3 ms·

The author claims that being able to distinguish expensive wines from cheap ones simply means that a person has developed an arbitrary preference drive by the w

The author claims that being able to distinguish expensive wines from cheap ones simply means that a person has developed an arbitrary preference drive by the wine industry. They article even explicitly states "wine is not art". I don't buy this at all. Almost everyone can relate to some field where they have more sophisticated tastes than the average person, whether it's music, art, food or wine (EDIT: how could I forget coffee). By the author's logic, we should all eat McDonalds or Panda Express. I'm not claiming that expensive wine is objectively better, but rather that people with experience and knowledge have a different taste to the average person, and this difference isn't just arbitrary, but reflects a deeper understanding and appreciation.

einarvollset 11y ago
Ah. Nuance, critical thought. Appreciation for subtle, yet important considerations for a subject that people devote their lives to. Not often one sees that here, and I thank you.
TTPrograms 11y ago
I've often heard that blind taste tests contradict these claims in the extreme ($30 bottle vs $100 bottle for example). Are there blind taste tests among any group that back up such a claim? Or are we just knocking out the truly cheap bottles? I was told by a man who professionally tested wines around the world that I should generally not spend more than $20 a bottle, and I'm often happy with $15.
- JesperRavn 11y ago
  I was going by the article here, which didn't say what the price range being distinguished was, and didn't cite any studies. I was more concerned with the logic that (even provably) refined tastes just reflected an arbitrary preference for the qualities of expensive wine.
- bshimmin 11y ago
  Perhaps this is right - and I don't professionally taste wine, so your man should know better than I do - but from my own experience of sometimes drinking very good and very expensive wine, there really is a demonstrably worthwhile difference! My father, a lawyer, was once paid by a client with a case of good Château Margaux, including some excellent years ('82 and '85 in particular); we've drunk these together slowly over time, on special occasions for the most part, and they really have been phenomenal. I don't know what you could buy for $20 that would in any way compare with those bottles (which probably would sell for 20x that amount, if not more). But, as they say in Latin, de gustibus non est disputandum. My mother and my wife detest the Margaux that my father and I enjoy so much - my mother charitably calling it "a man's wine" and my wife calling it... something much less charitable. But I think both of them would agree that it is certainly very different - in taste, colour, and bouquet, even if they can't actually enjoy those aspects of it - to what you could buy in a supermarket.
edoloughlin 11y ago
. By the author's logic, we should all eat McDonalds or Panda Express. There are other reasons not to eat junk food. Drinking wine that you like that also happens to be chap isn't necessarily bad for your health. Seriously, how did this comment end up on top?
- JesperRavn 11y ago
  Top rated comments tend to engage in a deep way with the matter at hand, and not some superficial side issue. My point wasn't related to health, but to the aesthetic qualities of the food itself. I don't think Panda Express is very unhealthy, and no more/less healthy than good Chinese food.
nether 11y ago
The weird thing with wines is there's no consensus in blind tastings as to what constitutes a superior wine. Judges' ratings end up all over the map. With teas in the North American Tea Championship, which employs blind cupping, there is consistent consensus in that certain brands (usually smaller, not Lipton) beat out other brands by large margins by judges who agree. How does wine end up being so impenetrable that connoisseurship confers such inconsistent evaluations? Can we even discern a "deeper understanding" if that means liking/disliking wines at random? I mean what if a movie critic placed 2001: A Space Odyssey in the same league as Backdoor Sluts 9? We'd conclude rightly he's full of shit. I think what we're really running into are the egos of oenophiles.
- JesperRavn 11y ago
  I'm not very familiar with the literature. I found a Guardian article[0] citing a number of studies that "debunked" wine tasting. But the studies didn't seem conclusive to me. I'm wary of both connoisseurs and academics, as both have psychological and monetary incentives to exaggerate how exact their knowledge is. [0] http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tas...
- hyperbovine 11y ago
  I'm as committed a rationalist as they come, and am the first to call bullshit when it comes to professional bullshit artists wanking over the "personality" of an $80 bottle of wine. Most of my time spent at tasting rooms consists of mentally rolling my eyes at the conversations I'm overhearing. So, as a self-identified wine skeptic who just really happens to like wine, I've gotta admit: there is a huge difference between a good $15-$18 bottle of wine and a good $5-$7 bottle of wine. To me. My spouse and I have even played "guess the bottle" in this price range, and believe me it's not as hard as you'd think. My tastes have, annoyingly, elevated over the years--annoying because $18 nightly bottles are out my budget. It's as though I crossed some sort of wine rubicon. I would agree with the point you are making at a higher price range, but mere mortals really can appreciate spending an extra $10 on a cheap bottle of wine, I claim. I'll say one thing though--the author is spot on about how much cheaper good wine is in Europe. Trying to buy wine at a Carrefour in Valencia last summer, we searched high and low for anything in our "splurge range" (~15 euros) before realizing that maybe the fact that 90% of the shelf was priced at a third that was trying to tell us something.
peteretep 11y ago
> means that a person has developed an arbitrary > preference drive by the wine industry ... I don't buy > this at all You should talk to a wine expert then, who'll happily tell you that different grapes come in to and out of fashion, and hence are priced differently. Riesling as a great example of a great grape that's "underpriced" because it's not so fashionable.
- JesperRavn 11y ago
  You should talk to a logic expert. Luckily I am one :^) Just because there is some element of faddishness, doesn't mean that something is entirely arbitrary. E.g. sushi used to be mostly white fish, and salmon was considered too greasy. It doesn't follow from that there is no good or bad sushi.
  - peteretep 11y ago
    A logic expert eh? May I suggest that concluding that there is significant difference between wine based on the price, despite scientific evidence to contrary, because another class of items does show a value/price relationship is a nice example of: * Appeal to probability * Argument from (personal) incredulity * False equivalence And I'm sure a few others.
alexhill 11y ago
I don't think the author would disagree with much of your post. I did not understand the point to be that wine critics are frauds – it's that they're playing a game that someone lacking the "deeper understanding and appreciation" simply doesn't have to participate in by buying expensive wine. As you rightly say this applies equally to all areas of taste, but wine is a good one to call out because people seem to feel a bit bad about knowing nothing and overspend to be on the safe side.

einarvollset 11y ago

Ah. Nuance, critical thought. Appreciation for subtle, yet important considerations for a subject that people devote their lives to. Not often one sees that here, and I thank you.

TTPrograms 11y ago

I've often heard that blind taste tests contradict these claims in the extreme ($30 bottle vs $100 bottle for example). Are there blind taste tests among any group that back up such a claim? Or are we just knocking out the truly cheap bottles? I was told by a man who professionally tested wines around the world that I should generally not spend more than $20 a bottle, and I'm often happy with $15.

JesperRavn 11y ago
I was going by the article here, which didn't say what the price range being distinguished was, and didn't cite any studies. I was more concerned with the logic that (even provably) refined tastes just reflected an arbitrary preference for the qualities of expensive wine.
bshimmin 11y ago
Perhaps this is right - and I don't professionally taste wine, so your man should know better than I do - but from my own experience of sometimes drinking very good and very expensive wine, there really is a demonstrably worthwhile difference! My father, a lawyer, was once paid by a client with a case of good Château Margaux, including some excellent years ('82 and '85 in particular); we've drunk these together slowly over time, on special occasions for the most part, and they really have been phenomenal. I don't know what you could buy for $20 that would in any way compare with those bottles (which probably would sell for 20x that amount, if not more). But, as they say in Latin, de gustibus non est disputandum. My mother and my wife detest the Margaux that my father and I enjoy so much - my mother charitably calling it "a man's wine" and my wife calling it... something much less charitable. But I think both of them would agree that it is certainly very different - in taste, colour, and bouquet, even if they can't actually enjoy those aspects of it - to what you could buy in a supermarket.

edoloughlin 11y ago

. By the author's logic, we should all eat McDonalds or Panda Express. There are other reasons not to eat junk food. Drinking wine that you like that also happens to be chap isn't necessarily bad for your health. Seriously, how did this comment end up on top?

JesperRavn 11y ago
Top rated comments tend to engage in a deep way with the matter at hand, and not some superficial side issue. My point wasn't related to health, but to the aesthetic qualities of the food itself. I don't think Panda Express is very unhealthy, and no more/less healthy than good Chinese food.

nether 11y ago

The weird thing with wines is there's no consensus in blind tastings as to what constitutes a superior wine. Judges' ratings end up all over the map. With teas in the North American Tea Championship, which employs blind cupping, there is consistent consensus in that certain brands (usually smaller, not Lipton) beat out other brands by large margins by judges who agree. How does wine end up being so impenetrable that connoisseurship confers such inconsistent evaluations? Can we even discern a "deeper understanding" if that means liking/disliking wines at random? I mean what if a movie critic placed 2001: A Space Odyssey in the same league as Backdoor Sluts 9? We'd conclude rightly he's full of shit. I think what we're really running into are the egos of oenophiles.

JesperRavn 11y ago
I'm not very familiar with the literature. I found a Guardian article[0] citing a number of studies that "debunked" wine tasting. But the studies didn't seem conclusive to me. I'm wary of both connoisseurs and academics, as both have psychological and monetary incentives to exaggerate how exact their knowledge is. [0] http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tas...
hyperbovine 11y ago
I'm as committed a rationalist as they come, and am the first to call bullshit when it comes to professional bullshit artists wanking over the "personality" of an $80 bottle of wine. Most of my time spent at tasting rooms consists of mentally rolling my eyes at the conversations I'm overhearing. So, as a self-identified wine skeptic who just really happens to like wine, I've gotta admit: there is a huge difference between a good $15-$18 bottle of wine and a good $5-$7 bottle of wine. To me. My spouse and I have even played "guess the bottle" in this price range, and believe me it's not as hard as you'd think. My tastes have, annoyingly, elevated over the years--annoying because $18 nightly bottles are out my budget. It's as though I crossed some sort of wine rubicon. I would agree with the point you are making at a higher price range, but mere mortals really can appreciate spending an extra $10 on a cheap bottle of wine, I claim. I'll say one thing though--the author is spot on about how much cheaper good wine is in Europe. Trying to buy wine at a Carrefour in Valencia last summer, we searched high and low for anything in our "splurge range" (~15 euros) before realizing that maybe the fact that 90% of the shelf was priced at a third that was trying to tell us something.

peteretep 11y ago

> means that a person has developed an arbitrary > preference drive by the wine industry ... I don't buy > this at all You should talk to a wine expert then, who'll happily tell you that different grapes come in to and out of fashion, and hence are priced differently. Riesling as a great example of a great grape that's "underpriced" because it's not so fashionable.

JesperRavn 11y ago
You should talk to a logic expert. Luckily I am one :^) Just because there is some element of faddishness, doesn't mean that something is entirely arbitrary. E.g. sushi used to be mostly white fish, and salmon was considered too greasy. It doesn't follow from that there is no good or bad sushi.
- peteretep 11y ago
  A logic expert eh? May I suggest that concluding that there is significant difference between wine based on the price, despite scientific evidence to contrary, because another class of items does show a value/price relationship is a nice example of: * Appeal to probability * Argument from (personal) incredulity * False equivalence And I'm sure a few others.

alexhill 11y ago

I don't think the author would disagree with much of your post. I did not understand the point to be that wine critics are frauds – it's that they're playing a game that someone lacking the "deeper understanding and appreciation" simply doesn't have to participate in by buying expensive wine. As you rightly say this applies equally to all areas of taste, but wine is a good one to call out because people seem to feel a bit bad about knowing nothing and overspend to be on the safe side.