Well, if you postulate that glass shape physically impacts how a wine smells (I’ve illustrated in previous threads that shape can’t affect how a wine tastes), you need some mechanism to explain it. I’ve pointed out that, for wine just sitting motionless in a glass, the ratio of surface area to glass volume (above the wine) is pretty much constant, with some modest variation due to shape, slope, etc. The only meaningful variable is height - and all these glasses have the same bowl height.
If you want to postulate that swirling is a factor, where aromatics are carried through evaporation from the sides of the glass, the effect is probably counterintuitive: the ratio of surface to volume is inversely proportional to radius. So the smaller the glass, the greater the contribution of evaporation due to swirling.
I’m going to request a copy of the article you linked, I’ve often gone looking for something more scientific. Still, the basic conclusion seems to be that psychological perception of the glass in your hand is the biggest factor, not size or shape.
This I agree with wholeheartedly!
And I applaud the effort, and your fabulous photo of these glasses. I hope Chris trades you something for the right to use the photo
I don’t have to prove anything as I did not post this topic in an effort to get into a debate about whether and to what extent the shape of glasses matter. You decided to advance your own agenda on a topic that I posted merely in an effort to be helpful to others who might like to see and perhaps discuss the differences between the glasses. You allege there is no difference and thus I suppose that the topic is useless. Some might call that trolling. The link I provided contains synopses of many studies if you scroll down. Different methodologies were used. From what I can tell, you can find support in the literature that the shape does not matter. You can also find support–and more of it-- that it does matter. The overall conclusion seems to be that it does matter, but probably not a lot. Some of the differences may well be psychological or connected to the sense of touch interacting with the senses of smell and taste. That does not make these differences nonexistent. The mechanisms of why we, as human beings, find differences between different glasses may be complex/multi-factorial. We all have different aesthetic tastes and sensory perceptions. As I have said twice, your mileage may vary. We are on a board that obsesses over small differences. What matters to me may not to you and vice versa. Don’t see why you feel the need to “prove” your allegation is correct on this issue.
As for the photo, thanks for your kind words but it is just an iphone shot. While I was not unhappy with the look it provided, I suspect I could do better with my real camera.
Well, if you postulate that glass shape physically impacts how a wine smells (I’ve illustrated in previous threads that shape can’t affect how a wine tastes), you need some mechanism to explain it. I’ve pointed out that, for wine just sitting motionless in a glass, the ratio of surface area to glass volume (above the wine) is pretty much constant, with some modest variation due to shape, slope, etc. The only meaningful variable is height - and all these glasses have the same bowl height.
If you want to postulate that swirling is a factor, where aromatics are carried through evaporation from the sides of the glass, the effect is probably counterintuitive: the ratio of surface to volume is inversely proportional to radius. So the smaller the glass, the greater the contribution of evaporation due to swirling.
I’m going to request a copy of the article you linked, I’ve often gone looking for something more scientific. Still, the basic conclusion seems to be that psychological perception of the glass in your hand is the biggest factor, not size or shape.
Have you ever tested different glasses next to each other with the same wine? The differences can be quite dramatic, and in my experience, this is not terribly subjective – the differences will be perceived similarly by others present. (Of course, you have to be careful about soap residue and odors that might linger from a cabinet or box, but those are relatively easy to control for.)
I don’t know the explanation – bowl size, shape, thickness of the glass, whatever. But just because we don’t have a good explanation doesn’t mean it’s not an objectively observable phenomenon.
Stephen, I apologize for what might seem to be criticizing your post, that wasn’t really my intention. Yours is just one of a long stream of “glass shape” threads and for whatever reason I used it to air my thoughts, but it wasn’t meant to be directed at you personally.
As a scientist, I am sensitive to pseudoscience, bad science, and (particularly these past two years, but really you can go back to the beginning of recorded human history) conspiracy science. We live in a time where anyone can “publish” their thoughts on virtually anything, and seem pretty convincing to those without the expertise to know better. So I find myself compelled to respond to topics that encourage acceptance of myths, and conventional wisdoms, no matter how small or harmless. If we don’t push back on small, seemingly harmless beliefs that actually have little or no good understanding behind them, that just opens the door more widely to acceptance of even bigger myths, or outright conspiracy science that has the potential to do real harm.
Having said that, I don’t doubt that different glass shapes and sizes provide a different experience for different people. Certainly some of that (though, based on what I’ve argued here, not as much as it might seem, just looking at different shapes) is due to the physical characteristics of a glass. My own belief is that most of it is psychological, based on how a glass looks and feels to someone.
Of course I have, John. But I think those differences are attributable more to psychological perception, order of tasting, palate saturation, etc., than physical shape. Comparing a couple of different glasses at home is a far cry from a large double blind study, with statistically significant results. When I see that - together with some correlation to different physical attributes of the various glass shapes, I’ll be persuaded. Until then, I remain skeptical.
@John_Morris is of course right. Don’t know the science but have experimented quite a bit myself, other wine lovers as well as insisting that friends who really don’t care much about wine (except having a decent beverage in whatever container).
Depends a lot on the wines/varieties though, with a scale from no difference to wow it’s a completely different wine experience.
I had a period (for quite some time) when I tried more or less every wine I opened in 3-4 different glass shapes; from schott zwiesel grand cru series (burgundy, Bordeaux, allround - Riesling/Sangiovese) and a Riedel Syrah.
Something with the glass shape/sizes definitely have an impact on the smell/taste of wines. Like I mentioned in the previous comment, the difference vary a lot between wine/variety (hardly detectable to very significant). Sometimes the glass choices was the difference between a humm not so interesting to wow, this is great.
Thanks Alan. I hope I did not come across as being overly critical. That you are a scientist does not surprise me. I think our area of disagreement is that while I very much respect the scientific method, some things are harder to quantify/test/prove than others. I tend to be perfectly comfortable with folks holding different opinions and that both may be valid. I agree with you that scientific testing and A/B comparisons can disprove a lot of myths. In high end audio, there has been a lot of snake oil claims regarding expensive speaker wire and other products that make not a bit of difference to the sound. Here, the issue is complicated by variations of human perception and psychological effects. I don’t agree with the notion that if something is psychological, then it is not real. That most studies seem to support a difference in different glass shapes, albeit subtle, puts this issue for me in a different place than the speaker wire I mention above. Still, reasonable minds may differ and I have no problem with your opinions on the subject.
Without wanting to open a can of worms, there is an awful lot of perception in the wine world beyond glasses that is influenced by psychological effects–confirmation bias, mood, famous names on the labels, etc…
