Home Distiller

Ben wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 6:25 am
I think if you just practice the hobby for the next 19 years, and put something in a once used 5 gallon barrel for the last 2 years you will get something more impressive out of it. A narrow cut doesn't have to make a boring whiskey, focus on the brew technique, nail the ferment, find the right yeast, adjust the base and specialty malts, pay attention to the cuts, try different blends from the same batch... learn and grow, master the craft. An age statement doesn't make a whiskey great.

Thanks for the insight this project is more of a symbolism vs how I would make a good wiskey. I think your 100% right I could probably make a much better wiskey in 2-3 years vs 21 but it's as a celebration for his 21st. I'm just concerned it will lack complexity if I cut it too narrow and taste like an oaky flavored "vodka" vs a complex rich wiskey. I think I will do what others have suggested and make several different cuts and blend later. Thanks for your input!

shadylane wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 12:25 am
Let's back up a moment and think about what makes a good whiskey.
Are you saying 21 years of aging is more important than cuts and blending?

My theory is, if it starts out good, it gets better with age.
If it tastes bad young because of wide cuts, it might take years to be drinkable.

I understand how what I said might be confusing. Obviously end flavor makes a good wiskey not an age statement. As I said prior this is for his first born son's 21st birthday so it's more of a symbolism vs what I would do to make a good wiskey. With that said if I'm waiting 21 years to drink it I want it to be a darn good wiskey! My fear is too narrow of a cut in 21 years time will be too mellow and round off too much of the good flavors that I put in there in the first place, but I have no idea how wide of a cut to make since I've only been doing this for a few years and never aged that long lol

Thanks for your insight!

I’m a total noob at making whiskey, but this is the internet, so that makes me qualified to comment, right?

From my own limited experience, I’m going to agree with the advice that you focus on improving your skill and then making something far more impressive about 18 years from now which will still have plenty of time to age. I rather arrogantly thought I was going to start a project a few months ago and make some world class bourbon. I’m not even half way through and I’ve already learned enough to realize that I had no idea what I was doing. I’ll still make something tasty, but I think I could do better already. If that holds true for the next 18 years, I personally would rather have a 3 years old really good whiskey in 2043 than to have a mediocre 21 year old whiskey.

This will probably sound a bit rude, and I don’t mean it to be at all, but I have a feeling that if you have to ask the question, you’re not ready to make use of the answer. It’s a really interesting question to ask, and one which I’m interested to hear the various answers to, but I don’t think it’s going to help you with this specific project.

With that said, the idea of having a bottle of something that is the same age as me would be pretty cool, even if it’s not the best product in the world. Maybe you’d be better off making a smaller batch and saving some of it in glass or stainless so that it won’t overage, and then focus on growing in the hobby. If his son seems like the sort who will appreciate a quality whiskey at 21 (I know I wouldn’t have), the make a damn good product in about 18 years and age it for the next 3. Enjoy both side by side and compare them, or blend them.

When I was a young child, probably about 6, my uncle (an avid wine drinker) gave me a bottle of wine that he told me would be perfectly aged on my 21st birthday. I treasured that bottle and excitedly opened on my 21st birthday, only to discover that I didn’t particularly like the wine. I was not a wine drinker, and could not appreciate the complexity of what was in the bottle. Now, more than 20 years later, I wish I could go back in time and taste that wine again. My tastes have changed drastically and I can now appreciate an excellent wine.

Steve Broady wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 7:31 am
This will probably sound a bit rude, and I don’t mean it to be at all, but I have a feeling that if you have to ask the question, you’re not ready to make use of the answer. It’s a really interesting question to ask, and one which I’m interested to hear the various answers to, but I don’t think it’s going to help you with this specific project.

With that said, the idea of having a bottle of something that is the same age as me would be pretty cool, even if it’s not the best product in the world. Maybe you’d be better off making a smaller batch and saving some of it in glass or stainless so that it won’t overage, and then focus on growing in the hobby. If his son seems like the sort who will appreciate a quality whiskey at 21 (I know I wouldn’t have), the make a damn good product in about 18 years and age it for the next 3. Enjoy both side by side and compare them, or blend them.

When I was a young child, probably about 6, my uncle (an avid wine drinker) gave me a bottle of wine that he told me would be perfectly aged on my 21st birthday. I treasured that bottle and excitedly opened on my 21st birthday, only to discover that I didn’t particularly like the wine. I was not a wine drinker, and could not appreciate the complexity of what was in the bottle. Now, more than 20 years later, I wish I could go back in time and taste that wine again. My tastes have changed drastically and I can now appreciate an excellent wine.

Haha you're not rude at all I'm just trying to learn as much as I can because you're right the point of this experiment is to have a bottle the same age as him regardless of the outcome (obviously I would love an amazing outcome). The reason why I want to make a larger batch is exactly what you said about not being old enough to appreciate it for what it is. I want to have several bottles so that when he does get older he can try it again and hopefully it's good enough for him to appreciate it! I will probably make the same grain bill 3 years out and compart them A and B!

For the birth of my first grandchild, I made a Batch of Brunello wine. I produced 22 bottles, intending for 1 to be drank every year on his birthday with 1 extra, just in case. They have special labels with his baby pic on them. We are 4 bottles in and beginning to appreciate the tradition. I’m looking forward to sharing bottle 21 with him when the time comes assuming I make it ….

My latest grand child was just born and I was making rum. I’m thinking I will pull a little out of the 5G barrel each year to celebrate on her birthday and when it’s in the right zone, bottle one bottle per year remaining until she would be 21 to continue the tradition.

I love your idea of saving until the 21st, but wanted to share our tradition in case you want to consider an annual taste test as well.

I'd get it right however long that takes and just call it 21 years in the making. Would have pleased me if someone was looking that far ahead.

If you are aging in a barrel (or to a lesser degree, glass bottles or jars with corks that can breathe a little);
you will need to top it up from time to time because of evaporation.
And if you top it up with newer product that will add some freshness...

Geoff

acfixer69 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 6:13 pm I'd get it right however long that takes and just call it 21 years in the making. Would have pleased me if someone was looking that far ahead.

Plus one on that.

My 2 cents worth.
I'd rather folks judge my whiskey making based on what I've made in the last few years.
Instead of what I made 21 years ago.

I've been putting 21 year old Scotch in my hip flask for the past few days. I know it hasn't spent the whole 21 years in barrels as it's spent a few years in my drinks cabinet already, but it is very nice and I'm happy to have it in my collection and be able to share it with friends and to tell them that they are tasting 21 year old Scotch.

What I am trying to say is, if, at any time in the next 21 years, you taste this whiskey and think it is exceptional, proof and bottle enough for your project. You can always proof some more if you think it gets better.

You may consider a solera type whisky. I.e. keep adding product as your experience improves and potentially make adjustments along the way.
Perhaps through a yearly buddy-event where you make whisky to add to your base cask/bottle/container.

Fantastic idea by the way and a great way to celebrate your friendship!

Let us know how it turned out

A relevant post today? viewtopic.php?t=88191

NZChris wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 10:37 pm A relevant post today? viewtopic.php?t=88191

From the aforementioned post of Tombombadil:

"The white dog is a little headsy and pretty tailsy, stanky even, it's not pleasant. Would not drink this or even use it in a cocktail.

The barrel aged stuff is neither solventy or stanky.
It's quite good actually."

"What would I do the same?
Wide tails heavy cuts and topping it up.
5% chocolate malt seems to have given the right amount of chocolate flavor.
I assume the grainy flavor came from the 6 row barley malt, I like it, I'll do that again."




That is exactly what I have described my longer aged white dogs. My first attempts at longer aging started with me making a tight cut of the white spirit with virtually no heads and tails. After age it ended up "flabby" and lacked complexity and character. My first attempts almost tasted like a vodka with oak and vanilla flavoring added to it and nowhere close to a complex all grain wiskey.

Later tests I purposely cut wider with a shift towards the tails (mainly because I hate heads) and the white spirit tasted exactly like the white spirit described above. I would not even use it in a cocktail it tasted so terrible! Not that my process was the reason it tasted terrible the hearts of the run tasted amazing but the final cut had in my opinion way too much tails to be palatable. I trusted and patiently waited a year on 3x3x1 inch sticks from an old Buffalo trace barel and the tails were not only completely gone, but they transformed into some dark fruit/heavy/oily (in a good way)/earthy complexity that I LOVED.

I think I have an idea on how I am going to cut this project. I want a little touch heads in the mix to add some fruit complexity but not so much that the new make taste headsy. Also I will determine off the still but I'm going to have a wide tails cut to make sure some of those oils carry over and transform into a fuller body wiskey with time. Now all I have to do is decide on a mash bill

Mcg000 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 9:39 am I think I have an idea on how I am going to cut this project. I want a little touch heads in the mix to add some fruit complexity but not so much that the new make taste headsy. Also I will determine off the still but I'm going to have a wide tails cut to make sure some of those oils carry over and transform into a fuller body wiskey with time. Now all I have to do is decide on a mash bill

Also be aware that your final cut does not have to be continuous. If you're collecting in jars, you may find that there are some that aren't adding anything to the mix, while others further down the line have some interesting flavours that you'd like to keep. So skip the "empty" jars and just include the interesting ones. And be sure to make up test blends before you commit. My last two blends have taken 2-3 days to iron out (also 'cos I'm still learning!) and I'm glad to have taken the time to check my final call.

Hey! That's a great point I tend to not be that specific in my day to day cuts due to the time commitment (and jars ) it takes to iron out a blend, but for this one for sure I need to nail the blend as good as it can be going into the barel so I plan on doing this to make sure I add the best of the "fractioning". Thanks for the thoughtful reply!

Hey all! So I'm excited to anounce that I decided on a recipe and finally got around to "distilling" the wash. Let me preface I know that this post heading says Scotch and I know some purists might be upset, but just like corn wiskey has to be at least 51% corn to be labeled as corn wiskey. Likewise in the same way this recipe is labeled as a scotch as there was 51% Barley in this recipe but as you can see it's not a single malt because why not make something unique if you don't need to adhere to strict production/labeling standards.

I added each of the ingredients other than barley in a way to add nuanced flavor to the final product that I tend to enjoy in a wiskey. The base was plane 2 row from Briess to give a good "single malt base" at 51% of the total weight. The next biggest ingredient was feed store oats (I hope they're worth it in the long run since they were a pain in the A** to deal with lautering). The goal with the oats were to add complexity, creamy mouth feel, vanilla, grain goodness, and to smooth off the bite from the spirit. The next biggest contribution was Corn to add the classic touch of sweetness to the product.

I also added some Speciality grains I roasted myself. First was medium toasted oats slightly soaked in water to make a sort of "crystal oats malt" which turned out beautiful vanilla and toasted oat smell. Also I cold smoked some oats with white oak wood that were sitting in a pan of water until the water all evaporated and the grain dried up back to it's original humidity content to give good smokey flavor in a diferent way vs peat smoking at around 190 degrees F.

I also roasted specialty barley to add complexity. First was chocolate malt to add nuttiness and chocolate...Duh! Second was Vienna malt because I love how it adds a Carmel/toasted bread to the distilate. And finally a scotch would not be complete without a touch of heavily peated malt.

Lastly before some of you get mad yes I did add sugar. And No it was not just to get a little more distillate out of the condenser. I love how some scotches aged in rum barels have that unique ester fresh fruity flavor and I did not have molasses on hand, but I did have a ton of brown sugar that I used in it's place. If I were to go back I would probably actually use molasses, but here we are...


RECEPIE:

100 gallons mash

150 pounds feed oats raw/milled
6 pounds roasted raw oats (320° for 35 min lightly soaked in water)
3 pounds white oak smoked oats 180° for 4 hours and 23 minutes water soaked oats until dry and slightly toasted (crystal smoked oats)

200 lbs 2 row
3 pounds roasted barley 380° 2 hours (chocolate malt)
5 lbs Vienna malt
5 lbs Simpsons heavily peated UK barley

12 pounds of instant maise

30 lbs brown sugar


TOTAL PERCENTAGES:

213 lbs Barley
163 lbs Oats
12 lbs Corn
30 lbs Sugar

11.10% abv

418 lbs total fermentables
388 lb grain
30 lb sugar
92% all grain

51% Barley
39% Oats
3 % Corn
7 % Sugar


The way I fermented this was off grain lautered like a traditional Scotch in 3 separate brew days and 3 separate fermentations all with different "yeast/generations" and different temperatures all split roughly evenly.

The first way was ferment at room temperature with Kveik yeast at 63° F to encourage a very clean fermentation and squeeze a little of the fruitness out of the ferment without throwing off too much byproducts from a hot ferment.

The 2nd batch was fermented with the 2nd generation of yeast harvested from the first ferment. It was the same conditions, but with the yeast having open fermented from the 1st round had a little of funk from the outside bacteria that I liked. Basically tasted the same as the first one with a little hint of sour mash to it.

The last ferment was the same harvested yeast from the first 2 so it was on its 3rd generation and I also added a sourdough starter into the mix that I started and had been feeding for the last 6 months but this ferment was as hot as I could make fermentation about mid to high 80s.


The first ferment smelled exactly like sweet juicy white wine mixed with passon and stone fruit with a hint of sweet grainy/smokey/beer and dark dried fruit on the back end. I swear when I finished the first strip I thoughht I may have accidentally stripped a white Sav blanc or reisling but the subtle grain funk in the back reminded me it was grain. The second run had the same components of the first with a little more fruitiness and funk. The 3rd had all the same components but dialed up the sourdough acidic smell to 10 that accompanied with the fruity white wine/Stone fruit smell and it was heavenly! At the end it tasted like

I "stripped" all three down past 3% coming off the still and had about 40 gallons at around 30% abv low wines total after the first strip. Then I "re-distilled" one more time to have a final cut of 13 gallons at 62% abv that I diluted to 55% and filled up a 15 gallon beer keg leaving some head space for 02 interaction. I had a much wider cut then I thought I would be able to keep. I've read in the past how oats softens up the heads region of the run but I was shocked just how much early distilate I was able to keep that normally at that part of the run is jaggy and harsh to the nose and palate. The nice thing about the heads portion being rounded off is I was able to keep some of the heads portion which had all the fruity juicy flavors associated with the early part of the run with very little detriment to the jaggy aspects normally associated with earlier in run. It reminded me of how you would normally cut a fruit brandy leaving some heads in to fruiten up the product, but it wasn't jaggy at all!

In the 15 gallon keg I added a barel stave from an old 2015 Buffalo trace burbon barel that has been weathering outside off the ground for 1 year hopefully leaching out some of the water soluble tannins. I toasted if for 350° F for 3 hours to help pull out sweetness and vanilla then bumped it upnto 425 for 30 minutes and finished it off witha level 1 char. I ended up with a level 1 char to hopefully provide minimal filtration but still add a small toasting gradient to the stave.

I'm very excited to keep you updated on the flavors of this product as it ages and hopefully provide tasting notes as the flavors change.

I've always been of the opinion that people who sell whisky put as much of the run in the barrel as they can practically get away with and then sell it for as much as they can get.

This leads me to the idea that very wide cuts are as much or more about making money as taste.
The idea that chewy whisky is better whisky is excellent marketing.
The idea that it is better if it is older and therefore more expensive is again excellent marketing.

Younger whisky generally needs narrower cuts to get a good product.
With the same marketing hearts cuts of white whisky could become fashionable instead.

Make what you like. I am getting a little too long in the tooth for making 21-year-old whisky but 10 in a small barrel every year can work.

tiramisu wrote: ↑Fri Apr 28, 2023 7:46 am I've always been of the opinion that people who sell whisky put as much of the run in the barrel as they can practically get away with and then sell it for as much as they can get.

This leads me to the idea that very wide cuts are as much or more about making money as taste.
The idea that chewy whisky is better whisky is excellent marketing.

I half agree. There are a lot of quite expensive Very Old bottlings of Scotch that could easily just be a way of getting some unused barrels out of the warehouse.

But my little collection of single cask Scotch shows that there can be waaaay more complexity in a wider cut. When I look at my tasting notes there are often flavours that I'd love to have in my blend but which go hand-in-hand some really bad funk. If time on oak helps reduce the funk and leaves some of the other stuff then it's worth it.

tiramisu wrote: ↑Fri Apr 28, 2023 7:46 am … I've always been of the opinion that people who sell whisky put as much of the run in the barrel as they can practically get away with and then sell it for as much as they can get …

The “reason” is clear: in Scotland, producers pay taxes based upon what goes into making the product, not simply the product made. Therefore, as much efficiency of production is paramount. Wide cuts and long term aging (to compensate for it) are necessary. And then, when “the angels” take their share, the bottle prices must be escalated to cover the cost of production, labor, and even finance costs (“time value of money”).

If the Scotts could make their beers and spirits like most of the world, where the products were taxed and not the processes, then perhaps their products wouldn’t be as expensive (or as exclusive).

Fortunately, we hobbyists don’t pay taxes on our hobby spirits, so we can use processes that befit our needs (and schedules). And by no means, does that imply that we must use “old world processes” to make an authentic representation of those spirits. In fact, we’re not limited to those classic styles. Age on wood does add character to a product while reducing inherent distasteful components from poor processing (mash & fermentation, and post-distillation collections).

If you can wait 12, or more years for your products to mature and you don’t mind the shrinkage losses, then replicating the Scott’s processes may be beneficial to your stillshed. I don’t have that much time in front of me to wait, so I adapt my processes for my products to be bottled (and consumed) sooner. That way, I’ll get to enjoy them.
ss

still_stirrin wrote: ↑Sun Apr 30, 2023 6:09 am In fact, we’re not limited to those classic styles.

This.

Make the thing you want to drink, don't worry about the label or classification. Making wide cuts does not end well, tails pretty well never age out. I have some of the first stuff I made, wide tails cuts, its been on oak since 2011, still tastes like tailsy garbage.

I did a trade with another stiller a while back, and we talked about what we were tasting. I don't put anything into a barrel that doesn't taste good white, I will spend as much time blending as I do distilling. He cuts wide, and is quick about it... all of his stuff was much older than mine, but he wanted to redistill everything he had made after that comparison. I learned a ton from it as well, he uses a different set of grains than I do, and a different distillation process, it was great to see the differences. Do a run if you can, talk about the differences in the way you run your stills. If yoy can make it happen you will both learn more in that day than you will from reading here and going it alone for months.

You can get an incredibly complex, deep, rich spirit with one grain, precise cuts and minimum age... it's not the width of cuts that makes a great spirit. It is the entire process: grain selection, mashing, fermentation, distillation type and quantity, cuts, barrel selection, aging time and climate, finishing, blending. And all the steps matter (some more than others).

It's also real hard to rely on age at our scale. We don't have enormous Rickhouses with thousands of barrels to eat the losses. We are usually working in small, fast evaporating quantities that are being aged in less than ideal environments. Plus drinking a full barrel of product that didn't "turn out" blows, and there isn't enough other product in our libraries to be able to blend it in to other batches to compensate.