the sensory detection threshold of individual compounds. Some of the disparities may be due to the nature of the panels of tasters: trained, untrained, experienced, inexperienced, age, gender, cultural background, etc. In fact, although one might expect that wine tasting ‘experts’ would be very sensitive to common aromas and flavours, it has been noted that they can show high olfactory detection thresholds for some key wine compounds, which is far from ideal when assurance of wine quality depends on fault detection at low levels [1]. Another challenge lies in the use and understanding of tasting lexicons, aroma, and taste descriptors. Whether described odour categories are innate or learned depends on the influence of language on odour processing. The question may be raised as to whether olfactory description systems are basic linguistic arrangements based on the taster's experience and exposure to expert lexicons [2].
Even if the primary purpose of a tasting assessment is to determine possible faults, a taster must be able to undertake a complete and thorough assessment of the wine, and the techniques and structure of doing this to ensure that all characteristics are examined, as detailed in this chapter. Some fault compounds, particularly haloanisoles, should result in rejection by a professional taster, at any level. However, there are other ‘fault’ compounds whose presence, particularly at a low level, may not lead to the rejection of a wine. It will depend upon the matrix of the wine and the relationship with all the sensory characteristics, including the wine's structure and balance. Some characteristics are sought after as part of the identity of certain wines but may be unacceptable in others. For example, the ‘struck flint’ and smoky notes of benzenemethanethiol, also known as benzene mercaptan, are almost a trademark of a classic Pouilly‐Fumé (Sauvignon Blanc) from the Central Vineyards of the Loire valley. Such aromas would be unacceptable in a Vouvray (Chenin Blanc) from Touraine, further down the river, so context is crucial. Of course, wine tasting encompasses a degree, sometimes a large degree, of subjectivity but following a rigorous tasting structure, together with subsequent comparing notes and opinions with colleagues, helps the taster reach an honest and balanced assessment, including whether some characteristics are indeed faults or flaws.
Some of the information in this chapter is based upon content from Wine Production and Quality 2nd edn. by Keith Grainger and Hazel Tattersall [3]. This material has been revised and expanded. Many additional topics related to wine tasting are discussed in further detail in that work.
Every wine drinker is, to a greater or lesser extent, a wine taster. However, most wine consumers taste and drink the product without much thought other than whether or not it is enjoyable and meets their expectations. The wine lover gives the wine a more detailed appraisal and considers balance, complexity, and typicality (in the wine world very often referred to as tipicité). Neither is looking to find a fault, although if present, it may scream out and prohibit all enjoyment of the wine. The trade student, oenologist, winemaking consultant, or quality control manager have a much more detailed agenda in their tasting assessments and will follow a consistent and rigorous structure. The detection of any fault or flaw is an essential part of such tasting analysis.
The selection of tasters, for making professional judgements will encompass many criteria, including expertise in the types of wines to be assessed. There is an International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) standard for such selection: ISO 8586/2012: General guidelines for the selection, training, and monitoring of selected assessors and expert sensory assessors [4]. This standard is under review at the time of writing and is due to be replaced by ISO/CD 8586. ISO 8586/2012 defines expert sensory assessors as ‘selected assessors with a demonstrated sensory sensitivity and with considerable training and experience in sensory testing, who can make consistent and repeatable sensory assessments…..’ Key to an individual's suitability is being able to perform with precise accuracy and, crucially, reproducibility. Of course, a long‐term sensory memory is essential to make reliable comparative judgements.
2.2 Anosimics, Fatigue Effect, and Supertasters
2.2.1 Anosmics and Fatigue Effect
An anosmic has no sense of smell, and somebody with this condition is sadly precluded from being a capable wine taster. However, even amongst wine lovers and professionals, some people are specific anosmics, i.e. lacking the ability to detect one or more individual odorants. Further, tasters can become victims of fatigue or the adaption effect. When regularly or continuously exposed to particular odours, the sensitivity to them is reduced, sometimes completely lost. Professional tasters should be regularly monitored to ensure they remain sensitive to odorants commonly found in wines, and in particular, to fault compounds.
2.2.2 Supertasters
Some people have tongues with a high density of fungiform papillae and other papillae, which contain the taste buds, making them particularly sensitive to bitter sensations. This is probably on account of genetics. The psychologist Linda Bartoshuk, formerly of Yale University and latterly Presidential Endowed Professor at the University of Florida, defines these people, who perhaps comprise 25% of the population, as ‘supertasters’. The work done by Ann Noble, the inventor of the ‘wine aroma wheel’, at UC Davis also established that there are no ‘supertasters in general’. An individual who is a supertaster with one bitter compound, e.g. naringin(e), might be a non‐taster with another, e.g. 6‐N‐propylthiouracil (PROP), or caffeine. It should be noted that supertasters do not necessarily make the best wine tasters, for the intense sensations they perceive from bitterness and astringency, impacts on other sensations and perceptions of the balance of a wine.
2.3 Tasting Conditions, Equipment, and Glassware
2.3.1 The Tasting Room
For any detailed and professional assessment, and particularly when checking for faults and flaws, it is important to taste in suitable conditions. The ideal tasting room will have the following characteristics:
Large: Plenty of room is necessary to give the taster his or her personal space and help concentrate on the tasting;
Light: Good daylight is ideal, and the room (if situated in the northern hemisphere) should have large, north‐facing windows. If artificial light is required, the tubes/bulbs should be colour‐corrected so that the true appearance of the wines may be ascertained;
White tables/surfaces: Holding the glasses over a white background is necessary to assess the appearance and show the true colour and depth of colour of the wine, uncorrupted by surrounding surfaces;
Free from distractions: Extraneous noises are undesirable, and smells can severely impact on the perceived nose of the wines. Tasting rooms should be sited away from the winery, avoiding all the smells of the vat room and cellar, together with kitchens and restaurants. This is vital that when tasting wines for suspected faults, as ambient odours will have a severe impact on the assessment process and sensory detection thresholds. There is no doubt that building materials, decorations, furnishings, and people all exude odours. Indeed, identical wines can be perceived differently according to the surroundings in which they are assessed. Tasters should avoid wearing aftershaves or perfumes, and smoking should not take place in the vicinity;
Sinks and spittoons: Spittoons, regularly emptied, are essential (see Section 2.3.2.4) and sinks for emptying and rinsing glasses are desirable.
There is an ISO standard for the design of tasting rooms: ISO 8589:2007 Sensory analysis – General guidance for the design of test rooms [5].
2.3.2 Appropriate Equipment
Having appropriate equipment for the tasting is most important. This includes an adequate supply of tasting glasses,
