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

151–160 of 180 posts

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

#151

Post by whiddershins »

rectang wrote: post #76
whiddershins wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On this topic, what resource do you think is a really good one for learning mastering?

Try messing around with buss processing and track sequencing while referencing other recordings in the same genre. Just make sure to keep the unprocessed tracks around, and err on the side of "less is more". There's a lot of overlap between the aesthetic skills needed for mixing and those needed for mastering. The profession of mastering is much more than that, but generally when people ask this question they want to…

Thanks for the directional advice.

For me personally, I'm a bit past the messing around stage and wondering about specific areas of exploration.

I'm just always thinking mastering engineers know some techniques I've never considered, especially in terms of creating that upper register 'shimmer' ... is there crazy stuff happening using m-s and then diving in to certain frequency ranges?

It could be that it's more mystique than real?

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

#152

Post by ogre_codes »

nojokes wrote: post #141
ogre_codes wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 t…

Ok... I'll admit, beer is a terrible example.

Though personally I can't tell one IPA from another unless they go really weird (like they have dark IPAs around here). And I vastly prefer stouts.

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

#153

Post by ogre_codes »

nojokes wrote: post #148
ogre_codes wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

This is in response to the article the parent linked, not the original.

In that article, professional tasters were fooled by a small temperature difference in the same exact wine.

The big takeaway is if you want to truly test anything about the flavor of wine, you absolutely must remove all preconceptions. So you must control for temperature, color, knowledge of the wine vintage, what you've eaten prior, etc. A true blind test in other words.

This isn't something just novices will fall for, many top pros will fall for simple changes as well.

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

#154

Post by nojokes »

mpol wrote: post #10

And still I do like my Pinot Noir a bit watery red :) I don't really know what is happening in this context. Maybe a lot of people have not much taste, or cannot disciminate between different tastes or things? I don't understand anything about the words that go along with wine and beer reviews. I don't understand anything about using words like chocolate or nuts in describing the taste of wine or beer. I do know what…

I think that the most important thing is development of your own taste, so this study is by most a distraction.

To me this study shows that novice students of the sommelier order were too biased to apply red wine terminology when the wine was just red colored white wine.

It does not show any deeper knowledge.

Now about discussion of our personal experience (my own based on Western-Europe).

I am personally more a Bordeaux person. I have discovered that there is clear distinction between Bordeaux and Bourgogne (Pinot Noir) wines and in general I do like Bordeaux more. That is, price wise, I would choose Bordeaux over Bourgogne any time.

Now being a general Bordeaux consumer, I could say that based on my personal experience, it is hard to beat it in similarity. At least in our market in my experience none of the Californian, South-American, South-African, Australian wines have came close to wines from Bordeaux. Not that these are bad wines, they are just not that interesting that anything else I could pick up from my supermarket.

What I want to say - many out of France producers are after some general commodity "good" wine, forgetting their specialty.

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

#155

Post by im3w1l »

ndnfjttkrk wrote: post #35
im3w1l wrote: post #30

I suspect it wont replicate. Not because there was any flaw in the original. But because today's students have heard of that study and will be more suspicious.

Randomize the coloring? Or make it part of a bigger study, for example "we want to test if wine tasters are also good beer tasters"

I suppose. But that's not the point I think. You are coming at this from a scientific point of view, which I frankly think is the wrong perspective.

My preferred perspective is an educational one. Students were administered a test, and they failed it. It's a statement about a specific group of students in a specific time and place. They had (so far) received a lacking education. Educators and curriculum should respond to address the shortcoming.

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

#156

Post by smsm42 »

nojokes wrote: post #147
smsm42 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 seaso…

It didn't hurt, but I feel it didn't also help much. If you had some point that you wanted to express by reposting it, I think you better to say it plainly, because otherwise it's not coming through.

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

#157

Post by smsm42 »

ogre_codes wrote: post #152
nojokes wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

Ok... I'll admit, beer is a terrible example. Though personally I can't tell one IPA from another unless they go really weird (like they have dark IPAs around here). And I vastly prefer stouts.

I don't drink a lot of beer, especially lately, but I do like to have a different one once in a while, and I certainly can taste the difference between many, and also can get an idea from most descriptions, what "fruity", "nutty", etc. means. That may have come with experience... Through given a beer in a blind test, I probably couldn't write a useful taste profile and if I tried, it would probably come out very embarrassing for me, since I had no training for this, I think given the description I could have if not exact than pretty useful idea of what to expect.

Interestingly enough, though I like taste of coffee in general, I have never cared for different sorts, it's all "coffee" for me, though I know people who swear there's a huge difference (and they are not generally pretentious kind so I tend to believe they genuinely think so).

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

#158

Post by bordercases »

nojokes wrote: post #116
keiferski wrote: post #96

This has been debunked repeatedly, but since "we showed those snobs!" makes for good clickbait, it inevitably returns. The studies listed never quite make it clear how "wine expert" is being defined. The one in this article says it used students, who clearly are not experts in any sense of the word. Other studies just handwave away the question and say, "We asked wine experts." If you dig into some of them, it turns…

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.

As a person who likes wine, I enjoy picking apart the taste on my palate and figuring out what it resembles to characterize it.

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

#159

Post by bordercases »

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…

You are restricting your perception by not attempting to apply active attention to the flavors. Not bad but it's not bad the other way around either.

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

#160

Post by bordercases »

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.

Then the threshold of what is "knowledgeable" has been mis-defined. There is clearly a level of knowledge that can articulate the distinction.
Post reply on HN