Sauzet added sulfur and used a slightly tighter cork. No more issues, previously poster child for premox.
oh, one more point–why didn’t wines undergo this pseudo-ox phenomenon in the pre-95 winemaking era where pressing was harder, sulfur was higher, batonnage less? And nobody has responded to why screwcap and Diam solve the issue.
Maybe Jasper wants to buy some of my remaining 96s.
Nonsense. Lots of incidences of sauzet premox post those changes. Here is a report of an ‘11, which is well after the changes you describe.
And I’d bet the other vintages aren’t far behind. With the exception of Arlot, I can’t think of any producer who can claim that they’ve solved the issue.
Never mind having solved the problem, too many producers have insisted that their wines haven’t been affected by premature oxidation.
Jasper is no dummy (was said earlier, but worth repeating I think). The fact that premox is still a problem is proof (or an indication) that we have no idea what premox is. And, the recent premox occurrences at Domaine Leflaive seems further proof (they wouldn’t knowingly change things that would increase it, and they’re a well informed domaine)
Also, I don’t know any domaines that solely increased their sulfur (including sauzet) and fixed their premox. Fevre is, so far, the most notable premox turn around…they made a lot of changes, including increased sulfur and changing to a lower oxygen transmission closure (Diam). I’m skeptical that sulfur was the leading (or even notable) factor…I’d guess it’s the closure. Note that Fevre later lowered their sulfur levels some (still higher than they were during the early/mid 2000s).
Have people had premoxed domestic Chardonnay? I haven’t heard about that. I have heard about premox Beaucastel Blanc. Have people had premix Riesling?
Alex–I was referring/replying to what John had quoted, and got trapped into what I warned folks about above–we can end up talking about two different things.
Yes, I listened to the interview and yes, if I remember correctly, he was referring there to wines that were showing an elevated frequency of pre-mox seeming to be pristine several years later, and that maybe in some cases it could be a temporary phenomenon. I’m really not sure how he could have concluded this, and would assume it was circumstantial evidence–finding frequent “premoxed” bottles in a supply of wine, then leaving it alone for a few years, and subsequently finding none in the same supply, but it would interesting to have him explain himself.
I wonder if anyone else here who has a lot of burg experience has suspected the same phenomenon? And how many believe his suspicions? Not me, at least yet (and I don’t dump or sell my supply of wine if I start getting premox–I keep everything I have and have never sold a bottle. So I have a fair number of leftovers to continue to sample, and no sign yet of a turn around in any heavily affected producer.) I do, however, have the capacity to keep an open mind.
I haven’t listened to the podcast. John - Is he really espousing a different theory there than he did in the article?
I get it, but have had too many that are exactly like an apple or banana left on counter, they dont get better.
If it’s temporary then its not oxidation, so what is it?
What he should do is coravin and catalog the ones that are “oxidized” and come out of this new phenomenon.
That’s an interesting idea. I will say that I’ve looked at recent cellartracker notes on bottles from ‘96 that were heavily flawed and I see lots of recent notes for flawed bottles. So at least the data I have doesn’t gibe with what Morris is saying.
At the end of the day, I care very little. I stopped buying white burg after the 2010 vintage and sold everything except the 2010 vintage. I will wait to open my 2010s until the point that they would have been mature. It would be nice to have some support for the idea that I’m doing the right thing, but my guess is that I’ve been fleeced the same way I was with every other white burg vintage of my wine buying lifetime. I’m happy enough with German Riesling, and anyone who still buys white burg for cellaring does so at her own risk.
Maybe people should actually listen to his words rather than just commenting without an understanding of the statement. The podcast is free, after all.
I’ve listened once thru prior to all of this discussion, and not re-listened, but what I remember is that yes, he was stating that some wines that seemed to be heavily affected by what might have been premox seemed to be pristine several years later. He didn’t explain how one would be able to conclude this. He speculated, if I remember correctly, that perhaps is was in some cases just a very ugly phase that some wines went thru and came out the other side by some unknown process. I don’t think he was implying that this was all of premox.
Ordinarily, I would regard this as laughable, and just one more example of those with deep relationships with producers trying to give them a break, but I otherwise have respected his judgement. If anyone knows him or has access to him, it would be nice to have him elaborate. As I asked before, if anyone thinks they have noted the same phenomenon, please speak up.
You’ve posted extensively in a thread on this very topic
Does this not remind anyone else of what white Rhone can do? I’ve read extensively about it, although I don’t think I’ve tried enough of it over a period of time to have observed it myself, but I believe this is seen regularly in quality white rhone: at 5-8 years they can appear utterly oxidized, but at around age 15 onwards they are then utterly pristine. Presumably it’s the same process.
Yes, I have! Good work. and I think I’m being entirely consistent. That’s why I warned earlier in this thread that there may be two different issues here and we should be careful which one is being discussed. I’ll go back and re-listen, but my impression was that Jasper wasn’t referring to the wines that perk up with an hour of air, but in fact to wines that we would all regard as appearing to be premoxed.
I’m very interested in the idea of creating a test for premox that doesn’t involve a Coravin or bottle opening. The bottles are made of glass after all. Could some kind of light/laser be passed through the bottle, with interactions picked up on the other side of the glass? If we can think of ways to study light from stars thousands of light years away, maybe we can figure out a way to study the contents of bottles without affecting them? Chemists, have at it 
.
There’s something going on with white Burg. We all agree that it’s not well understood. Seems imaginable that what is reported as premox is not one phenomenon, but two (or three or four).
Full disclosure: I don’t buy white Burg for long term storage and consumption. I drink it early.
Some people are just that good. ![[highfive.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/d/db21b9263a9105e51f6f8b11e61dd4de095611f9.gif "highfive"){kind=small}
Marcus - do you know of any one else who does hyperoxidation? It’s supposed to result in a more stable finished wine.
I think oxidation itself can be reversed as a chemical reaction, but I’ve never heard of it with finished wine.
The example of white rhone is very interesting. But I have never experienced this phenomenon with white burg–ever. Has anyone else?? It’s not as if we haven’t tried.
John, in the podcast my interpretation is he’s talking about a change in the bottle over years. The paragraph from the book does sound more like waiting for a few hours. Possibly that’s just part of the discussion from the book, or maybe something different, I’m not sure. At a dinner last year, we had a conversation with him where he discussed this issue, and he was referencing changes over years from cases where bottles had seemed oxidized in prior years (i.e. what he seems to be saying in the podcast). I remember thinking harder about it afterward than I expected to, and in my mind he’s very worthy of respect. So I’m a bit skeptical but open minded.