Plum Wine One Year Later - New Scoring! 

Probably would be evening time EST 😉

Technically the old scoring is just taste.

Can you explain why? The new system goes over the important aspects and grades on that. The old was just "did you like it" and "give this a very precise number based on if you like it today".

@@CitySteadingBrews of course. It's simpler in my opinion (the old system). Often times I won't reach for a brew because clarity or intent (as examples). Repeatability made a lot of sense and taste. Maybe there could be a way to keep the new in depth scoring and add the old 1-11 system. I love your content and I don't want this to come off as harsh criticism, I like keeping it simple and taste driven. The new system certainly has merits, but I just prefer the old way

More precision is defeats the purpose though. Let me explain: Let's say I give a 7 on something. If I tasted it on a different day, it could be a 6, or even an 8. But, on the new system, that's a 4, for all three, meaning, above average or good. Any finer description is just bias and ultimately meaningless. So 1-11 has 22 points of score in it. That's quite a lot. Especially when those points are so close together, but... a 7.5 vs a 7. Does that really make much difference? I don't think so, especially in a system that is based on personal preference.

@@CitySteadingBrews you can do whatever you prefer, I just like the old way. It certainly doesn't disrupt my enjoyment of it, I just like it better personally.

Thank you. We put a lot of thought into it, and I agree with what you said, and created it for those reasons!

The lack of precision is the idea. A half point can vary from day to day on the same beverage. But it's still "good" or "great".

We do have a spreadsheet on our website of all the scores. Personally, I don't find the scoring to be important. The words we say should matter more, but people like numbers so we use scores. I'd just do away with them, personally, but we have received feedback to the contrary 😁

@@CitySteadingBrews fair enough, I guess it's hard to quantify quality in general 😂. Thank you for taking the time to reply, love you guys, I could watch hours of you two talking just about anything lol.

Exactly, quality like this is difficult to put a half point precise number that people will overanalyze on! 🤪. Joking, but it's true.

This is a new ststem. Just started using it.

Though the Shandy video that came out a few days ago also had the new system.

Thanks. Huge investments of time and money to make it work!

I believe we do.

Loads of time and lots of tastings!

Yeah, not sure about adding that though. Seems we can just talk about it.

It's a tried and true way to solve a problem!

@@CitySteadingBrews just hoping no bugs found their way in . Was possibly exposed for up to 3 hours. Honey is too expensive to waste Guess we just wait and see

Probably fine. Bugs cannot live in CO2, so they may be turned off by it during a really aggressive fermentation.

Can we make "blew the bung" a common euphemism? For over enthusiastic activity resulting in a negative outcome? Or is homebrewing too niche for it to catch on?😂

I would rather not.

Yup!

We actually used to add them at the end of videos and no one watched!

We are working on something that does this 👍

Tldr: I see no issue with extracts and flavorings!

Nope. Would just have less honey flavor I would imagine.

ha!

Not really. I do prefer in conditioning as I have more control over it.

Yup, we have done it several times.

I would rather not.

I don't think the powder works in a fermentation, but, you could make an extract from it, by putting it in vodka for a few weeks.

We did have good results with this extract: a.co/d/0fFRZm8B

@@CitySteadingBrews Thanks for the tip. I'll let you know how it works.

Not likely. We don't know any local and don't generally invite strangers to our home. 😀

@@CitySteadingBrews OK - zoom then - maybe some of your admins or ??? Just a thought

Not for a live show, no. Definitely not a stranger for a live show. Our admins? Maybe? They don't really want to be on the show afaik.

Why do you want another brewer on for a live show if I may ask?

The only thing I was thinking, a third opinion and comments on brew on a one year tasting . A person who's a part of your contributor base - those you acknowledge already who might be interested in a zoom. So if they were not in person you'd have to ship (?) a bottle to the invitee? Again just a thought

Maybe? Dunno, haven't had that!

Ok. The issue is... you cannot be precise about a bias. So, out of 100, or even 10, that's a very fine point of dlineation. 7 to 7.5. It's just about the same, and that's the idea. We have had people performing statistical analysis on our scores, not even taking into consideration a 6 one day is a 7 on another. But both are a 4 on the new system, making their differences have absolutely no meaning. I can't even imagine trying to decide between 71 and 72 for a score. The point was to say, "Bad, below average, average, good, and great". What more do you really need?

@@CitySteadingBrews When you reduce a Measurement Scale... You also reduce the relative information. For example... if you changed it to only a rating of 1 out of 3 stars: Bad, OK, Great The person hearing these scores, on such a limited scale... isnt getting a relatively in depth idea about what the product is actually like. A 5 star may be a bit more in depth... but... its still a Limited depth scale. When you bump that up to a 10 scale... your brain actively recognizes the boost in the scales difference. Before typing this reply... I was thinking about how many words that are to describe something. Its a LOT more than a mere 5 words. Maybe something is "Good", but not quite "Perfect", nor even "Very good". Maybe its somewhere between good and very good (pretty good ?!). What if its beyond Very good... but still not "Perfect" (Extremely Good ?!). So you see... Just between "Good and Great" per your listed ratings... there can still be a lot of variance (Depth) between these Values. SO while a rating between 1 and 10 is still a limited scale.. its a scale that the brain easily recognizes, with just the right about of Depth / Resolution, to create a relative Idea, in peoples minds. That doesnt happen with a 5 star rating system, IMO. Its too low of a resolution for that. With rating... its ALWAYS going to be a personal opinion. And the thing is... Opinions also can change too. Taste in particular, are very unique to the persons Palette. Ive theorized, that there are people whom enjoy some very "Funky" tasting foods... because they are not fully able to register / detect / taste... the same level of "Funk" (if at all). Of course, we have discovered that some people think that Cilantro taste like Soap... due to their actual Genetic differences. The point being... is that you shouldnt care about some Autistic Statstititions think, about your Ratings... to the point of changing your ratings. Are they even making any of your mead/wine recipes ? If anything, maybe create a publicly accessible Google Spreadsheet, with all of the ratings... and, actually slide them up and or down the list... depending on how you feel. For example... if you think the Peach Wine, which was at position 50 in the list... is inferior to the new Cherry Mead.. then slide the Peach wine down to position 51... and put the Cherry into position 50 (of course, if its arguably worse than whatever is at position 49). You might even have a 2nd spreadsheet, for others whom have made these recipes, to give their own taste ratings. That said... Its your show, and your opinions.. so do as you will. Im merely stating my own perspective on the issue.

We are actually working on something along those lines!

This is not a typical plum wine.

It all factors in. I can't give something a 10 if it looks like soup and smells off, can I?

Not really relevant to the channel but we met when we were both professional photographers at a convention and other events.