nouveau / liquid assets / preview / review


possibly in 2005, and almost certainly Sarantex if the AWRI is to be believed. Will it be alive and kicking? I wonder. Paul Brajkovich remarked, “We have always used the SaranTin liner as this is the most effective and long-lasting seal. Our own trial with Saranex and other liners showed oxidative affects after only a few months in bottle, so we discarded any idea of using those quite early on. I think the library of wines we now have under the SaranTin liner proves that this was the right decision.” Incidentally, screwcaps are relatively cheap when compared with good-quality cork—20–30c for Sarantex and 45c for SaranTin, while the bottles are marginally (10c or so) more expensive for similar bottles used with cork. Diam closures cost 30–45c. Compare this with a high-quality cork, which will cost upward of €1. Admittedly, converting to screwcap from cork requires a new bottling machine, and there are dual purpose machines for those who want to use both closures for different markets, so there is an initial investment. It was availability rather than price that drove Guffens’s decision to use Sarantex screwcaps for a decade, while in New Zealand it was the unavailability of quality cork that persuaded many producers to seek an alternative closure. The tasting, albeit of just a small sample of New Zealand Chardonnay, would suggest the wisdom of the move to screwcap, and this was confirmed by tasting a few reds—Felton Road Pinot Noir, Kumeu River Bordeaux blend, and Henschke Shiraz. Voting showed that most agreed. “The New Zealand wine industry seems to have been completely vindicated on its decision to switch to screwcap just over 20 years ago,” wrote Stephen Browett in a message to the participants following the event. Maybe this result was predictable, but I was surprised to prefer Ségla and Cepparello under screwcap, although the panel was divided. I felt the screwcap wine displayed a more attractive evolution, showing freshness and greater textural elegance than those under cork. The closure cannot, however, be seen in isolation. There are variables in the bottling process—the physical bottling and additions to the wine— something I felt the tasting exposed. The most obvious variable is the free


30 | THE WORLD OF FINE WINE | ISSUE 87 | 2025


The closure cannot be seen in isolation. There are variables in the bottling process—the physical bottling and additions to the wine—as this tasting exposed. The most obvious variable is the free SO2


. Prior to the tasting, Julien Desplans told me he uses 20mg/l of free SO2 800ml/l CO2 for screwcap. For cork, he uses 30–35mg/l SO2 and 900mg/l CO2 For Diam, 30mg/l free SO2. “If we use


SO2


and .


less sulfur, the wines will be less fruity, but will stay fresher for longer.” I found the 2003 Corton-Charlemagne under screwcap quite oxidized, however, and Julien conceded that in the early days he used too little free SO2


, before


increasing the level from 2011. “I was a little bit troubled at the end of the tasting because I expected a bigger difference, particularly between screwcap and natural cork. But after a little rest, I was quite happy, for since 2011 I think we have managed the screwcaps much better.” By contrast, some wines were


arguably a touch over-reductive—in particular, the 2012 Meursault Les Clous under Diam 10. Tasting this wine, Julien felt he had added too much SO2


when


he started using Diam in 2012. But I still preferred the 2012 Les Clous under Diam to that closed with Sanatex screwcap. I also preferred the Diam closure to the Sarantex screwcap for the Mâcon-Vergesson and St-Véran 2013s. So, for the vintages in which it was possible to compare Diam versus Sarantex, I preferred Diam; and across the tasting as a whole I found the Sarantex screwcap was consistently the worst-performing closure. A quick aside on Diam, which comes


in different grades—5, 10, 30, etc—that reflect potential years of bottle aging. Diam 5 would be used for a wine destined to be opened immediately. A Diam 30 used for the same wine, especially with a generous level of free SO2


, could shut down a wine designed to be accessible. Horses for courses. Julien uses 30mg/l free SO2


for all levels of Diam, commenting, “The


porosity is the same between Diam 10 and 30. The difference is the guarantee of elasticity between the cork and the bottle—at least ten years guaranteed for Diam 10, and at least 30 years guaranteed for Diam 30—so, for us the level of free sulfur has to be the same.” In the hot 2015 vintage, Julien


plumped for a Diam 30 for both the Meursault Les Clous and the Pouilly- Fuissé La Roche, from its warm slope and limestone soil. I assume the warm terroir and rich vintage gave him some concern, but I preferred the more expressive nature of the wines under the screwcap—the higher-quality SaranTin. I felt the Diam 30 suppressed and overprotected the wines, at least for current drinking, but a few years down the line this could well be a good thing. Reflecting on the other examples of Diam versus Saran Tin screwcap, it was also not clear cut. For the 2017 Tinus and C de Sec du Château Closiot Bordeaux, Julien used Diam 10. Once again, I felt the wines were more reduced under the Diam, but not excessively so, and both closures did a good job. So, to return to the AWRI’s earlier statement, if European producers have steered toward Sarantex for fear of reduction, this may have been a poor decision for high-quality wines destined for aging. As for SaranTin, this tasting indicates that producers should be equally concerned about the reduction under Diam as SaranTin. But really, it’s not straightforward balancing closure and SO2


additions,


and there is also the reductive potential of the wine itself to be considered. Certain varieties and production methods are more reductive than others. “We like reductive flavors, and for Chardonnay you don’t need much oxygen. If the reductive flavors are good from the beginning, even the grape skin can taste reductive, it will not get worse. (In common with many top producers of white Burgundy now, Guffens likes to extract more phenolic material by crushing the grapes before pressing). “This good reduction is our goal.”


Priorities and preferences This highlights the point: What is the objective when choosing a closure?


Opposite: An artistic take on closures, but the best more practical option is far from obvious.


All photography by Jon Wyand


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196  |  Page 197  |  Page 198  |  Page 199  |  Page 200  |  Page 201  |  Page 202  |  Page 203  |  Page 204  |  Page 205  |  Page 206  |  Page 207  |  Page 208  |  Page 209  |  Page 210  |  Page 211  |  Page 212  |  Page 213  |  Page 214  |  Page 215  |  Page 216  |  Page 217  |  Page 218  |  Page 219  |  Page 220