Wine expressions I'd like never to see or hear again:

I thought I had used "juice" in a tasting note about Alysian Floodgate West Block Pinot Noir but what I said was this is SERIOUSLY good stuff! I'll stand by that description.

Has there ever been a term used that hasn't caused someone some annoyance? I've never really understood why language causes such strong feelings (though I feel them, too!). Sure there are some expressions in vinous jargon that I find annoying but I try to always remember that language is still just meant to convey ideas. If wine discussions were literature - and sometimes it does transcend from the fun but mundane to art - then I think we could better discuss such things. If only we could remember that if it does turn to art, then our preferences would be perfectly subjective. So whichever it is, I just prefer to let people write how they want to write. And if I find something slightly annoying, it's my problem not theirs.

I've never really understood why language causes such strong feelings

It's not just language! I think anytime people care about a subject, they are more likely to be sensitive to the way that subject is expressed. In part this may involve talking/writing about wine. But also to the extent that people (like myself) are interested in language they will be more sensitive to how language is deployed. Just like people interested in fashion are sensitive to dress, and so on. Pretty basic, no?

Robert Parker's "melted tar" reference to a bouquet.....I've never smelled "melted tar" in any wine!

The addition of "melted" adds an unfortunate mental image, Drew, but that said, "tar" is a fair descriptor for a scorchy torrefied/black coffee character that I often find in Piemontese Nebbiolos.

Hmmm, that is not the character I associate with tar. For me it is a more of a sweet, high-toned aroma - not too different from the violets I get on Nebbiolo.

And therein is the difficulty in using language to describe smells! I presume American tar is the same as British tar, but sometimes these differences in interpretation can be down to experience. When I say forest, I think of deciduous trees, not pine - a big difference. And farmyards do not have chickens - they generally have around 6in of mud mixed in with the excrement of cows and/or sheep.

Steve, I get tar---hot asphalt---from Nebbiolo as well. Nebbiolo has been called "The wine of tar and roses" by others through the tears.

I sometimes, not very often, get that asphalt note from northern Rhone too.

It's not a negative; far from it, as it adds to the complexity of the wine.

As you say, it's wonderful and wondrous, this complexity of smell.

For the most part, most of us make the distinction say between “apple juice” (filtered and fined version); “soft apple cider” (unfiltered and un-fined version); and “hard apple cider” (fermented version).

Not all tar is created equal. Tar can be produced from coal, wood, petroleum, or peat. Wood derived tar could have a “pleasant” odor, smoky, piney, sweet musky barbeque-like aroma. Peat derived tar could evoke a medicinal impression. Petroleum derived tar could have a more “pungent” odor; in small amounts this might be a positive thing.

Salute

For the most part, most of us make the distinction say between “apple juice” (filtered and fined version); “soft apple cider” (unfiltered and un-fined version); and “hard apple cider” (fermented version).

Not all tar is created equal. Tar can be produced from coal, wood, petroleum, or peat. Wood derived tar could have a “pleasant” odor, smoky, piney, sweet musky barbeque-like aroma. Peat derived tar could evoke a medicinal impression. Petroleum derived tar could have a more “pungent” odor; in small amounts this might be a positive thing.

Salute

Absolutely, Victor! And well said.

In any case, it's not necessarily the actual smell we're talking about: it's the mental resonance in our olfactory sensory bank that we associate with what we're smelling in an effort to describe it.

People who love wine often get criticized for their attempt to provide detail for what they are experiencing, when it's not at all (or not always the case, I should say ) a point of pretention, but an attempt to add precision.

You could say "floral"---but what, exactly does that mean, and what associations might it bring up to you? Because those associations may be totally different to what your audience is thinking of. Better then to say "roses", as opposed to lily of the valley or orchid or violets.

I had a winemaker buddy who smelled a wine once and, without thinking, immediately said "Lincoln roses". Another person (not a wine person, by the way), scoffed and said "That's the kind of thing that makes wine geeks sound silly...not just a rose, but a Lincoln rose! Really!!!"

Turns out the winemaker was also a quite devoted gardener of vegetables and flowers, and had spent a lot of time cultivating a variety of roses....including, you guessed it, one of his favorites, the Lincoln Rose.

I remember when a speaker took an audience through an exercize where she had them supply specific terms attempting to describe the sensory term for "green". The responses were intriguing. Some predictable; some rather strange (to others.)

[Jenise]

Is it a spelling thing. Or, maybe just saving some keystrokes? Actually I am guilty of using Bojo for Beaujolais. AND, how about sweet tannins?

It's cute; I use it because it's verbal shorthand and something I consider acceptable when talking to others with considerable wine knowledge. It's when such terms are flashed around people who aren't that it gets affected.

[Jenise]

I loathe

pop and pour, popped'n'poured etc

That objection surprises me. I use it all the time--as a noun, not so much a verb that is. A "pop-and-pour" is a wine that comes out of the bottle ready to go, doesn't need lots of oxygen to get it going or separation from sediment. I like the economy of being able to convey that in just three words.

Has there ever been a term used that hasn't caused someone some annoyance? I've never really understood why language causes such strong feelings (though I feel them, too!). Sure there are some expressions in vinous jargon that I find annoying but I try to always remember that language is still just meant to convey ideas. If wine discussions were literature - and sometimes it does transcend from the fun but mundane to art - then I think we could better discuss such things. If only we could remember that if it does turn to art, then our preferences would be perfectly subjective. So whichever it is, I just prefer to let people write how they want to write. And if I find something slightly annoying, it's my problem not theirs.

Exactly. There are worse things to get you knickers in a knit over (there! how's that word police?!)
Language is so particular to an individual that it is better to just hear them out, nod your head, and say 'cool'.

For the most part, most of us make the distinction say between “apple juice” (filtered and fined version); “soft apple cider” (unfiltered and un-fined version); and “hard apple cider” (fermented version).

Not all tar is created equal. Tar can be produced from coal, wood, petroleum, or peat. Wood derived tar could have a “pleasant” odor, smoky, piney, sweet musky barbeque-like aroma. Peat derived tar could evoke a medicinal impression. Petroleum derived tar could have a more “pungent” odor; in small amounts this might be a positive thing.

Salute

Absolutely, Victor! And well said.

In any case, it's not necessarily the actual smell we're talking about: it's the mental resonance in our olfactory sensory bank that we associate with what we're smelling in an effort to describe it.

People who love wine often get criticized for their attempt to provide detail for what they are experiencing, when it's not at all (or not always the case, I should say ) a point of pretention, but an attempt to add precision.

You could say "floral"---but what, exactly does that mean, and what associations might it bring up to you? Because those associations may be totally different to what your audience is thinking of. Better then to say "roses", as opposed to lily of the valley or orchid or violets.

I had a winemaker buddy who smelled a wine once and, without thinking, immediately said "Lincoln roses". Another person (not a wine person, by the way), scoffed and said "That's the kind of thing that makes wine geeks sound silly...not just a rose, but a Lincoln rose! Really!!!"

Turns out the winemaker was also a quite devoted gardener of vegetables and flowers, and had spent a lot of time cultivating a variety of roses....including, you guessed it, one of his favorites, the Lincoln Rose.

I remember when a speaker took an audience through an exercize where she had them supply specific terms attempting to describe the sensory term for "green". The responses were intriguing. Some predictable; some rather strange (to others.)

We grew roses at our home in So. Ca and the Lincoln roses gave off by far the strongest scent of any plant in our garden. A deep red variety with an aroma to match.

For the most part, most of us make the distinction say between “apple juice” (filtered and fined version); “soft apple cider” (unfiltered and un-fined version); and “hard apple cider” (fermented version).

Not all tar is created equal. Tar can be produced from coal, wood, petroleum, or peat. Wood derived tar could have a “pleasant” odor, smoky, piney, sweet musky barbeque-like aroma. Peat derived tar could evoke a medicinal impression. Petroleum derived tar could have a more “pungent” odor; in small amounts this might be a positive thing.

Salute

I certainly agree with this.

-Michael

Has there ever been a term used that hasn't caused someone some annoyance? I've never really understood why language causes such strong feelings (though I feel them, too!). Sure there are some expressions in vinous jargon that I find annoying but I try to always remember that language is still just meant to convey ideas. If wine discussions were literature - and sometimes it does transcend from the fun but mundane to art - then I think we could better discuss such things. If only we could remember that if it does turn to art, then our preferences would be perfectly subjective. So whichever it is, I just prefer to let people write how they want to write. And if I find something slightly annoying, it's my problem not theirs.

Exactly. There are worse things to get you knickers in a knit over (there! how's that word police?!)
Language is so particular to an individual that it is better to just hear them out, nod your head, and say 'cool'.

And I most ardently agree with this.

-Michael

In short, I don't ever mind how people choose to convey tasting notes. I almost always can get something useful out of just about any descriptive language, if the person is truly trying to help others sense what they're sensing/feel what they're feeling when smelling and tasting a wine. Some of us do tend to get carried away a bit at times...

Having said that, I fully admit that there are a few wine-geeky phrases that for reasons I can't explain do seem to grate on me. I guess a few would be "Champers" and "farmer fizz".

-Michael

Come to think of it, the thing that probably bothers me the most is when people refer to sparkling wine as "Champagne" no matter where it's from (be it California, Spain, Italy, wherever), and yet I just can't help but do it myself all the time! It's practically instinct it's been so ingrained in us here in the US.

[Jenise]

Same as you, Alex, though we actually have our own cringe-worthy nickname for bubbly, besides 'bubbly'. It's 'poon', an abberation on the 'pagne' part of champagne that came out of some drunken event in their long-ago past. Have no idea what, but it's more fun to say than any of the other names so we use it, too!

In short, I don't ever mind how people choose to convey tasting notes. I almost always can get something useful out of just about any descriptive language, if the person is truly trying to help others sense what they're sensing/feel what they're feeling when smelling and tasting a wine. Some of us do tend to get carried away a bit at times...

-Michael

I see each tasting note that someone shares as a gift.
As with others gifts, some are more to my taste than others, some more evocative for me than others, some arguably more thoughtful than others. But all are appreciated.

shares as a gift...gifts.

Since we're talking about gifts, using 'gifted' as a verb irritates me. And for some reason it seems to be more common in the wine world than elsewhere.

[Robin Garr]

shares as a gift...gifts.

Since we're talking about gifts, using 'gifted' as a verb irritates me. And for some reason it seems to be more common in the wine world than elsewhere.

You disapprove of verbing nouns?

shares as a gift...gifts.

Since we're talking about gifts, using 'gifted' as a verb irritates me. And for some reason it seems to be more common in the wine world than elsewhere.

I don't know, Rahsaan, I certainly think of you as gifted , though perhaps more adjectiviously.

I don't know, Rahsaan, I certainly think of you as gifted , though perhaps more adjectiviously.

Gifted, but not gifting.

Thanks for the adjective-based thought!

[James Roscoe]

Has there ever been a term used that hasn't caused someone some annoyance? I've never really understood why language causes such strong feelings (though I feel them, too!). Sure there are some expressions in vinous jargon that I find annoying but I try to always remember that language is still just meant to convey ideas. If wine discussions were literature - and sometimes it does transcend from the fun but mundane to art - then I think we could better discuss such things. If only we could remember that if it does turn to art, then our preferences would be perfectly subjective. So whichever it is, I just prefer to let people write how they want to write. And if I find something slightly annoying, it's my problem not theirs.

Exactly. There are worse things to get you knickers in a knit over (there! how's that word police?!)
Language is so particular to an individual that it is better to just hear them out, nod your head, and say 'cool'.

Common sense could be the death of the internet. Fortunately human beings are still in control!

"Killer juice" is an attempt to bond with me by speaking a common jargon. It doesn't work.

"Bojo" is vaguely disrespectful, as is "Corton Charlie".

I try not to quibble over scent/flavor terms because, well, it is very difficult to describe them and I'm always up for a good guessing game.