DISQUS

1WineDude · 1 year ago

Good stuff, it's a fascinating topic. Personally, I believe (though I've no scientific facts to back it up!) that we can reach a relative level of quality & aromas/tastes. This is borne out through history (see <a href="http://1winedude.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-makes-..."><a href="http://1winedude.blogspot.com/2008/04/wh...) - as cultures we more-or-less agree what we consider good. After that, it's all personal.

1WineDude · 1 year ago

Good stuff, it's a fascinating topic. Personally, I believe (though I've no scientific facts to back it up!) that we can reach a relative level of quality & aromas/tastes. This is borne out through history (see <a href="http://1winedude.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-makes-..."><a href="http://1winedude.blogspot.com/2008/04/wh...) - as cultures we more-or-less agree what we consider good. After that, it's all personal.

1WineDude · 1 year ago

Good stuff, it's a fascinating topic. Personally, I believe (though I've no scientific facts to back it up!) that we can reach a relative level of quality & aromas/tastes. This is borne out through history (see <a href="http://1winedude.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-makes-..."><a href="http://1winedude.blogspot.com/2008/04/wh...) - as cultures we more-or-less agree what we consider good. After that, it's all personal.

1WineDude · 1 year ago

Good stuff, it's a fascinating topic. Personally, I believe (though I've no scientific facts to back it up!) that we can reach a relative level of quality & aromas/tastes. This is borne out through history (see <a href="http://1winedude.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-makes-..."><a href="http://1winedude.blogspot.com/2008/04/wh...) - as cultures we more-or-less agree what we consider good. After that, it's all personal.

Viinipiru · 1 year ago

Spot on! I agree with the subjectivity. In my blog I've solved the everlasting problem of recommending wines while recognizing they represent my preferences by ditching the numbers and replacing them with simple labels "Get it", "Try it out" and "Avoid it" . It works, though not even close perfect... Well, for at least you need to get more verbal than "89 points. Coffee, jam, nicely concentrated body, medium long aftertaste". Nice to hear someone else feels the whole points system as absurd as I do:) Cheers

Arthur · 1 year ago

Nice summary. But I would caution against the "it's all so subjective" mentality. While the difference between an 87 and 88 point wine is a matter of how the rating scale is structured (and how rigorously the taster follows its criteria), the fact is - as you point out - sensory assessment is alike a language. it can be learned and used reproducibly, consistently and reliably. Don't buy into the "we're all so different and wine is h-so subjective" line.

Bill · 1 year ago

You have successfully explained why wine rating by the "professionals" is done in a "sterile setting" and done blind. They are seeking the highest level of objectivity they can find within the subjective framework of our human senses. Another way for consumers to mitigate the personal preferences of tasters is to try multiple wines being rated by different publications. With Parker or Opaz, you're getting a single person's opinion on a wine. With The Wine Spectator, you are getting a blended score from multiple tasters. One is not inherently superior to the other. The goal is to find the palate(s) that consistently provide you with a good wine experience, should you so choose to use outside assistance.

Kevin Hogan · 1 year ago

Human 'scent-sibilities' are close to that of dogs? How can that be? We each have around 5 million scent receptors versus around 220 million for dogs. While I feel as if I am better able to relate to my dog after I smell something really good (the new 2007 Blanco Nieva Sauvignon Blanc from Rueda, for instance), the way dogs use their noses is (though I have no proof of this) much more central to their perception of the world than is mine. Unfortunately, my dogs and I do not always share the same sense of what smells 'good' but I have learned much about the pleasure of scent from watching them.

Kevin H. · 1 year ago

More about scent dogs and wine : <a href="http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articles/2006/0..."><a href="http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articl...

Kevin H. · 1 year ago

More about scent dogs and wine : <a href="http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articles/2006/0..."><a href="http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articl...

Kevin H. · 1 year ago

More about scent dogs and wine : <a href="http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articles/2006/0..."><a href="http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articl...

Kevin H. · 1 year ago

More about scent dogs and wine : <a href="http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articles/2006/0..."><a href="http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articl...

Mark Koppen · 1 year ago

I would tend to agree that the language can be learned and used, but the 100 point system has to go, if only for one reason - the difference between 89 and 90 is about 20 times the difference between 88 and 89...you know what I mean!

ryan · 1 year ago

Wine is subjective. Yes there are objective elements, but wine in the end and in the most important facet, consumption, subjective. You can see that over time certain wines are born out as superior to others, thus implying some sort of temporal objectiveness, but the wines that are loved today are not the wines that will be loved tomorrow. If wine is objective then you could take a non-wine consuming culture, give them a series of wines and have them all agree with "us" the wine consumers. On the other hand you may now say they are not educated on what is good wine, well then you reinforce my opinion by showing that wine is dependent on the current wine education. Education is VERY subjective, as born out by looking at any text book from 50 yrs ago, it's based on current knowledge and ideas. Romans enjoyed wine with salt water, and you would never drink wine without dilution. Maybe this is due to wine making back then, but none the less the "objective" answer then is different than ours today. 100yrs from now we'll be arguing that another style of wine is better/correct. Subjectively as a Human organism we agree on what is in fashion with those who educate us. We are not individuals, but rather a larger group, that culture to culture decides what is right based on our tastes.

ryan · 1 year ago

I agree this comment blew me away and I want to read the book to learn more about it. I was shocked, though I have heard of the studies that show that blindfolded humans can track scents with similar accuracy to dogs...Very interesting at the least!

Arthur · 1 year ago

Fashions are fleeting. Maybe the salt water made the wines better and today's enthusiasts (or connoiseeures) would find those Roman wines better with a splash of salt water than without. We won't know until we try a wine made that way - with and without the salt water. I am wary of embracing ambiguous, relativist philosophies. They tend to appease and validate the masses and lull them into a false sense of comfort. The only people who come to be enrichmed by this are those who affirm the masses sense of quality or value about a product. I appreciate that prefences change, but the crowd is not always wise. What appeals to the masses is not necessarily the pinnacle of viticultural achievement.

Arthur · 1 year ago

Another critical difference is the location of the oflactory epithelium. Theirs is located closer to the nostrils and lines the path inhaled air takes. Ours is up between our eyes and not in the direct path of incoming air.

ryan · 1 year ago

and the best part is that pinnacle can never be defined or achieved thus leaving us with an ever changing standard of perfection. Thus we can temporarily define a standard of perfection, or "objective" set of rules. But this is only temporary

Philip James · 1 year ago

Love the fart comment! Even Parker and Tanzer et al admit there's no difference between 87 and 88 points. However, given that one number is higher than the other, whats the casual enthusiast to think? Its about time the 100 point system was abandoned. When the guy who invented it, and the most famous people who use it all admit that there's no difference between similar scores (within 2 or 3 points) and only use a few percentage points in the range, all youve left is a 10 point scale with 80 odd points tacked on as a base level.

Mike · 1 year ago

Avery Gilbert also recently did a Podcast for the New York Academy of Sciences' Science and the City, where he talks about some similar themes. For those interested in listening and hearing more from Dr. Gilbert, you can listen to that here: <a href="http://www.nyas.org/snc/podcastdetail.asp?id=1841..."><a href="http://www.nyas.org/snc/podcastdetail.as....

Mike · 1 year ago

Avery Gilbert also recently did a Podcast for the New York Academy of Sciences' Science and the City, where he talks about some similar themes. For those interested in listening and hearing more from Dr. Gilbert, you can listen to that here: <a href="http://www.nyas.org/snc/podcastdetail.asp?id=1841..."><a href="http://www.nyas.org/snc/podcastdetail.as....

Mike · 1 year ago

Avery Gilbert also recently did a Podcast for the New York Academy of Sciences' Science and the City, where he talks about some similar themes. For those interested in listening and hearing more from Dr. Gilbert, you can listen to that here: <a href="http://www.nyas.org/snc/podcastdetail.asp?id=1841..."><a href="http://www.nyas.org/snc/podcastdetail.as....