Bourbon Derby: 19 Days Off: Elijah Craig 12yr

As the days approach, I find myself again more and more used to the whiskey I'm drinking, and with less insight to add. Hopefully that will change soon! That said, I'm also afraid I'm blowing my wad here a bit -- I have only a few more opened whiskeys on my shelf matching the ones available at the Derby, which means I'm going to have to start cracking open new bottles. What a shame, eh?

Elijah Craig tastes a bit like demarara syrup or honey, particularly on the finish. There is a slight off note on the finish, a charcoal bittersweetness, balanced by some of the tastiest rye finish I've had. The whole whiskey is a bit corn-y, with a slightly thin ethanol smell. The demerara makes me really like it, but the heat and bitterness finish makes me unsatisfied. I still go by my general assessment that it is a really good introductory whiskey, particularly to the complexities of rye. I think the other flavor note I get is often described as eucalyptus -- spicy and evergreen smelling. That said, that's the flavor I get from a lot of Heaven Hill offerings, so I might just be expecting it. I used to be able to pick it out in blind testings; nowadays I'm not so sure my palate is calibrated well enough.

I'm glad the LCBO gets at least EC12. Heaven Hill is a really underrated distillery (for the second-or-third biggest distillery in Kentucky, that seems kind of silly), and I'm kind of sad that we don't have Evan Williams available, preferably at around the same price as Jim Beam. (That said, I am extremely glad we have access to Four Roses Yellow!)

Bourbon Derby: 20 Days Off: Four Roses Small Batch

There are 20 horses, max, in the Derby. There are often fewer -- horses get scratched all the time. It's appropriate that, 20 days until the 3030 Bourbon Week event, that I have a bourbon from Four Roses. The Derby is the Run of the Roses, after all, and Four Roses is a pretty fantastic distillery.

In stark contrast to last night's bourbon, Blanton's, the nose on Four Roses' Small Batch is fantastic. I could sit and smell this whiskey for a while -- and it's not even as good as my memories of some of the premium whiskies Four Roses makes. In fact, the nose on this guy is good, but nowhere near the level of any of the Single Barrels -- and I had to cheat a little and pop the cork open on a (already-opened) bottle of 4R Single Barrel just to confirm that assumption. That said, the nose is a bit one-note; rye, oak, and vanilla are completely dominant.

I'm a bit tired, so I'm going to make this review quick and sweet. The whiskey itself has a lovely taste, with some spice interplay, but continues to be a bit one-note. There's definitely some vanilla there, but with a sparkling spice note at the end exceeds Blanton's in intensity, if not in complexity. For a premium (mid-tier bourbon, this bottle is quite nice for the price. Rye, vanilla, a little honey, and oak are present in all parts of the drinking experience, and while the alcohol asserts itself, it never dominates. Four Roses SmB has a lovely bottle, with a raised rose, and that, plus some light heather/honey may make the drinker assume it is supposed to be a light introduction to whiskey, but that heavy rye finish always kicks back and reminds you you're having a mid-age bourbon. This is an easy-drinking whiskey, but while it is straightforward it's never shallow. The finish lingers just long enough. It lacks the value and burn of its younger/more mixed (Yellow Label) and heftier (single barrel) expressions, but the Small Batch, right now, strikes me as a great introduction to the distillery and bourbon in general. Certainly, I've won some scotch fans over with this bottle, and it does have a mild resemblance to a Speyside, swapping any peat for the common bourbon rye, corn, and vanilla, the first and third of which are in spades in tonight's drink.

Bourbon Derby: 19 Days Off: Makers Mark 46

This is a tough review for me, since I'm going into it with... feelings. Maker's Mark is probably the perfect whiskey to introduce someone to the concept of whiskey with, as it is whiskey without a strong finish. The finish, as I've noted before, is why I love bourbon. However, it's also a tough thing to deal with if you haven't drank much hard booze and you're conditioned by tough-guy movies or whatever to believe that a strong finishing flavor is harsh. I was a right snotty young man a few years ago, the kind who couldn't help rolling his eyes at people who took a shot of Jack Daniels (probably the smoothest and blandest of American whiskeys) and declared it to be harsh. It wasn't a tough-guy judgement for me, like drinking terrible whiskey was a decade ago, but it was still an unfair one. All sorts of folks have been trained to believe that "smooth and easy" is desirable -- and why not? That's what a lot of folks are looking for in life, too -- things to just be smooth and easy, for once. That said, I'm not a cantankerous old man who insists that hardship always builds character, but I actually like a little roughness and difficulty in both my life and my whiskey.

Maker's 46 launched at a time when I was knee-deep in my whiskey obsession, prior to Ontario opening up the floodgates a bit. Its marketing campaign was also a bit suspect -- Maker's claimed that it was the first time they offered an alternative to their standard product (Maker's marketing is based around consistency, holding up consistency as the highest sign of quality), which the late-80 dusty bottle of import Maker's 101 hidden in my whiskey closet proves wrong. I had lots of reasons to distrust Maker's at the time.

The bottle of 46 I'm drinking from was from the first release to hit the shelves in Kentucky. I've heard newer bottlings of it are a little more balanced, but, hey, I drank a couple ounces from this when it came out and let it sit. Despite that, it has a reasonable kick -- 90 proof shines through without being harsh. It has the same hints of cinnamon in the taste that Maker's often has, and manages to expand upon them and let them linger. That said, there's not a ton here. It's tasty, but not interesting -- where the 4RSB I had last night was one-note, this is even less intriguing (an ambient ocean sound compared to the Ramones, maybe?). That said, it's a wheater, and they're relatively rare, with a lot of the same nice wheat-grain-notes that bourbon nerds like. If it was aged longer on top of more efficiently aged (the gimmick with this guy is they add additional wood staves to the barrel, to increase the surface area of oak affecting the aging white dog -- that's why they can't call it Straight Bourbon), it might be something really special. The higher proof really benefits the Maker's flavor profile; I would absolutely love to try some 101 or barrel proof of the current product, but they're so strapped for juice they tried to drop the proof of their base offering, so that seems like a pipe dream.

Bourbon Derby: 21 Days Off: Blanton's

My whiskey for September 12th: Blanton's.

Taste is inextricably linked with our other senses, and, more importantly, our overall perceptive abilities. When we feel alert and interested, our tastes may change; in times of stress, some unfortunate sensitivities are heightened. In times of pleasure, things might overall "feel" better. Our ability to review situations is reflective of our mental state -- when I think back to my favorite meals, for example, they were often on happy occasions (birthday dinners, anniversaries, so on). It's a bit of a self-perpetuating conceit -- I often go to a nicer/more novel place because of a special event, but eating a meal when the moment already feels significant may already make the meal seem better than usual, pre-confirming my desire for things to be special. Later meals at the same places are typically enjoyable, but may not have lived up to that first experience, either because they were novel or because I was particularly receptive to positive feedback.

One of my fondest memories in recent years is sitting and drinking Blanton's with my dad. Because of that, it's difficult to really review it completely objectively outside a blind tasting. After all, the situations I'm drinking bourbon these days -- exhausted, late at night after a bar shift, as my wife and the world sleep around me -- aren't exactly the perfect tasting scenarios. That said, Blanton's is good enough to lift my spirits. The nose is nothing to write home about, but when it hits my tongue, it reminds me of the lovely honeyed taste Scotch aficionados write about. The mouthfeel isn't exactly thick, but it's not really thin or anything. The final taste and finish is a thing of beauty, one of the great back-of-tongue flavors and finishes in the world of bourbon, and whisk(e)y in general. The finish is what brings me back to bourbon -- a peaty scotch has a lovely finish, but nothing matches a beefy bourbon finish, save for a really exceptional (and/or old) American rye. The wood gives so much to the back of the tongue and the lingering taste on the throat. 

I'm trying to avoid looking up outside information as I drink these whiskeys, but, unless my memory fails me, I think that Blanton's is part of the higher rye/lower corn mashbill that BT uses for some of its bourbons. That rye definitely kicks in that "back of tongue" grain interplay I keep harping about.When I want to tell people about the crazy tingling and "dancing-grain" tastes I get in some bourbons, I usually use the Weller bourbons as a point of reference. However, this freshly-cracked bottle of Blanton's is giving me the same thing, but with a rye profile. While Van Winkle is no doubt a great distiller, Blanton's (and Stagg) are the big arguments for how Harlan's mainline BT stuff can go toe-to-toe with the hyped Pappy (and its little bro Weller).

I'm trying avoid dipping too much into my stash of rare (mostly-US-only) bourbons, to keep mostly to whiskies that will be available at the Derby. I'm worried, drinking Blanton's now, that it will be hard to feel as enthusiastic about another bourbon as I do about this whiskey. That said, there are some lovely whiskies lined up on my shelf -- EC12, Wild Turkey, and the entire Four Roses line -- and a lot of them should offer some nice alternatives. Especially when it comes to the nose -- as I finished the last few drops, I can't help but notice how I quickly skip past nosing the whiskey (normally one of my favorite parts of the drinking experience) and just jump to the finish. I do have to say that's a clever way to get me to down my drink quick.

Bourbon Derby: 22 days off: Woodford Reserve

The Derby of Bourbons, 20 bourbons at 3030, is on October 3rd. This is my whiskey for Sept 11.

Had a conversation with a customer tonight about how the only bourbon he drank regularly was Woodford, because it was easy to drink. The Woodford distillery -- a gorgeous tourist destination, but only partially a working distillery  -- is within 25 miles from my parent's house, so I always bring folks who are visiting there. I've been almost 10 times, which is weird considering how little Woodford I actually drink.

It's certainly not a bad whiskey, but tasting it today, it doesn't taste so much like bourbon. Not sure if my tastebuds are incorrectly attuned to bourbon these days, but it really tastes like an irish whiskey crossed with bourbon. Maybe my brain is deceitful; it knows that about half the whiskey going in that pretty little bottle is from a pot still, just like Redbreast. This bottle is mild; the taste and mouthfeel is different than most bourbons-- thick and oily, like a corny baby Redbreast. The finish has some nice spice interplay, but not near what the best wheaters can have. The rye is more or less lost, and the taste is just sweet corn and vanilla; most bourbons have those as notes, but this is ramped up.

It's certainly a whiskey for people who don't like complications or corner cases. No sharp edges on the taste, no harsh burn; it has a lengthier finish than, say, Maker's, but even that is mild and agreeable. Further into the glass and I'm actually less interested in it -- it's drinkable but not much else, like drinking syrupy soda. I can definitely see why Brown-Forman slap it up as the premium bourbon to sit alongside their Jack Daniels line; it's more interesting than the too-smooth Daniels, but it's smooth and easygoing in its own way.

I need to pick something more interesting tomorrow. Maybe Wathen's or Van Winkle 10? Certainly don't regret drinking this, but I do regret the lateness of the hour. To bed!

Bourbon Derby: 23 days off

Just getting thoughts down here...

Been a while since I drank bourbon. I've certainly had a slug here or there (feel dirty calling it a "dram"), but the last year has seen me drink less bourbon than I have in a decade, due to learning about beer and cocktails and all that fun jazz.

So, a few whiskeys a week, to re-orient my tastebuds. I'm actually going to aim for one a day, to lead up to Toronto Bourbon Week.


First off is Jim Beam White Label. Figured it would be an appropriate starting point, as it's most folks' starting point with bourbon. I don't get the nuances I used to, which makes me trying whiskey all the more important. Still, that corn-y-ness, the raw cornbread and yeast Jim Beam flavor is still there, and makes that first sip a little tough. It's watery, too, lacking the viscous mouthfeel and complex flavors of the amaros and such I've been drinking recently. The finish is a bit unpleasant for a bourbon -- not bad, mind you, and certainly nowhere near harsh, but thin and not too exciting. That said, I can see why this was the fancy step up from Kentucky Tavern for me a decade ago; its harshness is a mild, rounded back of the mouth sort, the kind that doesn't gag. I find I let my mouth open for oxygen more to let the taste escape. There's some acidity on the sides of the back and tip of the tongue. It's certainly more sippable as the pour opens up and I'm ten minutes in; the sweetness comes through, and it's not wholly drowned in ethanol. Still, you can barely taste it as a rye-flavoured whiskey; 80 proof probably cuts back on the intensity a bit much.

Not sure what I would do with it in a drink; feels like it would get lost. On the rocks, I recall, it tastes like the dirty-but-an-institution bars you go to see grungy bands at; Black Cat in DC, the Dame in Lexington, Little Brothers in Columbus, hell, even Lee's Palace here in Toronto. Watery whiskey that is made inoffensive by the cold, then you chew on the whiskey-flavored ice to hydrate and save money on buying another. Corn-water-with a little finish, so you know you're drinking bourbon.

Jim Beam. You ain't bad but sure you ain't any good.

Jefferson's Revisited

JEFFERSON'S SMALL BATCH
Jefferson's -- Unknown Distillery

$49.85 - 82 Proof

Yeah, gave it another try. Still not a huge fan, and it's not cheap. Thomas Jefferson HATED whiskey, by the by, and thought it would be the downfall of a nation. He was super into wine and grumpy when he couldn't get his favorite vines to grow in the Americas. Maybe this whiskey was why?

Oily, light, burnt, a little chemical, a little sulfurous.

Taste -- Not undrinkable, just Poor (1 out of 5)

Value -- Nice bottle. Poor.

BBQ # 3 - Where is Bourbon made?

I get a lot of questions about bourbon at work. In the hopes of saving myself some effort, I am putting some answers to common questions up here on the blog. That way, if you have been referred to here from my work, you can get a more in-depth answer than I could likely give you at the bar.


WHERE ARE THE BOURBON DISTILLERIES?

There have been a couple of people, over the last 3 months, who have asked me where to visit during a quick stop in Kentucky. Basically, if you're travelling to Kentucky, you're probably going to Northern Kentucky (near Cincinatti), Louisville, or my old hometown of Lexington. For Northern Kentucky, you're about equidistant from Lexington. Here are some good places to check out.




WOODFORD RESERVE -- only about 20 minutes from Lexington, in scenic Woodford County, is Woodford Reserve. They don't actually make a lot of whiskey here; it's really more a tourist destination. They tour is pretty great and they have lengthier tours in certain months you can reserve. Definitely a great introduction to bourbon, just like the whiskey itself.


LAWRENCEBURG - about 40 minutes west of Lexington, Lawrenceburg is home to both Four Roses and Wild Turkey. I haven't been back to Wild Turkey since they opened their newly renovated distillery, but I hear it is great. Four Roses has a very nice tour during the on-season, but is nothing special during the summer.


BUFFALO TRACE -- The Buffalo Trace distillery in Frankfort is probably the best distillery overall to visit; they give you a very thorough tour even off-season, and their hard hat tour (which requires calling ahead for reservations) is fantastic. Plus they experiment a lot, which gives you the chance to see some interesting upcoming products, and they let you try both their standard whiskies and their white dog, which is pretty educational. It's halfway between Lexington and Louisville, too.


BARDSTOWN -- Bardstown gives you access to the Bardstown Bourbon Cultural Something or Other (really the Heaven Hill bottling plant and warehouses, which have a great behind the scenes reservation-requiring tour that shows you a lot of the bottling and production end you don't see elsewhere). Bardstown is also the home of Barton distilleries, which only recently has started running tours. Right next to Bardstown is Loretto, home of Maker's Mark and one of the nicest-looking distilleries.


LOUISVILLE -- Go a bit south of Louisville and you can visit Jim Beam's big operation. I haven't been there for years, so I'm not sure what they offer for premium tours.

W.L. Weller 12 Year Review

W.L. Weller 12-Year Old
Buffalo Trace - Sazerac
$44.95 (Website Only) -- 90 Proof

Earlier this summer, the LCBO offered a few interesting Buffalo Trace products as a direct order for customers online -- the E.H. Taylor Bourbon (which I believe was bottles from the 3rd distinct release of that specialty brand in recent years), Buffalo Trace White Dog (unaged whiskey from the still), and the W.L. Weller 12 Year. Old Weller Antique used to be one of my go-to value bourbons in Kentucky (along with Kentucky Tavern and Very Old Barton, depending on how much money I had at the time), and while that bourbon line is gone, the Weller 12yr and the Weller 107 proof are still around (for now).

What makes the Weller notable is that it is the "baby" version of the famed Pappy Van Winkle line. Julian Van Winkle serves as the master distiller for the Weller, Rip Van Winkle, and Pappy Van Winkle lines, and he uses recipes based off the old Stitzel-Weller recipes; most notably, all the aforementioned whiskeys are wheated bourbons (like Maker's Mark). The Van Winkle family were the master distillers at Stitzel-Weller; S-W is a legendary distillery among bourbon nerds, known for its wheated bourbons with rich, cognac-y flavours.

The Weller line tops off at the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection's William Larue Weller, which is released unfiltered at barrel-strength, often well above 120 proof (60%). Previously, the Weller name was used to distinguish between whiskey that contained mostly Buffalo Trace-distilled product (the Wellers) and whiskey that also contained product distilled elsewhere (the Van Winkle line, which contained some aging whiskey from Stitzel-Weller and other defunct distilleries). Nowadays, the stock of old Stitzel Weller has dried up (the last was distilled in the early 90s), so the younger bourbons in the Van Winkle line (the 12yo Lot B and the 15 year old) contain mostly Buffalo Trace product, making the lines extremely similar. To my taste buds, there isn't much appreciable difference between the W.L. Weller 12 year and the much-hyped Rip Van Winkle 10-year and Pappy 12 Year Lot B.

The nose isn't anything remarkable, but it is good. This whiskey sparkles -- when I hold it on my tongue, I can feel the grain interplay tingle my tastebuds. It's mouthfeel is thicker and oilier than Makers, but, as a wheater, it's taste is light and playful enough to drink almost incidentally. It's like a good Collins in whiskey form. Unlike other wheaters, the finish lingers just long enough without vanishing.


This is a GREAT (4 out of 5) whiskey. While I prefer the toughness of the 107 proof version, we don't get it up here, and the extra age adds a bit of complexity to the finish.

It is also a VERY GOOD value. While there are lots of good bourbon at this price range, and while we're paying almost $25 more than Kentucky prices for this bourbon, the uniqueness of the Van Winkle line and the huge markdown compared to the similar Van Winkle products make this an awesome value. Hopefully the LCBO leans on Buffalo Trace to make this bourbon a regular feature north of the border!

BBQ -- Basic Bourbon Question #2

I get a lot of questions about bourbon at work. In the hopes of saving myself some effort, I am putting some answers to common questions up here on the blog. That way, if you have been referred to here from my work, you can get a more in-depth answer than I could likely give you at the bar.

WHAT DOES PROOF MEAN?

Alternatively, why does this bottle say "proof"?

Proof is pretty simple -- figure out how much alcohol, by overall volume, is in the spirit, and double that number. You found its proof! (Basic algebra tells us we can reverse that too -- half of proof is ABV.)

The term proof came from how they used to measure alcohol -- they would mix a gunpowder with a bottle of booze and then set it on fire. If it burst into a bright flame (usually blue!) it would be "Proof" that the alcohol was good -- at least 50% ABV. Nowadays we have much more accurate ways of telling the amount of alcohol in a spirit (proof back then was actually a bit higher than the aimed-for 50%), but that was where the term came from, and it mostly just stuck.

Bourbon, to be bourbon, must be at least 80 proof, or 40% ABV. That means that in addition to containing weird flavoured additives that keep them from being real whiskey, a lot of "flavoured" and "spiced" whiskies are under 80 proof, further disqualifying them from true whiskeyhood. They're not my cup of tea, but if you like 'em, though, more power to you.

Maker's Mark Review

Maker's Mark
Maker's Mark Distillery - Beam Global
$42.95 -- 90 Proof (45% ABV)

Maker's Mark is one of the greatest branding success stories in the spirits world -- scratch that, one of the biggest successes period. They apparently sell out of their complete volume every year -- despite that, you can find it pretty much everywhere. The red wax is iconic and the distillery aimed for a premium market from the get-go; one of their first advertising campaigns is brilliant:

 For decades, Maker's entire strategy has been to tout their consistency; they rotate barrels in their warehouse and claimed to put out only a single product. (This is false -- one of my collection's treasures is a bottle of 100 proof extra-aged premium Maker's from the early 90s; the lower dilution and extra time really makes the normally-mild wheat shine compared to the current offering.)

Maker's is, above all, incredibly easy to drink. While most bourbons are made with corn, rye, and barley, Maker's substitutes wheat for rye. Wheat is a more subtle flavouring grain than rye; it takes very well to aging, backing off and allowing complexity from the wood to shine through, but as Maker's is typically 6 years old (according to their official line; it has no age statement, so it could be as young as 4), the mild wheat takes center stage.

For people who want their drinks to be "smooth" above all else, Maker's is probably the way to go. There's not a lot in the nose -- corn and wood chips, really; it's hard to tell if Maker's is so basic because that's what the company taught us normal bourbon should smell like, or if middle-of-the-road was entirely what they were aiming for. The taste is very sweet, a tiny bit of the wheat tingle, a little diluted syrup. It's smooth, smooth, smooth; well balanced but thin. The finish is blink and you'll miss it -- sweet; wheat; spice; gone. It really requires a shot for the taste to linger at all, and that doesn't overwhelm, which is probably why it is so popular for bourbon shots.

Makers is a completely average bourbon (2 out of 5) and a great introduction to whiskey. There's nothing wrong with it, just not a lot that's interesting. That makes it the perfect thing for a lot of folks, and there's nothing wrong with that -- I like a good well-balanced pilsner every now and then.

Value-wise, the whiskey itself isn't a fantastic value. 90 proof for $42 isn't great, and there's a ton of competition from more interesting whiskeys around that price. What a bottle, though! That, and its universal appeal, means it deserves a place on most shelves, bumping it up to an OK value. Just don't hoard it or anything.

Bourbon Ratings

As I revise the blog, I'm removing some of the older notes on how I rate bourbon and replacing them with hopefully more succinct and understandable ones. Early blog entries from 2011 break down my own personal system for rating bourbon; if someone manages to steal one of my tasting notebooks, that's what they'll find. For you folks, be you a thirsty LCBO shopper, one of my patrons at 3030, or just a curious internet citizen, I want to make things more simple.

When you break down a ranking into something exact, you are basically calling yourself an extreme expert -- after all, what is the difference between a 93 and a 96, really? Bourbon makers, especially, aims for a specific flavour profile, and thus have fewer "colours" to play with their palette, so quality is often a matter of degrees. Additionally, a large part of enjoying whiskey, like enjoying any sensory experience, comes from the ambiance and situation.

So, my rankings will break bourbon down into general categories -- taste and value. Taste will be a simple score out of 5, with half points if my personal rankings require them. A zero is undrinkable, a two is average, and a five is among the best whiskies I have ever had. As per my previous ratings, I have very little desire to make ratings look great, so expect a lot of stuff around the 2.5 average mark.

The more important ranking will be value, and it will also be on a basic four tier descriptor -- Terrible, Poor, Good, and Great. What do these rankings that mean? Well, it's pretty much an all-inclusive, non-mathematic judge of how grumpy I am to buy this whiskey from the LCBO. Some whiskies, like Old Forester 100 Proof, cost three to four times more at the LCBO than at an equivalent store in the US. Sometimes, this could be due to overall rarity, but too many times it is just due to the LCBO bringing things in at lower volume. I tend to be fine with paying $10-15 more for a bottle of whiskey here in Canada than in higher-cost areas of the US (comparing prices to Kentucky prices would just be cruel). $45-55 more (like the ridiculous initial price for the already-odd-and-mediocre Bernheim Wheat Whiskey) is just outrageous. I also try to take into account things like general availability in the United States -- Sazerac and Rittenhouse Rye have a pretty standard $15 or so mark-up here, but they can be so difficult to find in the US that they are actually a pretty good value here.

Elijah Craig 12 Year Revisited -- Capsule Review

ELIJAH CRAIG 12 YEAR OLD KENTUCKY STRAIGHT BOURBON
HEAVEN HILL DISTILLERIES  
94 Proof (47% ABV) -- $39.95


In the States, Elijah Craig 12 Year Old is pretty broadly available. Here in Toronto, it seems to be a twice-yearly event. I remain baffled by the general lack of Heaven Hill whiskies at the LCBO -- Evan Williams Black is the #2 selling Kentucky Bourbon, globally, and here we get, what, the single barrel every other year?

The nose of this new bottle of Elijah Craig is nothing spectacular; sweet but not very strong for a bourbon. There's all the standard brown sugar and a little medicinal/minty plant-y flavour (consulting a flavor chart says eucalyptus) and a lot of oak. The finish is predictably great; Heaven Hill products can run a bit wood and oak-y, so unless the whiskey is completely overwhelmed by wood, it often has all that caramelized oak that I am after.

Elijah Craig is usually one of the first bourbons I give to new bourbon drinkers (after their cheap bourbon of choice and Maker's) and does a great job of being a slightly complex exemplar of a rye-flavoured bourbon. I dub it GREAT (4 out of 5).

Value-wise, if they bring it back at the same $40 price point, it goes blow-for-blow with the other whiskies at that price point. There's a lot more competition there these days, but I prefer it to Buffalo Trace, and it has enough going for it that it is a worthy alternative to both Bulleit and Four Roses Small Batch. I think it is a GOOD value. (3/4)

BBQ – BASIC BOURBON QUESTION #1 -- Where Does Bourbon Come From?

Since I've stumbled my way into the “whiskey guy” role at 3030 (the fantastic new bar at 3030 Dundas West, in the once-dry Junction neighborhood of Toronto), I get a lot of people asking questions about bourbon – as they should! There's a lot of romanticism and myth-making in whisk(e)y marketing. Each country is basically its own brand, and each distillery also aggressively defends its own processes. It makes for some good storytelling, but it can be pretty confusing. I've heard reps for various companies tell me that all American whiskey is 100% corn (false), that all Scotch whiskey is smokey single malt (false), and that all bourbon must be made in Bourbon County, Kentucky (false). It's annoying for a generally laconic dude like me, since I don't want to be "that guy." Y'know who he is-- the one who plays gotcha when he stumps his bartender with a rare drink order; the guy who turns his nose up and bobs his head side to side when he gets to look like a know-it-all. 

So, in the hopes of saving myself some effort, I am putting some answers to common questions up here on the blog. That way, if you have been referred to here from my work, you can get a more in-depth answer than I could likely give you at the bar.

Note that a lot of my information comes from a bunch of old books I have lying around, including some by fanastic bourbon writers like Chuck Cowdery, Mark Waymack and Jim Harris, Gary Regan, and 

DOES ALL BOURBON HAVE TO COME FROM KENTUCKY?

Long story short, no. "Bourbon" currently has a very specific meaning, but only for the last fifty years or so. Prior to that, it was a term referring to a style of corn-based whiskey made in the United States. Back before Prohibition gutted the American whiskey industry, there were distilleries all across the United States, but they primarily were located in Kentucky, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and Indiana. (Basically, the central-east part of the US -- the early "frontier" states with easy access to the Ohio River/Mississippi River transportation system.) Way back in the day, the type of whiskey was based on the common cash crops -- Pennsylvania and Maryland were known for their American rye whiskey (considerably different than the modern Canadian style; I'll talk about it in the future), while the other states had a large amount of corn and were known for a whiskey made with a corn-dominated mixture of grains. 

For a decent amount of time, anyone could call their whiskey bourbon, but a series of laws began to specify the meaning of the term. In 1897, the Secretary of Treasury, John Carslile, teamed up with Col. Edmund H. Taylor to sponsor the Bottled in Bond Act, which defined Bottled in Bond whiskeys as being "at proof" (100 proof, or 50% alcohol), and contained only distilled grains, distilled during one season (there are really only two distilling seasons a year) at a single location. Previously, unscrupulous distillers would add neutral grain spirits, colouring, mix young whiskey with old, and add all sorts of non-whiskey elements (sugar, turpentine, other gross stuff) to give it bite and touch it up. Bottled in Bond was a sign of quality, a measure of safety, and a great marketing tool. 

Then, in 1964, Congress passed a resolution declaring Bourbon to be the official spirit of the United States and a "distinctive product" of the United States, much like how Scotch whisky is made only in Scotland, Irish Whiskey is made only in Ireland, Canadian in Canada, and so on. Most of the international community has recognized this in some way or another, though not all the same rules and regulations are enforced.

Back in December of 1969, the United States Federal Government passed a law defining how spirits are delineated. Basically, bourbon must be made in the United States, must be aged in new wood barrels, must be a grain mix in the initial "mash" with at least 51% of the grains being corn, and it has some restrictions on the proof of the whiskey (distill it to too high a proof initially, and you end up with a flavorless neutral grain spirit, like most vodkas). So, there's nothing saying bourbon must be made in Bourbon County, or even Kentucky specifically. Funnily enough, it also means that Jack Daniels is technically a bourbon, though they prefer to use their own clever sub-definition of Tennessee Whiskey). LDI, a mysterious distillery in Indiana, produces a ton of bourbon which is bottled and sold by various other companies (see my previous post on Jefferson's Bourbon for more provenance discussion). 

In fact, there are no distilleries in Bourbon County; there haven't been any in years -- if you want to visit one, you're much better off going to Nelson, Bullit, Jefferson, Frankfort, Anderson, or Woodford County. And I've had a few bourbons made in various other places -- most notably a young-but-promising prototype from Garrison Brothers in Texas, and the overpriced but interesting Hudson Baby Bourbon from New York.

 

New Updates

So a year or so has passed since I began spottily updating this blog, and and a lot of changes have happened since then, both in my life and the Ontario bourbon market. The LCBO has learned quite a bit since I first moved here, when there was really only 7 or 8 bourbons on the shelves, from two major companies. The Vintages program did a great job of introducing various brands to the Ontario market, and several of them have, happily, gained enough traction to remain more-or-less constantly on the shelves (I'm sipping on a glass of the dependable and tasty Four Roses as I type this).

Additionally, I have been working as a bartender, so I have gotten a slightly better feel for what the average drinker knows and wants to know about bourbon. With the start of my public bourbon tastings (another one taking place at 3030 at the end of the year) and sitting in on some rep talks for various spirit brands, I have a pretty reasonable idea of what information and misinformation is out there.

So, what does this mean?

Well, first, my reviews will become simpler. I plan on revising all my old reviews and replacing them with more capsule-style reviews. More and more, I am convinced that rating systems are bunk, so while I plan on tasting, taking notes, and evaluating whiskies in the same way, my ratings will become even less granular and more generally descriptive (I plan on still including a rating, for easy reference, but it will be rounded to be out of five rather than ten), and a seperate value rating for the whiskey. This latter element I believe to be pretty important here in Ontario, as we get a lot of whiskies brought in as “super premium” finds, due to their previous unavailability here, despite the whiskies themselves being niche experimental bourbons or, more often, barely a step above a value brand.

So, here we go!

Tasting Post-Mortem

Nah, we're not dead, or tasting dead people (gross). I just wanted to thank everyone who came out to the tasting at 3030, and the high-quality staff (particularly Vince and Jeff). It's rare to see a group of people at a bar so new and cool also so interested in quality products and drink making!


We did a quick run-down on Jim Beam White Label, Maker's Mark, Woodford Reserve, Four Roses Small Batch, and Buffalo Trace, all of which (other than the Four Roses) have been reviewed in big, wordy reviews by me on this blog so far. Expect some easier-to-parse capsule reviews soon!

Bourbon Tasting at 3030

The blog is in the midst of an overhaul, but I'm re-posting recent entries here to inform everyone of the bourbon tasting I'm hosting at 3030 Dundas West this Wednesday.

We'll be learning how to taste whiskey, talking about the myths and secret origins of bourbon, and I will be providing plenty of facts for you to slyly mention so you can look smart next time you're drinking with your friends, so come on down.

Wild Turkey 80 Proof

Wild Turkey has always had the reputation of being a harsher bourbon. In a movie, when someone is on the down-and-out or a tough country boy, he's usually hoisting a 750 of Wild Turkey to his lips. For many years, this sorta made sense: Wild Turkey's only whiskey was at 101 proof, higher than the 80-90 proof counterparts by other distilleries, but that doesn't keep it from being a pretty tasty whiskey. I've been lucky enough to sample some WT from the 80s, back when they had one major flagship label, and it was pretty great back then. The 101 was my go-to bar bourbon for years in the states -- it could stand up to a couple ice cubes, just to make it last longer, and went great before or after a beer.

Up here in Ontario, we're stuck with the 80 proof version. Wild Turkey is interesting in that it keeps a pretty similar flavor profile through all of its releases -- the super premium stuff, like American Spirit and Rare Breed, tastes to my tongue like really good and strong Wild Turkey. (Beam, for example, has similar notes across the releases -- namely the yeasty finish -- but not the same sort of flavor profile). Unfortunately, my tasting of Wild Turkey is essentially going to be influenced by my memories of 101, but thus is life.

Wild Turkey has a pretty strong smell --  and it's pretty recognizable. It's less so in the 80 proof version, since it smells a bit thin and watery, but there's a strong ethanol smell, some old orange rind, and some turpentine. I don't mean to characterize it as unpleasant; I kind of like the smell of gasoline, and WT 80 has the same sort of unhealthy goodness to it. The taste is unlike the nose: entirely sweet and simple. It's like sugar water mixed with irish malt. The finish is distinctive but muted, strong sour corn, with hints of grapefruit and bitter root. It lasts a couple seconds.

Overall, Wild Turkey 80 Proof is very sweet and not very sophisticated. It's worth trying to sample the Wild Turkey flavor but nothing like the much more distinctive 101. The LCBO is doing us a disservice by providing the 80 proof rather than the company's flagship. Value-wise, it's cheap, and was worth buying back when the only other cheap option was Jim Beam, but now that it faces some competition at the the bottom-shelf, I would much rather giver or take a dollar and drink Four Roses or Jim Beam Black. I guess if you want to look tough while drinking something pretty mild it's a good choice.

WOODFORD RESERVE

90.4 proof  -- $47.00

Woodford Reserve is a great example of brilliant marketing, and a pretty decent bourbon. Woodford is owned by Brown-Forman, and is made – sorta – at a beautiful old distillery in the horse farm country outside my old hometown of Lexington, Kentucky. It’s one of the first whiskeys I tasted, and I’m using my old notes on it, since I didn’t know much about it back then and I think it’s interesting to do so. Since then, I’ve been on several tours to the distillery, as it’s a lovely place to take tourists. Brown-Forman is, of course, the owners of Jack Daniels, the best-selling American whiskey. They also make Korbel, el Jimador tequila, Early Times Kentucky whiskey (not bourbon, as it isn’t made in new barrels), Canadian Mist, and that terrifying stuff known as Southern Comfort. They also own some pretty great Scotch distilleries, like Ardbeg.

Woodford Reserve is their premium American whiskey brand. Their big name is obviously ol Jack, but Old Forester is their old-school brand, with its distillery outside Louisville. The Woodford distillery was the first bourbon distillery to really take advantage of the whisk(e)y tourism industry that BF pioneered with their Jack Daniels brand and distillery. They re-opened a closed distillery and installed a fancy new brass set of old-school pot stills (more on those after the review). Now, Woodford Reserve isn’t all made at Woodford – it’s made from whiskey made at the Woodford distillery mixed (either before barreling or vatted after, not sure entirely, but assumedly the post-barreling vatting) with whiskey from the standard Brown-Forman Old Forester distillery. Probably the best of that whiskey that doesn’t go into their Birthday Bourbons. (Now, I polished off a bottle of Old Forester last year, and I’m a bit sad we can’t get it – I drank it before but never owned a bottle, and it grew on me quite a lot for its price.)

Brown-Forman’s huge Jack Daniels-fueled pull is why Woodford, despite being a relatively small brand, gets such broad distribution. After Maker’s, Woodford was the first premium/super-premium whiskey I remember encountering in local bars. Anyway, on to the review…

In general, Woodford has some pretty standard flavor notes for bourbon – oak and vanilla dominate the nose, taste, and finish, and that’s pretty much what I think of, other than the flavoring grains and some spice, when I think of bourbon. The nose itself is pretty pungent, almost like an Irish whiskey. This makes sense, as I would later find out, as my favorite Irish whiskeys are made with a pot still rather than a column still, which apparently gives it a creamier, rounder flavour (or are, as Woodford is, a mix of pot and column stilled whiskeys.) This review is already getting lengthy, but at some point I’ll do some more research on the two types of stills and write up an explanation.

The taste is pretty standard, with some cinnamon at the edges, and a nice viscosity – a bit oily and it coats the mouth. The finish is pretty darn good. Oak and vanilla, again; medium length, 2-4 seconds, with some nice spice at the back end. Overall, Woodford does nothing wrong and a lot of things right, but nothing about it is very exciting or unique (other than that pungent, and not always pleasant, nose). Honestly, it pretty much tastes like a bourbon should – it’s just not bold or interesting.

The only problem is the price. It’s the most expensive of the standard LCBO bourbons, but it’s also typically among the best bourbons available. It’s a premium that doesn’t do anything premium but taste pretty good, and there’s nothing wrong with that. I’m just not sure if I want to regularly spend almost $50 on it when I could be trying interesting and unique new offerings at that price.

Another note about Woodford – like Elijah Craig, it has better and worse batches. It doesn’t swing as much as EC does from sublime to not-great (so its highs aren’t as high and its lows aren’t as low, but it is more expensive). I’ve been pleased with it every time I’ve drank it here in Ontario, barring a couple of less-than-great glasses that probably were from a bottle sitting open on a shelf forever at a bar. The bottle itself is pretty and functional but nothing too mindblowing, either, kind of like the whiskey inside.

Woodford's price hurts it, but I wouldn’t begrudge any high-rollers out there who keep a bottle of it as their go-to. 

Next time: either Wild Turkey 80 or Maker’s Mark. Woooooo.

Knob Creek Small Batch

KNOB CREEK SMALL BATCH
Beam Global
$45.95 - 100 Proof (50% ABV)

Unlike the other Beam bourbons reviewed so far, I don’t have a wacky story or explanation about Knob Creek. I have drank a lot of Knob Creek in my day, since back when I started drinking, the two premium bourbons you could find everywhere were Maker’s and Knob Creek. One of my first steps on the way to bourbon appreciation was noticing the difference between Knob and Maker’s and (at first) ranking them, and later deciding they were good for different reasons and different moods. (We called getting drunk on it “slobbin’ on the Knob” because we were oh so clever.)

 I don’t drink Knob Creek as often as I used to, so I am excited to approach it afresh. There’s some solid char in the nose, like a barbeque. There’s a little something skunky in there (that Jim Beam yeast, I think), and some vanilla. There’s some nice spice in there, a slippery feel in the mouth, with a touch of spice at the edge of the tongue – not as much as some bourbons, but still enough there. The taste has bitter almond in there alongside the spice and char. It’s pretty smooth for a 9-year-old 100-proof bourbon, and the Beam yeast taste gives the finish a slightly bitter nutty flavor that I have to be in a certain mood to enjoy before crumbling away into a short, tasty burn of charcoal.

Knob Creek is a pretty decent bourbon with a pretty unique finish and a solid taste. At 100 proof, it is pretty solid, and can take a dash of water to open it up and reveal some sweetness and citrus hidden in there. I really like the bottle and the wax, but I’m not a huge fan of the trade dress.

Knob Creek, you are a GOOD bourbon (3 out of 5).

It’s certainly better than Jim Beam Black, but $20 better? I’m not sure if I’ll hurry pick up a bottle again after this one is gone; I probably will get another just for tastings (it makes a great flight with the other Beam products) and occasional nostalgia, but it won’t be until I need it. That said, I wouldn’t turn down a glass or a bottle, either, particularly one from the duty free, where it's among the better choices.

Value wise, it is an OK value (2/4).