Defect acceptability, similarity to a target profile and personal preference should be measured separately.
For personal blending, liking remains a legitimate objective when explicitly distinguished from the specified target.
Keep independent quality gates and target-fit scores in the blending workflow; an enjoyable departure from target is not automatically a successful target match.
Researcher synthesis grounded in Hill & Jack (2023), chapter11. Linked Literature Note provides exact chapter evidence. Not a tested consumer blend result.
Atomic idea
Defect acceptability, similarity to a target profile and personal preference should be measured separately.
Reasoning
Keep independent quality gates and target-fit scores in the blending workflow; an enjoyable departure from target is not automatically a successful target match.
For personal blending, liking remains a legitimate objective when explicitly distinguished from the specified target.
Provenance
Evidence:
Connections
Uses existing approved retrieval tags. This is a research synthesis, not an experimentally established recipe or claim of reproducing a premium bottle.
Maturity checklist
Maturity remains Developing pending broader synthesis and any applicable trial evidence.
Whiskey and Philosophy connection — 21 September 2026
Dalton, chapter 12, pp. 195–202, distinguishes conformance to a production standard from product design and customer fit. Burnham and Skilleås, chapter 8, pp. 137–150, supply a philosophical account of relational evaluation. These arguments complement the existing blending evidence without replacing its empirical basis.
Whiskey and Philosophy — Judgment, tasting language and critic scores
Further implications
Aesthetic evaluation explains relationships beyond a descriptor list