Similar in wine? Negative correlation between prices of wine and ratings among ordinary people

[BobbyTimmons]

Individuals who are unaware of the price do not derive more enjoyment from more expensive wine. In a sample of more than 6,000 blind tastings, we find that the correlation between price and overall rating is small and negative, suggesting that individuals on average enjoy more expensive wines slightly less. For individuals with wine training, however, we find indications of a non-negative relationship between price and enjoyment

Our main finding is that individuals who are unaware of the price do not, on average, derive more enjoyment from more expensive wine. In fact, unless they are experts, they enjoy more expensive wines slightly less.

Marketing provides one channel through which consumers can be influenced to buy certain wines. But it is not the only one: wine critics/experts may also play a role in affecting wine prices and shaping consumer preferences. For example, Hadj Ali et al. (2007) fi nd a positive effect of wine critic Robert Parker’s ratings on the price of Bordeaux wine. There is, however, some research expressing scepticism towards wine ratings and their use for the average wine drinker. According to Quandt (2007), many wine ratings do not actually convey any information, nor is there substantial agreement in ratings by experts. Consistent with this view, Weil (2007) investigates whether wine descriptions by experts convey information to wine consumers. This is tested by having testers match wine descriptions to wines. In a similar setup to Weil (2001, 2005), tasters are asked to distinguish the odd one out of three different glasses of wine. Only about 50% of the participants in Weil (2007) can distinguish the odd one out, and of those who manage to do it, only about half can correctly match a wine critic’s description of the wine with the wine itself – which is no better than a random guess. https://wine-economics.org/wp-conte...nce-from-a-Large-Sample-of-Blind-Tastings.pdf

For pro wine tasters.

Each panel of four judges would be presented with their usual "flight" of samples to sniff, sip and slurp. But some wines would be presented to the panel three times, poured from the same bottle each time. The results would be compiled and analysed to see whether wine testing really is scientific.

The first experiment took place in 2005. The last was in Sacramento earlier this month. Hodgson's findings have stunned the wine industry. Over the years he has shown again and again that even trained, professional palates are terrible at judging wine.

"The results are disturbing," says Hodgson from the Fieldbrook Winery in Humboldt County, described by its owner as a rural paradise. "Only about 10% of judges are consistent and those judges who were consistent one year were ordinary the next year.

Colour affects our perceptions too. In 2001 Frédérick Brochet of the University of Bordeaux asked 54 wine experts to test two glasses of wine – one red, one white. Using the typical language of tasters, the panel described the red as "jammy' and commented on its crushed red fruit.

The critics failed to spot that both wines were from the same bottle. The only difference was that one had been coloured red with a flavourless dye.
For Hutchinson and Hodgson the unpredictability means that human scores of wines are of limited value. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis

 

[Axo1989]

Colour affects our perceptions too. In 2001 Frédérick Brochet of the University of Bordeaux asked 54 wine experts to test two glasses of wine – one red, one white. Using the typical language of tasters, the panel described the red as "jammy' and commented on its crushed red fruit.

The critics failed to spot that both wines were from the same bottle. The only difference was that one had been coloured red with a flavourless dye.

I tried something like that after someone posted words to the effect that people can't distinguish red wine from white when tasting is controlled for visual bias.

I happened to have two wines from the same vinyard and year, one Pinot Grigio and one Pinot Noir. Pouring samples into identical glasses, and tasting blindfolded I thought the first (which turned out to be the Grigio) tasted somewhat ambiguous, then the second (the Noir) tasted obviously red. Rinse and repeat. I wasn't wrong and it wasn't difficult. Neither were "jammy".

I've no doubt people can be influenced by non-gustatory stimuli including olfactory and visual factors along with brand cachet and various narratives. And that some wine-tasting notes and rituals are pretentious. But I this isn't like inaudible sonics, different wines can certainly have different flavour profiles.

Our main finding is that individuals who are unaware of the price do not, on average, derive more enjoyment from more expensive wine. In fact, unless they are experts, they enjoy more expensive wines slightly less.

Consider that some of the wines (more expensive than average) I've enjoyed recently could be described as acquired taste. As I've reduced sugar and carbohydrates in my general diet (health reasons) I find many things sweeter or too sweet, including more than a few wines. Dry/complex/earthy/astringent flavours won't always be crowd pleasers, but are often characteristics of various natural wine methods and practices (for example). There are many factors in play of course but I can see some friends enjoying these wines a lot, and some not so much (without being presented with a narrative or price information). It doesn't surprise me if differences (which exist per the first study) aren't positive (per the simplistic bad-to-great scale employed) for a majority.

 

[Pe8er]

I happened to have two wines from the same vinyard and year, one Pinot Grigio and one Pinot Noir.

Your test seems to be different though. Wouldn't it be comparable if you poured Pinot Grigio into both glasses and added red dye to one of them?

Consider that some of the wines (more expensive than average) I've enjoyed recently could be described as acquired taste.

I'm observing a similar situation with specialty coffee. A lot of innovation with production methods results in flavors that are strikingly different from what one typically expects from coffee. And yeah, some of these experiments are not necessarily successful.

The question is - how do I find a good quality bottle of wine that's not a rip-off? With coffee, there is a pretty useful baseline of specialty coffee properties (country and province of origin, roasting level, cultivar, farmer, processing method and time etc.), which I combine with trust for the roaster which I established based on experimentation and lucking out (e.g. I like what Tim Wendelboe imports and how he roasts) plus a little bit of learning from pretty much the only coffee YouTuber who isn't a shill or annoying to me (James Hoffmann).

Does anyone have any similar process they more-or-less reliably follow with wine?

 

[BobbyTimmons]

Your test seems to be different though. Wouldn't it be comparable if you poured Pinot Grigio into both glasses and added red dye to one of them?


I'm observing a similar situation with specialty coffee. A lot of innovation with production methods results in flavors that are strikingly different from what one typically expects from coffee. And yeah, some of these experiments are not necessarily successful.

The question is - how do I find a good quality bottle of wine that's not a rip-off? With coffee, there is a pretty useful baseline of specialty coffee properties (country and province of origin, roasting level, cultivar, farmer, processing method and time etc.), which I combine with trust for the roaster which I established based on experimentation and lucking out (e.g. I like what Tim Wendelboe imports and how he roasts) plus a little bit of learning from pretty much the only coffee YouTuber who isn't a shill or annoying to me (James Hoffmann).

Does anyone have any similar process they more-or-less reliably follow with wine?

Maybe a situation like audiophilia where the proof of the pudding is in the eating? If the bottle of wine tastes good to you that's all that matters. Maybe not a helpful suggestion if you want to know if a bottle is good before you opened it, there's no-one in wine like Amir to show us the graphs.

 

[Waxx]

I know some winery that makes cheap wines (<10€/Bottle) that are great and my standard wine (for the few occasions that i drink them), and i drank wines that costs a lot that were more vinegear than wine in my opinion. Price has little to do with quality here, hype and tradition has a lot to do with it.

But if you know your way a bit, you can find exellent wines from very low prices, in any style and in most wine producing regions. But it won't be as snobby as saying you drank a bottle of Châteauneuf-du-Pape from 1983 or so...

 

[Axo1989]

Your test seems to be different though. Wouldn't it be comparable if you poured Pinot Grigio into both glasses and added red dye to one of them?

Yes, for sure, and that's why I said "something like" and really it's the opposite: eliminating colour/optics as an influence.

I'm observing a similar situation with specialty coffee. A lot of innovation with production methods results in flavors that are strikingly different from what one typically expects from coffee. And yeah, some of these experiments are not necessarily successful.

Haha yes.

The question is - how do I find a good quality bottle of wine that's not a rip-off? With coffee, there is a pretty useful baseline of specialty coffee properties (country and province of origin, roasting level, cultivar, farmer, processing method and time etc.), which I combine with trust for the roaster which I established based on experimentation and lucking out (e.g. I like what Tim Wendelboe imports and how he roasts) plus a little bit of learning from pretty much the only coffee YouTuber who isn't a shill or annoying to me (James Hoffmann).

Does anyone have any similar process they more-or-less reliably follow with wine?

I do enjoy Hoffman's presentation and content. And find him informative.

As for choosing wines, similar factors to your coffee attributes can be discerned I think, but I wouldn't call them determinative. I wouldn't say I was very knowledgable about wines. For the last year or so I've been going for declarations of eg biological (or other interesting) methods or inputs, interesting labels, and a cork (or crown seal if pet nat). No disasters (so far) but certainly higher prices. Picking from the local bottle shop and selecting considerably cheaper offerings yields mixed results. Some good, some sweet/simple which I enjoy less these days.

 

[Multicore]

For pro wine tasters.

What are you quoting from in OP @BobbyTimmons ?

Anyway, it's all in line with my expectations. The analogy with non-experts enjoying and experts assessing audio is pretty good, I think. The idea that standards for preferability exist or could be established, or what they are useful for is debated. Mark Twain made some solid observations on the topic of standards of this kind in the case of cigars.

Concerning Tobacco, by Mark Twain

As concerns tobacco, there are many superstitions. And the chiefest is this—that there is a STANDARD governing the matter, whereas there is nothing of the kind. Each man’s own preferenc...

www.poeticous.com

 

[escape2]

Yes, our brains apply filters to our senses... hearing, tasting, seeing. Pretty sure this has been posted on ASR before:

What We Hear

FIRST SOME UPDATES: This is a promising sign. I’ve managed to publish another article in less than a week and it’s a big one! Since last wee...

nwavguy.blogspot.com

 

[BobbyTimmons]

What are you quoting from in OP @BobbyTimmons ?

Anyway, it's all in line with my expectations. The analogy with non-experts enjoying and experts assessing audio is pretty good, I think. The idea that standards for preferability exist or could be established, or what they are useful for is debated. Mark Twain made some solid observations on the topic of standards of this kind in the case of cigars.

Concerning Tobacco, by Mark Twain

As concerns tobacco, there are many superstitions. And the chiefest is this—that there is a STANDARD governing the matter, whereas there is nothing of the kind. Each man’s own preferenc...

www.poeticous.com

https://wine-economics.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Vol.3-No.1-2008-Evidence-from-a-Large-Sample-of-Blind-Tastings.pdf

Wine-tasting: it's junk science

Noses have been put out of joint in the wine industry, with experiments showing that even experts can't always tell cheap plonk from grand cru. David Derbyshire reports on the chemistry behind the taste

www.theguardian.com

 

[Anton D]

If any of the 'all wines taste the same' folks ever happen through Chico, California, we will let you find out what your own palate can do in a blind test. We'll fed you and make you listen to records...so beware!

There are objective requirements for certain 'titles' in the wine/service industry. This is only a stupid topic stupid people push to make them feel superior in some way.

If someone can't tell wines apart, that's too bad. It doesn't make them the ones who are correct.

_

The question: "The question is - how do I find a good quality bottle of wine that's not a rip-off?" Go to wine tastings at local stores, the bay area is full of them. Go visit wineries. Buy something and try it. Keep track of the things and characteristics you like. Practice will bring you that answer. It varies from person to person.

 

[DonR]

The question is - how do I find a good quality bottle of wine that's not a rip-off? With coffee, there is a pretty useful baseline of specialty coffee properties (country and province of origin, roasting level, cultivar, farmer, processing method and time etc.), which I combine with trust for the roaster which I established based on experimentation and lucking out (e.g. I like what Tim Wendelboe imports and how he roasts) plus a little bit of learning from pretty much the only coffee YouTuber who isn't a shill or annoying to me (James Hoffmann).

Does anyone have any similar process they more-or-less reliably follow with wine?

Learn to make your own. After a modest capital investment in equipment, you can bring the cost down to well under $5 a bottle (mine is now $1.25) and have full control of varietals and chemicals.

 

[DonR]

For pro wine tasters.

You could go a step further and change the colour of the glass and have noticeably different results. It works for food and plates.

 

[Multicore]

Who remembers the hilarious 2004 French film Mondovino? I was looking for it a few months back hoping to watch it again but it seems to be out of circulation now. It caused a bit of a stir in the wine business here in the USA at the time. I remember because I was in that business then. After the 1st Dot Com crash and before the next bubble got going.

 

[Ron Texas]

I read somewhere that all ratings from the very influential publication "Wine Spectator" were the product of a single individual.

 

[Anton D]

I read somewhere that all ratings from the very influential publication "Wine Spectator" were the product of a single individual.

That would be an abomination. All the ratings done by one person at a given information source. Would audiophiles ever fall for that? No way, right?

 

[DVDdoug]

Comparing wine is more like comparing music (not audio equipment) and it's 100% preference.

But at least winos believe in blind testing whereas most audiophools don't.

 

[Cbdb2]

Comparing wine is more like comparing music (not audio equipment) and it's 100% preference.

But at least winos believe in blind testing whereas most audiophools don't.

The big difference is different wines actually do taste different, while different electronic audio devices often sound identical.
On wine, "Sourgrapes" is a great doc on expensive wine and a guy who got rich faking it. He had such a great pallate he could recreate a $100k bottle a year after trying it and the "experts" could not tell the difference. The similarity to hi end audio is interesting.

 

[Pe8er]

I remembered I have a friend who manages a winery in Napa. A couple insights from her:

I would say from my experience in the wine industry that the more a wine costs, the more "care" is usually taken to make the wine and thus the quality is better than a $5 bottle, if that makes sense? I would say once you hit the $50 price point (more or less), a bottle of $250 or $500 wine will have probably seen the same level of care and stewardship as the $50 bottle, and will be comparable in quality.

Even master sommeliers have a hard time telling a $15 bottle of wine from a $100 bottle of wine. You can watch them do tastings and they don't always realize they are tasting a cheap bottle.

 

[BobbyTimmons]

more a wine costs, the more "care" is usually taken to make the wine and thus the quality is better than a $5 bottle, if that makes sense? I would say once you hit the $50 price point

That is similar to the audio industry.

 

[JiiPee]

In my opinion, the crucial difference is that controlled listening tests between audio stuff show that people are unable to tell a difference between two properly made amplifiers, or DACs for example, but in controlled wine tasting, people can reliably spot differences between wines of good quality. Thus, we can say that there is objective proof that those wines taste different, while the preference regarding which one tastes better is subjective.