WELCOME TO MY WEBSITE — IT IS FREE TO ALL WINE-LOVERS — AND OTHERS — TO PERUSE AND — HOPEFULLY — ENJOY. However, this work is copyrighted and the redistribution — sharing — of any reviews and stories on is not permitted without permission. But you can read more detail about this sort of stuff here. stuffIf you’re Copyright licences — a.k.a. reproduction rights, I.P. licences — may be purchased by wineries, distributors, and retailers who think my work is worthy and wish to use these reviews for marketing purposes. More detail on this can be found here. In the meantime, thanks for your consideration and please enjoy your wines of choice in moderation. Tim White
Unless otherwise indicated all wines reviewed on this site have been assessed in half-blind, peer-group line-ups. This has long been my preferred process for assessment. I’m of the view that sighting a label will significantly influence what's perceived — or not — no matter how reasoned or experienced the taster. Also: I enjoy the challenge placed on one's assumptions that comes with evaluating wine in this manner. It does slow down workflow, but I consider this an important part of the process too. We may well be able to ’taste’ fast, but wines sometimes take a little bit longer to reveal themselves.
You'll note that I publish two ratings for each wine reviewed. The score out of 100 (e) is my ‘empiric’ appraisal founded on many years of rigorous and — and wide-ranging — sensory assessment, where examples of benchmark wines are filed away in palate memory. Although I’d add here that there remain many gaps in my personal reference library. My ‘hedonic’ (h) score is more personal and owes a portion to a delightful little volume by food psychologist, Robert McBride, titled The Bliss Point Factor (Sun Books, 1990). You’ll also find detail about the conversation that stimulated my hedonic x empiric approach in the back-story here.
I believe that the two marking systems provide a more nuanced approach to ‘rating’ wine, and other flavour experiences. You might also notice that sometimes my ratings, both empiric and hedonic, are appended by another in brackets. This indicates one of two of things. If I’ve stated in the review something like — ’this would benefit from a five year spell in the cellar’ — then the bracketed score is how I feel the wine will benefit from a little more time in bottle, even a short period. However, the number may also indicate that I’m vacilating: that if I were asked — when judging at a wine show, for example — whether I'd promote a wine up from, say, a high silver to a gold, then I would. It’s best to be positive and encourage effort I reckon, although I don’t adhere to the points generosity of many Aussie wine ‘critics’ — where some seem to start at 95/100 and ascend further, especially if the producer is of some reputation. My words should make these distinctions clear.