[BrianM]

Or drink, rather.  Does what go for professional wine tasters possibly go for audio reviewers, too?  Or for all of us?

http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2007/11/the_subjectivity_of_wine.php

Anyway I thought it was amusing.  Maybe some others here already heard about it a long time ago.

Money quote:

In 2001, Frederic Brochet, of the University of Bordeaux, conducted two separate and very mischievous experiments. In the first test, Brochet invited 57 wine experts and asked them to give their impressions of what looked like two glasses of red and white wine. The wines were actually the same white wine, one of which had been tinted red with food coloring. But that didn't stop the experts from describing the "red" wine in language typically used to describe red wines. One expert praised its "jamminess," while another enjoyed its "crushed red fruit." Not a single one noticed it was actually a white wine.

The second test Brochet conducted was even more damning. He took a middling Bordeaux and served it in two different bottles. One bottle was a fancy grand-cru. The other bottle was an ordinary vin du table. Despite the fact that they were actually being served the exact same wine, the experts gave the differently labeled bottles nearly opposite ratings. The grand cru was "agreeable, woody, complex, balanced and rounded," while the vin du table was "weak, short, light, flat and faulty". Forty experts said the wine with the fancy label was worth drinking, while only 12 said the cheap wine was.

[TheChairGuy]

ha - food (and libation) for thought, indeed 

John

[martyo]

First let me say I really believe every person is unique. I despise stereotypes and all the minimizing that comes with grouping people together because of this or that. That being said, after attending RMAF and then reading MANY reviews from well known and apparently highly thought of publications, this article doesn't surprise me at all.

[BrianM]

First let me say I really believe every person is unique. I despise stereotypes and all the minimizing that comes with grouping people together because of this or that. That being said, after attending RMAF and then reading MANY reviews from well known and apparently highly thought of publications, this article doesn't surprise me at all.

Heh. I was hoping you'd follow the 2nd sentence with, "That being said, wine tasters are clearly a bunch of Frenchified, puffed-up pussy posers."   

And it's not like wine tasters always get it wrong; I rely on Wine Spectator just like the next red-blooded guy sometimes.  But to some extent they're paid to write colorfully about wine.  To an even greater extent IMO, audio critics are paid to write, not to be right.  What *I* hear is basically unaccountable, if I'm in my living room chair.  That's why I look for audio reviewers & makers who are also musicians or have worked in the music biz; musicians are actually paid to hear, in public - and people tend to notice whether they can or can't ('cause you can't fake it).

[sts9fan]

That's why it is important to find a good wine store with top notch people working there.  I am lucky to live near an excellent store that has never sold me a bad bottle.  I think the key to a good wine store is small size.  This limits the stores ability to stock cheap cases they got at a steep discout.  You know the 3 for $10 stuff you see at all the big liquor stores.  Its amazing all my friends think I am a wine expert but all I have is a excellent store.  80% of their bottles are under $20 to boot.  This is just my very humble opinion.  I am sure there are many holes in my theory.

Kris

[BrianM]

I am sure there are many holes in my theory.

None that a bottle of wine couldn't gloss over.

[Rob Babcock]

I think there are enormous parallels to that wine story and the audio press.  In my experience much of the purple prose spewed forth about the Critic's Darling of the Month is pure fantasy, just a way to fill a page with copy to sell advertising.  A couple of influencial writers say they hear something and soon people are falling all over themselves to agree.  It reminds me of a mainstream audio writer who once said he'd done a somewhat similar thing; he told his companions in a listening test he was hearing something (that he just made up) and soon they "heard" it too.  At the end he admitted to just inventing it.  They were pissed!

[acd483]

Great article. If you like this, you'll enjoy some of the tricks Penn & Teller play on unsuspecting participants in their show Bullshit!

They have a situation where they stage a high end restaurant and ask customers to rate different types of water they "pair" with food. The customers generally gush and go on about the vast differences in quality and taste. The truth, all of the different waters came from the same hose outside the building. Upon hearing the truth, the golden tongued usually blush and nervously laugh as their partner looks on wondering what else this person lies about.

We are all susceptible to the siren's call of the ego. It is our ego that compels us to distinguish the indistinguishable for to be able to do that is quite special indeed. The truth is, just as blind testing reveals we can't tell the difference between amplifiers of similar quality, it also reveals that we create differences where none exist, or hear things that aren't there. We can't stand not being in on the action. That is why these silly buying trends on forums occur without any good reason, that is why we have audiophiles arguing that equipment contain intangible, non-quantifiable characteristics, all to protect the ego.

As Juliet so rightly states "What's in a name? that which we call a rose / By any other name would smell as sweet"

Well, not so fast Juliet, perception IS reality. The more colorful rose will always smell sweeter!

[KCI-JohnP]

Funny that this popped up as I have to go to a "Wine Party" this weekend!! This will be my first and I'm going cuz my good friend is hosting. I'll be taking along a bottle of Crown Select for myself, I hate wine....

John

[miklorsmith]

It certainly would be cheaper if everything sounded the same.  All of us could agree the placebo effect is real.  Likewise, we've all heard differences between gears.  Whee.

[acd483]

P.S. If bullshit reviews of $10 bottles of wine scare you, imagine the implications of $4000 amps!

[acd483]

It certainly would be cheaper if everything sounded the same.  All of us could agree the placebo effect is real.  Likewise, we've all heard differences between gears.  Whee.

Wait, are you implying the placebo effect isn't real?

See this is the beauty of the article. It proves that the differences we hear don't necessarily exist. But I know by now that you are the type of guy who says "if we think the differences exist, that's all that matters." That mindset is fine with me as it's your money, not mine, but for my cash, I want evidence!

[BrianM]

It certainly would be cheaper if everything sounded the same.  All of us could agree the placebo effect is real.  Likewise, we've all heard differences between gears.  Whee.

This would appear to miss the point...

[miklorsmith]

Of course the placebo effect is real.

An article about wine proves something about audio?

There's precious little "evidence" on this site outside The Lab.  Maybe you should confine your comments there.  This whole line of discussion is a total killjoy.

[zybar]

That's why it is important to find a good wine store with top notch people working there.  I am lucky to live near an excellent store that has never sold me a bad bottle.  I think the key to a good wine store is small size.  This limits the stores ability to stock cheap cases they got at a steep discout.  You know the 3 for $10 stuff you see at all the big liquor stores.  Its amazing all my friends think I am a wine expert but all I have is a excellent store.  80% of their bottles are under $20 to boot.  This is just my very humble opinion.  I am sure there are many holes in my theory.

Kris

What store?

George

[BrianM]

Of course the placebo effect is real.

An article about wine proves something about audio?

There's precious little "evidence" on this site outside The Lab.  Maybe you should confine your comments there.  This whole line of discussion is a total killjoy.

As the initiator of the thread I'd certainly want to disassociate myself from any notion that the article "proves" anything at all.  I just thought it was funny, and perhaps spoke to some (unquantifiable) truths about perception vs. reality.  If you don't like it...such is life...

[miklorsmith]

It is a funny article - I enjoyed it!

[Cacophonix]

Nice write up! 
I shud get my wife to read it!

[Wayner]

I watched a bartender take lots of money from people in a bet that they couldn't tell the difference between Coke and 7UP after they've had one alcoholic drink and were blind folded when they took the test. After awhile I said, give me the blind fold and I lost too. Apparently, much of our taste comes from our eyes and the sence of smell. Since both Coke and 7UP are cabonated, the effect on the senses are similar and the mind becomes confused with an AB test.

And some of you think we aren't marketed like sheep?

Wayner aa

[zybar]

I watched a bartender take lots of money from people in a bet that they couldn't tell the difference between Coke and 7UP after they've had one alcoholic drink and were blind folded when they took the test. After awhile I said, give me the blind fold and I lost too. Apparently, much of our taste comes from our eyes and the sence of smell. Since both Coke and 7UP are cabonated, the effect on the senses are similar and the mind becomes confused with an AB test.

And some of you think we aren't marketed like sheep?

Wayner aa

I need to try this one...

While I in no way doubt you, it is hard for me to believe that I couldn't tell the difference between the two after one drink.  Was this a normal sized drink or super sized?

George