Do Wine Glasses Make A Difference?

I’m picking up thru Chris’ company two each of the Grassl Liberte, 1855 and Cru. I’ll be interested in doing a blind comparison of the Cru and 1855 with the Zalto Burgundy.

And this leads back into what I was hypothesizing about in my earlier post. Let’s accept that we all prefer nice glasses to crappy ones (too small, too thick, whatever). So you do a comparison of three different high-quality red wine glasses as you just suggested. And let’s further accept that one may have preferences in terms of balance or beauty or swirlability or how they fit in the dishwasher or whatever and set those aside.

Now you’re drinking wines out of all three and seeing if they smell or taste differently. Let’s assume they do, and that you preferred the 1855 for the Napa cab you tried out of all three, and that you preferred the Zalto for the 1er Cru Burgundy you tried out of all three.

My question is whether this is predictive. If you get the results above in the two taste tests I’ve hypothesized, how likely is it that a month from now or a year from now, with a different Napa cab and a different 1er Cru Burg, that you will again prefer the 1855 for the former and the Zalto Burg for the latter? This is the “do glasses make a difference” question that I’m not satisfied has been answered objectively. Is it really a matter of Glass A being reliably “better” for wines of one type and Glass B being reliably “better” for wines of another type, or is it just that wines taste differently from different glasses, but there’s no predictable rhyme or reason as to which glass will favor which wine on a given night for a given taster (assuming, again, that we’re keeping tiny crappy chunky glasses out of the discussion)?

Dave - that is exactly the question that needs to be answered. I don’t have the answer I only have annecdotes - but we are going to be building a database around this exact topic.

What I can say and feel comfortable with are comments and observations like the following:

1 - We work with winemakers and trust that they know their wines better than anyone so when they pick our glass and get rid of the one they used to use, we view that as a good data point - FOR THAT WINERY and their wine… Roulot moved to us from Zalto Universal stems b/c our glass ‘gave me elements of my wine I’d never noticed before.’ according to JM himself. We are building examples of this daily and updating our web page accordingly (www.grasslglass.com). But, Etienne Sauzet, Drake Whitcraft, our own Marcus Goodfellow and Vincent Fritzsche, Realm, and others like their wines in our glass.

2 - We had the president of the N.American Somm. Association (I wrote NASA but, well…it’s different) use our Bordeaux (1855) stem and at first he did roll his eyes (politely as I’m told) but gave it a go. What he liked about our glass and ultimately wrote was it is the first large bowled stem for Cab blends which doesn’t drill your nasal passage with alcohol.

The plural of anecdote is not data. We view this as a long game, one where we simply hope to be a frequent ‘winner’ if you will. But, it is also critically important to recognize we acknowledge a 2017 Realm Tempest in a Liberté is great, today - but it may very well show wonderfully in a Zalto Bordeaux glass in 2034 and not so well in an 1855 by me.

To think otherwise would be egotistically asinine.

Buy what you like. I do advise you buy to what you drink and “universal” stems aren’t really that but are certainly ‘good enough’ the majority of the time and you should, if you can, try wine in a few stems at the same time and then go with which glass is bringing you the most pleasure. Unless it is a root day…but that’s another thread. :stuck_out_tongue:

*If you’re in Boston - Troquet is moving to our stems…

Thanks, Chris, and as you know I’ve moved to your glasses, too, so I’m a fan. I do think I’ve answered the question for myself as to whether the Grassls (generally) give me more pleasure for the wines I drink than the Riedel Vinums I used to use. I haven’t compared them to Zalto or any others.

But let’s keep drilling down because beyond “I prefer Grassl to Riedel Vinum,” I’m still not sure that “big reds in Grassl 1855 and lighter or high-acid reds in Grassl Cru” is some kind of objectively applicable rule, even though it’s the rule I use (I view it more as “received wisdom” than as “empirically demonstrated” at this point). So Roulot moved to “your glass.” But Grassl makes more than one glass - so which one, and why that one and not a different one? Does Markus prefer one of your glasses for his chards and a different one for his pinots? Which ones for which and why? Has he then tried the next vintage of pinot and chard in each of your various glasses to make sure that preference still holds? Etc.

Lots of research to be done. The things we do in the name of science…

And I’ll admit, most of the time I’d rather just enjoy the wine with dinner so I use the received wisdom to pick a glass and just go with it and it works fine. But I will have to bring some discipline to bear and get myself to do some trials, though of course “blind” trials with these glasses really aren’t possible.

  1. As to whether such a comparison test is predictive of future results. I think it’s difficult to assume future results are predictive, particularly in a case where the subjective initial impressions may have little discernible variation between glasses - assuming that’s the case. If the results are dramatically obvious we may reasonably assume future performance will align with initial results, but again I don’t think it’s necessarily predictive.

  2. Even in a blind test, it will be difficult not to get a clue about which glass one is drinking on based on weight, base size, lip design and balance. will having a clue prejudice the test? I don’t know yet.

Thankfully I’ve got a pretty good sniffer and palette, so I’m hoping I’ll be able detect differences and create preferences. At the end of the day I want to replace existing wine glasses that I know objectively do not perform optimally. Thus, I’m in a no lose situation and will have testing to support whatever conclusions I draw.

Liberte is my favorite all around glass. It works well for pretty much all whites and I even like to use it for certain red varieties like Syrah, Nero d’Avola, Sangiovese, Zinfandel and Nerello Mascalese.

I also really like the Grassl tasting glass for everyday use. They are a bit more sturdy and work fine for all everyday wines.

I mostly agree with these except for Liberté I would add Barbera and subtract (based on preference for other Grassl stems) Syrah (I like from 1855) and Nerello Mascalese (Cru gets the nod so far but still open-minded). I don’t drink much Zin but am inclined to agree with you based on early results with Croatina.

N.B. I sell Grassl.

I think Syrah has the greatest variance. I’ve been drinking through some Aussie Shiraz recently and have done side by side comparisons and I preferred the Liberte. Definitely agree with Barbera. I see your point about Nerello Mascalese but I find the nose to be a bit more muted in the younger wines I’ve tried in the Cru.

This is the problem I always had with my Riedel Somm Bdx glasses and why I am liking the Cru and 1855 over them. The Riedel was great for in-glass decanting/aeration. However I always got that ethanol hit and then had to fish around for the other aromas.

Not so much with the 1855 and Cru, the aromas are just focused, which is nice.


And on the subject of the Mineralite, I like mine, but my nose is probably the largest that could fit in that opening. I’ve had friends and family complain it was uncomfortable to drink from. So while I think it’s great for the acidic whites, I can understand if some find the ergonomics challenging.

And on the subject of the Mineralite, I like mine, but my nose is probably the largest that could fit in that opening. I’ve had friends and family complain it was uncomfortable to drink from. So while I think it’s great for the acidic whites, I can understand if some find the ergonomics challenging.

Yup - polarizing glass. I love it. And, it’s quite popular in Asian markets. Southern Europe…nope.

Right, one more crack like that…

:slight_smile:

Oh, Dave, the above winemakers I reference all use Liberté

The glass comparison has been set for Saturday Nov. 14. I was able to pull in four members from our wine club, including the owner who has an encyclopedic knowledge of wine. We’ll compare at least two Riedel glass designs, three from Grassl and the Zalto Burgundy.

Category of wines included in the test are as follows:

  1. Old world white, lighter in body
  2. Full body Chardonnay, probably a single vineyard Aubert
  3. Medium body red, like a CdP or Oregon Pinot
  4. Full body red, perhaps a Syrah (Shiraz), CA Cab, Bordeaux blend

Assuming your goal is to pick wines that “should” show better in different glasses than the other wines in the tasting (and that may well not be your goal), I would suggest changing 3 to something old world and from some place cooler than CdP - Burgundy or Piedmont, or the more traditional higher-altitude parts of Tuscany. For 1, within your suggestion, I think a riesling or Loire chenin would be great.

I can go along with that approach to #3.

+1

The Grassl glasses arrived yesterday and unbeknownst to me my wife picked up two extra of the 1855, so now I have 4 of them. We did a preliminary test last night with the Cru against a Penner Ash Pinot Glass. The wine was a 2012 Rhys Alpine Vineyard PN. Both my wife and I thought the Grassl Cru was superior in bouquet presentation. The Penner Ash glass allowed an alcohol note to resonate up through the glass, not so with the Grassl Cru. On the palate we went back and forth on which one was better. Initially the Penner Ash glass seemed to create less astringency, acid and green notes. However, over time it flipped back an forth and ultimately I thought the Cru provided the overall better experience. Lastly, I would say I slightly prefer the lip design on the Zalto Burgundy a bit better, as it’s a bit smoother than the Cru.

More to come…

Thanks for your test and comments, Dave.

You’re welcome. I’m adding another glass to the test. I’m picking up 2 Zalto Bordeaux’s to compare with the Grassl 1855.

Over the weekend I watched a Somm from the original “Somm” movie do a wine glass comparison. It was not blind and all glasses were of the ‘universal’ variety. She selected the Zalto ‘Universal’ and a Gabriel-Glas Stand’Art Edition as the two highest performers.

Last night I opened a very nice Chardonnay from Burgundy and poured it into a new Liberté glass. My initial impression was that I liked the look and feel of the glass design in my hand, however it seemed a tad short in it’s height and wondered how that would impact the aroma experience. After a few tastes I thought about comparing the same wine in a Zalto Burgundy glass. The difference in aroma sensation was immediately apparent. There was significantly more aroma complexity in the Burg glass design. I took both glasses to my wife and asked her to close her eyes as I put both glasses before her nose. She came to the same conclusion.

This led me to the following questions:

Why does the wine world treat whites differently than reds from a glass design perspective? Whites can be every bit as aromatic and complex as reds. One of the most complex and aromatic wines I’ve ever experienced was a classic rated Condrieu. If Pinot and Bordeaux glasses have large bowl designs to give reds room to breath and show off their aromas, why wouldn’t that principle apply to whites? Mark Aubert must have asked the same question, because he exclusively uses a Burgundy Pinot glass to showcase his offerings.

The official test comparison is still two weeks away, but these mini experiments have me thinking.