I’ve had some people claim that wines aged under DIAM can at times exhibit a ‘glue-y’ flavour to it, although as I understand it, it’s also a widely contested issue. Personally I haven’t had anything aged significantly under DIAM to test that out, curious to hear your experiences with that potential ‘issue.’
To the degree that they are present and positive, natural cork flavors would also be missing from wines with screwcap closures.
-Al
I have regularly opened DIAM closed wines back to about 2008. No off notes at all. Nothing like glue.
None of the people who claim DIAM imparts an off flavor are willing to do a blind tasting. That should tell you something.
1 Like
Thanks for the data point David.
I’m also curious to see see how DIAM corks develop physically over much longer times periods compared to natural corks. Do they degrade in any form like natural corks?
Not really enough time has passed to know how they will break down. No disrespect to anyone here, but if I were trusting anyone, I would trust David Ramey. He’s been using DIAM for years.
My statement was more geared as a musing I had, something I’m eager to see develop and be tested. I’m aware the jury is still out on DIAM in the very long term, though as you said, given the number of knowledgeable people that understand closures well that have adopted DIAM, I have pretty high confidence in DIAM corks as a closure. At the very least they perform as well as corks with the added benefits of limiting premox. I’m always glad to see it in bottles I open and see it as a quality minded producer trying to ensure a consistent product to their client base. Makes me wish more people noted closure type in their TNs and that I should likewise try include in mine.
The current versions of Diam use beeswax and a plant-based binder in place of polyurethane glue. The change was made because some people claimed (small number, anecdotally) the glue was leading to a “glue-y” or bitter taste that most of were not able to detect.
-Al
And some who claimed to taste it claim it still tastes that way, which tells you it’s bullshit.
I don’t sell my plonk, but I’ve been making wine at home for 5 years now and have a hate-hate relationship with cork. First year I bought corks from the home brew store, grade 3. 50% TCA. Second year I bought a grade 2 cork from a highly reputable wine supply company and about 25% TCA. I can’t feel good about giving wine to friends that tastes like cardboard and wet socks.
Bought a filler that can support nitrogen overlays. I have a friend that sources from a mid to high tier supplier direct and set me up with grade 1 that runs close to a dollar a cork with a guarantee. First two years has been 3-5%, but also the bottle variability is crap. I popped one bottle that was a miserable experience and proceeded to open 3 more bottles. I was horrified that I may have given away such foul tasting wine. All were much better, one was a magical experience. My friends have all said they’ve had good bottles. Second year same corks, same experience. For the second year I also used some samples of Diam 10’s. So far, they’ve all been good and haven’t observed the variability of the normal cork. Good enough for me, I’m switching.
I use both Diam, starting with the 2014 vintage with the exception of the Reserve bottling and the Amorim “cork-taint free” line of corks starting in (has to go look it up because of age and whiskey) the 2017 vintage. That vintage I basically have no tracking of which wine got which due to a screw up and I had to emergency use the Amorim corks and didn’t track it. In 18 and 19 I know basically exactly what wines have Amorim and what wines have Diam. There is very little 19 out there yet but enough 18 and likely with the 17s having a more random nature a LOT more of those are on the loose and opened. Zero returns.
They’re wicked f-ing expensive. 3x or close to that on the Diam 30 costing. I get way better pricing on Diam because of volume but the Amorim corks are expensive. Around $1.25 apiece or more. That’s closing in on 3x the price of the bottle as well. I’ve purchased around 20-24,000 corks the last couple of vintages and haven’t heard a peep back. I don’t look at the depletion reports so I don’t know what those have to say but in general in 18 and 19 they went into wines that are only sold at the winery.
Great corks. Love them. Super expensive.
I always though that compound look made it look a bit cheap, so it was just a visual choice. But I’m not dead set against it.
OK, so let’s talk real numbers. I pay $0.59/cork for the lowest entry Evictus “sniffed” corks from Lafitte. Very happy with them, they look great and they have not resulted in a single return. But still, for a small producer like me it adds up to a $10K invoice for each bottling year. That hurts when you have all the fruit costs and other bottling costs come at same time. I would like to get down to about $0.30/cork or even less. So what TCA-free options are available for at that price? Amorim, Cork Supply or DIAM?
Count me as one that cares less about the looks, but until diam is proven to not degrade and break down over x number of years, I would prefer it not be used in long aging wines. I’d rather take the chance of 3% TCA than potential 100% cork failure.
Flame away
1 Like
Adam,
Others will need to pipe in here with regards to costs of these other products. My guess is that DIAM is probably not going to be more expensive then you’re paying (which is actually quite reasonable for natural corks, by the way), but not sure of the other alternatives.
Bottom line - if you and your customers are happy with what you’re currently using, and folks are not returning any, then all seems well in your camp 
Cheers
Scott,
I know others will join in here, but in many ways, you are right to be concerned - just as folks are ‘concerned’ about ageworthiness of wines under screw cap. The time test will prove folks either right for being concerned OR wrong for not trusting the closure, and there’s no way to know for sure right now.
I’m sure folks are going to rush in and say that they’ve had a decade old wine under DIAM and it’s been ‘great’ - the proof will be in either comparing the development of that wine under cork and DIAM side by side or some other measure.
Cheers
Something is working at least to a certain degree, I get way less TCA the last few years in current releases than 20 to 30 years ago.
No flame at all, Scott. But traditional corks break down all of the time. I’ve opened enough 30-40 year old bottles in my time and there is lots of variability in how they have held their seal, their sturdiness and elasticity. I would bet that DIAM and similar corks have a more consistent aging pattern then traditional corks.
William Fevre started experimenting with Diam corks in 2003, and used them for all of their village bottlings since 2006 with good results as far as the wines developing and the corks not disintegrating and tainting the wine (shifted 1ers to the closure in 2007, grand crus in 2010). In 2017, 75% of all grand cru white burgs were bottled with Diam, which seems to suggest a high level of confidence in that community.
This article from Bill Nanson includes at tasting of 2006-2017 Fevre village Chablis.
-Al
For those that are concerned about the integrity of DIAM corks, do note that the adhesives used to agglomerate the DIAM corks are the same adhesives that have been used in the production of Champagne corks for the last 50+ years.
That’s true, but Champagne corks have disks of real cork on the bottom where most of the contact with the wine occurs.
-Al
That’s what I’m saying. The adhesives used to hold the cork disks together are the same that are used to bind together DIAM corks.
So if time has shown that those adhesives are long lasting enough to secure the disks in champagne corks for decades, there’s strong evidence to suggest that they’ll bind DIAM corks together equally well. Slightly different as glueing a disk and small cork particles are different, but it suggests that the adhesive is sufficiently long lasting. Only time will though