You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Volatility Manifesto
- Thread starter Oswaldo Costa
- Start date
Jeff Grossman
Jeff Grossman
YW, I suppose. Kerning is a pinnacle of wickedness, if you're the right sort.originally posted by MLipton:
TILa new word. Thanks, Jeff (and xkcd).
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
YW, I suppose. Kerning is a pinnacle of wickedness, if you're the right sort.originally posted by MLipton:
TILa new word. Thanks, Jeff (and xkcd).
xkcd is life.
Oswaldo Costa
Oswaldo Costa
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
YW, I suppose. Kerning is a pinnacle of wickedness, if you're the right sort.originally posted by MLipton:
TILa new word. Thanks, Jeff (and xkcd).
xkcd is life.
Excellent.
Christian Miller (CMM)
Christian Miller
originally posted by mark e:
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by MLipton:
VA is a lot like Brett: people’s sensitivities differ markedly and in low quantity both can be viewed as positive attributes. At low levels, a little VA can give a wine a “lifted” or “high toned” nose, which some tasters might find appealing.
Mark Lipton
Do we know this? This seems unlikely to me. If you mean sensitivity colloquially, as in people have different levels that they like/find objectionable, then yes. But if you mean absolute sensitivity to the physical stimulus, I'd need to be convinced. Everything I know about olfaction makes me think that while there is a lot of variability within individual sensitivity from day to day there isn't that much of a spectrum between individuals. What people like or don't like and also what they can name depends more on social factors than any difference in sensitivity at the physical level.
Actually, I think there is a huge difference between individuals in the ability to detect different volatile components of wine. I'd need to find some studies on ranking of panelists' ability in organoleptic analysis. But suffice to say - and this is anectodal, 'natch - I know for sure that different people cannot detect TCA at the same level.
Agree. I don't have time to look up and make citations, but discrepancies in threshold detection of many components is well-documented. One of the first steps in many sensory research projects are basic duo-trio tests to weed out people unable to detect or discriminate the component being analyzed.
Then add preference differences, once there is detection.
originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):
originally posted by mark e:
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by MLipton:
VA is a lot like Brett: people’s sensitivities differ markedly and in low quantity both can be viewed as positive attributes. At low levels, a little VA can give a wine a “lifted” or “high toned” nose, which some tasters might find appealing.
Mark Lipton
Do we know this? This seems unlikely to me. If you mean sensitivity colloquially, as in people have different levels that they like/find objectionable, then yes. But if you mean absolute sensitivity to the physical stimulus, I'd need to be convinced. Everything I know about olfaction makes me think that while there is a lot of variability within individual sensitivity from day to day there isn't that much of a spectrum between individuals. What people like or don't like and also what they can name depends more on social factors than any difference in sensitivity at the physical level.
Actually, I think there is a huge difference between individuals in the ability to detect different volatile components of wine. I'd need to find some studies on ranking of panelists' ability in organoleptic analysis. But suffice to say - and this is anectodal, 'natch - I know for sure that different people cannot detect TCA at the same level.
Agree. I don't have time to look up and make citations, but discrepancies in threshold detection of many components is well-documented. One of the first steps in many sensory research projects are basic duo-trio tests to weed out people unable to detect or discriminate the component being analyzed.
Then add preference differences, once there is detection.
I'd be interested in that. Is it sort of normal variation, or is it quite wide? If you could just give me the names of some researchers. I went through the faculty at Monell without much luck. Couldn't think where else to look quickly and my NCBI search didn't yield anything good.
Oswaldo Costa
Oswaldo Costa
What is harder to test/plot than variation/distribution in people's innate sensitivities, and underlies the irritation that prompted this post, is the variation that comes from experience and training. That is more to the point in the complaint that young natural wine hipsters are overly v.a.-tolerant and help give natural wine a bad name.
In order to identify something, the sensation must be to a sufficient extent present in one's mind, independent of individual sensory thresholds. Surely we all know from personal experience that beginning drinkers tend to have more difficulty identifying stuff than experienced drinkers just because they haven't fully internalized the sensory concepts, not because their senses are on average any less perceptive.
Whereas before our recent Scandinavian romp I used to detect v.a. only when it passed a certain point (the "vinaigrette threshold"), two and a half weeks of relentless exposure at different levels crystalized the sensation in such a well-defined manner that I now sense it even in minute amounts. My innate sensory ability did not improve, it was the concept that became clearer. Looking back at my insufficiently sharp ability before the trip, and therefore greater tolerance for this particular form of spoilage, I see that drinkers who are like I was until so very recently are an important part of the problem.
In order to identify something, the sensation must be to a sufficient extent present in one's mind, independent of individual sensory thresholds. Surely we all know from personal experience that beginning drinkers tend to have more difficulty identifying stuff than experienced drinkers just because they haven't fully internalized the sensory concepts, not because their senses are on average any less perceptive.
Whereas before our recent Scandinavian romp I used to detect v.a. only when it passed a certain point (the "vinaigrette threshold"), two and a half weeks of relentless exposure at different levels crystalized the sensation in such a well-defined manner that I now sense it even in minute amounts. My innate sensory ability did not improve, it was the concept that became clearer. Looking back at my insufficiently sharp ability before the trip, and therefore greater tolerance for this particular form of spoilage, I see that drinkers who are like I was until so very recently are an important part of the problem.
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
... two and a half weeks of relentless exposure at different levels crystalized the sensation in such a well-defined manner that I now sense it even in minute amounts...
Who sez tastes can't be trained?!
Oswaldo Costa
Oswaldo Costa
Strained is closer to the mark(S).
Jeff Grossman
Jeff Grossman
I'll see it when I believe it.
Oswaldo Costa
Oswaldo Costa
Exactly. I’ll recognize it when I know it.
robert ames
robert ames
and then there's all that stuff that has to be believed to be seen. which is the trump card of our current c.m.f.i.c.
Oswaldo Costa
Oswaldo Costa
Rum experience with a pair of hipster wines from the boot. 2011 Le Coste Rosse R and 2011 Le Coste Le Coste (not so much a redundancy but their top bottling) abounded with v.a. The Rosso R was still borderline drinkable, but the cru was so acetic that it had to be unceremoniously tossed into teh thinsink.
robert ames
robert ames
originally posted by BJ:
Chief mother fucker in charge?
in the military, yes. funny story--while i was living in anchorage (a city with 2 large military bases) the personalised license plate folks at the state dol were let on to what the cmfic plates that they had approved was all about and tried to take them back. the proud owner of these personalised plates fought back, insisting that it stood for 'clergy make fun in church'.
but the best personalsed plate i saw up there was a totally pimped out yellow firebird trans am with plates that read 'mofo'.
Oswaldo Costa
Oswaldo Costa
Over the last three evenings we opened three sans soufre Macons from Clos des Vignes du Maynes: the 2016 Aragonite, 2016 Cuvée 910, and the 2016 Auguste.
The Aragonite smelled lovely, had some v.a., but of the non-acetic kind. Went down slowly.
The 910 was very reduced, so spent three hours in a decanter with a copper penny, where it was periodically swirled. That got rid of most of the reductive aromas, revealing some acetic. Went down slowly.
Finally, the 2016 Auguste. When first tasted two years ago in New York, it had a knock-out aroma and only a hint of acetic, so I bought me half a dozen in Europe. The first two of these confirmed the amazing aroma and the hint of acetic, but, one year later, the three opened last night were an absolute train wreck. The first had much less of that aroma and a ton of acetic, so down the drain it went. The second appeared the same, but was also corked. Down the drain it went (aargh). The third was identical to the first, an undrinkable mess.
Trustworthy sources from the bored assure me that v.a. does not increase in bottle over time, so the snarling volatility of these three Augustes can only be attributed to the waning of whatever held it in check earlier -- the gorgeous, intense, primary fruit, I suppose.
So, what's the deal, Mr. Guillot? To think this was a producer I used to hold in high regard.
It is becoming increasingly well-known, I hope, that anyone can make sulfur-free wine, but only a small subset can make them without salient defects. Why do those who make "dirty" sans soufre get away with it, and are even celebrated by trendy noobs for it? Part of the answer lies in the inability of the consumer to discern, without which there can be no blowback. Knowledgeable importers and merchants, who should be doing some triage, are not driven to do so by the vast majority of non-discriminating consumers. So, it's structural.
The Aragonite smelled lovely, had some v.a., but of the non-acetic kind. Went down slowly.
The 910 was very reduced, so spent three hours in a decanter with a copper penny, where it was periodically swirled. That got rid of most of the reductive aromas, revealing some acetic. Went down slowly.
Finally, the 2016 Auguste. When first tasted two years ago in New York, it had a knock-out aroma and only a hint of acetic, so I bought me half a dozen in Europe. The first two of these confirmed the amazing aroma and the hint of acetic, but, one year later, the three opened last night were an absolute train wreck. The first had much less of that aroma and a ton of acetic, so down the drain it went. The second appeared the same, but was also corked. Down the drain it went (aargh). The third was identical to the first, an undrinkable mess.
Trustworthy sources from the bored assure me that v.a. does not increase in bottle over time, so the snarling volatility of these three Augustes can only be attributed to the waning of whatever held it in check earlier -- the gorgeous, intense, primary fruit, I suppose.
So, what's the deal, Mr. Guillot? To think this was a producer I used to hold in high regard.
It is becoming increasingly well-known, I hope, that anyone can make sulfur-free wine, but only a small subset can make them without salient defects. Why do those who make "dirty" sans soufre get away with it, and are even celebrated by trendy noobs for it? Part of the answer lies in the inability of the consumer to discern, without which there can be no blowback. Knowledgeable importers and merchants, who should be doing some triage, are not driven to do so by the vast majority of non-discriminating consumers. So, it's structural.
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Finally, the 2016 Auguste. When first tasted two years ago in New York, it had a knock-out aroma and only a hint of acetic, so I bought me half a dozen in Europe. The first two of these confirmed the amazing aroma and the hint of acetic, but, one year later, the three opened last night were an absolute train wreck. The first had much less of that aroma and a ton of acetic, so down the drain it went. The second appeared the same, but was also corked. Down the drain it went (aargh). The third was identical to the first, an undrinkable mess.
So I'm guessing that the wine you tasted in NY was before you developed your version of the Stockholm Syndrome? For those who are not aware, this might be O's heightened perception to VA that came about owing to overexposure in Sweden.
Oswaldo Costa
Oswaldo Costa
originally posted by mark e:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Finally, the 2016 Auguste. When first tasted two years ago in New York, it had a knock-out aroma and only a hint of acetic, so I bought me half a dozen in Europe. The first two of these confirmed the amazing aroma and the hint of acetic, but, one year later, the three opened last night were an absolute train wreck. The first had much less of that aroma and a ton of acetic, so down the drain it went. The second appeared the same, but was also corked. Down the drain it went (aargh). The third was identical to the first, an undrinkable mess.
So I'm guessing that the wine you tasted in NY was before you developed your version of the Stockholm Syndrome? For those who are not aware, this might be O's heightened perception to VA that came about owing to overexposure in Sweden.
The first, bought at Chambers, was pre-Scandinavia and the second, possibly also bought at Chambers, post. The first didn't vanish as quickly as the aroma warranted because the acidity was perceived as stringent. In the second and third bottles, post-Scandinavia, the v.a. was clear as such, though I don't recall an explicitly acetic element (which I would have recognized, and rejected, pre-Scandinavia).
Since yesterday's bottles were bought in Europe, I wonder if the heightened v.a. is due exclusively to fading fruit. Mebbe the transatlantic bottles got a touch of SO2 at bottling, whereas the continental ones didn't (just speculatin').
Christian Miller (CMM)
Christian Miller
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Trustworthy sources from the bored assure me that v.a. does not increase in bottle over time...
While VA typically starts in the winery, why couldn't increase in the bottle, as long as there is some oxygen and low/no free SO2? In that sense, it would be no surprise that the highly reduced bottling had the least VA.