‘Twas a Black Day

This story was prompted by two unfortunate experiences with bottles of Rockford Black Shiraz, and whilst these problems could have occurred with any Sparkling Shiraz, it got the brain cells ticking over and I decided to do some research.

The first bottle, a 2000 disgorgement was taken to an offline in Sydney and upon opening, the bouquet was muted and one taste confirmed the dreaded cork taint had ruined yet another bottle of wine. Luckily there were was plenty to drink that night so this bottle was not particularly missed. The second bottle was a 2001 disgorgement which I placed in the fridge, lying down, early in the morning as I was going to take the bottle with me to another off-line dinner. When I pulled it out the fridge at lunchtime, there was a red puddle on the shelf where the bottle had been resting. The cork had leaked. Now this was interesting! The wine had been on its side in the cellar since release, so why didn’t it show signs of leakage before that? I don't know!

There was no way I was going to risk taking that bottle of wine with me, because the chances were it was stuffed, so I took a Primo Estate Joseph Sparkling Shiraz (2003 disgorgement) instead (and it was magnificent.) I left the 2001 Black Shiraz standing up in my office, took it home later and placed it in the fridge standing upright. When the cork was extracted there was not so much as a whimper, or a single bubble left; it was as flat as a pancake. Another terrific bottle of wine ruined by a tree bark plug and in this case, the reason was easy to see; the cork had totally lost its elasticity.

Regular readers will know that I have never been critical of Rockford before but when criticism is due, I don't care who it is, I will speak out. In the last issue of the Rockford Rag, the regular annual newsletter to their customers, Robert O'Callaghan said, "A couple of people have rung concerned that some of their old Black Shiraz have weeping corks. The wine has the capacity to last for a long time, but sparkling corks are so tightly compressed that they can lose their elasticity. Black Shiraz is five years old at release and ready to drink, so you should only put a small amount away for very long term maturation, otherwise you and the cork could be weeping."

These comments are interesting. In one breath Roberts states the wine has the capacity to last for a long time, and in the next he says it's not a good idea to do it because the corks that they elect to use, may not be up to the task. Am I the only one that sees not only the contradiction in terms, but the folly of this dichotomy? Why encourage people to cellar wines, such as the label of the Black Shiraz does, when the seal is not up to the job?

Whilst I have to applaud Robert O'Callaghan's wish and desire to do things in “a traditional way,” but when the resulting product can be less than satisfactory, when clearly there may be a better alternative and that alternative is not investigated; criticism is warranted.

Rockford is not the only Sparkling Shiraz where I have had trouble with the corks; Sparkling Shiraz that have been cellared a few years often have problem corks; the most common problem being that they snap when you try to open them, and you have to get the remaining cork out with a corkscrew. There are also some bottles where the corks weep, but for some reason, based on my experience, Rockford's corks seem to have a much greater leakage problem than other Sparkling Shiraz.

Whilst I was researching this story, by accident and without design, I happened to compare the corks that Rockford is using for their Sparkling Shiraz against a number of other corks that had come from other sparkling wines that had recently been opened.

From left – Rockford, Rockford, Billecart, Joseph, Seppelt, Seppelt, Seppelt

The Rockford cork on the left is from the 2001 disgorgement, the one next to it is from the 2000 disgorgement. Notice both the difference in height and width of these two corks.

(Rockford cork left - Seppelt Right) Notice the huge difference in width of the corks (left picture) and length (right picture).

A few questions come to mind about the quality of the Rockford corks. Firstly, why are they so much thinner and secondly, why are they so much shorter than the corks used by other manufacturers?

I posed these questions to Rockford, and David Kalleske, the General Manager was kind enough to provide the answers. In short, the longer the cork is in the bottle, the greater the compression of the cork over time. The cork is subjected to pressure from the carbon dioxide in the bottle which pushes up on the cork and over time can shorten it; and eventually it loses its elasticity. The cage on top of the cork also exerts pressure and compresses from the top. In terms of thickness, once the cork is placed into the bottle it will spring back and take the shape of the neck, but over time it will lose its elasticity and if it has been in the bottle for long enough, eventually when it is extracted from the bottle it will not decompress. That is the reason why the Rockford corks in these pictures appear to be both shorter and thinner than the other corks shown; the Rockford corks were in the bottle for far longer.

According to David, Rockford uses number one grade champagne corks and they don’t have a major problem with them. Without any prompting, David also said “Robert doesn’t like to change for the sake of it, but will not do anything that will diminish the quality of our wines.” So clearly, Rockford do not think they have any real issues with corks in their Black Shiraz. Some of their customers may disagree.

When I spoke to David, and asked why Rockford Black corks leaked, I was told it was because of the “sweetness of the dosage.” David told me that the residual sugar makes the wine much more slippery and as a result, the liquid can push its way past the cork. According to David, a slight discharge in itself is not a problem and in most cases the wine is not affected. Apparently, according to David, (older) Sauternes are notorious for leakage due to their residual sugar levels.

At first thought, all this may seem reasonable but when I asked why Sparkling Shiraz corks from Primo Estate, Leasingham Classic Clare, BVE Black Pepper, and a number of other wineries don't leak anywhere near as much, the answer was “I can't comment about other wineries products but I will ask a couple of people and see what I can find out.”

Robert O'Callaghan is not alone in his preference for corks, Ed Carr the Group Sparkling Winemaker for the Hardy Wine Company, loves them. Now what does Ed know about making sparkling wine? I am told that Ed’s sparkling wines have been awarded sixty national wine show awards, and 953 medals - 190 of them gold and that makes Ed Carr Australia's most decorated winemaker. In an interesting coincidence, as well as being a solid proponent for corks, and being quoted on Amorim website, Ed has also won seven consecutive Amorim Cork trophies for Best Sparkling Wine at the Royal Melbourne Wine Show.

According to Ed, "Cork closure and maturation under cork has a positive organoleptic effect and gives the wine additional complexity and character, hence we now use sparkling corks made by the new technologies which have an exceptionally low failure rate.

A crown seal is an inert closure and as such the incidence of cork taint will be avoided, but conversely the wine will not develop the attractive characteristics of cork age.  In tasting trials comparing cork and crown closures we have always found the former to be ranked significantly higher."

When I asked for an elaboration on the "new technologies" here is the (short version) of the answer.  

1. Reduction of initial contamination of the raw cork;

2. Improved boiling techniques, eg smaller batch sizes

3. Washing and /or steam distillation of sparkling cork granulate and discs

4. Introduction of strict QA programs using GC/MS to analyse for TCA at all stages of production.”

These technologies are not used by all cork suppliers and they usually come at an extra cost. Hardy's carefully selects its suppliers based on continued performance and quality.”

By Hardy's own admission, not all corks are created equal, but I'm willing to bet that if you ask every producer about the quality of their corks, the vast majority would tell you that they buy top-quality corks. As we all know, this is simply not the case and cork variation is a reality of life, and therein lies the problem.

If you want a perfect example of cork variation, have a look at the very first picture this article. As we now know, the longer the cork stays in a bottle of sparkling wine, the more compressed it will become because of the pressure of the carbon dioxide in the bottle. Yet, in the first picture the cork from the 2000 disgorgement (second cork from left) is clearly larger in both height and width then the cork from the 2001 disgorgement (first cork on left) despite the fact that the 2000 has had a year longer in the bottle.

Most people would probably know that when Sparkling Shiraz, Champagne and other high-quality sparkling wines are bottled, they are sealed with a crown seal and that crown seal stays on the bottle until the wine is disgorged, the lees are removed, the dosage is added and the bottle is resealed. In the past, tradition has dictated that when the bottle is resealed, a cork with a wire cage over the top is used.

Given the wine spends so much time under crown seal already, I keep asking myself why crown seals are not used on the finished product, as the alternate seal will eliminate cork taint and cork failure. The answer to that question is, some wineries already do seal their sparkling wines with a crown seals. Cofield in Rutherglen is one such winery.

According to Damien Cofield, “There is too much variability in the quality of corks to continue using them on our sparkling range. The decision to move away from the traditional cork & wire seal has been made to ensure the quality of our sparkling wines is not compromised. This was a big decision for us to make.  There are a few wineries that have put one or two of their sparkling wines under crown seal, but not the entire range.  We decided if we were going to put one sparkling wine under crown seal then we would place the entire sparkling range under it.  We want our customers to be able to enjoy our wines at their best and the crown seal will ensure our sparkling wines are not compromised.”

Cofield is a pretty small winery and although I love their Sparkling Shiraz, most people have probably never heard of Cofield, so what about other wineries using crown seals. Seppelt is a name that is not only synonymous with fine Australian wine, it is well-known for its sparkling wines, both red and white: their Show Reserve Sparkling Shiraz is an Australian icon and their Original Sparkling Shiraz is regarded as one of the best value, well-made wines in its bracket. (The Seppelt winery also makes all the Southcorp sparkling wines in Victoria, so they know a thing or two about the subject.) I rang Arthur O'Connor, the head wine maker at Seppelt's for his opinion. According to Arthur, he was so convinced in the logic of using crown seals instead of cork for sparkling wines, when they made the decision at Seppelt's to go with crown seals; they decided to lead the charge with their flagship wine. When the Seppelt's 1994 Show Reserve Sparkling Shiraz was released, consumers were given the choice between crown seals and corks. Arthur said the crown sealed supply was completely sold out before they had a single order for any bottles that had been sealed under cork.

After the success of the 1994 Show Reserve, when the current vintages of Seppelt Salinger and Seppelt Original Sparkling Shiraz were released, a percentage of them were sealed under crown seals. Apparently, the only complaint the winery has received are from customers who want more of a crown sealed bottles but can't get them. Seppelt slowly plan to increase the production of sparkling wine under crown seal and anticipates that in the near future they will be at a 50-50 mix and who knows where it will go from there.

Seppelt is a totally committed to the use of crown seals, but what about other wineries? In terms of sparkling wines, Domain Chandon (and their parent company) is well-known for their sparkling wines and I spoke with John Harris, their sparkling wine maker for their opinion on this subject. (By a strange coincidence, John told me I was the second person that he had spoken to about this subject that day; the other person turned out to be Jeremy Oliver who published his article about two weeks ago.) Domain Chandon now have two sparkling wines in the marketplace that are sealed with crown seals. (It should be noted, unlike sparkling reds, both of these wines have zero dosage.) The first, a 2000 Vintage Brut was released almost three years ago and this wine retails for approximately $33.35. The second, a Blanc de Blanc style wine was released in 2004. Some of their Yarra Valley ‘cellar door only’ releases are also sealed with crown caps. According to John, the wines have received a phenomenal acceptance, for both the wine style, and the modernisation of the packaging which occurred at the time the seal was changed. The positive acceptance has been from both consumers and the trade.

Domain Chandon are now exporting sparkling wine sealed under crowns to the UK (bad pun intended) and other markets. They are particularly excited about a new crown sealed Sparkling Rosé that is destined for Japan.

John's attitude towards the crown seal is extremely positive; he stated, "They produce wine that is more consistent; there is no deterioration of the seal, it maintains its integrity, the wine is not subject to premature ageing, and from my perspective it provides a better sensory experience." As far as comparing cork and crown seal, John felt that a perfect, taint free cork may be as good, possibly even better than a crown seal, but their 2000 Vintage wine that has been sealed under crown caps has aged well and has maintained its freshness.

Even though John is extremely positive about crown seals, Domain has no immediate plans for increasing its use beyond where they are today. They are maintaining a "suck it and see" attitude and feel they need to wait until the market is ready before they expand its use. That could be as soon as next year.

The thrust of this article has been in relation to the acceptance or non-acceptance of crown caps by wine companies, it is not gone into the theoretical technical advantages or disadvantages of the two different seals. However it would be remiss of me not to highlight one comment made by Ed Carr when he stated “Maturation under cork has a positive organoleptic effect and gives the wine additional complexity and character……. and develops the attractive characteristics of cork age.”

I am not a wine maker, nor do I profess to know terribly much about winemaking, but that last comment astounds me. Whilst sparkling wines are on lees, they are sealed under crown seal. Once they are disgorged, at that point a cork may be inserted; but bear in mind, with many wines, in the overall scheme of things, the wine is released relatively soon after it has received its final cork seal. Most of the ageing, prior to release, has been carried out on lees under crown seal, so the cork does not make a positive contribution for wines that are going to be consumed in the short term. In terms of wines that are going to be matured for the long-term, does the cork really give the wine added complexity and character? I don't know if it does, but it sounds strange to my way of thinking. With corks inherent inconsistency, why would you want to rely on it to add complexity and character? In the case of still wines, pro-cork proponents will tell you one of the supposedly advantages of corks is the ability to let in minute amounts of oxygen which enables the wine to age gracefully. If you think about it, in the case of sparkling wine, rather than letting the air in, there is a positive pressure from the inside of the bottle to the outside, so if anything, carbon dioxide would escape from the bottle which would eventually make the wine go flat.

There is some similarity in the debate between crown seals and corks and the ongoing debate between Stelvin and corks. A scant a few years ago, there was a very high level of scepticism about the ability of alternative closures (like Stelvin) to be a viable alternative to cork. History has shown, in Australia at least, and in the case of white wine in particular, a very high acceptance of alternative closures took place in a relatively short space of time. All it needed was some initial inertia and it took on a life of its own. Arthur O'Connor at Seppelts believes the same thing will happen with crown seals on sparkling wine.

John Harris is very open-minded about alternative closures and thinks that the crown seal has a big future. Like Arthur O'Connor, John felt that consumer acceptance is the key and it is important to aim at the “right markets” first and once the notion has been established, it can bubble through the rest of the range.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the future. Will conservative wine producers like Hardys and the traditionalists like Rockford's stubbornly stick to cork, or once the market acceptance is there for crown seals, will they move to them? Or, will the cork industry finally rectify the issues with cork so their use will not present problems.

In the meantime, Robert O’Callaghan should give his customers a choice. I am willing to bet if he does, like Seppelts, the take-up one crown seals will be huge. It's easy enough to provide the alternative, even if Robert has a personal preference for corks.

PS - The day I finalised this article, thanks to the generosity of Andrew Buller, I opened two different cuvees of the Bullers Sparkling Shiraz to compare them and write a comparison tasting note. (Bullers have just released a new blend and I was anxious to try it.) The cork in the older bottle broke, but that is common with older Sparkling Shiraz and a corkscrew removed the bottom half without problem. When the cork was removed from the newer bottle, I was interested to see that the older cork was in fact longer than the newer cork, another great example of cork variation. I sniffed the older wine - terrific. I sniffed the younger cuvee - rank with cork taint and undrinkable. So I can't do the comparison and I don't get to try the new wine now.

PPS - Since speaking to Rockford and finding out the reason for the variances of cork sizes in sparkling wines, I have been watching all the extracted fizzy corks very closely; and at this time of the year with all the heat, there are a fair amount of them. The variation and inconsistencies are mind boggling; let me provide just one example. About a week ago I opened a St Hallet The Black that had been disgorged four years ago. The wine did not show well, there was no detectable fault but it was no where near as good as previous bottles. It may come as no surprise, the cork was pretty compressed and did not have much girth. The next night I opened a BVE Black Pepper Sparkling Shiraz that had probably also been disgorged about four years ago. The cork was in terrific shape; far better than the St Halletts, the girth of the cork was like it had been put in recently and the wine was magnificent. A few nights later I opened a 1994 Black Queen that had been disgorged in 1999; the wine was perfect. The cork from this wine was in better shape than the St Hallet's cork, yet the Black Queen cork had been in the bottle almost twice as long. To make matters more "interesting" the St Hallet's lousy cork and the Black Queen  cork were both stamped with the same brand! The more I look at them, the more obvious it becomes that corks in Sparkling Shiraz are an inferior, indeed inadequate closure and frankly in my not so humble opinion, anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded.

The feedback to this article can be found here.