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.

Staving Off the Summer Heat

Now, what we got here is a little game of show and tell. You don't wanna show me nothing but you're telling me everything.

Month 8 - Glenmorangie Quinta Ruban

Glenmorangie - The Quinta Ruban
Classification: Single Malt Scotch Whisky
Country: Scotland, United Kingdom
Region: Highlands (Tain, Ross-shire: 57.826N, -4.078W)
Mash Bill: 100% Malted Barley
Strength: 46.0% ABV (92.0° Proof)
Color: Natural Color
Filtration: Non-Chill Filtered
Maturation: 12 years (10 years American bourbon barrels, 2 years Portuguese ruby port pipes)
Price: $57.99 (Total Wine)

Overview

Ahh, back to our beloved Scotland for Month 8. I am sure the brand name is familiar, but just in case, as in Month 4, let's start with how I was told to pronounce the distillery's name. Glenmorangie is comprised of three syllables and breaks down as the three words Glenn-Mourn-Gee. Put the emphasis on the middle syllable and off you go. I have also heard the pronunciation Glenn-More-Angie throughout the years, but once had a Scotsman adamantly insist that was a common, but totally incorrect pronunciation. I'm sticking with the mourn-gee on this one.

Glenmorangie has been making alcohol of one form or another for a long time. Things all got started on the Morangie Farm in 1703. A formal brewery was built on the farm in the 1730s and by 1843, a distillery was built and whisky production began. Incredibly, the Morangie Farm and Glenmorangie brand remained family owned through 2004, but both were ultimately sold to Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton (which in turn is partially owned by drinks giant Diageo).

Month 8's whisky - Glenmorangie's Quinta Ruban - is one of four 'core' expressions produced by Glenmorangie. Each of the four expressions differ in maturation, but all start life as Glenmorangie's 'The Original' which is the result of their distillate spending ten years in American ex-bourbon barrels. From here, some of the ten-year malt is sent for bottling (The Original) while the remaining is sent to one of three different wine barrels for an additional two years - Sherry casks from Spain (The Lasanta), Sauternes casks from France (Nectar d'Or), or Port casks from Portugal (Quinta Ruban).

The first thing that jumps out when looking at a bottle of Quinta Ruban is its majestic reddish-copper color. Some single malts that feature such a glorious color are artificially colored, but thankfully, this is not the case with the Quinta Ruban. The color you see is overwhelmingly due to the two years the whisky spent in its port barrel home. Speaking of port barrels, they are commonly called port pipes due to their elongated shape and are quite large, typically three times the size of an American bourbon barrel, holding over 160 gallons of liquid. Gaze upon their titanic awesomeness!

Put that in your pipe and smoke it

Speaking of barrels, it is a lesser known fact that Glenmorangie owns their own forest in Missouri's Ozark Mountains. Here they fell their own American white oak, cure the timber for two years, then send the oak to either Heaven Hill Distilleries (producer of Month 2 and Month 7's whiskeys!) or Jack Daniel's to age their respective whiskeys before dumping and sending the empty barrels to Glenmorangie to begin aging their malts. In a rather rare proclamation, Glenmorangie state in writing that they only use their barrels twice. Very few Scottish distilleries state precisely how many times they refill their casks in their lifetime, with many speculating that barrels are reused five, six, or even more times.

Glenmorangie proudly boasts operating the tallest stills in the whole of Scotland. Standing 26 feet, the distillery claims the tall stills ensure 'that only the very lightest and purest vapours make it to the top, giving a smoother, more elegant whisky.' While the marketing speak is high, there is some scientific merit to the claim, but please realize there are far more variables in producing a quality distillate than just still height. As for what those variables are, I apologize, but I will leave that as an exercise to the reader. (p.s. - email me when you complete that exercise, I would love to learn myself)

Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton deserve a lot of credit for the entire Glenmorangie line. Not only are the core expressions readily available, but they are relative bargains in comparison to their single malt shelf mates. Further, the three extra-matured expressions are far from marketing gimmicks. The Sherry, Sauternes, and Port barrels each altar the base Glenmorangie in unique and delicious ways creating wildly different experiences. Finally, and crucially, Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton deserve a standing ovation for offering two of the three (sorry Lasanta) wine-barrel finished malts as age-stated, non-chill filtered, and at an above-average 46% ABV. These facets of quality ensure a better overall experience for the consumer. Had Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton decided to cut those corners to eek out a bit more profit, the haunting subtlety of malt mingled with ancient wines would be, to a large degree, lost. And that dear malt mates and bourbon buddies would be a travesty. Well done Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton.

Tasting Notes

Group Impressions

Such a fun month. While the color of the whisky gave all pause, virtually everyone zeroed in that this whisky most likely hailed from Scotland due to its malty aroma and taste. Month Eight provides perfect justification that a book should never be judged by its cover - it had the appearance of an American whiskey, but it certainly did not smell or taste like one. I chuckled when I read in one impression the mention of a 'tawny' color. Oh how appropriate that observation was given our whisky's port influence. Another near-universal observation was the sense that this whisky was higher proof but did not taste or smell of a high proof malt. For me, this is the ultimate testament to the quality of maturation Glenmorangie affords their malts.

Further, more than one impression put forth the guess that not only was Month 8 a Scotch, but a Scotch hailing from the Speyside region. Close, very close, but alas, Glenmorangie is a Highland malt, albeit geographically very close to Speyside.

Interestingly, a few mentioned the possibility of this whisky working well in cocktails. Scotch traditionally has never been a popular mixing whisky, but perhaps a wine-finished whisky like Quinta Ruban could rebuke this trend. Challenge Accepted.

Thanks to all for another great month. With Month Eight firmly in the rear-view, we screech toward the horizon; first stop - Month Nine. Cheers to you all.

Waldo Norris
The color of this glass is not something I ever had to describe before. A "Tawny" color (yes, i had to look that up), which gave hues of red mixed with amber.

The legs took a long time to develop and slowly moved down the glass.

When i smelled the glass, I smelled fresh apples, pears, and vanilla. This certainly smelled sweet, but did have just enough of the burn to let you know there was a moderate amount of alcohol.

The first taste was very fresh tasting at the beginning. It was subtle on the tongue, and in the mouth.  Again, I noted fresh apples, perhaps a bit the pear and a hint of vanilla. A medium finish, as it reached the back of the mouth and down the throat. It didn't stick around for long after, but left a nice impression, and something I would definitely order our pour for myself or friends.

This was a really nice pre-meal Single Malt Whiskey. I would think this is fairly young. Any chance we have a SPEY?

Thanks again as always!  I am having a ton of fun with this!

Apollo
This one looked like it was going to be pretty interesting. It had a nice dark, sort of golden brown color. It stuck to the inside of the glass for quite a while before finally dripping down in fairly small legs.

When I smelled it, however, I couldn't pick out much besides a general sweetness and possibly a hint of butterscotch.

The taste was similar to the smell in the sense that nothing really jumped out at me. I even tried it with a splash of water and also with an ice cube, but it just tasted kind of plain to me. It did taste a bit sweet so I'm going to guess that it's a bourbon.

For my tastes, this one wasn't very interesting. It didn't separate itself from the pack at all, in my opinion. There was nothing wrong with it, it just seemed pretty standard in every way. While I didn't mind it, I wouldn't go out of my way to sample it again.

Keoki
Our August offering was right up my alley.
When I got the sample from Johnathan, it was a contrast in styles. It looked a dark, rich amber color. From sight alone, I figured we had something strong and intense.

However, on smell, I noticed a very mild fragrance. It reminded me of a Speyside malt.

Taste was exquisite. It had the sweetness and spice. Sometimes with the delicate Scotches you get a lot of sweetness and a barley taste. This one, however, lended a nice spicey note that is not common in my experience.
I really enjoyed this offering.  I have since moved towards more peaty offerings, but this is a great intermediate-level scotch that you could build on a traditional Speyside. 10/10 would recommend.

Admiral Hawkes
This month's selection appeared to be a pleasant scotch whisky by look and nose.

Upon opening the lightish amber dram, the first whiff was the malty, ever so smokey aroma of Scotch.  This one didn't have fire in the nostrils, leading me to guess 80-86 proof.  The were hints of orchard fruit on the nose as well. I imbibed this sample in two sittings.

The first, as always, was neat. The low amount of heat translated to the taste, and this one was pretty smooth. The apple orchard aroma didn't really translate to taste notes, but there was some earthiness and nutty notes for me. I wondered as I sipped whether this was a blend.

A week later, I poured the remaining sample over a large ice ball. I must say it was a good pour and it went down faster than I would have thought. Chilled and only slightly watered down by a slow melt (and a fast quaff!), the drink was even smoother. I got a little bit more of fruit-type notes on this pour, but could not put my finger on the exact flavor.

This was an enjoyable selection, maybe more of an everyday drinker than a special treat. I've never made a mixed drink with scotch, but perhaps this would be a candidate for a first try. Any suggestions, gang?

Zeus
Appearance: Nice amber color. Above average legs. Persistent legs. 'Why won't you go away' legs. I like saying legs. LEGS!!!

Smell:
Powerful medicinal smell initially. After several sniffs I started to pull out a nice mellow woody smell. Perhaps brown sugar. Dare I say maple syrup?  I did say it.

Taste:
Light taste on initial contact. The first second ... it almost seemed like it was watered down. It's followed up by a moderate burn that was a huge contrast in comparison.

Adding an ice cube eliminated the burn completely. It washed out the taste a bit too much for my liking.

Finish:
Far more potent after taste. I sensed a caramel like taste after several sips. I'm left with a woody taste that makes me think of a Scotch, but no Scotch would have such a lack luster initial taste. I think. Damn it, this guy has got me confused.

The finish after adding an ice cube was also a bit washed out.

General Thoughts:
This is a really nice whiskey I can see myself casually drinking. Perhaps it would be good in a mixed drink paired with a more potent whiskey cousin.

While it did not taste like a high proof whiskey I did feel it affecting me faster than most 80 proof types. The legs kind of say it's a high proof to me, but I still am not sure.

I'm really not confidently locking to the type of whiskey.  I'll go with a lackluster vote to a mild rye whiskey.

LEGS!!!

Jonathan Quayle Higgins
Appearance
Reddish-copper. Nice long, slow legs in the glass. Wow, the more I gaze at the whisky in the glass the more I appreciate the magnificent contribution of the port barrels.

Nose
Ahhh, the delicious malt sweetness right off the bat. No alcohol punch, warm, gentle, inviting. After five or so minutes in the glass a jammy wine begins to present itself. Some orange on deeper sniffs. Does it smell like a port? To a degree yes, but not as sweet or cloying as the ports I have enjoyed in the past. Wow, a deliciously subtle and nuanced nose. I have been on a bourbon run the past couple of weeks, perhaps my nose has been beat into submission by the bold, fire-rich whiskeys from Kentucky and really appreciates the subtle elegance here.

Taste
Malt up front. A bit more alcohol burn and a bit less fruit than the nose had me anticipating. A gentle open that builds to a medium level of spice. A bit of barrel char upon swallowing. Black pepper. Upon the third or fourth sip, the jammy sweetness appears mid-taste; I wonder if this is my tongue getting past the alcohol wallop in the first few sips.

Finish
Oh nice warming finish. Dare I say a bit of Kentuc...err Scottish hug. There are aspects of this finish that remind me of the ports I have enjoyed during dessert courses of various meals through the years. I would say the finish produces the strongest ‘this is a port’ sensation for me in the entire experience.

Overall
Well I have nothing negative to say about this single malt. I enjoyed the sip from the first to the last. For me, I feel the port finish differentiates this malt to such a degree that it is absolutely worth keeping a bottle on your shelf. In a sea of sherry cask finished single malts, the port finish of Quinta Ruban really makes this dram stand out to me.

Carol Baldwin
Appearance:
Golden Amber. Easily developed numerous legs after swirling the glass.

Smell:
Sharp. Somewhat grassy. Wood as I sniffed deeper into the glass.

Taste:
Sharp, woody, and warming with a strong alcohol burn.

Finish:
Clean, some wood, and a bit astringent.

General Thoughts:
Neat this whiskey had a strong sharp taste with woody flavors and a fairly strong afterburn. I suspect this whiskey is a higher proof. Not sure of the origins but I would bet my life this is not a bourbon. Adding a bit of water did help to bring the flavors out and somewhat tame the alcohol burn. Really a nicely balanced whiskey. I enjoyed sipping this and I'm looking forward to finding out what this month's pick was.

The Genius of Tasting Panels

What you see above *should* be nearly identical whiskeys as both are distilled, aged, and bottled by Jim Beam in Clermont, Kentucky. Both were distilled and bottled to the same proof from the same mash bill, fermented with the same yeast for the same amount of time, and finally run through the same column still at the same temperature. Both were put into effectively identical barrels that were charred to the same degree. Both were rolled into one of Beam's many rickhouses and here is where their journey deviated.

Before we continue, let's summarize what we know of each. On the left, Jim Beam Distiller's Cut. Its label proclaims it is 100 proof, aged 5-6 years, and is non-chill filtered. On the right, Knob Creek Small Batch. Its label proclaims it is 100 proof, reveals no age statement, nor any filtration statement. In years past, Knob Creek Small Batch was labeled as 9 years old. Jim Beam have stated in both verbal and printed interviews that Knob Creek Small Batch is chill-filtered while the Single Barrel and special-edition versions of Knob Creek are not chill-filtered.

Both are 'batched' bourbons meaning that multiple barrels of bourbon are dumped and mingled to create what is ultimately bottled. There is no publicly available resource that tells us how many barrels comprise a 'small batch' at Jim Beam. I have read wildly variant speculation through the years that a batch of Knob Creek is comprised of 40 to 100 barrels. To date, there is no speculation regarding how many barrels comprise a batch of Distiller's Cut.

Up to this point, on paper, the Distiller's Cut is the clear winner simply because more of that whiskey's provenance is known thanks to the information printed on its label. Conversely, Knob Creek leaves much more to the speculative imagination. But things become complicated when we get to the final bit of information we can concretely state about each whiskey - their respective prices. Distiller's Cut retails for $18.99 while Knob Creek Small Batch retails for $27.99, nearly $10 more.

So if you are Jim Beam and you have two products that are nearly identical metric-wise, how do you ensure a 47% price difference is justified between the two? The answer, ignoring blind consumer loyalty, lies in the idea that Knob Creek Small Batch is comprised of quality aspects that are not disclosed on its label. Looking at the picture above, we know Distiller's Cut is 5-6 years old, yet the Knob Creek is noticeably darker. Because bourbon by law cannot be artificially colored, this leads us to the safe assumption that the Knob Creek contains older, perhaps even much older, whiskey than the Distiller's Cut.

In the glass, the differentiation continues. While the Distiller's Cut smells and tastes of a quintessential bourbon, tasting it alongside the Knob Creek is eye opening. Distiller's Cut smells of wood, char, and vanilla. Knob Creek smells of all the same but adds brown sugar, baking spices, and maple syrup. The finish of the Knob Creek yields that much more flavor lasting that much longer. Most surprisingly, the alcohol punch is noticeably less sharp in both smell and taste in the Knob Creek compared to the Distiller's Cut which again allows us to safely speculate that the whiskey comprising the Knob Creek spent more time in the barrel smoothing over its ethanol.

The cliched way to summarize the two is to claim the Knob Creek is more complex, has greater depth and character when compared to the Distiller's Cut. Of course, these differences are really only prevalent when you sip the two side by side. If I were to pour a glass of one to enjoy alone, I assure you, I would enjoy it just as much as the other.

And this brings us to the tasting panel. It is the job of the distillery's blenders and tasting panels to pick and blend the appropriate barrels to produce the appropriate product. Returning to where our two whiskeys deviated in their journey, being rolled into the rickhouse, we can really appreciate the task at hand for Jim Beam's team. They need to select and blend barrels that not only produce two exceptionally enjoyable bourbons, but have to do so while simultaneously creating expressions deserving and reflective of their respective price points. Oh and by the way, they need to accomplish this task year in and year out ensuring near-pefect consistency in the bottle despite potentially wildly variant whiskey in the originating barrels.

I am in constant awe at just how good a job the major distilleries do in this area. And this is a major reason why whiskey interests me so. While distillation is pure chemical engineering, maturation and blending are pure art; a perfect example of science and art working together in perfect yin and yang harmony to create and capture a magical genie in a bottle.