CT reviews show that n.18 might have needed time, got scores of 87/88 points in 2020 and getting 93 now…
1 Like
That’s why I make sure to be number 2 or 3 so that I can quietly sneak out the back door (after staying on a bit to pass off my limited knowledge). .
1 Like
After reading that article about the dN sale it made me a bit nostalgic for the old days. Am thinking about cracking open an OG. N01 tonight for old-times sake. Matt, can’t thank you enough for alerting me to dN right from the beginning!
4 Likes
The article had a picture of the new “The future of wine” corks, which reminded me how much I HATE them. They feel like the cheapest they can get away with. I can’t think they’ll age well, or as good as the different previous iterations, Vinc, Nomacork…
Also makes me think if/when the new corp overlords will move away from the heavy and slanted side bottles, which make them impossible to stack. Another pet peeve.
3 Likes
Great point!
I can see these on their Pinot Grigio, Sauvignon Blanc, etc., ok.
But for the age worthy Reds, this could be a mistake??
Anyone have current cork technology knowledge. Please chime in!
My cork knowledge is so last millennium, circa 1980……think tin LED capsules.
Led as in The element PB. Not, liquid electric diode???
None the less, I just got some #518 Napa Malbec, a long ager I believe?
Hopefully the corks will do justice to the wine??
2 Likes
Rest of us call them Light Emitting Diodes 
1 Like
Thanks, my dinosaur is showing. 
I knew it didn’t sound right.
I used carbon paper, Manuel typewriter, white-out, punch cards, Rolodex, etc…
Any thoughts on the current corks?
Don’t mind Matt @ToddFrench , he’s in mourning, having never gotten over Cameron leaving dN. 
3 Likes
Agglomerated corks are fine, but there are very different grades and levels of Oxygen permeability, more suitable depending on the type of wine. Diam, who’s the leading provider, out of France, has a range from 3 all the way to 20+ years. The Vinc that Cam was using early on was a great comparison to the 20. Very consistent and any of them eliminate the risk of TCA/corked.
Then Cam switched to fully synthetic stopper with the Nomacork. I was skeptical at the beginning as the early implementations of silicone and other plastics were poor and led to quickly oxidized wines. But these Nomacorks also have different levels and the ones Cam picked he was expecting like 20+ years. And if I had one complaint was how slow the wines have evolved, so I can buy that claim.
The ones in use now are like the Diam 3 or 5 tops. I would not age anything past 5 with them.
7 Likes
At long last I’ll be heading into my wine pit tomorrow to take inventory and see what I actually haven’t drunk already. If you have already given me a list of your interests, thank you. If you haven’t but see something here that you might want to buy from me, please let me know now. I plan to begin wheeling and dealing next week. Thanks.
3 Likes
Thank you Carlos! Nice info on cork/closures!
It may be concerning that long lived wines (#497, etc.?) shouldn’t be held over 5 years.
Kinda sucky?
Thanks for the information.
2 Likes
So what does that mean for a wine that requires more bottle time than the closure can provide?
2 Likes
In the olden days, I remember recorking of 1st growth Bordeaux, etc. after about 25 years or so.
By the Chateaux or importers? Totally Irrelevant but interesting???
Since putting up my post an hour ago, several people have responded, so I’m reposting the list of the DN#'s I have purchased. 15, 23, 24, 25, 27, 30, 31, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 46, 47, 49, 50, 55, 57, 58, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 82. 85, 86, 87. 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 99, 100, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 113, 114, 115, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 126, 129, 130, 133, 135. 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 143, 145, 146, 150, 151, 153, 156, 157, 158, 159, 168, 169, 172, 173, 179, 185, 190, 199, 200, 216, 217, 219, 221, 223, 224, 225, 228, 229, 231, 233, 235, 236, 238, 239, 245, 250, 254, 255, 258, 279, 280, 298, 300, 302, 303, 311, 313, 329, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 348, 354, 356, 361, 363, 363, 364, 365, 368, 370, 385, 386, 400, 401, 428
[/quote]
2 Likes
My question exactly. If the cork isn’t going to last more than 3-5 years, why buy wine that needs 6-8 years to strut its stuff? I’m just starting to drink the top tier 2018s…
1 Like
Planned obsolescence.
3 Likes
As I recall, Cameron stated he wanted to use the highest rated closures for reds, and the lower rated closures for whites. In the end he struggled with inconsistent availablity and had to bottle with what was available to get the Chateau Cash Flow going to the next lot. These closures are a “guidleline”, have certain permeability ratings, as I can testify, the '17’s are holding up just fine. '18’s no duds. And on and on. In 2030, may I find some?? I suspect. But Cmon that’s more than 5 years from now. Who’ll be reading this blog complaining about those shitty closures Cameron used back in 2020?
In the end, we paid what like $15 a bottle for these spectacular Cabs/Pinots/Chardonnays? And they have provided YEARS of drinking pleasure, more than most expected.
Cheers, Tim
6 Likes
Those ranges are ‘suggestions’ - like drinking windows 
3 Likes
I agree wholeheartedly, Tim. My concern isn’t with the closures that cam used, since overall he sought out high quality corks for high quality offers. It’s with the corks used by the new management team (the ones with the imprint of 3 bottles). From what others have said, those corks may not go the distance. And I tend to like wines with some bottle age.
4 Likes