| Vincent |
When I read wine reviews, here by folks like Dale Williams, in magazines
like Wine Spectator, or on web sites by Robert Parker, I realize that I am
missing a key part to appreciating wine. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy it,
or that I can't discern good from bad (most of my favorites do score in the
90's). But I cannot taste (or smell) all these things that the experts are
able to detect.
When I open a 2000 Duluc, for example (using a cheap one that I can
experiment with over and over), it smells like, well.... wine. I can swirl
it, decant it, do all sorts of things to it, and although the smell may get
softer after some decanting, the predominant smell is still... wine.
Okay, whites may be a lot easier. Oak, no-oak, that I can tell when doing a
blind taste test. But then oak is something that's actually used (unlike
various fruits, etc.). Here's what WS has to say about this particular wine:
"Soft, plummy and chocolaty, with a lovely medium-bodied palate, with plenty
of fruit and a delicious aftertaste. Second wine of Branaire-Ducru. Best
from 2004 through 2008. 7,915 cases made. (JS)"
I can't taste/smell plums, I can't taste/smell chocolate (though it goes
terrific with semi-sweet chocolate ice cream). "Plenty of fruit?" Grapes,
yes, I agree. And yes, I agree about the delicious aftertaste too. But I
really would like to convey my experiences (especially enjoyable ones) to
fellow wine enthusiasts. So I'm wondering just how to go about training the
nose and the palate to do just that. Berries, tobacco, cherries... all stuff
to which I'd like to be able to relate one day while enjoying my favorite
reds.
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
| Ed Rasimus |
On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 21:20:48 GMT, "Vincent" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>When I read wine reviews, here by folks like Dale Williams, in magazines
>like Wine Spectator, or on web sites by Robert Parker, I realize that I am
>missing a key part to appreciating wine. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy it,
>or that I can't discern good from bad (most of my favorites do score in the
>90's). But I cannot taste (or smell) all these things that the experts are
>able to detect.
>
>When I open a 2000 Duluc, for example (using a cheap one that I can
>experiment with over and over), it smells like, well.... wine. I can swirl
>it, decant it, do all sorts of things to it, and although the smell may get
>softer after some decanting, the predominant smell is still... wine.
>
>Okay, whites may be a lot easier. Oak, no-oak, that I can tell when doing a
>blind taste test. But then oak is something that's actually used (unlike
>various fruits, etc.). Here's what WS has to say about this particular wine:
>
>"Soft, plummy and chocolaty, with a lovely medium-bodied palate, with plenty
>of fruit and a delicious aftertaste. Second wine of Branaire-Ducru. Best
>from 2004 through 2008. 7,915 cases made. (JS)"
>
>I can't taste/smell plums, I can't taste/smell chocolate (though it goes
>terrific with semi-sweet chocolate ice cream). "Plenty of fruit?" Grapes,
>yes, I agree. And yes, I agree about the delicious aftertaste too. But I
>really would like to convey my experiences (especially enjoyable ones) to
>fellow wine enthusiasts. So I'm wondering just how to go about training the
>nose and the palate to do just that. Berries, tobacco, cherries... all stuff
>to which I'd like to be able to relate one day while enjoying my favorite
>reds.
"How do you get to Carnegie Hall?"
"Practice, practice, practice" (Apologies to Henny Youngman.)
Seriously, taste and pause to consider. Talk to whomever you are
sharing the wine with. Sniff, swirl, sniff. Swirl, sniff, taste. Hold
in your mouth...ponder the taste. Wait, repeat, consider and discuss.
Think about the nuances. Why is this wine different than the one you
had yesterday or last week?
There are kits of essences of various smells and tastes, some
inexpensive and some off-the-charts outrageous. I'm not sure they are
better than pulling corks and tasting.
Attend tastings or tasting dinners in which someone will be there to
point out the differences.
Pair wines at a sitting and compare them for differences.
Take notes. Jot down impressions. Revisit your notes on subsequent
bottles.
So many wines, so little time. Practice, practice, practice.
Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
"Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights"
Both from Smithsonian Books
***www.thunderchief.org
|
|
|
| Steve Slatcher |
I wouldn't disagree with any of Ed's advice, but I would add...
Don't be too disheartened if you cannot identify the range of fruits
etc that other claim to detect. The fruit-basket style of tasting
note is a relatively recent phemononen, and if you compare note from
different notes for the same wine you will often see wildly different
descriptors.
If you detect, e.g., strawberries or whatever, then fine - take a note
of it - it will help you remember your experience, If you don't,
don't worry - be honest to yourself.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
| Bill Spohn |
>Don't be too disheartened if you cannot identify the range of fruits
>etc that other claim to detect. The fruit-basket style of tasting
>note is a relatively recent phemononen, and if you compare note from
>different notes for the same wine you will often see wildly different
>descriptors.
Indeed, don't be too quick to envy the expansive and oft times bombastic
lexicon of the professional reviewer.
One would think that they spend their time going about familiarizing themselves
with the odour of wet dogs, peeing cats, leather saddles, manure.......you'd
think they'd end up with a dubious reputation and a crick in their necks.
Whenever someone says a sauv blanc smells like cat's pee, I say that I defer to
their greater experience in smelling said substance. When someone once said
that it TASTED like cat's pee, I had to ask him how he knew!
|
|
|
| Mark Lipton |
Vincent,
Keep in mind that you can read three reviews of the same wine and
they'll use enitrely different descriptors to describe it, much like the
three blind men and the elephant. Most of us feel that the overblown
prose used by Parker and the Spectator are a bit too much, but to each
their own. You can train your "organoleptic memory" by smelling
individual scents and committing them to memory, such as the smell of a
fresh, ripe pineapple (or raspberry, or canteloupe, etc.).
Alternatively or additionally, you can buy a kit like "Le Nez du Vin"
that is designed to assist your learning different smell descriptors.
Also keep in mind, however, that we are not all equally endowed with the
ability to distinguish and remember individual smells. Robert Parker,
for instance, is widely reputed to have a nearly freakish ability to
remember smells and recall them on demand. I know that in my case, I
began to notice and remember characteristic smells as a child. I used
to play a game with my mother where I'd walk into the house at
dinnertime and tell her what she was cooking from the lingering smells.
Practice does improve our abilities, but native talent does also count
for a lot.
Good luck in your quest,
Mark Lipton
|
|
|
| Hunt |
In article <20040806183216.22535.00000960@mb-m11.aol.com>, wspohn4@aol.
comnojunk says...
>
>>Don't be too disheartened if you cannot identify the range of fruits
>>etc that other claim to detect. The fruit-basket style of tasting
>>note is a relatively recent phemononen, and if you compare note from
>>different notes for the same wine you will often see wildly different
>>descriptors.
>
>Indeed, don't be too quick to envy the expansive and oft times bombastic
>lexicon of the professional reviewer.
>
>One would think that they spend their time going about familiarizing
themselves
>with the odour of wet dogs, peeing cats, leather saddles, manure.......you'd
>think they'd end up with a dubious reputation and a crick in their necks.
>
>Whenever someone says a sauv blanc smells like cat's pee, I say that I defer
to
>their greater experience in smelling said substance. When someone once said
>that it TASTED like cat's pee, I had to ask him how he knew!
Do you mean all that time I spent in the barnyard has been a waste? Well, I
won't offer to wash the neighbor's Setter again!<G>
Hunt
|
|
|
| Hunt |
In article <QCSQc.784$FV3.147@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com>, nobody@nowhere.com
says...
>
>When I read wine reviews, here by folks like Dale Williams, in magazines
>like Wine Spectator, or on web sites by Robert Parker, I realize that I am
>missing a key part to appreciating wine. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy it,
>or that I can't discern good from bad (most of my favorites do score in the
>90's). But I cannot taste (or smell) all these things that the experts are
>able to detect.
>
>When I open a 2000 Duluc, for example (using a cheap one that I can
>experiment with over and over), it smells like, well.... wine. I can swirl
>it, decant it, do all sorts of things to it, and although the smell may get
>softer after some decanting, the predominant smell is still... wine.
>
>Okay, whites may be a lot easier. Oak, no-oak, that I can tell when doing a
>blind taste test. But then oak is something that's actually used (unlike
>various fruits, etc.). Here's what WS has to say about this particular wine:
>
>"Soft, plummy and chocolaty, with a lovely medium-bodied palate, with plenty
>of fruit and a delicious aftertaste. Second wine of Branaire-Ducru. Best
>from 2004 through 2008. 7,915 cases made. (JS)"
>
>I can't taste/smell plums, I can't taste/smell chocolate (though it goes
>terrific with semi-sweet chocolate ice cream). "Plenty of fruit?" Grapes,
>yes, I agree. And yes, I agree about the delicious aftertaste too. But I
>really would like to convey my experiences (especially enjoyable ones) to
>fellow wine enthusiasts. So I'm wondering just how to go about training the
>nose and the palate to do just that. Berries, tobacco, cherries... all stuff
>to which I'd like to be able to relate one day while enjoying my favorite
>reds.
>
>Thanks in advance
Vincent,
You have some good advice, that follows - plus my comments that I could not
resist (sorry).
Question: can you smell in your environment, beyond wine? This is not a
trick question. Maybe your olfactory senses are not where you would like
them to be. This could have several physical, or even heredity causes. My
wife has slight asthma, and, though a great chef, cannot discern many of
the nuances in wine that I find. The same can be said for many in my informal
tasting group. This is not a problem to the enjoyment of wine, though it is
a deterrent to complete enjoyment. As Ed comments, the "practice, practice,
practice... " aspect is a very good one. If you do not have a physical problem
with sensing the smells around you, then this is the best way to "learn" to
pick out the various aromas in wine. One of the best ways to separate the
smells
is to do the various tasting segments, swallow, then slowly exhale, partially
through
your mouth, and partially through you nose, concentrating on the smells that
you
now pick up. This retro-nasal smelling concentrates what smells exist to the
sensors
located deep in your nasal/oral passage. This usually yields stronger
impressions,
than does just sniffing the wine in the glass.
Half way to the retro-nasal move, it often pays to cover the glass with your
hand, as
you swirl. Clean hands, without smell of soap, or lotion is a MUST! Once you
have
swirled the wine, un-cup one side of your hand, and stick your nose into that
smaller
opening. Again, this concentrates the aromas, and doesn't let them dissipate
too
quickly.
As strange as it might seem, I also practice my olfactory perception by
reading from
William Faulkner. Much of his description of place and person relies very
heavily
on the sense of smell. As a place is described, I let my mind, and my
olfactory
memory wander, to see if I can recall that smell. While this might be a bit
meta-physical, I find that many everyday aromas, can transport my mind to a
long
ago, far away place. This is part of the practice.
I'll also go out and try to find rather common wine smell descriptors, if they
are not
in my memory bank. Gooseberries (often associated with SB) are not that common
in the US. For me to know what a gooseberry smells like, I had to hunt all
over for
an example that did not come out of a can.
Kendall-Jackson has a new facility in Sonoma, and whatever one might think of
their
wines, or their marketing, the facility is excellent for sensory instruction.
They have
planted a sensory garden with items that are common wine smells and tastes,
and also
with items that are complementary to those very tastes. There is also a small
vineyard that is planted with most of the varietals that are grown in the US,
where,
depending on the season, you can actually taste the various grapes, and decide
which ones have what element(s), just from the grape, regardless of the
vinification
method(s).
What I would recommend is to take Ed's advice, and add a copy of "Light in
August,"
or some other Faulkner. A nice Zin would probably compliment the book, and
just tell your family that you are "in training!"
Regardless, enjoy, at what ever level you can,
Hunt
|
|
|
| Steve Slatcher |
On 7 Aug 2004 01:29:32 GMT, noone@hunt.com (Hunt) wrote:
>I'll also go out and try to find rather common wine smell descriptors, if they
>are not
>in my memory bank. Gooseberries (often associated with SB) are not that common
>in the US. For me to know what a gooseberry smells like, I had to hunt all
>over for
>an example that did not come out of a can.
I thought everone knew that gooseberries tasted like SB :-)
I recently tried lychees (canned, not fresh, and not as a palate/nose
improvement exercise) and immediately thought "this tastes just like
gewurztraminer".
Another comment for our OP: Even for tastes/smells you thiink you
understand, it can be very useful to try them side-by-side. A useful
excercise for me was to try a range of citrus fruits at the same time.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
| Steve Slatcher |
On 06 Aug 2004 22:32:16 GMT, wspohn4@aol.comnojunk (Bill Spohn) wrote:
>>Don't be too disheartened if you cannot identify the range of fruits
>>etc that other claim to detect. The fruit-basket style of tasting
>>note is a relatively recent phemononen, and if you compare note from
>>different notes for the same wine you will often see wildly different
>>descriptors.
>
>Indeed, don't be too quick to envy the expansive and oft times bombastic
>lexicon of the professional reviewer.
>
>One would think that they spend their time going about familiarizing themselves
>with the odour of wet dogs, peeing cats, leather saddles, manure.......you'd
>think they'd end up with a dubious reputation and a crick in their necks.
>
>Whenever someone says a sauv blanc smells like cat's pee, I say that I defer to
>their greater experience in smelling said substance. When someone once said
>that it TASTED like cat's pee, I had to ask him how he knew!
Being relatively new to all this myself, the conclusions I have drawn
are:
Sometimes this sort of thing is pretensious nonsense
Sometimes wierd descriptors are intensely meaningful to individuals in
that, e.g., a childhood memory is invoked.
Sometimes they are a professional shorthand for a particular
smell/taste that is only tenuously related to the note. I struggle a
lot with mineral descriptors, which I believe often fall into this
category. For example, I understand that maybe a "flint" descriptor
for a Puiily Fume implies a smoky gunflint rather than a lump of rock
out of the ground. And that the smell of pebbles is probably the
smell of vegetation/bateria that grow on them.
Problem is knowing which of the above categories note fall into (and,
for me, understanding the professional shorthand).
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher
|
|
|
| Tom S |
"Vincent" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:QCSQc.784$FV3.147@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
> When I open a 2000 Duluc, for example (using a cheap one that I can
> experiment with over and over), it smells like, well.... wine.
> yes, I agree about the delicious aftertaste too. But I
> really would like to convey my experiences (especially enjoyable ones) to
> fellow wine enthusiasts. So I'm wondering just how to go about training
the
> nose and the palate to do just that. Berries, tobacco, cherries... all
stuff
> to which I'd like to be able to relate one day while enjoying my favorite
> reds.
Your problem is not only training your nose and palate; it's also training
your sensory vocabulary. You need to associate words with smells and
tastes. That's easier said than done, however. Some have a talent for it
and many don't. If you don't, don't worry about it. Just enjoy. This is
not the Pass/Fail Test of Life. ;^/
Tom S
|
|
|
| Bas van Beek |
Tom S schreef:
> Your problem is not only training your nose and palate; it's also training
> your sensory vocabulary. You need to associate words with smells and
> tastes. That's easier said than done, however. Some have a talent for it
> and many don't. If you don't, don't worry about it. Just enjoy. This is
> not the Pass/Fail Test of Life. ;^/
>
> Tom S
>
When I started with drinking wine I had similar problems... I could
understand differences between good and bad but lacked the words to
describe what i thought of the wines.
The way I learned was not only drinking and tasting lots of wines but
also doing this in tasting groups. A good way to enhance your vocabulary
is listening to what other more experienced tasters have to say about
the wine... and discuss it with them... I found that pretty soon I was
able to use those words too...
Also I found out that a lot of people using bombastic words and
wine-lingo where often just setting up smoke screens not to show they
actually had no sense of taste. And even very experienced tasters and
professionals often have preconceptions on what should be good and what
should be bad. They often rate wines which are not there "cup of tea"
much lower than they actually are worth (and vice versa)
Take Parker... He's pretty famous here for not knowing his red Burgundy
wines (even Pinot Noir wines from other regions in the world) and often
not appreciating them (which is fine be me because i wouldn't like to
see those Parker followers with large wallets trying to buy my style of
wines). Take a "double wooded", heavy, over the top wine and probably
Parker will think it's great.
My point is... believe in what you taste and smell and in what you don't
taste and smell... be critical and discuss... don't be affraid to say
you don't like something when others praise it straight to heaven.
Bas
|
|
|
| Mathew Kagis |
> "How do you get to Carnegie Hall?"
>
> "Practice, practice, practice" (Apologies to Henny Youngman.)
> Ed Rasimus
> Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
> "When Thunder Rolled"
> "Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights"
> Both from Smithsonian Books
> ***www.thunderchief.org
What He said...... (Ed & Henny)
Cheers
Mathew
|
|
|
|
