Or is it improper to do something like this?
Let’s say you buy a bottle of whisky, take it home, open it up, taste it and…well…it’s not exactly what you hoped it would be. Maybe it’s too woody, too sherried, too one dimensional, etc.
Is it okay to add a whisky (or whiskies) to it to make it more to your liking? Or is it in bad taste (no pun intended) to alter the way a veteran whiskymaker intended the whisky to be?
Here’s what I think. If it’s your whisky and you paid for it, you have the right to do whatever you want to the whisky to make it more appealing to you. After all, isn’t a pleasurable drinking experience the ultimate goal? And since everyone’s preferences are different, it’s impossible for a whiskymaker to make a whisky that is perfect for everyone. One size doesn’t fit all.
Still, not everyone agrees with me. Dr. Whisky reviews the Bernheim Wheat Whiskey here, noting that he finds the whiskey “boring and inconsequential.” I suggest that, since it is a wheat whiskey, that he might consider adding a bit of rye whiskey to it the next time he drinks it to give it more personality, depth and complexity.
Hey says this might be a bit presumptuous, noting:
Who am I to judge professional whisk(e)y makers with 45 years of nosing experience, 3 generations of blending in their families, 10 year apprenticeship training, etc.?
Do you bring a paintbrush to an art gallery in case you find Renoir missed a spot? Do you add salt, Tabasco sauce, and ketchup when dining at a friend’s house?
I have the most respect for the master distillers and blenders who make whisky. But, I find it difficult equating a unique painting of Renoir to a whisky that has a bottling run in the thousands. You can experiment with one bottle and still have the rest of that bottle–and thousands more just like it. The Renoir is unique. There’s only one.
I like Dr. Whisky–and I really enjoy reading his reviews–but I must disagree with him here. (Perhaps his full time gig as a brand ambassador for a leading Scotch whisky brand is showing some bias?)
Maybe I’m the one who has it wrong here? I mix a lot of things in my life. I blend beers together. I mix cereal brands together in the morning. I mix ice cream together. I blend my teas together. I even mix my metaphors sometimes. Maybe my brain is mixed up too?
How do you feel about this?
I agree with you. Do what you need to make it enjoyable for you. If I buy something and don’t particularly like I might use it for mixed drinks, or cooking, or try it with something else I don’t love to see if the combination is greater than the sum of its parts in my taste. I’m certainly not going to just keep drinking it straight b/c someone with more experience than me said I should. Also, I tried the Berneim with some Bulleit and thought it was good.
Only recently have I tried this, mixing malts.
Say, “blending” equal parts of Laphroaig 10 and Macallan 12, for example. Was interesting, easy, fun and tasty.
The best of both worlds, you could say.
I don’t understand. I’m supposed to let a bad bottle of whisky go to waste just because the person selling the product, with their experience, thought it was good? Umm, no.
Absolutely you should mix and match to find something more pleasant to your palate – Its you palate(and your money) afterall.
Now, to make it more fun have friends over and play around with different mixes and matches – - Sherry – Abundh for example – can mask lots of less than stellar whisky if you want to go that direction. But remember you can always batch things but you cannot remove it once its there so do it slowly and experiment!
“Who am I to judge professional whisk(e)y makers with 45 years of nosing experience, 3 generations of blending in their families, 10 year apprenticeship training, etc.?”
Um… isn’t that exactly what he did when he called the whiskey “boring and inconsequential”?
I think you should do whatever you can to improve a bottle to your liking. I’ve got a ’66 Banff that is way to woody.. I blend in a bit of younger Banff and it’s great.
I’ve also played with adding my own barrel finishes… a lot of fun.
I’ve only ever had one whisky I considered not palatable. Out of fear of wasting something I appreciate, I wouldn’t mix it with anything in an attempt to improve it.
Using the good Dr’s analogy of not judging a whisk(e)y maker’s experience, should we assume, then, that every whisky scores a 100 in its own right? Perhaps all except the Bernheim Wheat Whiskey, I guess.
I’ve served quite a few folks “whisky and water” and “whisky and rocks.” They get their whisky in one vessel and their water or ice in another. If someone wanted to “blend” The Glenrothes 1985 with Ardbeg 10 yo, I’d feel none the worse to watch them pour one into the other.
You buy it, you own it.
If you want to blend it with something else, be it another whiskey, or water, or coca-cola, so be it.
If you want to wash your windows with it or drive your car on it, again, so be it.
You bought it, it’s yours to do with as you wish.
I generally agree, although with the caveat that those who rush too quickly to make a whisk(e)y more to their liking may miss out on something.
The first impression may be off — a few minutes of aeration may change things dramatically. And many great things are often foreign and challenging at first, revealing their depths only to the patient and open-minded.
But after engaging with a new whisk(e)y and giving it a real go, then by all means do with it as you wish.
I have had have a lot of fun re-creating John Glaser’s Compass Box Whisky creations. But if someone tries to ‘improve’ a Bowmore 12 year old by adding some Black Bowmore. The whisky police should definitely confiscate the rest of thb bottle (the BB, of course).
Sure, why not? I know people that enhance their whisky to their liking by pouring over ice. Not something that I do often, but hey once you own it you can do what you want. I vat different whiskies frequently. I independently put together something that tastes very much like Rendezvous Rye by combining different proportions of Old Overholt, Thom. Handy, and Sazerac 18. Delicious!
The comment suggesting that whisky is sacred because someone with great experience and wisdom made it reminds me of a story I read recently about Thomas Keller, celebrated chef of Per Se and French Laundry. A customer requested salt and the waiter brought the request timidly to the kitchen in fear that this might offend the great master. Keller himself filled a small bowl with salt.
I think it’s not a bad thing to mix whiskies together. However, i don not make such a thing – i always try to sample a new malt, before i buy it, so not to purchase something, which is not too good for my taste. Te other ting is, i respect the work of those people, who make these nectars, and i don’t think the would like to mix their product with other’s. But people have different taste, so i just search for the malt, i like.
Slainthe! Peter
I’m with you on this one John. If you buy the malt you can do what you want with it to make the experience as pleasurable as possible – it was bought to give pleasure wasn’t it. The likening to a painting doesn’t work as the owner of the painting is merely a custodian, spending their time with it and enjoying it before passing it on to the next wealthy collector. Whisky is consumed and once it has gone it’s gone.
I really like GS’s comments. At the end of the day there are going to be those whiskies which we like more than others, and possibly, some we don’t like. We could pour them down the sink or we could mess about with them and try and make them into something pleasurable.
I have a 4.5 litre oak cask that gets all of my dull samples and bottles and after a brief period of marrying and maturing something pleasurable goes into my glass when required – problem solved!
David
Absolutely – some people I know have a ‘living bottle’ where a half-finished bottle (unlabelled/defaced/whatever) of not particularly outstanding whisky has been periodically ‘augmented’with other whiskies. When people come to visit they have a little taste to see how it’s developing. While you wouldn’t add a rare Port Ellen to it or Macallan Gran Reserva to peat/sherry it up, a bit of laphroaig or aberlour might find their way in from time to time. Not one for the purists, but as a one off thing of interest it’s fun
Definitely! Mix away, I say!
This is why I always mix my Dalmore 50 with Coca Cola.
Seriously, though, we sit in shock and bewilderment at the people who mix fine Scotch with cheap cola, but what are they doing that is different to you, other than adding in items that aren’t all whisky? They’re still trying to mix things up to make them more palatable to themselves.
I’m all for blending whiskies, though. I do it on occasion to change flavour profiles, but I’ve also been known to take a whisky I found uninteresting and oak it (with oak chips) for a couple of months to change its profile as well. I even once redistilled a cheap lowland Scotch just to see what would happen (at $15/bottle, it didn’t seem like too much of a crime). It was an… interesting experiment.
It’s our whisky. We should be able to do what we like with it. It doesn’t mean everyone’s going to agree, and I wouldn’t expect them to do so. Some people may even find it offensive. I find it offensive that some people spend $4000 on handbags (may as well go downtown and kick a poor person in the face), but at the end of the day, it’s their money, and it’s up to them to decide what brings them the most pleasure from it.
I have to agree with most. I don’t see any reason why we can’t mix.
After all, most of the whiskies company are mixing there single malts to make blend.
Why not try to make the same ourselve.
I try 2 time the add of cola and ice to single malt but keep it to low price malt.
Cragganmore 12 OB, it’s way better than a blend but this whisky is already great to drink neat.
Macallan 10 cask strengh, difficult to taste the cola but it’s easier to drink.
MARS
A friend and I are making a vatted malt out of whiskeys that we own that we don’t particularly care for.
Not that they are bad whiskies, there are many good whiskeys that just do not appeal to my palate.
I don’t think the artwork analogy works – you but a piece of art, you know what you are getting. You are given a bottle of whiskey, or you buy one you have never tried, you have no idea what it will be like in the glass.
Even from a distillery that you love there is the chance that this bottling (or cask) is not one that you love to drink.
I am very selective about the sherried whiskeys – most of them I find too sharp, or too fruity – I am a malt lover and when the malt is overshadowed, I probably won’t like it very much – there are exceptions, of course.
As for mixing a single malt with flavored soda, I cringe. I do keep a bottle of McClelland around for those who insist upon mixing this way – you like it how you like it, but you really miss out on all the wonderful flavors of the whiskey if you pour juice or soda in – even ice can dull the whiskey to the point where it is boring (to me.)
Definitely okay!
Isn’t that how blended whisky came about – only they even add grain whisky to the blend also?
Not that it’s a bad thing… look at Hedonism, or Nikka Coffey Grain 1992.
Is there anyone who opposes this? Besides the people who cringe and moan when they see ice or water added to a premium whisky and proceed to lecture on how it should be appreciated neat.
I find a hand carved iceball a beautiful accompaniment to a fine cask strength malt that can take it.
But by taking a nice highland malt, adding a splash of Caol Ila, a dash of Talisker, maybe 36 or so other whiskies and surely you’re on your way (after 30 years of blending) to a Johnnie Walker…
So add what you like…. the biggest seller in Asia right now is a bottle of Chivas 12 and a big jug of iced, sweet, green tea… seriously…. one bar does 100 bottles a night… and with those kinds of numbers, who can argue…
Make your own blends. You don’t have to use the whole bottle. Just get an empty one. Try putting things you think will work. Eventually I may strike Gold. Maybe not Johnny Walker Gold. In the case of bourbon, use it to enhance boring porters and stouts!!!
I’m going to join the rest of the crew here and say mix away… and then I’m going to push the whisky envelope (it’s what I do in the whisky world) and say cook with it!
If adding another whisky to a dram your taste buds find only so-so, add that dull dram to a sauce of dark chocolate and drizzle over your favorite dessert (or whisky loving guest!). Or, try adding it to a sweet and spicy mustard, then use it as a glaze for ham or a brisket.
Whisky is meant to be savored and enjoyed… and sometimes experimented with. I say go for it.
Slainte!
I would agree with the prevailing sentiment here. But from a different perspective…our philosophy (and this is backed by our Master Distller) is enjoy it as you like it. If you enjoy your whiskey with cola, go for it. Add some other, whiskey…works for us. There is no perfect way to enjoy. Enhance away.
Making blends is a lot of fun and something of a window into how difficult it must be to make a great expression, as more often than not, at least in my experience, what results from blending isn’t so good and sometimes goes down the drain. In that sense, rather than being some travesty perpetrated on something best left unsullied or whatever, blends contribute to one’s appreciation.
“Who am I to judge professional whisk(e)y makers with 45 years of nosing experience, 3 generations of blending in their families, 10 year apprenticeship training, etc.?”
Why would a whisky reviewer of all people ask this?
BTW, best personal blend: A bottle of A’bunadh (I don’t remember which release) emptied to the bottom edge of the label, filled the rest of the way up with Ardbeg 10. As someone not particularly wild for sherry or peat monsters, the compromise was nice and they complimented each other extremely well.
Home vatting is great. It increases your learning and enhances your experience.
Who am I to judge? The man calls himself Dr. Whisky!!! If Dr. Whisky can’t judge a whisky, who can?
I follow Johannes from Malt Madness on this — keep an empty bottle around and “vat” your leftover whiskies as the bottles get low. I also have vatted some disappointing whiskies with others to balance out flavors, such as an Islay with a Speyside sherried malt. A young Islay does wonders for some of the overly sherried malts.
The end customer has the final say on what he purchases and how he uses/drinks it. I personally like mixing and experimenting, just try our “Blush”. All distilleries should and do listen to their customers and try to produce whiskies that suit them so if the customer likes a final “tweak” then great. By the way any suggestions for something different…..
I find it an excellent idea to experiment.
If something you bought is disappointing, then by all means try to “enhance” it a bit.
Like most people said, it’s your whisky, so it’s your decision to do whatever you like.
And, if successful, please let us know. We might learn from it.
Maybe an idea for a website: successful home-vatted whiskies!!
If you couldn’t “enhance” one whisky with another, how could you ever learn how to blend?
The “Renoir” argument doesn’t hold, because by bringing your own paint and brush, and modifying the painting, you’re changing the enjoyment for everyone else. By “enhancing” a whisky you purchased, you’re only changing it for yourself (and those with whom you share it).
At any rate, the bottom line is that if you found a way to enjoy it, then you’re not doing it wrong.
I agree that you can do what you want with your whisky. However, there are “good” things and “bad” things you can do.
“Good” – would include a vatting of sorts to suit your taste.
“Bad” would include a mixture of say First Growth Bordeaux with Single malt as did Queen Victoria. Michael Jackson summed it best when he said ” It ruined two perfectly good drinks”.
Mixers, in general deter the flavors in the malt. However, an experiment with a dropper and a bottle of Port or Sherry, for example,can provide much the same experience as a malt that has been “finished” in similar styled casks.
Obviously, experimentation will determine what best suits YOUR specific taste!
I recently moved and had to do it quick, so I had four bottles of single malt – Oban, Dalwhinnie, The Glenlivet and Cardhu, which is not a scotch that I find readily available often and has a beautiful bottle. I had two to three fingers worth left in each bottle. Either I came up with four immediate occasions to drink them separately or they were all going into the same bottle, and they did.
I have to say, the result was overall a delicious beverage; I found it muted the unique nuances each single malt, yet emphasized the strengths of all. The heathery Dalwhinnie and strong Oban were like the lassie and the sea kelpie myth. So, I liked it and I’m drinking it, but as something of a purist, I definitely like them separate. If I drink blended, it’s generally Johnnie Walker (which also owns Cardhu and uses it in their blends).
It is awesome to cook with – for reductions and in desserts, so need let a drop of uisge beatha go to waste unless it goes to the angels in process.
I agree with you. It makes a lot more sense than drinking something boring, and some of the vats are better than the whiskeys that created them.
For me, blending, vatting or mixing whisky at home is absolutely acceptable. A while ago I did a small series of experiments that I published on my blog (in case anyone is interested, the link is hiding under my name). I even tried to mix whisky with other spirits. To my own surprise this can work quite well, but only if you stay within certain limits.
Blending with other whiskies will almost always lead to an acceptable result. But I wouldn’t expect the blend to be better than the sum of its parts. It might be possible to achieve this, but for an unskilled person this will be pure luck.
My personal favorite was a mix of a peated Islay with a rye. Try it!
I’m principally in favour of mixing whiskies that don’t turn out too terrific, but I don’t think creating something good is easy. I tend to mix the JW Red Label 2008 with the 2009 version (yes, I still love blends), and in general like the 2008 bottlings more.
But vatting my Glenfarclas 8yo with something else (another malt) is much harder. I tried the Glenfarclas 15yo as a co-component once, but the end result didn’t convince me.
However, I’ll try the idea mentioned earlier here of pouring all the unfinished single malt into one (previously) empty bottle – and see what the vatting tastes like. Sounds like fun!
John, I think the way you’ve asked the question makes it hard for anyone to disagree. Of course, we all think we should be able to taste the best thing possible, do what we want with our whiskies and, heck, I’ve been known to throw things like PC5 and Handy Rye into cocktails, so I’m no purist.
However, having read many of Sam’s posts on his blog as well as comments, I think you may not be doing justice to his position. I think he was speaking to you as a fellow critic about the content and value of criticism.
As far as I can tell, Sam indeed views each whiskey as a work of art, and judges it as such. While he may give some inkling of his personal feeling about the whiskey, and did it moreso in the Bernheim review than is typical, his reviews are largely descriptive in nature. He doesn’t rate or score. He views himself more as art critic (or literary critic) than consumer advisor.
As with a work of art or a meal at a fine dining establishment, you don’t embellish the artist’s work. You should judge the works by what the artist has presented. That doesn’t mean you always love it, but it shows some amount of respect for the artist and allows you to appreciate the art work, flaws and all.
Now, granted, some of Sam’s comments go to the extreme on this, but I think what he’s really saying (and he can correct me if I’m wrong) is that we should treat each whiskey as a complete art work, judge it as such, like it or dislike it as such.
If you are dissatisfied with a work of poetry or prose, say Hamlet, Moby Dick or Pound’s The Cantos, is it appropriate to take out pages and add your own or eliminate the ending and write your own in? Surely everyone has a right to do so with their personal copies and by doing so, perhaps you will even create something of value. But doing so does not add to the appreciation (or criticism) of that writer’s work and does not assist others in understanding that work.
For my part, that’s how I see Sam’s argument and in some ways, why I think the two of you are more talking past each other than to each other.
sku, you make some excellent points, and I, for the most part, agree with you. Thanks for taking the time to post the comment.
I corresponded with Sam this morning and I think he’ll post up his thoughts too here eventually.
Thanks to your enthusiasm and zeal, the many of you almost convinced me I should try my own vattings. Then I thought about Johnnie Walker Green. The first time I tried it I was WOW’d. Since then I’ve tried its components individually. For me, Talisker, Caol Ila, Cragganmore, and Linkwood each have more to offer by themselves than they contribute to the pure malt of JW Green.
I look forward to finding an establishment that offers The Famous Grouse 12 or 18 yo malts, which include The Macallan and Highland Park. I’m not a fan of The Macallan, but I thoroughly enjoy Highland Park. I wouldn’t on my own try to enhance The Macallan, but I’m eager one day to try a wee dram of The Famous Grouse malt to see how they’ve done it.
Not only is it acceptable, you’re silly not try. Make a whiskey cocktail.
Glenmo LaSanta is over-sherried and overpriced. But if you find yourself with a bottle, make a Rob Roy. The extra sherry marries well with the vermouth and shines instead of distracts.
Early Times whiskey makes a mean whiskey sour. Just ask David Wondrich!
While I understand the nod to the professionals when it comes to making whiskey, I can support the notion of “experimenting” on your own a bit. I don’t see anything wrong with creating your own “signature” blend. It’s all good in my opinion.
My response to sku’s “work of art” argument is that remix culture is valid art too. I see no problem with using an existing art I own as a nice tool to work my own art, and if I make a mistake then I’ve been a poor remixer. This is not an art completely out of the hands of us lowly hoi polloi what, you know, actually buy the booze.
On the other hand the rare time I’ve tried blending by my own self, I’ve had some wonderful successes and some learning points that made me happy I didn’t make it taste like, uh, Loch Dhu.
I’ve made my own wood block prints and homebrewed, and I don’t see where my lack of credentials as a master blender means I should not have the right to do what I bloody well want with the whisky I’ve bought. He thinks there’s an easement on the sale terms or something? It’s booze, not surgery!
Why do you think JW and others have been sending elite reviewers blending kits and doing webcasts, eh?
John,
I personally try to be a purist and typically drink only cask strength whiskies when at home. I try to get bottlings that are straight from the cask (but you know that there aren’t too many of those) and try to decipher all that the whisky and it’s components have to offer. I try to enhance this experience by pairing the whisky with an appropriate cigar, pipe tobacco or a meal.
For example, I’d pair Rick Duff’s 66 Banff with poached salmon and a slice of meyer lemon or with a young (aged less than 2 years) Fuente Fuente Opus X – A. The woodiness would add chrachter to the fish and the minerality of the cigar would add complexity to the whisky. As for pipe tobacco, I would probably smoke a well aged Dunhill Elizabethan with that particular whisky.
I have had many whisky cocktails that I liked but I prefer Rick’s approach of blending the two Banffs together, this probably keeps the foundation of the whiskies intact.
But that’s just my humble opinion!
People should be free to do what they want with what they have, and others should reserve the right to not feel good about what’s happening around them. Like using a PC5 or an Octomore or Supernova for a cocktail or a blend and calling it a work of art, now that is a travesty.
I believe that there should be a line that shouldn’t be crossed, after all we do live in a civilized world. But then again, that’s just my two cents!
I’m with you and the gang here on this one. You buy it, you enjoy it in any way you like. That’s how it works. As for Dr. Whisky’s take, I think he’s actually way out-of-line. Whisky is a beverage, first and foremost. YES, there is often real artistry involved, and YES, some whisky expressions even achieve true artistic greatness, but it is still a potable product sold for consumption. Strictly speaking, whisky is a luxury product. Enjoyment is, in fact, what it is all about. If instead of painting Renoir’s medium was the food and beverage industry and his art was served in a restaurant or purchased at a retail outlet rather than viewed at a museum, Dr. Whisky’s analogy would be less off the mark. Besides, mixing or adulterating the purchased product does not necessitate negative judgments against the artistry of the producer, any more than mixing a martini is a judgment against the particular brand of chosen gin or vermouth.
I have used 18 year malts for Gaelic coffee, not sure if it enhanced the malt, but the gaelic coffee was amazing
Commercial : Sugar+coffee then add the stiffwhipped cream on top of the coffee and pour the malt over the solid cream. You can taste the malt
Blasphemy ? No, if I did the the same with Tullamore Dew or the likes I wouldn’t get as good a gaelic coffee
I wasn’t even trying to get rid of a bad malt here. What you do with what you paid for yourself is your own business
Macdeffe
Many great comments. Any whisky with the exception of Single Cask whisky has been blended to create an expression for that distillery or brand. It is the correct expression for that brand, however, it may not be the right expression for you the consumer. I love heavy, oaky, red wines but my wife loves sweet rieslings, who’s right? We both are.
I believe DR. Whisky is correct in his evaluation based on his personal opinion. The consumer needs to realize that it is just an opinion.
I also believe you are correct John. The one thing missing in my opinion in the entire whisky industry is the celebration of the “Art or craft of blending”. In cognac, armanac, and wine it is the blending that is celebrated. In the Scotch Industry it seems that “single malt” over shadows the fact that the real art or craft was in the “blending of that single malt”.
I do not believe adding your personal blending notes is appropriate when evaluationg a product. The product should be evaluated based on what it is and where it came from. Full stop.
From a consumer standpoint blend away. I tend to add a bit of rye to some bourbons as I find that a higher rye content makes it more enjoyable to this scotch drinker.
Cheers to blending
Jeff