In the comments in the thread about 1998 red Burgundies, Jeremy Caan refers to the "magnum advantage" as an explanation for the splendid showing of the 1998 NSG Clos des Forêts St-Georges from Domaine de l'Arlot.
We've all been taught that because the neck opening is the same for 375 ml, 750 ml, and 1.5 l bottles, the rate of aging is slower the larger the bottle gets (i.e., the larger the bottle, the same amount of air comes in through the cork for a larger volume). Beyond 1.5 l, I've always heard, corks are individually cut and neck openings may vary, so the rule doesn't necessarily hold.
I recall a commentary in La Revue du vin de France from the 1990s (I believe it was by Michel Bettane, but I can't be sure) that in fact, this maxim has never been proven by blind tasting. For older bottles, he said, the best wine was always saved for large formats, so side-by-side tastings, so older (then) results were not meaningful or relevant.
In the years since then, I've never come across a tasting to compare wines from bottle size.
My own feelings are generally agnostic because I haven't had sufficient experience comparing the same wine from different formats in a relatively short period of time. The one exception (and I admit, it might be confirmation bias) is Champagne, where I do firmly believe that magnum is better than 750 ml is better than 375ml.
Does anyone know of any tastings testing the hypothesis/accepted wisdom?
Views of others?
We've all been taught that because the neck opening is the same for 375 ml, 750 ml, and 1.5 l bottles, the rate of aging is slower the larger the bottle gets (i.e., the larger the bottle, the same amount of air comes in through the cork for a larger volume). Beyond 1.5 l, I've always heard, corks are individually cut and neck openings may vary, so the rule doesn't necessarily hold.
I recall a commentary in La Revue du vin de France from the 1990s (I believe it was by Michel Bettane, but I can't be sure) that in fact, this maxim has never been proven by blind tasting. For older bottles, he said, the best wine was always saved for large formats, so side-by-side tastings, so older (then) results were not meaningful or relevant.
In the years since then, I've never come across a tasting to compare wines from bottle size.
My own feelings are generally agnostic because I haven't had sufficient experience comparing the same wine from different formats in a relatively short period of time. The one exception (and I admit, it might be confirmation bias) is Champagne, where I do firmly believe that magnum is better than 750 ml is better than 375ml.
Does anyone know of any tastings testing the hypothesis/accepted wisdom?
Views of others?
, maturity wise the difference lies in the handling ( time of opening and pouring ). And magna are clearly more impressive.
