That is fair, and I agree it’s probably not that simple. I liked your insight on Dauvissat and the potential for “malolactic instability.” My train of thought was that longer time in barrel would theoretically reduce (but definitely not eliminate) the risk on an incomplete or sluggish malo that could start back up during transport.
Not sure if your opinion has changed since you discussed this in 2020 
Put it this way, I just ordered DIAM 30s for my own white wines in Burgundy.
Sorry. Vincent.
I have always felt that whereas diam may help prevent premox, corks are not the problem.
Why is there no premox here in California?? It seems to be French problem. I don’t think we get corks superior to what others get. Corks are graded and priced accordingly.
In a classic Burgundy bottle any cork over 45 mm long is a waste of money and may be counterproductive.
corks are the problem in a setting where batonnage, too gentle pressing, and low sulfur are all used, such that the variable oxygen permeability of cork allows random premature oxidation of some bottles. That’s my conclusion and how the random nature of premox can be explained. It’s not happening under Diam.
I’ve been enjoying the 2014’s over the last couple of years and every bottle I’ve encountered has been excellent. Also really enjoying the 2017s.
Alan,
You pinpoint several of the real causes, though I am not sure about batonnage. Ramey stirs the lees and his whites age well.
I hope we are right about diam, as I have a lot of Genevrieres bottled with it.
Because only a relative handful of California Chardonnay can age? How is Kendall Jackson or Clos du Bois at 10 years old?
Howard,
Many Chardonnays made here are not designed to be aged. But there are many that do:
1/Mt Eden
2/the old Chalones
3/anything out of Au Bon Climat and the old Qupe
4/Marcassin
5/Ramey
6/the old Acacia
7/Saintsbury
8/Mondavi
The wines that aged well and 1990 and haven’t changed direction are still aging well.
On the other hand, there are many Burgundies that aged well for a long time, then didn’t age well for a blip and now may be ageing well.
German wines seem to keep on keepin’ on. Just opened an '02 last night.
Opened up a '99 that Clendenen and I made together…fine and dandy in spite of the crappy cork.
Just opened an oxidized bottle of 2017 Domaine Guillemot-Michel Viré-Clessé Quintaine based on some very good reviews. This bottle had been purchased on release and stored at 55 degrees. I have one 2017 left and 3 from 2020. As soon as I posted my note I received a comment from another cellartracker user that he had the same issue. Very disappointing, but I guess I’ll open them all this year and avoid this producer from now on. Too bad since the bottle of 2017 that I opened last year was excellent.
This is a good opportunity to seek an up to date answer to the important question of whether premox occurs under Diam. I’ve not seen a single bottle amongst the many I have opened ( often with difficulty ! ). Early on reduction could be an issue but most producers have that sorted.
Has anyone seen a typically premoxed bottle under Diam ?
Others would include Stony Hill and Kalin. But, other than Mondavi (I have not had a Mondavi Chardonnay in many years and never an older one), we are talking about very tiny wineries that are a very tiny percentage of the production of California wines (esp. since the times you are talking about for Chalone and Acacia are prior to premox in Burgundy). So, you are comparing a very miniscule volume of California wines with all of Burgundy. It is like saying well Coche and Raveneau did not have a premox problem so there was not a premox issue in Burgundy.
And, in many cases it is the same issue you describe for California Chardonnay. In the 90s, many Burgundy producers started trying to make wines in a way that would make them taste better young and did not realize it would hurt the aging of the wine (esp. doing things like reducing sulfur and cleaning corks differently to reduce the number of corked wines).
Howard,
I take your point that most California chardonnays are not made for the long haul. But none of the ones that are have had problems.
One of my theories about premox is that distributors wanted white Burgundies that were restaurant ready.
As one grower said to me, one per cent of my whites are aged.
I guess I am tired of folks blaming the corks. Don’t know why…normally I love to pick on cork people.
Yeah, not sure why you keep defending corks either.
Fevre was a poster child for premox - until they switched to Diam. Did they also make other changes to their winemaking process at the same time? Maybe, but the simple known fact is that literally as soon as they switched to Diam, their incidence of premoxed wines dropped precipitously. Maybe I’m just a simple, linear-thinking kind of guy, but I think we’ve identified one of the primary reasons for premox.
Bob, I wish we had the answers to your questions. We never know unless we are close to the people in charge. It’s like being a detective with just a picture of the deceased.
To generalize:
1/I see no evidence that corks changed between 1995 and 2010.
2/We do know that lots of folks bought new presses and lowered their levels of SO2.
3/We also know that as the earth warmed levels of ripeness went up and levels of acidity went down.
There is a story that PYCM was called ‘Monsieur SO2’ by others until they noticed his wines weren’t falling apart.
I don’t know the reason for premox and probably this should be answered by someone who is more of an expert than me. But, my understanding is that Mel is wrong and that something did happen to corks around this time. As I understand it, during this time period, hydrogen peroxide was substituted for chlorine (hyperchlorite) as a bleaching agent for corks, and silicone was substituted for for paraffin as coating on some wine corks. For much more detail on this than I could possibly say, see corks [Oxidized Burgundies] (gdeschamps.net)
The best explanation that I have heard is that these changedsin cork treatment along with various changes in winemaking resulted in higher incidents of premature oxidation.
I have to ask Mel also if corks did not play a big role in this (for whatever reason) why has the incidence of premox gone way down for wineries now using DIAM? start [Oxidized Burgundies] (gdeschamps.net)
Do note Mel that I agree with you was that one reason for premox probably was that wineries were trying to make wines that could be drunk earlier. One bit of timing that I do not believe was coincidental was that this started a couple of years after Robert Parker gave huge scores to 1992 Verget wines. [I do note that some of those early Verget wines, although they seemed to be going premoxed at one point, somehow recovered and ending up aging quite well - proving again that I only know what I have experienced and not really why.]
Hard to isolate a single variable when producers threw the kitchen sink at the issue. If you switch to Diam, increase the diameter 1mm and/or use longer corks, change batonnage and then hit it with more sulfur … and incidence of premox goes down, what caused it? And if you do all that and it’s still happening … just not as often … what major variable did you not address?
Howard,
I see your point about corks…so we add one more variable to the story. Having used hydrogen peroxide to treat a wine that somebody treated with too much SO2 , I think you would need a lot more than what is coated on the inside of a cork to make a big difference. On the other hand, if you bottled w 15 parts free…watch out!!
Sometimes I worry with diam,my wines won’t age.
I have 2014 Lodi Vermentino bottled w diam…still fine…
I used to sell French bottles…the bore entry is only 45 mm deep so anything past that doesn’t help
Hello Scott_Stewart,
You’ll avoid our wines because you had one oxidized bottle eventhough the previous one was excellent? Bit extreme no? 
Sorry you had an issue with one of our bottles, our wines are low sulphur (11 free, under 40 total SO2 at bottling on the 2017) and after 5years in the bottle, if the cork is not perfect there can be some variance. We do our best to get great cork (natural, I know there are a lot of DIAM fans here), but it’s never 100% perfect. On that note, if you still have the cork, I’d be happy to get the acronym of the cork maker (I wouldn’t be surprised if it was HD, we noticed more variance on their corks and stopped working with them)
If you open one of our bottles that seem a bit tired (or seems of for any other reason by the way), I recommend giving it some air and time before giving up, our wines tend to love air. A few months ago, I had a 2002 that got great after a week opening eventhough there wasn’t much initially. If nothing helps, I know it doesn’t do you any good from afar but my policy about these is the same as on corked bottles, bring it back, I’ll exchange it.
PS: I don’t want to go into the whole premox debate, feel tom me that this word has been largely overused but for a bit of context, never had batonnage or a new presses here, but always been low sulphur (the oldest analysis I could fin without digging into the archive boxes is 1997 vintage and it’s 45mg total, and yes it still holds but I only tried bottles that never moved from the estate and yes there can be some variance).
no.