Decanting has always seemed somewhat of a mystic art to me, to say nothing of differences between various aeration methods, so I’m just curious as to your prefences on this: Do you prefer one method versus the other? Or, do you use different decanting methods for different purposes/occasions? Do you use different decanting methods for different wines?
I am interested in your practice as it pertains to aeration specifically, not in terms of just getting a wine off it’s sediment.
I personally lean towards thinking a long, slow decant out of the bottle is preferable to a short decant involving splashing and/or a wide decanter. I suspect that wine does not aerate equally but simply at a different speed based on the amount of oxygen exposure (for example, as between just popping the cork and leaving the bottle open vs. pouring in a decanter vs. putting into a paint can shaker), and my hunch is that a slower decant tends to be better.
I’m also more likely to use a slow aeration method for older wines and more delicate wines such as pinot, and more willing to use a decanter for younger wines and more powerful wines such as Barolo or Bordeaux.
But “mysticism,” guesswork, and feel is a big part of it, plus simply practicalities (did I decide to open this bottle in the morning, or 30 minutes before it’s time to start drinking it?).
It would be fun to get a panel of good tasters and do a comparison. Say four bottles of the same youngish Bordeaux, one popped and poured, one simply uncorked the night before and left upright, one poured into a decanter for 3 hours, and one shaken hard, splashed into a decanter and swirled around aggressively for 10 minutes. Taste them blind, and see what the differences and preferences are, if any.
I’ll admit – I find it an interesting part of the wine experience to observe and experiment with aeration. It’s sometimes frustrating when you don’t get it right, but I think it’s an interesting part of the experience.
I find I double decant a lot, but it mostly relates to practicalities of not deciding what I want to drink until 1/2 hour before. the only reason I “double” is that I much prefer to serve out of the original bottle, and it’s also easier for transport to tastings.
I generally never decant without tasting the wine first. Some wines almost always need it, like younger cab/merlot-based wines, and we’ll often leave Bordeaux in the decanter for the entire bottle (though will sometimes try to “put the genie back in the bottle” if the wine hits a sweet spot drinking window). For pinot noirs (which is most of what we consume), if its younger, the initial taste usually dictates that a quick double-decant is in order, then it generally works out great to let it evolve in the bottle from there. Some pinots almost always require at least a brief decant (e.g., Fourrier, to release CO2), but I generally don’t like what happens to pinots when they’re exposed to too much air, so we never leave them in the decanter for more than about 15 minutes. We’ll often just pop ‘n’ pour after the initial taste, particularly if its a red Burgundy with a little age on it…
Since the majority of what I drink is red or white from Burgundy (though plenty of Alsace whites and Piemonte reds, too)…it is this category I think mostly about re: aeration.
I think even most older wines needs tons of aeration to show their best (maybe my biggest surprise as I age out). Reds often show best a day or two later. This shocks me (and so do many Chablis and even Condrieu). So, for me the choice is to pop and pour or to give a long aeration in an open vessel. The risk of pop and pour is that the wine might go back into a shell pretty soon thereafter…and not come out for a long time (after the meal/tasting). But, you do have a chance to catch something good, albeit briefly. Long aeration is clear; very few wines go over the hill in that process. (Though, with all of this you have to use your own buds and knowledge and goals.) The real culprit is a short aeration. That will almost always ensure a wine showing dumb/closed, as it captures neiher of the above two approaches. Of course, “short” is pretty vague…too…again…you have to use your insights…and your options.
Try tasting different methods, with the same bottle side by side…if you need convincing.
And, to be clear, I think “slow ox”/Audouzing…is the same as pop and pour…just the pop is a little earlier…but so little wine is exposed to the air that it is the same as doing nothing, IMO. YOu will catch that initial jubilation. (And, to be fair, with really old wines, that’s what you want/the safest method.
For red Burgundy, what I mainly drink, I’ve found that the traditional is the best: pour some, let it open up in the glass.
For other reds, I taste first. Some might need at most an hour or two decant. A gentle decant; no rough splashes, blenders, etc. I am very skeptical of claims that wines need 8, 12, 24 hours or more aeration; they just seem to lose complexity that way.
The problem , IMO, is that after a while, a Burg. will close up in the glass…though there is a window, for sure. But, if you’re on the wrong side of the window…that’s the problem.
As best I can understand the mystery of all this, there are three fundamental processes are at work – two beneficial and one potentially detrimental: (1) releasing reduction and other odors you want to blow off, (2) exposing the wine to oxygen to open it up and (3) allowing aromas to arise from the wine.
– A. Merely pulling the cork or pulling the cork and pouring off a little takes care of (1) and a bit of (2).
– B. Pouring the wine into a decanter or another bottle or a glass does more of (1) and (2). Double decanting does it very intensely.
– C. Leaving the wine in a decanter with a large surface area will do both (2) and (3).
I agree with Stuart that (A) doesn’t do much, but it may be appropriate for a very old wine that’s delicate.
Double decanting is at the other extreme, and I wouldn’t do that except for a very young wine that was still tight as a fist even a few minutes after a first decant.
I’ve had great luck with (C) over the years with a wide range of wines – Bordeaux, Burgundy, Barolo, old white Burgundy (before the premox days) and even young riesling. But leaving a large surface area allows a lot of aromas to evaporate and, except for very young reds, I stay away from wide-bottomed decanters because the surface area/wine ratio is so high, particularly as you drain the decanter.
Greg dal Piaz has convinced me of the virtues of decanting into another bottle (or sometimes double decanting gently from bottle to bottle) some time ahead and then sealing the bottles. That introduces oxygen but doesn’t leave room for a lot of aromas to evaporate. This has been stunningly successful with old Barolos and it seems to me more predictable than traditional long decanting, where you sometimes have to wait and wait until a wine is in its moment.
But, basically, it’s all voodoo and somewhat unpredictable.
A long slow aeration does yield different results than a more accelerated aeration. But, practically speaking, it depends on the age, body, and structure of the wine, and how much time you have. With older mature wines I definitely prefer the slow-O no-decant approach. This is more practical with Burgs, since they are inherently less tannic than Bordeaux for instance, but I am thinking in terms of 20-year-old ones (or more) ideally. For Bordeaux, maybe 25 - 30 years old, though a sturdy vintage like 1970 will really need a LONG time, say 10 hours, in many cases.
I don’t drink younger wines very often, having accumulated a cellar over the years! But I think a younger wine will probably need the more vigorous decant routine, or else something like 24 hours of slow-O! The slow-O approach, with older wines, lets them develop nicely, but preserves their vitality and complexity, which can be blunted somewhat by a decant.
So in general I think you can adjust the method, and timing, to fit the age and structure of a particular wine. Experiment! Serving temperature is also very important. A cool temperature will focus and strengthen older fruit, but too cold and a wine will get hard and even nasty.
When I decanted more I always used a moderate surface area carafe though. A wide-bottom one might look exotic, but I think it encourages decline and over-aeration, unless you’re dealing with something like a young Port. But they might be OK for younger wines in general?
I’ve never had them actually close up in the glass once they are fully open, though as they develop in the glass they do go through a number of mini-phases, some more pleasant than others, until they reach the sweet spot. (The sweet spot being my purely subjective judgement.) This spot might take an hour to reach, usually less, sometimes more, but once it’s there, I’ve remained satisfied. Maybe that sweet spot is also a phase, a window, but I can’t remember it closing back down–though at times the wine continued to improve and found a better sweet spot.
I guess it also depends on how long it takes one to consume a wine in a glass…if you just pour it in tranches…from the bottle, I guess each glass could have the benefit of that initial rush. If one leaves a glass in the open to see how it evolves, and doesn’t pour in more, that’s when the wine is more likely to close up…or possibly be closed up out of the bottle. I think you do have to do some figuring among the possible variables…including your goals, purpose and time available…and experience to figure out the best strategy.
Last night I opened a Dauvissat '99 “Sechets” and let it sit in decanter for 4 hours or so…it was really nice. This morning, after leaving the decanter open in a very cold kitchen…it was fantastic…and evolved to where I would hope it would. Right out of the bottle and in the first hour or so…i tried both…the wine showed very very little of its promise, though it wasn’t “bad”. My guess, from experiences with Dauvissat wines, is that it will be holding fine for dinner tonight (though we won’t be here.) It always amazes me. And, once you know what the possibilities really are…it’s difficult not to want to make them happen. That’s the paradox…to know what a wine’s really capable of and …how to try to get it to go there…not just to have it taste/show ok in a short window. IMO. To use your term, Mike, I guess the challenge is to recognize when a wine’s “fully open”. It can be baffling.
In the end, it is paradoxical and baffling, but it is also totally subjective. We are the ones who have to drink the wine we drink. As for my technique, I pour some, swirl it, let it open, taste it, give it time, swirl, drink, swirl, pour a little more in swirl, taste, swirl, drink. It’s really quite interactive, so maybe that “initial rush” does work; maybe it would close otherwise. The point for me is that I find the wine reaches a “sweet spot” fairly quickly; this is not merely “ok”; it finds a place I find truly enjoyable.
A couple points: I used to decant Burgundy, but even then, I never thought it needed more than 90 minutes or so until it was good to go. I stopped decanting not because, as some traditional Burgundians fear, I was damaging the wine from the process, but because it did not need it. I tend to drink younger Burgundies (under 10 years), and the claim is the younger wines need the most air. Perhaps; I just don’t think they need that much.
My experience with long term aeration is with the half-a-bottle re-corked and left overnight in the fridge or cold cellar. Again, it is subjective. I have found such wines lose some complexity, or the flavors are somewhat washed-out. (I’ve had this with northern Rhones also, where the initial, delightfully rich spicy notes are simply gone the next day.) I know many people like long aeration, and many people say many wines are fabulous the next day or the day after that, but I don’t experience that. With so much in wine, it is very personal. Maybe what I find lacking in complexity or washed-out is fully-integrated and silky mellow to others.
It is the same with tasting notes when it sounds like someone has tasted something totally different than I have though it is the same wine. Wine is a mystery.
Though it isn’t really that “subjective”, people’s reactions to a specific wine certainly are , and can be all over the place. That’s why whenever I read about someone popping and pouring and thinking a wine is closed or “bad” or way too young…I give the report little credence…even if I have reason to suspect that the taster knows what he/she is doing, should be expecting, etc.
And, people “enjoy” different things. I saw that with the 2004 reds. I think they’re very flawed; others really enjoy them.
A half bottle recorked, back in the cellar, IMO, is not really aeration. In fact, assuming the wine is enjoyable when it’s left there…it is a recipe for a closed in wine, as the wine won’t really evolve under those circumstances.
But, it is certain that people’s perceptions are all over the spectrum…and what they enjoy, too…that’s also why I am not too interested in detailed tasting notes…and more interested in the harmony of a wine or its readiness or future.
I do think certain things, though, like realistic expectations and some planning…can make the odds better…maybe less of a “mystery”. In large part, that’s why, IMO, Burgundy as a category has such a bad rep in some people’s views.
I also find I taste best early in the morning, myself, which is why I often find second day wines appealing: I am not interested in drinking them then, only in trying to discern what they have to offer.