willing to lay down a few bottles of fine Champagne in the hope that the added complexity will be worth the wait. Most of the winemakers with whom I spoke agree. Pommery's Gasco looks to gain flavor components that include dried apricots, vanilla and mocha; Bollinger Export Director Hervé Augustin finds toasted bread, butter, nuts and mushrooms. Jacques Peters, Champagne Veuve Clicquot's cellar master, marked the millennium with non-vintage Clicquot that he had aged for an additional five years after release. "I love the added richness and round-ness the Champagne develops with age," he says.

Consumer perception aside, Louis Roederer's Lecaillon also endorses cork aging: "I always put my [own] wine aside for some time."

Deutz's Rosset believes Champagne is that rare wine that can be enjoyed at many stages. "There are times for young and fresh wines, other times for mature and complex wines," he says diplomatically. "I like Champagne at every stage of evolution, but I particularly like the balance of freshness and vinosity of mature Champagne."

But before a Champagne is disgorged and corked, its maker must first decide how much time it requires on the lees. The period can be as short as twelve months for non-vintage Champagne or as long as six or seven years for high-quality, vintage Champagne. The duration varies for a given vintage and a given blend, but ultimately lees aging must yield a wine that befits a particular house's style.

Some houses emphasize citrus flavors and crisp acidity - a fresh style that calls for conservative aging on the lees - while others strive for a richer style that requires more extended lees aging.

"The longer you keep the wines on their lees," Bollinger's Augustin says, "the better you allow the yeast to free up new aromas and contribute to the overall flavor."

Both the fresher and richer styles can be enhanced and underscored with careful aging.

Double your pleasure

Champagne ages in several ways, all facets of which are related to both the primary fermentation and the aforementioned secondary fermentation.

Some houses, such as Krug and Bollinger, may ferment the base wine in oak barrels, which increase oxidation, though most Champagne is first fermented in stainless steel tanks. The grapes are usually harvested before they are fully ripe to ensure a backbone of acidity that will halt the primary fermentation at about 9 to 10 percent alcohol content. And maturity curves differ for chardonnay, pinot noir and pinot meunier - the region's three legal grape varieties.

After this primary fermentation, wines made from one or more of the three varieties, are blended together to make a cuvée. This cuvée is dosed with yeast and a bit of sugar, then bottled to undergo its second fermentation.

It is from the resulting sediment (the lees) that flavors are imparted to the wine, adding complexity and dimension beyond what was achieved in the primary fermentation. As the lees slowly decompose, the wine's flavors are enriched.

The yeast and sugar also contribute to the creation of carbon dioxide. Because the bottle is now tightly sealed, the gas cannot escape. Instead, it dissolves in the wine and will emerge as millions of effusive bubbles when the cork is eventually popped.

To be sold as non-vintage Champagne, French law dictates the wine must age at least 15 months after the second fermentation begins, and three years if it will bear a vintage date. The best houses, however, invariably opt for longer aging periods to add more complexity to the final product, giving their non-vintage wines three years or more, and their vintage-dated wines as much as five, and even longer for luxury cuvées.

The question of when to disgorge the sediment is paramount, for it represents the moment when the Champagne house strikes a tricky balance between quality and commerce.

"A Champagne is released, ideally, for its peak quality selling period," affirms Dennis Yeast, the U.S. importer of Charles Ellner Champagne.

But when is that?

Daniel Thibault, Charles Heidsieck's winemaker, has authored an impressive chart detailing the difference over time in the proteins and amino acids, the process of change called autolysis (so much nicer a word than decay) that gives Champagne much of its toasty, yeasty and mushroomy character.

"Immediately after beginning its secondary fermentation in the bottle," he explains, "there is a dip in flavor and complexity that slowly begins to rise again. By the time the wine has reached the legal minimum of one year's aging on the lees, flavor and complexity have only just regained their original levels at the point the fermentation was started." He says the legally mandated three months of aging in bottle after disgorgement helps the dosage (the final addition of of sweetened wine used to top up the bottle after the yeast plug is expelled) marry with the wine, but it's really nothing more than a brief interlude that adds only nominal aged character.

When it comes to lees-aging, it is from the one-year mark forward that things literally become more interesting. "From the one-year point to five years on the lees, the aging curve traces a steady rise in the transformation of proteins and amino acids, and after five years the curve nearly flattens as the development slows markedly," Thibault says.

It is that slowed-down aging process that allows Champagne houses to keep undisgorged wines cellared for a very long time. "For each house," he says, "the question of when to disgorge, ending the aging on the lees, is a delicate balance of the costs involved in keeping the wine to gain more complexity and selling it to recoup money invested."

Contact with the lees over time enhances the depth and complexity of the flavors and aromas. According to Dacotah Sutor, the change is most significant in the second and third years that the Champagne rests in the cellars. When it passes the three-year mark, there is a shift in momentum.

Didier Depond, general manager of Champagne Salon, one of the region's most elegant and longest-lived wines, describes the deceleration as a sort of hibernation. "We can keep a wine a very long time on the lees, but the trade-off is that the longer it has rested on the lees, the faster it ages after disgorgement." And, of course, the longer it ages in the white chalk cellars of Champagne, the more it will cost in retail shops and restaurants.

The blending components also contribute greatly to the aging equation.

Pinot meunier is a quick-maturing grape that, according to Champagne Ellner's Yeast, "tends toward a rustic or earthy character along with some of the dark fruit style as well." With the notable exception of Krug and Gratien, which believe strongly in the elegance and balancing power of pinot meunier, the great houses do not generally include it in their vintage blends. Rather, it is pinot noir and chardonnay that are considered the backbone of fine Champagne.

"As it ages, pinot noir reveals toasty aromas of roasted almonds, coffee and cocoa beans and even a gamy character," Deutz's Rosset says.

It is a sense of elegant weight that a number of houses value. Piper-Heidsieck, for example, leans heavily on pinot noir in its blend to emphasize youthful, fruity components such as apple and bright, red berry flavors; Pol Roger and Louis Roederer rely on it for promoting a full-bodied style.

Others, including Pommery and Laurent-Perrier, opt for more restrained elegance by emphasizing chardonnay in their top blends. Chardonnay, however, is hardly a wallflower. "It asserts itself as a wine ages, particularly with age on the lees," Heidsieck's Thibault explains.

With time, even after disgorgement, the floral, meaty flavors and aromas of the pinot noir begin to give way to the citrus qualities imbued by the chardonnay. Ellner's Yeast notes that pinot noir "has more dark fruit orientation, like plum and cherry, but is more tricky to manage in aging."

Rosset believes that with age, "chardonnay expresses nutty flavors of brioche, pastries, toffee and honey" - qualities, he says, that add a sense of richness, but do not develop without time in the bottle. Chardonnay is, after all, the slowest-maturing of the three grapes in the Champagne palette, a fact that often comes as a great surprise to wine lovers.

Charles Heidsieck's Sutor says the misconception may stem from a national palate predisposed to ripe wine. "American winemakers have a mixed relationship with the chardonnay grape," she says. "They tend toward making oaky, upfront wines that reach their full potential early on; the French have a history of creating age-worthy Chardonnays."

To understand the benefits of extended lees aging is one thing, but to be able to go out and purchase such a wine, chill it and pop the cork is quite another. At the very least, it's illuminating, and sometimes even exhilarating.

Since 1952, Bollinger has been releasing a wine it labeled "RD," or recently disgorged ("recent" is usually six months and generally no more than a year from disgorgement to sale). Prior to Bollinger's RD program, it was difficult for consumers to obtain wines aged longer on the lees than a house's standard commercial vintage release. Bollinger's Grande Année vintage wines normally receive five to seven years on the lees, but its RD can go even longer. "For us, a good RD is one that expresses best the identity of the year and our terroir," Hervé Augustin says. "They are not simply Grande Année wines kept longer. For instance, the 1981 was never released as a vintage wine, but kept in our cellars until 1999 when it was absolutely beautiful, so we released it then. There is no rule," he insists, "we disgorge by taste alone."

Quantities of Bollinger RD are small and the wine is expensive. "But if you like old wines," Augustin warns, "then you are better off letting us age the bottles here in our cellars than elsewhere."

Demand has proven so great, that Bollinger RD is now available only through a subscription system.

Moët & Chandon has introduced a similar concept in its "Oenothèque" program, a library release strategy designed to showcase the aging capabilities of its bestselling luxury cuvée, Dom Pérignon. Most notable was a stunning, boxed trio of recently disgorged wines from 1964, 1973 and 1980, all of which proved to be vibrant examples of the Champagne's longevity. The house plans to continue to release very limited quantities of special vintages that have been aging undisturbed in Moët's cellars. (Presently, both the 1973 ($400) and 1985 ($300) Dom Pérignon may be ordered through specialty wine merchants.)

Other wineries are taking a more accessible tack, making the concept of buying aged Champagne realistic for those with slimmer wallets.

An enlightened approach to selling aged Champagne spawned the Mis en Cave program at Charles Heidsieck. Conceived by Thibault more than three years ago, mis en cave means, literally, to put into the cellar. Each year, the house releases three non-vintage wines carrying a date, not of the harvest, but of when the bottles were put into the cellar. Each is disgorged at about the same time, so in the case of the 1993, it had six years aging on the lees, the 1995, four years and the 1996, three years (the 1994 has subsequently sold out).

Because the point of a non-vintage blend is to achieve a consistency in style year after year, Charles Heidsieck's three Mis en Cave bottlings are essentially the same wine disgorged at different points in the evolutionary cycle.

According to Sutor "a wine with three years of aging on the lees tends to keep its upfront acidity, while balancing it with lingering fruitiness. Four years on the lees brings out the wine's floral notes and deepens its fruity characteristics, and even more time adds intensity with bold fruit and a buttery yeastiness balanced by the wine's inherent acidity."

Though not often emphasized in marketing strategies for fear of cannibalizing the non-vintage segment - which is every house's bread and butter - extra age is the primary reason for purchasing vintage-dated Champagne, which invariably is pricier than its non-vintage counterpart. The Mis en Cave program really represents one of the first opportunities for a consumer without a wine cellar and deep pockets to experience first-hand the differences aging on the lees brings about in Champagne. The lessons one can learn from the Mis en Cave wines are transferable to nearly every Champagne house: what is gained by lees aging, and the option to gain added complexity with bottle age.

In the final analysis, most Champagnes will continue to be consumed soon after purchase. For the average bottle, the complexities gained by age will be realized only for the duration of its stay in the cellars of Reims.

But at least there is an option. Once disgorged, Champagnes, are, indeed, age-worthy on the cork. By creating the right storage conditions and exercising a degree of patience, there are new flavor dimensions to be discovered. In fact, I can think of no wine for which the cliche "nothing ventured, nothing gained" is more applicable.

Fabrice Rosset says that when all is said and done, his preference is for aged Champagne. Half-jokingly, he suggests taking a bottle of Deutz, and putting it under your pillow for 15 years. "When you share it with other aficionados, you will realize again that Champagne is not only bubbles, it is wine!"

Bearing witness

I have always been of the school that believes when it comes to Champagne a little age is a good thing. My laboratory for proving this theory is Le Vigneron, a charming restaurant in Reims to which I return year after year.

The winemakers of the region beat a regular path to its door, too. They appreciate not only the solid, regional cooking of its owner, Chef Hervé Liégent, but also its exceptional wine list, a hefty manual that includes both the grande marques and a significant stock of many of the small, independent houses whose Champagnes are rarely exported and are seldom seen elsewhere in France. More impressive is the fact that many of the selections are available in numerous vintages. And with the best-known houses, Liégent has in stock numerous vintages stretching back for decades.

I first went to Le Vigneron on the recommendation of a friend employed by Champagne Louis Roederer. "Tasting older Champagne," she said, "lets one see what the wine is really all about."

That was ten years ago. When I recently repeated her words to Chef Liégent, he smiled, stroked his handlebar mustache and agreed that old Champagne was a rare and particular treat. A visit to his cellar was proffered, and we set off across the street to enter what appeared to be a bank.

Our small group marched single file down a long, dimly lit flight of stairs to a pitch-dark vault carved out of limestone. Liégent flicked a switch and some ancient light bulbs sprang to life, casting just enough of a glow to read, beneath a fine layer of dust, legendary names from decades past: 1964 Dom Pérignon, 1979 Louis Roederer Blanc de Blancs and dozens more, all neatly tucked away in alcoves and racks.

Poking about in his cache with his back to us, he soon found his quarry. "Ah hah," he exclaimed, grabbing the suspect bottle. He popped the cork and poured. Operating in the shadows, his guests could only detect that it was a rosé. Well-developed aromas of caramel, hazelnut, citrus and, though not unpleasant, mustiness and maderization wafted from the glass. The steady bead announced the wine's continuing vitality, and the first sip confirmed the aromatics with the addition of mushroom, dark, toasted bread, spice and a vibrant, yeasty quality.

Though perhaps a bit beyond its virile prime, it was certainly a wine that was aging gracefully. "It has not moved much since it was made," Liégent said. "The limestone keeps the wines at a steady temperature, and we are deep enough to guard against vibration and light. Here, the wine matures slowly."

Nothing in the flavor prepared me for what came next. Liégent revealed the bottle with a flourish: It was not a rosé, but a vintage wine that had gained its deep color from aging on the cork. Slightly faded, the label pronounced it a 1934 Bollinger. You could have knocked me over with a feather.

Taste Tests

Clearly, Champagne possesses some special qualities that give it a longevity equaled by few red wines and almost no dry whites. Aside from my experiences at Le Vigneron at the hands of Chef Liégent, extensive tastings of late-disgorged wines and the same wine from its original release date indicate that cork aging - the facet of aging over which the consumer has the most control - can produce exceptional development.

In preparing this article, I assembled Champagnes for tasting from two perspectives, the first of which was pairing up wines from the same vintage with different disgorgement dates (the original release and a second bottling disgorged at least three years later) to compare the effect of continued aging on the lees versus the more oxidative process of cork- aging. The second format brought together four vintages of the same Champagne, all disgorged on original release to explore the effects of aging on the cork.

The late-disgorged wines uniformly gave an impression of higher and crisper acidity and, generally, were more active in the glass. They often had a finer bead (small bubble size is directly related to aging time, especially time on the lees), as well as a funky aroma that dissipated with airing.

While the Champagne makers generally prefer wines aged on the lees because, to a large extent, the process better preserves the youthful qualities of the wine, most of my tasters (primarily members of the BuyLine panel) preferred the more mature flavors of those Champagnes that had accrued several years of cork-aging. The most appreciated were those that had both additional time on the lees plus some cork age. Champagnes given extensive time on the lees age very quickly after disgorgement, so those with extended lees aging (17 years for the 1981 Bollinger RD and more than 30 for the 1964 Dom Pérignon) seemed relatively advanced with a rather short time on the cork after disgorgement.

The 1985 Cristal provided what turned out to be the definitive example of the differences between wines with significant time aging on the lees and significant time aging on the cork. While the inherent elegance and creaminess one associates with the wine were apparent, the flavors were noticeably different. Tasted blind, a few preferred the freshness of the late-disgorged bottle, but the majority opted for the cork-aged Cristal.

Perhaps most importantly these tastings confirmed just how long-lived Champagne can be when properly stored. Carbon dioxide acts as an antioxidant and preservative whether the wine is aged on the lees or on the cork, and nearly all the wines tasted were astonishingly fresh. Wines without malolactic fermentation retained slightly more crispness, but there were no practical indications of the major differences in age-worthiness that proponents of "no malolactic" claim. Because aging regimens differed slightly in each flight, the wines were not scored. We found Champagnes of this caliber are equally good, just different.

More than 60 wines were tasted; notes on some of the most significant follow here:

Cristal 1985, original release, disgorged June 19, 1991 - Medium-straw hue; very complex aromas of candied citrus peel and toasted almond with juicy flavors that mirror the nose. Very long finish.

Cristal 1985, disgorged on October 22, 1999 - Pale, straw hue with aromas and flavors of toasted almonds and white flowers. Very active with more effervescence than the original release, and crisper acidity. Fresh and youthful, but lacking the flavor development of the cork-aged bottle.

Louis Roederer 1979, disgorged in 1985 - Vibrant, straw hue with a very small bead. Great aromatics: maderized scents augmented by toasted almonds, honey and floral tones. Forward, yeasty notes of toasted bread with elements of mocha and lovely, dried fruit; quintessential, old Champagne qualities. Exceptionally long and elegant.

Louis Roederer 1983, disgorged 1989 - Deep, straw hue. Aromas of white flowers, pine and citrus peel with creamy, like flavors that fade rather quickly.

Louis Roederer 1989 Brut, disgorged 1995 - Vibrant, medium-straw hue; very active bead. Crisp acidity and a creamy texture. Lots of grip with lovely notes of white flowers, honey and fresh apple and pear with hints of toasted almond and mocha. Very long finish, elegant body. A knockout.

Louis Roederer 1990, disgorged 1996 - Fresh aromas and flavors of peach, pear and brioche with faint suggestions of roasted nuts, lemon meringue and apple. Very crisp; lovely flavors that could use even more time to develop well-aged qualities.

Bollinger RD 1981 - Medium straw hue; stunningly vibrant, pinpoint bubbles. Deep, rich aromas of fresh bread and roasted nuts with a whiff of mushroom. Crisp citrus acidity balances rich, yeasty, malty flavors. Very long finish.

Bollinger RD 1988 - Exceptionally fresh with the trademark Bollinger nose of roasted nuts, malt and yeasty bread dough. Flavors are deep with a crisp, acidic accent. Yeast and toast combine with lime peel to yield a big yet elegant Champagne.

Cuvée William Deutz 1982, disgorged 2000 - Pale, straw hue. Toasty, yeasty nose. A faint but refined nutty quality is evident from front to back. Crisp and elegant with a dry finish.

Cuvée William Deutz 1982, disgorged 1988 - Slightly darker straw hue. Complex, toasty aromas with hazelnut and floral components; like qualities on the palate, plus a slight fruity sweetness. Very long finish with more rounded flavors.

Cuvée William Deutz 1985, disgorged 2000 - A distinct acid thread wends its way through a citrus-infused core. Crisp rather than creamy.

Cuvée William Deutz 1985, disgorged 1991 - Showing a soft, creamy aroma and texture in the mouth with elements of hazelnut and lightly toasted bread. Very clean, elegant and rich.

Lanson Gold Label 1990, disgorged in 1995 - More opulent than one would expect at this age with hints of raspberry and sweet hazelnut on the palate and a lemon drop character in the long, crisp finish.

Charles Ellner 1976 Brut, disgorged in 1999 - Impressively fresh aromas of citrus and roasted nuts. Just beginning to show flavors of oxidation, but later vintages were steely with mineral and citrus notes.

Dom Pérignon 1964 (RD) - Very active bead. On the brink of maderization, but still holding its own. With air, aromas of caramel and petrol develop. Light flavors of toast, a hint of molasses and an unforgettable roasted hazelnut quality.

Dom Pérignon 1973 (RD) - Active bead. Soft citrus and toast aromas. Light, malty flavors with nuances of hazelnut. Very long finish. Quite elegant.

Dom Pérignon 1980 (RD) - Very active bead. Scents of caramel, green apple, yeast and toast. Racy in the mouth with vibrant acidity and delicate flavors that hint at white chocolate, brown sugar and vanilla. Finishes with flair. Stylish and extremely youthful.

Pol Roger Sir Winston Churchill 1979, disgorged 1986 - Medium, straw-gold hue. Youthful, fresh doughy aromas. Full, very appealing flavors of toast with a robust yeastiness and elegant citrus that carry through to the long finish. No maderization.

Pol Roger Sir Winston Churchill 1985, disgorged 1991 - White-gold hue; fine bead. The nose blossoms with alluringly rich scents of peach and citrus. Red fruit notes emerge in the very long finish.

Pommery Cuvée Louise, all disgorged at original release, aged on the cork: 1980 - An exceptionally active bead. Reticent aromas of apricot and citrus with pleasant vanilla notes punctuating the nose and palate.

1985 - Beautifully balanced elements of toast, caramel and citrus. Very elegant with great length.

1988 - Rich, developed aromas with a wisp of sherry. Enticingly mature flavors with lovely nuances of toast.

Senior Editor Lyn Farmer produces a daily radio program on wine.