Let's face it, we’re an impatient lot that demands instant gratification, and this quest for "wanting it now" has led to many changes in the way wine has been made. Until fairly recently, many of the red wines produced were tannic monsters that were built for the long haul and many of them did not show all that well in their youth. Sensibly, as the vast majority of wine is now consumed within hours of purchase, most of the wine made today has softer tannins and is much more approachable.

These easy-to-drink wines may be more approachable and enjoyable in their youth, but that does not necessarily make them top-quality wines, and some wine lovers who appreciate high quality wine are still impatient and have a desire for instant gratification too; this has led to a number of gadgets that, in theory, are meant to quickly age or at least improve those young wines that are meant for medium to long term cellaring.

The first devices to be released have been various forms of “magnetic gadgets” and by all accounts, they are not much more than snake oil. Recently, a new range of Eisch Glasses have been released that are meant to age wine in the glass and these glasses were the subject of a Readers Questions and Answer article on Torbwine recently.

The newest device is the Clef du Vin, which was sent to me by the Australian importer for a trial. The device comes in three different types. A “Pocket” version which is ideal for a key ring and retails for about A$160, a ”Service” version which looks a little like a spoon and a “Bottle” version which is designed to be used in a whole bottle; (the last two are more costly.)  All the devices look like they are made of stainless steel and the Pocket version has a small round disk (about 75mm diameter) that looks like it is made of some copper type material. It is this little disk that is responsible for the “magic” properties of the device.

According to the instructions, the device claims to be” effective on all wine, ….. immediately revealing your wines’ ageing potential over the years to come.” It goes on to state one second of the device in the wine is equal to one year’s age.

According to their website, the basis of the way the gizmo works is “In order to bring out the ageing potential of a wine, the Clef du Vin gradually modifies amongst other things the balance in oxidation-reduction up to its destruction (taste). Each second of contact in a 10 cl glass (or 75 cl bottle with the corresponding wine key model) will advance the wine one year on its oxidation-reduction curve (life), showing its laying-down potential or ageing potential.

It will show you the pleasure that you will have drinking the wine in 1, 2,…5,…10 years.”

The instructions clearly state that the primary objective of the device is to assist one to determine how long a wine should be cellared for and it also goes on to state, (it) “ accelerates the aromatic development of the wines flavour and softens its structure, or “ opens up.” Red wines will see their tannins softening, and there roundness appearing. The acidity of dry white wine is will be diminished, revealing the supple flavours of the fruit. Clef Du Vin allows you to enjoy today the full potential of a lay down wine, which would have otherwise waited for years. (Their bolding.)

These are some of the “claims” made about this device so I decided to put to the test with a bottle of John’s Blend 2003 Margarete’s Shiraz. I used three glasses; two as control wines and one for use as the test glass. Glass one (control) and glass three (test for CdV) were regular ISO’s filled with a hundred millilitres of wine, and glass two (second control) was a Spiegelau.

Control Glass One Tasting Note; the bottle was opened, the wine immediately poured and the tasting note completed. The bouquet was dusty, incredibly tight and was dominated by lifted sawdust, black notes including chocolate, blackberry and liquorice, a touch of menthol and some mint. A full-bodied wine, it was sweet on the uptake of fresh acid that cut through the blackberry sweetness and was further offset by savoury, peppery flavours, loads of chocolate, some minty notes, liquorice and coffee oak on the finish. The palate was just as closed as the bouquet, with tight, fine-grained tannins that have admirable length, and finish dry with excellent persistence. With an excellent structure and balance, it's rated as Highly Recommended with *** for value; it's a lovely wine and whilst approachable now, the rating should improve as it peaks around 2012. Clearly, there is less oak in this wine than in previous vintages and it is all the better for it.

Spiegelau Glass - the bouquet was very similar to the control Glass but the bouquet was more open, expressive and seemed a little sweeter.

After four seconds with the Clef du Vin - simulating a further four years old bottle age. Although the bouquet seems softer, it does not show much more than the control sample; with sawdust and sweet fruit being the primary aromas, together with aniseed and coffee: if anything it seemed to be more reminiscent of the Spiegelau control glass bouquet. In comparison to the control ISO, the bouquet was more open slightly softer; but the original control had better definition and was more expressive, even if it was slightly more primary.

Initially, the first taste was absolutely horrid; the wine seemed thin and had a metallic taste. The wine was tried a few minutes later and had lost its nastiness and whilst it did seem a little softer, there was no great difference in the structure or the taste.

After eight seconds - simulating eight years old bottle age. The bouquet showed blackberry, chocolate, aniseed, oak, it was definitely softer and rounder than the control sample.

The tannins were still very firm, the acid still just as fresh but the flavours seem to have integrated more than the control sample. Other than softening slightly, there was no real difference and the structure between the two wines still seemed very similar; i.e. fresh acid and pretty tight tannins.

After twelve seconds - simulating twelve years old bottle age. The bouquet was showing mainly black notes, blackberry, chocolate, and coffee but still seemed tight.

On the palate, the acid still seemed just as fresh as the control sample and the tannins just as firm, but somehow the CdV sample does seem a little bit more mature, but definitely not 12 years worth. It has certainly impacted on the flavour profile, but not the structure.

After twenty seconds - simulating twenty years old bottle age. This is remarkable, the bouquet seems to be going the other way and has come back towards the (un-aged) control sample with sawdust notes starting to re-emerge and dominate.

Tannins are becoming very dusty but the acid is still fresh and whilst the flavours seem to have integrated further they are not necessarily better.

In all honesty, I can't see this wine still being so good after 20 years, but in the interests of fairness, I used a gadget for a further 10 seconds to see what the wine would be like after a theoretical 30 years.

After thirty seconds - simulating thirty years old bottle age. The bouquet became more brooding and was not showing much at all except for dusty oak with fruit below; in some ways it had reverted back to being closer to the original control sample.

On the palate, the flavour profile is still showing masses of primary fruit and whilst the wine definitely does seem a little older there is no way its 30 years worth. The acid is still fresh that the tannins are starting to show signs of integration. An hour later, this sample was starting to fall apart.

So how does it stack up?

In the interests of being fair, I tried the device on a number of bottles of wine and the results seemed not to be entirely consistent. Firstly, based on my experience of projected drinking windows, my recommendations would be at odds with the conclusions obtained using the device.

Based on my tests, there is absolutely no way that I could regard the one second of immersion to equal one year of ageing potential as anything remotely resembling an accurate guide; so as far as that goes, the device does not meet its claim.

Based on the information obtained with the device, there is a reaction between the device and the wine that “will advance the wine one year (per second) on its oxidation-reduction curve (life), but to my way of thinking this does not make sense, because oxidation and reduction are opposite ends of the spectrum. Now just for a moment, lets assume the device “works” by a chemical process which hyper quickly oxidises the wine; but, and it’s a very big but, there is more to wine ageing than just causing an oxidative reaction.

Secondly, there is no doubt that at some test points the wine was changed but from my perspective, and this is the important part, the wine was no more enjoyable after it had been treated with the device.

The claim that “Clef Du Vin allows you to enjoy today the full potential of a lay down wine, which would have otherwise waited for years” I found to be completely unjustified.

It looks to me like it's just another wine gimmick, and at the price, an expensive party trick. Novices will be impressed at how it changes the wine, but in this case, changed does not necessarily mean improvement.