[Tart Cherry Jam]

In January 2024, I bought a Nespresso Vertuo machine and with it, a bunch of different espresso pods with which I make latte with added protein powder. Later I learned that one could reuse a pod to make two shots which is what I have been doing. Very economical. Now I have almost run out of pods and on the website of Nespresso, chosen the cheapest pods of various kinds and have them in my shopping cart, waiting for Black Friday deals. I am only choosing the pods that are the cheapest.

When I had more expensive pods from that initial large purchase – single origin, organic, what not – I could not tell the difference between them. They are described with those very interesting adjectives but for the life of me, I cannot identify these qualities of their taste or texture that these interesting adjectives are supposed to describe.

Now, with wine (which I do not drink anymore after last year my internist convinced me during a physical that all the supposed health benefits are purely associational and there is no causation), I could not taste the adjectives that describe wine. I could not taste "oak", "fruitiness" and all the rest.

On perfume reviews sites, people go on and on describing the scents in great detail. Yes, I get what vanilla smells like (and dislike it), what fruity is (and dislike it), but I do not get all the rest. And the list of adjectives and nouns is insanely long, so I wonder, where do people learn that vocabulary? And then there are top, middle, base notes of a fragrance. And I cannot imagine that all the reviewers have gone to school to learn that, so either they pick up this knowledge somewhere (where?), or... is it Emperor's new clothes?

Either that or somehow I lack the perceptive faculties that other people seem to have.

When I was a teen and then a young adult and still drank champagne in small quantities at events and celebrations, I knew that I preferred dry and disliked sweet. Brut which means extra dry was the best (or to be more precise, the least bad – I did not particularly like all champagne and am happy without it in my life now). But that distinction, between dry and sweet, is basic – it is like telling what is sweet and what is not which of course I can do. It is not about tasting "oak" or "cherry" in wine.

So... do I totally lack perception finesse or is this all Emperor's new clothes?

[unaluna]

Coffee - it all tastes bad to me. I only drink it for the caffeine and the chocolate and the cream and the sugar!

Wine - i can discern a quality wine. I like Chateauneuf du Pape, or a blanc de blancs. But the most i could say about their flavor is that they are not watered down. Many poorer wines are so tannic.

Perfume - i prefer powdery, or floral, or spicy. I think you have to look to the classic scents, and i wonder if there has been a good one created since the 1980s. I think the cost has become prohibitive. I am stuck at Opium and Lauren, Anaïs, Tatiana, Chloë, and what came before.

I will answer your other question in due time. Thanks for asking.

[DocJohn]

I look at it like I'd look upon any hobby. I think that some people (many?) can learn, practice & develop the skills necessary to find these subtle differences, leading maybe to a greater appreciation of them over time. I think that most people, however, find a flavor (or smell) profile they like and kind of stick to that throughout most of their life.

I've found I can now differentiate between certain things like tasting notes after a lifetime of drinking a certain beverage. But yeah, it took close to a decade of doing it and it's also because I really appreciate and enjoy what it is I'm drinking. If you're kind of "meh" to whatever it is you're drinking (or smelling), I don't think you'd have much incentive or interest in developing what constitutes "oakiness" in a wine, for instance.

It's just like a really good musician can hear when someone plays or sings a bad note or something off-key. It's a hobby interest that people develop the skills necessary to enjoy it fully.

If you're just an occasional enjoyer of the same thing, you're not necessarily ever going to have the same experience in order to describe or enjoy it the way the hobbyist does. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that when you look at it as though it were a hobby. It's just a hobby you don't have any particular interest in other than occasionally enjoying.

[MuddyBoots]

Hang around stoners and you'll hear the phrase "this lemonhead hubba bubba is aptly named."

Like DocJohn said, if it's something you get really into, you start being really familiar with different senses regarding whatever it is. Say someone's looking for a new guitar. If they're new to strings, they're not going to be super knowledgeable on what sounds and feels good to them compared to someone who has played anything from a Yahama found in a hoarder's basement to a Les Paul that they put hundreds into modifying to be just right.

I will say that doesn't necessarily mean that to an expert x will always be better than y. There's a lot of personal preference in anything, and with wine tasting there was an experiment I think where they had experts do a blind test and basically the $10 wasn't always shyttier than the $1000 bottle. I mean, Billy Corgan's guitar was so cheap it whistled when he stopped playing, but that made the cool sounds in Mayonaise (mandatory link)

[Tart Cherry Jam]

That makes sense. I have never given enough time, effort or repetition to even come close to a hobbyist in these matters. But I also wonder... I am not tone deaf but close to it in music. So, maybe there is something neurological in not having the discernment ability outside music, too.

[MuddyBoots]

Originally Posted by Tart Cherry Jam

That makes sense. I have never given enough time, effort or repetition to even come close to a hobbyist in these matters. But I also wonder... I am not tone deaf but close to it in music. So, maybe there is something neurological in not having the discernment ability outside music, too.

Some people are, however, naturally better "sensors." There's a personality theory (Myers-Briggs) that says we have cognitive functions in different strengths (feeling, thinking, sensing, intuition) that can be either extroverted or introverted. Strong extroverted sensors (MBTI types ESxP and to a lesser extent ISxP), under this theory, are the most skilled at observing physical sensations.

It's very pseudo sciencey but it's fun

Fragrantica.com....Some of the serious cologne-heads are hilarious.

excerpt: "The opening is a burst of invigorating lavender, creating a sense of crisp refinement right from the start. As it evolves, the heart reveals notes of rosemary, geranium, and mint, adding depth and freshness with a hint of complexity. These herbal elements are perfectly layered, giving the fragrance a rich, full-bodied presence without ever feeling overpowering."

Cracks me up this stuff. Most comments thankfully are helpful.

[splitimage]

I find I'm better at discerning between flavours somewhat selectively. Coffee I can tell the difference between different types for strength and primary flavours but that's about it. Wine, back when I was drinking I definitely had a preference for some varietals over others, for example I loved pinot grigio but couldn't stand chardonnay as it was too oaky for. me.

[Tart Cherry Jam]

I, too, liked pinot grigio, also called Pinot gris, but not Chardonnay. So I understand that. But I would not have been able to say that the reason I disliked Chardonnay was because it was too oaky. So that part is still mysterious for me.

Cologne heads! Hilarious!