The notion of wine quality has long been entangled in a paradox: it is simultaneously revered as an art form shaped by human expertise and dismissed as an arbitrary construct vulnerable to bias. This report challenges the entrenched belief that wine quality is inherently subjective, arguing instead for a framework where quality is rooted in verifiable, reproducible metrics. By synthesizing insights from chemical analysis, machine learning models, and critiques of traditional sensory evaluation, we propose that wine quality can—and should—be democratized through objective standards.
Wine characteristics are the fundamental traits that define a wine’s taste, aroma, and overall quality. The five basic characteristics of wine are sweetness, acidity, tannin, body, and alcohol. The general consensus has emerged around the Basic 5, easily identifiable not only by wine experts but also by wine enthusiasts. These characteristics aid in recognizing and appreciating each wine's unique qualities and creating a memory print for a wine that a person finds pleasurable. And it is the ideal combination, the harmony of the 5, that defines the perceived quality or enjoyment factor for a layperson.
Climate and weather significantly influence wine quality. Cooler climates produce wines with higher acidity and lower sugar and alcohol content. Temperature and sunlight affect grape growth, flavour, and colour development, making them crucial factors in determining wine quality. Environmental factors shape regional wine styles, resulting in unique and distinct flavour profiles. Weather conditions, such as frost and drought, can have a direct impact on wine quality, affecting grape growth and flavour.
Winemaking practices, including maceration, fermentation, extraction, and aging, influence wine quality and can greatly impact the final product. For example, the use of oak barrels can add complexity and depth to a wine while also influencing its flavour and aroma. Consistency is key in the winemaking process, with skilled winemakers able to coax the best from their grapes. The use of sulphur dioxide and processing enzymes can also contribute to wine quality, helping to preserve the wine’s natural flavours and aromas.
Evaluating wine quality involves assessing its complexity, balance, typicity, intensity and finish. Higher quality wines have a more complex flavour profile, with numerous layers and a lingering finish. Balance is key in wine quality, with each component balanced and harmonious. Typicity refers to how much a wine looks and tastes like it should, with certain wines having a distinct typicity.
Grape variety, wine’s grape, and wine’s body are all factors that influence wine quality. The use of specific grape varieties, such as Cabernet Sauvignon, can result in distinct flavour profiles and higher-quality wines. Light-bodied wines, such as Pinot Grigio, can be just as complex and nuanced as full-bodied wines, such as Cabernet Sauvignon. The winemaking process, including the use of oak barrels and aging, can also impact wine quality.
Tasting wine is an essential part of evaluating its quality. Skilled palates can identify and appreciate each wine's unique characteristics. But taste alone is not enough. This is like the equivalent of asking a visually impaired person to assess the visual beauty of something. Yes, the other senses are heightened, and one can make an assessment based on touch, smell, and taste, but this is incomplete.
The increasing adoption of technology, lab analysis and continuous experimentation are super important in elevating wine quality. A little over a year ago, we toured the onsite lab of Frind Estate Winery. The state-of-the-art lab, sitting atop the production facility, blew us away. But this required a 7-figure investment that is not available to most wineries. However, this allows the winemaker, Eric von Krosigk, to test continuously, whereas other wineries send their samples to the lab once every so often.
Understanding wine characteristics and identifying the different traits that make up a wine’s flavour profile greatly enhances tasting enjoyment for a layperson. Most wine lovers classify wines by their fundamental traits to learn about their own personal tastes and identify the wines that they enjoy the most. Identifying wine characteristics helps one develop a deeper appreciation for the art of winemaking and the craftsmanship involved in creating high-quality wines.
Regional wine styles are shaped by environmental factors, resulting in unique and distinct flavour profiles.
Wine quality begins at the molecular level. Volatile acidity, chlorides, total sulfur dioxide, sulphates, and alcohol content form the bedrock of physicochemical stability and sensory profiles. High volatile acidity (>0.8 g/L) correlates with vinegar-like off-flavours, while sulphates (0.5–1.0 g/L) enhance microbial stability and mouthfeel. Alcohol content (>13.5%) amplifies perceived body and sweetness, but excessive levels (>15%) disrupt balance. Modern Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectroscopy quantifies these parameters with 99% reproducibility, enabling labs to authenticate the origin and detect adulteration. NMR spectroscopy utilizes the magnetic characteristics of certain atomic nuclei to identify the physical and chemical properties of atoms or molecules.
Yet chemistry alone cannot explain why two wines with identical profiles receive divergent expert scores.
The romanticized concept of terroir—the interplay of soil, climate, and tradition—dominates quality narratives. Regions like Bordeaux and Napa Valley leverage terroir to justify premium pricing, yet studies show chemical markers (e.g., tartaric acid ratios) often fail to align with geographical claims. This is not to say that terroir is not important. Terroir is super important, but the linkage is one of correlation rather than causation.
Correlation means two things happen together, but one doesn’t necessarily cause the other. Causation means one thing directly leads to another. Example using organic farming and wine quality:
Reputation and scarcity further distort perceptions: limited-production wines command higher ratings despite comparable chemistry to bulk alternatives.
To believe that terroir is the "sole", "primary", "key" determinant of wine quality is to believe that Earth is flat. If this were the case, we would never have had the rise of the Super Tuscans, the Judgement of Paris, or the continuous emergence of 100-point wines from the New World and emerging wine regions.
Terroir is often correlated with high wine quality, but the relationship is more nuanced than simply saying, "Great terroir equals great wine." While soil, climate, and elevation play critical roles, mastery and community also shape a wine’s success.
Malcolm Gladwell’s 10,000-hour rule suggests that true expertise comes from deliberate practice over time. The world’s most celebrated wine regions—Burgundy, Bordeaux, Barolo, Champagne—aren’t just geographically blessed; they are home to winemakers whose families have honed their craft for generations. Their deep understanding of terroir has been developed through centuries of trial, error, and refinement.
In the greatest wine regions, winemaking is rarely a solitary pursuit. Instead, it thrives on collaboration, shared knowledge, and competition. Vignerons in Burgundy, Champagne, and the Mosel exchange insights on vintage variation, soil management, and sustainable practices. This communal wisdom elevates the collective quality of the region’s wines.
Regions with long-standing reputations—like Bordeaux or Napa—command prestige, leading to financial investment in vineyard management, research, and innovation. This cycle of improvement makes their wines even better over time, reinforcing the idea that terroir itself is the sole factor behind their quality.
Terroir alone doesn’t make a great wine—time, mastery, collaboration and continuous experimentation refine it. The world’s best wine regions are not just "blessed" with great terroir; they are built on thousands of hours of dedication, a deep respect for land, and the shared wisdom of passionate winemakers.
Sensory panels, such as Ontario’s VQA tasters, operate under strict protocols to assess "typicality" and defect thresholds. However, inter-rater reliability remains problematic. In a study of 304 Spanish wines, expert ratings diverged sharply from lab analyses: SO₂ levels deemed "faulty" by chemists were praised as "complex" by tasters.
This dissonance undermines the notion of expert objectivity, exposing ratings as amalgamations of personal bias and market trends.
Wine scoring systems perpetuate inconsistency. Critics using "objective" scales (e.g., weighted aroma/taste metrics) produce ratings incompatible with those employing holistic "expertise-based" methods. For example, a 90-point wine from Critic A may share more chemical similarities with Critic B’s 85-point bottle than with another 90-point wine. Such variability renders scores meaningless as quality indicators, reducing them to marketing tools.
Regression models and random forest algorithms now predict wine quality with 91% accuracy using 11 physicochemical variables. Key findings:
High-resolution ¹H-NMR creates digital fingerprints for wines, detecting adulteration (e.g., added sugar or water) at 0.1% precision. When paired with blockchain-ledgered data—recording pH, alcohol, and volatile compounds—consumers could independently verify quality claims via smartphone apps, bypassing expert intermediaries.
Resistance persists among sommeliers and critics whose authority relies on mystique. A 2024 study found that 68% of experts dismissed algorithmic ratings as "soulless" despite models outperforming human tasters in blind tests. Cultural narratives equating complexity with quality further skew perceptions; wines with layered tannins and oak receive higher scores, even when chemical thresholds for astringency are breached.
Appellation systems (e.g., EU PDOs) prioritize tradition over chemistry. Bordeaux’s mandate for Cabernet Sauvignon dominance ignores climate-driven shifts in optimal varietals, penalizing innovators who adopt drought-resistant grapes with superior analytical profiles.
The wine industry stands at a crossroads: cling to romanticized subjectivity or embrace evidence-based quality standards. By mandating disclosure of physicochemical data (volatile acidity, sulphates, etc.) on labels and pairing it with AI-driven ratings, producers can empower consumers to judge quality independently. This shift would not eliminate artistry but ground it in reproducible metrics—a Riesling’s crispness quantified as pH <3.2, its terroir validated via NMR trace elements.
The best wine is not the one scored highest by "experts", but the one whose quality is verifiable by all!
Copyright © 2024 Vinerra Corp.
