That was a lot of introductory words to get to the point, and I frankly don't agree with the intro: my father, who is red-green colorblind, will NOT agree on the color of certain wavelengths (he has a great deal of trouble with tomatoes), and science, with the tool of the gas chromatograph, among other tools, can accurately and repeatedly isolate and identify scent compounds from foods. The several chapters in Eric Schlosser's "Fast Food Nation" discussed the flavor industry and food science in great detail; I think we'd all agree isoamyl acetate smells like bananas; and I believe the UC Davis "Aroma Wheel" for wine was developed based on gas chromatography research.
So, no, I don't agree that scent or flavor is any different or more obtuse compared to other sensory perceptions.
It seems the expensive words in general go with red wines, the cheap words with white wines?
Question: stereo speakers can be evaluated objectively by looking at the wave it generates. That wave can be measured at different spots in a room so you can create objective maps. But those maps don't match to what people hear all that well. That may be a case of training; one hears what one is used to and what one is used to may be wildly inaccurate. But that may also reflect innate differences in perception. Where do you draw that line with food taste?
First, I wouldn't say that taste and smell are so different from sound and sight as you suggest. Although it's true that it is easier to measure the frequency of a sound or a color than it is to measure the palette of a taste or smell, very little music or visual art is composed of a monotone! (Russian suprematism and John cage aside -- that was their point in many ways!). Rather, all works of art are composed of a spectrum. Although taste and smell are multidimensional spectra, our brain ultimately has to process them in reduced dimensional terms.
Second, this is an interesting test of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in some ways. Analogies to music and art might be payola and the modern art market over the past few decades. Producers do seem to prime consumer tastes -- the freemium is not as new as Wired Magazine Chris Anderson might suggest!
While there is no shortage of Bullsh*t in the wine industry, it is important to remember that wine is the product of both an agricultural process and an industrial process. There are economic factors in those processes that help (along with the Bullsh*t) to determine the final price. Many of the adjectives in the "expensive" category seem to refer to wines that can be cellared, have structure and come from intentionally lowering the yield of the vineyard. It is technically difficult to create a structured wine that can be cellared. Low yields means fewer bottles. The inexpensive adjectives suggest white wine made from high yield, productive vineyards that are not barrel-aged and will precipitously decline in quality after a year of storage.
k, above, brought up an interesting point about color-blindness. I for one am utterly incapable of making sense between blue and purple, green and brown, and a host of other colors.
While we can agree that the color society calls "green" is represented by a certain wavelength, do we really all see green? My green, clearly, is not the same as society's green, and thus, my impaired eyes (and brain) are unable to perceive it as any different from brown. Despite our remarkable vocabulary and desire to describe the world around us, we are incapable of describing colors by anything other than "bullsh*t" descriptors... think "cool" blue and "hot" red... While we know is that the sky is "blue"... what the hell does that mean? We, as a society, simply have decided that the color of the sky, as the brain perceives the wavelength it emits, is blue.. we know nothing of how that color looks in the mind
I dunno, I 'get' that most of the wine snob thing is coming up w/ creative/evocative ways to describe things. Wine tastings are kind of like poetry slams that're more closely integrated with alcohol consumption. And if people dig that, more power to 'em.
A very impressive distillation of the components of wine that make a great wine great versus that which make wine good. Beautiful wines, whether from Bordeaux or Barossa, possess a quality of sensory input on the nose and the palate which is unique. One may say it is then snobbery that assigns preference to that uniqueness vis a vis a Lodi merlot, but in my mind, the preference is clearly one of taste.
Leonard Cohen's "Dance Me To The End of Love" or Megadeath's "Addicted To Chaos"? Guerlain dark chocolate or Walmart dark chocolate? 2001 Pesquera Reserva or Two Buck Chuck NV?
Comparing sauvignon blanc and cat pee smells is insane. I once trapped my cat in my home office overnight. She left us a wet present in the morning along with sad yelps. It smelled dreadful. I cannot recall something else that smelled that bad. Cat litter is really amazing.
I think it is fair to say that the average person uses their sense of sound and sight in conjunction and comparatively with others far more than they do the same with taste and smell. Therefore, they have a more accurate way to assess sight and sound along the collective norm.
Wine writers or others who find their vocation or avocation in wine tend to participate in the collective language of wine. Frankly, they are trained to recognize and describe aromas and flavors more precisely or at least differently than people who have better things to do.
On top of all that, wines that are more expensive tend to have oak aging - which, for better or worse, can impart many of the "expensive" adjectives discussed. Obviously, this is one among many of the wine-growing and -making techniques that increase the price of the product.
Let's also not forget that marketing and romanticism enter into the mix
re "k's" first comment. The UCD wine aroma wheel, more accurately is the wine aroma wheel, which I developed while at UCD. It was developed by searching the wine lit, discussing with folks in industry, and then selecting the terms (specific and analytical...not hedonic or evaluative, such as 'luscious') which are most commonly encountered in table wine's aromas. For more info go to winearomawheel.com Ann Noble
"But how carefully are we really choosing these adjectives and analogies? How often do they correspond to real chemical commonalities? " In the North American beer judging world chemical names are frequently used as descriptors: bjcp.org/cep/kits.php
That was a lot of introductory words to get to the point, and I frankly don't agree with the intro: my father, who is red-green colorblind, will NOT agree on the color of certain wavelengths (he has a great deal of trouble with tomatoes), and science, with the tool of the gas chromatograph, among other tools, can accurately and repeatedly isolate and identify scent compounds from foods. The several chapters in Eric Schlosser's "Fast Food Nation" discussed the flavor industry and food science in great detail; I think we'd all agree isoamyl acetate smells like bananas; and I believe the UC Davis "Aroma Wheel" for wine was developed based on gas chromatography research.
ResponderEliminarSo, no, I don't agree that scent or flavor is any different or more obtuse compared to other sensory perceptions.
It seems the expensive words in general go with red wines, the cheap words with white wines?
Question: stereo speakers can be evaluated objectively by looking at the wave it generates. That wave can be measured at different spots in a room so you can create objective maps. But those maps don't match to what people hear all that well. That may be a case of training; one hears what one is used to and what one is used to may be wildly inaccurate. But that may also reflect innate differences in perception. Where do you draw that line with food taste?
ResponderEliminarLots of interesting points here.
ResponderEliminarFirst, I wouldn't say that taste and smell are so different from sound and sight as you suggest. Although it's true that it is easier to measure the frequency of a sound or a color than it is to measure the palette of a taste or smell, very little music or visual art is composed of a monotone! (Russian suprematism and John cage aside -- that was their point in many ways!). Rather, all works of art are composed of a spectrum. Although taste and smell are multidimensional spectra, our brain ultimately has to process them in reduced dimensional terms.
Second, this is an interesting test of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in some ways. Analogies to music and art might be payola and the modern art market over the past few decades. Producers do seem to prime consumer tastes -- the freemium is not as new as Wired Magazine Chris Anderson might suggest!
De gustibus non debutandum est indeed.
Quandt's article is wonderful! Thanks for pointing it out.
ResponderEliminarWhile there is no shortage of Bullsh*t in the wine industry, it is important to remember that wine is the product of both an agricultural process and an industrial process. There are economic factors in those processes that help (along with the Bullsh*t) to determine the final price. Many of the adjectives in the "expensive" category seem to refer to wines that can be cellared, have structure and come from intentionally lowering the yield of the vineyard. It is technically difficult to create a structured wine that can be cellared. Low yields means fewer bottles. The inexpensive adjectives suggest white wine made from high yield, productive vineyards that are not barrel-aged and will precipitously decline in quality after a year of storage.
ResponderEliminark, above, brought up an interesting point about color-blindness. I for one am utterly incapable of making sense between blue and purple, green and brown, and a host of other colors.
ResponderEliminarWhile we can agree that the color society calls "green" is represented by a certain wavelength, do we really all see green? My green, clearly, is not the same as society's green, and thus, my impaired eyes (and brain) are unable to perceive it as any different from brown. Despite our remarkable vocabulary and desire to describe the world around us, we are incapable of describing colors by anything other than "bullsh*t" descriptors... think "cool" blue and "hot" red... While we know is that the sky is "blue"... what the hell does that mean? We, as a society, simply have decided that the color of the sky, as the brain perceives the wavelength it emits, is blue.. we know nothing of how that color looks in the mind
I dunno, I 'get' that most of the wine snob thing is coming up w/ creative/evocative ways to describe things. Wine tastings are kind of like poetry slams that're more closely integrated with alcohol consumption. And if people dig that, more power to 'em.
ResponderEliminarA very impressive distillation of the components of wine that make a great wine great versus that which make wine good. Beautiful wines, whether from Bordeaux or Barossa, possess a quality of sensory input on the nose and the palate which is unique. One may say it is then snobbery that assigns preference to that uniqueness vis a vis a Lodi merlot, but in my mind, the preference is clearly one of taste.
ResponderEliminarLeonard Cohen's "Dance Me To The End of Love" or Megadeath's "Addicted To Chaos"? Guerlain dark chocolate or Walmart dark chocolate? 2001 Pesquera Reserva or Two Buck Chuck NV?
ResponderEliminarComparing sauvignon blanc and cat pee smells is insane. I once trapped my cat in my home office overnight. She left us a wet present in the morning along with sad yelps. It smelled dreadful. I cannot recall something else that smelled that bad. Cat litter is really amazing.
ResponderEliminarI think it is fair to say that the average person uses their sense of sound and sight in conjunction and comparatively with others far more than they do the same with taste and smell. Therefore, they have a more accurate way to assess sight and sound along the collective norm.
ResponderEliminarWine writers or others who find their vocation or avocation in wine tend to participate in the collective language of wine. Frankly, they are trained to recognize and describe aromas and flavors more precisely or at least differently than people who have better things to do.
On top of all that, wines that are more expensive tend to have oak aging - which, for better or worse, can impart many of the "expensive" adjectives discussed. Obviously, this is one among many of the wine-growing and -making techniques that increase the price of the product.
Let's also not forget that marketing and romanticism enter into the mix
i was tasting with another wine writer recently and when I opened up a Pinotage, she yelped, "Ew, bug spray!"
ResponderEliminarThat was one unforgettable moment and I am now wrecked for any future Pinotage experiences.
re "k's" first comment.
ResponderEliminarThe UCD wine aroma wheel, more accurately is the wine aroma wheel, which I developed while at UCD. It was developed by searching the wine lit, discussing with folks in industry, and then selecting the terms (specific and analytical...not hedonic or evaluative, such as 'luscious') which are most commonly encountered in table wine's aromas. For more info go to winearomawheel.com
Ann Noble
"But how carefully are we really choosing these adjectives and analogies? How often do they correspond to real chemical commonalities? " In the North American beer judging world chemical names are frequently used as descriptors:
ResponderEliminarbjcp.org/cep/kits.php
"Is this why it