After a two year sabbatical (and what a couple of years they were), the band has reunited for yet another group tasting. This time around, two mystery whiskeys were sent out, one labeled as 'Green' and the other as 'Yellow'. The standard instructions for this tasting were augmented with the following additions: describe how these two whiskeys directly compared to each other, did each taster prefer one over the other, and lastly, would the taster purchase a bottle of either with their own hard-earned.
Unsurprisingly, the two whiskeys sent out were indeed closely related to each another and the group's whiskey-spidey-senses were all over it. But before we get to the group's impressions, let's remove the cloak of mystery and reveal our two whiskeys. Both Kentucky straight bourbons hailing from Brown-Forman's Old Forester distillery in Shively, Kentucky.
Whiskey 'Green':
Old Forester 1910 Old Fine WhiskyClassification: Kentucky Straight Bourbon
Country: United States of America
Region: Kentucky (Shively: 38.242N, -85.817W)
Mash Bill: 72% Corn, 18% Rye, and 10% Malted Barley
Strength: 46.5% ABV (93.0° Proof)
Color: Natural Color
Filtration: Unknown (most likely non-chill filtered)
Maturation: Unknown duration in new charred American oak followed by unknown duration in a new, heavily charred American oak barrel
Price: $54.99 (ABC Fine Wine & Spirits)
Whiskey 'Yellow':
Old Forester 1920 Prohibition Style
Classification: Kentucky Straight Bourbon
Country: United States of America
Region: Kentucky (Shively: 38.242N, -85.817W)
Mash Bill: 72% Corn, 18% Rye, and 10% Malted Barley
Strength: 57.5% ABV (115.0° Proof)
Color: Natural Color
Filtration: Unknown (most likely non-chill filtered)
Maturation: Unknown duration in new charred American oak
Price: $59.99 (ABC Fine Wine & Spirits)
Classification: Kentucky Straight Bourbon
Country: United States of America
Region: Kentucky (Shively: 38.242N, -85.817W)
Mash Bill: 72% Corn, 18% Rye, and 10% Malted Barley
Strength: 57.5% ABV (115.0° Proof)
Color: Natural Color
Filtration: Unknown (most likely non-chill filtered)
Maturation: Unknown duration in new charred American oak
Price: $59.99 (ABC Fine Wine & Spirits)
Established in 1870 by George Garvin Brown, as in the Brown of today's beverage giant Brown-Forman, Old Forester bourbon has been offered without interruption in the United States since its debut. It is the longest continually offered bourbon available today. By comparison, both 1910 and 1920 are but wee pups when plotted on Old Forester's historical chronology. While junior in terms of brand tenure, both 1910 and 1920 are members of Old Forester's Whiskey Row series which debuted in 2014. 1920 Prohibition Style joined the series in 2016, accompanying the 1870 Original Batch and the 1897 Bottled in Bond entries. Two years later in 2018, the 1910 Old Fine Whisky completed the series and all four are year-round standard offerings from Old Forester. One pedantic note: while unusual in American whiskey, Old
Forester, like Maker's Mark, label their whiskey as 'whisky' in a nod
to the Scottish ancestry found in the respective families of each
product's founder.
Each of the four entries in the series is accompanied by a story explaining the historical significance of the respective product in Old Forester's lineup. The 1920 version celebrates the fact that the Old Forester distillery was one of only six distilleries permitted to remain in operation during the dark, dark days of Prohibition in the United States. Old Forester states during this period, whiskey was barreled at 50% ABV which would rise during the years of maturation as water evaporated from the barrels. The final result after maturation was a whiskey whose ABV was in the 57% range. Hence, the 1920 offering, labeled as a 'Prohibition Style' of Old Forester, is bottled at 57.5% ABV.
The 1910 offering has a similarly compelling story. According to Brown-Forman, on October 22, 1910, a fire on the bottling line halted production of Old Forester. Mature whisky that was in vats on the bottling line had to evacuated and was quickly transferred to secondary barrels and rolled to safety. When the rescued whiskey was eventually bottled, its taste was distinct enough to merit being bottled under a brand new label from Old Forester - Old Fine Whisky, making it the first official bottling of a double-cask matured bourbon.
Today's 1910 offering pays tribute to this history by taking standard Old Forester, proofing it down to 50% ABV, and transferring to a second heavily charred American oak barrel. Brown-Forman states that the second barrel used in 1910’s production is by far the heaviest char they have ever applied to a barrel. A standard Old Forester barrel receives ~22 seconds of flame exposure whereas the secondary barrels used in 1910’s production receive ~50 seconds. The folks at Old Forester have said in interviews that 1910's second barrel is charred almost to the point of incineration.
Coincidentally, Brown-Forman produce another whiskey that has very similar characteristics to 1910: Woodford Reserve Double Oaked. Like 1910, Woodford's Double Oaked begins life as a standard offering from its respective distillery that is then transferred to a new second barrel for a period of time. There are a few differences however. For starters, Woodford Reserve bourbon is actually a blend of pot-distilled whiskey produced at the Woodford Reserve distillery and column-distilled whiskey produced at the Old Forester distillery. Also, unlike the heavily charred barrel of 1910, Woodford's Double Oaked is transferred to a heavily toasted, but not charred second barrel.
While neither 1910 or 1920 disclose any age statements, there is some scuttlebutt and speculation guessing at each whiskey's age. It is believed that 1910 is a standard 4-year old Old Forester that is proofed down to 50% ABV and then spends 6-9 months in that heavily charred second barrel. The 1920 by comparison is thought to be a bit older, but not by much with speculation placing its age in the 5 to 6 year range. Both products are produced from Brown-Forman's standard bourbon recipe which is also used at Woodford Reserve, though as stated above, Old Forester is 100% column-distilled whiskey whereas Woodford Reserve is a blend of pot-distilled and column-distilled whiskey.
Official Tasting Notes
Old Forester 1910 Old Fine Whisky (courtesy of Old Forester)
Old Forester 1920 Prohibition Style (courtesy of Old Forester)
Group Impressions
I've long envisioned this tasting as I've always been intrigued by the effect maturation has on whiskey. To me, a whiskey's lifecycle can be divided into two phases. The first phase, progression from grain to beer to distillate, is pure chemical engineering. Highly consistent results can be obtained in this phase by the application of sound, thorough procedures and processes. The second phase, progression from freshly distilled ethanol to mature bottled whiskey, is just as much art as it is science. No two barrels are alike nor do they influence a whiskey in an identical manner. Factor in different barrel types and different locations where those barrels are stored and you have the potential for wildly diverse results in matured whiskey.
In this tasting, we have two whiskeys that are subjected to identical production techniques up until the point the Old Forester 1910 is transferred to a second charred oak barrel. How does this seemingly simple deviation change the end product? Significantly it turns out, but not so profoundly that it overwhelms the whiskey's foundational roots. As for the group's overall impressions, many immediately recognized both were bourbons, particularly a bourbon with a strong rye component. So pronounced was the rye, that a few tasters even theorized they were dealing with a rye whiskey. Impressively, some in the group displayed their keen senses speculating both whiskeys shared the same mash-bill and possibly hailed from the same distillery.
In regard to personal preferences, Green (Old Forester 1910) received 5 votes to Yellow's (Old Forester 1920) 3 votes making Old Forester 1910 the preferred whiskey in this tasting. It is worth noting however that two of the tasters, while willing to pick a preference, also stated that they would not purchase either for their home shelf.
Great stuff all around, and a special nod of appreciation to those who mixed some
of their mystery whiskey into a libation and reported back!
Admiral Hawkes
Upon receiving these bottles I immediately held them both up to the light and observed that they had the exact same color. Hmmmm... were we dealing with different treatments of the same mash bill? Then I opened each and had a sniff. They seemed to have the same aroma as well. I ruled out scotch but could not discern what type of whiskey we were dealing with. That had to wait.
I drank each of them neat twice.
Mr Green, in the kitchen, with a highball glass: The nose on this was quite different in the glass than it was confined in the small bottle. I kept thinking orange fruit, and settled on apricot as the dominant note. I knocked back the first taste, and noted a pretty good alcohol burn and a delightful finish. The note I wrote was, "not sure what it is, but I like it". I kept asking myself what I was tasting and thought maybe that this one was aged in a charred cask. As the glass was emptied, the aromatic notes intensified, presumably from the remnants on the side and bottom of the glass. If I were to bet, I'd say this whiskey was a rye, or had a good amount of rye in the mash bill. Liked it, and have enough left for a Manhattan, which may happen this evening.
Colonel Mustard, in the Conservatory, with a Candlestick: The yellow labeled sample confounded me. I had ruled out scotch from the sniff test, but this one had the mouth feel of a scotch to me. It was nutty on the nose, perhaps almonds were suggested. It has less of an alcohol burn than Mr. Green, and had a lightness to it that made it an enjoyable drink. If I were to guess on this one, I'd probably swerve and say Irish Whiskey based upon its Scotch-like character which I just couldn't dodge. The remnants of this one will go in a cup of coffee when I feel so inclined. If I am wrong, who cares? It is still kicked-up coffee (no whipped cream, please)!
Both were nice, and if I had to choose my taste leans toward Mr. Green.
Upon receiving these bottles I immediately held them both up to the light and observed that they had the exact same color. Hmmmm... were we dealing with different treatments of the same mash bill? Then I opened each and had a sniff. They seemed to have the same aroma as well. I ruled out scotch but could not discern what type of whiskey we were dealing with. That had to wait.
I drank each of them neat twice.
Mr Green, in the kitchen, with a highball glass: The nose on this was quite different in the glass than it was confined in the small bottle. I kept thinking orange fruit, and settled on apricot as the dominant note. I knocked back the first taste, and noted a pretty good alcohol burn and a delightful finish. The note I wrote was, "not sure what it is, but I like it". I kept asking myself what I was tasting and thought maybe that this one was aged in a charred cask. As the glass was emptied, the aromatic notes intensified, presumably from the remnants on the side and bottom of the glass. If I were to bet, I'd say this whiskey was a rye, or had a good amount of rye in the mash bill. Liked it, and have enough left for a Manhattan, which may happen this evening.
Colonel Mustard, in the Conservatory, with a Candlestick: The yellow labeled sample confounded me. I had ruled out scotch from the sniff test, but this one had the mouth feel of a scotch to me. It was nutty on the nose, perhaps almonds were suggested. It has less of an alcohol burn than Mr. Green, and had a lightness to it that made it an enjoyable drink. If I were to guess on this one, I'd probably swerve and say Irish Whiskey based upon its Scotch-like character which I just couldn't dodge. The remnants of this one will go in a cup of coffee when I feel so inclined. If I am wrong, who cares? It is still kicked-up coffee (no whipped cream, please)!
Both were nice, and if I had to choose my taste leans toward Mr. Green.
Apollo
For this review I started with the green one. The color was a nice amber, on the dark side. It smelled strongly of alcohol and some spice and sweetness. I found it to be pretty harsh on the tongue, which led me to believe that this might be a higher proof whiskey than most. Honestly, I didn’t much care for this one. It was too sweet for me, which leads me to believe that it’s a bourbon. I didn’t care for the alcohol burn but when I tried it with an ice cube, that just brought out the sweetness even more.
The yellow one one was next. That seemed a little better to me. It was almost exactly the same color as the first one. The smell was a bit more gentle but it still had a sweetness to it. The taste confirmed the smell. It didn’t have as much burn as the green one but it was still too sweet for me.
Personally, I don’t think I’d buy a bottle of either one, but I’m not a big bourbon fan (I do enjoy bourbon-based cocktails, but if I’m drinking whiskey it’s normally scotch). I did prefer the yellow one to the green, though, since it was smoother. I got the impression that these were both bourbons and that the green one was probably higher proof or less mature.
Bottom line, I thought yellow was better than green. But they both get a pass from me.
For this review I started with the green one. The color was a nice amber, on the dark side. It smelled strongly of alcohol and some spice and sweetness. I found it to be pretty harsh on the tongue, which led me to believe that this might be a higher proof whiskey than most. Honestly, I didn’t much care for this one. It was too sweet for me, which leads me to believe that it’s a bourbon. I didn’t care for the alcohol burn but when I tried it with an ice cube, that just brought out the sweetness even more.
The yellow one one was next. That seemed a little better to me. It was almost exactly the same color as the first one. The smell was a bit more gentle but it still had a sweetness to it. The taste confirmed the smell. It didn’t have as much burn as the green one but it was still too sweet for me.
Personally, I don’t think I’d buy a bottle of either one, but I’m not a big bourbon fan (I do enjoy bourbon-based cocktails, but if I’m drinking whiskey it’s normally scotch). I did prefer the yellow one to the green, though, since it was smoother. I got the impression that these were both bourbons and that the green one was probably higher proof or less mature.
Bottom line, I thought yellow was better than green. But they both get a pass from me.
Francis 'Icepick' Hofstetler
Yellow Label
My first impression was that this whiskey had a high alcohol content. Upfront it had a sweet taste, and I thought I tasted vanilla. The finish was more boozy. I tried the whiskey neat, but my larger pour was over a large ice ball. This is how I tend to drink any whiskey.
There wasn't anything I disliked about the whiskey. However, I tend to prefer whiskey's that are in the 40% alcohol range, and this seemed higher than that.
Based on the sweetness, I think this is bourbon. Possibly Colonel Taylor Small Batch.
Green Label
Like the Yellow Label one, this whiskey also had a high alcohol content. I didn't find this whiskey as sweet as the Yellow one, and it wasn't quite as smooth. It seemed more middle of the road. Not sweet and not too smokey either in taste or smell. I do think it is an American Whiskey, so I'm guessing it was a Rye. I drank this over an ice ball.
I preferred the Yellow Label, but I don't think I would purchase either due to what I deemed the high alcohol content. I simply find them a bit too harsh on my stomach, frankly.
Jonathan Quayle Higgins
Green: 1910
Smell: Wood resin, nail polish remover, medium charred oak. The addition of water eliminates the nail polish remover vibe. Cigar humidor
Taste: Faint fruit, sawdust, gentle alcohol, gentle brown sugar, near-immediate tannin sensation (drying). The addition of water brings out more wood.
Finish: Medium-length, sawdust, very gentle sweetness.
Yellow: 1920
Smell: Chocolate coated cherries, brown sugar, distant barrel char, vanilla, medium-light ethanol
Taste: Stronger alcohol, mint, strong fruit sugar, gentle wood, cinnamon candy
Finish: Oak, leather, vanilla, brown sugar, ethanol, cool mint, fermented corn mash. Long length.
General Notes
Did I prefer one over the other? I’d say 1910 simply for how well it evolved in the glass with time
Waldo Norris
First impressions when I poured these 2 samples neat were on the noser. Both came out sweet, heavy vanilla, yellow had a slightly more spicy note to it than the green bottle. Green almost smelled like a candy corn. These 2 glasses however are incredibly similar in smell and while I am no connoisseur of smelly things, despite my years of trying to smell what those sommeliers of wine could smell, my nose is not good enough to pick up on the differences between these aside from the yellow bottle having slightly earthiness to it.
My first pour was neat, and this is where I picked up on the differences between these two... although still amazing is how different and similar they are. The Yellow was spicier, coated the tongue nicely and had a good amount of heat that stuck around for a good many seconds after. The green bottle is smoother, has almost no burn aside from a subtle amount on my lips. The green bottle despite it being spicy was a bit grassier and the yellow bottle had maybe a little orange peel type of feel to it.All that said again, had it not been for the difference between the spice differences between these 2 pours, they are super similar.
Mixed drink time! I decided to make 2 small, but enjoyable manhattans. Nothing fancy, and I avoided the sugar (ya know, to be healthier) and went with a lemon spritz and peel. The Yellow bottle had a nicer balance with the drink and I could pick up on the spice a little more than the green bottle. Both are quite enjoyable, but if I were to pick, I would go with the yellow bottle over the green. I just tend to want the whisky to stand out unless I am going for something very sweet.
I very much think we have a Rye in the Yellow bottle and a Bourbon in the Green.
Because I am currently in more of a mixed drink phase lately, I would likely choose the yellow bottle over the green bottle. I simply enjoyed the drink more. If I were going to drink neat or with an ice cube, I would enjoy the sweetness of the green more.
I would say they came from the same distillery or even from the same label, but where's the fun in that.
Zeus
#1 Green
Appearance: Dark amber, looks like maple syrup
Smell: Slight sweet woody smell, reminds me of Woodford bourbon. Does smell maple like but it might be my subconscious throwing that in there due to the color.
Taste: Ohhh, much sweeter then I expected. Definitely a bourbon. Slight caramel taste. Is that maple? I think I taste maple. Damn you subconscious!
Finish: Slight bite a few seconds after sipping. Burn lasts way longer than a normal 80 proof, thinking it's 90 or 95 proof
General Thoughts: Very tasty! I'd like this as a base in a old fashion, which I promptly made into an old fashioned. It was as delicious as I had hoped for.
#2 Yellow
Appearance: Amber, slightly lighter than batch green
Smell: Whoa, much more burn in the smell than green. Not picking up much else other than my nostril hairs screaming at me
Taste: Holy moly, that seemed smoother than green on the initial taste. Another bourbon. Getting a more brown sugar taste out of yellow.
Finish: Burn does not last as long as green. Slight bitter taste that lingers.
General Thoughts: Pretty good! I didn't like the finish as much as green but it was very comparable.
How are these two whiskeys similar and/or dissimilar to each other?
Both are bourbons. Green is a bit darker. Green is sweeter, yellow is smoother. Maple notes always win with me. Some day they will perfect a whiskey that combines maple, butter, bacon, and waffles for a complete breakfast experience.
Did you like one more than the other?
Green would be my choice, but marginally so. The initial taste of yellow was better but green won on the finish. Might be less of a difference if they were in an old fashion.
Would you buy a bottle of either (or both or neither)?
Yes, either would be get Zeus's seal of approval.
Was one a clear-cut favorite or did you enjoy (or not enjoy) both fairly equally?
Only marginally like green better, enjoyed them both.
Carol Baldwin
#1 Green
Appearance: Dark caramel color
Smell: Sharp, sweet, slightly floral, green, caramel, alcohol.
Taste: Texture is smooth, somewhat viscous and rich. Taste is green and sharp, mellowing into warm caramel vanilla with an astringent finish.
Finish: Alcohol, astringent with a warming after-burn.
General Thoughts: This whiskey had an interesting evolution of flavors. The sharpness seems to dominate on my palate, yet I keep sipping to get that progression from sharp green into warm vanilla caramel.
#2 Yellow
Appearance: Butterscotch caramel color
Smell: Slightly sharp alcohol, butterscotch caramel.
Taste: Smooth, rich toffee, butterscotch vanilla
Finish: Pleasantly smooth and rich, warm alcohol.
General Thoughts: Just a nice sipper all around. All of the flavors you expect with bourbon. I expect this would be nice in a cocktail as well.
How are these two whiskeys similar and/or dissimilar to each other? .
The Green labeled whiskey had a very pronounced sharpness and greenness to it (was this a hint regarding the contents?) with just a slight promise of mellow warm vanilla flavors. The finish was quite astringent. The Yellow labelled whiskey was noticeably more smooth on the palate, with pronounced warm vanilla flavors. The finish was smooth and warm.
Did you like one more than the other?
Yes, I prefer the Yellow labelled whiskey.
Would you buy a bottle of either (or both or neither)?
The Yellow!
Was one a clear-cut favorite or did you enjoy (or not enjoy) both fairly equally?
While the Green label was an interesting sip, I did prefer the Yellow overall.
Robin Masters
#1 Yellow #2 Green
#1 has an orange-amber glow, is slightly more translucent and leaves a stationery ring of liquid behind at the crest of the swirl.
#2 is a slightly darker amber giving the impression it has either aged longer or been in a darker charred barrel. When swirled, it leaves a thicker coating of liquid behind producing a show of lazy cascading drops down the side of the glass. There is a slight bit more opaqueness to #2.
#1 starts out with smells of butterscotch, softer varnish, leading into ginger snap, grass, mint, verbena and finally into cinnamon red hot candy. There is a strong, sharp bite with a minty and buttery finish.
#2 starts out with a strongly sugary caramel smell and then shifts into coffee cake. A surprising strong wood varnish note overwhelms and fades into a recently blown out candle smoke. There is a softer bite, but a longer finish. Soft sweetness on the front end with a very delayed buttery end.
Both feel like a higher proof. Water was added after 3 sips. #1’s addition of water turned this one into a mean, and angry prickler. #2’s addition of water kept it nice, and a salt water taffy, salted dark caramel note surfaced. #2 is still leading in the sweetness category and the cascading drops show goes on completely unaffected by the water.
#1 is starting to turn more perfumy. #1 with water and time is starting to soften the sharp edges, and is getting smoother to drink, but still punchy. Vanilla.
#2 is mimicking characteristics of a high proof sherry whisky. Pile of aging autumn leaves. Banana. Sugary sweet finish. I would choose #2 if I had to pick between the two.
Green: 1910
Smell: Wood resin, nail polish remover, medium charred oak. The addition of water eliminates the nail polish remover vibe. Cigar humidor
Taste: Faint fruit, sawdust, gentle alcohol, gentle brown sugar, near-immediate tannin sensation (drying). The addition of water brings out more wood.
Finish: Medium-length, sawdust, very gentle sweetness.
Yellow: 1920
Smell: Chocolate coated cherries, brown sugar, distant barrel char, vanilla, medium-light ethanol
Taste: Stronger alcohol, mint, strong fruit sugar, gentle wood, cinnamon candy
Finish: Oak, leather, vanilla, brown sugar, ethanol, cool mint, fermented corn mash. Long length.
General Notes
- Green is a touch darker than Yellow
- Both have an inherent sweetness on the nose.
- Green smells, tastes, and finishes drier and less sweet than Yellow
- Yellow is fruit, Green is wood.
- Neither is crap whiskey, the ethanol is well controlled in both and neither has any wood astringency. Both could be considered sippin’ whiskeys
- Yellow has a longer finish than Green but Yellow’s finish is much punchier with the ethanol
- Green aged well - the longer it sat in the glass, the more I enjoyed it. Yellow did not evolve as much, its experience stayed consistent, but green morphed and improved the longer it sat.
- Time in the glass plus water is Green’s best friend
- Green lacked the length of finish, but did have more complexity than yellow
Did I prefer one over the other? I’d say 1910 simply for how well it evolved in the glass with time
Waldo Norris
First impressions when I poured these 2 samples neat were on the noser. Both came out sweet, heavy vanilla, yellow had a slightly more spicy note to it than the green bottle. Green almost smelled like a candy corn. These 2 glasses however are incredibly similar in smell and while I am no connoisseur of smelly things, despite my years of trying to smell what those sommeliers of wine could smell, my nose is not good enough to pick up on the differences between these aside from the yellow bottle having slightly earthiness to it.
My first pour was neat, and this is where I picked up on the differences between these two... although still amazing is how different and similar they are. The Yellow was spicier, coated the tongue nicely and had a good amount of heat that stuck around for a good many seconds after. The green bottle is smoother, has almost no burn aside from a subtle amount on my lips. The green bottle despite it being spicy was a bit grassier and the yellow bottle had maybe a little orange peel type of feel to it.All that said again, had it not been for the difference between the spice differences between these 2 pours, they are super similar.
Mixed drink time! I decided to make 2 small, but enjoyable manhattans. Nothing fancy, and I avoided the sugar (ya know, to be healthier) and went with a lemon spritz and peel. The Yellow bottle had a nicer balance with the drink and I could pick up on the spice a little more than the green bottle. Both are quite enjoyable, but if I were to pick, I would go with the yellow bottle over the green. I just tend to want the whisky to stand out unless I am going for something very sweet.
I very much think we have a Rye in the Yellow bottle and a Bourbon in the Green.
Because I am currently in more of a mixed drink phase lately, I would likely choose the yellow bottle over the green bottle. I simply enjoyed the drink more. If I were going to drink neat or with an ice cube, I would enjoy the sweetness of the green more.
I would say they came from the same distillery or even from the same label, but where's the fun in that.
Zeus
#1 Green
Appearance: Dark amber, looks like maple syrup
Smell: Slight sweet woody smell, reminds me of Woodford bourbon. Does smell maple like but it might be my subconscious throwing that in there due to the color.
Taste: Ohhh, much sweeter then I expected. Definitely a bourbon. Slight caramel taste. Is that maple? I think I taste maple. Damn you subconscious!
Finish: Slight bite a few seconds after sipping. Burn lasts way longer than a normal 80 proof, thinking it's 90 or 95 proof
General Thoughts: Very tasty! I'd like this as a base in a old fashion, which I promptly made into an old fashioned. It was as delicious as I had hoped for.
#2 Yellow
Appearance: Amber, slightly lighter than batch green
Smell: Whoa, much more burn in the smell than green. Not picking up much else other than my nostril hairs screaming at me
Taste: Holy moly, that seemed smoother than green on the initial taste. Another bourbon. Getting a more brown sugar taste out of yellow.
Finish: Burn does not last as long as green. Slight bitter taste that lingers.
General Thoughts: Pretty good! I didn't like the finish as much as green but it was very comparable.
How are these two whiskeys similar and/or dissimilar to each other?
Both are bourbons. Green is a bit darker. Green is sweeter, yellow is smoother. Maple notes always win with me. Some day they will perfect a whiskey that combines maple, butter, bacon, and waffles for a complete breakfast experience.
Did you like one more than the other?
Green would be my choice, but marginally so. The initial taste of yellow was better but green won on the finish. Might be less of a difference if they were in an old fashion.
Would you buy a bottle of either (or both or neither)?
Yes, either would be get Zeus's seal of approval.
Was one a clear-cut favorite or did you enjoy (or not enjoy) both fairly equally?
Only marginally like green better, enjoyed them both.
Carol Baldwin
#1 Green
Appearance: Dark caramel color
Smell: Sharp, sweet, slightly floral, green, caramel, alcohol.
Taste: Texture is smooth, somewhat viscous and rich. Taste is green and sharp, mellowing into warm caramel vanilla with an astringent finish.
Finish: Alcohol, astringent with a warming after-burn.
General Thoughts: This whiskey had an interesting evolution of flavors. The sharpness seems to dominate on my palate, yet I keep sipping to get that progression from sharp green into warm vanilla caramel.
#2 Yellow
Appearance: Butterscotch caramel color
Smell: Slightly sharp alcohol, butterscotch caramel.
Taste: Smooth, rich toffee, butterscotch vanilla
Finish: Pleasantly smooth and rich, warm alcohol.
General Thoughts: Just a nice sipper all around. All of the flavors you expect with bourbon. I expect this would be nice in a cocktail as well.
How are these two whiskeys similar and/or dissimilar to each other? .
The Green labeled whiskey had a very pronounced sharpness and greenness to it (was this a hint regarding the contents?) with just a slight promise of mellow warm vanilla flavors. The finish was quite astringent. The Yellow labelled whiskey was noticeably more smooth on the palate, with pronounced warm vanilla flavors. The finish was smooth and warm.
Did you like one more than the other?
Yes, I prefer the Yellow labelled whiskey.
Would you buy a bottle of either (or both or neither)?
The Yellow!
Was one a clear-cut favorite or did you enjoy (or not enjoy) both fairly equally?
While the Green label was an interesting sip, I did prefer the Yellow overall.
Robin Masters
#1 Yellow #2 Green
#1 has an orange-amber glow, is slightly more translucent and leaves a stationery ring of liquid behind at the crest of the swirl.
#2 is a slightly darker amber giving the impression it has either aged longer or been in a darker charred barrel. When swirled, it leaves a thicker coating of liquid behind producing a show of lazy cascading drops down the side of the glass. There is a slight bit more opaqueness to #2.
#1 starts out with smells of butterscotch, softer varnish, leading into ginger snap, grass, mint, verbena and finally into cinnamon red hot candy. There is a strong, sharp bite with a minty and buttery finish.
#2 starts out with a strongly sugary caramel smell and then shifts into coffee cake. A surprising strong wood varnish note overwhelms and fades into a recently blown out candle smoke. There is a softer bite, but a longer finish. Soft sweetness on the front end with a very delayed buttery end.
Both feel like a higher proof. Water was added after 3 sips. #1’s addition of water turned this one into a mean, and angry prickler. #2’s addition of water kept it nice, and a salt water taffy, salted dark caramel note surfaced. #2 is still leading in the sweetness category and the cascading drops show goes on completely unaffected by the water.
#1 is starting to turn more perfumy. #1 with water and time is starting to soften the sharp edges, and is getting smoother to drink, but still punchy. Vanilla.
#2 is mimicking characteristics of a high proof sherry whisky. Pile of aging autumn leaves. Banana. Sugary sweet finish. I would choose #2 if I had to pick between the two.
No comments:
Post a Comment