SkepticblogSkepticblog logo banner

top navigation:
​

Scientific Wine Test, Pt. 1

by Brian Dunning, Dec 30 2010

Last night was my birthday. For my party, we had a scientifically controlled wine test. I had fun. I had a lot of fun. We'll have more on this next week.

28 Responses to “Scientific Wine Test, Pt. 1”

  1. tmac57 says:
    December 30, 2010 at 10:29 am

    I once held a blind beer tasting at a New Year’s Eve party,and it was very funny to see people choosing their predicted ‘least favorite’ beer as the one that they liked the best.I have heard similar tales about blind, wine tastings.I found that the more sure someone is about their preference, the worse they are at picking it out in a blinded test.

  2. Max says:
    December 30, 2010 at 11:18 am

    The last Freakonomics podcast was about wine tasting, and whether expensive wines taste better.
    http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/freakonomics-radio-do-more-expensive-wines-taste-better/

    • tmac57 says:
      January 1, 2011 at 3:03 pm

      Interesting podcast.It pretty much confirmed my own experience with expensive wines.Once, I was at a wine tasting at a boutique wine shop,where we sampled about 10 moderate to expensively priced wines. Most of them were fine,but none seemed to really stand out,until the owner proudly presented us with an $80 bordeaux. He waited expectantly like a proud parent,to see what our impression would be,and most of the tasters nodded approvingly,and made a few comments about the ‘nose’,or the ‘legs’,but he saw me frowning,and asked what I thought.I had to sheepishly admit that I didn’t really care for it,but hastily admitted that it was probably just me,but then embolden by what I had said,a few others chimed in and said it wasn’t really their favorite either.The owner visibly became alarmed,and tasted the wine,looked a bit confused,and smelled the cork,suspecting that the wine was ‘corked’,but he wasn’t quite sure.He grabbed a second bottle of $80 bordeaux,and opened and served it to us in clean glassed…same reaction by me (who had somehow become the main guinea pig),followed by most of the other patrons.I think the wine was probably OK,but aged wines can take on a ‘musty’ character that can be an acquired taste,which I hadn’t developed,but it was interesting that the owner,who probably had vastly more knowledge and experience with wine,became so unsure and disconcerted by someone just willing to tell him the truth.

  3. Max says:
    December 30, 2010 at 11:37 am

    Hell’s Kitchen had episodes where blindfolded contestants had to guess what they were being fed, and they mistook fillet mignon for chicken, fish for crab meat, black truffles for watercress, which suggests cheap substitutes for expensive food. Just eat with the lights very dim.

    • MadScientist says:
      December 30, 2010 at 1:46 pm

      I don’t see how black (European) truffles can possibly be mistaken for watercress. There is a similar looking black truffle commonly used in China, but it tastes absolutely nothing like the horribly expensive black truffle in Europe. In the fish vs crab, I guess people who only have frozen crab and frozen fish would be easily confused. Filet mignon vs. chicken … wow … that one I just don’t get. Who were the subjects, heavy smokers?

      • Max says:
        December 30, 2010 at 2:59 pm

        http://www.hulu.com/watch/188955/hells-kitchen-8-chefs-compete

        Sea bass = crab = salmon
        Iceberg lettuce = Romaine
        Black truffles = watercress
        White asparagus = bok choy
        Filet mignon = chicken
        Smoked mussels = octopus = smoked ham
        Pear = apple
        Scallops = halibut
        Endive = arugula

      • tmac57 says:
        December 30, 2010 at 6:01 pm

        Personally,I find the filet mignon to be very bland by itself (no sauce).I could imagine that without any visual clues that it could be mistaken for chicken.They have a very similar texture too.

      • Chris Howard says:
        December 31, 2010 at 4:44 pm

        Could be some were “super tasters” while others had a normal amount of tastebuds. Could also be that the subjects weren’t too familiar with the foods they were being teased on. It would be difficult to determine what truffles taste like, if you have limited, or no point of referrence.

      • Tommy says:
        January 7, 2011 at 10:16 am

        The contestants on the show are professional chefs of some sort.

        A lot of them seem to be heavy smokers, but I don’t know if that really affects the taste buds.

    • shayDblue says:
      January 3, 2011 at 11:28 pm

      Were their nose “blinded” as well?
      Much of the tasting is in the nose, no smell = no flavor. Then all you get is texture and the five tastes(sweet, salty, sour, bitter and umami). Easy to mistake food then.

      So were they? I’m curious.

      All in all, those “reality” shows have little to do with reality and more with manufactured drama. I’ve seen food shows from the inside. I don’t trust this to be research worthy evidence for a second.

      I do think that many food stuffs and wines’ prices are irrelevant to their actual culinary worth. A lot of it is hype and BS.

  4. Retired Prof says:
    December 30, 2010 at 10:14 pm

    I have often given thanks that my taste is not very discriminating. I can’t tell cheap wine and cheap whiskey from the good stuff, so I buy the cheap and use the money left over for good eats.

    Hard to believe somebody confused beef and chicken, though I can’t swear I’d pass a blind taste test myself. interesting.

  5. SocraticGadfly says:
    December 31, 2010 at 2:23 am

    I think I could tell Coke from Pepsi blindfolded, but wouldn’t absolutely bet on that.

  6. David H. says:
    December 31, 2010 at 7:33 am

    Brian, here’s a belated wish for a happy birthday, from all us of inside my head.

  7. Chris Howard says:
    December 31, 2010 at 3:07 pm

    Happy birthday. As a chef, I get a lot of, “What should I drink with this?” to which I usually reply, “what ever you like.” Viticulture is so highly controlled, at all levels, that $6.00 bottle of Yellow Tail, Little Penguine, Old Truck, or Peace Wine will taste consistently good, and usually as good as most higher end bottles. Most people that eat at my establishment can’t tell the difference, not because they’re igb
    ignorant, but rather, because cheaper wines have become consistently better, over time. I know this, because because of two things. 1) we make mistakes, and sometimes the customer gets the wrong wine, when we inform them of the mistake, the most common answer is “Oh, I couldn’t tell.” most of our customers drink a lot of wine, so you’d think they’d know the difference. 2) We allow tasting, we figure if you’re willing to pay $150, for two people, you should be able to see which one, out of two or three possible wines you prefer. Most peoples response is “I can’t really tell, but I like this one.” Most people, on merits of taste, pick the cheaper, to mid-priced wine. One glarring problem is, that there’s no accounting for taste. Food and drink, like art, is subjective. In any event, happy birthday, and a happy new year to all.

    • MadScientist says:
      January 1, 2011 at 12:25 pm

      I find that everyone has different tastes in wine anyway. I even know a few people who are quite happy to drink stuff which I instantly spit out, so sometimes I give people a bottle of wine knowing they’ll love it and knowing that there’s no way in hell I’d touch it. I know a few people with similar tastes in wine to me, so I let them pick their wines. I can’t stand a wine with much sodium sulfite in it though – they have the bouquet and flavor of an ashtray.

      • tmac57 says:
        January 5, 2011 at 4:42 pm

        Mad,don’t you mean Sulfur dioxide (SO2)? My understanding is that very few wines are not made with them. Wine will not keep well without SO2, and you are more likely to encounter an off tasting, or vinegary wine that has little sulfites in it. That said, have you tried a blind tasting with sulfite/non-sulfite wines? If not,try it,you might be surprised.

      • tmac57 says:
        January 5, 2011 at 4:47 pm

        Oh, I see that some wines do use sodium sulfite too.I was not aware of that,so disregard my 1st sentence above.

  8. Chris Howard says:
    December 31, 2010 at 3:12 pm

    BTW the Rex Goliath merlot, and cabs., this year are awesome!

  9. tmac57 says:
    December 31, 2010 at 4:11 pm

    I have also heard that some white wines can be mistaken for red wine,which also seems odd,but I have never tried that while blinded.

    • Brian Dunning says:
      January 1, 2011 at 11:59 am

      We had this test scheduled, but by the end of the evening it was too late and people had had too much wine. Pinot Grigio and Pinot Noir should be the red & white that are hardest to tell apart; we had a bottle of each at the same temperature.

      • tmac57 says:
        January 1, 2011 at 2:06 pm

        Jonah Lehrer wrote about this in 2007.

        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.

      • Brian Dunning says:
        January 4, 2011 at 2:34 pm

        LOL. We actually considered doing that.

  10. LarianLeQuella says:
    January 1, 2011 at 12:17 pm

    Brian,

    The real question we all want to know: Did you subject your wine to “Magnetic Therapy”? ;)

    http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=58106

  11. CW says:
    January 2, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    You might like this documentary by John Cleese on wine, which includes a scene with a blind-tasting: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0466506/