Tasting Notes: Is Fakery a Good Thing?

[Edward_call_me_Ed]

Before I was seriously into whiskey I was into essential oils, not really aromatherapy, but the oils themselves. I once opened a bottle of essential oil and passed it to a friend to nose. She at once thrust it away and said, "Oh, that is way too floral for me!" Then I told her that it was cucumber oil. She asked to nose it again and said, "Huh. Yeah, now I can smell it... Isn't that funny..." I did that with other people. Most couldn't identify it till I told them what it was that they were smelling. Then it was obvious.

Ed

[MikeK]

While writing tasting notes I often ask my wife or daughter to nose the glass. Neither of them drink whiskey, but they both like the aroma of Bourbon. It is common for them to name something I did not notice, and when I nose it again I often sense it as well.

[jbutler]

:slappin:

Actually Wade, the day before I wrote that I had had a most superficial encounter with a tasting room employee at BV winery in Napa.

I tasted their "new" Pinot, and stated "That's quite good", to which he replied "Umm, I believe scintllating is the word you're looking for." It was everything I could do not to spit my mouthful of red wine all over his suit from laughing. And just where the hell did he get that phony New England accent anyway?

In my teenage son's parlance, "I was like WTF?"

[bluesbassdad]

I edited out an oft-heard quip in the belief that someone else would probably refer to it. It hasn't happened so far.

"Writing about music is like dancing about architecture."

I think the point is that music is a unique form of expression, not readily translated to another medium.

While tasting bourbon is not a form of expression per se, I think any attempt to describe sensations in words faces a formidable challenge. The classic form of a definition of a word is to place it in a class and then differentiate it from other members of the class. Both elements presuppose a vast range of shared and elucidated experiences between the writer and reader of a definition.

IMO tasting (regardless of the subject) has not, and maybe cannot, be codified to such a degree.

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[tgriff]

I once opened a bottle of essential oil and passed it to a friend to nose. She at once thrust it away and said, "Oh, that is way too floral for me!" Then I told her that it was cucumber oil.

Ed

It sounds like essential oils might be a way for neophytes like myself to learn to name "familiar" smells...I wonder if there are kits of these on the market that may work for deciphering the nose of bourbon?

...aw shucks...I'll just buy more bourbon and figure it out....

[Edward_call_me_Ed]

It sounds like essential oils might be a way for neophytes like myself to learn to name "familiar" smells...I wonder if there are kits of these on the market that may work for deciphering the nose of bourbon?

...aw shucks...I'll just buy more bourbon and figure it out....

I think there are kits for wine, they may or may not help you with bourbon. One thing you can do to figure it out yourself is to pay attention to the scents of things on the list in the FAQ when you come across them in your day to day life.

I myself rarely write detailed tasting notes, I fear getting it 'wrong.' I do sometimes try to pick out the major notes and that sometimes leads me to minor ones as well.

Ed

[Edward_call_me_Ed]

:slappin:

Actually Wade, the day before I wrote that I had had a most superficial encounter with a tasting room employee at BV winery in Napa.

I tasted their "new" Pinot, and stated "That's quite good", to which he replied "Umm, I believe scintllating is the word you're looking for." It was everything I could do not to spit my mouthful of red wine all over his suit from laughing. And just where the hell did he get that phony New England accent anyway?

In my teenage son's parlance, "I was like WTF?"

I can't stop chuckling about this!

[jeff]

I edited out an oft-heard quip in the belief that someone else would probably refer to it. It hasn't happened so far.

"Writing about music is like dancing about architecture."

I think the point is that music is a unique form of expression, not readily translated to another medium.

While tasting bourbon is not a form of expression per se, I think any attempt to describe sensations in words faces a formidable challenge. The classic form of a definition of a word is to place it in a class and then differentiate it from other members of the class. Both elements presuppose a vast range of shared and elucidated experiences between the writer and reader of a definition.

IMO tasting (regardless of the subject) has not, and maybe cannot, be codified to such a degree.

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

I concure with the sentiment Dave and believe, as Chuck put forth, that you can only get so far trying to verbalize the non-verbal. But you used the word "fakery" in your original post. Do you believe that when someone, here or perhaps in a published work, claims to taste violets, lemongrass, vitamins or the infamous "emphatic mint toffee", that they actually taste (or believe they taste) those things, or are you suggesting that they are simple blowing smoke up the reader's ass in an attempt to get attention and brandish credibility?

[Gillman]

Fair question and I'll let Dave answer but I must say I can't see what is so strange about "emphatic mint toffee". Even tasters who choose not to analyse too carefully admit to detecting vanilla in bourbon. All tasters I know agree a rye-recipe bourbon or some rye whiskey is minty. Caramel candies are sometimes flavoured with mint or one can see they might be just like some salt water taffee is (which is similar to some U.K. toffees). Writers who write things like this are just trying to get across general impressions. They sell books based on their expertise and a lot of people get guidance from them. No one is claiming they are scientists with a complete method of describing tastes.

Gary

[jeff]

Fair question and I'll let Dave answer but I must say I can't see what is so strange about "emphatic mint toffee". Even tasters who choose not to analyse too carefully admit to detecting vanilla in bourbon. All tasters I know agree a rye-recipe bourbon or some rye whiskey is minty. Caramel candies are sometimes flavoured with mint or one can see they might be just like some salt water taffee is (which is similar to some U.K. toffees). Writers who write things like this are just trying to get across general impressions. They sell books based on their expertise and a lot of people get guidance from them. No one is claiming they are scientists with a complete method of describing tastes.

Gary

I believe you and I are in general agreement Gary. My response was not to discredit verbose tasting notes, but to understand the intent of Dave's original post. I have been the target of several doubting remarks when I have claimed impressions such as: acetone, vitamins, asparagus, sod, coconut, etc. I know I taste those things, but how to you get those impressions across to someone who doesn't, or can't taste them?

[Gillman]

Not everyone can look at whiskey this way. Some will have their own criteria. They can discuss what they like and dislike more easily with those who "speak their language". An example relating to brewing: A brewing scientist, a leading PhD in his field, wrote a book some years ago on porter and stout. You may know it, Jeff, or the series of which it is a part, there are volumes on pilsener, brown ale, etc. He quoted Michael Jackson writing that an Imperial Stout had the flavor of burned currants on a Christmas cake. The professor was a former Briton so he had the "cultural background" to know what Jackson was saying. The professor wrote to this effect: I can enjoy stouts with the best of them but for the life of me I could never have written that! Of course he could speak very knowledgeably about stout and beer to his colleagues, in his terms. This is equivalent to someone telling me that a certain estate coffee has winey acidity, a fresh-turned loam quality and an overlay of brambles. Okay, if you say so.. This morning I had some expensive coffee that tasted like truck stop coffee but was stronger. It didn't taste "real" (or real enough) and I won't have it again if I can choose; beyond that I can't say.

As Dave himself said I believe, most people can find some common tastes in whiskey. Most people I talk to can, e.g., in terms of caramel, sweetness, brown sugar, smokiness. But if they cannot or don't wish to view it in a more detailed way or even that way that's fine. Their way is as valid as mine and I accept that but the reverse is also true.

Gary

[tgriff]

I have been the target of several doubting remarks when I have claimed impressions such as: acetone, vitamins, asparagus, sod, coconut, etc. I know I taste those things, but how to you get those impressions across to someone who doesn't, or can't taste them?

That is a tough question! I don't think there is an easy answer since, for the person to recognize the specific taste you are describing, they must have had experience with that taste previously. Granted most folks have experienced caramel, vanilla or mint flavors. But the water is further muddied by the diversity of experiences with other specific flavors. For example, if that person has never eaten plain asparagus, but only asparagus smothered in cheese, then that person may never understand (or recognize) the flavor of asparagus in a drink. Besides, I would think asparagus would be a strange taste in a beverage anyway and it could difficult for a newbie like me to name it or pick out. And sod would be even harder....

[bluesbassdad]

Do you believe that when someone, here or perhaps in a published work, claims to taste violets, lemongrass, vitamins or the infamous "emphatic mint toffee", that they actually taste (or believe they taste) those things, or are you suggesting that they are simple blowing smoke up the reader's ass in an attempt to get attention and brandish credibility?

Jeff,

I regretted my use of the word "fakery" after I posted. Its negative connotation far exceeds my intent. When I tried to edit to "faking it", the change appeared in some screens and not others.

I meant to suggest that if someone makes the attempt, even to the point of selecting a descriptor that only almost fits, perhaps s/he is following the only available path to becoming a more effective reviewer. I meant to suggest strongly a correlation between this matter and what I observed in est back in the 1970's. If one is not willing to make an attempt, then no progress is possible.

In regard to the matter of smoke being blown, or not, I do not cast aspersions on anyone. I want to make it perfectly clear that if someone claims to taste, let's say, vitamins, I believe him without question. :grin: However, the fact is that if a given writer is blowing smoke, there's a good chance I wouldn't know the difference.

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[bluesbassdad]

The professor wrote to this effect: I can enjoy stouts with the best of them but for the life of me I could never have written that!

Gary,

That thought prompts an idea I'm surprised didn't occur to me before now. In some respects tasting notes are more like poetry than prose.

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[bluesbassdad]

Besides, I would think asparagus would be a strange taste in a beverage anyway and it could difficult for a newbie like me to name it or pick out. And sod would be even harder....

I think that's a valuable insight. Context matters. Being bound by context is probably a significant handicap for a reviewer. Looking at a list of flavors may help the novice taster expand the context.

I doubt that I'm unique in the experience of having a chance encounter with someone in an unaccustomed context. Once I was entering the Queen Mary to check out the arrangements for a gig. In the elevator I saw my ENT doctor, dressed in tourist clothes. I was focused on my mission, which was to check out electrical outlets and speaker placement, not to obtain treatment for an ear infection. It was several minutes after we had gone our separate ways before I realized who he was.

I would guess there's an analogy to be made here.

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[Gillman]

These last posts make excellent points. And in fact, Michael Jackson's work has been described as "poetic" (his book of some years back which combines literary and photographic essays of Scotland is a prime example). A blurb to this effect appeared for years on the dust jacket of some of his books. And poetry can, in fields more profound than the one we are discussing, convey great truths...

Gary

[tgriff]

Being bound by context is probably a significant handicap for a reviewer.

I think Dave is right on target. That comment is so true in every field of study or hobby. Real progress is only made by those with the courage to break the mold....

Man, I may have made this too philosophical. I apologize!

[bluesbassdad]

That phenomenon often occurs when I'm in the vicinity. Coincidence? I think not. :grin:

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[Gillman]

It is interesting I find to look at the entries on wine writing and literature of wine in Oxford Companion To Wine (ed. by Jancis Robinson, an English wine writer of great accomplishment and ability). It is explained (and this is from memory) that there was great development especially in England in the field of specialist works after the first World War. Many of the wine authors in this era were (as earlier) authors or teachers. One of the first of the new wave in the 20th century was George Saintsbury of Oxford University whose Notes on a Cellar-book is an early (circa 1918) example of sophisticated wine writing. (By the way he discussed briefly the personal vatting of malt whiskies). So a lot of the impetus came from people whose main job it was to express thoughts with words. Of course, wine and literature and poetry have always been closely connected, so this development is not unexpected and was inevitable in fact. It was mainly a U.K. phenomenon (with a small American analogue) until after the Second World War, even the French did not look upon wine, a key part of their heritage, in this way until recently.

It was, too, a class-oriented matter since people with a certain amount of leisure and monies were able to stock cellars and devote time to thinking about the merits of the contents. The class focus has changed; all these areas are much democratised, and properly so. Some of the best and most influential writers on drink did not come from privileged backgrounds, e.g., Michael Jackson, Jancis Robinson, Robert Parker, Jr. So there is a specific social and cultural background to the matter of wine writing which has influenced whiskey and beer writing and their "taste notes". The field today is broad and there is a large range and style of opinion out there, professional, amateur, etc. There is an approach for everyone.

I really must look more into the taste nuances of coffee, come to think of it. (Just kidding).

Gary

[BSS]

A lot of this discussion reminds me of a saying I have heard often.

"That taste like piss" or "that taste like Shit"(sorry for the lack of words, but I think we are grown ups and can handle a little foul language.).

Does the majority of people that use those sayings really know what each of those taste like. I can't tell you how many people I have heard describe certain beers as "tasting like piss". I don't know what either taste like myself, but I have an idea of what they might taste like. I would compare that to the use of "sod". Has anyone on here really tasted sod? Probably not, but I do have an idea of what its taste may be.

I think this type of idealistic "taste" come into play when many people are trying to pin point a flavor.

[cowdery]

There may be more to the quip "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture" than initially meets the eye.

First, a lot of people have written about music for hundreds of years and, more importantly, a lot of people read it, so there must be something there of value.

Second, is dancing about architecture such a bad idea?

It is very easy to make fun of over-the-top tasting notes. I guarantee there are a couple of solid laughers in every issue of WHISKEY Magazine. "Emphatic mint toffee" is one I have joked about, but Gary is right that it's really not so extreme.

One challenge in writing tasting notes for publication (as opposed to just making notes for your own private purposes) is to make them not all sound the same. Every reviewer approaches that challenge in a different way.

As for developing the skill, some people are better tasters than others just as some people are better writers, but mostly it comes with practice. You also have to be willing to do the work. The drinking part is easy. It's the thinking part that's hard.

As for the various lists, I find them useful for the same reason others have mentioned. You smell something distinctive but you don't know what to call it. The lists can help you put a name to it.

One time, I struggled to describe the very distinctive aroma of Jack Daniel's, especially after it is just poured. It is common to all JD products and not apparent in other American whiskey, or it is but to a much lesser degree. The best I could come up with was shellac, which though accurate seems more pejorative than is really necessary. Then someone suggested overripe bananas. Yes, perfect. That's exactly it.

That's the process.

For me, I like to think of my tasting notes as elegiac.

[CrispyCritter]

Does the majority of people that use those sayings really know what each of those taste like. I can't tell you how many people I have heard describe certain beers as "tasting like piss". I don't know what either taste like myself, but I have an idea of what they might taste like. I would compare that to the use of "sod". Has anyone on here really tasted sod? Probably not, but I do have an idea of what its taste may be.

Well, I've never tasted piss, so I couldn't answer whether $BEER tasted like it or not. As for sod, I've noticed a grassy impression (smell, not taste) with Connemara, a peated Irish single malt; it made me think of a grassy meadow after rain. It tasted like a relatively strongly peated single malt - but then again, all of the peated single malts I've tried have been different from one another. Here's where my "tasting vocabulary" fails; Ardbeg, Connemara, Laphroaig, Bowmore, Caol Ila, and Port Ellen aren't the same, despite their similarities, yet I'd be hard-pressed to explain just what sets them apart.

[gr8erdane]

Well, I for one have tasted sod (quite unintentionally during football games) on several occasions in my youth and would definitely know it again were I to have my face mashed into it in the future.

As for body wastes, I think we have all been in situations where the smell was strong enough to seemingly taste. In other words, many things we might describe as "tasting like" may not necessarily have been physically tasted but rather remind us of what we imagined it to taste like according to smell.

[bluesbassdad]

Well, I for one have tasted sod . . .

Dane,

Yes, but is your sod palate sufficiently refined to distinguish, say Bermuda from Zoysia? Or were you in such a hurry to get ready for the next play that you short-changed the tasting process? :grin:

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[gr8erdane]

Dave, normally the taste lingered until after I hit the showers. In case I needed a reminder there were bits and pieces hanging from my facemask as well as inundating my mouthguard. I believe the majority of the conference where I'm from used plain old fescue with some bluegrass mix. The clay in the soil portion of the sod added a hint of "fresh pottery" while the sand added some grit and tasted somewhat of lime....(well limestone anyway)....

Of course the good news is that you can't get a mouthful laying on your back so at least I was moving in the right direction when I got mashed into the turf by 383 lb nose tackles like St Genevieve had......