左圖 W. W. Scherkenbach 《戴明修練 II) (台北:華人帶明學院,1996)。p.289 英國啤酒風味輪,當年公賣局的兩位專家/朋友幫忙翻譯,很感激、思念他們。
右圖是某台北咖啡店的包裝紙及其上的 flavor wheel (2020 中一中1971級22班同學會謝兄之禮物,引起一番討論。.....近日台灣茶的 flavor wheels都容易見到。
The Oxford Companion to Beer definition of
The Oxford Companion to Beer definition of
flavor wheel
Flavor Wheel is an internationally accepted tool that describes in a graphical wheel format the flavor terminology of beer. It serves to standardize the terms used in descriptive analysis of beer and enables brewers to communicate effectively about flavor. The original wheel named and described 122 separately identifiable flavor notes (in 14 classes) that can occur in beer. The system was developed from 1974 to 1979 by a joint working group consisting of the Master Brewers Association of the Americas, the American Society of Brewing Chemists, and the European Brewery Convention and stems largely from the input of the late sensory evaluation scientist Dr Morten Meilgaard.
On the wheel each separately identifiable flavor characteristic has its own name; similar flavors are placed together and no terms are duplicated for the same flavor characteristic. The goal is to provide a reference standard compound to be used in spiking (titrated dosing with flavor-active or aroma-active compounds) of beer samples to convey the meaning of each term. This aids in the training of sensory panelists.
From the simplified figure of the wheel it can be seen that the inner portion consists of 14 classes of components. As an example, Class 1 is aromatic, fragrant, fruity, and floral. The first tier then represents the more specific flavors that appear within that class. Class 1 is broken down into alcoholic, solvent-like, estery, fruity, acetaldehyde, floral, and hoppy descriptors. A four-digit code is also applied to those descriptor terms. The class and first-tier terms contain common terminology familiar to most people and thus form a vocabulary to fulfill nonspecialist needs. A second tier, not shown in the figure, further refines the flavor notes and becomes more specific and specialized. For example, the term “estery” from the aromatic/fragrant class (Class 1) is subdivided into distinct esters such as iso-amyl acetate, ethyl acetate, and ethyl hexanoate. The other second-tier terms are also subclassified into the distinct flavor notes within the respective groups. Additionally, components are also classified into more diversified physical odor, taste, mouthfeel, warming, and after-taste/flavor sensations.
As terminology and understanding of beer flavor components grow, so, ideally, does the Beer Flavor Wheel. Recently collaborative committees are redefining the wheel to include more aged/oxidized beer flavors, the concept of mouthfeel, and newer, more style-specific flavor components. The time may have come to split up the wheel into several subwheels to better define the new terminology.
Wiki
A fragrance wheel, also known as aroma wheel, fragrance circle, perfume wheel or smell wheel, is a circular diagram showing the inferred relationships among olfactory groups based upon similarities and differences in their odor. The groups bordering one another are implied to share common olfactory characteristics. Fragrance wheel is frequently used as a classification tool in oenology and perfumery.
The first example of a fragrance wheel was conceived by Austrian perfumer Paul Jellinek and titled the Odor Effects Diagram, published in the original German edition of his book The Practice of Modern Perfumery (1949).[1] Other notable versions include the Fragrance Circle, developed in 1979 by U. Harder at Haarman & Reimer, the Wine Aroma Wheel, from 1984 by sensory chemist Ann C. Noble, and the Fragrance Wheel, created in 1992 by perfumery taxonomist Michael Edwards.[2][3][4]
Fragrance Families and Personality[edit]
Various suggestions have been put forth about the relationship between a person's favorite scent family and their personality. Stephen V. Dowthwaite, founder of PerfumersWorld, claimed that "Our choices in perfume are influenced by [...] the image we want to portray." According to Dowthwaite, very feminine personalities gravitate toward Florals while very masculine personalities prefer the Woody family. Young people tend to like fruity, creamy, and vanilla scents, young adults prefer citrus and metallic scents, and mature adults enjoy heavy white flowers and Chypres. Elegant, sophisticated personalities enjoy aldehydes, powdery notes and leathers, while earthy, practical personalities prefer tobacco, spice and green notes.[5]
Michael Edwards' Fragrance Wheel[edit]
Developed by a perfume expert to help retailers and consumers, Edwards' wheel consists of a primary scent (Woody, Floral, etc.) divided into blended subcategories. Each of the subclasses were in turn divided into Fresh, Crisp, Classical, and Rich compositions. Prior to 2010 Fougère family was placed at the center of this wheel.[6]
In this classification scheme, Chanel No.5, which is traditionally classified as a "Floral Aldehyde" would be located under Soft Floral sub-group, and "Amber" scents would be placed within the Oriental group. As a class, Chypres are more difficult to place since they would be located under parts of the Oriental and Woody families. For instance, Guerlain Mitsouko, which is classically identified as a chypre will be placed under Mossy Woods, but Hermès Rouge, a chypre with more floral character, would be placed under Floral Oriental. Originally they are:
Fougère | Floral | Floral |
---|---|---|
Soft Floral | ||
Floral Oriental | ||
Oriental | Soft Oriental | |
Oriental | ||
Woody Oriental | ||
Woody | Mossy Woods | |
Dry Woods | ||
Fresh | Citrus | |
Green | ||
Water |
With the publication of Fragrances of the World 2008, two new sub-groups: Fruity and Woods, have been added to the wheel.[7]
Fougère | Floral | Floral |
---|---|---|
Soft Floral | ||
Floral Oriental | ||
Oriental | Soft Oriental | |
Oriental | ||
Woody Oriental | ||
Woody | Woods | |
Mossy Woods | ||
Dry Woods | ||
Fresh | Citrus | |
Fruity | ||
Green | ||
Water |
The chart was again modified in 2010, moving the Aromatics/Fougere group to between Citrus and Dry Woods to synchronize the chart with recent studies on smell perception.[8][9]
Floral | Floral |
---|---|
Soft Floral | |
Floral Oriental | |
Oriental | Soft Oriental |
Oriental | |
Woody Oriental | |
Woody | Woods |
Mossy Woods | |
Dry Woods | |
Aromatic | |
Fresh | Citrus |
Fruity | |
Green | |
Water |
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ^ Jellinek, P. (1949) Praktikum des Modernen Parfümeurs, Vienna
- ^ Harder, U. (1979). Der H&R duftkreis. Haarmann & Reimer, Contact, 23, 18-27.
- ^ Noble, A.C., Arnold, R.A., Masuda, S.D., Pecore, J.O. Schmidt, and P.M. Stern, “Progress towards a standardized system of wine aroma terminology.” American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 35 (1984), pp. 107-109
- ^ Edwards, Michael. Fragrances of the World. Sydney, N.S.W.: Fragrances of the World, 1992. Print.
- ^ "The Art and Technology of Perfumery Bangkok March 2012". PerfumersWorld (Video). DAY 4: 4-01--Perfume and Personality. Retrieved October 8, 2019.
- ^ ab Edwards, Michael (2008), Fragrances of the world 2008, Michael Edwards & Co, ISBN 978-0-9756097-3-6
- ^ Boberick, Mark David (2010-03-30), "Sniffapalooza Magazine Exclusive interview with Michael Edwards Fragrance Expert and Author of "Fragrances Of The World"", Sniffapalooza Magazine
- ^ Zarzo, Manuel; Stanton, David T. (2009), "Understanding the underlying dimensions in perfumers' odor perception space as a basis for developing meaningful odor maps", Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71 (2): 225–247
- ^ Donna, Laura (December 2009), "Fragrance Perception: Is Everything Relative?", Perfumer and Flavourist, 34: 26–35
- ^ Edwards, Michael (2011), Fragrances of the world 2011, Michael Edwards & Co
沒有留言:
張貼留言