The Auswine Forum

I was chatting with a fellow doing a wine tasting in a local liquor outlet this afternoon. (Taylors cheaper reds & whites) He mentioned that it was his understanding that stelvin capped reds would age much more slowly than cork sealed ones - at a quarter the rate, in fact.
I have to admit I have not thought about this much. Do you agree with this contention?

When I last chatted to a yalumba wine maker their impression was agining compared to cork was several times longer, however they also stated the aging process it undergoes with stelvin is different to cork and hence isn't really comparable.

Would be interesting to lay some away, I know 04's moss wood's amy's cabernet is available under both stelvin + cork, and its a very good wine either way.

We're basically in speculation land.

Yep - lots of speculation

FWIW my understanding from a limited # of previous studies I'm aware of, was that stelvin typically aged at a similar rate to the longest lasting cork sealed wines. However it's also sounding like the evolution of the wine might follow a different route (not necessarily better or worse).

More studies needed, but also paying attention to the different regimes (especially wrt sulphur) to ensure we're not drawing conclusions from earlier regimes.

Much to learn and plenty to speculate on in the meantime!

Good timing with seeing this topic come up (again). This reply comes from Portugal, so if I dont make it back to Australia the immigration people have had me shot for being so outspoken in the home of cork....
Ãnybody that has seen my wines will no doubt be aware they are all screw capped (sc).I wondered for ages myself if wines would age under sc or not.The more you thiink about it, does it matter if they dont?Surely the whole idea of winemakers searching for the ultimate cork to guarantee (to a degree) the integrity of their has been solved with the advent of sc's?I digress.Over the years in the course of my employment I've had the opportunity to see many wines, red and white sc´d. Do they age? Yes? Is it slower? Yes?Whats the problem?The best example I've seen was a 1975 Hardy's 'Claret', in a half bottle, under sc. Given that under cork, a half bottle should theoretically age twice as fast (i.e the passage of air through a cork supposedly reacting with half the volume of wine, vice versa for magnums)you would not have much hope of this wine being in good nick. Given also the wine itself probably wasn't a top tier bottling either-witness the fact it was labelled 'Claret' as opposed to being varietally indicated n.b presumably the wine was Shiraz based.A lot of things working against a happy ending here. The wine was enjoyed in the company of some of the country's greatest palates. all were amazed. This is only one wine and one shouldn't base their thoughts on just one, but this is just one of many experiences that has me utterly convinced of sc being the preferred option if you have devoted your winemaking philosophy to this end.
But...the idea of just any wine being sc'd isnt that simple.I really believe there may well be a case for some young cabernets for example, being benefitted from a really good quality cork, as they can show some reduced, green characters, that a good slug of air can fix. Thats why micro-ox has been so popular of late. But as a wine producer, I couldn't sell somebody a case of wine knowing that there are 2 or 3 of those wines that are going to be undrinkable due to cork taint in time.So,to guarantee that every bottle in the case is as good as each other, I use a sc.And adapt my wine making techniques accordingly, but for other reasons as well.
I've just seen how much I've rambled on so I'll go back to my day job for now.
Just one persons take on it...

Its not really comparing apples to apples.
Screwcapped wines (reds) do age differently to those under cork.

No question.
I've found that for bigger reds ( read lots of colour and tannin) the wines age poorly under the s/c going hard and tough.
I don't think its anything to do with sulphur compounds but more to do with tannin chemistry (which is why it isn't an issue in aromatic whites..Ries /Sauv Blanc etc) and we have seen it arise in highly wooded whites.

From the trials we've done I'll avoid s/c for our bigger reds.
I think there will ultimately be a huge consumer backlash against wines that are bottled under "wrong"closures.

Thats the results of our trials anyway. (Now 3 years and still going)

Love those Diams!

Cheers
Smithy

The Diam closure is an excellent choice. I'm happy that great wine makers like Sandro Mossel from Kooyong / Port Philip (amongst many others) have chosen to use them. In their opinion the aging process in stelvin is not acceptable and it shows (recent line up of kooyong clonal chard).

However. I have been reading that American's can't stand the Diam closure, *apparently* it doesn't have a prolonged life span. *as in it will fail after 'X' years, sorry don't know weather that is true or not however seems a general industry concensus that it is shorter*. In fact i've heard stories in which Americans take their Diam closure wines and get it re-corked with natural cork!

Smitty, Do you know why we have soo many wines these days under SC rather than Diam? It seems to me that the Diam gives us the best of both worlds, no cork taint and I presume the same aging rate as cork. This then eliminates the problems we may see with SC where some wines go hard and tough and we will have some really great wines that will be undrinkable due to the closure method used.

Finney (Craig)

Finney
Likewise I'm at a loss as to why so many reds are being bottled under s/c that I don't think will benifit from this closure.
Having said that, it is cheap (14 c / screwcap as opposed to 28 Diam plus 14 cent capsule..so it is 3 times the price.

I expect its about market perception. Haven't previously heard about resistance to the Diam in the US ( but I'm not surprised). Maybe people are getting aboard the S/C is the new beaut best thing for avoiding corktaint.
As for Diams having a shorter life than s/c...absolute bollocks.
1) They won't age the same
2) You only have to look at how far the wine travels up the side of a Diam.(0.5 mm tops) They seal incredibly well.
3) there is no random oxidation. Zip.

The number of higher end SA reds wev'e seen under S/c that have aged really poorly is getting quite serious. And they started out as bloody nice wines!
New thought for us as consumers....No more S/c reds!!!!!


Cheers
Smithy

Is it true that MM Quintet will go to Diam from 05's onwards? If true it is a great move and will make for a good test of Diams ageing capabilities on a wine that has a history of standing up for a long long time.

smithy wrote:As for Diams having a shorter life than s/c...absolute bollocks.

How do you know? They are a composite cork..I like them but we don't know. I would have thought that your wine would have been ideal for screwcap?
GW

PS. All the wines that I have tasted under screwcap are aging well and consistently..like a good cork.

Smitty, if there is only .5mm movement up the diam how can there be any difference in the aging? Is ingress of atmosphere/egress of internal gasses truly evident? If so, how does this improve things? If not it doesn't seem to make sense. At this point there seems to be more opinion than study in the responses. If someone has an opinion on the difference can they provide a reasonable explanation? I'm not arguing one way or the other, I simply am not convinced of the current arguments I'm hearing.

As for the development under the different closures, responses appear to be quite varied (just like personal responses to any wines, surprise, surprise!). I've yet to hear any consistent broad based verdicts, apart from how many good wines end up stuffed under cork!

Cheers,

Mark

Smithy,

Screwcapped wines (reds) do age differently to those under cork.

No question.
I've found that for bigger reds ( read lots of colour and tannin) the wines age poorly under the s/c going hard and tough.

What do you mean by "age differently"? What do you mean by "hard and tough"?

How long have you been running Diam trials?

Roger

A few months ago, I took part in a tasting of s/c vs cork, which yielded suprising results. A few of the Rieslings we looked at were from the mid 70's (Clare Valley) and most of the cork ones wre stuffed, but the s/c looked like a 5-10 year old cork closure wine (for comparison!). The reds on the other hand were the opposite, though none were older than 10 years, the cork won hands down for development of the wines. The s/c ones were all metallic and austere, and even when coming back to them after a few hours, they had not improved. We even tried decanting the hell out of them, but little improvement could be made. It would be interesting to see them again in another ten years though! Most of the reds were Coonawarra Cab. with a few others thrown in for good measure, and the tasters were all respected members of the industry (not in sales!) However then was one particular Cab that was better in s/c than cork (Was only 4 years old) but might have been the cork, second bottle was more neutral. And the one French wine (reputable, expensive producer from the Rhone) was corked! Then we finished of with a magnum of 1974 Redman cab, which was amazing and seemed as it could go at least another ten years.

Gary W wrote:
PS. All the wines that I have tasted under screwcap are aging well and consistently..like a good cork.

Gary,

I have had a few wines that have showed bottle variation under screwcaps; admittedly nothing like the level with corks, but there is some bottle variation under screwcaps.

I have had some that are not ageing well and showing reductive characters.

http://torbwine.com/pa/2006/damnedorscrewed.shtml

silkwood wrote:Smitty, if there is only .5mm movement up the diam how can there be any difference in the aging? Is ingress of atmosphere/egress of internal gasses truly evident? If so, how does this improve things? If not it doesn't seem to make sense. At this point there seems to be more opinion than study in the responses. If someone has an opinion on the difference can they provide a reasonable explanation? I'm not arguing one way or the other, I simply am not convinced of the current arguments I'm hearing.

As for the development under the different closures, responses appear to be quite varied (just like personal responses to any wines, surprise, surprise!). I've yet to hear any consistent broad based verdicts, apart from how many good wines end up stuffed under cork!

Cheers,

Mark

Indeed lots of opinions! Some are based on commercial interest (including self-justification, because that's the decision the winemaker has made); some on personal view from one trench or the other; some on very limited and inconclusive evidence.

The above comments aren't meant to be personal attacks and aren't strictly related to comments on this thread, but hopefully a reminder to people to keep an open (and enquiring) mind. Personally I couldn't criticise a winemaker for going one way or the other, as we don't have all the evidence yet.

regards

Ian

I have another question on a related topic:

Wines sealed with cork, that are then sealed with wax.

I've got a fair number of wines using this combination of methods and am now left wondering whether the addition of the wax will create a seal perhaps more in keeping with a s/c wine. If so then isn't this the worst of both worlds - a wine that risks cork taint *and* ages slowly?

Interesting topic, and one that is very relevant for those who cellar wines. In the April 11th edition of the Sydney Morning Herald's "Good Living" Ralph Kyte-Powell makes a tasting comparison of red and white wines sealed with a cork and screwcap. In his estimation the white wines under screwcap fared better overall than the same wines under cork. The screwcap wines seemed younger and fresher, maintaining their youthful varietal character. The exception seemed to be the older semillon and barrel fermented chardonnay where the cork sealed wines showed greater maturity and complexity. For the red wines the result was mixed.

As far as I am concerned the only reason to cellar wines is in order to ensure a supply of the wine you want, and to age them so that you can drink older, mature wines. If a screwcap wine is going to maintain its fruitiness and mature more slowly then I don't see the point. I can buy and drink fruity wines anytime but to find a broad, complex, expansive bouquet and mature tertiary flavours requires age and that can only come from reasonably lengthy cellaring. To make my point, why would I want my 1994 Wynn's John Riddock (which is still years away from ready) to be under screwcap and be even more backward than it is?

I have no experience with older wines under screwcap but I have had plenty of older wines under cork. Sure, some of them were corked, but most were not. I have had a number of wines over 20 years of age and if they were to be under screwcap I am not sure they would necessarily have been better. And in order to get the equivalent level of age and complexity I probably would have had to wait even longer to drink them.

However, for most people who like their wine big, bold and fruity, and expect to drink them in the next few years I don't think there is anything wrong with screwcap wines. In fact it would be better. No chance of ot being corked, and still drinking much like it did when young. How many times have I heard people say that they were disappointed by a big wine that they liked when they tasted it young. In fact, they were drinking the wine too early, having lost some of its young fruit but not having developed any complexity, essentially in its closed or "dumb" phase. The screwcap would solve that problem, extending the youthful phase of the wine for several years.

Of course, I am no expert, so this is only my opinion. However, if I was cellaring a wine to drink when fully mature, and if I had the choice, I would probably opt for a cork sealed wine. Life is too short, and it is getting shorter every day. No longer can I think about wines that require more than 20 years to develop.

Mahmoud.

TORB wrote:

Gary W wrote:
PS. All the wines that I have tasted under screwcap are aging well and consistently..like a good cork.

Gary,

I have had a few wines that have showed bottle variation under screwcaps; admittedly nothing like the level with corks, but there is some bottle variation under screwcaps.

I have had some that are not ageing well and showing reductive characters.

http://torbwine.com/pa/2006/damnedorscrewed.shtml

I am talking about the ageing thing. I read the Alan Limmer article about 4 months ago...(I think he is a bit out of control...).he is using DIAM in his latest wines which is nice to see.
GW

Interesting topic, and one that is very relevant for those who cellar wines.

Interesting?? God help boring if this is interesting

Relevant?? Ok will give you this one, it is relevant, but id just like to read the exec summary!! Can someone point me to the exec summary please

Craig(NZ) wrote: Can someone point me to the exec summary please

No problem

Cork 89 points
Diam 91-93 points
Screwcap 92-94 points
Zork 90 points

Always a pleasure, never a chore

Ian S wrote:

Craig(NZ) wrote: Can someone point me to the exec summary please

No problem

Cork 89 points
Diam 91-93 points
Screwcap 92-94 points
Zork 90 points

Always a pleasure, never a chore

I would have thought:

Cork:50-100
Diam:85-95
Screwcap:75-96
Zork:75-90
Vinlok 75-90



As a matter of interest 12 wines tasted on Friday arvo all double blind all under screwcap....6 x Riesling all beautiful, 6 x various reds.....2 showing slight reduction and 1 to the point of it being a major fault

A closure debate......what a novel idea.........

I can't add much to the debate rather other than personal opinion, and maybe one point which hasn't been dredged up yet. I understand during the mid to late nineties when our production levels were skyrocketing the demand on corks increased, and the quality declined accordingly. Is it worth considering that many of the wines we are currently drinking and commenting on are from the mid to late nineties, and their may be a higher level of random ox and other issues due to the quality of cork available at the time.

Secondly I will just pose the question, is there the same proportion of structured, cellar-worthy wines available (as a percentage of the market) as there were 15, 20 and 25 years ago, or are we manifesting our disappointment in fruit forward unbalanced wines on the closure. Perhaps many of these wines were never made to be long for the cellar (despite what the label may say)

In terms of personal opinion im still on the fence. There are no all encompassing answers and so many environmental factors such as varietal, style, region, producer, micro-climates, etc etc etc that will have bearing on the outcome. That is why I applaud producers for conducting intensive in-house trials to find out what closure is best for their wines produced from their site, and ignore the drum beating, the vociferous opinions and experts of the self appointed variety.

Cheers,

LL

Personal opinions are all we self appointed experts can offer as well at this stage also

great post LL

I try to keep an open mind, it just seems to slam shut again every time I have a tca affected wine.

roughred wrote:I understand during the mid to late nineties when our production levels were skyrocketing the demand on corks increased, and the quality declined accordingly. Is it worth considering that many of the wines we are currently drinking and commenting on are from the mid to late nineties, and their may be a higher level of random ox and other issues due to the quality of cork available at the time.

'Our production levels' means whose, exactly? France, Italy and Spain make vast oceans of wine. Australia's demand for a proportion of the world's cork supply means diddley-squat. You could treble production in Australia, and it would hardly make a blip in world cork demand - especially when you took out the 40% (or whatever) of wine that goes into casks. As for world-wide, I don't know. Compared to many years ago, consumption per head of wine in the the big-drinking European countries has been falling. On the other hand, perhaps much of that wine was transported and drunk from bulk containers, not making demand on cork. Making a comparison between now and a certain point in history is bound to be a bit dodgy.

Secondly I will just pose the question, is there the same proportion of structured, cellar-worthy wines available (as a percentage of the market) as there were 15, 20 and 25 years ago, or are we manifesting our disappointment in fruit forward unbalanced wines on the closure. Perhaps many of these wines were never made to be long for the cellar (despite what the label may say)

I don't understand what this has to do with corks. Cork problems manifest themselves as TCA contamination (detectable irresective of, and independently from, wine quality) or oxidation. Assuming people are not blaming the effects of poor storage on the cork (ie. excessive oxidation due to 'cooking' of the wine), then whetrher the wine is a structureless mess or not simply aren't relevent. Only the ignorant open a bottle 10 years past it's prime (if it ever had one) and blame the cork for its condition.

cheers,
Graeme

Secondly I will just pose the question, is there the same proportion of structured, cellar-worthy wines available (as a percentage of the market) as there were 15, 20 and 25 years ago, or are we manifesting our disappointment in fruit forward unbalanced wines on the closure. Perhaps many of these wines were never made to be long for the cellar (despite what the label may say)

I don't understand what this has to do with corks. Cork problems manifest themselves as TCA contamination (detectable irresective of, and independently from, wine quality) or oxidation. Assuming people are not blaming the effects of poor storage on the cork (ie. excessive oxidation due to 'cooking' of the wine), then whetrher the wine is a structureless mess or not simply aren't relevent. Only the ignorant open a bottle 10 years past it's prime (if it ever had one) and blame the cork for its condition.

cheers,
Graeme

Think you've misunderstood the point here Graeme. What he is saying is that wines that are badly made in the first place are laying the blame for their condition on the stelvin as not being as good for ageing as cork, when it is the wine that is either not meant to be aged or is not improving with age. Correct me if I'm wrong, roughred.

[quote="Craig(NZ)"][quote]Interesting topic, and one that is very relevant for those who cellar wines.[/quote]

Interesting?? God help boring if this is interesting

Relevant?? Ok will give you this one, it is relevant, but id just like to read the exec summary!! Can someone point me to the exec summary please :lol: :lol:[/quote]


Almost anything to do with wine is interesting if you are a wine geek.

Now, for an executive summary:

White wine for drinking young: screwcap good
White wine for cellaring: take your pick
Red wine for drinking young: screwcap good
Red wine for cellaring: cork good

I hope this helps. Cheers,

Mahmoud.

Graeme,

The indication from wineries I have worked with past and present is that cork quality in Australia dipped from the mid to late nineties. Whether this is a local, national or international phenomena I cannot say, but I simply raise this as a possible explanation for increases in bottle variation, and feel it related to the topic at hand.

With regard to my second comment I just think in the greater scheme of things the closure is just one of a number of factors that will deliver a wine of a certain quality after a number of years. A wine that is deemed to have developed prematurely or simply fallen in a heap after X amount of time may have done so for a number of reason, yet rightly or wrongly the closure will be blamed.

Everything that can be said about closures has been said dozens of times over. I don't have any specific knowedge to add, so I like to look at the issue from a couple of different angles.

Cheers,

LL