bearcat

I just report ‘em..

http://www.vox.com/2015/5/20/8625785/expensive-wine-taste-cheap

I prefer beer, myself...

BC

Does the Price Affect Taste?

belly113 Loc: Australia

I love Red Wine and here in Australia we are blessed with great cheap wines of which i think many are better than more expensive bottles. I agree with this 100%. Tell someone it costs and arm and a leg and immediately most will drool over it.

I don't fall into that category..

GARGLEBLASTER Loc: Spain

I would tend to agree with the findings. About four years ago I was in New Zealand and took some friends out for dinner and ordered a $100 bottle of red wine, not that I was interested in it but I knew my friends were. Frankly it was nothing special. I have tasted a considerably better bottle of $6 here in Spain. I am not influenced by price, I judge a wine by what I taste.

balticvid Loc: Queens now NJ

I agree.... :thumbup:

NeilL Loc: British-born Canadian

I think price affects the brain. The "wine snob" is a peculiar character.

Rathyatra Loc: Southport, United Kingdom

There is a lot of snobbery in the wine drinking world.
For years we were educated into believing that wine tasted better if it was more expensive.
With all of the so-called New World wines available I find the best red wines, in general, are Australian, South African and Chilean.
Of course we all have our personal palettes and our level of enjoyment can be related proportionally to the amount we consume in any particular session lol!!

D43 Loc: Mount Juliet, TN

Well, I'll go to Trader Joe's and get a bottle of "Two buck Chuck" which they have been selling for $1.99 for years. Great stuff!!!

Valenta Loc: Top of NZ

I thought that clip was pretty crappy. Never have I been to a wine tasting and drunk out of silly little 'cocktail?' glasses.

Tasting is all perspective. It is what you like that you will later buy.

bearcat

"I thought that clip was pretty crappy. Never have I been to a wine tasting and drunk out of silly little 'cocktail?' glasses."

So, you're saying that wine "tastes different" in a cocktail glass??

The article was not opinion.

It was a factual report on a study...limited, though it may be.

But, it still shows that if the "taster" doesn't know the wine sample by name and price, they more often "prefer" the taste of some less expensive wines. Of course these were not "wine trained" tasters.

And it was shown that multiple blind samples of the same wine were given differing ratings by the same "expert taster".

So, either his "taster" fails after a few samples, or he really doesn't know what he's talking about.

Even the "experts" can't agree agree with each other, which is an expected and accepted matter of personal preference.

I'm sure there are "almost universally bad" wines but, as you ended your post, It's what you like that you will later buy.

Maybe at your next wine tasting, you might want to try some "blind tasting" to see if there actually is any constituency in the perceived quality of the wines.

I just report 'em.

BC

Valenta Loc: Top of NZ

Thanks for that Bearcat. I've been in the trade for nigh on 20 years and have experienced many tastings.

Some of Penfolds 'Grange' at $500+ a bottle are no better than some Argentina wines at $12! But their a glass for every type of wine and believe you me, they DO make a difference

GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA

Here again the classic double blind test has to be the only way to compare wines or many other products. For those few who don't know what a double blind test is, neither the administrators of the test nor the testers know what is being considered.

A wine test might involve the administrator filling the glasses, labeled A, B, C or whatever, out of sight of the testers. The glasses would then be taken to the testers by someone who doesn't know which is cheap, expensive, or whatever. As you can imagine these conditions aren't that easy to satisfy, certainly not at home!

Audio gear desperately needs more double blind testing. A cable costing $300 per meter (not kidding, folks!) seems always to yield "jaw dropping" improvements. Oh, yeah! If you'd spent that sort of money, even if it were the magazine publisher's money, wouldn't you want to feel that the money were well spent?

Here we have one of the major advantages of photography as a pursuit over audio or gastronomy, for example. We can look at resolution data, contrast, d-max, all those objective (we hope!) criteria. But...watch out for bokeh, for example. And micro contrast...too much like the "micro dynamics" of high end audio.

Enough of the sermon! I'd be interested to see what others think.

GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA

Chilean wines. I remember my father, who died in 2001, suggesting that Chile's wines were worthy. He said this many years ago, perhaps in the 70's, based on his palette. I came to agree with him, also finding that many California vineyards, and Australian were, in the same price range, often superior to French vintages. Please don't throw too many brickbats, but Gallo has improved, at least to my taste, immensely since the early 70s. But then, I enjoy box wines for everyday drinking.

Although, I remember a 1967 Chateau Beychevelle with great pleasure. Of course much of the joy came from the overall menu and our guests. And isn't that what fine wine is all about?