The main objective of this work was to revisit several steps of a wine profiling protocol based on 1H-NMR to insure its deployment on all spectrometers of WAP-NMR consortium. The previous protocol1 required manual steps in front of the spectrometer and needed to be adapted to automation used in the future for high-throughput authentication studies. Wine samples were pHadjusted (BTpH, Bruker). NMR spectra were acquired with automation at 500 MHz and manually at 600 MHz. Two pulse sequences were used, a single (zgpr) and a multi-solvent (noesy) suppression. NMR spectra were processed with MestreNova for targeted analysis, and with NMRProcFlow2 (nmrprocflow.org) for targeted and untargeted analysis. The explored steps concerned sample preparation taking into account wine type, calibration for compound quantitation, NMR acquisition parameters including iconnmr and spectra processing. Two deuterated-water concentrations and three buffer-solution strengths were tested. Effects on duration of gradient shimming adjustment and of pHadjustment as well as on NMR spectral quality were checked. Repetition times depending on longitudinal relaxation time and field strength were also determined. Wine sample stability was verified during two weeks to set the time span allowed between sample preparation and acquisition and to minimize uncontrolled variability. We report on our first results of these interlaboratory comparisons of wine profiling by 1D 1H-NMR spectroscopy across two different spectrometers. Acknowledgments: We thank J. Coutant for fruitful help on NMR sequence optimization, and MetaboHUB 2.0 (ANR-11-INBS-0010) and WAP-NMR (ANR21-CE21-0014) projects for financing. References 1: Gougeon et al. 2018. doi.org/10.1007/s12161-018-1310-2 2: Jacob et al. 2017 doi:10.1007/s11306- 017-1178-y