Home Distiller

This might be a stupid question, but I had a teacher once say, no stupid questions, just stupid people.
So, I might fall in the later....anyway....
(and so you know, I tried to search this....but it is such a weird topic, I couldn't search it like I wanted)

Here is some back story to my question:
I was reading Pure Corn Whiskey by Smiley (yes, I know there are some on here who slam it) but I was reading it none the less.
He made a statement that a traditional whiskey still is no good and a goose neck should be used.
That is here nor there and not the topic of this question.

It made me wonder, with all of the different designs of pot stills out there...does the design of the still relate to how the distillate
coming off will taste? Basically, if you run a gooseneck vs. a boka as a pot still vs. a simple stove top...and considering
this is a perfect world and we live in a vacuum....would your middle cuts taste the same? My little brain tells me yes, but
I am curious as to the ole dogs on here that have made more whiskey than Elijah Craig himself have found through experience.
(another reason I ask, is because when scotch makers have new stills installed they put all of the dents in dings in the copper...they
swear it makes a difference if they don't)
Cheers,
CA

Each still has its own personalty .Dont know any other way to put it.Kinda fall into the posts about hybrids.Makes for a range on little added reflux or not.More surface area for copper vapor contact.

whisky distilleries swear that a certain still design creates unique characteristics in there whisky. They have even said that if you were to duplicate a certain still, it still wouldnt create and identical product to its "twin". I watched a deal on whisky distilleries on modern marvels. one of the famous scotch distilleries had been usin the same pot for hundreds of years. They claimed that if they had to get a new still, no matter how close it was to the original, there product would never be the same.

MuleKicker wrote:whisky distilleries swear that a certain still design creates unique characteristics in there whisky. They have even said that if you were to duplicate a certain still, it still wouldnt create and identical product to its "twin". I watched a deal on whisky distilleries on modern marvels. one of the famous scotch distilleries had been usin the same pot for hundreds of years. They claimed that if they had to get a new still, no matter how close it was to the original, there product would never be the same.

Mule,
Saw that episode. I am curious as to the science behind that claim. I am sure there is a lot of truth to it.

Each rig is different. I could do a big wash and split it up between 4 different stills and come out with a noticeably different version. What still is best? That depends on who you ask. Honestly I don't think it's so much about the equipment, it's more about the distiller.

RD

rubber duck wrote: What still is best? That depends on who you ask.
RD

Thanks for the answer, RD. I wasn't even about to tred on the ground your above quote was referencing.

rubber duck wrote:What still is best? That depends on who you ask. Honestly I don't think it's so much about the equipment, it's more about the distiller.

Also, at what point is 3" more height (or what ever) going to offer a measurable difference with out a side by side?

As an aside perspective,,
Old fella used to come round the back yard on jamb nights. His banjo was a technical jahloppy. Did not resonate sound particularly well. First glance wouldn't spend 30 bucks for it at a yard sale.
But man the action on that instrument fit so perfectly with my hands.....I swear it was like I couldn't make a mistake with that old raggiddy ass banjo.

Couldn't get that Gentleman to sell me that jahloppy for nuthin.

Coon-ass wrote:

rubber duck wrote: What still is best? That depends on who you ask.
RD

Thanks for the answer, RD. I wasn't even about to tred on the ground your above quote was referencing.

Good answer.