“A dozen of us began with a Chardonnay served, as you might guess, in a Riedel Chardonnay glass. A few sniffs and sips later, we poured the wine into one of those small glasses commonly used by restaurants and bars. The effect was striking. The bouquet seemed much weaker and the taste sour, as the smaller glass’ shape directed the wine away from the tip of our tongues, where our sense of sweetness lies.”

The rest is here:
http://www.grapewallofchina.com/2007/08/08/riedel-a-glass-of-any-other-shape/

To me, a key difference between the Riedel and the smaller non-Riedel glasses was in terms of aromas – I found more of them when using the former. I wonder if wine might taste better in those bigger Riedel glasses because, when we take a sip, we also take in more aromas? Not sure, but I *did* end up buying new glasses — 22-ounce Stone Island ones about the same size as the Riedel I used, but costly only USD1.50 per piece.

Cheers, Jim Boyce

Hats off to Daniel Zwerdling for such a smart, thoughtful piece! It makes me sad to think Gourmet will soon be a thing of the past.

Yes, true, there is a lot of regurgitating. I guess I was wondering if “crowdsourcing” might catch something like this that didn’t seem to pass the sniff test. Clearly those journalists involved in the events at the end of “Shattered Myths” did more than simply regurgitating; they didn’t even respond to requests for clarification. At least in a blog, someone could post a comment.

I guess my comments as to the newness of the story were based on our discussion from a couple of years ago when it was not available. Glad it is now.

Sorry that Gourmet’s closing brings an end to an outlet for this type of wine writing on display in this piece.

When it comes to wine glasses, it’s hard to argue science or practicality because so much of the appeal is purely aesthetic: the people you’re drinking with, the quality of the food you’re consuming, the music in the background, what sort of mood you’re in… After a round of boxing or karate practice, a slug of whiskey or stein of beer might be refreshing, but that glassware is going to survive your adrenaline rush and your taste buds aren’t going to care one way or the other.

I think you have to be at least somewhat relaxed and meditative to truly appreciate wine, and the finer, more delicate stemware can only be handled and used properly when you’re in such a state. Likewise, if you care about the appearance of your overall table, it’s an art form to provide the proper glasses for the proper courses.

And one tiny correction: Zwerdling’s piece has been available on the gourmet.com site for quite some time.

Dave/The Wine Mule – yes, I didn’t comment on that part of the story in the post but the closing section does reveal, as you point out, a shocking display of journalistic ineptitude. I wonder whether today, in an time when blogging is more important, such a “scientific” story would be simply regurgitated whole or actually verified?

Having said all that, as long as people are happy with the deal they’ve struck and know what that deal is, then all’s well. Many people probably think the ability to serve wine in a Reidel is worth its cost and fragility. I wouldn’t begin to second-guess that decision.

Second, because I was shocked at the unseemly eagerness of the press to report a finding that would support the status quo, to the point of not returning the calls of the original study source! I must be some kind of idiot; I always thought reporters were supposed to be skeptical.

I have a small collection of Baccarat glasses. They set one hell of a lovely table. Yes, they are all for show. One does not taste better out of them if you are blindfolded, but if context matters, and I believe that it does, even for folks like me who claim to know better than to believe that it is the wine that is changing, then showy stemware does have a place.

Over the years, I have tried out all kinds of tasting glasses and have switched brands several times. For the last decade and a half, however, we have tasted, in our blind sessions, with Riedel Overture Reds. We taste all varieties that way, and we are satisfied that this glass represents the wines extremely well.

Even bubbles. We drink bubbles out of showy glasses at every occasion, but we taste them with Overture Reds and they probably show better in those glasses. But, context is important, and sitting around drinking, as opposed to tasting analytically, we like drinking from showy sparkling wine glasses.

Now, as to the Riedel tastings. They are not to be taken seriously–except for this. No matter how you slice it, good wine glasses are a lot better than poorly designed glasses.

But, at the Reidel tasting, Georg Riedel trotted out first his oversized Burgundy balloon with the round, so-called “chimney” top edges. Yes, Burgundy did taste good out of that glass. And then he treated us to claret out of an oversized claret glass. It worked just fine.

What came next was not supposed to happen. We, being the bad boys we were sitting in the last row, poured out the Burgundy and poured the claret into the Burgundy glass. And the claret showed far more nose in the Burgundy glass than in the claret glass. But it tasted the same.

So, for me, I have concluded that wine tastes better out of different shaped glasses because those glasses look good–not because they taste good.

She says she gets nothing from the Joker glass; people agree. Were she to say she got the same level of intensity from that glass, can you guess what people would do? Yup, probably agree with her.

That being said, I do like holding a Riedel (or Spieglau, or the 2.98€ glasses I can get at restaurant supply stores here in Paris) better than the cheap $1 tasting glasses. That’s just aesthetics, though, isn’t it? And has little to do with the wine. Though it helps the whole experience…