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

141–150 of 180 posts

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

#141

Post by nojokes »

ogre_codes wrote: post #128
nojokes wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's how the research went down. First, Brochet gave 27 male and 27 female oenology students a glass of red and a glass of white wine and asked them to describe the flavor of each. The students described the white with terms like "floral," "honey," "peach," and "lemon." The red elicited descriptions of "raspberry," "cherry," "cedar," and "chicory." I think what this study showed is that oenology try to fit the wine…

> As a person who likes wine, I simply like to enjoy wine and not to describe it and try to figure out what that smell or taste resembles. I feel similarly about beer and coffee. I hear people talk about fruity flavors in coffee or other similarly weird descriptions of beer and I taste it and just taste the coffee. I can definitely taste the difference between fairly distinct varieties of coffee (or beer). But when p…

Usually common beer is, well, common (good as beer but no special tastes, smells). There are of course differences between scale of sweetness, bitterness and so on but rarely something extraordinary.

But craft beers have introduced many flavors into the beer world where you can clearly say that some of the beers are fruity etc (because they maybe were fermented with juice instead of pure water etc).

Now I again try to just enjoy the beverage but the distinction is much more pronounced.

Single malt whiskies are also special case - more similar to the craft beers in their nature - a lot of experimentation and variety and some very distinct smells and tastes.

With coffee there is distinct difference between Arabica and Robusta beans but in general I have not felt anything that would distinguish coffee from common beer - maybe I just have not tasted a really special coffee though.

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

#142

Post by sandworm101 »

analog31 wrote: post #57
sandworm101 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The experts do prefer the more modern sound, but the core of the study proves that strats are different. They have a special sound. If that's what you want to hear then you need a strat. And we should not discount the psychological effects on the player of playing and living with such a legendary object. Great paintings are more than pixels. Great instruments are more than sound boxes.

Watch out, a "strat" is a Stratocaster. ;-)

A "glock" is also not a gun.

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

#143

Post by nojokes »

UncleMeat wrote: post #120
nojokes wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's how the research went down. First, Brochet gave 27 male and 27 female oenology students a glass of red and a glass of white wine and asked them to describe the flavor of each. The students described the white with terms like "floral," "honey," "peach," and "lemon." The red elicited descriptions of "raspberry," "cherry," "cedar," and "chicory." I think what this study showed is that oenology try to fit the wine…

Sure. Only a small portion of people care about trying to analyze wine. But it is useful for selling wine. I like wines with lots of non-fruit flavors. Seeing a description with things I have heard used to describe wines I remember liking is useful. So there is a place for descriptors even if I buy wine to enjoy rather than analyze.

Sure, definitely. I have sold wine in my early adulthood and clients really cared about such things and it is good to have some vocabulary to describe and distinguish different wines.

Just what I think this study shows is that you may get stuck in this learned framework and try to apply it based on the appearance of the wine (red|white) and you will bias your judgement based on this.

This study setup is clearly adversarial but then again it pointed out a clear weakness in current state of oenology - to understand the wine better, you must eliminate biases.

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

#144

Post by nojokes »

ogre_codes wrote: post #128
nojokes wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's how the research went down. First, Brochet gave 27 male and 27 female oenology students a glass of red and a glass of white wine and asked them to describe the flavor of each. The students described the white with terms like "floral," "honey," "peach," and "lemon." The red elicited descriptions of "raspberry," "cherry," "cedar," and "chicory." I think what this study showed is that oenology try to fit the wine…

> As a person who likes wine, I simply like to enjoy wine and not to describe it and try to figure out what that smell or taste resembles. I feel similarly about beer and coffee. I hear people talk about fruity flavors in coffee or other similarly weird descriptions of beer and I taste it and just taste the coffee. I can definitely taste the difference between fairly distinct varieties of coffee (or beer). But when p…

I am currently having Belgian Leffe Brune dark beer and when I force myself to describe it then I could say that I feel coffee overtones. It might be similar to Guinness but it feels more liquid and spicy but in general it is a beer that I just really enjoy.

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

#145

Post by nojokes »

DonaldFisk wrote: post #134
keiferski wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2019/07/can-profess...

That article doesn't debunk Brochet's experiment. Here's what it says: "That said, important to note here is that while Brochet’s studies are often cited as definitively showing how bad wine experts are at judging wines, in this case that they can’t even tell the difference between red and white wines, that’s not what that study actually showed at all." Brochet proved that most people who are reasonably knowledgeable…

I think what Brochet study clearly displayed is that novice oenology students are too biased by the framework what they have been taught - they see red colored wine and they try to fit it into the framework they know.

What this study did not show was that a general public would not distinguish between red wine and colored white wine.

It also did not show that seasoned wine experts would not distinguish between red wine and colored white wine.

This is a really interesting study but it has its clear limitations and these should be acknowledged.

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

#146

Post by smsm42 »

nojokes wrote: post #145
DonaldFisk wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That article doesn't debunk Brochet's experiment. Here's what it says: "That said, important to note here is that while Brochet’s studies are often cited as definitively showing how bad wine experts are at judging wines, in this case that they can’t even tell the difference between red and white wines, that’s not what that study actually showed at all." Brochet proved that most people who are reasonably knowledgeable…

I think what Brochet study clearly displayed is that novice oenology students are too biased by the framework what they have been taught - they see red colored wine and they try to fit it into the framework they know. What this study did not show was that a general public would not distinguish between red wine and colored white wine. It also did not show that seasoned wine experts would not distinguish between red wi…

For the general public, wine of red color IS the red wine, so the whole question would be moot. Unless you're very non-general knowledgeable person - either formally trained or self-taught - you not only wouldn't see the difference, you wouldn't realize there's anything going on at all. Is it wine? Is it red? Then it's the red wine, period.

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

#147

Post by nojokes »

smsm42 wrote: post #146
nojokes wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what Brochet study clearly displayed is that novice oenology students are too biased by the framework what they have been taught - they see red colored wine and they try to fit it into the framework they know. What this study did not show was that a general public would not distinguish between red wine and colored white wine. It also did not show that seasoned wine experts would not distinguish between red wi…

For the general public, wine of red color IS the red wine, so the whole question would be moot. Unless you're very non-general knowledgeable person - either formally trained or self-taught - you not only wouldn't see the difference, you wouldn't realize there's anything going on at all. Is it wine? Is it red? Then it's the red wine, period.

I think it does not hurt to repost my comment again:

I think what Brochet study clearly displayed is that novice oenology students are too biased by the framework what they have been taught - they see red colored wine and they try to fit it into the framework they know.

What this study did not show was that a general public would not distinguish between red wine and colored white wine.

It also did not show that seasoned wine experts would not distinguish between red wine and colored white wine.

This is a really interesting study but it has its clear limitations and these should be acknowledged.

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

#148

Post by nojokes »

ogre_codes wrote: post #130
keiferski wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2019/07/can-profess...

Hmm. Maybe you read a different article from what you linked. "Our results indicate that both the prices of wines and wine recommendations by experts may be poor guides for non-expert wine consumers." "Much to my mortification I was dead wrong, as was everyone else in the room. The proprietor chuckled and informed his room… that the wines were actually the same wine; one was just warmer than the other." If anything,…

I think that this study is very specific to novice oenology students - they were too biased by the framework what they were taught - they saw red colored wine and they tried to fit it into the framework they know.

What this study did not show was that a general public would not distinguish between red wine and colored white wine.

It also did not show that seasoned wine experts would not distinguish between red wine and colored white wine.

This is a really interesting study but it has its clear limitations and these should be acknowledged.

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

#149

Post by GuB-42 »

rectang wrote: post #44

I used to make a living as a mastering engineer, where the job description is to make many tiny changes near or even beyond the threshold of perception, which when summed may add up to a perceptible whole. How to do this? It's simple: isolate and magnify. Zoom in to where your senses become reliable, make a change informed by your knowledge and experience which you predict will be beneficial, then zoom out. You don't…

Professional wine tasters are like engineers, and their senses work like a chromatograph. They are able to match a taste profile to one of the wines they know, they are also able to spot and identify defects. They know the wine process and the chemistry involved. They also know their senses can be fooled and will send samples to the lab if they think it is justified.

They are real pros, they work for wineries and distributors to help produce a wine with a desirable profile and to identify and eventually fix defects.

Sommeliers are only a subcategory of wine tasters and the most likely to sound like snobs, but that's only because it is what is expected of them. After all their job is to sell fancy wines in fancy restaurants, so they better sound fancy to customers.

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

#150

Post by gwern »

pyramidal wrote: post #129
gameswithgo wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until you do a blind taste test on yourself, you don't know that you can tell.

Gwern is that you? (Just kidding. I know he doesn't have a monopoly over blind/randomized self-tests.)

To be fair, I did do a blind taste-test indicating I can tell the difference between mineral water brands: https://www.gwern.net/Tea#water-experiment (Spoiler: they all taste bad or indifferent, and Evian tasted the worst.)
Post reply on HN