Right, I'm much closer to my own comfort zone now that I've seen images that are (almost) SOOC - this is what always needs to be shown if you want useful comments on the photography side of things, pp work hides the things that people need to see.
Beer bottle
Your light source - which in this case is a softbox - needs to be MUCH closer to the subject and also needs to be slightly behind, pointing forwards towards camera a bit. Doing that will create true diffused specular highlights (reflections of the light source that you can actually see through, to the subject beneath) and will also place those highlights where they should be, at the very edge of the bottle. Not only will this show the shape of the bottle in a much more attractive way, the light will also fall off far more quickly (in 1/4 of the fall off distance for every halving of the distance from the light source) it will also avoid making the edges of the label too bright, for the same reason - the inverse square law, which is what lighting is all about.
How close does the softbox need to be? as close as you can physically get it, something like 1/2" or thereabouts. It needs to be the very back edge of the softbox. The correct tool for this job is in fact a strip softbox and so you will probably need to mask off the surface of most of the softbox, where it is in front of the bottle, with black card or bin bags. This, together with a good lens hood, will prevent both flare and unwanted light going where it isn't wanted.
This is so important that it's impossible to get a well-lit image until you've got this bit right. And, for a shot as simple as this there's no reason for it not to be right. In fact, even if it was a far more complex shot, for example in a lifestyle setting with other things around it, theoretically preventing the softbox(es) from being placed in the right place(s) I would still light in in exactly this way and would then comp the bottle image into the rest of the scene. This is where comping really is necessary for this type of shot. You've used the comping process for the wrong reasons, i.e. you've done it because you only have the one light. You need a light each side, a light behind and a light for the label, ignoring the background and if you lit it correctly with the right amount of equipment then you would have achieved a better result much more easily.
Using brightfield lighting to create a backlight for the beer is a valid way of doing things but it needs to be controlled, to stop that horrible highlight on the top of the bottle cap - easily done by suspending a bit of black something-or-other above the top.
This should really be shot at f/16 (on a full frame camera, less on a cropped frame camera) to maximise the DOF.
Wine bottle and glass
Using just brightfield lighting for this hasn't really worked. Frankly, there's really nothing about this shot that has any real merit and it hasn't helped having those fake shadows, having whatever it is that the bottle is sitting on, especially with the front of it out of focus. You need an actual light on the label, and also on the embossed writing on the bottle (or just retouch it out but don't just leave it partly lit to distract the viewer) and, more difficult, you need the seal on the cork to be square to the label, which means moving it yourself, because even when the manufacturers provide a couple of cases for photography they're nearly always all wrong
Incidentally, we don't normally include just one glass with bottles of alcohol - a single glass suggests a lonely alcoholic, two glasses suggest company, romance etc.
And again, not really enough DOF
I'm a landscape tog that's been experimenting with some studio lights for beverage photography. This is a composite of 3/4 exposures taken with one Godox SK400 light in a rectangular soft box with some extra diffusion for the bottle edges. Black perspex used for the base and a white background. CC very welcome, as brutally and as frank as needed 
Thank you!
