Slashdot Mirror


Chemists Build App That Could Identify Cheap Replacements For Luxury Wines

schliz writes "Australian startup Wine Cue is combining the chemical composition of wines with customer ratings for what it hopes to be a more objective wine recommendation engine than existing systems that are based on historical transactions. The technology is likely to reach the market as a smartphone app, and could be used to identify cheap alternatives to expensive bottles."

16 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. More objective would be welcome by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If there is one thing that needs more objectivity its wine tasting.
    Too often the results are the opinion of the person who bought the bottle, and too seldom is there truly blind taste testing by people not already familiar with the vintage.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:More objective would be welcome by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even with blind tastings there is subjectivity, as people sense of taste and smell is quite varied. I tend to be good at picking up secondary aromas (not the primary fruit) but amd not as good at picking out some of the subtle fruit smells. It all come down to chemicals ... esters and other compounds, that can be measured objectively, but for now is still quite expensive to do accurately. Any good sommelier can generally pick out a cheaper example of an expensive wine for you based on what you like though. It may not be *as* good as the expensive one, but it is a game of diminishing returns for the most part, although it is occasionally possible to get a *better* wine for less money. Wine sells for what the market will bear, based on origin, availability, and reputation.

    2. Re:More objective would be welcome by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're also probably not as good at picking out anything as you think you are. If you've never done any kind of double-blind testing to find out then your assumptions are likely nothing more than conformation bias. Same thing with "experienced sommeliers"

      Example: You drink a wine and say that you taste X. The next person at the table hears this and therefore tastes X. It also probably works in reverse. That's not to say that you couldn't tell the difference between two wines that are drastically different, but subtle differences are likely imperceptible.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    3. Re:More objective would be welcome by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wine is not as fragile as some wine snobs would have you believe. You pretty well have to really abuse a bottled wine for an extended period of time for it to be noticeable. Virtually every wine you find on the shelf has gone through shipment sweltering in 100 degree heat in the back of a semi, or stored too cold in a warehouse by a uncaring wholesaler.

      There is more obvious difference in a wine attributable to how long the bottle has been open than there is attributable to it was shipped, or stored.

      More often than not the wine snob won't notice this either, unless it was egregious and prolonged.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    4. Re:More objective would be welcome by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why on earth would people who eat different foods and have different taste profiles and come from different ethnic heritages be expected to like wines equally.

      I've had several blind tastings.

      For most people, the ability to taste a difference tops out in the $20-$30 a bottle range.
      I've only known one person who had the ability to finely discriminate wine and he came from the new york area.

      At one tasting- the one bottle he disliked, everyone else liked.

      There is a tremendous difference at the lower end because many of the less expensive wines are either

      a) Just bad (and just about anyone can tell this)
      b) or they are "Thin" (watered down, one note) which anyone can taste pretty quickly and easily in comparison to a good wine.

      But there are plenty of wines good enough for 14-18 a bottle.
      And plenty of wines that are good enough after you are tipsy for $9-$14 a bottle.

      The truly great wines require an experienced and truly great wine tasting ability.

      And why give truly great wine to people who can't tell the difference anyway (i.e. most of us).

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  2. Re:first post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yes, exactly.

    And this had better be an Android-only app.

    The absolute last thing an IDevice owner wants to know is that his/her expensive purchase is objectively inferior to a cheaper alternative.

    The horror! The horror!

  3. Re:Technology can't replicate everything.... by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >I'm not a wine snob, but I know there are certain things that sometimes you *can't* replicate.

    You're clearly also not a chemist either.

    >After decades of analysis, we still can't build a violin as good as a Stradivarius.

    No, what we can't do is build a violin that self-proclaimed audiophiles say is as good as a Stradivarius during NON-BLIND TESTS in UNCONTROLLED ENVIRONMENTS. If you administer proper double-blind tests then you'll find that there's no difference.

    >We still can't fully replicate Damascus Steel

    Talk to a metallurgist. Modern steel actually performs better. I'm not sure how much effort has been given to duplication, but why try to duplicate something when you already have a better replacement?

    --
    -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
  4. Here's what I'm hoping for... by reverseengineer · · Score: 4, Funny

    Welcome to Wine Cue!

    INPUT: Chateau Petrus, 1998 vintage, Pomerol primarily of Merlot grapes, estimated retail 3500USD

    RECOMMENDATION: Charles Shaw, 2010 vintage, Merlot, estimated retail 2USD

    --
    "FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
  5. Re:Technology can't replicate everything.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Strad's aren't any better sounding than brand new violins.

  6. Re:Technology can't replicate everything.... by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not a wine snob, but I know there are certain things that sometimes you *can't* replicate. [...] I'd argue that fine liquors -- wines, whiskeys, etc... fall into that category. I'd say it's almost an art form.

    Detailed studies of professional wine judges in blind tastings have shown that prizes from contest to contest are so random that they might as well be picked from a hat. And the average professional judge, tasting the same wine on consecutive days, would on average only be able to narrow the rating to within 8 points on a 20-point scale.

    Other studies have even shown that professional tasters often fare pretty poorly even in tests like, "Taste 3 wines, tell me which 2 are identical," or that when given white wines dyed with red food coloring, they start spouting out the nonsense about "flavor notes" and "nose" that would be appropriate for red wines rather than whites.

    Given this information, it's pretty clear that even the so-called "expert palettes" don't know what the hell they're talking about.

    So, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it's pretty likely chemists could master the subtle art of getting a wine result that could satisfy even most professional judges in a blind test.

  7. Ignore the ratings, trust your buds by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've had some spectacular wines. No, no, not the wines that cost hundreds of euros per bottle. but wines that could be described as "WOW. I didn't know wine could do that". It would be nice to have an app that would suggest similar wines, based on a chemical spectrum instead of "that estate had a truly extraordinary summer, and more recent vintages have not faired as well."

    If a particular chemical is playing around with my brain,I want to know about it and be able to invite it around again sometime.

  8. Re:Technology can't replicate everything.... by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It always amuses the hell out of me when people think there were these amazing ancient technologies so much better than anything modern. It is like they think various videogames and novels are real and that we study the knowledge of the ancients to advance what we have, despite all evidence to the contrary.

    As you say, all this stuff is bullshit. In terms of violins we can, if anything, build even better violins today because of better material selection and manufacturing techniques. The thing that makes Stradivarius sought after is its rarity. It is a special thing to own one, as there aren't many. That then of course leads to a mystique and to people making bullshit claims.

    Same kind of thing with Damascus Steel. It has been claimed to be able to do things like cut through a gun barrel, which of course it can't do (gun barrels are amazingly tough objects). We can do better with modern metallurgy and processes (like an industrial hammer forge). The reason there's research to replicating Damascus Steel is because it is neat, it was very advanced for the time and it would be of historical interest to understand how it was done. We can do better, and indeed do all the time.

  9. Re:insufficiently advanced technology by c0lo · · Score: 4, Informative

    The way in which the microwave heats from the inside out...

    What???? Granted:

    * it's radiative heating, not contact heating
    * the penetration depth of microwave in water is between 25-38 mm, I assume larger than the IR penetration depth.

    but for the rest of the "inside", the heat transfer from those 25-38mm of "out" is not in any way different from cooking inside a gas oven. In other words, the stuffing inside your turkey will cook pretty much the same way in a microwave or classical oven, irrespective of spherical turkeys or placement in vacuum.

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  10. Re:Technology can't replicate everything.... by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Very interesting.

    In a blind test, professional musicians:

    In fact, the only statistically obvious trend in the choices was that one of the Stradivarius violins was the least favorite, and one of the modern instruments was slightly favored.

    the 17 players who were asked to choose which were old Italians, "Seven said they couldn't, seven got it wrong, and only three got it right.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  11. Re:Many fine australian table wines by aXis100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Go and have a look at the metabolic pathways that yeast use to glean energy from sugars in wine/beer. It is truly staggering, and temperature, PH, timing and yeast variety can all play a part in preferentially modifying those pathways. As a result, there are a bunch of fermentation by-products, including different alcohol groups and esters. For example, I'm a beer brewer, and belgian yeasts are noted for producing "lolly banana" esters.

    There is also a legitimate difference between cheap and expensive wine techniques - time spent cellaring, new versus second hand barrels, preservatives etc.

    At the end of the day though that doesnt make a lot of difference - peoples tastes vary wildly and If you personally like the way it tastes then that's great, go buy it again. Whilst there is no such thing as a "cheap" or "expensive" flavour, if lots of poeple like the way it tastes, then you can call it "good" wine. If lots of poeple say it tastes like arse, then it's "bad" wine.

  12. Here's to... by BrokenHalo · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...simplicity in wine labelling:

    "A fine-bodied Cabernet Sauvignon, with rich chocolate and blackberry notes. Will get you shitfaced."