As someone who ran a wine-tasting group for several years I can tell you this: there are definitely discernible differences between wines. What there is not, however, is any kind of absolute standard for what constitutes a "good" wine. Different people like different things. There are two things that makes wines expensive, and neither of them necessarily correlates with whether a particular wine will taste good to you:
1. Old wines cost more because you have to pay for the storage.
2. Low-production wines that have an affluent following cost more because supply and demand.
And that's it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with you if you if you prefer a Gallo Rhine Wine in a box to a Romanee Conti.
That said, there is definitely a skill and an art to being a Sommelier, and that is the ability to take someone's description of what they like and match it to what's on their wine list. There is no such thing as a "good wine" independent of any particular person's tastes (except if you have a wine that has, say, turned to vinegar) but there is definitely such a thing as a good sommelier.
My dad tells the story of how he went to a shop to pick up some wine when they were being economical, and was in the "value" section. A wino of the classic type approached and pointed out the (I believe it was) Franzia.
"That's the good stuff," he said, then added confidentially: "...doesn't give you the shakes."
My dad bought the box and many more over the years. Never got the shakes. Quality is relative!
> the ability to take someone's description of what they like and match it to what's on their wine list
Absolutely, I worked in a wine store for years and it was always awesome having a customer come back and buy more bottles of something I recommended.
> What there is not, however, is any kind of absolute standard for what constitutes a "good" wine. Different people like different things.
This is me with Eastern U.S. wines. I understand that conventional wisdom poo-poos Vitis labrusca (even though it saved European wine!) but I do love foxy wines from that region.
Old and scarce wines you have to pay for because there just are only so many bottles to be had. You pay for the craft, where it came from, the heritage, the tradition, and for the fact that there's a limited supply that has an expiry date as well. You pay for the privilege of drinking that and reducing the finite supply.
It's like people buying a vintage car. It's worth a lot more than the sum of its parts. Because there might only be a handful left to buy. And it might have been owned by interesting people. It goes to the highest bidder. Same with a original paintings by some of the old masters. You might not be able to tell them apart from a good forgery or replica. But they are one of a kind and that drives their value. Scarcity.
Wine snobs of course are just that, people pretending to taste subtle differences that would probably fail a blind test. But there are undeniably wines that are very tasty and wines that are very much a bit bland and underwhelming (or hangover inducing). And there's a wide variety of different wine with very different flavor profiles that are pretty easy to tell apart. So, with some training identifying the difference between those is not that hard. There are grape varieties, yeast varieties, different aging and blending methods, soils, climates, etc. A good sommelier will be able to tell those apart. And a regular drinker will also taste the difference. And a wealthy drinker will seek out the rare experiences that are there to be had in the form of overly expensive bottles that provide just that.
I'm perfectly happy to drink cheap wine and I do so regularly. The mass produced stuff tends to be stable in quality and perfectly drinkable. I live in Germany and I noticed my local supermarket has Rumanian wine from only a single vendor (red, white, and rose). Affordable price and I figured they would not bother stocking it if it was really bad. So, I've tried them and while it's not amazing, it's very drinkable. There are also some local German wines that seem popular and are very drinkable. When in doubt, go for the bottles that are nearly out of stock. Trust your fellow drinkers to know a good bar-gain.
I do enjoy the occasional expensive bottle where you take a sip and notice that "hey this is some really tasty stuff". Not sure if I would pay 40 euro for it but I do enjoy it when I get served some. And I'll spend a bit more when I have dinner guests.
> Low-production wines that have an affluent following cost more because supply and demand.
Champagne region produces some astonishing volume of sparkling wine, like hundreds of millions of bottles per year. Any given bottle of sparkling from Champagne costs approx. 2 times more than cremant of the same quality.
1. Old wines cost more because you have to pay for the storage.
2. Low-production wines that have an affluent following cost more because supply and demand.
And that's it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with you if you if you prefer a Gallo Rhine Wine in a box to a Romanee Conti.
That said, there is definitely a skill and an art to being a Sommelier, and that is the ability to take someone's description of what they like and match it to what's on their wine list. There is no such thing as a "good wine" independent of any particular person's tastes (except if you have a wine that has, say, turned to vinegar) but there is definitely such a thing as a good sommelier.