Month 12 - Johnnie Walker Green Label

Johnnie Walker Green Label
Classification: Blended Malt Scotch Whisky
Country: Scotland
Region: Multiple Regions (Speyside, Highland, Lowland, Islay and the Scottish Islands)
Mash Bill: 100% Malted Barley
Strength: 43.0% ABV (86.0° Proof)
Color: Artificially Colored
Filtration: Chill Filtered
Maturation: 15 Years in both American and European Oak
Price: $59.99 (Total Wine)

Overview

And so it comes to this, our twelfth whisky sample of the year and specifically ounce numbers 45 through 48 of this grand experiment. The first thing I did when devising this concept was to list and assign potential whiskeys to send - each month had to feature an appropriate and meaningful selection, but I did not want to repeat styles on consecutive months. There were revisions, tweaks, and changes to many of the months, yet the original selections for the first month and the last month remained unchanged throughout the editorial process. I wanted to open with an approachable and affordable Single Malt Scotch whose production quality was a notch above most of its price-point rivals. Similarly, I wanted to conclude with a whisky that is maniacally engineered to be reliably enjoyable to a wide spectrum of whiskey fans.

Jack Daniel's, Jim Beam, and Johnnie Walker - this has to be the holy trinity in regard to whiskey brand recognition. Imagine walking into a random watering hole and asking the barkeep simply for 'a whiskey'; it is said that in America it will be a coin-toss as to whether you receive a pour of Jack or Jim, but in the rest of the world, there is a high probability the bartender would pour you a Johnnie Walker.

Just as with Jack and Jim, there really was a Johnnie, well John Walker at least. Born in 1805, John Walker started his professional life as a grocery merchant but quickly shifted his focus to selling spirits. An odd choice for a man who chose not to consume alcohol personally. In his day, blended whiskey was far and away the most common presentation of Scotch Whisky and as such, John Walker produced a number of customer-specific blends of both malt and grain whiskies using just his name written on the bottle as he had no label of his own. In his day, the law forbade blending malt whiskey with grain whiskey - you could blend malts together, you could blend different grain whiskies together, but you were forbidden from blending a malt and a grain whiskey; quite a different story today, but we'll get to that in just a bit.

While John Walker had comfortable success in his life, it was his son and grandson that really skyrocketed the Walker whisky blending business. In 1860, John's son Alexander debuted two design details that are synonymous with Johnnie Walker to this day - its square bottle design (allowing more bottles to fit on a shelf) and its slanted label, precisely 24-degrees upward, left to right (allowing larger and more visible text). So iconic are these two design elements that a bottle of Johnny Walker is immediately distinguishable from all other products that it might happen to share a shelf with. In addition to cementing Johnnie Walker's brand identity, Johnnie Walker went on a distillery purchasing spree to ensure an ample and diverse supply of whisky from which they would produce their blends. You see, to a whiskey blender, consistency is paramount - they strive to ensure a bottle of blended whiskey purchased today tastes identical to a bottle of the same blended whiskey produced a year ago or even ten years ago. Because whiskey varies not only year to year, but barrel to barrel, the only way a whiskey blender can ensure consistency is to produce blends containing as many individual whiskeys as practically possible.

Today, Johnnie Walker is owned and produced by drinks giant Diageo. No entity on Earth produces more whisky than Diageo. In Scotland alone, Digeo operates twenty-eight distilleries whose combined annual yield is approximately one-third of all Scotch whisky produced. It is with the bounty from this stable of distilleries that Johnnie Walker produces its blends. Note that Johnnie Walker produces only Scotch whisky blends which legally are classified into three possible categories:

1. Blended Malt Scotch Whisky - a blend of two or more single malt Scotch whiskies from different distilleries.
2. Blended Grain Scotch Whisky - a blend of two or more single grain Scotch whiskies from different distilleries.
3. Blended Scotch Whisky - a blend of one or more single malt Scotch whiskies with one or more single grain Scotch whiskies.

Of Johnnie Walker's seven core blends, six are Blended Scotch Whiskies (#3 above) and only one, Month Twelve's Green Label, is a Blended Malt Scotch Whisky (#1 above). To me this is a huge distinction because it is only a blended malt that contains only single malt scotch whisky. The other two categories contain single malt and/or single grain, think things like vodka. This means that Johnnie Walker's most expensive core offering - the fabled Blue Label - contains single malt and non-malt Scotch whiskies. For the price of a single bottle of Blue Label, you could buy three bottles of Green Label and have three bottles containing exclusively Single Malt Scotch Whisky. That is a no-brainer to me.

First introduced in 1997, Green Label became immediately popular among single malt fans despite coming from a brand that some single malt devotees chide for being more marketing than substance. Temporarily discontinued in 2012 to make room for Gold and Platinum Labels, Diageo happily brought Green Label back in 2016. Johnnie Walker lists four specific single malts that represent the key components (using their marketing-speak) of Green Label - Talisker (The Power), Linkwood (The Finesse), Craggenmore (The Heart), and as sampled in Month Four, Caol Ila (The Mystery). All four distilleries are unsurprisingly owned by Diageo, but the reality of Green Label is that it is almost certainly comprised of far more malts from additional distilleries. Because all of Johnnie Walker's blending recipes are trade secrets, we can only speculate, but it is almost certain that well over a dozen different single malts are used in Green Label. Some even speculate that over two dozen single malts are used in Green Label which is certainly plausible given Diageo's prolific Scottish portfolio. Regardless of the actual blend recipe, we can state with complete certainty that not only is Green Label only made with Single Malt Scotch Whisky, but that the youngest drop of whisky in the bottle is at least 15-years old; a remarkable attribute given recent trends where whiskies are being released younger or without any age statement whatsoever.

To me whiskey production's two phases are the perfect marriage between science and art. The first phase, distillation, is pure science, pure chemical engineering. The second phase, maturation, is pure art as no two barrels of whiskey will mature identically. A blender must pick the appropriate barrels in the appropriate proportions whose combination will result in the desired taste profile. A good blender can often perform miracles by reliably producing a product that is notably better than the sum of its parts. Blending can just as easily mask imperfect whiskey as it can elevate delightful whiskey. It does boggle the mind to think of the task at hand for the blenders of Johnnie Walker - mixing together dozens of single malts whose end-result will be near identical through the years.

Lastly, I'll conclude with a few thoughts on whiskey blending at home. Consumers can, and should, dabble in whiskey blending at home. Do you have a bottle of ho-hum whiskey? Don't toss it away, try blending it to a higher plateau. Experiment by adding a portion of a favorite whiskey, or a dominate whiskey and, after allowing a few days for the blend to marry, see if it improves the experience. Personally, I have had luck in adding just a few drops of a peated single malt like Laphroaig to a lackluster whiskey; it is amazing how the peat complexity really lifts the overall enjoyment of the mediocre whiskey. Some home blenders approach blending with stedfast discipline, documenting each blending experiment while others are far more casual and fancy-free. There is no right or wrong approach, only experimentation and a loyalty to one's palate. If it tastes great to you, that is all that matters. Blend on my fine malt mates and bourbon buddies.

Tasting Notes

Group Impressions

Well well well, Month Twelve was fascinating indeed; the first month that saw universal enjoyment and desire to purchase the whisky sampled. Since everyone, save myself, tasted this blind, one must give a tremendous pat on the back to the blenders at Johnnie Walker as they bottled a blend that resonated quite positively with everyone in the group without any confirmation or brand bias. Further kudos must be given to both the blenders and the group as everyone picked up on at least one of the blend's official attributes denoted in Johnnie Walker's tasting notes. One of the coolest aspects of Green Label to me personally is how the blend captures so many hallmark single malt notes. You have honey and fruit sweetness from the Highlands and Speyside, grass and salt from the Lowlands, and of course the unmistakable peat from Islay and the Islands regions. Intermingled is a delightful whisper of aromatic woods that most likely comes from the mix of bourbon and sherry barrels used for maturation of the respective malts.

Fitting that our final month had the strongest consensus among the group as to the offering's many qualities and few shortcomings. Everyone picked up on the offering's modest proof, interesting mix of flavors, smoothness, and yes, it's shorter than desired finish. Very well done to all and a hearty thank you for playing along this past year. Rather than say goodbye, let's say until next time because who knows what 2019 will have in store.

Apollo
Our sample this month looked pretty standard upon visual inspection. It had a light brown color, and after swirling it in the glass, the legs started to drip like normal. However, they seemed to stick there on the side of the glass and never really disappeared. That was a little unusual in my experience. Although, it's possible that I just don't often let it sit long enough to notice that!

The smell didn't strike me with anything strong but I did notice a slight smell of peat.

Once I tasted it though, it was clear that this was something nice. It was very smooth. It didn't have much alcohol burn at all. No immediate flavors jumped out at me except for just a general sweetness. But after swallowing it, I was hit with a wonderful peaty flavor. It was like magic. I couldn't taste the peat at all until after it was gone. I've had very peaty scotches before, but never one that was so stealthy. It was a great flavor and a really nice surprise. Based on the peat flavor and the smoothness, I'm expecting this one to be a scotch in the 80 proof range.

So, as you can probably tell, I really liked this one. It was smooth drinking, very flavorful, and that flavor presented itself in an extremely interesting way. I can't wait to find out what it was!

Jonathan Quayle Higgins
Appearance
Light copper with a bit of the infamous e-150 glow of artificial coloring. Normally I loathe when producers artificially color their whiskies, but I have read that caramel coloring is used in blended whiskies for a practical purpose as it helps the multiple whiskies blend and marry in a blend. The truth is, every blended whiskey I have seen has been artificially colored, so it is unfair to ding Johnnie Walker for this if it is standard operating procedure for blenders.

Nose
Barley sugar, grass notes, fresh grass, not dried grass. Definite peat smoke, gentle, certainly not a pure Islay malt, but very reminiscent of the delightful Caol Ila. After a few moments in the glass, more fruit emerges for me, particularly peaches. There is a wood note here, not a charred wood, more of a aromatic wood. Gentle alcohol on the nose, far from fierce, but enough to know this is indeed a distilled spirit. This is a very inviting nose, a nice balance of smoke, fruit, and aromatics.

Taste
As with the nose, barley sugar leads the way here. Mild smoke and finally a fruit sweetness near the end of the sip. There is alcohol here, I would grade it as mild, not sharp, not even prickly, but present. Adding water is interesting, I feel after water this whisky becomes a bit spicier. I can’t say I have experienced increased spiciness as a result of adding a few drops of water with any other whisky.

Finish
Short if I am honest, medium-short if I am being generous. Smoke is most prevalent with the aromatic wood from the nose reappearing and lingering throughout. Just as with the taste, the addition of water brings more spice out on the finish. I just wish the finish was longer...

Overall
My previous bottle of Green Label had a screw top and a intricate plastic pour diffuser in the neck. I didn’t mind either, but the most recent bottles purchased have returned to an empty neck and a cork topper. Also, the most recent bottles have a lovely thick slab of tapered glass found at the bottle’s base, I gotta admit, it looks posh and fantastic.

Bottle aesthetics aside, Green Label is a thoroughly enjoyable whisky. I know some fans of Scotch whisky immediately dismiss Johnnie Walker the same way some fans of Bourbon dismiss Jack Daniel’s, but that is a bit unfair in my opinion. Not only is there nothing wrong with Green Label, I think there is a lot of enjoyment and satisfaction to be found in its pours. I do wish it was offered at a higher proof, even 3% more ABV would be a significant boost. The finish is in my opinion the weakest aspect to the experience as it is far too short. That ABV bump would help this I suspect. The nose and taste are both quite enjoyable - some fruit, some peat, some aromatic wood, a very nice all around experience. Price-wise, of course I would love a lower price, but in reality I can’t knock its $60 asking price given its 15-year age statement. These days, the $60 price-point typically nets you a 12-year single malt, so given the 15-year age statement combined with the luxury tax commanded by the Johnnie Walker label, $60 is not too shabby. This is a malt that has always been on my shelf and I find myself pouring Green Label whenever I just want to relax with an enjoyable, familiar pour.

Zeus
Appearance
Pale gold color. Legs are easily apparent.

Smell
Woody/smoky scent initially. Smells like a scotch, but not an overpowering one as the wood scent was subtle.  A little sweetness comes through in the scent for me. Cherry popped up on further sniffs.

Taste
Very light bite to it, somewhat mellow. There is that cherry again, tasting it this time. Not much wood taste to it, but it's there in the back. The cherry taste degraded quickly after further sips, might of been me consciously trying to pull that flavor out of it.

Finish
Nice smooth finish. The wood/smoke comes through came out better here.

General Thoughts
At first I was thinking this is a scotch. A very fine scotch.  It's so we'll balanced started to think this might be a Japanese whiskey. I compared it to a couple of Japanese whiskey's I had, a Yamazaki 12 year and Suntory Toki. The Toki was closer, but I think the sample tasted better.  fter the comparison I'm still on the fence, might be a Scotch or a Japanese whiskey, which a slight leaning to the Japanese whiskey. Great whiskey regardless, this would be one I would seek out and buy.

Admiral Hawkes
This month’s treat is a pleasant Scotch, with a nice golden/amber color, a nose that says scotch, but without the sting of alcohol that the hotter ones deliver. I could not quite find the words to describe the aroma.. almost a little corn, which is weird unless it was aged in a bourbon barrel.

I had the first taste neat as always. I liked it and found it drinkable. I want to say I tasted smoke and fire, but it was not overtly peaty, not sure how they pull that off. Nor was it hot, as my first sniff anticipated. The aftertaste, and I mean a good minute after a nice sip, had some sweetness to it. I was pleased, but somewhat baffled, because I still could not find words.

Two weeks later, I poured the remainder in a glass with intent to add a few drops of water.  I didn’t... neat again, and much the same result.  This time the aftertaste went int the direction of orchard fruit and a hint of vanilla. This was a good dram, delivering a smooth and not overpowering experience. I usually like to make guesses, but instead I will await the reveal and be surprised regardless.

Happy Holidays to all!

Carol Baldwin
Appearance
Golden yellow. When sipping I noticed several well formed legs.

Smell
Like a scotch! Ok, to elaborate, slightly peaty and grassy with some wood. A bit of resin and alcohol warmth.

Taste
It's a flavor explosion on the tongue. It's at first peaty and grassy; resinous. It mellows into a softly woody taste with well balanced alcohol heat and hints of tobacco.

Finish
Slightly bitter and warm.

General Thoughts
I really like this well balanced whiskey. A lot of flavor and it's a pleasure to sip neat. A fitting finish to end 2018!

Waldo Norris
Had a great night, cold outside, raining, and just a touch of feeling like winter (for Florida), so what better way to warm my insides with a nice glass of whiskey.

Appearance is a golden amber color

Aroma smelled of spices, tea and peppermint, with perhaps just a tad of vanilla.

The taste was smooth and fresh, which develop into a gentle bite, which had a dry, clean and brief finish.

Just to come clean, I had my first glass of this on a night that was a normal Florida in Winter kind of night. I did enjoy it on the first night, neat as a whistle. I rather enjoyed just sipping on this, as I wasn't looking for a heavy liquor that night. I would say this is an 80 proof whiskey, which on that particular night was perfect.

Tonight when I tried this glass, I did add a drop of water and allowed the drink to open a little more to see what more I could get from the nose. It did smell about the same as the first night, although I thought I could pick up more of the Vanilla on the second night. I'm not sure I liked adding the water as much (albeit, my cooler shoved a little more in the glass than i wanted), but it almost took away from some of the first night flavor that I was picking up on.

This to me seems like a drinkable whiskey, probably American. I'll venture a guess that is may be something from the Jim Beam distillery.

Favorite Pours of 2018 - Part Three: Jefferson's Ocean Voyage 14

Life my friends is a matter of perspective. Imagine if we selected two near-identical barrels, taste wise, of 6 to 7 year old Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey and then rolled one of those barrels back into the warehouse, but rolled the other into a steel shipping container that itself was placed on a cargo ship that proceeded to take to the high seas for the next six months. During its journey, the barrel would cross the equator four times, pass through the Panama Canal at least once, and visit over thirty different ports of call. The question is, once our seafaring barrel returned home, would it still taste 'near-identical' to its warehouse-bound sibling as it had before departing?

Bourbon nerds tend to have one of two responses to the above scenario - 'wow, who cares, that sounds like a pure marketing gimmick to sell inferior whiskey at a premium price ' or 'wow, that sounds amazing, let's get to tasting and find out! '. See, perspective, but sending barrels of whiskey scooting around the world's oceans is precisely what Jefferson's does to hundreds of barrels of bourbon each year. Their motivation is two-fold - first to pay homage to how bourbon used to travel from Kentucky to New Orleans via flatboats on the Mississippi River, and second to explore the effects of near-constant motion/agitation that a ship at sea induces on barrels of whiskey. To date, there have been sixteen different voyages (Jefferson's website only lists fifteen, but I do have a bottle from voyage 16), most bottled at a common 45%, but some bottled at 'cask strength'.

I will admit, what drew me to this particular bottle was the neck-tag bearing the double red-with-black square maritime flags that are flown when hurricanes are nearby and approaching. I had never purchased a Jefferson's product up to that point, but reading the tag's text describing Voyage 14's journey pushed me over the speculative edge. The ship carrying Voyage 14's bourbon departed Savannah on May 31, 2017. While en-route to the Panama Canal, the ship would fly a single red-with-black square flag indicating proximity to 'only' tropical storm level weather. When the ship crossed into the Pacific to continue its journey however, she would fly the double red-with-black square flags five separate times as she darted between typhoons while servicing her Pacific Basin itinerary before crossing back through the Panama Canal to return home.

Now does any of this make a lick of difference in this bourbon's quality? That I'm afraid I cannot answer conclusively, but I don't think anyone would dispute that it makes for one heck of a story. For me, a whiskey's story does play a part in the overall experience, but I do completely understand those who feel that it's what fills the glass that is important, not what fills the advertising copy.

So what's in this glass? Well, we can say Kentucky Straight Bourbon but we cannot get more specific than that as Jefferson's doesn't actually distill a drop of their bourbon nor do they say where their older bourbons originated from. Moving past the provenance, I will offer my opinion that regardless of voyage number, each pour I have had from the Jefferson's Ocean line has tasted entirely unique from any other bourbon I have tasted, even within other Jefferson's product lines. From first smell and taste, I was instantly intrigued by these bourbons.

The nose is unlike any other straight bourbon I have ever enjoyed. Floral, candy, cotton candy, even bubble gum all come to mind. There is some spice, but the hallmark vanilla and caramel are notably muted, replaced with more of a toffee smell. Bottled at 56% ABV, the alcohol is nearly absent to the nose. The aromas continue to the palate, but the spice is far more dominant in the mouth; this has got to be a rye-based bourbon. Amazingly, the sweetness, and this is a sweet bourbon, is not the corn sweetness of most bourbons, no it is a candy sweetness, dare I say even a salted caramel or toffee. There is near-zero wood in the experience, which is staggering to me - one of the few bourbons I have experienced where this is true. While this bourbon sips far easier than its proof indicates, there is an alcohol prickle indicative of a youthful bourbon. Don't confuse prickle with harshness however, there is nothing harsh in this experience for me. The finish is medium-length to me with spice first, then more of that candy sweetness, the bubblegum impression from the nose returns for me on the finish. Like with the smell and taste, there is near-zero oak/wood on the finish.

Did the months at sea influence this bourbon's flavor? Well, given how unique every Ocean pour is to me from any other bourbon, I personally feel the answer is yes. But returning to perspective, I also fall on the 'wow, that sounds amazing ' side of the fence, so impartial I am not. I love the idea of bourbon sloshing around as a ship plods along on the open ocean and I want to believe that yes, being at sea actually does impart some maritime magic into the bourbon. I want to believe...

I must go down to the seas again, to the lonely sea and the sky,
And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by;
And the wheel’s kick and the wind’s song and the white sail’s shaking,
And a grey mist on the sea’s face, and a grey dawn breaking.
- John Masefield

Drink up me hearties yo ho

Favorite Pours of 2018 - Part Two: Colonel E.H. Taylor Small Batch

Whoooo boy, this was not the original introduction to this post. Once the initial draft was complete, I realized that this post ballooned far beyond what I expected as I prattled on about the man and his namesake product line before ever discussing the specific bourbon I enjoyed this year. Faced with a choice between editorial discipline or blubbering ceaselessly, I opted for a compromise - a get-to-the-point intervention where I move the portion specifically dealing with the pour up to the top and move the backstory bloat to the end for those who might be interested. So without further ado, let's get to it, hooch first, history second.

Colonel E. H. Taylor Small Batch bourbon is produced by the Buffalo Trace Distillery. Of the four regularly produced whiskeys in the Taylor product line, the Small Batch is the easiest* to find at retail. Those familiar with Buffalo Trace products immediately understand the meaning of the asterisk as virtually every product from that fabled distillery typically lingers for less than a day upon delivery to retail shelves. That being said, each year for the past three years, I have been able to purchase at least one bottle of E. H. Taylor Small Batch at retail, so there is hope.

Late last year, I had Matic ... err Robin Masters present to me four identical glasses, each containing a half-ounce of a different Buffalo Trace product. Each glass was labeled with only a single letter such that Robin knew what was in each glass, but I had no clue. After working through the lineup, I offered up my ranking as well as a guess as to what bourbon was in which glass. I ranked the samples in the following order, favorite to least-favorite: #1) E. H. Taylor Small Batch, #2) Blanton's, #3) Eagle Rare, and #4) Buffalo Trace. Embarrassingly, I did not correctly identify any of the individual samples. Going into the blind tasting, I was convinced that I would put Eagle Rare at #1 and Blanton's at #4. This goes to show why blind tasting is such a powerful tool - it forces you to experience a whiskey in a totally honest way, void of all preconception and bias.

Bottled at 50% ABV, the inviting copper color is only the beginning of this whiskey's enjoyment for me. The nose is interesting - seductively, there is more to smell here than bourbon's hallmark notes of vanilla and caramel. There is actual fruit for me, cherries come to mind, as has apricot in some tastings. Very odd because Buffalo Trace's Eagle Rare bourbon is made from the same recipe and is more or less the same age, yet in there, Jolly Rancher Green Apple jumps out at me. Incredible.

Taste-wise there is a vibrant corn/grain sweetness but with a kettle-corn twist on the sweetness. Some vanilla, light oak, and light to medium spice, particularly cinnamon. The finish is on the long side for me and improves with each successive sip. More sweetness, light spice, light wood and zero drying effect. Of the three phases of the experience, I would say taste takes the top spot with the finish slightly edging out the nose for the second step on the podium, but I am splitting hairs here, I thoroughly enjoy every aspect of this bourbon.

Restructuring intervention complete, but wait, there's more! For those interested in more Taylor goodness, feel free to peruse below, beginning with this posts's original introduction.

Colonel Edmund Haynes Taylor, Jr. was quite the individual - a mayor, Kentucky state senator, successful businessman, all with notable distinction, but those achievements take a backseat to the purpose of this post because Colonel Taylor was also one heck of a whiskey man. While the topic of this post is the bourbon bearing his name, I feel it would be a great injustice to not mention at least a bullet-point summary of his whiskey contributions. In 1870 Colonel Taylor purchased a small distillery that today is known as Buffalo Trace. By all historical accounts, Colonel Taylor labored tirelessly to improve the quality of bourbon production and presentation which in turn cemented bourbon's perception as a premium spirit. In his day, bourbon's quality was often compromised by unscrupulous vendors who horrendously altered the whiskey they purchased from a distillery before selling it to individual consumers - think rampant dilution compensated with grain alcohol, turpentine, tobacco juice for color, etc. Because of this, bourbon began to gain a reputation of rot-gut garbage and Colonel Taylor, along with other distillery owners, joined forces to address this issue. Among the innovations - whiskey would be individually bottled at the distillery under brand names and sold to vendors in sealed bottles as well as the Bottled in Bond Act of 1897 that introduced a Federal Government supervised standard in spirit production, maturation, bottling, and labeling.

Colonel Taylor also changed for the better the perception of the distillery itself. He was the first to build a distillery not as an industrial plant, but as a tourist destination. His distilleries featured intricate architectural details, elaborate gardens, and ample space for visitors to explore, relax, host formal social events, or just a leisurely afternoon family picnic. The last distillery he owned, the Old Taylor Distillery on Glenn's Creek near Frankfort, Kentucky was recently purchased, restored, and back to distilling whiskey under the name Castle & Key. Happily, the new owners preserved and accurately restored much of Colonel Taylor's original vision both architecturally as well as in spirit production. To oversee spirit production, Marianne Eaves, formerly Woodford Reserve's co-master distiller, was hired as master distiller.

Now let's talk bourbon - produced by Buffalo Trace, a distillery Colonel Taylor once owned, Colonel E. H. Taylor Small Batch is sold as a non-age-stated, Bottled in Bond Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey. Because it is Bottled in Bond, we know that the bourbon in the bottle is at least 4 years old and is bottled at precisely 50% ABV. Having tried numerous whiskeys that are four and five years old, upon trying E. H. Taylor Small Batch, it became blindingly obvious to me that Buffalo Trace is using much older whiskey than the legal minimum. Indeed, even Buffalo Trace's master distiller Harlen Wheatley has verbally stated in interviews that the bourbon used in the E. H. Taylor line is on average 10 to 12 years old.

Further, Buffalo Trace has also stated that E. H. Taylor Small Batch is produced using their Mash Bill #1, which is also known as their 'low rye' mash bill. Currently, Buffalo Trace has three bourbon 'recipes', each differentiated by its mash bill:

Mash bill #1, low rye (thought to be less than 10% rye), produces their E. H. Taylor, Eagle Rare, George Stagg (both antique and Jr.), their namesake Buffalo Trace, Old Charter, and Benchmark #8 bourbons.

Mash bill #2, high rye (thought to be 12 - 15% rye), produces their Elmer T. Lee, Blanton's, Hancock Reserve, and Ancient Age bourbons.

Mash bill #3, wheated (wheat in place of rye), produces their Weller and Van Winkle bourbons.

Incredibly, Buffalo Trace has offered nine different variants of whiskey within their E.H. Taylor family, yet most were limited, one-and-done type releases. Almost all releases however were produced from the mash bill #1 recipe. There are four annually produced E. H. Taylor whiskeys:

Small Batch - the most common, verbally stated that each batch consists of 20 to 40 barrels of bourbon blended and selected by their tasting panel. In my opinion the most consistent in regard to taste-profile.

Single Barrel - just as the name implies, a single barrel of bourbon that Buffalo Trace's tasting panel feels is representative of the E. H. Taylor taste profile. Personally, I have had examples of single barrel that are toe-curlingly incredible, but I have also had examples that I felt were less impressive than the Small Batch.

Barrel Proof - also as the name implies - effectively Small Batch that is bottled without dilution. The only offering in the E. H. Taylor lineup that is not Bottled in Bond as it is not bottled at precisely 50% ABV. Naively, I passed up the opportunity to purchase a bottle of this at retail over three years ago; I have yet to see another bottle in the wild.

Straight Rye - not a bourbon and as such, made from Buffalo Trace's forth whiskey recipe, their rye whiskey recipe. I have never personally sampled this, though it is the easiest of the E.H. Taylor lineup to find in retail shops.

Now we get into the exotic, one-time/limited releases in the E. H. Taylor lineup. I have personally seen only one of these in the wild, but I would love to try some, particularly the tornado survivor:

Old Fashioned Sour Mash - Buffalo Trace state that whiskey bottled under this label utilizes a sour mash process similar to one used in Taylor's day - one that allows the mash to sour naturally for days before distillation. I believe this was one of Buffalo Trace's experimental offerings and as such its production run was small and finite. I do not believe Buffalo Trace has produced this variant in some time.

Warehouse C Tornado Surviving - just as the name implies, on April 2, 2006, a tornado passed near the distillery and damaged Warehouse C (a warehouse that Taylor himself had built in 1881). It took some time for the warehouse to be repaired, in fact the warehouse went roofless and partially wall-less for an entire summer, exposing the barrels stacked inside to the elements. Upon tasting the barrels years later, Buffalo Trace felt they had something special and as such offered a very limited, very rare product. I have never personally tasted this bourbon, but have read recaps from many who have tasted this bourbon blind, and all agree that it is beyond fantastic.

Cured Oak - The barrels used to produce this variant were constructed of staves that were seasoned (aka cured) for 13 months (more than double the standard length of time) before being assembled into barrels. The bourbon was aged for an astonishing 17 years in these barrels before bottling.

Seasoned Wood - one of two E. H. Taylor bourbons not to be made from mash bill #1, this rendition featured Buffalo Trace's wheated bourbon recipe. The barrels for this release utilized staves that were immersed in an enzyme rich bath for a period of time before being kiln-dried as well as staves that were seasoned outdoors for six months and still other staves that were left outdoors for a full 12 months. Finally, all the staves were brought together to form the barrels in which this release was aged.

Four Grain - essentially a one-time release, however Buffalo Trace spread the release across two consecutive years. Demand skyrocketed for this release when Jim Murray named this bourbon his 2018 World Whiskey of the Year. Just as the label indicates, this offering was made from a custom mash bill containing corn, malted barley, rye, and wheat. Aged for 12 and 13 years respectively and released in 2017 and 2018, this bourbon became one of the most sought after items of the year, particularly after the accolades started flowing.

Favorite Pours of 2018 - Part One: The Balvenie Peat Week 14 Year

Despite Best of 2018  type monologues being a tad cliched, the urge to recap and highlight some of my favorite pours from this year is difficult to resist. As such, allow me the indulgence, and my apologies for contributing to a phenomenon that is overplayed, but at least we're talking whiskey here.

Balvenie has always been a hit-or-miss distillery for me in terms of their offerings. Their now-discontinued 15 Year Single Barrel from ex-bourbon barrels remains one of my favorite pours and constituted the first whisky I purchased in volume to 'bunker away' for the future. Sadly, the current rendition of the 15 Year Single Barrel, drawn from ex-sherry barrels, fell flat to my palate and consequently my half-full bottle was gifted to a friend who enjoyed the pour far more than I. Similarly, neither Balvenie's popular 12 Year Doublewood or 14 Year Caribbean Cask resonated with my tastes and consequently left me cautious when contemplating the purchase of an unknown Balvenie offering.

In 2017, Balvenie debuted a 14-year Peat Week release. The premise - beginning in 2002, Balvenie dedicated one week of their production schedule to producing and distilling a heavily peated malted barley. Balvenie's motivation, according to Internet scuttlebutt, was primarily to give their production team experience in producing a peated malted barley (Balvenie is one of the few Scottish distilleries that still produce, rather than purchase, their malted barley).

Two traits make the 14-year Peat Week a noteworthy offering from Balvenie: first, and most glaring, Balvenie traditionally only distills non-peated malt and second, Balvenie opted to use 100% Highland peat rather than Islay peat; geographically appropriate considering Balvenie is located in the Speyside region of the Highlands. When most folks think peated whisky, they think of Islay malts - Laphroaig, Ardbeg, Lagavulin, etc. Each of those Islay malts deliver an earthy, grassy, bog fire due to Islay's peat characteristics. Highland peat however is a totally different animal. Rather than emanating from swampy bogs adjacent to coastlines, Highland peat comes from forest-dense, rocky, mountainous terrain and as such is more mineral and dry-wood smoke.

Once distilled, the whisky is placed in American oak barrels, almost certainly ex-bourbon barrels, and left to age for fourteen years. Come bottling time, Balvenie do the whisky a great service by bottling in natural color, without chill-filtration, and at a very generous 48.3% alcohol by volume. The label found on the packaging and bottle displays the year of distillation, essentially that Peat Week's vintage if you will.

2017 saw the release of the 2002 distillation year and this year saw the release of the 2003 distillation year. When the 2002 vintage appeared on the shelf, my apprehension was overshadowed by my curiosity to try a Highland peated malt, a fairly rare style of whisky these days, from a distillery that has both excited and disappointed my palate through the years. Odd isn't it - the allure of a gamble that you know will not deliver average results, it's either going to be cheers or tears; such gambles often bring out the inner-optimist of even the most resolute of pessimists. The pour, happily, was love at first sniff and sip - campfire is most prevelant, but the smoke is very controlled. If I were to compare the 'smokiness' of other peated malts to the Balvenie, I would score Laphroaig or Ardbeg a 9 out of 10, Highland Park a 2 out of 10 and the Balvenie a 4 out of 10.

The ABV is high enough to give the whisky an impression of feistiness, but no where near harsh or rough. Unsurprisingly, the malt does fantastically well with a drop or two of water which opens up more fruit and honey notes without diminishing the peat smoke one bit.

I have been fortunate enough to purchase bottles from both the 2002 and 2003 distillation years. They are predictably similar, but not as identical as one might guess. To my tastes, the 2003 distillation year is slightly more peaty, perhaps a 5 out of 10 using the scale mentioned previously. This increased peat could be due to the barley used in the 2003 run or it could also be due to my opened 2002 bottle having oxidized over the course of the year as opposed to my freshly opened 2003 bottle. Regardless, both are darn enjoyable and recommended to any peated whisky fan. If you do happen to procure a bottle, be sure to taste the Balvenie Peat Week alongside an Islay peated whisky - I think you will be surprised at how the subtle differences between Highland and Islay peat really do stand out when experienced alongside one another.

The Standard

Earlier this year I talked about variations of the Old Fashioned that are enjoyed in our house. Since then, I noticed I kept returning to one specific variant and thought it only fair to share. By and large, this variant is in keeping with those discussed earlier, but there is a new dancer at the disco - orange curacao.

Like many, when shopping for orange curacao, I would trundle down to the liqueur/schnapps section of the bottle shop and pluck out one of the cheaper offerings. How nonsensical that I would agonize over a cocktail's main spirits, purchasing the best examples I could, but then put near-zero effort into the support player's selection. That all changed when I was strongly urged by a friend to consider purchasing a 'proper' curacao, one actually comprised of cognac/brandy and real bitter orange peels from the curacao orange (yup, an actual fruit!). I am here to tell you malt mates and bourbon buddies, what a difference it makes - gone is the syrupy, cloyingly artificial orange imposter and in its place a graceful, smooth, authentically orange elixir. If interested, the brand used is Pierre Ferrand Dry Curacao and can be found in most large liquor stores for ~$35/750 ml. Now, let's get mixing!

Ingredients

• 1/3 ounce Dry Orange Curacao
• 1 tablespoon Pure Maple Syrup
• 3/4 ounce Rye Whiskey
• 3/4 ounce 'smooth' Bourbon Whiskey (Four Roses Small Batch in this case)
• 3/4 ounce 'feisty' Bourbon Whiskey (Evan Williams Bottled in Bond in this case)
• 5 dashes Peychaud's Bitters

Technique

1. Pour the curacao into your glass and give the glass a good swirl such that the curacao coats the sides of the glass. 
2. Add the maple syrup to the glass
3. Add each of the whiskeys
4. Add the bitters
5. Give everything a good stir then taste. If too sweet, add more whiskey. If too bitter, add more maple syrup. Adjust to your preferences, keeping in mind we will be adding ice next, so some dilution will occur. Personally, I prefer a more whiskey-forward taste than sweetness, but you are the king or queen of your cocktail.
6. Add ice and stir well for ~30 seconds. If desired, remove ice.
7. Cheers!

So Make it One for my Baby...

and one more for the road...

Month 11 - Wild Turkey Rare Breed

Wild Turkey Rare Breed
Classification: Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey
Country: United States of America
Region: Kentucky (Lawrenceburg: 38.0386N, -84.851W)
Mash Bill: 75% Corn, 13% Rye, 12% Malted Barley
Strength: 58.4% ABV (116.8° Proof)
Color: Natural Color
Filtration: Non-Chill Filtered
Maturation: Unknown Age (Wild Turkey verbally claims a mix of 6, 8, and 12 years) all in 100% New Charred Oak
Price: $42.99 (Total Wine)

Overview

Could there be any other whiskey to send in November!? Yes, it is cliched; yes, it is close to the nose; and yes, it could even be deemed cheesy, but I adore just about everything regarding Wild Turkey.

While the name Jim Beam is synonymous with bourbon, it is a name several generations removed from the present day and as such has transcended into bourbon mythology. What makes Wild Turkey so endearing is that it also has a mythological name associated to its bourbon, but this person is very much alive and still actively making whiskey.

Jimmy Russell's first day of employment at the Anderson County/Boulevard Distillery in Tyrone Kentucky was September 10, 1954. Thirteen years later, Jimmy was named Master Distiller. As of this writing, sixty-four years after his first day, Jimmy Russell is still Master Distiller at that same distillery, though today it is known as the Wild Turkey Distillery. If you were to ever ponder how Wild Turkey came to be a globally known and respected whiskey, it can be said, completely free of hyperbole, that Jimmy Russell deserves a significant amount of credit for Wild Turkey's success. That success, as most great success stories are, was anything but a sure thing. In fact, its roots lie in the most humble of beginnings - a grocer's generic store brand.

Through the late 1800s into the early 1900s, the Austin, Nichols & Co. was the largest grocery wholesaler in the world. After prohibition however, the grocery industry began to change and Austin Nichols entered into wine and spirit distribution as a means to diversify. By the 1940s, the Woolworth Brothers 'five and dime' concept changed the dry goods wholesale model to such a degree that Austin Nichols decided to exit grocery wholesale entirely and focus on wine and spirit distribution exclusively.

Seeking a generic 'house' brand of whiskey to offer alongside, but at a lower price than name-brand whiskeys, Austin Nichols devised their own whiskey brand - Wild Turkey - and began shopping around Kentucky for barrels of bourbon to purchase and bottle.

The first bottling of Wild Turkey 101 whiskey hit store shelves in 1942 and was a respectable success year after year. Wild Turkey's success became so dependable that in the 1970s, Austin Nichols decided it was in their best interest to shift from bourbon purchaser to bourbon producer. Their first stop - the distillery that had produced the vast majority of the whiskey Austin Nichols had purchased to sell as Wild Turkey - the Anderson County/Boulevard Distillery in Tyrone Kentucky. And so, in 1971, the Anderson County/Boulevard Distillery became the Austin Nichols Distillery and subsequently the Wild Turkey Distillery and with it, Jimmy Russell whose sole marching order was to not change anything,  'just keep doing what your doing and keep your bourbon the same'.

With historical context, it is amazing to think of the Wild Turkey story. When someone orders and enjoys a Wild Turkey, they do not think they are procuring a generic store brand. They don't think they are ordering a well spirit offered at happy hour prices. They are ordering Wild Turkey and Wild Turkey is a legend thanks very much in part to Jimmy Russell's standard of excellence and continuing to produce whiskey the way he was taught by his predecessors. Jimmy transformed the Austin Nichols Wild Turkey from a generic brand to an icon.

In 1980, Austin Nichols sold the Wild Turkey Distillery to Pernod Ricard who in turn sold the distillery to the Campari Group in 2009. Though ownership has changed, Jimmy has not. In 1981, Jimmy's youngest son - Eddie Russell - joined the distillery but not as a distiller, no Jimmy started his son at the bottom of the ladder so to speak. Cutting grass, rolling barrels, cleaning the vast expanse of the operation. Eddie quite literally worked his way up the chain and ultimately became warehouse and maturation manager overseeing all the barrels of Wild Turkey whiskey as they aged. In 2015, Eddie was named Master Distiller when it was thought that Jimmy was retiring. Funny thing about retirement, Jimmy never quite got the memo on that and lo and behold he continued to show up for work each day. And so today, when you visit Wild Turkey, you will learn that they have not one, but two Master Distillers, a father-son combo, both of whom are members of the Kentucky Bourbon Hall of fame and as of this year have a combined one hundred and one years of experience working at the Wild Turkey Distillery.

I have often thought of Jimmy Russell as one of the 'Big Four' of bourbon. He along with Booker Noe (Jim Beam), Parker Beam (Heaven Hill), and Elmer T. Lee (Buffalo Trace) helmed their respective distillery during the extremely difficult period between the late-1970s and 1980s, when bourbon was out of fashion and sales were correspondingly low. Each resisted the urge and common marketing ploy to dumb their bourbon down by altering their product and offering a light whiskey, a flavored whiskey, or a significantly proofed-down whiskey. These four legendary whiskey producers not only resisted that trend, they embraced the exact opposite trend - they focused on better, more premium, and more costly offerings. As a result, when the bourbon resurgence began in the late 1990s, all four of their respective distilleries were well-placed with a dedicated, fervent fanbase eager to spread word-of-mouth advertising to the legions of new bourbon fans.

While I am typically quite cynical about corporate-produced sentimentality, I can't help but pass along an official Wild Turkey video about Jimmy Russell. It is an odd thing, despite never meeting Jimmy or Eddie, whenever I think of them, read an interview with them, or watch a video about them, I feel as though they are family members. I have no explanation for this and that warm feeling I have towards them continues on, both literally and figuratively, when I enjoy their whiskey.

Speaking of their whiskey, both Wild Turkey 101 and Russell's Reserve 10-year are mandatory residents on my whiskey shelf. Both represent tremendous quality and value and are readily available year-round. Month 11's Rare Breed is one of the few barrel proof offerings from Wild Turkey. Unlike Month 10's Jack Daniel's Barrel Proof, Wild Turkey's barrel proof comes in at a paltry (sarcasm intended) 58.4% alcohol, around 8% less than Jack. One contributing factor to the lower proof is Wild Turkey barrels their whiskey at a lower proof than the legally-allowed maximum of 62.5%. While their specific barreling proof is not public knowledge, Wild Turkey has verbally stated distillate goes into the barrel at 53.5% to 57.5%. Lower proof at the beginning of maturation can yield lower proof at the end of maturation (for completeness and a fair counter-point, some whiskeys, particularly those aged in the upper levels of rickhouses can gain proof as more water evaporates out of the barrel than in the lower levels). Every couple of years, Wild Turkey will update their Rare Breed batching, resulting in a different bottling proof, but rest assured, Rare Breed is always bottled without the addition of any water. Remember, it's always turkey time when the kickn' chicken is nearby; gobble 'til you wobble my fine malt mates and bourbon buddies.

Tasting Notes

Courtesy of RareBird 101: https://rarebird101.com/2017/08/27/wild-turkey-rare-breed-116-8-2017/

Group Impressions

Since being named Master Distiller at Wild Turkey, Eddie Russell has talked about how his preference in taste profile is different than his father's taste profile. Eddie tends to prefer a sweet bourbon accentuated by spice whereas Jimmy tends to prefer a spicy bourbon accentuated by sweetness. In the Wild Turkey lineup, 101, Rare Breed, and Kentucky Spirit are 'Jimmy's' products whereas Russell's Reserve and Master's Keep are 'Eddie's' products. With this in mind, imagine my delight in reading the near-universal impression noting the spirit's prevalent spice, so prevalent in fact, that many thought this could very well be a rye whiskey and not a bourbon. The operative word there is 'could' as no one was quite convinced enough to conclusively declare so. Fantastic job to all, because that is precisely Wild Turkey's intent - a bold, spicy bourbon.

Not only did everyone pick up on the high-proof of this sample, but more impressively, that this month's sample was not quite the Mike Tyson uppercut of proof that last month's was. Also near-universal was the notion that Rare Breed benefited from a bit of dilution, either via ice or a splash of water, though there were a few brave souls that said it was just fine as is. Brilliant!

Thanks to all for another fantastic month. Eleven down, one to go... or perhaps not!

Jonathan Quayle Higgins
Appearance
Dark amber. Nice slow legs

Nose
Vanilla, caramel, and cinnamon. Spearmint after some time in the glass. Some honey after the addition of water.

Taste
Strong alcohol at first. More spice than sweet. Some charred oak, but the wood is not dominant at all, more like a lingering backdrop to the sip. A lovely mouthfeel, the spice continues through the sip, sweetness is present at the very tail-end of the sip, but make no mistake, this is the spice’s party.

Finish
Medium length with the spice continuing to rule the roost. There is sweetness here, but if I had to assign a ratio, it is 75% spice to 25% sweet. The finish is not drying at all, amazing considering Rare Breed does have some decade-old plus bourbons in it.

Overall
I learned quite a bit while gathering my impressions for Rare Breed. Most importantly, I learned this whiskey was more enjoyable as a second or third pour in a tasting. For the record, my pour-size when documenting impressions is ~3/4 ounce, so that I do not get blasted. Regardless, when Rare Breed was sampled first, I tended to not enjoy it as much as when I had sampled a few other bourbons before Rare Breed. Perhaps my palate had to be broken in; perhaps the pre-bourbons helped open my mind to experience the entirety of Rare Breed. Or perhaps like most things after feeling a bit of a buzz, everything became warmer and more snuggly. Regardless, in the Wild Turkey lineup, Rare Breed is unique in this aspect; I can enjoy 101 and Russell’s Reserve 10-year whether it is the first pour of the night or the last.

I did taste both Rare Breed and 101 side-by-side. The similarities really were staggering. Bravo to Wild Turkey in their batching, because those two whiskeys were amazingly close to each other in both smell and taste. 101 has just and I do mean JUST a bit of grainy astringency to it; could be placebo, but it does lend credence to the idea that Rare Breed has an overall older makeup of whiskey. Unsurprisingly, Rare Breed’s nearly 8% more ABV helped up the spirit’s punch, but I can’t say the improvement justifies the price premium over 101.

The more time I spent with Rare Breed, the more I liked it. This is not a casual bourbon. This is not a turn-your-brain-off bourbon. This bourbon forces you to be an equal-partner in the experience. While I may not always keep a bottle on my shelf, that point may be moot as I would only reach for this bourbon when I am in a contemplative mood with plenty of time to spend engaged in this whiskey’s experience.

Waldo Norris
So this one got me this month, mostly because It was so different in the way that it hit me, that I'm not sure what it is.  Because of my limited experience I am leaning on a slightly uneducated guess.

So here it goes.

Visual
Light copper color with a slight small legs

Smell
Smells of cooked peaches and vanilla and creme brulee

Taste
Not what I was expecting from a sweet smelling nose. This has a strong spice to it, with apples, the flavor of this mellows very quickly after the initial bite and leaves a small zip on the tongue. I'm not sure if I prefer this style of whiskey, I tend to like the mellow and subtle notes of the spice, but because this calms so quickly, and tames completely under ice, I can say this is a good sipping drink.

So here it goes.. my guess.  I am going to say this is a Rye. Not sure why, as I do not believe I have enough to know one versus the other, but this feels different than a bourbon and certainly than a scotch. And just because I am feeling like a good Turkey may have something to do with it, i'll toss in another completely off the wall guess and say it's a Wild Turkey Rye... what would Thanksgiving be without a little turkey.

Apollo
This month's whiskey had a nice dark brown color and very slow-forming legs. To me, the smell was rather sweet with a touch of spice and caramel.

When sipping it neat it felt thick on the tongue and had lots of tingle. It had more of an alcohol burn than usual, so I suspect this was another higher proof sample. It didn't seem quite as a powerful as last month's barrel-strength offering, but it was still pretty strong. I didn't find it all that enjoyable neat, so I tried it with a couple of ice cubes. That definitely helped bring out the flavor which, like the smell, reminded me of sweetness and caramel.

If I had to guess, I think I would call this one a bourbon in the 90 to 100 proof range. It wasn't bad with a few ice cubes, but I don't think I would go looking for it again. It seemed too sweet for my tastes.

Keoki
Novembers offering was much different than the previous month.  Where last month burned the nostrils, this months was much more mellow.

As always, I tasted this batch neat. Maybe I'm getting used to bourbons--or maybe this me was different---but the bourbon this month didn't seem as sweet as some of the earlier months has been.

The sweetness was there, but it didn't overpower the overall taste of the drink. It had good balance. I feel like we've been offered highly sweet and highly abv batches, but in my opinion this is a good balancing act.

It actually didn't smell as bourbon-y as some of the others---maybe it's not bourbon?  Hmmm.

Also, where previous months I has to take my time drinking the offerings, this month was much easier to sip. I'd call this a social whiskey---not trying to show how tough you are by drinking something highly potent---or peaty (which I prefer).

I'd like this on my shelf.

Carol Baldwin
Appearance
Golden Amber color

Smell
Primarily alcohol; wood, maple

Taste
Strong alcohol burn , followed by wood and a mellowing maple flavor, strong astringent finish

Finish
Sharp and lingeringly astringent.

General Thoughts:
An American whiskey. Neat first impression- there is a strong alcohol burn first, followed with sharp woody notes, and some mild maple undertones. It has a very very astringent finish. Tried adding some ice and it mellowed the experience a bit, however the flavor profile remained generally the same- strong alcohol forward, with mild woody  maple tones, then immediately going into the very strong astringent finish that lingers on the palate. For some reason while testing this, I picture a cowboy of the Old West sidling up to the bar and asking the barkeep for a shot, then throwing it back in one go, grimacing hugely, and then plunking the shot glass on the bar with a flourish.

Admiral Hawkes
OK, so after many months of the taste-and-reveal, we’ve uncovered some tendencies of our fearless leader. Yes, he is subject to matching the sample with the season. So I expected Wild Turkey in November, the question was which one would it be, and which label in the WT family? Upon twisting the top off the bottle and having a first whiff I suspected bourbon, a reasonable assumption if we are talking Turkey.

I had a first taste neat and felt that it was a high proof bourbon, and didn’t return for a second taste for 10 days.  On the second taste, I had to reconsider. What I thought was heat felt more like spice, which led me to think we were sampling rye. The aroma was what tricked me. There was that bourbon signature, but a lot of sweetness, even a fruitiness. It seems that many ryes are what are known as “barely legal”, i.e. 51% rye with the rest mostly corn. So I was locked in on barely legal rye.

The finish seems hot as noted above, but in actuality, it was really a spice kick, similar to a Zinfandel or Syrah wine.  Peppery, a bit of Big Red gum, and actually quite smooth after it goes down. This was a pleasant drinker.  Guessing it may yet be 100+ proof, but could just as easily be the 80. So is it Wild Turkey, or perhaps Russell’s Reserve? Not sure, but it is a dram worth being thankful for. 

A Thankful Month

Oh, he's drunk. How would he know where we're going?

Month 10 - Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof

Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof
Classification: Tennessee Whiskey
Country: United States of America
Region: Tennessee (Lynchburg: 35.285N, -86.368W)
Mash Bill: 80% Corn, 8% Rye, 12% Malted Barley
Strength: 66.1% ABV (132.2° Proof)
Color: Natural Color
Filtration: Non-Chill Filtered
Maturation: Unknown Age (thought to be 6-8 years) in 100% New Charred Oak
Price: $64.99 (ABC Fine Wine & Spirits)

Overview

Sixty-six point one percent alcohol! Just let that sink in and realize that Month Ten's sample was two-thirds ethanol, now that is some firepower. Easily the highest proof whiskey sampled to date (can we go even higher?!), this is also our first sample that is effectively 'straight from the barrel'. The vast majority of whiskey sold at retail is 'proofed down' by adding purified water to the whiskey before being bottled. Not so in Month Ten, in fact, the only thing done to our whiskey between the barrel and the bottle was a coarse mesh straining to prevent any chunks of the barrel from finding their way into the bottle.

While barrel proof whiskeys are fun and sought after by many whiskey nerds, one should not feel that proofed whiskeys are 'bad', quite the contrary in fact. Sure there are some producers that proof their whiskey down too much to stretch supplies and maximize profit, but there are also producers that proof down their whiskey to the 'perfect' proof, finding the proper balance between alcohol punch, flavor, and consumer enjoyability.

Part of the justification for Month Ten's selection is that October is the month that Mr. Jack Daniel died (October 9, 1911), but a bigger reason is that Month Ten takes us to yet another new whiskey classification, and perhaps one of the most contentious - Tennessee Whiskey. Peppered throughout whiskey blogs and forums there rages a near-constant debate - is Jack Daniel's a bourbon? Officially and legally, the answer is no, Jack Daniel's is not a bourbon, it is a Tennessee Whiskey. Though Tennessee Whiskey is made in such a way that it could legally be called a bourbon, Jack Daniel's actively lobbied for a legal classification to separate their offerings from those of neighboring Kentucky. That legal distinction came in both 1941 when the Internal Revenue Service declared Jack Daniel's as distinct from both bourbon and rye as well as 2013 when Tennessee's governor signed a bill defining 'Tennessee Whiskey'.

The crux of the 2013 legal definition revolves around the notion of filtering whiskey through maple charcoal - also known as the Lincoln County Process. Jack Daniel's burns planks of sugar maple into charcoal, then grinds the charcoal into pebbles and finally fills vats with the pebbles to a depth of ten feet. At this point, all fresh-made distillate off the still is trickled over the vats of charcoal and collected at the bottom of the vat. From there, the whiskey is barreled and sent to the warehouse to age. No bourbon producer in Kentucky utilizes the Lincoln County Process, but there is no regulation preventing them from doing so. Conversely, not all Tennessee Whiskey producers use the Lincoln County Process, but only Prichard's is legally allowed to abstain from the process and call their resultant whiskey Tennessee Whiskey. Welcome to the world of labeling and regulatory affairs!

Fun fact - distillate destined to become Gentleman Jack is passed through the charcoal a second time before bottling. Fun fact #2 - historians agree that freed slave Nathan 'Nearest' Green is the one who most likely taught Jack Daniel about the Lincoln County Process before he founded his namesake distillery in 1875. There is no dispute that Nathan Green was hired to be the first head distiller at Jack Daniel's upon its founding. Fun fact #3 - the whiskey sampled in Month Ten is the very first barrel proof offering ever released by Jack Daniel's!

If you care to read more about the legal wrangling swirling around Tennessee Whiskey and Jack Daniel's, please check out Chuck Cowdery's fantastic synopsis from earlier this year.

Despite owning Old Forester and Woodford Reserve, I suspect it is Jack Daniel's that is the crown jewel in Brown-Forman's portfolio. The brand recognition of Old Number 7 is undeniable and it is year-in and year-out the #1 selling whiskey in the United States. If you travel overseas, Jack is typically one of the few, if not only American whiskey you will see on store and bar shelves. Jack was not always the barnburner of American whiskey however, in fact through the early 1940s, Jack Daniel's was considered a small-time player. That began to change shortly after, as legend has it, in 1947 when Jackie Gleason suggested to Frank Sinatra "Jack Daniel's. That's a good place to start" while he contemplated his drink order. Whether that legend is true or not is moot really, because ultimately Old Blue Eyes became the brand's best ambassador. Despite never being a paid spokesman for the brand, Frank vocally proclaimed his love of the whiskey wherever he happened to be which in turn caused sales to skyrocket worldwide. Legend also has it that he was even buried with a bottle of Old No. 7 in his jacket pocket. So with that, we shall raise a glass and drink it Frank's way - three rocks, two fingers, and a splash of water; that's the nectar of the gods baby!

Tasting Notes

Courtesy of Breaking Bourbon (https://www.breakingbourbon.com/jack-daniels-single-barrel-barrel-proof.html)

Group Impressions

Truth be told, I very nearly included a warning label when I sent out Month Ten's samples. Barrel proof whiskeys are not to be trifled with and are certainly not 'amateur' experiences as they are effectively impossible to enjoy neat. But the choice to send such a high-proof spirit this late into the experiment was intentional and I put my faith in each person's accrued nose and tongue experience. My faith was well-placed as each impression noted immediately the whiskey's potency. A second universal observation was this whiskey's American roots, specifically bourbon and while this is not technically correct, as discussed above, nothing in the Jack Daniel's process precludes it from being labeled as a bourbon. Many zeroed in on Jack hallmarks - vanilla, caramel, and oak and a few commented on the oily, buttery mouth-feel (thanks non-chill filtered!). Why there was even a second banana mention! Fantastic stuff all around and what a way to usher in the fall season.

Admiral Hawkes
So I approached the October selection with a sense of duty. Opening the bottle, I sensed a bourbon right away. It was dark, yet had a sense of lightness in the glass. The first taste was about oak and almonds for me. Heat was evident on the nose, tongue and throat, so it felt like a high proof bourbon. The aftertaste, after a breath or two, was actually quite nice. That said, it was satisfying and strangely familiar. Was it something I already had in my cabinet?

I took out my treasured bottle of Blanton’s. At 93 proof, it might be close. The color was essentially identical in the bottle, yet the mystery dram showed darker at the bottom of the glass.  I took pics (one in the bottle, one in the glass), is that allowed?

In the Bottle...

In the Glass...

So it definitely was not Blanton’s, which is softer and has a velvety, honeyed fruitiness that sets it apart.  The mystery selection was also definitely hotter than the Blanton’s. So I’d have to peg it at 100 to 120 proof. That puts it in the orb of Knob Creek or Booker’s, perhaps something on the high proof side of the Wild Turkey family. I am fairly certain it is not Knob Creek, which generally exudes from my pores. But it is an interesting, strong and bold bourbon. I’ve not yet put it in a Manhattan, but that will happen with the last shot. I am quite sure it will shine in that glass.

Apollo
This month's sample looked like it had potential. It had a nice dark color and decent legs. The smell wasn't too overpowering. I detected a hint of caramel and something else that I couldn't quite identify.

Upon tasting it, however, I was overwhelmed by the impressive alcohol burn. That amount of burn is unprecedented in my, somewhat limited, whiskey experience. The burn made it difficult to pick out any particular flavors. I typically drink my whiskey neat, but even with an ice cube in it, this one still had a lot of burn. It also had a strange aftertaste that I must have misidentified as being somewhat fishy. That can't be right, can it? I've never heard of a fishy tasting whiskey! I was actually wondering if there was something wrong with my taste buds. I had to take a sip of Glenfiddich just to make sure I was correctly calibrated. lol

It did have an interesting mouth feel, however. It had a very drying effect on the mouth, which is another thing I've never noticed in a whiskey before. This would seem to be more evidence of a high alcohol content. My guess is that this must be a cask strength whiskey, which is something I've never tasted before.

So, overall, this one was strange and very unique in my experience. I wouldn't say I particularly enjoyed it though. The alcohol burn made it difficult to enjoy, in my opinion. I don't think I'll picking this one up at my local store any time soon.

Michael Doheny
This months allowance was a deep copper color, but looked mighty brighter when looked at from the top of the glass to the bottom. There was a strong smell in the glass, but beyond the alcohol, it was near impossible to discern any other scent.

House rules are as follows, first sample, straight. Second sample, splash of water to keep you honest, and lastly on the rocks, as God intended.

Caramel, or toffee flavor was very prominent before being scorched by the tsunami of heat that crashed around the insides of my mouth. There was a thickness to the drink, almost a full bodied creaminess spiked with pepper. As I finish the sample, my tongue almost feels swollen from the heat.

Added a splash of water to the next sample, but it doesn’t take much starch out of it at all. Color is diluted somewhat, but it seems as though the water had not fully mixed, but rather acts like a solution or suspension, swirling in the copper color like some lava lamp.

The flavor is more butter or cream than toffee, and the heat is still sufficiently stoked in my mouth. The thickness of the first sample is still present, but it is disrupted by the water.  Its heat is distracting from whatever flavors maybe beneath the alcohol. The burn is tamped down, and the sweetness is cut back. It is almost apple in flavor. Reminiscent of the dry unsweetened ciders of the appleseed days.

The color looks American. I’d also say it is a high ABV. Due to the lack of balance, I’d say it is some sort of blended whisky.

Jonathan Quayle Higgins
Appearance
Light copper in the glass. Ridiculously lethargic tears and legs form when swirled in the glass. Easily the laziest whiskey sampled in this regard.

Nose
Alcohol, maple, caramel, vanilla, some smoke. Years ago, I read that banana was a signature component of the Jack Daniel’s smell. I swear I smell some banana here, but I am worried that is confirmation bias. Like the sirens gently beckoning go to sleep, little babe to Ulysses, Pete, and Delmar, the nose enamors you, keeping the proof-bomb well hidden until the first sip.

Taste
I’m going to do it…. I’m taking a sip neat...
WOW! That is an assault on the tongue! The alcohol on the first sip is ever present, mouth coating, like the first time you eat authentically spicy food (Thai, Mexican, etc.). The mouth feel is incredible neat - oily and clingy, like an oil-spill in the mouth. Subsequent sips are calmer as the tongue and mouth are prepped for the alcohol (or my taste buds are blanched by the alcohol). There is definite vanilla, oak, a mild sweetness and damn if there is not banana again.

Let’s add some water, usually just a splash, but this time it will be a healthy dollop.

Oh the nose seems much more vibrant now. Prominent vanilla, wisp of spearmint, definite oak as well. Water really helps tame the ethanol punch, that or my mouth really is accustomed to the whiskey now. It is a delicious whiskey with water, like building a bakery in the middle of a lumber aisle - oodles of vanilla and oak. There is not a rush of sweetness, this is not a sugar bomb, but there is just the right amount of sweetness here. The taste starts with vanilla and oak, the spice builds and builds then fades into that slight sweetness, slight bitterness, slight dryness. How very unique and interesting. Amazing how different this is than Old No. 7.

Finish
On the long side for me. The finish to me contains the lion’s share of the sweetness found in the experience. The oak is the first to fade, then the spice, and what’s left is a vanilla sweetness. Really delicious finish. It is fair to expect such a high proof whiskey to leave a long lasting finish and this whiskey certainly does not disappoint. The finish however is not as long as some lower proof whiskeys I have had. For example, peated malts from Islay, despite being lower in proof, tend to have a much longer finish for me. I certainly don’t intend to undersell the finish here, it is warm, lasting, and fulfilling, just not as long as I expected going into the sample.

Overall
What a fantastic offering from Jack. For years their hallmark product, Old Number 7, has been considered more of a mixing whiskey despite being known as a ‘sippin’ whiskey’. That began to change for me with Gentleman Jack, but this Single Barrel Barrel Proof is a whole different beast. With proper dilution, I would put this sample up against the best from Kentucky; blasphemous speak to some for sure, but for me the experience is just as enjoyable while being quite unique from traditional bourbons. Well down Brown-Forman for not only making such a product readily available, but doing so at an obscenely reasonable price.

Zeus
Appearance: dark Amber, no noticeable legs

Smell: Raisin, fruity like scent. Very mild however, I had to really dig my nose into the glass to pick it up.

Taste:
Oh my. Ack! what the hell! I'm hit with an overpowering sensation that is hard to describe. It's like my taste buds are instantly numbed and then I'm hit with a burn after a second or so. The taste is...bland? I can't really pick anything out when I first sip it. Follow up sips are the same, with the burn being significantly less. The taste only comes through with the finish for me. I'm not picking up much of a wood taste for some reason.

Finish:
Burn baby burn! My throat was hit with a burn that lasted 20 seconds or so. My tongue is left with a taste that I was expecting from the initial smell, a nice raisin like taste. After the third or fourth tasting that burning sensation weakened significantly to the point I really enjoyed the after taste.

General Thoughts:
Complex this one is. Not an amateur whiskey. I probably would want to start off with this on the rocks or with some water until my taste buds adapt to it next time. I did put in a ice cube after several tastings but it seemed weaker then I would of liked. I suspect this is a high proof whiskey.  Most likely a bourbon.

Carol Baldwin
Appearance: Golden Amber color, decent legs

Smell: Honey, caramel, vanilla

Taste:. Honey, maple syrup, vanilla, caramel, and wood with a strong alcohol punch.

Finish: Lingering sweet notes of vanilla and caramel with pronounced earthy wood. And a hint of banana? Very strong alcohol afterburn.

General Thoughts:
Wow this is really sweet and really strong. Absolutely must be a higher proof.  My guess is a bourbon from the sweet notes and the color. The flavors are typical bourbon, but the woody finish is very pronounced in this one. This whiskey has a big personality; possibly cask strength? The flavors are so in your face that it seems too much drinking it neat. Some ice and a bit of dilution calmed it down very nicely.

Keoki
October’s offering was very interesting.

Smelled like a pretty normal bourbon upon smell.  It had a good, dark color—-maybe a tad darker than most bourbons.

As always, I normally try the sample without any water to start. I was...surprised.

I couldn’t believe how strong it was! It really hit me hard—it actually made me start coughing.  I normally drink scotch neat—-or maybe just a drop of water.

I couldn’t handle this sample without a touch of water.  Once doing that, I actually enjoyed the sample.  It had a pleasant sweet flavor—-and wasn’t overwhelming.

I would recommend this as a great gift for a bourbon lover—-however, I don’t think it would be good for a beginner.

Trick or Treat?

Jack, please, I'm only an elected official here, I can't make decisions by myself!

Month 9 - Maker's 46

Maker's 46
Classification: Kentucky Bourbon Whisky Barrel Finished with Oak Staves
Country: United States of America
Region: Kentucky (Loretto: 37.648N, -85.349W)
Mash Bill: 70% Corn, 16% Wheat, 14% Malted Barley
Strength: 47.0% ABV (94.0° Proof)
Color: Natural Color
Filtration: Non-Chill Filtered
Maturation: Unknown Age (Thought to be 6-7 years) in 100% New Charred Oak plus 2-3 months with 10 seared French oak staves
Price: $34.99 (Total Wine)

Overview

"It tastes expensive ... and is." Perhaps the boldest advertising line in the history of whiskey debuted in 1965 when Maker's Mark proudly boasted of their whisky's lofty quality and price. From the beginning, Maker's Mark has made their way in the whiskey business defying nearly all the norms of the industry.

Maker's Mark came to life in 1954 when Bill Samuels Sr. purchased a small distillery in rural Kentucky and opted to use wheat in place of rye in his bourbon's mash bill. There are many legends revolving around Samuels' choice of wheat, including the notion that Samuels baked loaves of bread from each of his candidate mash bills and the loaf that was his family's favorite was selected as his bourbon's recipe. Some bourbon historians also add that one of Samuels' business advisors was Julian Van Winkle (aka Pappy Van Winkle) who had been producing excellent wheated bourbons at his Stitzel-Weller distillery for decades and just might have had a voice in the choice.

After five years of maturation, the first bottle of Maker's Mark hit store shelves adorned with three design aspects that are still found on Maker's Mark bottles today - its unique label design, its unique square bottle shape, and its iconic red wax seal, complete with 'drips' down the neck. All three design aspects originated from Margie Samuels, wife of Bill Samuels. Digging deeper, Margie is also responsible for both the name of the whisky and the unique brand/logo adorning each bottle - a star in conjunction with 'S IV' - as she was inspired by English pewter whitesmiths who stamped each of their pieces with their respective marks. The star of her mark represents Star Hill Farm, the name of the family farm, the 'S' for Samuels and the 'IV' denoting that Bill Samuels was a fourth generation distiller (recent genealogy uncovered that Bill Samuels Sr. was actually a sixth generation distiller, but the mark had been cast; history can be a funny thing).

Unlike all other bourbon producers, Maker's resisted the urge to create additional brands and labels with different taste profiles. Incredibly, Maker's Mark spent the next fifty years producing only one product - their wheated Maker's Mark bourbon. In 2008 however, Bill Samuels Jr. and master distiller Kevin Smith began exploring the idea of creating a second Maker's Mark offering. Rather than tinker with their mash bill, the folks at Maker's explored barrel finishing fully matured Maker's Mark in the hopes of producing a whiskey that amplified the best aspects of Maker's Mark but also delivered a taste unique enough to justify the brand expansion.

Maker's barrel supplier, Independent Stave, was consulted and signed on to help Maker's begin experimenting with different barrel finishes. Over 125 different combinations of barrels and barrel char levels were sampled yet none yielded satisfactory results. Exasperated, Independent Stave began to think outside the box ... err barrel and spoke to employees within the company that were working on different wood recipes for the wine industry. These 'wood chefs' as they are called shared ideas and thus began another round of experimentation. More lackluster results emerged until lightning was caught in a bottle and 'profile 46' yielded a delicious whiskey. The secret to 'profile 46'? Ten seared, not toasted, not charred, but seared staves of French oak were added to a barrel of fully matured Maker's Mark and after nine weeks, tasters unanimously agreed they had a bigger, bolder, yet characteristically smooth, drinkable whiskey and thus Maker's 46 was born (yeup, Bill Samuel's Jr. thought '46' was a perfectly fine and fitting homage to keep as a name).

Traditionally, French oak has a nasty habit of inducing a bitterness into the wine or spirits that are matured in it. As such, great care must be taken during the aging process when French oak is in use. Independent Stave acknowledged this and have talked about a specific searing process applied to each of the French oak staves used in Maker's 46, specifically the desire to caramelize the the wood sugars and simultaneously lock in the bitter tannins. Unfortunately, I have yet to come across more specific details regarding this searing process, but I have full confidence that the actual specifics would boggle our minds. I mean Independent Stave employs people with 'Wood Chef' in their job title, can you imagine the minutia of wood chemistry these folks delve in to.

A little over two years after experimentation began, Maker's 46 debuted and was an instant hit. Interestingly, die-hard Maker's fans are hit-and-miss in the their 46 support, but Maker's 46 brought a whole new stable of fans, including many who did not particularly enjoy regular Maker's Mark.

Originally Maker's 46 was created only in the winter months as it was discovered the warm summer months caused the whiskey to penetrate deeper into the French oak resulting in undesired bitterness. Experiments showed that the perfect Maker's 46 formula was a barrel full of fully matured Maker's Mark plus ten seared French oak staves placed in the barrel for nine weeks with air temperatures not in excess of 50-degrees F. Realizing the winter limitation, Maker's Mark ended up excavating part of a limestone hill on their property to build a 14,000 square-foot underground 'bourbon cellar' that naturally regulates air temperature perfectly year-round and is exclusively used to produce Maker's 46 and Maker's Private Select (where customers can purchase a barrel utilizing combinations of five different wood staves).

A few final Maker's Mark tidbits - Maker's Mark is only one of three American whiskey producers that actually spell their offerings as 'whisky' in a nod to the Samuels' Scottish and Irish ancestry. George Dickel and Old Forester are the other two 'whisky' producers in America. Maker's Mark is the only major bourbon producer that rotates the barrels aging in their rickhouses. Barrels spend 3-4 years in the higher levels of a rickhouse where temperatures are hot and varied before being moved to lower levels where more stable temperatures reside. And lastly, while Maker's Mark has had a few owners through the years, Maker's Mark is owned by giant Beam Suntory presently, the Samuels family has always remained at the operational helm.

Tasting Notes

Group Impressions

Happy Bourbon Heritage Month (September that is)! Though Maker's 46 is not a straight bourbon, its foundation is one of America's legendary bourbons. I was quite curious how this month would be received by the group - it's a bourbon, yet it's not a bourbon. Maker's 46 also has a polarizing aspect - its drying finish, which some palates simply do not enjoy. It was such a joy reading all the impressions as each noted this sample sure was reminiscent of a bourbon or a rye, but different enough to prevent proclamations with 100% confidence. One impression even suspected this was awfully reminiscent of Maker's Mark, but not exactly so. Ha!

Universal adjectives included smooth, sweet on the nose, wood and spice on the tongue, and lastly, enjoyable. How fitting, I am sure if Bill Samuels Jr. could read this he would smile and remind us that his first requirement when setting out to make Maker's 46 was that it must be 'yummy' (his actual descriptor). Thanks again, and here is to October, what ever will the month of Halloween bring us?!

Waldo Norris
When I first smelled this bottle when it arrived in the mail, I really thought we had the makings of a Makers Mark. It was so incredibly similar in smell at that time, that even though I knew it wasn't the traditional Makers, I was pretty sure that perhaps we had a specific bottle from them. Fast forward days and now weeks later, after pouring it out of the bottle and into a glass, the notes change quite a bit. First just let me say that the nose on this one is straight out of a pancake house. It smells of sweet caramel and almost overwhelmingly Maple Syrup.

Pouring it into the glass, it has a pretty good leg, and given the nose, I felt like we had a pretty high sugar content in it. The taste however was somewhat surprising, as it didn't give me sweet, but rather a fairly acidic and hot flavor. I certainly wasn't expecting that from this bottle. The flavor stuck around for maybe a minute, but as I let the taste settle in, I was able to pick up notes from the barrel, and some mint, almost leaving my mouth cool as a breath mint would. A second pour with a dash of water, and I was really able to get some of the spice to cool off, and narrow on some of the earlier flavors I noted.

I think this would be a good mixed drink bourbon, but for me, I'm not sure this was my style of sipping bourbon.

Michael Doheny
My happy parcel arrived and I dutifully removed it from it’s box and admired the color. It shined like the lights from the marquee of that place in the the sun. It was a real rich amber, deep, but susceptible to the light. Cracking the seal, I got no discernable smell. I decanted 2 oz into the naked, curvy, Glencarin glass.

House rules are as follows, first sample, straight. Second sample, splash of water to keep you honest, and lastly on the rocks, as God intended.

The legs were smooth, and flowed down the sides of the glass seamlessly. There was still nothing reaching the old honker, so I twirled the gal around a few time to see if I could shake something loose, and get a secret or two. But like a virgin at a sock hop, she wasn’t doing any favors. With no other recourse it seems to give it a try, so why shouldn't I?

Nothing. After a slight residual burn, I busted out. Snake eyes on the first swig. As I chewed the remnants in my mouth there was a hidden something. How long I wondered, could this thing last, before some strong clues were spilling about choppers.

A hardware store, at least a memory of one, stuck in my brain. Wood, maybe, of some kind, but almost a chemical hidden in there. So maybe some tomfoolery going into this batch.

On the last bolt, there was a flavor of cream, the warm cream your mom would put in the coco after a long day of playing in the snow.

I splashed some water in the next slug and the water doused any heat from the straight sample. Flavor was still muted, but it was almost the whisper of licorice. With each sip, the mystery deepened and every breath becomes a sigh. Very drinkable, almost too drinkable. We need to keep this away from Dean, or will never make that Ocean’s picture. But the flavor has taken a big sock to the jaw from the water.

Ice. That Ice, Ice, baby! Despite those tentacles of melting water seeping through the body of the drink the color held pretty well. Now, normally the ice knocks smell right outta here, but with this sample there seemed to be a blossom of something aromatic.

Like the water, the drink lost its character, but went down easy. What is this?  How deep is the ocean? How high is the sky?

The color looks American. I’d also say it is a low ABV, so maybe some blended whisky.

Apollo
After a quick visual inspection, this month's whiskey had my attention. It had a really nice dark color and long-lasting legs. I'll be interested to find out if the color is natural or artificial.

The smell had only a bit of an alcohol burn. I may have picked up the smell of spice, but I couldn't identify any other distinct aromas.

As for the taste, this was a very smooth drinking whiskey with very little burn. Because of that, there wasn't much tongue tingle, but the flavor itself was quite good and it lingered for a while.

I thought this one was pretty good overall. It was very smooth and enjoyable. I won't be surprised if this turns out to be a more expensive whiskey. I'd definitely try it again. I'm not confident enough to make a claim as to what type of whiskey it is. My first instinct was bourbon but I'm not very sure about that.

Zeus
Appearance: Dark amber.  Average legs.  Looks like a bourbon or rye to me.

Smell: Sweet, complex, maple, raisins? Very inviting smell to it.

Taste: Very smooth. No woody taste is coming through for me. Does not taste like a high proof. Hard to place the initial taste. It was far more mellow then I expected based on the smell. Minor sharp bite to on sipping it. Dropping a large ice cube made the bite go away.

Finish: Mellow finish. Raisin after taste. Long lasting burn.

General Thoughts: I am thinking this is a rye, my fall back guess is a bourbon. Interesting taste, but it was improved upon with the ice. This whiskey would be good for beginner whiskey people being there is nothing in this that would scare them away. I was thinking this would be great in a Manhattan or Old Fashioned. So I made an old fashioned with half Jefferson's very small batch and the sample (yes, I made this with Carol Baldwin). It was good, but tasted washed out a bit at first. The more I drank it the more I appreciated how smooth everything was. Really weird how it grew on me. Overall I enjoyed this guy.

Jonathan Quayle Higgins
Appearance
Dark amber to light copper. Thin legs and fat tears; the story of my adolescence in a glass.

Nose
Oh my, what a nose. There is a gentle alcohol punch lingering in the nose but it is not the first thing I picked up on. That honor goes to a delicious cinnamon bread/roll (with icing) that is instantly recognizable to me. The spice builds proportionally to the duration of each smell. Just like smelling actual cinnamon - it is not spicy at first, but the deeper and longer you smell, the more the spice accumulates. Wood, but not the typical bourbon wood, emerges later in the smell.

Taste
Oh a sharper taste on initial sips than the nose indicates. Subsequent sips reveal that toasted french oak immediately - there is a toasty spiciness accompanied with just a whisper of bitterness. While the French oak never fully leaves the taste, it does subside to reveal caramel and vanilla. That whisper of bitterness eventually becomes a good dollop of sweetness. I can’t say I get much corn, but perhaps that is where the eventual sweetness is coming from. The spirit is silky smooth texture wise, almost (but not quite) feels like a butter-finished sauce's velvety texture. There is a drying sensation and a wood-astrigent tingling that lasts from mid-taste all the way to the swallow.

Finish
Medium length with nice warmth. The French oak influence continues all the way through the finish. My sinuses are left with a nice toasty-oak sensation that is quite satisfying; the best analogy is what peat does for Islay whisky, the toasted French oak staves do for this whisky. I do think the drying finish is my biggest complaint here, I feel it does rob the finish of longevity.

Overall
The first time I sampled Maker’s 46, Robin Masters and I were sitting in rocking chairs on the front porch of a restored gentile 19th century mansion in Versailles Kentucky. Robin ordered the 46 and I Wild Turkey Rare Breed. It was dusk at the end of our first day in Kentucky. The air was unseasonably cool, but not jacket worthy. The garden’s foundation of actual Kentucky bluegrass glistened and was inconceivably soft to Florida hands accustomed to St. Augustine grass. We sat, sipped, and rocked as rabbits and cardinals and robins foraged in the final flecks of daylight. Talk about stacking the deck in a whiskey’s favor. It was love at first sip for me with Maker’s 46, particularly when tasted alongside the traditional (and delicious) Wild Turkey. I was instantly smitten and intrigued. A bottle of Maker’s 46 has always been on my shelf since.

Carol Baldwin
Appearance: Deep Amber color.

Smell:  Alcohol and wood, hint of maple, slight caramel.

Taste: Wooo fire. This burned going down. Taste is sharp and strong. Not really tasting the maple or caramel I smelled; the sharp flavor is really predominant. I tried adding an ice cube, and I found that a little bit of dilution really allowed the complexity of flavors (the maple, etc) to come out.

Finish: Sharp and astringent with a bitter after taste.

General Thoughts: Hmm. Not getting a lot of very sweet notes with this, and the sharpness is interesting. Along with the bitter finish, I don't really think it is a bourbon. Maybe a rye? Whatever it is, it packs a strong alcohol punch. I think this would be interesting in an old fashioned, doing equal parts bourbon and this. Goes off to make an old fashioned... Ok, mixed 1:1 with Jefferson's Very Small Batch, added simple syrup in an old fashioned, and it's not bad at all. The bitterness in this is balanced fairly nicely with the Jefferson's and syrup. Not sure I would make this a regular choice, but all in all an interesting tasting this month; looking forward to the reveal!

Keoki
The September offering made me like bourbon more than I thought I would. Upon first appearance, it had a dark amber color. The smell reminded me of every other bourbon, so I wasn't exactly expecting a different taste. This bourbon, to me, is a great transitional taste. What I mean is, this bourbon isn't too sweet like some of the other Bourbons we've tried, but it almost has a scotch like taste to it. I've found that many scotch drinker's have a problem with the sweetness of bourbon. We're just not used to it with Scotch. This offering, however, doesn't overpower you with such sweetness, but gives you the distinct mild and mellow taste of some scotches.
I would highly recommend this to a scotch drinker--like myself. Especially if your goal is to get the scotch drinker to like bourbon more.