Comments on: Those bourbon guys, they’re finally getting it

By: John Hansell

John Hansell — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:25:54 +0000

Ugly and visceral is okay, as long as they get it.

By: Lew Bryson

Lew Bryson — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:21:47 +0000

I got this demonstrated in a really ugly and visceral way at WhiskyFest New York, when I dropped in after Parker Beam's seminar on "The Methuselah Myth," about aging and super-aging bourbon. Larry Kass let me taste a 19 year old that had been matured low in the warehouse: oaky, but spicy, good. Then he gave me a sip of a 19 year old that had been aged on the top floor: holy crap! It smelled like fingernail polish remover, and the tiny little sip spread over my tongue like toxins in a river. It was naaaaaaasss-TEE! Larry laughed and assured me that it was strictly a teaching tool. Yuck.

By: John Hansell

John Hansell — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 13:08:26 +0000

Louis, I agree with you that, while some of the older bourbons are amazing products, they are not 3x better than some of the bourbons that are 1/3 the price. The quality/price relationship is not linear.

By: Louis

Louis — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 00:51:55 +0000

Hi John,

I would be just as happy with middle aged (10-15 years) bourbon matured in warmer locations in the warehouse, and not have to pay three figure prices. For example, the Old Charter 13 year old is very competitive with single malt scotchs that are far more expensive. And I’m sure that the Jack Daniels single barrel has a ceiling on the price as it is ‘only’ seven years old.

Slainte.

Louis

By: John Hansell

John Hansell — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 15:58:36 +0000

Joe, I still have samples of Pappy Van Winkle around when it first was introduced and it was over the top with the wood. Then I went years without tasting it. I tried it again a few weeks ago (I think it was the bottle that the Brandy Library donated to WhiskyFest for our charity table) and was surprised at how balanced the wood was with the rest of the flavors.

Yes, we certainly have had our share of overly woody whiskeys. In addition to those earlier versions of Pappy Van Winkle 23, the Export Evan Williams 23 years old is way over the top. Ditto some of the Eagle Rare 17s from years back. Some of those 20-plus year old rye whiskeys also have seen better days. But I’m seeing some improvements, which is a good thing.

By: Joe

Joe — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 15:47:34 +0000

I certainly hope that this is true. I haven’t had any very recent bottlings of Pappy Van Winkle 23-yr, but the last one I tried had very harsh wood tannins.

I’ve also tasted a private bottling of a cask of Bourbon which an extremely knowledgeable Bourbon drinker that I know had done for him (cask-strength) and it was positively screechy with harsh wood tannins. Apparently, this is what he likes, but I found it undrinkable in it’s pure form; to me, it absolutely required not just airing out but also water. So I guess there are seasoned Bourbon drinkers who do like that style, but it’s definitely a niche.

I think that Chuck Cowdery has maintained that older doesn’t always mean better when it comes to Bourbon, and while I don’t wish to mis-attribute any of his published opinions, I seem to remember that he doesn’t believe that Bourbon over 18 years of age (or so) is always going to deliver the goods. Obviously, there are exceptions (i.e. Parker Heritage 27-yr immediately comes to mind), but I’ve tasted some over-20-yr Bourbons that tasted dried out. One wonders what they might have been like if bottled at 12-15 years of age.