undefined | Better HN

0 pointsDaishiman2y ago0 comments

This is a myth that's been perpetuated by a single bad study that lacks any credibility whatsoever.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

kurthr2y ago· 2 in thread

Yeah, and it's pretty easy to test by just buying two (a red and a white) bottles and trying yourself. Of course most red food dye the wrong color and you would probably taste it if you used that much... so just blindfold your self and try.

The lack of tannins, malolactic fermentation, and often the lack of oak will make it pretty obvious they are different. It's like saying you can't taste the difference between a Guiness and a Bud, because you've never had them before? Maybe you don't know which is which with a blindfold on, but you can taste the difference.

dagw2y ago

To be fair, there exists white wines with tannins, oak and even light skin maceration which, if coloured red, could confuse some people inexperience with those types of whites.

kurthr2y ago

Certainly, Grenache comes to mind as a red varietal/preparation that could be confused with some whites. There aren't many common (cheap) white wines with much tannin, perhaps some heavy contact SavBlanc, but that nose is so distinctive that it would be hard to confuse?

My point is mostly about the $3-10 wines which have pretty simple notes. They have very particular styles and relatively restricted grape varietals due to cost, availability, and customer expectations. I'm sure for the right money a good winemaker could take the right white grape and make it taste like a cheap red without the color (lots of skin contact, malolactic fermentation, heavy oak, and some age. On the other spectrum, I'm sure you could screw up and make any wine/grape so terrible you couldn't tell what it came from.

There are also people who couldn't tell the difference between a pilsner and an ale, I suppose.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse