The cheese may mask the difference between vintage and expensive but at the other end of the market nothing can hide the really cheap stuff, even after having drunk to much - so I am told .... Anyway, I voted to disagree with the statement.
I'm with capt_courageous - buy on an apple & sell on cheese. The oiliness of the cheese will mask imperfections, soothing an acidic or tannic wine.
It might close the gap between wines. But the article doesn't say that wines are indistinguishable - only that flavours are "suppressed". It would help if we knew how much they were suppressed - a little or a lot?
So a group of expert tasters can't detect as much boiled cabbage, or Victoria plum, or freshly cut grass after a mouthful of Canadian cheddar. Does that matter? It matters whether you enjoy your cheese & wine. You might get away with serving a lesser wine with cheese (hence the advice), but you'll still appreciate a more complex wine unless the cheese is overpowering.
I think in practice it all depends on the cheese, and on the wine, as well as on the ambience and how you are feeling at the time. Enjoyment of wine is subjective, and depends partly (largely?) on emotional factors.
Enough! Back to my glass! (Julienas, since you ask, but about to switch to the dry Marsala...)
[ QUOTE ]
Shite wine is still shite wine, with or without cheese!
Personally I prefer port with cheese, and you can tell the difference in flavours then! so why not wine! /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
[/ QUOTE ]I have never understood gratuitous bad language. Why not poor/bad/low quality/nasty... or any of the multitude of synonyms not carrying such an offensive tang? /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif