+- WineBoard (https://www.wines.com/wineboard)
+-- Forum: GENERAL (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-100.html)
+--- Forum: For the Novice (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: What characteristics are the least subjective? (/thread-18494.html)
- Tyrrell - 06-10-2003
It is clear that many of you have had vast number of conversations about wine. I'm hoping that you can answer a question for me. What characteristics of wine appear to be the least subjective? I imagine that people's perception of aromas varies greatly. Do people tend to universally agree on how much body a wine has? What about other characterisitics?
- Innkeeper - 06-10-2003
I would vote for alcohol for a couple of reasons. First, if you notice or don't notice the alcohol, the wine is out of balance. If you get heat, there is too much alcohol in relation to the rest of the wine. If the wine tastes flacid, it is usually because the alcohol doesn't give enough pizazz.
The second thing about alcohol is that it is a primary indicator of body. Generally speaking the higher the alcohol, the fuller the body. Other factors play as well, but alcohol is the only thing printed on the label of the wine that gives you a hint of the body of the wine.
[This message has been edited by Innkeeper (edited 06-10-2003).]
- Bucko - 06-10-2003
Trying to get people to agree on aspects of wine is like trying to get religious sects to agree........ not in our lifetime.
- wondersofwine - 06-10-2003
Heck, sometimes we can't even agree on what the label says! Maybe we can agree that the wine is red or white (or somewhere in between). Beyond that it's tough. A wine too tannic for me might be Drew or WW's "cup of tea" (although they may admit that the tannins are a bit rough, they may like it that way). A wine too "woody" for Bucko, may be a hit with someone else on the board. A California Chardonnay too buttery for some of us, may be a favorite with the American market. A sweet German dessert wine that I relish, may turn WW's stomach. We may agree objectively that the wine is opulent and sweet, but subjectively, he may find it cloying, and I may find it enchanting. Sugar can be measured in brix and acid can be measured (is it Ph factor?), so in the lab there is some objectivity to these things.
[This message has been edited by wondersofwine (edited 06-10-2003).]
- Tyrrell - 06-10-2003
Metadisagreement: you don't agree what you disagree about.
Let me restate my question with reference to the characteristics that people have mentioned so far. When I listen to someone who is describing a wine or reading someone's comments about a wine, I might imagine a continum like this.
A tiny little bit subjective:
Color
A good bit more subjective:
Alcohol
A bit more subjective yet:
Sugar
Acidity
Even more subjective:
Woodyness
Tannins
Preposterously subjective:
Good or bad
Is this close to representitive of your experiences?
(I realize that trying to be objective about subjectivity is clearly a fool's errand. Feel free to mock me for the attempt if you can do it tastefuly)
[This message has been edited by Tyrrell (edited 06-10-2003).]
- Thomas - 06-10-2003
Tyrell,
Techincal things like color, alcohol, sugar, acidity, tannins, wood, sulfites, body, et al are not subjective--they are what they are. But people perceive differently. So, it isn't a subjective matter when talking about components--it is a perception matter.
As for good or bad, that is completely subjective.
- Tyrrell - 06-10-2003
Yes. but in what ways do people's perceptions tend to coincide most frequently and least frequently?
- Thomas - 06-10-2003
Depends on the level of experience and training, not to mention personal bias.
With perceptions trained people SHOULD agree more than untrained people. Experienced people MIGHT agree more than inexperienced people.
As you said earlier, this is not a simple subject, but it is an interesting one.
I teach wine component classes. I am frequently amazed at how many people simply cannot perceive what seems obvious--but
it happens all the time.
- quijote - 06-10-2003
Maybe it should be mentioned here that various scientists, such as Anne Noble at UC Davis, have done a great deal of empirical research in order to determine various characteristics of wine. The result of Noble's work includes the Aroma Wheel which is supposed to represent (in terms of a continuum) the range of taste and aroma sensations, allowing for progression from general features (such as "fruity") to more specific subfeatures (such as "citrus" and then "lemon"). The Aroma Wheel only deals with aromas and flavors whose presence in wine has credible scientific backing; it does not take color, body, alcohol level, and other matters into consideration. I suppose that, if you find this research credible, then our ability or inability to detect certain features in a wine that may chemically have those features, is a problem with perception (as Foodie points out) instead of physical/chemical reality.
Having said all of this about the Aroma Wheel's empirical scope and nature, it doesn't seem very thorough to me, though this is probably due to the reality/perception thing. There's no place on the A.W. under the "tropical fruits" area for passion fruit (which I perceive in many NZ Sauvignon Blancs), and there is no specific section for minerals such as flint, slate, and other elements of the terroir of certain wines....
[This message has been edited by quijote (edited 06-10-2003).]
- stevebody - 06-10-2003
Tyrell,
In my cooking classes, my students frequently don't even agree on what tastes sweet and salty. Taste is an abyss of individual perception and I'm talking about nthe taste registered on your tongue, not your powers of discernment, which is even more slippery.
The area of alcohol, as mentioned, is probably the easies to to nail down, which brings us to (pardon me) Body. Body is one of the least subjective things about wine. Almost anyone can blind taste four or five wines and tell which is the fullest and which is the lightest, if you explain the concept. As it happens, my first assignment for a newspaper back in Carolina which recently hired me to write a wine column was that very thing: individual taste. Working on that column, I've asked a lot of knowledgeable wine people, and a few people who know very little about it, your exact question. The answers are all over the board. As high as is the level of wine acumen on this forum, we can't all agree on much of anything and frequently get pretty exercised about our opinions. Great question but it probably doesn't have a satisfying answer.
- Tyrrell - 06-12-2003
I've thought of a way to phrase it as an answerable quesiton!
Of course I may be beating a dead horse here.
When you read someone else's review of a wine that you're familiar with, what aspects of their description do you find to be most commonly to be at odds with a description that you would have written yourself?
- winoweenie - 06-12-2003
You are. I don't understand what about personal subjection can be comparmentalized. WW