The Wine Clip -- review from Dan's Data

[Robaato]

The Australian tech review site Dan's Data reviewed the Wine Clip a couple of years ago. You can read his review here. Dan did consult w. Randi, after which the Wine Clip people stopped replying to his e-mails. ;) He also found a practical use for the thing, amazingly enough.

[Zep]

Any linky-thingy??

[Robaato]

Oops...:boxedin:

http://www.dansdata.com/wineclip.htm

[Zep]

An Aussie reviewer, no less!

And good to see he found a genuine use for the product after all.

[a_unique_person]

And his Review has link to one of Randi's commentaries.

http://www.randi.org/jr/030703.html

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

I don't claim to be any kind of amazing wine expert who can sense dozens of complex tastes in my wine (and come up with pretentious descriptions of an alcoholic beverage), but I do enjoy wine a great deal, and I like trying new wines. It strikes me, however, that whoever designed the wine clip probably isn't all that familiar with wine. Not all wine is even meant to be aged a great deal. There are many wines (Beaujoulais being the one that most comes to mind) that are not meant to be aged beyond when they are sold, and in fact will taste worse upon aging. The idea of aging a "young wine" only works if you happen to come across a young wine that is meant to be aged. And that isn't all that likely, being that most wineries release their wines somewhere around the point that they are best to drink.

[Hastur]

As I understand it, most wines are intended to be consumed within a year of purchase save really REALLY good (and really REALLY expensive) French wines that are meant to be consumed in ten years.

[Piggy]

When faced with the "to age or not to age" question, I find myself turning again and again to the timeless advice on the Thunderbird bottle: "Serve very cold".

That usually solves everything.

[rjh01]

This is not the first time we have discussed this issue.
Can a magnet age a liquid 10 years in 10 seconds (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=38593)

[Robaato]

Dan's Data has got a lot of cool articles up in addition to his hardware reviews. For example, this bit (http://www.dansdata.com/magnets.htm) on rare-earth magnets is quite intriguing...I'd like to play around with the ferrofluid mentioned near the end.

[Piggy]

this bit on rare-earth magnets is quite intriguing
Wow. Well, that explains a lot. See, I've been wearing Goode Wraps (http://www.200.com/) for a while now. I especially love my magnetic underwear (http://www.200.com/compr2.htm). But the pain-reducing properties are sometimes counter-acted by large metal objects flying off shelves and into my crotch. :eek:

[Strider1974]

I forwarded Randi's article along with the link to the Wine Spectator Magazine. Here is the response I received

To whom it may concern:

It has come to my attention that Robert Catania is claiming that Wine
Spectator has endorsed his product called the Wine Enhancer. This is not
true.

We did receive a test product, and we did indeed test it, in an informal
way, and wrote up our results. Below is the complete text of our report:

"Yes, it was fun to ridicule the girl down the hall in college who wore
black, burned incense and swore by the healing power of crystals. But how
would you feel if it turned out she was right about magic and the strange
forces of the universe? That's how we felt when the Wine Enhancer--a heavy,
funky-looking resin coaster containing about a dozen different metals,
crystals and stones--arrived in the mail. Its creator, Robert Catania, a
hotel and restaurant owner in Sandwich, Mass., claims that the device helps
soften the tannins and lift the aromas of red wine by simply having the
bottle placed on it for 10 minutes. "It's energetically bringing in a
combination of Orgone energy, zero-point energy and then the frequencies of
the crystals and the gemstones. And the enhancers tweak that energy as it
comes in," Catania claims. Yes, it sounds crazy--as if putting a cup of
coffee on your mouse pad rather than directly on your desk will make it
taste different. But we conducted several blind tastings with different
wines and different tasters, comparing a control glass with a glass poured
from the bottle after it was placed on the Enhancer. In each case, there was
a slight but obvious difference, with the tannins in the "Enhanced" wine
being softer (much to the skeptics' chagrin). Was the wine actually better?
Some thought so, some didn't. And be warned: hour-plus "charging" on the
Enhancer basically turned the wine to mud. Of course, as they say in product
legalese, your results may vary. Only one thing is guaranteed: with its $149
price and unusual appearance, the Enhancer is definitely a conversation
piece."
Unfiltered, posted August 5, 2005 on Wine Spectator Online

Our bottom line: the device did seem to affect the wine, though our tasters
disagreed on whether the changes were positive or negative. In any case, we
make no claim that our tests were definitive. However, at least we tried it
-- which seems to be more than some critics have done.

Mr. Catania should refrain from any claims that Wine Spectator has in any
way verified the effects claimed for the Wine Enhancer, or that we endorse
it in any way. However, we would be interested to learn of results of any
other tests that have been done, but supporters and skeptics alike.

Sincerely,

Thomas Matthews
Executive editor
Wine Spectator

[Gr8wight]

we conducted several blind tastings with different wines and different tasters, comparing a control glass with a glass poured from the bottle after it was placed on the Enhancer. In each case, there was a slight but obvious difference

Our bottom line: the device did seem to affect the wine, though our tasters
disagreed on whether the changes were positive or negative. In any case, we
make no claim that our tests were definitive.

Thomas Matthews
Executive editor
Wine Spectator

I suspect Mr. Matthews' tests were not as blind as he might have thought.

[Blue Mountain]

I suspect Mr. Matthews' tests were not as blind as he might have thought.
The tasters probably suspected or knew the second glass they tasted was the "treated" one.

[Silly Green Monkey]

Or, they assumed. P&T did a show where they tested a bunch of women to see if they were more attracted to the twin with perfume or the twin with pheromones. They all chose the second twin as the more attractive.

Also may be related to the same effect that woos use when pushing some enhancer or claiming microwaves destroy taste. They always give you the altered sample second. Could explain why some thought the unaltered stuff tasted better. Did they monitor which drink was chosen as the best each time?

[Flange Desire]

I forwarded Randi's article along with the link to the Wine Spectator Magazine. Here is the response I received...

As they took the trouble to respond, I wonder whether it may be possible to interest them in this proposal ...

WSM could produce a large high-profile article 'The straight dope on wine enhancers', wherin they subject many supposed wine enhansers to properley controlled double blind testing.
They could give it a big build up, and angle it as 'finally putting an end to the debate about how well they work', or some such blurbspeak.

Help and assistance developing a protocol could be offerered.
Help in running the tests and compiling the results could be offered.
Possibly it could be performed (and publicised by them) as a joint effort with JREF or some other skeptical organization.
If they can be conviced that the skeptical organizations are respectable and have a large audience, then they may well be interested in the free publicity.

It would take effort, but would be a huge win for critical thinking.

But I guess it will never happen due to the loss of advertising income,
and fear of treading on toes.

$0.02

Strider: If you haven't already, you could send WSM this thread link.

PS, off on hols for 2 1/2 weeks. see youse later.

[Strider1974]

Strider: If you haven't already, you could send WSM this thread link.

Done

[gruk]

As they took the trouble to respond, I wonder whether it may be possible to interest them in this proposal ...

WSM could produce a large high-profile article 'The straight dope on wine enhancers', wherin they subject many supposed wine enhansers to properley controlled double blind testing.
They could give it a big build up, and angle it as 'finally putting an end to the debate about how well they work', or some such blurbspeak.

Help and assistance developing a protocol could be offerered.


A test protocol I think[ is suitable is that (for each wine/enhancer), three glasses are poured, labelled A, B and C. First, a glass is randomly selected as "for treated wine", the other two glasses are poured, the wine enhancer is applied in the appropriate manner and the third glass is poured. After that, place the glasses on a tray, with a sealed envelope with "treated glass identity". Send in a fresh observer and send off everyone that have observed the initial pouring.

The glasses are then brought to the taster, who tastes the glasses and pronounces which one is different.

Main problem here is that the three glasses will have had different exposure to air, so it may be that one has to have two bottles of the same wine and treat one of the bottles, leaving the other untouched.

[pgwenthold]

Our bottom line: the device did seem to affect the wine, though our tasters
disagreed on whether the changes were positive or negative.

Call me stupid, but doesn't the fact that "some are positive, some are negative" basically average out to say that there really is no effect, and it's all easily explained by saying the testers were just guessing?

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

Call me stupid, but doesn't the fact that "some are positive, some are negative" basically average out to say that there really is no effect, and it's all easily explained by saying the testers were just guessing?
Well, I think they're saying that is always has an effect, but it doesn't always actually make the wine taste better; sometimes it makes it taste worse than it did before.

The point is, if using one of these things one a bottle on wine would make it taste like motor oil, it would still be an unexplainable effect, and the manufacturers would be $1,000,000 richer.

[Mechbob]

I keep seeing these goofy wine enhancers in stores. Every one has directions saying "open bottle in normal way, etc." Well, I buy wine in plastic one gallon jugs and there is no normal way to open the pesky things, so I just use my electric drill and put some holes in the top and drink it "au naturaule".
OK, seriously now:
What isn't said is that it is preferable to let wine "breath" for at least 20-30 minutes before drinking to let the wine "mellow" and "find it's legs". Thus, if you open the wine bottle, implace, or attach your gizmo and wait for the magnets to work, aren't you simply allowing to wine to "breathe"? I would have thought the so called wine experts would have noticed. Ahh, but wait, they were invited to a wine tasting, with food! No sense in insulting your generous host by telling him his invention is a waste of time!

[Starrman]

What isn't said is that it is preferable to let wine "breath" for at least 20-30 minutes before drinking to let the wine "mellow" and "find it's legs". Thus, if you open the wine bottle, implace, or attach your gizmo and wait for the magnets to work, aren't you simply allowing to wine to "breathe"? I would have thought the so called wine experts would have noticed. Ahh, but wait, they were invited to a wine tasting, with food! No sense in insulting your generous host by telling him his invention is a waste of time!


This particular item clips to the neck, and claims to age the wine several years as the wine is poured. So all of the action happens as the wine flows through the neck of the bottle. So, for this item anyway, the breathing is irrelevant.

[Ted C]

I've researched this product a couple of times since Randi first mentioned it -- once after it first appeared and again when they changed their description of how it works on the website. If you Google "Wine Jip", you'll probably find my blog articles.

In a nutshell, their original description of the operating principle was inherently contradictory. They said that the Wine Clip caused no chemical change to the wine, when a chemical change is actually *necessary* to get the kind of "softening" that you get from aging the wine.

Their update to the Clip's operating principles simply threw in a lot of vague nonsense to make it a less testable claim.

[Mongrel]

As an mild derail I would like to declare that it was that article, when it was first written, that led me to these boards :)

I thank you for you time