Latent oxidation flaw in 09 Clos Saron Pinot?

D

D. Zylberberg

David Zylberberg
So I had an odd experience over the weekend. Cracked a bottle of 2009 Clos Saron Pinot Noir Home Vineyard. Delicious stuff - and I say that as a deep skeptic of CA pinot.

BUT, and this is a big but - the wine madeirized overnight.

I have never seen anything like this before and I've opened (and kept overnight) 100's of wines. Bought at retail around noon, popped it around 6PM, used an inert gas canister to keep the wine, poured a second (generous)glass at around 9PM, refilled the empty space from the gas canister, went to sleep.

Popped the bottle around noon the next day. The remaining ~third wasn't volatile or "dead" - that happens all the time on day 2. It was, rather, clearly madeirized, with strong nutty notes of oxidation.

I can't remember this happening with a white, let alone a red which, in theory, should be able to stand up to 18 hours of light oxygen exposure. In view of the premox debacle, I wonder if there's some odd flaw here.
 
From Matt Kramer's blog on the Wine Spectator website just last week:

"Take Clos Saron, for example. Mr. Beinstock decided recently to forswear (or nearly so) the use of sulfites in his wines. This means that although he does apply sulfur to his grapevines (the last application typically a month before harvest), he uses no sulfites (which are various forms of sulfur) in the winemaking process, either during fermentation or barrel aging or before bottling."

Just guessing, but that may account for the accelerated oxidation.
 
originally posted by Brian Loring:
From Matt Kramer's blog on the Wine Spectator website just last week:

"Take Clos Saron, for example. Mr. Beinstock decided recently to forswear (or nearly so) the use of sulfites in his wines. This means that although he does apply sulfur to his grapevines (the last application typically a month before harvest), he uses no sulfites (which are various forms of sulfur) in the winemaking process, either during fermentation or barrel aging or before bottling."

Just guessing, but that may account for the accelerated oxidation.
Click to expand...

That would make sense . . . but, yikes for long aging! And that's a shame, because this was one hell of a wine.
 
Here's another excerpt from the same blog:

Why is he doing this? "Well, there is always the possibility of spoilage, and while I've discovered that, with additional bottle aging the so-called spoilage does disappear—it's hard to believe, I know, but I've seen it for myself—the fact is that these are wines meant to be drunk young and not aged.

Looks like he's willing to sacrifice ageability. I'm not sure I agree with his comment on spoilage. Things like VA, 4ep/4eg (from Brett), etc don't dissipate with time in my experience.
 
Wellll...

1. I don't agree that there is anything abnormal about a wine becoming oxidized the day after you open it.

2. I don't believe those insert gas canisters do anything. In my experience the best way to save wine for the next day is to leave the open bottle in the cellar. I don't know why it seems to work better than all the other methods, but it has for me, including with Clos Saron wines.

3. I've had Clos Saron pinots with 5 or 6 years of bottle age on them that had lasted just fine - in fact, if anything they'd aged glacially and were not much more advanced than they are on release.

BUT

4. It is true that these wines are delicate, perhaps as a result of the forswearance of sulfur, and I've had some show oxidized or maderized notes from the pop of the cork. Significantly, however, this tendency has not been true of the winery in general but of specific bottlings. For example, one batch of Texas Hill 375ml's was at least half tainted, while it's been several vintages over maybe 15-20 opened bottles that I have yet to experience any problematic Homes.
 
originally posted by Brian Loring:
Here's another excerpt from the same blog:

Why is he doing this? "Well, there is always the possibility of spoilage, and while I've discovered that, with additional bottle aging the so-called spoilage does disappear—it's hard to believe, I know, but I've seen it for myself—the fact is that these are wines meant to be drunk young and not aged.

Looks like he's willing to sacrifice ageability. I'm not sure I agree with his comment on spoilage. Things like VA, 4ep/4eg (from Brett), etc don't dissipate with time in my experience.
Click to expand...
Brian, that quote is out of context. The "meant to be drunk young and not aged" comment was NOT in reference to his pinots. And I'm not even sure why he'd said that in reference to his whites/rosés because I know for a fact that (a) they can age well and improve over at least a few years and (b) Gideon is a big believer in their ability to do so. Perhaps he was misquoted.
 
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
Wellll...

1. I don't agree that there is anything abnormal about a wine becoming oxidized the day after you open it.

2. I don't believe those insert gas canisters do anything. In my experience the best way to save wine for the next day is to leave the open bottle in the cellar. I don't know why it seems to work better than all the other methods, but it has for me, including with Clos Saron wines.

3. I've had Clos Saron pinots with 5 or 6 years of bottle age on them that had lasted just fine - in fact, if anything they'd aged glacially and were not much more advanced than they are on release.

BUT

4. It is true that these wines are delicate, perhaps as a result of the forswearance of sulfur, and I've had some show oxidized or maderized notes from the pop of the cork. Significantly, however, this tendency has not been true of the winery in general but of specific bottlings. For example, one batch of Texas Hill 375ml's was at least half tainted, while it's been several vintages over maybe 15-20 opened bottles that I have yet to experience any problematic Homes.
Click to expand...

1. It's highly unsual for a wine, let alone a red wine, to show oxidative notes the day after it's opened. This is based upon my experience. Perhaps someone more sensitive to the products of oxidation would feel differently, but then you probably would've found the Clos Saron overwhelmingly nutty on day 2. It's common for a wine to show volatile acidity the day after it's opened, but, IIRC, that volatility arises from bacterial activity, not oxidation of anything in the wine itself. I'm sure someone can correct me here if I'm mistaken.

2. Because of a medical condition, I have a lot of experience keeping wine overnight. Inert gas makes a significant difference (and yes, I've tested it blind). Keeping the wine at cellar temp helps too (reduces the bacterial activity; reduces the rxn rate of oxidation). Combo of both is best. Decanting into a 375ml only helps if you sparge out the oxygen in the 375ml first.
 
Speaking of odd oxidation, anyone have an idea why a freshly opened bottle of 2008 Oddero barbera would have a strange oxidative note in the finish?
 
I agree that a good whack of inert gas makes a difference, though I often don't bother. Refrigeration helps too, IME.

I frequently find reds oxidized enough on the second day that I don't want to drink them.

Haven't tried this Clos Saron.
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
Speaking of odd oxidation, anyone have an idea why a freshly opened bottle of 3008 Oddero barbera would have a strange oxidative note in the finish?
Click to expand...

You might be drinking it too young?
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
Speaking of odd oxidation, anyone have an idea why a freshly opened bottle of 2008 Oddero barbera would have a strange oxidative note in the finish?
Click to expand...
 
When I visited Clos Saron a few years ago, Gideon said he added SO2 at crush, but none thereafter (including none at bottling). This wine was probably made during this time period, but it sounds like he's backed off all SO2 use (?)
 
originally posted by Keith Levenberg: In my experience the best way to save wine for the next day is to leave the open bottle in the cellar.
Click to expand...

What cellar?

I like the way you type this with a straight face.
 
I am certainly concerned and saddened to hear whenever anybody has a bad experience with our wines. The sulfite addition question is something I live with, not something I have yet resolved...

Specifically to the 09 Pinot: The 09 Pinot did get one shot of 35ppm at crush, and none thereafter. I have not yet had, or heard a report of problems with this wine - this is a first. Not having been there with you, I cannot for sure know what the problem relates to. I would guess that it is not really oxidation but, rather, a bacteriological problem, related to / triggered by the oxygen intake overnight. Certainly "maderization" - if the term is used correctly - cannot happen overnight, but over much longer time frame.

If my assessment is correct, my experience over the years seems to indicate that this problem (the wine's tendency to react to aeration in this way) will diminish in time, perhaps go away completely. We have seen a number of wines go through this phase shortly after bottling (no, I am not saying that this is "bottle shock" in the traditional sense), only to "recover" completely or nearly so with further aging (min. 3-6 months, up to a couple of years). Perhaps the tendency of the wine to "recover" relates to the depletion in it of whatever nutrients that specific cootie needs for its survival.

All wines are perishable, especially so light wines, especially so un-sulfited wines. And even when properly stored and handled, they may at times disappoint. So this brings us back to the question "why not to sulfite?" For me there is still not a clear answer. As Matt's article indicates, at this point we went back to a minimal addition at bottling of our two most delicate wines, the rose and the white. Perhaps we should also do that to the Pinot... The reasons for my gradual minimizing and often completely refraining from any use of sulfites are complex. For one, sulfites are simply toxic and harmful; if possible to without them, no doubt that would be for the better. How toxic? I have seen with my own eyes a cellar worker jump off a 15' tall tank in a desperate attempt to avoid a tiny leak of SO2 gas during application. Yes, you may say, but normal dosage is very small? That is fortunately right, but the stuff is highly toxic and my own preference is not to add anything toxic, actually anything at all, to my wine.

But my main reason for not adding sulfites is related directly to the wine quality and expression. In simple terms, SO2 locks the wine up: it locks up the phenolic structure, it locks up the flavor, it makes the wine "brittle" and more superficial aromatically (which superficially can be easily confused with cleaner and purer). The wine loses subtle nuances and dimensions. And it also loses some of its "freedom of movement" in the presence of oxygen. Unsulfited wines respond with greater degree of flexibility and complexity to aeration. I think sulfiting the wine makes it safer on the expense of its intrinsic quality and degree of expression. I realize these are controversial statements, but they reflect my taste and experience with wine. That is not to say that, when a wine goes through a bacteriological phase, I consider this a plus. But in most cases, I would consider it the lesser evil of the two options.

As I said, these are not firm conclusions, but rather thoughts in progress... and possibly we may experiment with a minimal addition to the Pinot at bottling...
 
Thanks, Gideon, very interesting.

Sulfite also binds various flavor components.

It is also possible that certain flavors of light oxidation that might have been bound by sulfites (aldehydes, some alpha-beta unsaturated carbonyl compounds, etc.) that may be part of "bottle shock" may also go away over time as they slowly combine with active phenolics and so on. I'm making that up, and Professor Lipton can correct me, but it seems fairly reasonable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top