The Auswine Forum

rossmckay wrote:With all due respect, you seem to be caught up in semantics and perhaps my first hypothesis could have been put better. The concept of my original statement was in reference to comparative tastings and in the places where corks are the seal of choice, blind tastings (almost) exclusively favour cork sealed wines. There could be a number of reasons for this but it is entirely reasonable and logical that wine drinkers may prefer the taste of wines that are sealed under cork over screw cap.

But since there are plenty of tastings (including people on here) that are contrary to that..or mixed (as done by Chateau Margaux), it no longer becomes a logical statement.
http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000 ... aux%2Bcork

rossmckay wrote:The tastings I am referring to are where people don't have a commercial interest or may be looking to justify a business decision.

So the ones listed were not valid because you felt there were some sort of commercial interest? Just because the one I put was on brokenwood (because they were justifying their decision), the actual information was NOT done by them.
The Elridge one was by them but they were being quite objective about the whole thing. Wineries have moved to screwcap because they believe it works out best...I'm sure you must agree that is the case...In a lot of cases, they just don't have that long long history to worry about and were willing to change because the short/medium term was better even if the long term was not so clear.

rossmckay wrote:I am not advocating any type of seal and can easily take any side of this debate. I have noticed though, that there are some who seem to take a position bordering on religious dogma i.e. a belief system and for whom no amount of evidence will allow them to concede that others have a point. Which brings us neatly back to arguing on the internet.

Really? I don't see anyone on here that has taken any sort of position in a near religious way in favor of screwcap...Obviously you view it like that..but read it again. Most of the opinions on here are quite moderate...Not one person has said screwcaps are the way to go for all wine and should just be implemented now. I think a lot of people want an alternative because of the problems associated with cork and that, at least in the short/medium term, screwcap does a very good job of that. You say you've provided evidence but there are many tastings out there with different results..I see a lot with MIXED results. So in your mind, you've provided evidence that should be taken into account yet all of the other evidence that is completely counter to that should be thrown out?

You've also not considered what Tigger said...It could just be the wines were more evolved under cork when you did the tasting...and for many drinkers, that is going to be a plus. Does that mean the same wine under screwcap won't be at the same stage but later? It is so easy to throw out the flawed cork ones..when they've allowed too much oxygen in..but when a cork does its job right does the wine taste good? Of course..

Here's something you need to consider:

If wines under cork tasted better than ones under screwcap - which is your assessment.
THEN
Wouldn't all wineries stop their trials on screwcap? They're certainly NOT going to use an inferior enclosure. If the evidence is clear that would clearly be the best course of action. They may still look for other closures but certainly screwcaps would be a dead way forward. Since this hasn't happened your assessment either means they have no idea what they're doing ...or your assessment is incorrect in the eyes of these people... What really makes more sense?

The overwhelming opinion seems to be people say they're not sure screwcap wines will EVOLVE properly..and I think that is a perfectly fair statement. If I owned Lafite, there would be no way I'd change unless I was damn sure the wine was going to be the same it would be under cork in 50+ years.

I believe Australia hopped onboard the screwcap train quicker than any other country mainly because of financial reasons:
- high quality cork costs a lot; and
- higher profits due to not having to replaced corked bottles of wine.

I'd hazard a guess that most other countries do not have as "generous" consumer protection laws for corked wine.

Screwcap appears to be ok for short-medium term, however the ageing and development of great red wines for 15-50 years is still up in the air. I'm still very wary about how a screwcap can be so easily damaged...imagine buying a case of screwcapped wine and leaving it in bond for 20 years, only to discover afterwards that the cap had been compromised.

Polymer wrote:So in your mind, you've provided evidence that should be taken into account yet all of the other evidence that is completely counter to that should be thrown out?

Sounds like how government works.

There is a requirement for DOC and DOCG wines in Italy to use cork so my understanding is that Barolo under cork is Barolo, but the same juice under screw cap is just nebbiolo.

So I doubt that they'll be changing any time soon.

Those requirements don't help..but sometimes it won't matter...Sassicaia is a DOC rather than DOCG because they didn't care and felt they were limited..they could easily not even be classified that if they didn't want to..it doesn't matter. Gaja has a bunch of "barolos" that have Barbera and not considered Barolo..I don't think they care either....

For smaller producers, it might matter..for larger established ones, I doubt that would determine what closure they end up using...

But again, those with a long history aren't going to switch without being very sure what they closure will do long term...

Cork appears to be ok for short term as it is easier to get a replacement from the retailer, however the ageing and development of great red wines for 15-50 years is a lottery. I'm still very wary about how a cork can be infected with TCA before it even goes in the bottle... imagine buying a case of cork sealed wine and leaving it in bond for 20 years, only to discover afterwards that the batch of cork was bad.

I think it depends on which country you're in...

In Australia, most wineries are pretty good with replacing wine that has been infected with TCA..even ones 20+ years old...TCA is TCA..even if the wine was over the hill, that wine was dead the winery put a bad cork in.

I don't know if I've ever heard of an entire case being infected before...to their credit, the cork industry does try to detect TCA....I think the only time I've heard of anything close was some italian winery..but even then, it is hard to say whether it was the cork or the actual winery that had the problem (it was some silly high %). But I do agree with what you're saying, the fact that it could happen is not a good thing...

Polymer wrote:I think it depends on which country you're in...

I don't know if I've ever heard of an entire case being infected before.

A whole 6 pack of Cahors purchased from auction. All down the sink! Caveat Emptor.

Interesting article by Jaime Goode

http://www.wineanorak.com/wineblog/wine ... d-screwcap

rens wrote:

Polymer wrote:I think it depends on which country you're in...

I don't know if I've ever heard of an entire case being infected before.

A whole 6 pack of Cahors purchased from auction. All down the sink! Caveat Emptor.

Ugh..that would be painful...

tarija wrote:I believe Australia hopped onboard the screwcap train quicker than any other country mainly because of financial reasons:
- high quality cork costs a lot; and
- higher profits due to not having to replaced corked bottles of wine.

I'd hazard a guess that most other countries do not have as "generous" consumer protection laws for corked wine.

I think there is one other reason: it has never been easy for the Aussie wineries to get the same quality of corks that the best French guys use... So when your only option was slightly less good corks anyway, its easier to switch to something new.

Hacker wrote:Interesting article by Jaime Goode

http://www.wineanorak.com/wineblog/wine ... d-screwcap

Say it isn't so!

rossmckay wrote:

Hacker wrote:Interesting article by Jaime Goode

http://www.wineanorak.com/wineblog/wine ... d-screwcap

Say it isn't so!

Well if that isn't conclusive evidence I don't know what is..

Found this interesting

http://www.amcor.com/promotion/stelvin- ... -wine.html

So it's totally accepted that current screw caps do not breathe, that they should breathe to a degree (depending on the wine)
and now Amcor/stelvin are addressing the issue so they can breathe at different rates for different wines.
Surely if the permeability of a screw cap is able to be controlled than that's the end of cork.
If it's possible to measure the breathability of a cork and replicate those rates in a
screw cap a varying degrees than everyone's a winner right?
Is this the knock out blow for cork?

Polymer wrote:

rossmckay wrote:

Hacker wrote:Interesting article by Jaime Goode

http://www.wineanorak.com/wineblog/wine ... d-screwcap

Say it isn't so!

Well if that isn't conclusive evidence I don't know what is..

Ouch

I wonder if there are subtleties in the wine-making process where wines can be optimised for bottling under one or the other closure? Margaux clearly have fine tuned their winemaking on the assumption that the product will be bottled under cork, and have then just bottled that wine under a variety of closures for the comparison.The technical (rather than cultural) complaints about the result seem to centre around a lack of oxygen getting to the wine -i.e. the wine has reductive characters, the wine is not as developed, etc etc.

Perhaps slightly different, more oxidative treatment in the winery, treatment which may be detrimental to a wine under cork, could be the answer?

But of course I have no idea what I am talking about - I'd love to hear a winemaker's opinion on the subtleties of oxygen content at bottling. Are Eh or oxygen buffering measurements taken in the winery and modified/optimised prior to bottling in the same way that pH and total acidity are?

RE: Jamie Goode's article……..

la louviere 2006!!!!!!!! amazing co-incidence!!!!!!!
I purchased a case of that exact wine from Auction at the beginning of this year, sealed under screwcap, yep, I would rate it around 89-90, same as him. Wish I had got the cork-sealed version!!!!!!!!!!!!

An interesting debate so far.

One issue with cork that needs to be raised is the variability of its wines. They may not be part of the 5%-10% that are officially affected by definable cork taint etc but may be affected in some other more obscure ways that creates variability within a case of one wine. I have always found this to be very frustrating particularly when taking a special wine to a special occasion only to be disappointed that it was not 100% quite right. How many times have you thought that a wine was a little disappointing but could not work out why? With stelvin you know exactly what the wine will taste like. Well probably 98% of the time as there have been some faults associated with damaged caps.

2 negatives for stelvin that need to be considered:

They age more slowly.

You can't tell if it has been heat affected. With cork there are telltale signs.

Carl

Am I the only person who thinks that saying a wine ages better under cork because it ages faster is a lot like saying a wine ages better at a warmer temperature because it ages faster? To me that doesn't make sense. Isn't it common knowledge that the slower the wine ages, as long as it's not so slow it is dormant, the better? It may only be a slight difference but a difference for the better none the less.

I think most people whether they realise it or not (myself included), like the process of uncorking a wine. It creates a greater ambience then just popping off a screw cap and improves the overall enjoyment for a lot of people, particularly if they already believe that wines under cork taste better.

The old world is hell bent on tradition and they won't change from corks until the market demands it and even then I think they will fight it for as long as possible. That being said, I won't buy an old world wine under screw cap because I know how they feel about them and therefore I assume the wine was not taken serious and rubbish.

But as far as tastes go, I don't prefer one over the other, but I don't trust corks.

Ok let's get a bottle of wine with a bit of yeast left in it put a crown seal on it which will mean it is under pressure and mostly full of CO2 not O2 turn it upside down so the head space is not in contact with the seal and leave it for a few decades or more and see if it ages or not? Should put the whole stupid aging debate to bed once and for all. We could probably do one for reds as well as whites.

What do you think



GB

Reading an article in Gourmet Traveller Wine about an awesome tasting of 77 vintages of Chateau Latour. 18 were faulty, most due to a piece of bark.

Carl

vovo wrote:There is a requirement for DOC and DOCG wines in Italy to use cork so my understanding is that Barolo under cork is Barolo, but the same juice under screw cap is just nebbiolo.
So I doubt that they'll be changing any time soon.

Well, that's not right. This afternoon I saw a bottle of Pieropan "Soave Classico" (which is either DOC or DOCG, I forget which) under screwcap, so it's permitted these days, even if it wasn't in 2005.

Also, the notion that Oz winemakers moved the screwcap to save money - at least directly - wasn't true at all. I don't know exactly how much $ winemakers spent recompensing ruined bottles of wine, but that wasn't the reason for the change. It was kicked off initially (outside the 'elite' richmond grove project with a limited bottles of the 98 and 99 rieslings) solely by Clare riesling makers. At a dinner in 2008 Mitchell Taylor told me it basically grew out of a meeting of winemakers at the Auburn pub in the run up to the 2000 vintage. Since riesling seems to be a grape that has relied a bit on 'inside knowledge' for appreciation, it seems the winemakers were more willing to take a chance on a 'new'/(old!) seal. They were basically sick of the fact that so many of their bottles were being ruined by crap corks. It amounted to nothing more than that. And the fact that many of them had tasted the old screwcap-sealed Yalumba bottlings from the 70s/80s and found them jaw-droppingly good.

Mitchell may have claimed (my memory is ropey here) that Taylors were the only ones to commit 100% to the proposal; 17 wineries agreed to launch 'some of' the 2000 vintage with screwcaps; even Grosset split his bottlings between the two seals.
All the bottles back then came from France (oh, the irony); everything about the frst couple of years of the 'screwcap initiative' (and its quick-following Kiwi cousin) cost winemakers more money per bottle to sell than the default cork position.

Just because it's cheaper now, doesn't mean that was the reason for its launch in the first place. As perhaps a moment's thought would have revealed, given the economies of scale involved...
cheers,
GG

Just a little anecdotal data to chew on.

Needs to be prefaced with the fact that I'm a huge fan of screwcaps, half my cellar (50+ bottles) is under screwcap.

1 x Cape Mentelle 2002 Zinfandel under cork, opened September 2014.
Wonderful, integrated, even at 16.5%, no hint of the alcohol, didn't even notice until I looked closer at the bottle the next day. Natural cork, perfect condition, no travel up the sides or anything.

1 x Cape Mentelle 2003 Zinfandel under screwcap, opened last week.
16% and it shows. Flabby and unbalanced from the get go. Benefited from decanting, as did the '02, and was somewhat better the following night - though the aromas dissipated, the palate had integrated the acid and fruit together somewhat. Still a bit tannic which was surprising. Altogether unimpressive and a big let down after the stellar '02.

Both were bought at auction at the same time from the same vendor. What I make of this, is perhaps the rate of ageing required for screwcapped reds of this sort is too long for my patience. Or perhaps there were winemaking and bottling subtleties that hadn't been quite resolved in this wineries first vintage under screwcap. I know Redmans of Coonawarra refuse to change to screwcap, citing that it would change their whole approach to winemaking.

Contrary to this is my own tasting experience with Tyrrell's Vat 1 Semillon. In trying 18 cork-sealed pre-2003 vintages of this wine over the past few years, I've had 2 of them that are drinkable, not affected by TCA or oxidised. That's hardly 10%, and 18 is not exactly a tiny sample size. No problems with the 5 or so post '03's I've had under screwcap, just too young. I have one '02 left, because I'm clinging to the faint hope it's okay, and I so desperately want to try one at an 'advanced' stage of maturity. I probably never will, given how slow they age under screwcap...

gggaz wrote:Both were bought at auction at the same time from the same vendor. What I make of this, is perhaps the rate of ageing required for screwcapped reds of this sort is too long for my patience. Or perhaps there were winemaking and bottling subtleties that hadn't been quite resolved in this wineries first vintage under screwcap. I know Redmans of Coonawarra refuse to change to screwcap, citing that it would change their whole approach to winemaking.

Possibly. Of course, 2002 and 2003 were two different vintages. Big factor...
And, not strictly relevant to closures, but if there was a winery in Australia which needed to change its winemaking approach, it's Redmans...
(a regular entrant in the annual "great underachievers" awards, along with, oh, Bannockburn, Mountadam, Lindemans...and a few other big names who've never impressed me)
cheers,

GraemeG wrote:

gggaz wrote:Both were bought at auction at the same time from the same vendor. What I make of this, is perhaps the rate of ageing required for screwcapped reds of this sort is too long for my patience. Or perhaps there were winemaking and bottling subtleties that hadn't been quite resolved in this wineries first vintage under screwcap. I know Redmans of Coonawarra refuse to change to screwcap, citing that it would change their whole approach to winemaking.

Possibly. Of course, 2002 and 2003 were two different vintages. Big factor...
And, not strictly relevant to closures, but if there was a winery in Australia which needed to change its winemaking approach, it's Redmans...
(a regular entrant in the annual "great underachievers" awards, along with, oh, Bannockburn, Mountadam, Lindemans...and a few other big names who've never impressed me)
cheers,

True, although according to their website, 2003 was a more even and dry growing season, with 02 being problematic and wet during budburst.

Completely agreed about Redmans wines.

Although it sounds like it wasn't too bad and it had higher than normal acidity..which for Zin is good if you want it to age...But comparing wines from a different vintage doesn't really do much for this type of comparison...

Polymer wrote:Although it sounds like it wasn't too bad and it had higher than normal acidity..which for Zin is good if you want it to age...But comparing wines from a different vintage doesn't really do much for this type of comparison...

Absolutely right, so allow me to step out of the way to make room for all the incoming posts from people comparing the exact same wine under 2 different closures...


....

There's plenty of exact wine, screwcap vs cork comparisons out there, and it seems to me that whenever cork wins (and it often does), it's mostly because the wine is more advanced, therefore showing some desirable aged 'tertiary' characters. The screwcap one shows younger, and hence suffers in the comparison. Unless the wine is old enough where the screwcap closure has allowed the wine to age sufficiently, whereby the screwcap tends to win because the wine exhibits both aged characters and a consistent freshness about the fruit as well, while the cork one is more variable and the fruit is sometimes less vibrant.

Other times reductive characters come into play, which can be attributed to a winemakers inexperience with screwcaps. Then there's the issue that modern screwcaps are superior to early models, and available with differing permeabilities, making older comparisons even more difficult. Plus the fact that different people like different things in wine! Some like it young, some don't!

But as we all know, no-one likes TCA and dramatic bottle variation....

gggaz wrote:

Polymer wrote:Although it sounds like it wasn't too bad and it had higher than normal acidity..which for Zin is good if you want it to age...But comparing wines from a different vintage doesn't really do much for this type of comparison...

Absolutely right, so allow me to step out of the way to make room for all the incoming posts from people comparing the exact same wine under 2 different closures...

Well, it is sort of like comparing Vat 1s from the 90s and ones under screwcap. Do I think the more recent Vat 1s can't hit those same highs? Not at all...But the ones I've had from 98 and 99 were absolutely fantastic..and if I compared one of them (with a good cork) to a Vat 1 under screwcap, the 98/99 blows them away...without question..not even close. Does that mean wine tastes better under cork? Not at all....It COULD mean they do...It is possible that, especially with older screwcaps, that a wine will never age properly...or that specific wine won't age properly in the given conditions but it doesn't mean wine under cork tastes better. It could also mean they age better and taste better under screwcap given enough time to age properly..we don't know yet...

Another way to look at it is...Let's say you took a 99 Vat 1 and it was under screwcap and you tried it today..might be just as good..might be too young still..but what about in 10 more years? Might be just as good as the 99 under cork tasted today, might be better..might be worse...based on what we've seen so far there is good reason to believe it will age properly but who knows. With the belief it will, most likely, age properly but without the risks of all the dodgy corks, which would people rather have? The wine gods have been very kind to me when it comes to older Vat 1s but that doesn't mean each time I open one I'm not praying to them...whereas with screwcap it isn't even a thought...

In any case...I'm in favor of Ardea Seal...Same size as cork so not need to worry about headspace...made to allow the same amount of oxygen in as very high quality corks (and can be adjusted), chemically inert...designed to adjust to changes in temperature, humidity, pressure (or something like that..). They're also cheaper than cork. I actually think you'll see a lot of producers in the old world moving towards this instead of screwcap. It is basically a high tech version of a cork, what should be the known attributes of good corks but without the downsides...

I suppose the only way we get stuck with cork is if there is a determination that it actually adds to the flavor of wine or the cork itself is reacting with the wine and doing something...

gggaz wrote:

Polymer wrote:Although it sounds like it wasn't too bad and it had higher than normal acidity..which for Zin is good if you want it to age...But comparing wines from a different vintage doesn't really do much for this type of comparison...

Absolutely right, so allow me to step out of the way to make room for all the incoming posts from people comparing the exact same wine under 2 different closures...


....

From Jamie Goode's site, from Joe Miller about his long-running parallel trials of the same wines under different closures:

"I have been experimenting with different types of closures for many decades. I am often disapointed by so-called careful tests of crew caps versus corks and other closures, which are conducted in a very unscientific way. Many variables aren’t controlled for, and often just one or two bottles are used for the test. Furthermore, cork does flavor a wine even when it doesn’t spoil it, and people who are accostumed to cork flavors in wines may prefer them to the (to me) cleaner, fresher taste of wines sealed with screw caps. My tests have generally been done with the same wines flowing through the same bottling equipment, but ending in different bottles with different closures. Since I use a six spout hand bottle filler, it is simple to put different types of bottles at different spouts. Throughout a bottling sessions I have mixed bottles and closures, with the result that some single cases can have more that one closure-type bottle. Thus the starting wine and aging conditions for the different-closure bottles are the same. My longest running test (over 20 years) is comparing crown caps to corks, and the crown caps win hands down. It isn’t even close.

Over the past six years I have been trying saran, saran-tin, and Vinperfect screwcaps along with the best corks I could find. So far in all blind tastes all tasters have clearly preferred the screw caps over the corks for reds (mainly Pinot Noir) and whites. Our Pinot that has been in the bottle for four years already shows some variation from bottle to bottle for the bottles with corks, and we can’t detect any difference between saran-tin and saranex yet. Clearly we need many more years before we can evaluate the long-term aging potential of the different closures, but so far the screw caps are clearly to be preferred, and the trend we see for the cork-finished wines aren’t promising for long term. In five years we have only had one bottle with a screw cap returned for suspected closure problems (we didn’t detect any), though we have encoutered many corked wines. We have not encoutered any reduction problems. We have not encoutered a sinle customer who balks at a $45 bottle of wine because of a screw cap, but rather our customers are enthusiastic about our use of screw caps. We estimate we save about $6 a case using screwcaps, but wouldn’t hesitate to use corks if we thought they were better. I recently opened a 1999 Musigny that was corked and was undrinkable. I fully believe if it had a screw cap it would have been wonderful.

Joe Miller"