Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

realclearscience.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 180 posts

Re: The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

#21

Post by fenomas »

mamon wrote: post #6
optimalsolver wrote: post #4

Now do one for Stradivarius violins.

That has been done multiple times. It is easy: just record the sound and compare acoustic signatures. And yes, Stradivarius is different. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/may/21/scientists-f...

Um. That article describes a study where the researchers took recordings of different violins, looked for a difference in the strads, and found one. That doesn't establish that strads sound different, it presupposes it.

Surely if they wanted to show that strads sound different they'd need to test whether their method lets them predict whether an unknown recording is a strad or not?

Re: The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

#22

Post by cbmuser »

ddek wrote: post #17

I've got a few issues with most of these studies. The media tends to make this worse, because these articles (and their accompanying social media discussion) seem to exist solely for writers and readers to claim superiority over the perceived elites . Those pretentious wine snobs, don't they know an Aldi boxed wine tastes no better than their precious Chateau Lafite Rothschild ? The argument is always the same: a cla…

I don’t know why you’re so upset about this article.

The experiment basically just proves that wine “science” doesn’t live up to scientific standards and therefore shouldn’t be considered science.

I do agree though that every wine tastes differently and that therefore wine drinkers have preferences.

Re: The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

#23

Post by mrmonkeyman »

ddek wrote: post #17

I've got a few issues with most of these studies. The media tends to make this worse, because these articles (and their accompanying social media discussion) seem to exist solely for writers and readers to claim superiority over the perceived elites . Those pretentious wine snobs, don't they know an Aldi boxed wine tastes no better than their precious Chateau Lafite Rothschild ? The argument is always the same: a cla…

Tannines, complex flavours? Sure. Let's actually taste the difference between red and white first, sir, then we'll talk about the other bs.

Re: The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

#24

Post by casion »

tyleo wrote: post #11
casion wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These studies are flawed in ways that every experienced musician recognizes they are: context. It's _common_ that instruments that sound amazing in a solo context will sound poor in a larger ensemble, or might sound great in one ensemble but not another. Personal context factors in: how does it feel, how stable is the neck, is it work in commonly stressed spots (usually good), is the design kind to your habits, etc..…

I don’t know if I understand your point about generics syntax and a scrappy underdog. Are you trying to imply that a group of experts is better than the group of experts and laypeople at judging things? If so, I’m not sure that’s true.

No, I'm saying that generics syntax doesn't express the value of a language.

Re: The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

#25

Post by casion »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #15
casion wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These studies are flawed in ways that every experienced musician recognizes they are: context. It's _common_ that instruments that sound amazing in a solo context will sound poor in a larger ensemble, or might sound great in one ensemble but not another. Personal context factors in: how does it feel, how stable is the neck, is it work in commonly stressed spots (usually good), is the design kind to your habits, etc..…

Stradivarius violins are invariably played and sometimes owned by soloists, who either literally play solo, lead a concerto, or occasionally play with a pianist or as part of a small ensemble. First violin in an orchestra will usually have a more modest instrument. Edit to add: of course there's a lot of Veblenisation in music, and this gets silly when people who are really collectors try to do music and end up being…

I find your response somewhat strange. I'm saying that context matters, and your response is that... context matters?

It would appear that I'm being misread to defend a specific instrument. I'm saying that there's more value to an instrument than simply a 1:n listening test. That goes for ANY instrument.

Regarding people spending money on things they can't fully use (or sometimes appreciate), of course. That happens with everything.

Re: The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

#26

Post by esperent »

thinkingkong wrote: post #3

Another somewhat famous study involved taking a cheap wine and an expensive wine and swapping the bottles. When people tasted the wines and the bottles were hidden, people accurately scored the wines. When the bottles were visible, people preferred the wine in the expensive bottle. All but the experts were susceptible to this effect.

> All but the experts were susceptible to this effect.

Even the experts, according to some studies, like the one described in the title article, or here:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-ta...

Re: The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

#27

Post by touggourt »

As a professional cooker, I can confirm that vision is the most important part in tasting. I've read other studies that shows that taste is a brain build which include senses and feelings. Everyone has done a dinner with good friends, eating pasta with butter and drinking some basical wine — do you remember how it was delicious ?

Re: The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

#28

Post by boomboomsubban »

cbmuser wrote: post #22
ddek wrote: post #17

I've got a few issues with most of these studies. The media tends to make this worse, because these articles (and their accompanying social media discussion) seem to exist solely for writers and readers to claim superiority over the perceived elites . Those pretentious wine snobs, don't they know an Aldi boxed wine tastes no better than their precious Chateau Lafite Rothschild ? The argument is always the same: a cla…

I don’t know why you’re so upset about this article. The experiment basically just proves that wine “science” doesn’t live up to scientific standards and therefore shouldn’t be considered science. I do agree though that every wine tastes differently and that therefore wine drinkers have preferences.

What about this experiment doesn't live up to standards? It seems well set up and supports the hypothesis that perception takes precedence to smell/taste when describing things.

Re: The Legendary Study That Embarrassed Wine Experts (2014)

#29

Post by robertlagrant »

thinkingkong wrote: post #3

Another somewhat famous study involved taking a cheap wine and an expensive wine and swapping the bottles. When people tasted the wines and the bottles were hidden, people accurately scored the wines. When the bottles were visible, people preferred the wine in the expensive bottle. All but the experts were susceptible to this effect.

Which asks the question: if no one else can tell the difference, are experts just able to detect what expensive wine tastes like, as opposed to what nice-tasting wine tastes like?
Post reply on HN