The Whiskey Critic Thread

[Dan Call]

Okay guys...it's quite obvious that we can whip the pants off of a commercial distillery with what we make at home....that's not even an issue. What's more....I'm going to take a liking to my sugar vodka as much because I made it myself as because of any taste considerations. My observation is that most folks here don't give have any truck with commercial beverages, and with good reason. Well....we can learn alot from discussing the characteristics of commercial spirits and if nothing else it can provide a point of reference for taste, an index of sorts.

I'm starting this thread in order to generate discussion on taste comparisons between commercially available stuff and our stuff we make at home, we have to have some accessible benchmark by which to do so. And I'll start with a very specific observation.

Being a fan of the ultra premium Bourbons like Pappy Van Winkle and Bookers, I've often wondered what an aged sugar based spirit would taste like. I've oaked some of my own corn/sugar UJSM type stuff with rather, uh......interesting results, but we all know it doesn't doesn't precisely duplicate the characteristics of barrel aging. On the other hand I'm not sure my pallete could tell the difference anyway!!

I've been investigating Rums lately.....Bacardi seems to be truly miserable stuff....there's nothing right about the taste at all except that caramel/butter flavor in the nose and on the front of the tongue that seems to fade all-too-quickly. On the other hand...it seems to have too much of everything, sometimes I taste too many heads, sometimes too many tails, mostly too many tails, like thin and insipid. Then they cover it up with space and some aging. I do not like Bacardi Gold, so maybe some taste comments on Bacardi are in order.

I tried Myer's Dark Rum. It's supposed to be 100% Jamaican pot-stilled rum, and aged in white oak barrels, it's a dark run. Apparently it's "blended" in a series of mixtures in which some of the blend comes from casks that have aged for over 40 years.......not sure I buy that one.

Well....the oakiness/smokiness on the Myer's Dark definitely slaps you in the face, much like a highly aged Bourbon, like more than 10 years. The distinctive part is how clearly the alchohol taste comes out, unlike the grain smoothness of bourbons, the aged rum still just clearly says...."Hey...here's the pure alchohol part." The in-between is interesting though, kind've leathery, thick, smoky, chocolately, somewhat complex. It's got to be the cask characteristics overshadowing the distillate characteristics because the buttery thing expected in rum is mostly subdued. But I must say that the fuzzy whang of fusels is not nearl as strong. Maybe this stuff really IS pot stilled. I'd like to find some rum that is 100% pot stilled and see what that tasted like.

[I-GOR]

I'm starting this thread in order to generate discussion on taste comparisons between commercially available stuff and our stuff we make at home,

Great idea! I've been waiting for someone to start a thread like this (unless there's already a thread like this and it died of loneliness). Maybe along the lines of "What did you Drink and how did it Taste?" Perhaps it should be moved to the Flavoring and Aging page.

Starter.... Skyy Vodka. Here at the Warshington State liquor store (all spirits can only be bought at the WSLCB stores) $20 for a pretty blue 750ml bottle. To me, it's all heads. If I had made something that tasted like that I would've soaped it down and ran it again. Had a belt before bed, had a headache when I got up. (I didn't buy it, it was given to me)

Pendleton a "Canadian" style whiskey by Hood River Distillery in Oregon $20 for a 750ml. Really smooth, does taste like canadian whiskey and not bourbon, a little too light on the grain flavor, oak seems to be the major flavor component on the finish but is not the heavy buttery coconut flavor I often taste in American whiskey.

Been drinking I-gor's tipple lately. Kinduv a mash / UJSM style hybrid. 25% Malt barley, 75 crack corn, cooked to convert, then added sugar and a dollop of molasses, distiller's yeast. combined singlin run with final run on wash. Aged about 2 mo's on toasted oak fingers. I found that the corn flavor was strong initially but has really backed off now and the barley and oak comes through. I can tell that I kept to much heads (dang!).
Flavor profile: Not as smooth at first as I wished it was (owin to the heads), but smoother than most on the market, dry grain-barley up front, rounding out to some fresh corn, lastly, oak is startin to pick up the nice vanilla / carmel / butter tones. It's really great on ice with a splash of fresh apple cider!

[Dan Call]

I completely agree on that Skye stuff..very cool bottle....I was expecting a really super clean deal there, I actually saw the distillery "tour" thing on discover channel. It's grain based vodka ran through multiple continuous collumn distillations. I think it's on youtube somewhere. Well...here again.....continuous collumn distillation in big operations show once again that the emphasis is on quantity rather than quality. But Skye is also ran through a very cutting edge carbon filtration system, and STILL gets stuff this crappy? Made in Illinois, and 'cellulose' filtering.....wonder what it's supposed to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUEoMwT7 ... re=related

Skyy is covered at 8:26 on.

Good comments on that I-Gor, I remembered my experience with it after reading yours. These are just the sorts of trading notes and discussions I was hoping to see. The main reason being is that I know there are some very well trained pallates on here that can give us all pointers and what we're getting with various commercials spirits and how drastically they can differ with what we make in small controlled batches, and, some larger basis of comparison. Thanks much.

[muckanic]

I tried Myer's Dark Rum. It's supposed to be 100% Jamaican pot-stilled rum, and aged in white oak barrels, it's a dark run. Apparently it's "blended" in a series of mixtures in which some of the blend comes from casks that have aged for over 40 years.......not sure I buy that one.

Well....the oakiness/smokiness on the Myer's Dark definitely slaps you in the face, much like a highly aged Bourbon, like more than 10 years. The distinctive part is how clearly the alchohol taste comes out, unlike the grain smoothness of bourbons, the aged rum still just clearly says...."Hey...here's the pure alchohol part." The in-between is interesting though, kind've leathery, thick, smoky, chocolately, somewhat complex. It's got to be the cask characteristics overshadowing the distillate characteristics because the buttery thing expected in rum is mostly subdued. But I must say that the fuzzy whang of fusels is not nearl as strong. Maybe this stuff really IS pot stilled. I'd like to find some rum that is 100% pot stilled and see what that tasted like.

<flame suit> Folks get too hung-up on the method of distillation IMHO. The pot vs column debate is a little tired, whereas it would seem that the really nasty stuff comes out of continuous stills, combined with sloppy post-processing. I like the heaviness of Myers, and regard it as excellent value for the price-point. </flame suit> That alcohol sensation you mention is just what you would expect from a blend of old and new. Here in Oz, our dark rum market is so dominated by Bundaberg that I assume they must be cutting corners somewhere to keep production up. Inner Circle has recently emerged as a new competitor, and trumpets the fact that it is batch-distilled (whether pot or column I do not know). Without having performed a side-by-side comparison, I would say there is not much in it between the two. So there is some more evidence that the method of distillation is not the whole story, and that the flavouring/aging technique could be at least as important. We are kind of inhibited in making these comparisons due to the general unavailability of a decent, heavy white rum.

[Dan Call]

Those are good comments.....no need for a flame suit. Hopefully we're secure enough to thoughtfully engage differing viewpoints....isn't that what a forum is for?

I'd agree with you on the pot vs collumn, it appears to me that cask has exceeded fermented substrate with Myers and I do laud it for this complexity that, at points, reminds one of a bourbon aged more than ten years, like Old Rip Van Winkle 15 year old particularly. Again, it just seems like the absence of a "grain character" in the flavor does leave a more raw alchohol flavor in the finish. I understand that "Pusser's" rum is blended in a similar fashion and is supposed to be all pot stilled, I think it's expensive though....anyone had it?

As far as collumn vs pot, it has been discussed to death, and that's with good reason, precisely because of the apparent differences in the final product. But to clarify, when I say collumn, I don't mean a home type collumn reflux, I'm talking about a 4 or 5 story tall continuous plate collumn that uses steam shot up from the bottom with a take off point of the distillate somewhere near the top, condensed, then put through a rectification collumn with the same baffle plate set up only with much smaller diameter holes. They're taking so much off they can't possibly control the quality as well as a home distiller can, despite all the arm waving they do about quality. Perhaps that's why so much emphasis is placed on changing the flavor of the distillate.

I've never heard of some of those rums, it's interesing to hear how they compare to Myers.

[theholymackerel]

I've been drinkin' rye recently:

Sazerac Rye. (6 year old straight rye whiskey), it came highly praised so I had high hopes. 90 proof and surprizin'ly smooth for the strength, but the barrel flavour dominated all else. Not worth the 27$ for the overpowerin' taste of oak.

Jim Beam Rye. I only tried it 'cause it was given to me. Very harsh with definate heads and tails taste. Too sweet. I suspect it's too sweet from all the corn in it. Not a traditional rye by any means, nor a smooth one. Not worth the 15$. I gave it to a friend to take home who liked it.

Old Overholt. (4 year old straight rye whiskey), this is my go-to Rye when I buy a bottle. Rich rye flavour. The rye is the dominant flavour, with a nice mild yet dark barrel flavour underneath. Old Overholt can be hit and miss... some bottles are heavenly nectar, others a bit harsh. A bad bottle is worth the 12$ (often on sale around here for 9$!!!) and a good bottle is an equal to Van Winkle in my opinion.

Next week I'll do Wild Turkey Rye and Van Winkle Rye.

[Dan Call]

The Van Winkle has always been my favorite rye, never liked the Beam either. Beam does all the rye that they sell for the whole year on a single day, if it turns out bad....too bad I guess.

A note on the Van Winkle offerings. Julian III switched all the distilling operations to Buffalo Trace from Lawrenceburg, where he had a small bottle operation but all the distillate was contracted out. The original bottles of 20 and 23 year old "Pappy Van Winkle" that won the 99 score and deemed the best bourbon in the world are long gone and were actually left over from the old Sitzel Weller distillery and were contract distilled by Julian P. Van Winkle Jr., who was, of course, the son of Julian P. Van Winkle Sr., the famous owner of Sitzel-Weller distillery in Louisville, and bottler, but not maker of, "Old Fitzgerald," one of the original wheated bourbons based on an even older W.L. Weller recipe wherein wheat was used instead of Rye. This is the recipe that Maker's Mark is based on, Pappy Van Winkle being the one who gave Bill Samuels Sr. the recipe and yeast. But neither Bill Sr. or Jr. or any of the Van Winkle men actually distilled whiskey, they just 'had it made.' Now...Julian III does have an uncanny ability to select and blend his Van Winkle bourbons and get great results and hang with the best, but he's not a distiller. About the only name you would know from a family that actually has distillers in the family is Beam. There are Beam family members all over the place and they remain masters of the craft as they have been for for almost two-hundred years. Fred Noe, Jim Beams great grandson, is current master distiller at the actual Beam distillery.

[muckanic]

Okay guys...it's quite obvious that we can whip the pants off of a commercial distillery with what we make at home....that's not even an issue.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think that's a bit of an inflated claim. Largely because most amateurs do not have the capacity to get into serious barrel aging. Look at how the pricing on the commercial stuff works. If you want that smooth-as-silk-I-can't-believe-I'm drinking-spirits sensation, then it takes 10 years in a barrel and costs at least double what an everyday drop costs. It doesn't seem like there are any shortcuts. I guess I'm mainly referring to Scotch/Irish here, with say Bushmills as an example of something pretty good (although a lot of Irish is arguably a bit light and one-dimensional). I haven't drunk so much aged rum or bourbon, partly because of availability and partly because I tend to mix it with sweet muck anyway. For some reason, I don't have too much interest in brandy.

Maybe a more reasonable claim is that craft amateurs can produce a drop that shows more potential than many commercial examples, in much the same way that big red wines can be evaluated young by predicting how they are likely to turn out, and ignoring selected aspects of harshness. In the majority of cases, however, I would say that most amateur spirits do not ever reach their full potential. This is not to say that they are poorly made, just drunk young. Taking a cue from the wine scene, it could in fact be an argument for not making these spirits too aggressive in the first place.

Now, it seems to be commonly observed around here that the volume producers don't or won't perform cuts properly, and that consequently their product is more headache-inducing than one's own. I get the impression this accusation is mainly levelled at the bourbon guys (?) although I have personally encountered more of this sort of incompetence in the grappa and schnapps area. It is also interesting that wherever you go in the home-produced alcohol forums (including beer and wine), the craft enthusiasts all tend to claim that their own product doesn't give them headaches. Methinks there could be a bit of wish-fulfillment going on here. I'm quite comfortable claiming that my various brews are vastly more interesting than the bland, mass-market stuff, but it would be stretching it to claim that these brews immunise me to the effects of alcohol consumption! And, like I said, we possibly should have the humility to admit that both the wine and spirit producers have generally better aging facilities at their disposal.

[punkin]

Okay guys...it's quite obvious that we can whip the pants off of a commercial distillery with what we make at home....that's not even an issue.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think that's a bit of an inflated claim. Largely because most amateurs do not have the capacity to get into serious barrel aging. Look at how the pricing on the commercial stuff works. If you want that smooth-as-silk-I-can't-believe-I'm drinking-spirits sensation, then it takes 10 years in a barrel and costs at least double what an everyday drop costs. It doesn't seem like there are any shortcuts. I guess I'm mainly referring to Scotch/Irish here, with say Bushmills as an example of something pretty good (although a lot of Irish is arguably a bit light and one-dimensional). I haven't drunk so much aged rum or bourbon, partly because of availability and partly because I tend to mix it with sweet muck anyway. For some reason, I don't have too much interest in brandy.

Maybe a more reasonable claim is that craft amateurs can produce a drop that shows more potential than many commercial examples, in much the same way that big red wines can be evaluated young by predicting how they are likely to turn out, and ignoring selected aspects of harshness. In the majority of cases, however, I would say that most amateur spirits do not ever reach their full potential. This is not to say that they are poorly made, just drunk young. Taking a cue from the wine scene, it could in fact be an argument for not making these spirits too aggressive in the first place.

Now, it seems to be commonly observed around here that the volume producers don't or won't perform cuts properly, and that consequently their product is more headache-inducing than one's own. I get the impression this accusation is mainly levelled at the bourbon guys (?) although I have personally encountered more of this sort of incompetence in the grappa and schnapps area. It is also interesting that wherever you go in the home-produced alcohol forums (including beer and wine), the craft enthusiasts all tend to claim that their own product doesn't give them headaches. Methinks there could be a bit of wish-fulfillment going on here. I'm quite comfortable claiming that my various brews are vastly more interesting than the bland, mass-market stuff, but it would be stretching it to claim that these brews immunise me to the effects of alcohol consumption! And, like I said, we possibly should have the humility to admit that both the wine and spirit producers have generally better aging facilities at their disposal.

Well said Muck, i agree with most of what you've said. Especially the stuff about comparing bourbons.
I know i can put my ujsm up against Jim Beam and knock it over for 4 out of 5 people, cause i've done it.

i also know that i can taste a small glass of Blantons and a 3-6 month old ujsm and know where i have some potential to catch easily in a year the smoothness but not draw level with the complexity of the barrell aged good stuff. Then i can taste a small dram of Bookers and my allgrain (again, only a month or two old) and know that i'm in the hunt, but years off being able to compare, and i'm troubled at whether i can acheive the complexity and lasting pallette that is what i'm in it for (with complex reds or whiskeys). And i do believe that you're right in pointing where you are, it's the aging we can't viably replicate (i'm going to though, even if i'm not the one to benefit ).

As far as the hangover goes, i still think we're topping em, not saying it ain't gunna happen if you hit it real hard, but a typical friday night sees me working with grinder and welder on saturday in the shed rather than laying on the lounge. There's just too much anedectol evidence in my circle of aquaintances to dismiss this as phsycological.

[Dan Call]

I'd have to say that saying "whipping the pants off" is a little out there. Irrespective of either hangover or barrel compelxity considerations, these folks around here are very much into what they're doing and meticulous about what happens, even with basic sugar washes and the settling out for clarity of the fermented wash and the taste of the final product. The personal attention and care that is apparent has and will yield interesting results. I wish we could all share the final product and have a yearly tasting. I'd say what people here are getting is easily and favorably comparable to commercially produced stuff, and considering the
very small scale of our production equipment, we do far better on the whole. Hey wait...that's starting to sound like "whipping the pants off of." Okay....in some ways we do. We seem to be a
'get the most out of the least' kinda group, just my type of people. How's that?

I do not, however, think that the Bourbon producers have the most issues with hangover inducing stuff in their distillate. I view the Bourbon producers in Kentucky to be the most skilled of any distillers anywhere in the world with the exception of Scotland and Ireland. There is an astounding concentration of distilling talent, technology, tradition, and lore around this little town in Kentucky called Bardstown. Enough of that, if you get the chance, go see it, it's amazing. It seems to me that the more commercially oriented distillers that produce many many different distillates and brands, like blended whiskies, vodkas, gins, etc, all in the same distillery are the one's that are much less meticulous about the cuts.

I wanted to comment on Bookers. Bookers, to me, is the finest commercially available Bourbon that one can get, and it's unique because it's barrel strength, you cut it with water to taste. It's taste complexity is incredible, sweet, hot, smokey, caramel, it's really rich. The barrels for Booker's were hand selected by Booker Noe, Jim Beam Master Distiller Emeritus who passed in 2004. He bottled the whiskey at barrel strength and gave it to friends for Christmas. It became so desirable that he decided to release it, imagine that. The barrels always came from the 'sweet spot' of the rack house. The sweet spot was usually in the middle. The barrels at the top have more extremes in temperature compared to the bottom floor, apparently the middle one's are just right. How do you duplicate that barrel complexity? Well....you need a 5-10 story rack house with metal sides painted black full of whiskey barrels up on a hill in central kentucky, that's the only way. Anything else is "targeted approximation.'

[punkin]

How do you duplicate that barrel complexity? Well....you need a 5-10 story rack house with metal sides painted black full of whiskey barrels up on a hill in central kentucky, that's the only way. Anything else is "targeted approximation.'

I disagree. I'm not trying to make Bookers. I'm tyring to make Punkin's 'The Buisness'.

I don't need to be in Kentucky or have my barrell house black or any of those other conditions, cause i'm trying to make my own whiskey that is as good or better than the commercial whiskey i can affordably buy. Not the same but better, different but better

I don't want to beat a $1000 bottle of scotch, and i don't wanna replicate a particular bourbon, therefore, i don't have to use the same materials or processes.

But i agree also with most of the rest of what you said, the time and ageing process is irreplaceable.

[Dan Call]

Well.....Punkin....you talked yourself right out of my example. I was sorta saying that these are the precise conditions for Bookers, ergo, that's how you get that barrel complexity, otherwise you don't get that particular barrel complexity, now do you. The assumption was that you are otherwise duplicating the barrel complexity of Booker's. And there seems to be quite a bit of it at that. However...there is a definite smokey flavor in Booker's that you can trace back to plain old Jim Beam white label, it's the same stuff, just the best aged. However, that particular flavor nuance could have as much to do with the yeast strain that yields that particular flavor from the wood. Now I'm getting in over my head, but I can tell that particular flavor thing.

I think it would be cool to have a "personal rack house" in the backyard that was painted black and aging say 80-100 barrels at any one given time. Ah....the blending and testing that would have to be done would be excruciatingly wonderful work......hmmm.....80-100 barrels would be nice size for a micro distillery I'd suppose.

Well....Punkin, why don't you list the precise characteristics you are looking for in what you make?