Article: Is wine fake?

[Scott_G_r_u_n_e_r]

at first assumed it was 100% click bait, but better researched and more interesting than expected. ymmv

Is Wine Fake?—Asterisk

[Anton_D]

Wine is as ‘real’ as any hobby based on connoisseurship.

Hi Fi is similar, gourmet foods, fashion, art…

It was a fine article. I can’t remember the source, but there was a cool review of wine scent notes and how they corresponded to the actual notes we mention. There is some good objective data, as well.

Also a skill that can be learned and refined!

[Ian_Sutton]

Perfumes would seem an obvious other sphere.

Some is for sure ‘wine wankery’, and I reckon there are few of us that haven’t at some point in our lives been guilty of that.

It’s good to keep our egos in check when winetasting, writing notes up, and talking about wines. Recognising the imprecision, and differing palates, but also being confident in ourselves to say e.g. the acid is more supportive than refreshing, or calling out a little mousiness. There is much we can detect, but much that is vague to us.

Only partially related, I once listened to a radio interview with the (human) taster for pedigree dog food. He explained that yes, the majority of the tasting was done by dogs, and they were an ideal way of testing how well a recipe would be received. However he was called in to taste, when (for instance) a recipe they thought would be loved by dogs, was instead mostly snubbed by them. They needed him to taste it, to explain what they flavours were, and suggest why it wasn’t well received. Dogs may be the best judge, but don’t have the ability to say “I like liver, but not as much as that!”. The final question to him, is “what are the main skills of the job”. He said an ability to differentiate and talk about the different flavours and textures was very important indeed, but the most important attribute was a ‘strong constitution’

[Kurt_H]

I just read this. One thing they mention is that non-expert tasters tend to like cheap wine better than expensive wine. I’m thinking that’s because cheap (mass market) wine (like much popular music) in designed (for want of a better word) to meet a certain profile that’s in the fat part of the bell curve stylistically. It’s what non-experts are used to drinking. When you give the something that hasn’t been dumbed down, it comes across as “different,” and often not in a good way.

[RichardFlack]

Yes. I think it’s connected to wine being an “acquired taste”. How many here really liked their first glass of wine at age fourteen or whatever? Also, at least in North America, the dumbing down involves, as well as lower acid etc, higher actual or perceived sweetness to suit the Coca Cola corrupted palate. (For the sake of clarity I haven’t read the article yet it’s on the list for later, this is in response to the posts here). So sweet as well as bland.

[John_Morris]

@Ian_Sutton

Only partially related, I once listened to a radio interview with the (human) taster for pedigree dog food. He explained that yes, the majority of the tasting was done by dogs, and they were an ideal way of testing how well a recipe would be received. However he was called in to taste, when (for instance) a recipe they thought would be loved by dogs, was instead mostly snubbed by them. They needed him to taste it, to explain what they flavours were, and suggest why it wasn’t well received. Dogs may be the best judge, but don’t have the ability to say “I like liver, but not as much as that!”. The final question to him, is “what are the main skills of the job”. He said an ability to differentiate and talk about the different flavours and textures was very important indeed, but the most important attribute was a ‘strong constitution’

Woman at bar: “So, what do you do for a living?”
Man at bar: “I’m paid to taste dog food.”
Woman: