82 Snake Oil in My Wine Glass From: aroundthekitchen@aroundthekitchen.info [mailto:aroundthekitchen@aroundthekitchen.info] On Behalf Of Joshua Cohn Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 10:19 AM To: aroundthekitchen@aroundthekitchen.info Subject: Re: Contemplating rocks in our food         Nice one, Dom.  Don’t know if you read the article that Leslie mentioned.  It doesn’t quite call Reidel snake oil salesman, but something close is implied.  Still, I’ve got my favorite wine glasses for different varietals.         And I work with a guy who is a German wine devotee.  When I told him that German wines are my Alaska, my final frontier, he brought me in two bottles and a special glass I had to promise to use when drinking Ausleses and Spatleses (sp?). -J Sometimes a Great Notion Josh Cohn From:   Kkraditor@aapa.org Subject: Snake oil in my wine glass? Date: December 21, 2004 10:25:38 AM EST To:   aroundthekitchen@aroundthekitchen.info Reply-To:   aroundthekitchen@aroundthekitchen.info The glasses used at Inniskillin for ice wine have very long stems to force you to tilt your head back, which directs the wine to the back of the palette.  I tasted some of their wines from multiple glasses and definitely noticed a difference.  I have also noticed differences in flavor and aroma when tasting the same wine in two similar glasses (Andrew can attest to this).  There is some truth in what Reidel claims, but they are not the only maker of good wine glasses.   From:   Asgasg15@aol.com Subject: Re: Snake oil in my wine glass? Date: December 21, 2004 11:45:23 AM EST To:   aroundthekitchen@aroundthekitchen.info Reply-To:   aroundthekitchen@aroundthekitchen.info Since I was mentioned... I’ve wanted to get in on this topic for a day or two... there is deffinitely truth to the claim that wine tasting is part psychological.  I don’t know a single wine lover who thinks otherwise; if you are drinking a wine with a great meal with a great conversation you are likely to find it better than otherwise -- but the same could be true of a course of food, too.  And, of course, if you believe that the wine you are tasting will be superior, you are likely to find it such.  But, the fact that emotion and psychology exist in our tasting of wine doesn’t negate the wine and glass component -- just like I expect my food at The French Laundry to be better than my food at Burger King, that doesn’t mean I can’t intelligently discuss why the food at TFL or The Inn at Little Washington, etc is better than the food at a fast food restaurant. While some of Reidel’s claims are silly, the idea that certain shapes produce different effects is not silly at all -- it is downright correct.  But, this is also a belief you need to come to on your own.  This is a truly untestable belief; virtually all winos will attest to the fact that different wine glasses produce different results.  If you were to test people with no prior opinion on glasses, you would be testing a segment of the population without significant wine drinking experience and less likely to pick up subtle differences.  So, there is, really, no segment of the population that you can test to get an accurate account of the effect of glasses on wine.  On multiple occasions I have tased Reidel Vinum vs. Spiegelau Vino Grande Bordeaux stems to see if a difference is discernable.  On nearly every occasion, when drinking a well balanced, complex, wine, the Reidel provided a more concentrated, linear, expression of the wine, whereas the Spigelau provided a more open, complete nose.  Without speaking my opinion to others, various wine nuts have had this exact same reaction during the test.  Kevin can attest to this ;)  Personally, I think Reidel, Spiegelau (sp?) and Tritan all make great wine glasses.  To me the most important thing is drinking out of an appropriate wine glass.  All of you non-believers, taste a Carneros Pinot Noir out of a Bordeaux glass and then out of a Burgundy glass and see if you can tell the difference -- I bet you’ll surprise yourself.  Over the past two weeks I engaged in two of the most rediculous tastings I’ve ever been a part of.  These tastings proved a few things to me.  First, they proved the incredible personal quality of wine -- to see half a room dislike a Robert Parker 98pt wine (I was in that half) and the other half dote upon it, when it is tasted blind and no one knows what they are tasting, is really an interesting learning experience.  (FYI: the controversial wine that I did not like was 1997 Montelena Estate.)  Second, they proved the incredible suggestiveness of wine -- when told that 1989 Pichon Baron, tasted blind, was a CA Cab, only 4 out of 30 winos (I was one of the 4) refused to believe it; 26 of the 30 participants didn’t immediately note it as a ringer.  What is more baffling than this is that half of the people in the room had tasted this wine just 3 weeks prior!  And, the two tastings proved that, despite all the problems with wine tastings, you can make general qualitative comments about wines; in our blind Cab tasting an unrated Cabernet would up slaughtering -- decimating -- the other wines in the voting process (three of which had been rated 98 points by either Parker or Spectator).  Of course I have five more of the winning wine, so I was especially happy with the results :-) I would go into the terrior issue but I don’t belive I have much to add.  It isn’t a secret that 90%+ of the world’s top wines come from gravely hillsides in water-created valleys.  Outside of that, as others have said, the proof is that many winos can tell similarities.  Even non-winos can tell similarities, really.  When I met Lisa it was a struggle to get her to drink Alsacian Gewurtzraminer.  Now, it is a struggle for her not to attack the cult cabs and ‘00 barolo stashed deep in our closet. andrew