Wine Tasting

There are probably as many perceptions about wine tasting as there are tasters. For some, it is a charade; it can be an expression of cultural heritage; it may increase self-esteem; but primarily, it is a means of enhancing wine appreciation. Most people taste wine holistically and strictly on a subjective basis. Wine competitions are more objective, ranking wine against some standard—the grape variety, geographic region, production style, or artistic attributes. The latter include features termed complexity, harmony, subtlety, dynamism, development, duration, and uniqueness. The most objective form of tasting is descriptive analysis. In it, panelists are trained and selected for their use of specific sensory terms. These are used to describe the wine analytically. All tasting forms have their particular purpose and merits. However, their different intentions mean that their conclusions typically differ. In addition, any tasting possesses a degree of subjectivity due to differences in taster experience and sensory acuity. This entry describes the various factors that influence assessment of the taste of wine.

Detailed tasting follows a particular sequence. This involves visual assessment, followed by smelling, then tasting. The process is completed by assessing overall quality. The more detailed the tasting, the more individual attributes are described as to how they change in character and intensity.

Most consumers taste wine with food. At its best, this is viewed as pairing particular wines with specific dishes. However, the combination frequently results in mutual flavor reduction, rather than enhancement. For example, when sampled together, cheese appears milder and wine less sour or bitter/astringent. The ambiance of a tasting can also significantly influence the impression. A regional wine so pleasant when sampled in a local bistro on a relaxed vacation may be disappointing back home. In addition, the supposed synchrony between local wines and cuisines reflects more habituation than a conscious effort to harmonize regional produce. for the general populace, critical tasting is typically viewed as ranking wines. As noted, this is usually based on wine being assessed relative to established norms. These criteria are, however, not strictly objective, and can change with the social context and have varied over time. Even within categories, subtypes exist, for example, the eight quality categories of German wines. In addition, various countries may have distinctive expressions of varietal wines. An excellent example is found with Sauvignon Blanc. New Zealand versions are the most flavorful and varietally unique, whereas those from Australia, California, France, and South Africa are less varietally distinct but still show regional attributes.

Although the sensory acuity of experienced tasters has only occasionally been investigated, exceptional skill has not been demonstrated. Even sommeliers may have difficulty consistently detecting the regional or varietal origin of wine. In addition, identifying similar wines, sampled minutes apart, is a severe challenge. This should not be surprising; the differences can be subtle. In addition, they often vary from year to year, region to region, and producer to producer. What training and experience create is a memory bank of features that characterize different groups of wines. Although training and experience improve judging skill, it also modifies qualitative judgment. For example, trained tasters are often critical of features consumers may not detect or may consider of little importance. Thus, expert opinion usually differs considerably from that of most wine consumers.

...