I don’t, but I can understand how a selective reading of what I’ve written could lead one to believe that.
Actually, a normal reading will do that.
What Alan said:
You are smelling the formation of mercaptan, furfuryl mercaptan in particular. These compounds often spread the spectrum of very pleasant aromas (citrus and grapefruit: ever notice that orange rind note in Pinot noir?) to distinctive coffee aromas to burnt rubber (syrah often reduces with these aromas) to smelly rotten eggs. Hopefully my father will notice this thread and post as he is an aroma/flavor scientist and could elaborate with a more scientific response!
You are right about the lack of a correlation between the two audiences (and tea for that matter). However, I also think it is interesting that it is not the case despite the strong similarities between the two subjects. But when given a proper experience of it, I find people who are experienced technical tasters easily find fascination in the other field, whether going from coffee to wine or vice versa.
Too true. Well executed espresso, macchiato, and cappucinos are sublime. What gets me is that the difference between a well made espresso drink and the bitter, dry stuff is a matter of cents for the consumer, if that. When thinking about the difference in cost, great espresso is much more accessible than great wine could ever be. The reciprocal is that most people have to seek out great espresso while great wine is all around.
Dave, re-read post #40 of this thread, and focus on the third and fourth sentences therein.
Brian,
I did. You wrote: “Are they on the package to help sell the product? Well, duh – of course they are, to the extent they’re not mandated by law - and, to my knowledge, no such description is required by law.”
So, why do you object to the term “marketing” when describing the use of these descriptors?
I object to the characterization attached to the term/phrase “marketing”, not the term/phrase itself. After re-reading through this thread, I think you and I are actually on the same page, although we would use different words to say the same thing. Here’s some examples of the characterizations that I disagree with (with some emphasis added by me):
It sounds like the ‘Pinot Grigio’ descriptor is one for sales > rather than accuracy> .
I disagree with the idea that said description is probably not accurate. We don’t know if it’s accurate or not, but the implication in this statement is that the Pinot Grigio descriptor is “for sales” and “not accuracy.” This statement characterizes marketing as being misleading/lies.
It sounds like the ‘Pinot Grigio’ descriptor is one for sales rather than accuracy. How many women who love that Santa Margarita will think ‘yum!’ when they read that bag of coffee?
I think this is about right. It really doesn’t make sense otherwise.
When trying to sell… you might > take some liberties with descriptions > in order to attract a wide range of customers.
Another characterization as marketing being misleading/lies.
To me putting Pinot Grigio in the coffee description sounds like > too-precious marketing > and > has little or no meaning> .
Another characterization as marketing being misleading/lies. After all, if the descriptor is accurate then it does have meaning, right?
The coffee business has discovered that it can sell it’s product using a version of “wine speak”, in fact from some of the descriptions I read you would think you were drinking wine rather than a cup of Joe. It’s just smart marketing, which I respect.
I don’t disagree with what is said here, necessarily; but, since when is a tasting descriptor “wine speak” — such descriptions are used to sell a wide variety of edible goods, not just wine. Depending on the meaning of the word “just” there may be an implication in the above-quoted statement that the tasting note is only (i.e. “just”) for marketing, and not at all meant to convey accurate information to the consumer. Connoisseurs of every edible good want/expect/are-interested-in tasting notes of the thing(s) of which they are connoisseurs — so, to that point, I feel the descriptions on the bags of coffee beans are aimed at selling to the coffee connoisseur; this could accurately be referred to as marketing (and this is where I agree, in principle, with the statement quoted directly above), but, if the marketing statement is accurate, it also operates as a consumer-informing statement. IMO, a statement that is purely (“just”) for marketing is a statement that is designed only to sell the product to consumers. IMO, a tasting note is not such a statement because there will inevitably be some potential consumers who pick-up that product, read the tasting note, and decide - based on that tasting note - that they will not like the product, and therefore choose to not purchase said product.
The geek in coffee or wine doesn’t read those descriptors in order to figure out if they will buy that coffee/wine.
I often read “those descriptors” when making purchasing decisions — usually to clue me in on products that I won’t like.
informative labels that give details of growing conditions and wine making choices [are] a very far cry from a mere tasting note written by a friend of the winery. Those can lead to instances of descriptors > used for sales rather than honesty of description > like when someone would use Pinot Grigio to describe coffee
Another characterization as marketing being misleading/lies.
If you get something as nuanced and specific as Pinot Grigio from your coffee then you need to wake up and smell the coffee.
Hypocritical statement.
Here’s a statement I completely agree with, which suggests I mis-interpreted prior posts of yours, Dave. It sounds like we’re probably on the same page.
All I said was that the coffee industry has discovered that their own variation of winespeak can be very effective in selling coffee, just as it sells wine, from the most knowledgable drinkers to the newbiest. When I stop in the WaWa here on my daily walk and their sign tells me about the nose, flavor and finish of this month’s special grind/blend (Brazilian) then that is good marketing, and if the description is true, even better.
Here’s an interesting tangent: San Francisco Restaurants and Food News - SFGATE
Apologies as I have not read this entire thread but there was a freakishly “Coffee laden” wine at my visit to Pichon Baron in the mid nineties, It was the 1993 PB and the winery at the time had taken a bemused stance on it and tasted it out as an oddity. Yes it was full on Java.
in complete agreement 
as i type this i am enjoying a beautiful cup of a direct trade honduras el ocotillo. bourbon and pacas variety. used aeropress to make it. soft strawberry jam like acidity, red fruit, prunes and milk chocolate.