Tension defined (or not)

Peter Creasey

Peter Creasey

Peter Creasey
Tension is often tossed out as a descriptor, often with Burgundies.

Paul Sequeira...

Tension by definition involves two or more forces acting in opposition to each other; in wine, these opposing forces generate a “pull” in the mouth that many describe as “energy”. Ideally, the energy produced by that opposition can both express and mitigate the forces involved. Suspended in equilibrium, the forces can achieve a sense of “balance” to which all wines aspire. This equilibrium is often fragile, forming sometime after fermentation and dissolving at some subjective point in the future.
Click to expand...

Tension in Wine

Resonate or not? Any simpler ideas on this?

. . . . Pete
 
I usually like wines that show sweet and sour flavors. Taste goes back and forth between the 2 perceptions always changing. Pretty good description of my experience above.
 
I'm not convinced the term used by itself is anything other than more esoterica in wine speak.

I can see using the term to express the relationship between two elements e.g. tension between acid and fruit. But used alone, as is usually the case, the term seems superfluous.

Good tension means good balance.

Less than good tension means less than good balance.

Minus the esoteric nuance, balance is the term that fills the bill.

Or am I missing something?

. . . . Pete
 
as mentioned in the first post above: energy. There are plenty of more or less balanced wines without much energy at all. And I'm not sure it's acidity at one pole as much as pH
 
Steve, Yes, energy is often mentioned with respect to tension, but I don't see how energy in a wine is exactly (or even generally) judged by a taster.

. . . . Pete
 
Steve, No, I never think of tension.

Balance is first and foremost, but tension as a parameter or descriptor just doesn't register.

. . . . Pete
 
Balance is the harmony of several flavors or other sensory qualities.

Tension is one voice, only slightly louder, trying to shout down the others. It succeeds momentarily then yields; it warbles and therefore draws attention to its circumstance.
 
originally posted by kirk wallace:
i thought the questionable "I" was implied. but yes, definitely questionable. is there AS?
Click to expand...

McDermott, for one, thought the stupidity was natural.

I look forward to the discussion of what "natural stupidity" really means...
 
originally posted by Steve Guattery:
originally posted by kirk wallace:
i thought the questionable "I" was implied. but yes, definitely questionable. is there AS?
Click to expand...

McDermott, for one, thought the stupidity was natural.

I look forward to the discussion of what "natural stupidity" really means...
Click to expand...

I would have thought that the OP was sufficient.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top