Follow the character.
Then measure it.
Flavor develops through the grain and its treatment. A useful sensory test tells you what the malt contributes—and where the evidence stops.
Which kind of character are you looking for?
Illustrative tasting questions drawn from the site’s descriptions—not measured profiles or promised outcomes.
Click a term for its definition and anchor status. Record additional observations in your own words.
Four cups. Three different jobs.
Illustrated sample codes for one preparation at a time. Repeat the setup separately for hot steep and reference-mash wort. These are teaching examples, not an actual randomized session.
Candidate comparison tests a malt difference.
Reference malt provides a stable comparison. Physical descriptor anchors calibrate the vocabulary.
Hidden duplicate shows within-session scoring consistency; it does not create an extra independent sample.
Where does the note appear?
A pattern narrows the question. It does not prove a chemical mechanism, the origin of a fault, or safety.
Record an observation.
Use the proposed GFB-SML draft v0.1. Choose a descriptor, record a single assessor’s observation and download it. All 26 terms are available.
0 = not detected under the stated conditions. Blank = NA, not assessed. Use 0–15 in 0.5 steps. Intensity is not liking, quality or a release decision.
What this diagram is based on
This is an explanatory companion to the sensory-evaluation page. The lexicon and GFB-SME are proposed standards, not validated lot-release specifications. No taste trials or sensory results were created for this diagram.
Use the actual linked operating methods. This diagram does not reproduce the ASBC hot-steep method or invent replacement preparation settings. A clean taste cannot establish gluten-free status, mycotoxin safety or conversion performance.