Making pure whiskey

[baron4406]

I've researched SPP, and I'm very interested. However most of my free time is devoted to wine, beer and whiskey making. Yea my friends love me since I don't drink a whole lot anymore. However it doesn't look fun to make, I might try it with a drill or something. or make it out of copper. Just gotta find the time.

[lampshade]

We refer to is as doing a 1.5 spirit run here, where you continually add the feints in with the next wash... I run them regularly... But I don't shoot for ~95% all the time...

I get more flavor in hybrid mode where the spirits start out in the 91% - 92% range and drop to between 80% - 70% when the tails kick in... Those figures would depend on how you run the hybrid setup... And by running this way I lose less flavor when I dilute to drinking strength than if I was to run in strict reflux mode at or near azeotrope throughout the duration of the run... I achieve this by running a short 7" column with 6" of structured packing which gives me more tails to recycle...

Rad, I am a little confused about what you call "feints" when doing a 1.5 spirit run. For example, the HD glossary defines feints as tails. However, Odin re-distills heads+tails when doing a 1.5 spirit run. During your 1.5 spirit run, do you re-distill: (a) tails or (b) heads+tails?

I think what makes Odin/Smiley's approach different from previous approaches is the following:
Traditional (HD) 1.5 spirit run == add the tails in with the next wash
Odin/Smiley 1.5 spirit run == add the heads+tails in with the next wash

[Jimbo]

'Feints' is anything that didnt make the cut. Except maybe some fores.

[lampshade]

'Feints' is anything that didnt make the cut. Except maybe some fores.

Thanks, Jimbo.

Assuming what you say is true, is the Odin/Smiley approach the same as the 1.5 spirit run that many people, including rad, have been doing?

Is the distinction of the Odin/Smiley approach that it distills to 192 proof while the 1.5 spirit run distills to 160 proof?

Does the HD glossary need to be updated to define "feints" as "anything that didn't make the cut, including heads and tails, but without the fores"?

On the other hand, maybe feints is not the correct term in this application. Many people think of feints as only the tails. For example, "Whiskey Magazine" provides the following definition: Feints --Also known as tails, or after-shots. The final spirit from the Spirit still at the end of Distillation The Feints are low in alcohol, and are re-distilled.

See http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... =1&t=18823, which includes this post from Dnderhead:

" I just always kept the rejects from my cuts in a jug, and added it to next spirit run.'
feints are tales not heads . and they go into the stripping run not the spirits run.

(pronounced “Faints”) a name given to the last portion of spirits that runs from a still as the distillation of a batch nears completion. Feints are normally turned back into the still for redistillation. Feints are also, and more generally referred to as tails

[Jimbo]

I think all Rad is saying is instead of running a stripper and spirit run on everything you do. 2 runs. You can effectively get good drinkin likker from one run by adding all your feints (cuts) from the last run. It boosts the abv and the yield. Leaves more flavor too since your wash is only getting run once. Or maybe the yield isint better if you just take the hearts and relegate everythign to a large cut to get added next round again. Gotta play with it and find the balance. I use it for apple brandy and rum. AG grain based stuff tho I still prefer 2 honest runs. The first (stripper) gets some feints from the last spirit run. Maybe that should be called 2.5? haha.

As far as 160, 190 etc. depends on too many things. I never get close to 190 with my potstill even on a spirit run. Nor would I want to. Lop too many flavors off.

[heartcut]

Tried running whiskey at 180 proof, it was OK, but it taught me why most whiskey is run at 160 proof or less. Lots of ways to do it, but with my rig the flavor starts to go away after 165/170.

[lampshade]

I think all Rad is saying is instead of running a stripper and spirit run on everything you do. 2 runs. You can effectively get good drinkin likker from one run by adding all your feints (cuts) from the last run. It boosts the abv and the yield. Leaves more flavor too since your wash is only getting run once. Or maybe the yield isint better if you just take the hearts and relegate everythign to a large cut to get added next round again. Gotta play with it and find the balance. I use it for apple brandy and rum. AG grain based stuff tho I still prefer 2 honest runs. The first (stripper) gets some feints from the last spirit run. Maybe that should be called 2.5? haha.

Here is stab at nomenclature:
Type 1 distillation-- Spirit run only
Type 1.5a distillation -- Spirit run only with tails from the last spirit run.
Type 1.5b distillation -- Spirit run only with heads and tails from the last spirit run.
Type 2 distillation -- Strip and then spirit run
Type 2.1a distillation -- Strip multiple generations with tails from the last spirit run added to the first strip and then spirit run
Type 2.1b distillation -- Strip multiple generations with heads and tails from the last spirit run added to the first strip and then spirit run
Type 2.5a distillation -- Strip multiple generations and then spirit run with tails from the last spirit run
Type 2.5b distillation -- Strip multiple generations and then spirit run with heads and tails from the last spirit run

Using this nomenclature, I think Odin, in this thread, is using Type 1.5b distillation. Many people use Type 2.1a distillation or Type 2.1b distillation. I haven't accounted for double or triple distillation with a pot still.

I provided this nomenclature only as a vehicle to understand what people mean when they talk about re-distilling feints. If it would be useful for the community to adopt a standardized list of different distillation categories, maybe we could form a committee to prepare one.

[baron4406]

The last few responses were good reading, it illustrates a very good point. You have to know how your still runs and what are your goals. Odin suggested distilling whiskey at high ABV's for a reason, to get super clean tasting whiskey that is good with very minimal aging. He's also using a computer controlled IStill that takes the guesswork out of everything.If your running a pot still this really isn't possible. Pot stills get lower ABV's, and smear everything together. Sometimes its a little rough tasting off the still, but after 6 months on charred oak is heaven in a bottle. Don't forget Rad (as well as me) are running hybrid stills this year. They combine the best of pot stills and reflux stills

[rad14701]

lampshade, you're trying to make something simple too overly complicated with that list...

Feints, as I and many others consider them, is anything that has a feint off smell or taste, aside from foreshots which contain acetone, methanol, etc... But I agree that, historically, the term has been defined differently - sometimes even regionally... Just like low wines could mean only the hearts from a stripping run or everything except, or even including, foreshots... Here on HD it's safe to say that feints could be anything other than foreshots that didn't make it into the blended potable spirits... So a 1.5 would be a boiler charge of feints + wash, which by my interpretation is heads + tails + wash...

Confused yet...???

[Dnderhead]

I "chase " the flavor ,by adding tales from grain/whiskey it gives more flavor.
feints goes back one step so its redistilld over and over.so if say you distill 3 times,first run feints goes back in with the next wash,, feints from the second run goes back into low wines,the feints from spirits run goes into the high wines.
now with many fruit must (wash) when distilled the flavor is in the heads.
some even comes off before the fore shots.
Odin has a thread about using tales and distilling with a reflux.
new? the reflux part is.

[lampshade]

lampshade, you're trying to make something simple too overly complicated with that list...

Confused yet...???

Yes, I'm confused, but a lot less after I compiled that list.

How is this for an explanation of "chasing" flavor:
The feints is heads or tails or both, depending on the application.
Method 1: This is known as a 1.5 spirit run. If stripping, add the feints from a spirit run to the first charge that is stripped. If not stripping, add the feints from a spirit run to the spirit run.
Method 2: Used when double or triple distilling with a pot still. For each distillation, add the feints from the previous distillation to the charge to be distilled.

[blind drunk]

What about all the subsets and sub subsets

Here's a good thread, if you haven't already -

http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... =1&t=18823

[lampshade]

What about all the subsets and sub subsets

Here's a good thread, if you haven't already -

http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... =1&t=18823

I agree that it is a good thread. But it contained a lot of confusion, too (e.g., are feints heads or tails or both).

[Odin]

Guys, I think we are overcomplicating things. All I say is: you can fractionate a great whiskey. And that is against everything we asumed normally. Heartcut, a whiskey in one go, and taking it to 180 proof ... Yeah, that will give you an eau de vie, light whiskey, strong vodka. What Ian (and I) propose is: really fractionate your whiskey, making cuts for fores, heads, hearts and tails. Not at 180 proof, but if possible at 190. Throw out fores, keep heads and tails together as feints. How will the hearts be on this first gen Pure Whiskey? Like a vodka or eau de vie. Next mash, that's where the magic happens. Add the feints from run one to mash number two and fractionate again at 190 proof. Seperate fores, heads, hearts and tails. Fores you toss as usual. Heads and tails you collect in the feints container. And here it comes: the hearts on this second gen are awesome! Full whiskey flavour, no ageing required.

Dunder puts it correctly: what is new in this thread is not the feints part or how cuts are done. It is about that you can fractionate a great whiskey. In other words: you don't need a potstill or flute to make a great whiskey.

Odin.

[baron4406]

I was just about to PM Odin and ask him to come in this thread and clarify, then his post shows up. So in addition to being the HD mad scientist-he's also psychic.

[lampshade]

Guys, I think we are overcomplicating things.

I naively understood your OP, Odin: Add heads and tails (no mention of feints) to the next wash and reflux-distill to full strength.

However, it quickly became confusing when Rad mentioned "1.5 spirit run," implying that your OP is nothing new. I did research in other threads regarding re-cycling feints and found many "subsets and sub subsets", as Blind Drunk said. I also found a Tower of Babel -- many confused, imprecise definitions for the same thing (for example, is feints heads or tails, or both; the larger whiskey community seems to equate feints only with tails).

[lampshade]

Odin mentions, in his OP, re-cycling heads and tails. Is there any opinion about only re-cycling tails.

It was mentioned in viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18823, that including heads in the feints leads to "the sting" after a few generations.

[Jimbo]

Yes I have an opinion. Many flavor components are in the heads. Aside from ditchin some fores (how much Ill leave up to you and your nose), put the heads back through to capture the flavor.

also

the larger whiskey community seems to equate feints only with tails).

I dont think thats true. The feints tank at whiskey and single malt distilleries contains everything that doesnt find its way into a barrel.

[Dnderhead]

Iv been at this aaaa "couple years".......
we always used the tales as feints witch was recycled ,but then we always used a pot still.
we recycled tales ,once a week for the whole season witch was from April? to some time in October. then switched to fruit witch was then ripe.
never used "back set" never heard of it before I came to HD.
not sure what they did with heads i thank they made made vinegar?
witch was very useful as we put up 100gal? of diferant pickled vegetables.
to be ate as is or cooked.

[lampshade]

Yes I have an opinion. Many flavor components are in the heads. Aside from ditchin some fores (how much Ill leave up to you and your nose), put the heads back through to capture the flavor.

also

the larger whiskey community seems to equate feints only with tails).

I dont think thats true. The feints tank at whiskey and single malt distilleries contains everything that doesnt find its way into a barrel.

The HD glossary, the Whiskey Magazine glossary, and Dunder use feints to mean only the tails. Also, the commercial guys age, which mellows the harshness of the heads. Odin asserts that the approach in his OP produces a mellow whiskey without the need to age. Will this still be true after multiple generations of heads are used?

Anyway, there seems to be a lot of opinions about using feints, made all the more confusing by a lack of a precise, standardized language to describe it.

[lampshade]

Got this from http://whiskyscience.blogspot.com/2012/ ... tland.html. Yikes!

[Jimbo]

Iv been at this aaaa "couple years".......
we always used the tales as feints witch was recycled ,but then we always used a pot still.
we recycled tales ,once a week for the whole season witch was from April? to some time in October. then switched to fruit witch was then ripe.
never used "back set" never heard of it before I came to HD.
not sure what they did with heads i thank they made made vinegar?
witch was very useful as we put up 100gal? of diferant pickled vegetables.
to be ate as is or cooked.

could it be there was no heads? Meanin after takin a good cut of fores and losin the acetone slam in the nose, the heads can add a nice flavor, specially if agein it up. and double especially if its fruit based. I have a hard time dislikin that early runnin likker. Maybe my tastebuds is just not right? Fellow from a scottish single malt stillery once said they only run fores for 5 minutes then cut over. Felt like a little validation that I wasnt totally screwd

[lampshade]

Perusing the Net regarding Irish and Scottish whiskey distilling, I'm left with the following definitions:

• foreshots = the cut before the hearts
  hearts = the middle cut
  feints = the last cut
  strong feints = feints with an ABV of approx. 70-72% (obviously early feints)
  weak feints = feints with an ABV less than 70% (obviously late feints)

These definitions would appear to align with the diagrams I provided above. It also would appear, from the above diagrams, that Irish and Scottish whiskey distilling is quite complicated. However, let me remind you that complicated just means complicated. It is not necessarily correlated with quality. And those diagrams pertain to pot distilling, which is not, alas, the subject of Odin's OP (Sorry Odin, for hijacking your thread about your great discovery. I hope no one thinks I am a troll; I'm just a newbie trying to learn, and hopefully, contribute to HD. Blame it all on Rad, who mentioned 1.5 runs, obviously while kicking back on his throne. )

[Andy Capp]

Thanxs for bringing this up Odin. This is exactly what i have been doin the last couple of months. Read the book by Smiley and decided to do the same. Researched on here but couldn't find any thread relating to refluxing a good whiskey. Somehow i found this one. I'm probably blind though and overlooked many others.

So, i started with a 22lt wash ujssm @ 9abv pot still single run only. This came out nice and slow and is aging on charred oak cubes nicely @ 51abv
I recycled 2lt of tails from that into the next run.I dont recycle the heads. I collect them for a later full blown boka run for vodka.
I'm not using backset for these runs either.

Next was a single run with a boka head on top of a 300mm 2" column packed with marbles. The marbles idea came from reading UJ and Rad having success with them. Started at 91abv after foreshots were tossed then gradually declined. Found this hard to run but that was my fault. I fiddled with the reflux ratio by upping the collection rate and it started jumping all over the place. Next time i will leave the collection rate alone and see what happens.

After more research i got inspired by a thread by olddog and wound some 1/4" copper round the top of my potstill head using 2 metres( 10 winds ) to create a dephlag of sorts. Myles also has used something similar. Ran this slow and steady on top of the marbles to great success. After foreshots it started at 86abv and very gradually declined. Last jar of hearts was at 70abv before tails were showing. Collection rate was a thin stream @ 1300w.Taste was smooth and similar to having done a double run.

I've got a few more variations to do for my own learning curve and will post back the results as they happen. I know that others will read this and say it's already been done and there's a thread about it, but unless you do these things yourself its just not the same.

[Jimbo]

Perusing the Net regarding Irish and Scottish whiskey distilling, I'm left with the following definitions:

• foreshots = the cut before the hearts
  hearts = the middle cut
  feints = the last cut
  strong feints = feints with an ABV of approx. 70-72% (obviously early feints)
  weak feints = feints with an ABV less than 70% (obviously late feints)

These definitions would appear to align with the diagrams I provided above. It also would appear, from the above diagrams, that Irish and Scottish whiskey distilling is quite complicated. However, let me remind you that complicated just means complicated. It is not necessarily correlated with quality. And those diagrams pertain to pot distilling, which is not, alas, the subject of Odin's OP (Sorry Odin, for hijacking your thread about your great discovery. I hope no one thinks I am a troll; I'm just a newbie trying to learn, and hopefully, contribute to HD. Blame it all on Rad, who mentioned 1.5 runs, obviously while kicking back on his throne. )

Jumpin from the fores to the hearts, or, shit to keep, is how I considered it for years, almost 20, before finding HD, who added 'heads' to the list. But I never saw a definition for heads here, good or otherwise. So in my question below to Dunder, " could it be there was no heads?" Maybe is just symantics. The early shit you dump, after that you keep. Pretty simple really, if you rely on your nose and tastebuds.

Your charts and wantin to categorize everthing, and define the categorize and all, is overcomplicated lampshade. I suggest you just roll up yer sleeves and get to stillin. You'll figger out what works right quick. Lots of us here make damn good likker, ask 10 of us here how we do it, and you'll get 10 answers. Ask 10 good painters how to paint, and its the same. If 'n you want to paint nice pictures, you just gotta get out the brush and start paintin

[Odin]

Just to clarify how to interpret different terms used:
fores: first 50 mls coming out (toss);
heads: next part coming of (Ian Smiley calculates 17% of total collectable);
hearts: middle part, the thing we are after (Ian calculates 58% of total collectable);
tails: last part.
Feints = heads & tails together.

Add the feints of run 1 to wash number 2 and fractionate again. Make cuts again. By taste and smell, because I find that Ian's percentages do not completely hold. Depends on still and on how quick you run.

On run 2 (with feints of gen 1 and wash 2), you stabilize and draw off. Like this tasty oils that normally are associated with heads and tails smear into hearts. Not the bad alcohols themselves, only the taste components that tend to hitch hike over.

You can first strip and then fractionate. But doing a wash and fractionating it in one run gives of more taste. Around 1 liter of feints per 20 liter wash. Stop collecting tails when your LM reaches 82 degrees C.

Hope this clarifies things. Maybe leave distilling 1.5 out of the equasion, since to me that means something else again: distilling one wash with one strip. Not needed here. If you keep your focus on what this is really about, you are in for a surprise: it is possible to fractionate a great whiskey at 96% if you add feints (heads & tails) to the wash you are fractionating.

Odin.

[lampshade]

Referring to the Irish distilling charts I posted, please observe that they recycle the heads (what they call the foreshots), in the third and last distillation. (As an aside, I think it needs to be noted that the distillation diagrams don't address aging for years on oak.)

I am not surprised that people can be upset by this thread. The problem here is fuzzy semantics, and it is not surprising when basic terms are interpreted differently by different people. (Hell, the HD glossary defines feints as tails.) Again, for the sake of unity among the community, I think we need a precise, standardized language. Otherwise, language will cause needlessly hurt feelings.

Regarding Jimbo's last quote: Yes, it is true that 10 artists will probably paint 10 different ways. But that does not negate the benefits of having a common language for understanding how they painted differently. I am not qualified to judge different distillers (artists or craftsmen), but I think we need a common language to understand what each of the 10 distillers is doing.

Please let me reiterate my position: I am not judging any distillation method. Instead, I am calling for a common language to describe what each distiller is doing, period. In my previous posts I identified logical discrepancies not to highlight distilling flaws but to identify semantic flaws. (Again my apologizes to Odin; I did not intend to hijack your wonderful announcement that high grade whiskey can be made using reflux stills.)

[lampshade]

Just to clarify how to interpret different terms used:
fores: first 50 mls coming out (toss);
heads: next part coming of (Ian Smiley calculates 17% of total collectable);
hearts: middle part, the thing we are after (Ian calculates 58% of total collectable);
tails: last part.
Feints = heads & tails together.

Odin, I don't mean to assert that the Irish definitions (semantics) are superior to yours. I only wanted to highlight that different people are using these terms differently and until we can agree on a standardized definition (at least in the HD community) we will not understand one another.

Can we at least agree on this?

[lampshade]

Personally, I would prefer if the HD community used these definitions for cuts:

• Cut a, methanol = the first distillation cut, always discarded
  Cut b, foreshots = the next distillation cut, also known as heads
  Cut c, hearts = the middle distillation cut, containing almost all ethanol
  Cut d, strong feints = ABV greater than or equal to 70%, also known as early tails
  Cut e, weak feints = ABV between 70% and 20%, also known as late tails
  Cut f, dunder = the last distillation cut, ABV less than or equal to 20%

Further refinement is needed.

[lampshade]

Your charts and wantin to categorize everthing, and define the categorize and all, is overcomplicated lampshade.

I'm sorry Jimbo, if I come across as too anal. It's not my intention to force my will on the HD community. I only think that we could progress more when we all agree on the meaning of terms that are casually thrown about. Feints, for example, means different things to different people. My "categorizing" is just my way of trying to understand the different semantics that the members of the community use for distilling cuts and techniques.

At the very least, this exercise has helped me, and I hope others. better understand the language that is used on this site.