A decade ago, I was encouraging the bourbon producers to experiment more. While the Scotch whisky industry had already been well into wood finishing and other sorts of tinkering, the American whiskey industry was, to a large degree, stuck at the starting gate.
A large reason for this is the fact that the bourbon industry is a very traditional group of distillers and (justly) proud of their heritage and traditions. They weren’t going to go out and start making radical changes overnight.
The good news is that all this has changed now. During this past decade, bourbon producers have really kicked it into high gear. Now we have Buffalo Trace Experimental Collections, Parker’s Heritage Collections, Woodford Reserve Master’s Collection and much more to keep us entertained.
What’s the bad news? Well, we’re guinea pigs to a degree. The whiskey companies are saying to us: “you asked for it, you got it!” Sure enough, we now have bourbon finished in Zinfandel wine barrels, straight wheat whiskeys, sweet mash whiskeys, four grain whiskeys, 27 year old bourbons, 23 year old rye whiskeys, and a lot more in the pipeline.
Some of the stuff has been incredibly good. Others have been disappointing. That’s what experimenting is all about. Some experiments work out, while others don’t.
I suppose we never get to see the really bad experiments. (I hope so anyway.) Those should never be bottled as a stand alone product.
But what about the “so so” experiments? Yep, we still get those, and I understand why. The producer doesn’t know how popular the whiskey will be (and they are hoping for the best), so they release it.
So, the responsibility is on your shoulders. Embrace the experimentation and be glad that we have it, but also be cautious. “Try before you buy” is always sage advice.
John
I`m a firm believer in cask finishing as it offers whisky lovers something different, clearly the rules in the Scotch Whisky business state that there has to have been a precedent, i.e. you have to prove that whatever cask you are using it has historically been used to mature whisky.
I think some of our whisk(e)y companies take it a little too far with finishing.
If the previous liquid in the cask is insufficiently strong in flavour then it`s unlikely that you will pick up any enhancement in flavour, I`m talking here about wines as to me most are not strong enough to impact on the flavor of a whisky, whiskey or bourbon.
Madeira, rum, sherry are examples of where we get it right but Chenin Blanc, etc are maybe a pitch too far.
I do like the `try before you buy` concept.
Best wishes from Speyside.
Ian Millar
Tastings are fun, when available.
It gives you the chance to try some things you might otherwise not risk the money on.
Hopefully, I’ll see Fred Noe again Friday night.
It’s been quite some time since the last Beam tasting locally.
He’s a great and funny guy. Wonderful stories.
Out of the 4 “small batch” Bourbons we sampled back then, I liked Booker’s best.
I’ve been fortunate enough to enjoy some other whiskies since then (mostly Single Malts), and am curious to see if Booker’s still holds up in my mind.
Ian, yes, the “try before you buy” advice applies to all whisky categories–especially scotch! And yes, Sam, tastings are the best way to do it.
Well, anything not aged in new American oak (i.e. Woodford Reserve Sonoma-Cutrer cask whiskey) cannot be called Bourbon, so these experiments can be interesting, but some of these have also proven to be ghastly. I won’t pick on any one distillery here (note: not Buffalo Trace) but some of these are so outrageously overpriced that I worry that they will turn off potential Bourbon whiskey enthusiasts.
Try before you buy, indeed. Thank goodness that more and more bars are offering a greater selection than just the major national brands.
Joe, yes, next to attending a tasting somewhere, buying a taste at a restaurant or bar is you next best opportunity (unless you have a friend who has a bottle).
Hi John,
I hope that the bourbon distilleries do not go the way of some scotch distilleries, and direct all of their creativity towards finishing. BTW, I looked thru the Malt Advocate’s ratings for finished malts over the past few years, and almost all fail to rise above the low 80′s.
Slainte.
Louis
Louis, I know for a fact that Mark Brown of Buffalo Trace told me that he wants to get away from the whole “finishing” thing with his experiments. I can’t speak for the other bourbon producers.
I love what’s happening with American whisky. Established distillers getting creative and micro-distilleries popping up are definitely steps in the right direction. Hopefully in the not too distant future, the experiments will pay off and we’ll have some nice new refined products out there. In the meantime, I don’t mind being a guinea pig!
Although I don’t want to discourage you from hosting single malt Scotch tastings, have you considered doing an experimental bourbon/American tasting? I’m sure you could fill the back room of Monk’s for such an event…
“Well, anything not aged in new American oak cannot be called Bourbon”
Actually, the labeling laws (27 CFR 5.22 (b) 1 (i)) state: ““Bourbon whisky”, “rye whisky”, “wheat whisky”, “malt whisky”, or “rye malt whisky” is whisky produced at not exceeding 160° proof from a fermented mash of not less than 51 percent corn, rye, wheat, malted barley, or malted rye grain, respectively, and stored at not more than 125° proof in charred new oak containers; and also includes mixtures of such whiskies of the same type.”
No mention of American. French and Slavonian oak are allowed, as long as they are new and charred. However, they are more expensive. In the case of French oak, up to 5 times more expensive. Would be cool to see, though.
Good call, Jake, and you’re right, it WOULD be cool to see what happens to American straight whiskey in those barrels.
My collection contains a letter from the 1940s from a barrel manufacturer to a Pennsylvania distillery espousing the use of barrels made from Mexican oak staves and American oak heads as a cost cutting measure, one that the cooper claimed would not compromise product quality. This would indicate that the potential use of foreign woods in straight whiskey cooperage is not necessarily a new concept.
>Mark Brown of Buffalo Trace told me that he wants to get away from the whole >”finishing” thing with his experiments. I can’t speak for the other bourbon >producers.
Woodford Reserves Sweet Mash would certainly qualify as a non-finishing experiment. It also fits the “others have been disappointing” category for me. In fact, I haven’t liked any of their one-offs. But I imagine it would get boring just making Woodford all the time, so I applaud the effort strictly as a distiller’s mental health measure. Cheap–probably even profitable–therapy.
Jon W, A bourbon tasting at Monk’s in the future is always a possibility.
JP & SK: No doubt Buffalo Trace has whiskey being aged in all sorts of oak. I suppose that other progressive distillers are doing the same. We’ll see.
JR: Yes, I’d rather have “hit or miss” experimental releases than no experimentation at all. It would get pretty boring.
My only concern is that distillery’s, in potential zeal, will stray away from what their prime directive is….making good bourbon. John, as you stated above, distillery’s have a deep tradition and are proud of that….I just hope that tradition doesn’t take a back seat to experimentation.
Greg, you got that right! In fact, my column in the next issue addresses this very issue.
Hope you’re talking about non-American distilleries in that column and not intending to poach on my American Spirit territory, John!
Interesting point on the oaks. I remember Mark Brown rather emphatically making that “doesn’t have to be American oak” point a couple years ago, and Ronnie Eddins alluded to some rather exotic oak experiments when I interviewed him for an upcoming Malt Advocate piece on warehousing…anyone ever come across Mongolian oak?
The great thing about these experiments is that they often drive the distillers to look back at the traditions and hallowed methods, often tearing things apart to see why they really do work. That, in turn, leads to thinking about the essence of those methods and how to make them work better. I love to see distillers experimenting within the traditions, as much — or more — as when they experiment outside them.
Lew, no poaching planned, but I might nibble around the edges.
Regarding oak, after returning from Japan, I turned Mark Brown on to Japanese oak (what some Japanese whisky producers are using) and gave him a cask sample of Suntory Yamazaki aged entirely in Japanese Oak. He was very interested in it. I imagine he is aging in a variety of different oak casks besides American oak.
Experimenting within traditions is a good point Lew, sort of like what Chris Morris (of Woodford Reserve) did with his “sweet mash” experiment.
Hello John,
a bit off topic. I attented a Scotch whisky tasting a week ago. The question which casks are used for maturing Scotch whisky came up.
Our host mentioned that casks for straight bourbon are by the straight bourbon rules only usable once and therfore they are the source for quality casks for Scotland.
But then he said that the rules are about to change. Could that really be possible?