September 30th, 2011
A couple years ago, the History Channel featured a one-hour show titled “Whiskey.” It is part of their popular series called Modern Marvels. They’ve run the show again several times since then. I mentioned it here before for two reasons:
If you still haven’t had a chance to see it, or if you would like to watch it again, you can now catch it on Hulu. I’m including the link here. They excluded most of the commercials (thankfully), so the show is only about 45 minutes.
Check it out. One bit of advice: having a whisky in your hand while watching it only enhances the pleasure!
August 10th, 2011
White Whiskeys — unaged, or briefly aged, grain distillates — are the focus in this review post. Lew Bryson, managing editor and reviewer for Malt Advocate magazine, takes a look at a few here.
Low Gap Whiskey (American Craft Whiskey Distillers), 42.7%, $40
Distilled from “malted Bavarian hard wheat” on the still formerly used at Germain-Robin. Good pedigree; does it deliver? Bread/flour in the aroma, like a fresh bag of flour, with a fruity alcohol edge to it, the wheat tang I know from beer. In the mouth, it comes through as bread and crackers. It’s somewhat hot, but it’s a brandy/aromatic heat: vapor-producing. The finish pulls more grain in, finally. They’re aging some of this; should be a great whiskey.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 80
Marko K. Spirits Doubled & Twisted, 49.5%, $60 (1 liter)
Distilled from “bottle-ready IPA.” Sure is; the hops leap out of the glass, piney and pithy, a real west coast beer and whiskey experience in a glass. Quite a fat mouthfeel for 99 proof, a big oily thing that rolls around the tongue, making itself at home with flaring hop flavor — not really bitter — and an underlying sweetness. Bittering kicks in on the finish. An astonishing experience that really grows on you…but ultimately there’s a lack of depth.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 80
Heaven Hill Trybox Series Corn, 62.5%, $25
New make from the same mashbill as Evan Williams, bottled “straight from the still.” Much higher proof than the others, but not noticeably hotter in the nose; that’s light corn and grass, with a bit of minty spice. Hotter in the mouth, but quite pleasant and evolving: fresh mint gives way to light corn, then a slightly oily slip to brisk sweetness…and you realize you didn’t notice the serious overproof. A well-behaved white dog.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 79
Finger Lakes Glen Thunder Corn Whiskey, 45%, $22
Crisps the nose hairs a bit, but it’s pure corn, even a bit of cornbread. Tip a sip in, and it’s nothing but more green corn, sweet, fresh — hot, for sure, but not overwhelming — and pretty tasty for what it is. With white whiskey, we’re walking the fine line between flavor and raw wound at all times, and this one finds the line.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 77
Koval Rye Chicago, 40%, $40
Smelling the rye from a foot away after pouring. Exceptionally clean aroma of grain; the oily/spicy rye notes come through clearly. Quite smooth. Not a lot of flavors: very focused on the rye itself, with grain and just a touch of mint. A long finish with sweet grain that slowly turns to mint in the end.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 77
Heaven Hill Trybox Series Rye, 62.5%, $25
This is new make from the Rittenhouse Rye mashbill, unaged, right off the still. Yeasty mash notes come through strongly, with a big nose of rye and corn underneath. It smells fresh, and alive. Wow, that’s powerful stuff. Much hotter than the Trybox Corn, this one is on fire with rye spice; it’s got me breaking a sweat! A bit of water brings out more grain notes, and some tempering sweetness, but it’s still no pussycat. Cleanly powerful.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 75
Koval Levant Spelt, 40%, $40
Provocative: spelt’s an interesting aroma. Grainy and a bit earthy, with hints of golden delicious apple all combining in the nose. There’s a fast, high flow of creaminess that spreads quickly and disappears, leaving a slightly fruity, grainy aftertaste. Interesting sensations, and again, quite clean.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 75
Stillhouse The Original Moonshine, 40%, $40
Aromas are soft and creamy, with a waft of sweet corn — underlain with a fairly blunt alcohol burn that comes through more as you smell it. Quite sweet on the palate, a wash of green corn, but the flavor isn’t enough to tangle successfully with the fuel, which leads to a tongue-curlingly hot finish. Some definite potential, but it really needs time in a big oak barrel (or some ice and a bottle of Dr. Pepper).
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 75
Hudson New York Corn Whiskey, 46%, $35 (375 ml)
Nose is sweet corn, with some mintiness to it, and some herbal notes; hot, but not off-putting. Tastes are not as sweet as expected. A bit flat, though the sweet corn does come through toward the end. Again, though, this one is quite hot, which is not surprising; the Hudson Baby Bourbons — which this is the foundation for — have struck me as hot also.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 74
Koval Raksi Millet, 40%, $40
A lively light fruitiness (white grapes, green plum) in the nose. Quite grainy, but with an interesting hint of vanilla and a slight saltiness. Finish is a bit astringent, unlike the other Koval spirits. I’m finding these an interesting exercise in distillation, and educational.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 74
Koval Midwest Wheat, 40%, $40
So that’s what wheat smells like: not much. The aromas here seem to be mostly yeast-derived, with a faint ripe fruitiness (undefined: peach, apple?) and alcohol heat, and a touch of wheat-origin sweet grass. Wheat’s in the mouth, like chewing fresh grain with some water and alcohol. It’s all there, and the finish is sweet, and it’s clean, but…that’s about all. White bread whiskey.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 74
Catoctin Creek Mosby’s Spirit, 40%, $39
Made from 100% rye, and USDA certified organic. Very hot for 40%; herbal nose, very green with rye. Much smoother on the palate, and very quick. There’s a fast shot of rye mint up front, some grassiness, and a sharp flick of heat…and then it vanishes, leaving only a fading flinty-sweet afternote. Clean, but not a lot of substance.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 73
Koval American Oat, 40%, $40
Very similar to the Midwest Wheat in aroma, with a slight additional tanginess…but that could be from sensory deprivation. Drier in the mouth, with a slight medicinal character to it that increases as the finish goes on; like a high school chemistry lab storeroom, or a bottle of fresh aspirin.
Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 73
August 4th, 2011
An article in The Atlantic last week suggests that a “whiskey crisis is looming” because craft distillers are aging their whiskey in small barrels in a (failed) attempt to accelerate the aging process, and then they are putting the whiskey on the market at a young age and calling it “bourbon.” (The issue here is that these bourbons aren’t as mature and complex as the straight bourbons being put out by the larger distillers and it’s going to drag down the reputation of bourbon.)
The author says they are cutting corners to save time and suggests that it could lead to a decline in the entire industry.
Read it here.
What do you think?
P.S. I think this article is significant because it shows that the issue is now being picked up by mainstream press, not just bantered about by us geeky whisky bloggers.
June 27th, 2011
Or do they just make whiskey taste woody faster?
I’ve been thinking about this recently because I’ve tasted a lot of whiskies over the past couple of years that were matured in smaller barrels. While it’s true that the big distillers are using them (e.g., Laphroaig Quarter Cask), their use seems to be more prevalent with the smaller, craft distillers. Why? They want to mature their young whiskey as quickly as possible and get it on the market.
Let me be clear right now and say that I have absolutely no scientific evidence to support what I am thinking. Indeed, I can’t even cite specific examples, because it’s not something I have been really taking notes on. So, take what I have to say with a grain of salt.
Still, what I have noticed on several occasions when tasting young whiskey aged in smaller barrels, is that the whiskey didn’t seem taste mature. It just tasted woody. The smaller casks provide for more contact with wood because of the larger surface area for a given volume of whiskey. But it still tasted “green,” somewhat harsh, and very youthful in character.
So, I wonder: are we trying to cheat mother nature by using smaller barrels? Does it actually work, or are we just fooling ourselves?
Again, this is just a general observation. I have no facts to support my thinking here. But, I can tell you this: I was speaking with a very high official of a highly respected distilling company who is doing research on this topic, and their preliminary findings seem to support my thinking. Stay tuned for more information on this in a future blog post.
I respect (and embrace) the craft distilling movement and everything they do. I don’t want anyone to take this post the wrong way think I am accusing them of trying to pull a fast one on us. There are a lot of distillers using smaller barrels, not just the small guys. And like I said earlier, this is just a gut feeling of mine.
I do think that the use of smaller barrels as part of a mix of smaller and more standard size barrels can add a new flavor dimension and inject some extra wood influence into the whisky. Laphroaig Quarter Cask is an excellent example of this. But, I wonder what Laphroaig would taste like if all Laproaig was matured in quarter (or even smaller) casks?
March 23rd, 2011
And they will continue becoming even more blurred in the future.
As the young, developing craft distilling movement matures and begins offering longer-aged whiskeys, they will compete with the established distillers’ products.
On the flip side, the established distillers are increasingly offering younger, and as is the case with Heaven Hill’s “TryBox Series” (shown in the picture), sometimes even unaged product for sale. In fact, distillers on both sides of the pond are selling unaged spirit.
Craft distillers comprise a rapidly growing, but still relatively low-production, market. I don’t think the large, established distillers have anything to worry about–yet. But they would be foolish to not pay attention.
Just take a look at the American craft beer market and you will see where craft distilling is heading. According to a recent Brewers Association press release, overall beer consumption is down, but the craft beer market continues to grow and capture market share.
The large brewers who made relatively bland pilsner-style beer are now making beer with more flavor–or forming alliances with craft brewers to compete with them.
You are witnessing the same happening within the whiskey industry. Small craft distillers like Stranahan’s and Anchor have been purchased by larger players in the drinks industry. And large distiller William Grant (owners of Glenfiddich and Balvenie) bought the Hudson whiskey brand from Tuthilltown Spirits, the Hudson Valley craft distiller.
Yes indeed, the lines between established distillers and small craft distillers will continue becoming more and more blurred in the future. For the most part, I think this is a good thing. It will be healthy for the whisky industry.
Will there be some downside? Sure! We will have to endure the “weeding out” of the inferior brands and “fly by night” companies that will undoubtedly surface to make a fast buck in this growth market (as we witnessed in the early phases of craft brewing–and that cigar boom a while back).
But the upside is far greater–and well worth any temporary inconvenience.
March 11th, 2011
For all of my United States readers, I thought you might like to know that there’s a bunch of new whiskies heading our way. I listed them below.
(I apologize in advance for not knowing the answers to the questions you are going to ask, like: When is it coming? Where will it be available? How much is it going to cost? With any luck, the importers will chime in here.)
For those of you coming to WhiskyFest Chicago in April, some of these whiskies will be poured there. You can find the complete WhiskyFest list here.
The new whiskies
Armorik Breton whisky (from Brittany)
Lark (from Tasmania): Single Cask, Cask Strength, Distillers Selection Single Cask
Samaroli (from Scotland): a bunch of them!
Tomatin “Decades”
Glen Garioch 1991 Vintage (extra smoky!)
Ardmore 10 year old Cask Strength
Glenmorangie Pride 1981 Vintage
Bruichladdich: “Laddie Classic”, Port Charlotte “An Turas Mor”
Michael Collins 10 year old Irish single malt
Plus something new from Dalmore (shhh!)
December 13th, 2010
I’m looking back on 2010. Indeed, there’s plenty to be thankful for. But I didn’t get a lot of sleep last night and I’m feeling a little grumpy, so I thought I would save the “giving thanks” post for a happier time and focus on my disappointments today.
I can think of several things that disappointed me this year.
Social media abuse
The first one was the regular misuse and abuse of social media by whisky company employees. On several occasions this year, I discovered whisky companies (from the smallest to the largest) artificially pumping up their brands with their “anonymous” comments here on WDJK. I addressed each abuse as I discovered them, so I am not going to rehash it here. (Plus, some of the companies I caught now have implemented policies to ensure this doesn’t happen again.)
But the fact remains that this kind of stuff is going on. And if it’s happening here, then it’s happening on other social media sites too. It’s not right, and the whisky companies should know better.
False or misleading statements
A second thing disappointed me: False statements by whisky companies. I’ve addressed this here earlier this year. For example, if it’s NOT your first new whisky in more than 50 years, then why are you telling everyone that it is? Sure it sounds nice, and it’s a great marketing tool. I’m even thrilled that you came out with a new whisky, and I like it too! But it’s not your first new whisky in more than 50 years, and it shouldn’t have been promoted as such.
Paying to play
Another thing that disappointed me: How many times must I say that you can’t pay for editorial exposure in Malt Advocate ? Just last week, someone in the business asked me how we determine what gets written in our New Products section. The person wanted to know if they had to pay to get one of their whiskies written up there. No, you just have to send us a press release and a review sample. (I guess I have to say it a few more times, which is why I am listing it here today.)
Premature bottling
And now to the last one. This one isn’t as much disappointing as it is sad. So many craft distillers are putting out new whiskeys right now. For most, the potential of the whiskeys are there, but they’re being released too soon. They’re just immature, and they need more aging. (Okay, some of them probably won’t get better no matter how long they are aged in wood, but I think this is the minority, not the majority.)
Look, I understand the need for some of these small craft distillers to get returns on their investments to pay mounting bills. (And I am also aware that young whiskeys can be great in cocktails, but I am speaking from the point of view of a whiskey drinker here, not a mixologist.) I would rather you make gin or vodka or unaged rum and let your whiskey mature a little longer, than sell your whisky before it is mature.
What do you think?
How about you? Do you agree or disagree with me? And please explain.
Finally, is there anything that disappointed you this year? If so, what?
Thanks!
P.S. I promise to not be this grumpy every morning.
September 25th, 2010
I have so much rattling around in my brain right now, I’m putting up this bonus weekend post before my evil twin takes over on Monday.
This past year we saw the Anchor Distilling Co. sold to the Griffin Group. Then we also saw Tuthilltown Spirits “Hudson Whiskey” brand sold to William Grant.
This is just the beginning. Count on it!
Make a list of the most reputable craft distillers (both here and abroad) who are putting out a clean product with strong business models, and I willing to bet that most all, if not all, have been approached by larger companies who want to buy them. In fact, I feel quite certain that there will be more announcements of alliances between craft distillers and larger companies in the future.
Why? Craft distillers need the money. They want to make a quality product, but they are also faced with mounting bills and need to put out something to pay off these bills. That’s why you’re seeing a lot of young whiskeys put out on the market–many of them too young!
An infusion of capital will allow them to invest in quality equipment, storage facilities, and barrels. They will be able to hire distillers (and consultants) who know what they’re doing. Moreover, it will allow them to age their product longer so it is fully matured before being put on the market. They will be able to increase production. Plus, the right buyer will get their product into distribution channels, increasing circulation–and sales!
It all makes sense. It’s going to happen. Again and again.
Care to take a guess at who you think will be next?
August 30th, 2010
(As promised, What Does John Know? becomes “What Do you Know?” this week–and next! Let’s hit the ground running with the most controversial guest blog. Our first guest blogger, Steve Ury of www.recenteats.blogspot.com, makes his point. And he doesn’t sugar-coat it.)
——
Most craft whiskeys suck!
I’m sorry, but someone had to say it. This particular emperor has been wearing new clothes for too long.
The Phenomenon
Like every whiskey writer/blogger in the universe, I’ve written a fair amount about American microdistilleries; I even put together one of the first complete lists of American whiskey microdistilleries on the web (which I continue to keep up to date). It’s a fascinating and exciting phenomenon. Suddenly, after years of having only a dozen whiskey distilleries, the nation is awash in microdistilleries cropping up in every unlikely nook and cranny. The proprietors of these micros are, almost to a person, lovely folks. They are the type of creative artisans who bring a real love to their craft and have invested countless hours of sweat-equity. They pursue innovative new recipes and techniques; they epitomize the “little guy.” Who could not like them? The only problem is that many of their products suck.
I’m sorry, but I am tired of hearing raves about this great new, innovative distillery in Idaho with their first whiskey on sale for $85 plus shipping, only to find out that it’s been aged for 18 days and tastes like turpentine. I have had this experience multiple times. Despite their lovable heritage, craft whiskeys are mostly too young, too expensive and too crappy.
Don’t believe me? Last May, the American Distilling Institute (ADI), an association for craft distillers, had a craft whiskey tasting competition. A panel of experts blind tasted 65 craft whiskeys. The winner of the best in show award (Best Craft American Whiskey) was High West’s Bourye. But the whiskey in Bourye was not made by a craft distillery. It was made by a macrodistillery and purchased by High West, which blended it for Bourye. It turns out that the best craft whiskey in American isn’t a craft whiskey at all.
The Press
It’s time to admit that many of us in the blogging/journalistic community, out of a desire to encourage and nurture this young industry, have given these craft whiskeys a pass. If you read reviews of craft whiskeys you will continually see words like “interesting,” “innovative” and “experimental.” Reviewers seem afraid to come down too hard on these lovely folks, so we get a lot of euphemisms. Meanwhile, we continually see romantic puff pieces about one man’s brave quest to make quinoa whiskey in a remote Nebraska town. The big exception to this trend has been Chuck Cowdery who has not held back about craft distilleries, particularly those that aren’t really distilling.
These Ain’t Microbrews
There are constant comparisons between the microdistillery movement and the microbrewery movement, but while there are certain similarities, the two are really apples and oranges. Back in the ’80s, before the first big wave of microbrews, the vast majority of Americans were drinking crap beer. It was Bud, Miller, Coors, Schlitz – looks like piss, tastes like water. There was barely any alternative. The microbrewery revolution wasn’t just about smaller producers, it was about bringing flavor back to beer. Suddenly, you could get beer that tasted like something. The microbreweries continue to lead the way on flavor and the big guys, for the most part, continue to put out crap.
The story with whiskey is nearly the opposite. The big macrodistilleries put out some amazing quality whiskeys. I’m talking Parker’s Heritage, the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection, Four Roses Single Barrel and Wild Turkey Rare Breed. They also put out innovative new whiskeys like the Buffalo Trace Experimental Collection and the Woodford Reserve Master’s Collection. Sure there is bottom shelf stuff out there, but the macrodistilleries give the whiskey lover plenty to choose from. In contrast, the micros are giving us less flavor and less age, and in the end, that means less care is going into the product. Unlike microbrews, they aren’t filling an important gap because there is no gap to fill.
I Said “Most”
Now bear in mind that I say “most” craft whiskeys suck, and by most I do mean the vast majority. However, Anchor’s Old Potrero and Charbay’s hopped whiskeys are excellent. I consider those two distilleries to be the only two I have tried that compete with the majors on quality. Everyone else is batting for the minor leagues at best.
I do love High West’s Rendezvous Rye, but as with their Bourye, it is not craft distilled. It’s a macrodistillery whiskey that High West has done a great job sourcing and blending. Sourcing and blending are real skills and High West deserves credit for blending and bottling a great whiskey, but it doesn’t count as something made by a microdistillery.
And I have nothing against craft distilling generally. I’ve written multiple posts on the fabulous craft distilled brandies from Germain-Robin and also enjoyed St. George Absinthe. I’m sure there are other good craft distilled spirits out there, but the whiskey sucks.
Now, I’m perfectly aware that mine isn’t the only opinion on the block, so I’d love to hear from anyone who thinks that these whiskeys really do measure up. Let me know which ones you love.
What Do You Think?
To the whiskey writing community I have to ask, are we doing any favors by coddling distillers who are putting out substandard products at inflated prices? Are we being honest with our readers about the line between “interesting” and “worth your hard earned cash”? Is our emotional investment in the innovation and enthusiasm of craft whiskeys clouding our collective judgment? Isn’t it time someone said it: Most Craft Whiskeys Suck! Maybe someday it won’t be the case, but today it is.
Recent Comments