Does fine champaign produce smaller bubbles?

[yukoncpa]

An attractive girl sat next to me in a bar and after some brief conversation, she ordered two glasses of Dom Perignon, for herself and for me, then another and another, till we polished off the only bottle they had. Amazingly, I managed to not get lucky in any other respect with this woman.

But during our conversation, she brought up the interesting fact that the finer the champaign, the smaller the bubbles that form in the glass. I became obsessed with this statement ( indeed, I’m quite sure that it was this obsession that prevented any further luck with the woman).

I pointed out that all the bubbles seem to be coming from fixed spots on the glass itself. And since I’ve read a bit about bubble formation, I explained that bubbles form in nucleation sites, which are tiny bits of crud on the glass or scratches on the glass. Tiny bubbles congregate on these sites until they are big enough to survive on their own, then they burst free and float to the top. I opined that the quality of the champaign may not be the attributing factor to small bubbles, but rather, the quality of the goblet. Perhaps a crystal flute, has finer scratches or imperfections, which cause finer bubbles.

At any rate, I was left high and dry and began to wonder if she was right after all. Does the quality of the champaign in any way correlate to the size of the bubbles?

edit - I wasn't being cheap with this woman. I did buy her a drink early on. When she asked for two glasses of Dom Perignon, the bartender wouldn't open the bottle unless she paid for the whole bottle, which she did and refused assistance from me.

[Neuge]

Unless the finer champaign has a smaller surface tension, I don't see how. It's entirely possible that it does however.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Unless the finer champaign has a smaller surface tension, I don't see how. It's entirely possible that it does however.



[/ QUOTE ] How does contraction of molecules or cohesiveness of molecules at the surface of a liquid effect bubble size? Is this cohesiveness something that is uniform throughout the liquid?

[ChrisV]

I'm not sure, but I think this relates to the mouthfeel of the champagne. It's about how much carbon dioxide is crammed into the wine. Champagne with a "fine bead" is more likely to have a "soft mousse". Bead is the term used to describe the appearance of the bubbles, while mousse describes how the bubbles feel in the mouth. A "hard mousse" is an undesirable attribute.

There might be other reasons why a fine bead is believed to be better. I will say that usually wine nuts are correct about what makes a wine better or worse even if the idea doesn't make immediate intuitive sense. For instance, wine newbies tend to scoff at the idea that glass shape makes a big difference in the way a wine tastes, but I can assure you that it does.

[Neuge]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unless the finer champaign has a smaller surface tension, I don't see how. It's entirely possible that it does however.



[/ QUOTE ] How does contraction of molecules or cohesiveness of molecules at the surface of a liquid effect bubble size? Is this cohesiveness something that is uniform throughout the liquid?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're generally correct in your OP about bubble formation sites, and the bubbles breaking-off and rising when they become large enough. Surface tension determines how large the bubbles need be. It also determines the bubble size in that it affects the pressure inside the bubble (and hence its volume).

And no, it's not uniform throughout the liquid volume, hence the name surface tension. You should look up the wiki page or some other source for the phenomenon's cause.

Also I was wrong in my post too. The supersaturation of CO2 is likely higher in fine champaign, which would increase spontaneous nucleation nucleation sites independent of the glass condition. That would likely be the cause.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure, but I think this relates to the mouthfeel of the champagne. It's about how much carbon dioxide is crammed into the wine. Champagne with a "fine bead" is more likely to have a "soft mousse". Bead is the term used to describe the appearance of the bubbles, while mousse describes how the bubbles feel in the mouth. A "hard mousse" is an undesirable attribute.

There might be other reasons why a fine bead is believed to be better. I will say that usually wine nuts are correct about what makes a wine better or worse even if the idea doesn't make immediate intuitive sense. For instance, wine newbies tend to scoff at the idea that glass shape makes a big difference in the way a wine tastes, but I can assure you that it does.



[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, this is very interesting. I don’t know a thing about champaign, but you mentioned cramming CO2 into the wine. Could it be that finer champaigns naturally carbonate in the bottle? If so, then you would definitely, I think, have a difference in bubble size.

[Neuge]

[ QUOTE ]
It's about how much carbon dioxide is crammed into the wine.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I realized this after my first post. It is almost certainly the major cause of bubble size differences, assuming we're using the same glass.

I won't comment on why this makes good champaign taste better. I've never had any except brief swigs from a cheap bottle on New Years Eve.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Also I was wrong in my post too. The supersaturation of CO2 is likely higher in fine champaign, which would increase spontaneous nucleation nucleation sites independent of the glass condition. That would likely be the cause.



[/ QUOTE ] Ok, this must be the case, if indeed her assertion is true, which I'm thinking it was. Thanks Neuge.

[Neuge]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure, but I think this relates to the mouthfeel of the champagne. It's about how much carbon dioxide is crammed into the wine. Champagne with a "fine bead" is more likely to have a "soft mousse". Bead is the term used to describe the appearance of the bubbles, while mousse describes how the bubbles feel in the mouth. A "hard mousse" is an undesirable attribute.

There might be other reasons why a fine bead is believed to be better. I will say that usually wine nuts are correct about what makes a wine better or worse even if the idea doesn't make immediate intuitive sense. For instance, wine newbies tend to scoff at the idea that glass shape makes a big difference in the way a wine tastes, but I can assure you that it does.



[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, this is very interesting. I don’t know a thing about champaign, but you mentioned cramming CO2 into the wine. Could it be that the finer champaign’s naturally carbonate in the bottle? If so, then you would definitely, I think, have a difference in bubble size.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. CO2 is always added after in any beverage preparation. Around any mass-producing brewer or bottling company you'll see one or more large silos. Most people assume it's to store the liquid in bulk. It's actually used to store all the CO2 they're gonna use.

[vhawk01]

I think the lab of Ho et al has been doing some really pioneering work on this.