Wine Tasting Notes form

There are a number of forms one can use for recording one's impressions during a wine tasting. Checking them out, I found that each has its own style and character but none fulfilled my needs. So I started struggling with Google doc to produce a "unique" multipurpose form which I published and is available to all on the web. It is a living organism in that any user can suggest changes to be incorporated into the form. When I upgrade it, any subsequent downloads will contain these improvements.

You can read my short post which suggests unique uses by going to the blog by clicking here http://israelwinetaster.wordpress.com/2011/08/19/wine-tasting-notes/. Through the israelwinetaster.com blog you can gain access to the form.

If you want me to incorporate changes, send me an email at israelwinetaster@gmailcom. Enjoy your tastings.

Hi Daniel - I have to take issue with the grouping of Aroma and Taste and the statement "Aroma & Taste (These are intimately related and inseparable)". They are related, but not inseparable. I've had too many wines that had lovely aromatics and totally failed in the mouth and vice versa - very little on the nose, yet very satisfying on the palate. Body, tannin level and finish all deal with taste, but not flavors. You list a lot of flavors in that category and very few smells (floral, brett, vinegar, etc.).

I think you really do need somewhere to record acidity and sweetness levels. These are usually more important for whites. Together with evodence from your list of aromas and colours I am therefore guessing you mainly drink reds.

Ah, I see now you have "tart" in amongst your list of aromas. I think acidity (and sugar) is a separate dimension. You also get bitter flavours.

Thank you Howie,

Good point.

ON THE OTHER HAND, there were (when I studied physiology way back when) four, and only four, tastes which included sweet, sour, bitter and salty. In 1985 they added umami (whatever that is). Nevertheless, there remain only the original four specific receptors on the tongue. The sense of smell is very different and very complex. The Oxford Companion to Wine has an excellent discussion of this point and states, "Most of what is commonly called the sense of taste is in fact the sense of smell." They go on to state, "From the olfactory bulb these messages are sent to other parts of the brain and processed, combining them and forming a pattern. Most aromas are made up of many different molecules, each of which activates several of these olfactory receptors, making odorant patterns, so that humans are able to recognize and, particularly, memorize up to 10,000 different aromas. The olfactory bulb is reached mainly by the nostrils, and to a lesser extent by a channel at the back of the mouth called the retronasal passage (which is why most healthy people can still perceive some flavour even if they do not consciously smell what they consume). The human olfactory sense is extremely acute (although not as acute as that of some animals).........the mouth, or palate as it is sometimes called, usually merely confirms the impressions already apparent to the nose"

This whole issue is fascinating. In addition, we have the concepts of bouquet, balance and of finish (length of the aftertaste) which are no less important.

One must compromise in building a form such as I am attempting to do. That is, the form could be extremely exact and go on for any number of pages. For the sake of practicality, I still think it would be best to lump aroma and taste together. I have removed the reference to their inseparability.

Dan Kovnat

And thank you Steve -- I am at home a 50-50 drinker. Don't know why but we alternate between the two pretty regularly. But in tastings as I travel the countryside visiting wineries, I do, indeed, as you suspected, mainly drink and post about in my blog, the reds.

In medical circles, we would always talk about lumpers and the splitters. Do you put a large number of things into a few small categories or do you "split hairs" and divide the universe into a gazillion different categories. Not to demean your points which are well taken, and again, for the sake of length of this WINE TASTING NOTES form, I need to be more of a lumper. I have added acidic (astringent) and bitter to the choices as these are really basic tastes.

Incidentally, I love YOUR rating system with simply a number of stars. I think it is similar to my grading system at the end of the form. And my wife absolutely adores your reference to "treacly" as she is a word buff and my editor-in-chief at the israelwinetaster.com blog

Cheers (as you say) and L'Chaim (as we say)
Dan Kovnat

Hi Daniel

It is not just a question of lumpers and splitters, but also how do you split. For me, body, astringency, acidity and sweetness are all fundamental dimensions to a wine. You say you do drink white wine, but do you drink German and Alsace wine I wonder? Or sparkling, or sweet wines? If so, are not acidity and sweetness crucial? Maybe not to you, but it depends how general you want your form to be.

I am prepared to admit I have probably been influenced a lot by the WSET. Whether or not you want to follow them, if you are not already aware of them I think you might find the documents linked to from this page interesting: http://www.wsetglobal.com/qualifications/25.asp

You are right - our overall scoring methods are very similar!

Best wishes

Steve

Oh, and on the subject your aroma discussion:

What you say is of course correct, but sometimes you perceive aromas differently when the wine is in the mouth compared to when it is in the glass. There are a number of possible reasons for this... the wine will be at a different temperature in the mouth, it enters the nose through a different route, and tongue taste affects how one perceives aromas (synaesthesia). Having said all that, for me the aromas are often similar, but earlier this evening I had a claret that was an exception - I got a lot more blackcurrant notes when the wine was in my mouth. The colour of the wine is also well documented to affect reported aromas - smell is a comlex thing.

In my personal notes I usually comment on the nose first, and then go on to say that the palate confirms the impression on the nose (or describe the differences if it doesn't). If I write the notes up for my blog or a forum, I usually omit these details unless there are marked differences.

With apologies, I am not normally brutal or harsh but in my opinion your effort is indeed both idiosyncratic and presumptuous and I see no reason whatever to post it and to "make it available to all on the web". Your listing is an entiely personal one, by specifying tends to omit literally dozens if not hundreds of possibilities.

As you say, you are just getting into the world of wine. Perhaps hold off a bit on announcing yourself to dozens of sites on the internet?

Dear Steve,

First of all, sorry for this lengthy response. That being said, I did pursue your suggestion to look into the WSET of which I was not aware. It seems to be a veritable treasure chest of wine knowledge.I am glad that you introduced it to me. I am sure it will help me grow and become a more valuable contributor to the forums here.

My wine tasting is rather limited, as here in Israel the availability of the domestically produced wines far exceeds that of the imported. This is especially true of the more remote location that I inhabit. Tel Aviv, being a more cosmopolitan city, must have a greater selection of the world's wines than Naharia. Were I 17 and not 70, I would go somewhere in the world noted for its wines and study/work there so as to learn and grow. But alas, I am stuck in this old body and it is, more or less, stuck in this location. So what I drink, is from what my car can take me to. At least now we are experiencing a blossoming of the quantity and quality of wineries and wines which is what I, therefore, write about on my blog. I don't taste sweet wines other that port-style drinks from grapes and pomegranates.

Your statement that for you, "body, astringency, acidity and sweetness are all fundamental dimensions to a wine" is well taken and I will try to figure out how to work these concepts into my form in order to make it less narrow and more universal.

You make excellent points about perception of aromas "differently when the wine is in the mouth compared to when it is in the glass........ the wine will be at a different temperature in the mouth, it enters the nose through a different route, and tongue taste affects how one perceives aromas" are 100% right on. Perhaps, for tasting and the form, I should separate aroma in the glass from taste, which, by its nature, is in the mouth. Not only, as you say, does the color of wine have an effect on its reported aroma but also other seemingly unrelated factors. One's emotional state and what one has eaten just before the tasting affect how we perceive aromas. This subject is really very complex and subjective. I guess that is why it is hard to codify into a tasting form. It looks like I got into more than I was asking for when I started on this path. I forgot to look at the fine print which labeled it as "Pandora's Box."

You say, "In my personal notes I usually comment on the nose first, and then go on to say that the palate confirms the impression on the nose (or describe the differences if it doesn't). If I write the notes up for my blog or a forum, I usually omit these details unless there are marked differences." I agree and this has to be somehow incorporated into my form. This requires more of a restructuring than a simple addition or subtraction. My work is cut out for me but I am sure that you have significantly contributed to my growth and to the refinement of my form.

Thank you again,

Dan Kovnat

No problem, Dan. I think you are tackling a difficult problem, and doubt you will ever find an entirely satisfactory solution with a single form. In the meantime, don't forget the most important thing - enjoy your wine