Again, if you judge a wine, spirits and probably a dish you aren't looking for what you like, but for more objective criteria. Those criteria aren't measured wi

Again, if you judge a wine, spirits and probably a dish you aren't looking for what you like, but for more objective criteria. Those criteria aren't measured with technology, but the tongue, nose and experience of the taster. I never said it is totally objective (it can't be, because it involves humans), but it is way less subjective than one might think. Those criteria are e.g. complexity, typicity, balance, off-flavors etc and are widely understood. In every wine tasting I participated we had a tasting sheet where we scored a numerical value. There was never a discussion if we "agree on what balance means". In the last tasting (some time ago) we examined a type of wine a co-taster didn't liked at all, but still scored pretty high. Because personal preference != quality of the product. The real problem is that quality doesn't directly translate to enjoyment. I guess most people look for enjoyable wines, not "good" ones. But enjoyment is personal, I don't know which wines you enjoy. But if you ask me blind, I can recommend you some which are at least worth trying. We can fight on quality, but not on enjoyment. And for me, this is the value I get out of professional recommendations: Which things are worth trying, in wine, food or music. Foot note: If you don't trust me (why should you), go and ask a Master of Wine how they judge wine. I'm not a MW, but had the honor and luck to work with some really knowledgable people.