Gothamist: Decanter’s Anonymous

Murray on the Hill

Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:24:20 -0500

Mr. Sigfried, Thanks for your reply. I have a couple comments. "Pour half of your next bottle into a decanter, leave the other half in the bottle: after a few minutes, taste and decide for yourself. Why take the word of anyone else?" Because of the power of suggestion and the fact that many people don't know what they're doing when tasting wine. Even those that allegedly know what they're talking about get this stuff wrong. I'm no expert, and I'd like to know from someone with authority as to what is actually happening. I'd prefer proof that there is a change, rather than subjective claims of efficacy (placebo affect and all that). My bias is to wait for the proof before claiming that something works. With decanting, the "flavor" aspect seems questionable. Or, at least there are significant voices that say broad claims of its effectiveness are whooey. And I don't put myself beyond the power of suggestion. I'm sure you've seen this in your own experience: It's pretty easy to convince a novice wine drinker of almost anything about the wine they're drinking. Jerk Expert: "Can you taste the charcoal? *snicker*" Novice: "Um, yeah. Now that you mention it." I, being an above average quantity consumer of wine (and unqualifiedly, "an authority"), can probably do that 9 out of 10 times (if I tried). People are insecure about their wine tasting abilities. One can tell a lot of people something early on, and they'll never shake it. They'll repeat it ad nauseum. I know if you told me there were rasberry flavors in a particular wine, I'd take it as gospel even if I couldn't detect them. While it's pretty well settled that opening the bottle and leaving the wine in there does nothing, people have believed, and continue to believe that it does do something. Clearly, they heard from someone that it does do something, tried it, and still couldn't tell. So, when I hear that almost every wine can benefit from decanting, as the Gothamist post seems to claim, I'm very suspicious. Moreover, even the experts don't always know what they're talking about. Indeed, for years, French wine experts claimed that the oh-so-special terroir produced the best wines in the world. It could never be duplicated! Silly Americains! With exposed labels, these experts could go on and on about the superiority of French wines. But, get them into some blind tastings, and American wines started winning. My question for you is: which wines will have a taste/flavor benefit from decanting, and how long must they be decanted for those benefits to be realized?

slang

Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:25:21 -0500

hey, that's interesting and useful. i'm going to go decant some wine now.

Darrin Siegfried

Mon, 23 Jan 2006 21:24:01 -0500

I wrote and taught the curriculum for the Sommelier Society of America's Wine Captain's Course, (also not Joe Shmoe's Wine Tasting School) and spent a few years as a Sommelier. Decanting does, indeed, help red wines to open up and taste "softer". Pour half of your next bottle into a decanter, leave the other half in the bottle: after a few minutes, taste and decide for yourself. Why take the word of anyone else? Simply opening a bottle to let the wine "breathe" is foolishness: the surface area of the wine exposed to air is smaller than the diameter of a penny. ("Don't pour it. Let it sit and breath" really means "I'm too cheap to order a second bottle for the table, so don't pour until the entrées are here.") Pouring the wine slowly straight down the middle of the decanter allows the wine to come into contact with air. Don't forget the pleasure factor: it's just more elegant to pour wine from a crystal decanter than from a bottle, isn't it?

Murray on the Hill

Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:19:10 -0500

A number of years ago, I took a wine tasting course at Cornell's hotel school (i.e., not Joe Shmoe's Wine Tasting School), and the professor said that decanting and letting the wine "breath" was, essentially rubbish. Decanting was for getting rid of sediment and that's pretty much it except for the rare wine here or there. Indeed, his opinion was almost the opposite of "There seems to be this misconception that decanting is just for expensive, older wines. However most people don’t realize that many inexpensive and youthful wines can greatly benefit by spending some time in the decanter." Maybe he was too conservative in its usefulness. But even wine specator says it's pointless to decant in a restaurant for flavor. http://www.accomacinn.com/menu_wine.shtm "Letting wine breath: Here is another truth. Uncorking red wine in a restaurant in advance of service is unlikely to have any effect on the taste of the wine. The reason for uncorking wine is to allow the wine to be exposed to air. This breaks down the tannins and smoothes the taste. The time this takes to happen is too long for your short stay in a restaurant, and, so, you can expect no effect from this age-old ritual; so don't worry about getting that bottle open early. If you want to decant, do so to remove sediment or because you have a handsome decanter, not because it improves the wine taste." So, to be generous, I would say there is disagreement in the value of decanting for flavor. I think the bulk of authority holds that it's not particularly useful generally outside of removing sediment and for a limited number of wines and for long periods of time. Indeed, a lot of authority stands in stark contrast to this post and is trying to rectify the misconception that _all_ wines (or a large number of them) could benefit from breathing/decanting. This post seems to be dredging that myth back up.