Call me weird, but there are certain wine terms that make me cringe every time I hear them. For whatever reason, I can’t stand the use of the following words:
Mouthfeel
Tannins
Whenever I hear the mention of “Mouthfeel” it’s always non-descriptive dribble. As in, this wine has a “luscious mouthfeel”. Also, the word “Tannins” comes across as a very esoteric term that never helps me to better understand a wine review. When someone says this wine has “well integrated tannins” I never know what the hell they’re trying to get at. I’m sorry if this seems like a bit of a rant; I was just curious to see if anyone’s in the same boat with these or other wine terms.
“Unctuous” makes me roll my eyes. To me the word conveys an excess of oiliness, yet people like Parker use it to compliment the wine they’re drinking. I don’t see how being in excess of anything is ever a compliment. Too much is still bad.
I also cringe when I’m reading how sexy a wine is or how it’s like a “sexy woman”… or like a fast car. (I feel like the people who use these descriptors overlap.) I know I am a minority on this one.
What would you suggest people use instead of mouth feel to describe how a wine feels in your mouth? Texture? I think it’s a fairly useful, if empty, term just to set up a description of how the wine moves in the mouth.
VARIETAL when referring to the grape. It’s VARIETY!!!
Variety refers to the grape variety, grown and used to make the wine. Pinot Noir is a variety, NOT a varietal!!
Varietal is an adjective, and refers to the wine. It describes a wine that is made from a single or dominant grape variety. Such wines are called varietal wines.
I’ve even seen some wine professionals use varietal for the grape in articles. That’s simply inexcusable for someone ITB.
Even though most people use the term I hate “on the palate…”. It just seems weird to me. “Nose” also is awkward to me.
I really dislike the use of “effort” such as “its a strong effort for this vintage” or any use of “effort”.
It doesn’t really bother me but I usually roll my eyes a bit when people talk about flavor complexity or forest floor elements in young wines. For the most part these are qualities that only come with age.
I agree with Peter regarding tannins. There is no such thing as a “ripe” tannin. There can be more or less or it can be buffered by fruit, but tannin tastes like tannin.
I’m pretty sick of all the parroted lines about “blueberry milkshake,” “vodka kool aid,” “pancake syrup,” “cough medicine,” “rocket fuel” etc. to describe any big and ripe wine.
Sure, most tasting not terminology is repeated (and I’m hardly a fountain of originality myself), but for whatever reason, I always get the feeling that the people using that AFWE script think they’re being really clever and impressive when they repeat all that stuff for the millionth time, and that they’re doing it more to declare their agenda and try to be one of the cool kids than really describing what the wine was like.
The following is the kind of rococo tasting note I find ridiculous:
“Scents of bacon; fresh cherry and red raspberry shadowed by their distilled counterparts; violet, honeysuckle, and acacia; musk; lavender and other resinous herbs; along with pungently bittersweet citrus oils, all capture one’s attention. Their counterparts on an infectiously juicy, fine-grained and strikingly buoyant palate are mingled with veal stock and mouthwateringly savory pan drippings. Cardamom and black pepper add yet greater complexity. The clean, marrow-like meatiness that extends all the way through this Syrah’s lusciously long finish is anything but gamey.”
David Schildknecht, writing for the Wine Advocate
![[soap.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/a/a7ea1fffd3ef237e8f19d17a83270ad8452218ca.gif "soap"){kind=small}
