I genuinely enjoy Champagne as a tipple, but remain eternally baffled by all the overly-yeasty wines that exist. Decades ago it was generally regarded as a sign of second-rate, old-fashioned winemaking to take the subtle, delicate flavours of grapes grown (mostly) on northerly, chalk soils and make them taste like brioche soup, and they were only drunk locally. But the ever-present quest for something different and its attendant snob cachet seems to have embraced the minor makers and their uneven products for years now, so I guess the only worthwhile rule is the eternal one: drink for pleasure, and not to impress.
For what incredibly little it’s worth - my taste is at the opposite end of the pole, where I find the best intersection of pleasure and price is the Veuve Clicquot of Ponsardin’s non-vintage (oh the irony) offer. It’s typical of the large-scale mainly chalk-grown Reims wines, but VCP also blend-in the essential Marne Valley stuff - and that’s the key to a really good Champagne.
The north side of the Marne Valley has a unique geology (Lutetian marls and limestones), yielding a unique soil type - and there is genuinely nowhere else in the entire World that has it. That soil type is so important to producing the best Champagne, that years ago (and perhaps now, but the pre-Millenium expansion has obscured the spots I knew…), there were small patches on the optimum positions where each single row of vines was owned by a different house and had a label proudly proclaiming it! It imparts the unique, subtle aromas characteristic of good Champagne which no other sparkling wine has, and certainly not the enjoyable-but-overpriced British stuff.