|
22 Eargesplitten posted:Does scotch get over-aged as well, or is it something about the new charred oak bourbon has to use? Scotch can definitely get over-aged, yea. Generally what happens is that the character of the spirit gets lost and the wood character takes over, making it taste woody, bitter, dusty.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:52 |
|
|
So buying that Balvenie 50 is even stupider than it seems?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:Does scotch get over-aged as well, or is it something about the new charred oak bourbon has to use? It's a combination of climate and fresh wood mostly. Very few single malts are aged in virgin oak because the resulting whisky would be wildly different than what people expect. A recent fad was to use virgin oak to finish scotches that were otherwise aged in refills, a much subtler method of adding vanillins and tannins to scotch whisky. Also malt whisky is milder than bourbon/rye by nature and new wood quickly overpowers the subtler flavors of the distillate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
That Works posted:I don't know why you'd say they don't work as well unless you've had a systematic study of ones aged normally vs artificially from the same batch stock of spirits. There hasn't been much of this out there. I've read on this before and most people tend to just think the older method works better without any empirical evidence. Along the lines of accelerated aging of spirits, I found this article interesting: http://www.wired.com/2015/04/lost-spirits/ Basically using clever chemical engineering and modern analytical methods like mass spectroscopy, this guy can produce what tastes like a 20 yr aged rum, which has impressed even some critics. There's nothing wrong with naturally aged spirits, and many purists may dismiss modern processes out of hand, but this new area of research is bound to get more traction as demand for quality booze increases. I say bring it on!
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Jim Rutledge (Four Roses) has decided to retire. GLHF, Jim!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:So buying that Balvenie 50 is even stupider than it seems? Well, some barrels do age really well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 07:33
|
|
|
Yep, it's not like they just leave the barrels to age for a set amount of time. A master blender/distiller or an apprentice will sample every barrel with a copper dog at regular intervals. At their discretion they'll pull a barrel for vatting/bottling or maybe if it's already gone slightly off, finish it in a wine cask.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 09:21
|
|
|
I grew my 12 year Irish Whiskey collection thanks to my cousin. Brought me back a Powers 12 year while he was in Ireland last week. I haven't tried it yet though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
I've found older Redbreast to be really underwhelming. Is that just me?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
I got rekt on a fifth of Jim beam Monday night and made a whole bunch if posts that I don't remeber making lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:21
|
|
Ralith posted:I've found older Redbreast to be really underwhelming. Is that just me? You mean the 15? If so yeah, we bought that for a friend as a gift and tried it along with the 12 and no way is it worth the price increase at all. There were some differences in flavor but it's not like it was better than the 12, just a little different. Solid bottle but for the price totally worthless if the 12 is there for the taking. wandler20 posted:I grew my 12 year Irish Whiskey collection thanks to my cousin. Brought me back a Powers 12 year while he was in Ireland last week. I haven't tried it yet though. How do you like the Jameson 12? Not a fan of their standard bottle but never tried the 12.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
I'm a little sad the price of Redbreast has skyrocketed in the past few years. I remember when it was around $40-45, and I thought it was a good deal at that price point. I'm seeing it now for $60-70, and there's just a lot more interesting stuff at that level.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
That Works posted:You mean the 15?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 06:18
|
|
|
the best Redbreast is the 12 cask strength
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 07:41
|
|
|
I think the Redbreast 15 is underrated. It's really a lovely spirit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 10:36
|
|
|
NightConqueror posted:I'm a little sad the price of Redbreast has skyrocketed in the past few years. Oh, the good ole days  Everything has skyrocketed, or become unavailable during these last couple of years. I wish i had the foresight to purchase my favorites in massive quantities before everyone came in and cleared out the supply 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 11:42
|
|
|
That Works posted:
I like the 12 but it's really not a huge improvement over the standard Jameson, and that's probably my favorite regular whiskey.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2015 02:25
|
|
wandler20 posted:I like the 12 but it's really not a huge improvement over the standard Jameson, and that's probably my favorite regular whiskey. Ahh good to know then. There's some particular taste in Jameson that I don't like. I'll drink Tullamore Dew or Red Breast like it's going out of style though. Always wondered what it was in Jameson that made that taste. Just can't get past it.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
That Works posted:Ahh good to know then. There's some particular taste in Jameson that I don't like. I'll drink Tullamore Dew or Red Breast like it's going out of style though. Always wondered what it was in Jameson that made that taste. Just can't get past it. I'd say the Jameson 12 year is a little closer to Red Breast though compared to regular. Might be worth sampling if you have the chance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
That Works posted:Ahh good to know then. There's some particular taste in Jameson that I don't like. I'll drink Tullamore Dew or Red Breast like it's going out of style though. Always wondered what it was in Jameson that made that taste. Just can't get past it. I had the same experience with Jameson but was determined to get past it. After a couple bottles something clicked and I started enjoying it. That has happened with other whiskies too where I didn't like them at first. Of course sometimes I never like them (Dickel) regardless of how hard I try.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
I picked up a bottle of Jameson Crested Ten which is like regular Jameson but a little older and with about 60% pot still in there. I have to finish a few other bottles before I allow myself to try it but I'm expecting it to be good. I'm mainly interested to see if it's better than Writer's tears which is 100% pot still but slightly younger iirc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2015 09:29
|
|
|
Monoclinic posted:Along the lines of accelerated aging of spirits, I found this article interesting: http://www.wired.com/2015/04/lost-spirits/ There is one distillery going in th opposite direction. When everyone (Maker's Mark, etc.) are using pressure cookers and all kinds of poo poo to get their spirits on the market faster, Claremont Distilled Spirits just patented (applied for) a granite aging cask designed to SLOW the process, and develop a unique flavor profile that way. Should be interesting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
Broccoli Cat posted:There is one distillery going in th opposite direction. When everyone (Maker's Mark, etc.) are using pressure cookers and all kinds of poo poo to get their spirits on the market faster, Claremont Distilled Spirits just patented (applied for) a granite aging cask designed to SLOW the process, and develop a unique flavor profile that way. Whiskey stones can gently caress up the taste in a matter of seconds. I'm scared what Granite aging will do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
KhyrosFinalCut posted:Whiskey stones can gently caress up the taste in a matter of seconds. I'm scared what Granite aging will do. I'm not sure if minerality is really what people are looking for in whiskey.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
kirtar posted:I'm not sure if minerality is really what people are looking for in whiskey. Umm... mineral content is rather important during the fermentation process.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
2DCAT posted:Umm... mineral content is rather important during the fermentation process. Sure, but that doesn't mean that the fermentation process means that incubating your product in rocks is a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
If they're putting that much time and money into the experiment, they must have a reason. They aren't just taking their results for granite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:If they're putting that much time and money into the experiment, they must have a reason. They aren't just taking their results for granite. It's a patent, people file patents for random poo poo that doesn't work or will never work or just because they thought it was a cool idea while on acid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
Regular, cheapo, Evan Williams is probably the first hard liquor I've liked. A week ago I tried the Single Barrel and it was terrible. Am I a whiskey scrub or is the Single Barrel just poo poo? Also, how's Knob Creek's Rye?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Neo_Crimson posted:Regular, cheapo, Evan Williams is probably the first hard liquor I've liked. A week ago I tried the Single Barrel and it was terrible. Am I a whiskey scrub or is the Single Barrel just poo poo? The single barrel is actually really good for the price. It might be that you like sweeter bourbons. Do you like Makers?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Lowness 72 posted:The single barrel is actually really good for the price. It might be that you like sweeter bourbons. Do you like Makers? Agreed; it's good value for money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
Here's the thing about single barrel releases: they are all different. Sometimes you don't like the barrel in question. Most whiskey is blended to make a consistent, generally delicious product. A single barrel offering is a couple people saying, "This particular flavor is excellent." If that flavor isn't your thing you won't dig it. It's worth trying a different single barrel offering later to see if it's your jam. Like Elmer T. Lee. That is some loving creme brulee-tasting whiskey. It's amazing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 07:35
|
|
|
Neo_Crimson posted:Regular, cheapo, Evan Williams is probably the first hard liquor I've liked. A week ago I tried the Single Barrel and it was terrible. Am I a whiskey scrub or is the Single Barrel just poo poo? No, EWSB is just poo poo, or at least the bottle I tasted was poo poo. 1783 though is legit one of my favorites and probably the best bargain in bourbon. It doesn't have much complexity or depth but it's a good basic sipper. It's also a fantastic cooking bourbon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
Four Roses Small Batch is my favorite bourbon for its cost. It's easier to drink for those who are new to bourbon, and it won't break the bank. Last time I purchased a bottle it was about $30.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:If they're putting that much time and money into the experiment, they must have a reason. They aren't just taking their results for granite. This terrible pun deserved more love
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 08:59
|
|
|
Jon Von Anchovi posted:This terrible pun deserved more love OK, fine. It rocked. Happy now?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Jo3sh posted:OK, fine. It rocked. Happy now? Somehow I feel like this praise is disinigneous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 17:25
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:Somehow I feel like this praise is disinigneous. No, he gave it a rock solid endorsement.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Neo_Crimson posted:Also, how's Knob Creek's Rye? ~8 ryes later and it's still my favorite. Started using it for Manhattens and it has been a hit amongst friends too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:52 |
|
|
Is all of Glenlivet pretty much void of smoke? I was a gifted a bottle of their Archive 21 and it doesn't have the slightest bit of smoke. Something I've never experienced before with my (limited) scotch drinking.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 20:35
|
|