Scientists Only

Sound feasible.

A Bedini clarifier produces similar results.

That's science for you!

And all you need to do is plug this special power lead into your nad and it will smell like an arcam


........

quote:

Originally posted by Bananahead:
And all you need to do is plug this special power lead into your nad...

Left or right?

I'll get me jump leads out.

Jono

On a serious note, I am shocked that something so slapdash has appeared in the New Scientist.

I've never read so much bollocks, and it makes me wonder whether reading other articles in magazines like that - which I used to respect - are equally misleading and sensationalist, but I haven't realised because it's not my area of expertise.

But this is. I've passed the Master of Wine (MW) exams and have spent years studying the science of wine. Shortcutting the ageing process by methods from pasteurisation to shaking (like those paint mixing machines) is not new. But nor does it, or could it ever, make a bad wine into a good one, any more than the passing of time does. The proponents of the machines, systems and devices don't usually claim such a thing either.

I could fault practically every paragraph of that article ("esters", for example, are not created by anything other than nature), but consider this particular nugget:

"No fewer than five wineries have now invested in the technology...Pass an undrinkable, raw red wine between a set of high-voltage electrodes and it becomes pleasantly quaffable."

So five wineries are confessing that their wine is raw and undrinkable, and at the same time paying (presumably quite a bit) in order only aspire for it to be to 'pleasantly quaffable'?

I've tasted vintage Port from the barrel and it is delicious. Time only changes wine, it does not make something undrinkable into something quaffable, pleasant or otherwise.

Perhaps to know how much rubbish is in that article you need only realise that this process is and can only ever be, applicable to red wine. The word 'red' doesn't get mentioned until the fourth paragraph.

All five of these wineries are in China. Doesn't really make that clear, either, does it?
Regurgitated PR twaddle being passed off as science. I shall not be buying the New Scientist again.

My friend Dr Jamie Goode may have a thing or two to say about this I reckon, and I thoroughly recommend his excellent website if you want well balanced, factually correct and interesting information about wine.

Santé

Rod

PS I have yet to taste a particularly good Chinese wine, although they are now in the top 10 producing countries volume-wise. They still have a long way to go. Time machines of any description will not allow them to circumvent vineyard ageing and years/decades/centuries/millenia of experience

quote:

I've never read so much bollocks

The sort of language one would expect from a scientist or a MW?!?

There's a much simpler, foolproof way of making poor wine taste very acceptable, nay positively quaffable!

Just drink two bottles of good wine beforehand. Works for me...

I thought it was as simple as the "fine" wines being those that are more rare and made in less numbers. Supply and demand.

quote:

There's a much simpler, foolproof way of making poor wine taste very acceptable, nay positively quaffable!

Just drink two bottles of good wine beforehand. Works for me...

In my youth a friend first once drank the bad wine first and with speed so he could then sit down and enjoy the good wine in calm splendor. As you have already guessed, he never got to the good wine...

JohanR