Let's talk about "dry extract"

[John_Morris]

@Steven Lawrence

So, I just searched the latest Burghound, and Meadows’ description is laid out in Issue 42 in the paragraph near the bottom of page 4. Not sure about copyright rules, so I’ll just paraphrase: the term is used to describe inner concentration derived from natural sap, rather than extraction, and is an indicator of high quality. He reports this is one of the features that makes 2009 a very good vintage for red Burgs. If you look at several notes where “dry extract” is used, it seems to be in the context that a wine has a lot of it, and that is a good thing. Maybe I’m over-interpreting, but I see this not so much as co-opting a technical term, but rather that the wine exhibits traits that are consistent with high degrees of dry extract, if they were to be measured.

Sounds like B.S. to me – borrowing a technical term with a meaning that may or may not equate to quality and using it in place of “concentration” or “depth.”

[Steven_Lawrence]

This thread is a good example of how posting TNs for the world to see can be fairly intimidating.
I shudder to think how critical people are of my imprecise TNs…on the other hand, actually I don’t really care that much!

[John_Morris]

As long as you don’t use B.S. terms, we promise not to give you a hard time.

[Steven_Lawrence]

@John Morris

As long as you don’t use B.S. terms, we promise not to give you a hard time.

At least publicly, right?

[Berry_Crawford]

@Rick Gregory

@Berry Crawford

@Rick Gregory

Use language that communicates the experience of tasting the wine. “Dry Extract” doesn’t do that.

Totally disagree

Wel don’t go into so much detail…
See above for my reasons. If you disagree, great. If you actually want to participate here, try doing that though. Sorry, but pithy comments like that just take up space and don’t add anything.

if you rephrase this to be more polite, I will respond in kind.

[Lewis_Dawson]

@Steven Lawrence

This thread is a good example of how posting TNs for the world to see can be fairly intimidating.
I shudder to think how critical people are of my imprecise TNs…on the other hand, actually I don’t really care that much!

Yes, exactly. Can’t say dry extract, pain grille, or sous bois. And other recent threads teach us that other BS words/concepts include…
Concentration
Balance
Complexity
Minerality
Over-ripe or under-ripe
Hot or alcoholic
Etc, etc.

The only thing acceptable in a TN seems to be…
Name of producer (preferably reduced to 2 initials)
Vintage
Name of wine
Score, but anything under 90 means you are an attention-seeking contrarian.

[Rick_Gregory]

@Berry Crawford

@Rick Gregory

@Berry Crawford

Totally disagree

Wel don’t go into so much detail…
See above for my reasons. If you disagree, great. If you actually want to participate here, try doing that though. Sorry, but pithy comments like that just take up space and don’t add anything.

if you rephrase this to be more polite, I will respond in kind.

Oh please. Your first comment contributes nothing to the discussion. If you have something to actually say, say it. I’m not going to beg you to participate since I don’t care if you do or not.

Stephen - actually a new person shouldn’t be intimidated at all. They’re the least likely to use specialist terms or the French phrase instead of the English one in order to sound cool. Most new TN writers seem to do exactly what I think anyone sharing a note should do - they try to describe what the wine was like to them in terms that others can understand.

Lewis - Again oh please. You fully understand the difference between the first set of terms and the second set. Don’t fake stupidity to make a silly point.

[Lewis_Dawson]

Rick, there have been other threads similar to this one about all of those other terms.

PS: if there is one thing I never fake, it is stupidity

[Linda_Baehr]

@Eric Ifune

Dry extract is not a tasting term. It is a technical one. Once the water and alcohol of a wine is evaporated, the residual is “dry extract.” Theoretically, the higher the dry extract, the higher the concentration of flavors. It doesn’t differentiate between “good” flavors and “bad.” If cooped as a tasting term it seems to me to be an imprecise one.

Eric has it right. I guess it could be used in place of a term describing mouthfeel or “weight” of a wine on the palate, but certainly not as a flavor descriptor.
Frankly, a descriptive term is only useful if people understand the meaning of the term. If people do not, and obviously some people will not understand this term, it is useless.
And once again, you guys go round and round.

[John_Morris]

@Linda Baehr

@Eric Ifune

Dry extract is not a tasting term. It is a technical one. Once the water and alcohol of a wine is evaporated, the residual is “dry extract.” Theoretically, the higher the dry extract, the higher the concentration of flavors. It doesn’t differentiate between “good” flavors and “bad.” If cooped as a tasting term it seems to me to be an imprecise one.

Eric has it right. I guess it could be used in place of a term describing mouthfeel or “weight” of a wine on the palate, but certainly not as a flavor descriptor.
Frankly, a descriptive term is only useful if people understand the meaning of the term. If people do not, and obviously some people will not understand this term, it is useless.
And once again, you guys go round and round.

The last thing we need around here is someone who actually knows what she’s talking about.

[Charlie_Carnes]

@Linda Baehr

@Eric Ifune

Dry extract is not a tasting term. It is a technical one. Once the water and alcohol of a wine is evaporated, the residual is “dry extract.” Theoretically, the higher the dry extract, the higher the concentration of flavors. It doesn’t differentiate between “good” flavors and “bad.” If cooped as a tasting term it seems to me to be an imprecise one.

Eric has it right. I guess it could be used in place of a term describing mouthfeel or “weight” of a wine on the palate, but certainly not as a flavor descriptor.
Frankly, a descriptive term is only useful if people understand the meaning of the term. If people do not, and obviously some people will not understand this term, it is useless.
And once again, you guys go round and round.

In a technical sense, I see what you mean that dry extract cannot be used as a flavor descriptor. But here I use the term to describe perception. When used to describe how I perceive a wine, sometimes, extraction or dry extraction, could be likened to fond in a culinary sense.

[Berry_Crawford]

@Linda Baehr

@Eric Ifune

Dry extract is not a tasting term. It is a technical one. Once the water and alcohol of a wine is evaporated, the residual is “dry extract.” Theoretically, the higher the dry extract, the higher the concentration of flavors. It doesn’t differentiate between “good” flavors and “bad.” If cooped as a tasting term it seems to me to be an imprecise one.

Eric has it right. I guess it could be used in place of a term describing mouthfeel or “weight” of a wine on the palate, but certainly not as a flavor descriptor.

I agree but are most people using to describe actual flavor? I don’t think so.

[John_Morris]

@Charlie Carnes

In a technical sense, I see what you mean that dry extract cannot be used as a flavor descriptor. But here I use the term to describe perception. When used to describe how I perceive a wine, sometimes, extraction or dry extraction, could be likened to fond in a culinary sense.

If you mean extracted, then just say “extracted.” Don’t use a term that is defined as something measurable by instruments as if it were a descriptor of sensation.

[chaad_thomas]

@Charlie Carnes

@Linda Baehr

@Eric Ifune

Dry extract is not a tasting term. It is a technical one. Once the water and alcohol of a wine is evaporated, the residual is “dry extract.” Theoretically, the higher the dry extract, the higher the concentration of flavors. It doesn’t differentiate between “good” flavors and “bad.” If cooped as a tasting term it seems to me to be an imprecise one.

Eric has it right. I guess it could be used in place of a term describing mouthfeel or “weight” of a wine on the palate, but certainly not as a flavor descriptor.
Frankly, a descriptive term is only useful if people understand the meaning of the term. If people do not, and obviously some people will not understand this term, it is useless.
And once again, you guys go round and round.

In a technical sense, I see what you mean that dry extract cannot be used as a flavor descriptor. But here I use the term to describe perception. When used to describe how I perceive a wine, sometimes, extraction or dry extraction, could be likened to fond in a culinary sense.

Huh? “Dry extraction”?? That’s a new one that you’re gonna have to elaborate on. Is that the process you apply to the dry extract, like mining or something?

[Berry_Crawford]

@John Morris

@Charlie Carnes

In a technical sense, I see what you mean that dry extract cannot be used as a flavor descriptor. But here I use the term to describe perception. When used to describe how I perceive a wine, sometimes, extraction or dry extraction, could be likened to fond in a culinary sense.

If you mean extracted, then just say “extracted.” Don’t use a term that is defined as something measurable by instruments as if it were a descriptor of sensation.

Isn’t “extracted” also a term that would require quantification to really define? I think in both cases the taster is guessing based on sensation, right?

[chaad_thomas]

@Berry Crawford

@Linda Baehr

@Eric Ifune

Dry extract is not a tasting term. It is a technical one. Once the water and alcohol of a wine is evaporated, the residual is “dry extract.” Theoretically, the higher the dry extract, the higher the concentration of flavors. It doesn’t differentiate between “good” flavors and “bad.” If cooped as a tasting term it seems to me to be an imprecise one.

Eric has it right. I guess it could be used in place of a term describing mouthfeel or “weight” of a wine on the palate, but certainly not as a flavor descriptor.

I agree but are most people using to describe actual flavor? I don’t think so.

Well, I can be daft at times, but by my reckoning, no one has yet bothered to make a comprehensible explanation of how and what they are using it to describe, so if you can I’d be much obliged.

I mean, how many ways can you run this?

“This wine has dry extract.” – Duh, they all do. Kinda…but the problem is that when it’s in the wine, it ain’t dry.

“This wine is loaded with dry extract.” – I’m fine with this if you have the analysis (e.g. 20g/L, but if you don’t, how do you know?

“This wine seems to have a lot of dry extract” – Kinda ok, but again, if it’s in the wine, it ain’t dry extract, is it? So what are you saying? Something else, no?

“You can really taste the dry extract in this wine.” – No. That’s just wrong.

“You can feel the dry extract in this wine.” – Kinda, but you’re beatin around the bush, because the dry extract is neither dry nor extracted (discuss amongst yourselves).

“This wine yielded 15g/L of dry extract.” – I really think that’s the only appropriate use of the terms–relating to a measurement.

I’m happy to concede daftness if I’ve missed something, and if you did earlier post a comprehensible explanation, sorry, I can be daft.

[Charlie_Carnes]

@chaad thomas

@Charlie Carnes

@Linda Baehr

Eric has it right. I guess it could be used in place of a term describing mouthfeel or “weight” of a wine on the palate, but certainly not as a flavor descriptor.
Frankly, a descriptive term is only useful if people understand the meaning of the term. If people do not, and obviously some people will not understand this term, it is useless.
And once again, you guys go round and round.

In a technical sense, I see what you mean that dry extract cannot be used as a flavor descriptor. But here I use the term to describe perception. When used to describe how I perceive a wine, sometimes, extraction or dry extraction, could be likened to fond in a culinary sense.

Huh? “Dry extraction”?? That’s a new one that you’re gonna have to elaborate on. Is that the process you apply to the dry extract, like mining or something?

In the sense that there is extract, perceived or otherwise, didn’t extraction, take place? At any rate I would rather have diarrhea(action) for four days than get into a semantic argument about wether I should have used a noun, verb; adjective: or Adverb". For the record I don’t think I have used the term too many times, but again FOR ME, I understand the term and like it when it is used in a way I understand it. And I certainly haven’t told anyone here, thank you John, wether or not to use a specific term.

[Rick_Gregory]

@Charlie Carnes

@chaad thomas

@Charlie Carnes

In a technical sense, I see what you mean that dry extract cannot be used as a flavor descriptor. But here I use the term to describe perception. When used to describe how I perceive a wine, sometimes, extraction or dry extraction, could be likened to fond in a culinary sense.

Huh? “Dry extraction”?? That’s a new one that you’re gonna have to elaborate on. Is that the process you apply to the dry extract, like mining or something?

In the sense that there is extract, perceived or otherwise, didn’t extraction, take place? At any rate I would rather have diarrhea(action) for four days than get into a semantic argument about wether I should have used a noun, verb; adjective: or Adverb"…

Don’t be silly - you should obviously use an adnoun!

[chaad_thomas]

@Charlie Carnes

@chaad thomas

@Charlie Carnes

In a technical sense, I see what you mean that dry extract cannot be used as a flavor descriptor. But here I use the term to describe perception. When used to describe how I perceive a wine, sometimes, extraction or dry extraction, could be likened to fond in a culinary sense.

Huh? “Dry extraction”?? That’s a new one that you’re gonna have to elaborate on. Is that the process you apply to the dry extract, like mining or something?

In the sense that there is extract, perceived or otherwise, didn’t extraction, take place? At any rate I would rather have diarrhea(action) for four days than get into a semantic argument about wether I should have used a noun, verb; adjective: or Adverb". For the record I don’t think I have used the term too many times, but again FOR ME, I understand the term and like it when it is used in a way I understand it. And I certainly haven’t told anyone here, thank you John, wether or not to use a specific term.

Wait a minute, aren’t you the dude who, back in post #31 couldn’t get his mind around the phrase, “faux precision”?

Oh, I think you know full well what it means…

[Berry_Crawford]

@chaad thomas

Well, I can be daft at times, but by my reckoning, no one has yet bothered to make a comprehensible explanation of how and what they are using it to describe, so if you can I’d be much obliged.

I mean, how many ways can you run this?

“This wine has dry extract.” – Duh, they all do. Kinda…but the problem is that when it’s in the wine, it ain’t dry.

“This wine is loaded with dry extract.” – I’m fine with this if you have the analysis (e.g. 20g/L, but if you don’t, how do you know?

“This wine seems to have a lot of dry extract” – Kinda ok, but again, if it’s in the wine, it ain’t dry extract, is it? So what are you saying? Something else, no?

“You can really taste the dry extract in this wine.” – No. That’s just wrong.

“You can feel the dry extract in this wine.” – Kinda, but you’re beatin around the bush, because the dry extract is neither dry nor extracted (discuss amongst yourselves).

“This wine yielded 15g/L of dry extract.” – I really think that’s the only appropriate use of the terms–relating to a measurement.

I’m happy to concede daftness if I’ve missed something, and if you did earlier post a comprehensible explanation, sorry, I can be daft.

To me “dry extract” is alot like tannins or acid or any other structural component. I will often say something like “quite tannic” or “lots of acid” or “locked down under tannins”. In each case I certainly have no data support my sensory perceptions, I am simply stating my sensory perceptions. I think people writing and reading such descriptions understand the implication that the taster is describing their experience and not nessisarily stating a scientific fact. I see dry extract in the same manner. People are comfortable with tasting note writters saying “lots of tannins” when they should be saying “tastes as if it had lots of tannins”. People understand the unstated implication in the shorthand version that it is simple a subjective taste experience being described. “Dry extract” being a structural descriptor has the same dynamic in my mind.