The Wine Clip

[hollywood]

There are two questions: does the wine clip cause a real change in the wine? is that wine change perceptible by expert (or even non-experts)?

I'm no scientist but isn't there a way to determine this using an electron microscope or some sort of spectroscope?

[Suzanne F]

Of course there are real, physical ways to determine whether or not there are actual chemical changes. But Dennis is not interested in that, if I read him correctly. He's only looking for perception of change; to him, perception IS reality.

[Fat Guy]

If I perceive a difference in my subjective experience of the taste of wine when using the clip, does it really matter an iota whether that perception is, scientifically speaking, illusory?

Sure it matters. It matters because truth matters, and also because somebody is trying to get your money in exchange for this illusory effect. If it is truly illusory, you shouldn't have to pay money for it. You should be able to accomplish it with a pine cone or a ball-point pen.

Let me put it this way, G: if somebody started advertising that he had invented a special secret wine chant that, when incanted just before drinking, would make wine taste better, how would you react? What if that person said that in more than 2,000 instances he had observed people reciting the secret chant and then enjoying their wine more. How would you react to that claim?

Repeat the scenario with various other clearly nonsensical interventions: a flashlight, a magic wand, etc. That's all we're looking at here: the flimsiest of pseudo-scientific explanations ("the magic rays from the flashlight alter the molecular structure of the wine, making it taste smoother!") backed up by various retreats from science and objectivity. Next, we will start to see the attacks on science and objectivity themselves.

What we are looking at here is essentially a paranormal claim. We've seen all the methods of argumentation common to such claims: the pseudo-science, the retreat from legitimate experimentation, and the defense of placebos -- and we should be seeing the dismissal of science altogether pretty soon, unless people get bored with this.

[Alex]

If I perceive a difference in my subjective experience of the taste of wine when using the clip, does it really matter an iota whether that perception is, scientifically speaking, illusory?

Sure it matters. It matters because truth matters, and also because somebody is trying to get your money in exchange for this illusory effect. If it is truly illusory, you shouldn't have to pay money for it. You should be able to accomplish it with a pine cone or a ball-point pen.

Let me put it this way, G: if somebody started advertising that he had invented a special secret wine chant that, when incanted just before drinking, would make wine taste better, how would you react? What if that person said that in more than 2,000 instances he had observed people reciting the secret chant and then enjoying their wine more. How would you react to that claim?

Repeat the scenario with various other clearly nonsensical interventions: a flashlight, a magic wand, etc. That's all we're looking at here: the flimsiest of pseudo-scientific explanations ("the magic rays from the flashlight alter the molecular structure of the wine, making it taste smoother!") backed up by various retreats from science and objectivity. Next, we will start to see the attacks on science and objectivity themselves.

What we are looking at here is essentially a paranormal claim. We've seen all the methods of argumentation common to such claims: the pseudo-science, the retreat from legitimate experimentation, and the defense of placebos -- and we should be seeing the dismissal of science altogether pretty soon, unless people get bored with this.

Boy, all that studying for the Certificat de Mérite really paid off.

Seriously, though, I don't want to answer Dennis's claims with the same kind of "reasoning" he uses. I doubt, of course, that any sane person would claim that you can influence the taste of wine using a pine cone or a pen. However, the clip has the trappings of science, and so I believe that the scientific method must be used to debunk or support it. If you haven't been there yet, I suggest visiting Skeptic.com for more on this approach.

I'm not naive, so I don't believe that if our eGullet testers find no significant clip effect that Dennis will admit to the error of his ways and issue a recall. I do appreciate his making them available at no cost, though (I certainly wouldn't have bought one just to test it out) and I'm looking forward to completing our investigation.

[Human Bean]

What we are looking at here is essentially a paranormal claim.

FG nails it again. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[vengroff]

the magnets are not rare earth (last time I checked, this may have changed).

I'm not sure where you checked, but these are indeed rare-earth magnets. Your website even says so. But if you want more backup, there are plenty of other sites that can tell you all about them.

For example, with a quick web search you can find that the rare-earth elements are "any of a large class of chemical elements including scandium (atomic number 21), yttrium (39), and the 15 elements from 57 (lanthanum) to 71 (see lanthanides)." Neodymium, which has an atomic number of 60, is a lanthanide, and is thus a rare earth element.

Rare-earth magnets, so named because they are made from neodymium (as well as iron and boron) are, despite the "rare" label, quite readily available. For example, this one, a rod 0.25" in diameter and 1" long which looks to be about the size of the ones you use in your clip, costs $1.03.

Science is out there on the web, and it's not hard to find.

[Carema]

Maybe it is all these fermented turnips I have been dreaming about, but I am still not sure what this wine clip thing rememdies. The layperson wine drinker (not always ladies in my neck of the woods) often uses the term bitter to refer to all manner of different characteristics.

For instance, Kim ( a he not a she), special education teacher and all around nice guy often refers to wines high in acidity as bitter so we keep him out of Italy& other cool climates when he comes in thursdays for his two bottles. I could sell him a clip and he could put it on some Italians but I would rather just sell him three other bottles for the $79 bucks.

Another male customer feels as if tannin (specifically wood tannin, not fruit because I have asked him whether its his teeth or his throat) is bitter. So we keep him off the over oaky woody stuff.

Had a lady in who thought beaujolais was bitter- now we have a diehard Brachetto fan (she needs sugar and bubbles)- again just figuring out her particular perception was really all it took.

Forgive me for being a dense and tired Momma, but technically, what aspect of the wine does this product neutralize/improve/ vanquish? Does it elongate a shitty finish? I vanquish those kinds of wines buy not buying for the shop in the first place.

If this product promotes enhanced enjoyment of wine that is terrific. I just hate a life to be so mucked up with gadgetry however that a simple bottle of wine now requires 82 accoutrements in order to drink it.

There is a band called the Magnetic Fields. Has the Wine Clip considered contacting them to procure song rights? It could be pretty cool.

[Mark Sommelier]

Greetings, eGulletters. These are the results of 3 separate testing sessions conducted by me this week and the conclusions I drew. I invited co-workers, chefs, wine importers and friends to help evaluate The Wine Clip. Dennis was kind enough to send one quickly. I chose to use different methodologies for each test. I will explain each as I go on.

Test #1

Wednesday, October 8, 2003 at the Chef's Table, Michel Richard Citronelle, Washington, DC

For this test I gathered 5 participants, including myself. One chef (MR himself), one wine importer and two co-managers of mine. Since this was the inaugural test, 4 wines were selected and poured in sequence into identical glasses with the subjects watching. The first pour was un-clipped, the second clipped. The first two wines had been opened 20 minutes prior to the testing sessions. The wines were:

1 Martue "Especial" 2001, Castilla, Spain ( a cabernet-merlot blend)

2 Abadal 2000, Plada Bages, Spain (merlot)

3 Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Cru "Perrieres", Domaine Michel Guillon 2000 (pinot noir)

4 Fugue de Nenin, Pomerol 1998 (merlot-cabernet franc)

Changes were noted by 4 out of 5 testers in both Spanish wines. The clipped wines had a more subdued bouquet and a slightly more generous mouthfeel. This got the ball rolling.

The Gevrey-Chambertin exhibited the most extreme changes. The wine was poured right after the cork was pulled. The un-clipped glasses had beautiful toasted oak and cherry scents in the bouquet. The clipped glasses were observed to have a more subdued bouquet, the toastiness of the oak suppressed now. A slightly smoother edge on the clipped wine as the wine finished.

The Pomerol also exhibited changes, but not neccessarily for the better. Again, the bouquet was suppressed with the clipped glasses and the wine had an agreableness the un-clipped wine did not show at first. As the moderator, I asked these simple questions:

Do you notice a difference? 5 of us said yes

Does the wine taste better? 4 said yes, one no

Does this thing work? 4 said yes, one said no

Further observations: It was noticed that 10 minutes after the test, the differences in the wine specimens was much diminished and harder to detect.

Test #2

Friday, October 10, 2003, Chef's Table

One co-worker, one wine importer with the best palate I know.

This test was conducted blind. The subjects covered their eyes as the wines were poured. Two wines were selected:

1 Gevrey-Chambertin "Vielles Vignes" AOC, Domaine Michel Guillon 1999

2 Clos du Marquis, St. Julien, Bordeaux 1996

For the first round, with the Burgundy, I poured the wine into the same glass for each participant, that is to say, un-clipped wine went into glass 1 for each participant, clipped wine in glass 2.

I poured the wine into the opposite glasses for each participant on the second round with the Bordeaux, that is to say, the clipped wine went into glass 1 for one participant and glass 2 for the other one. As the moderator, after each round I asked these questions:

Which wine tastes better? In both cases the clipped wine was chosen.

Do you notice a difference? Both subjects said yes.

Does this product amaze you? Both subjects said yes.

Further observations: Olivier the Importer picked the clipped wine right away in both cases. He is the importer of the delicious wines of Michel Guillon, so he was familiar with the wine's characteristics.

Because I had mixed up the glasses among the subject, the other person initially was hesitant about her choice. When pressed, she admitted that she like the other glass better. I then told her that this was indeed the clipped wine . The pinot noir showed the most drastic change. Again, 10-15 minutes later, the differences were much harder to discern.

Test #3

Saturday, October 11, 2003, Citronelle Bar

For this test I invited the estimable DonRocks to be the subject. Don is the best blind taster I have ever observed. Two wines were selected for this test:

1 Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Cru "Perrieres", Domaine Michel Guillon 2000

2 Chateau Maucamps, Haut Medoc, Bordeaux, 1995

Two methods were employed for this test. The Burgundy was poured first. The subject left the room when the wines were poured, first un-clipped, then clipped. After examining both wines, I asked Don:

Is there a difference? He said yes

Which wine tastes better? He indicated the clipped wine initially.

For the second round with the Bordeaux, I poured 3 glasses, one clipped, two un-clipped. After examining the glasses, Don was able to identify the clipped wine. This is where the trouble started. He thought one glass was definitely clipped and he identified it correctly. One glass he correctly identified as un-clipped. It was that pesky third glass that caused consternation. He suggested that perhaps I had poured clipped and un-clipped wine into the middle glass. At this point, he left the room again and I shifted the glasses around. He was able to identify the clipped wine again. The other two glasses were ultimately decided to be not clipped.

I asked these questions:

Did the clipped wine taste better? He was undecided

Was there definitely a difference? He said yes.

Would you pay eighty bucks for this? He said "Hell no"

Since Don is a passionate winelover, we began a discussion about the morality or immorality of zapping fine wine with neodymium boron magnets.

Further observations and conclusions:

1) In all cases a difference was noticed between wines poured straight from the bottle and wines poured using The Wine Clip.

2) In most of the cases the clipped wine was thought to be better tasting.

3) In all of the cases it was observed that 15 minutes after the test had been conducted, the differences in the two wines were almost imperceptible.

Personally, I found it interesting that different kinds of wine reacted diffferently, with pinot noir the most extreme example. Only red wines were used in these tests. I intend to experiment with white wines in the near future. I demonstrated The Wine Clip with some customers one of the evenings. They were amazed at the results, too. I hope that these observations are helpful to those interested in purchacing this product. It does most of what the literature that comes with it says: it makes wine taste as if it has been breathing for 30 minutes. It does not make wine taste as if it has been aged for many years as purported.

Thanks for the opportunity to test this product.

Mark Slater

Chef Sommelier, Michel Richard Citronelle

Washington, DC

Bon Vin ne peut mentir !

(Good wine cannot lie )

[Schneier]

Wow.

I am impressed with your methodology, and quite amazed by your results.

Bruce

[Jason Perlow]

So basically its like a catalyst for the oxidation effect? However, do you really need to spend $80 on something that simply allowing a wine to breathe for 15-30 minutes will do the same thing?

Nevertheless I am impressed its not totally snake oil. I suppose there are some people out there that are too impatient to let their wine breathe. Hell I even know some people like that.

I suppose in a restaurant setting when people want to drink the wine right away, as opposed to drinking it at home, this may have some use.

[thewineclip]

the magnets are not rare earth (last time I checked, this may have changed).

I'm not sure where you checked, but these are indeed rare-earth magnets. Your website even says so. But if you want more backup, there are plenty of other sites that can tell you all about them.

For example, with a quick web search you can find that the rare-earth elements are "any of a large class of chemical elements including scandium (atomic number 21), yttrium (39), and the 15 elements from 57 (lanthanum) to 71 (see lanthanides)." Neodymium, which has an atomic number of 60, is a lanthanide, and is thus a rare earth element.

Rare-earth magnets, so named because they are made from neodymium (as well as iron and boron) are, despite the "rare" label, quite readily available. For example, this one, a rod 0.25" in diameter and 1" long which looks to be about the size of the ones you use in your clip, costs $1.03.

Science is out there on the web, and it's not hard to find.

vengroff:

read what i said...I know that my magnets are rare earth. I am unsure if my competitors are.

As for some of the other claims and comments made about me not caring about the science... There's nothing more I'd love then to hear how all the microscopes, telescopes and electron meters (if there is such a thing) conclude that The Wine Clip is a scientific breakthrough. From what I've read, there are many things about magnetics that remain a mystery. I think the wine clips effect on wine is one of them.

Fat Boy: I watched 2k people taste and smile. There's nothing more I can tell you. Get over it.

[Fat Guy]

I thought you were done posting.

In any event, when you say, "There's nothing more I'd love then to hear how all the microscopes, telescopes and electron meters (if there is such a thing) conclude that The Wine Clip is a scientific breakthrough," you're not saying anything. Put your money where your mouth is: hire an independent third party lab to design and conduct a true double-blind control-group study with all the tools of real science, and agree to accept the results. Anything else is simply mysticism.

[Fat Guy]

Mark, I hope you will work with some of the scientists on eGullet to design a better test. From a scientific standpoint, the tests you've done thus far would never be considered reliable. Let me just state some of the problems, and those with more training (I'm only a journalist who writes on occasion about such things, whereas we have several Ph.Ds and other qualified people on our site) can expand:

- The unclipped wines need to be poured through a placebo clip. In other words, they need to be poured through a clip that has had the magnets removed. This controls for other effects such as agitation, passive cooling, etc., that could result simply from clipping a piece of metal onto the wine bottle.

- The pourer needs to be unaware, until afterwards, which wine is clipped and which has been poured through the placebo clip. This eliminates any potential "tells" regarding which wine is supposed to be altered.

- Each bottle needs to be split in two and poured through the real and placebo clips. Otherwise, both bottles need to be independently tasted in their unaltered states and pronounced identical by an expert not involved in the actual test. This controls for bottle variation.

- A control group needs to be established. This group needs to be given all wines poured through the placebo clip. Any false positives from this group need to be used to statistically adjust the results from the test group.

[Fat Guy]

Mark Sommelier has posted the results of some tests he designed here.

[thewineclip]

I've heard it all. Why can't Fat Guy admit it works?

[thewineclip]

Fat Guy: Question for you...

Does a curve ball really curve or is it an illusion?

[Fat Guy]

I've heard it all. Why can't Fat Boy admit it works?

Because until you submit your product for independent scientific testing you'll be considered nothing more than a snake-oil salesman living off the droppings of false positives from various poorly designed tests.

As it stands, there has been zero scientifically valid evidence submitted for the efficacy of the Wine Clip. All there have been are testimonials based on tests whose designs wouldn't pass muster in a freshman science class.

Another tool of the salesman of paranormal products is, of course, the selective citation of test results. Even assuming Mark Sommelier's test had scientific validity, one important conclusion seemed to be:

Would you pay eighty bucks for this? He said "Hell no"

If you are to accept the test, you should also accept that nobody should buy your product. But of course you won't do that -- you'll take only the parts that support you. That's how predatory opportunism works.

[Fat Guy]

Does a curve ball really curve or is it an illusion?

I'm sure you have a point.

[ronnie_suburban]

Thanks Mark for both taking the time to conduct these tests and for posting the results for us.

I guess they don't prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) the effects of the wine clip but given your experience and the experience of the testers (as you described them) I consider them to be credible--especially in light of the specific discussion that generated the test(s) in the first place.

I look forward to reading about the results of the other tests too although I don't see myself as a potential customer of this product regardless of any test results.

=R=

[slkinsey]

Thanks for the report, Mark. These are indeed very interesting preliminary results, and do tend to support thewineclip's marketing claims. That said, the fact that the difference was observed to be almost imperceptible after 15 minutes does not bode well for the Wine Clip as a product for practical use. This would depend greatly on whether most tasters would prefer 15-minutes-in-the-glass unclipped wine over freshly poured clipped wine.

As Steven said, there are some things that need to be cleared up in terms of experimental design (the control group is particularly important). But this was a very well done first look, and one that merits further investigation. Very interesting indeed.

[Fat Guy]

I disagree, Sam. The above methodology would not even pass muster as a preliminary study designed to determine whether further study would be necessary or meaningful. Even preliminary studies need to be scientific in order for their results to be worth considering.

[tommy]

Put your money where your mouth is: hire an independent third party lab to design and conduct a true double-blind control-group study with all the tools of real science, and agree to accept the results.

that seems to be it. perhaps some of that 20k a month that's going to that PR firm could be earmarked for such a study. surely it would be a drop in the bucket.

[Suzanne F]

In the spitbucket?

[docsconz]

My testing done so far has been somewhat primitive from a truly rigorous scientific point of view, but the results so far have been opposite to those of Mark. I posted my first limited tasting on the other thread. The results were inconclusive. Today I had a test in which I used two tasters much less experienced than Mark's. I opened a bottle of 1996 Altesino Brunello di Montalcino and poured three glasses (one for me) without the wineclip then three identical glasses with the wine clip. The pourings were done with the tasters out of the room. They were called back in and tasted the wines in front of them. Only I knew which wine was which. I asked them to taste each wine without identifying which was which and then to say if there was a difference between the glasses and which was "better". Both tasters identified a difference, however, both said the better glass was the non-clipped wine. I tasted both samples and could not reliably say there was a significant difference. A few minutes later, neither taster was able to discern any noticeable difference in their glasses.

My initial conclusion is that there may be a "difference", but that it is not necessarily "better". Upon being asked if the "better" glass was indeed the wine clip glass (they were not), would the diference be enough to influence a purchase of the device, both tasters stated a definate "No".

These tests are certainly not definitive in determining the efficacy of the product. I plan on continuing to trial it with additional tasters, wines and pourers (so I can be more of an official unbiased taster).

[tommy]

unless i missed something, "better" in this case means "less tannic". is less tannic always "better"? does the clip do anything that a big fatty steak won't do?